{"id": 1, "text": "Thank you, and, Mayor Koch-and I thank him; he is the donor of that jacket which I am very proud to have-Commissioner McGuire, Senator D'Amato, Congressman Molinari, and James Wieghart, together with the residents of this great city, you are reminding all Americans of what is right and good about our people and our country. My hat is off to New York and its police force for their dedicated and often thankless battle against crime. And I congratulate the New York Daily News for caring enough about its community that it sponsors the New York Crime Fighters Award program. I understand that more than $60,000 in those prize moneys that Mr. Wieghart mentioned have been given out so far, and that is quite an investment in our collective peace of mind. By working together, the city and the Daily News are another example of how our public and private institutions can be made even more effective in improving the quality of our lives. But most of all, I want to thank these citizens here for-they are everyday Americans-thank them for their courage in unexpected circumstances and for their becoming heroes they were. You know, someone once said that a hero is not braver than anyone else. I do not know whether that is the answer or not, but God bless them all. And those who say we are in a time when there are no heroes, they just do not know where to look. They certainly have not been flipping through the pages of the New York Daily News lately. I wish all our people could read, as I have, the accounts of your individual acts of heroism. In each case you seem to think you acted as anyone else would have in the same situation. And you spoke from your hearts about how we all depend on one another. If somebody needs help, we should try to help out. Well, when you read how the Torres brothers chased down a purse-snatcher wielding a knife; how Mrs. Keneally, a grandmother, collared a pickpocket by his neck scarf and gave him the back of her hand until the police arrived-I liked the picture of that one more than anything- -and how Rabbi Rosenfeld immobilized a mugger armed with a machete; you realize there is nothing very average about the average American. Sometimes I have accused some of our political opponents of referring so much about the common man, and I prefer to think that most Americans are pretty uncommon.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdailynewscrimefighterawardwinnersnewyorkcity", "title": "Remarks to Daily News Crime Fighter Award Winners in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-daily-news-crime-fighter-award-winners-new-york-city", "publication_date": "27-04-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2, "text": "Whatever successes this administration has had in combating global poverty, Colin Powell gets a lot of credit. I will spend some time talking about our responsibility as government to address global poverty. It is a responsibility we take seriously, and it is a responsibility that Colin Powell carried out in his distinguished tenure as the Secretary of State of our country. I want to thank you for being a friend, and thank you for your service to the country. Thank you all for allowing me to come by to speak. I appreciate the cofounders and the leaders of the Global Development effort. I want to thank you for having this summit. Thank you for being what I call social entrepreneurs, people who care about the plight of other people. Across the globe, more than a billion people live on less than a dollar a day. That should be a troubling statistic to all Americans. They lead lives of hunger; they lead lives of desperation. That struggle ought to inspire us here in America. It is inspired you; it ought to inspire all our citizens. I want to thank you for lending your expertise and your funds to address problems alongside your Government. Colin said, You know, this is not a governmental effort; it is not a business effort; it is not an NGO effort; it is a combined effort by a lot of compassionate hearts to address a significant problem. And so I am here to thank you for your commitment and to let you know, we are pleased to stand with you. I want to thank Susan Schwab, who traveled with me today. Maybe you do not know who she is, but you will soon, because she just got sworn in as the new Trade Representative for the United States. So who do you pick to be the Trade Minister? Well, you pick somebody who is a good negotiator, for starters, somebody who understands that opening markets is in our national interest and that when you open a market, you make sure-as we open our markets, you make sure you are treated fairly. That is what we want. We want to be able to tell the American people that free trade is good for our country, but fair trade means that it is responsible. And so she understands that. She will be a good, hard negotiator, but she also understands something I understand, and that is, trade is one of the best ways to help lift people out of poverty. I am going to talk about that in a little bit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3, "text": "I am sorry Laura could not be with me here. She is a-she is a person who cares deeply about the suffering in places like the continent of Africa. When she travels, she brings the message to the people there that a lot of Americans care deeply about ENTITY or care deeply about hunger or malaria. She sends her greetings. I am lucky she said yes when I asked her to marry me. I think this country is lucky to have her as an ambassadress for the good hearts of the American people. I thank Bill Clapp and General Shalikashvili, former Senator Dan Evans, Bill Ruckelshaus, cofounders of the Initiative for Global Development. I thank the members who are here as well. I appreciate Ambassador Randy Tobias. He had a pretty easy job there in Indianapolis at one time. I asked him to-I asked him-I said, Look, Randy, you have got management skills, and you care; why do not you serve your country, see; why do not you come here to Washington, DC, and put up with all the rhetoric and the noise and the sharp elbows and do something for people around the world? He ran the-he ran our ENTITY/ENTITY initiative, and he did a really good job. America is on the leading edge of fighting ENTITY/ENTITY, and one of the reasons we are effective is because of Randy Tobias. See, I got a place in Montana where I can fish. I think you got one in Montana, do not you? Yes, he started talking about his fishing place in Montana. I said, You need to run USAID. It is an important part of helping deal with global poverty. It is an important part of our strategy. I want to thank you for staying on, and I want to thank you for your hard work and your vision. You represent the very best of corporate America. You get your skills; you make a living; and then you come and serve your fellow countrymen and the world. Randy, I really thank you for the inspiration and the example you have set. I am going to talk about the Millennium Challenge Account. Colin mentioned it. The head of it is here today, John Danilovich. Like, we were not moving money out the door, and Congress began to get nervous. I remember Colin was coming to the Oval saying, Look, it is a great idea, but we got to show some results here pretty quick.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4, "text": "Danilovich understands the job is to be less bureaucratic and more forward-leaning when it comes to implementing the Millennium Challenge Account strategy. I want to thank you for taking on this important job. And I also want to thank my friend Rob Mosbacher, fellow Texan, who is running OPIC. Appreciate you serving the country. I believe to whom much is given, much is required. This country has been given a lot. We have got a great system; we have got wonderful entrepreneurs; and we are wealthy. We are wealthy because of the ingenuity of the American people. We are wealthy because we have got a fiscal system that encourages the private sector to flourish. We are wealthy because we are a country of rules and laws. I also believe that with prosperity comes an enormous responsibility. We have a moral duty to care for those who hurt here at home, and we have a moral duty to care for those-as best as we can for those abroad. That is part of the foreign policy of our country. It is a foreign policy that Secretary of State Powell helped implement-helped form and implement. We believe every person, no matter their income or economic status, bears the image of a Creator. That is what I believe. I believe every person, no matter their income or their status or where they live, has dignity of matchless value. And we believe that those who live in the most extreme poverty deserve this country's help. It serves our Nation's interests as well. It is the country's economic interest that we fight global poverty, because as developing nations grow in prosperity, they create better lives for their citizens and markets for U.S. products. It is in our security interests that we fight global poverty, because weakened, impoverished states are attractive safe havens for terrorists and tyrants and international criminals. We believe that young people without opportunities are susceptible to ideologies of hatred. And so by helping poor nations create a more hopeful future, we can not only build prosperity; we reduce the appeal of radicalism. The reduction of extreme poverty in our world must be a key objective of American foreign policy. And so today I want to talk to you about the need for us to expand trade, to promote freedom, and to reform the programs that we have in place, in order to achieve results, in order to say that-to the American taxpayer, the money is not only being spent; it is being spent wisely.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5, "text": "First, the strategy to defeat extreme poverty begins with trade. The value of trade is more than 10 times the value of foreign investment and foreign aid combined. In other words, prosperity as a result of trade is more likely, 10 times more likely, to have a positive effect on somebody living in a poor society than just investment and grants. History has shown what I am talking about. It is probably hard for some to remember, back in the fifties, particularly if you were born in the sixties- -but South Korea was one of the poorest nations in Asia. South Korea reformed its economy and opened its markets to the world. And today, export growth-the capacity for people to find work in South Korea, for products that are sold elsewhere-has made this country the tenth largest economy in the world. India, for a long period of time, had restricted its markets. India opened its markets to global trade 15 years ago. It has doubled the size of its economy since then and created a middle class which is larger than the entire population of the United States. The World Bank study found that developing nations that lowered their trade barriers in the 1990s grew three times faster than those that did not. Economic growth is one important way to reduce poverty. It is the most effective way to reduce poverty. The best way to help millions mired in poverty is to expand the benefits of global trade. That is part of this administration's strategy. I asked Congress, and Congress granted trade promotion authority. It took a lot of work, as you recall, Mr. Secretary, but it was a necessary part of our capacity to expand trade. And since then, we have completed negotiations on free trade agreements with 15 nations on 5 continents with a combined population of 200 million people. We have built on the success of the African Growth and Opportunity Act. For those of you who follow the economic vitality of Africa, you know that AGOA has been a very effective policy. It was put in place by my predecessor, President Clinton. And we signed into law the AGOA Acceleration Act. In other words, we took the step that President Clinton took and took it farther. Trade helps lift people out of poverty. Since AGOA's inception, U.S. imports from Africa have increased by 114 percent. Last year, over 98 percent of U.S. imports from AGOA-eligible countries entered this country duty-free. When somebody is able to sell a product into the United States, it means somebody is working.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 6, "text": "It means somebody has got a job. It means that people are not reliant upon the Government to help them realize their dreams. This is like-AGOA has created new opportunities. Americans have got to understand that when we talk about trade, we are not only talking about enhancing economic growth and vitality; we are helping people get out of poverty. Trade is an important part of making sure that we implement this strategy. You know, the AGOA showed that bipartisan cooperation here in Washington is possible. And one thing you can help is to make sure that bipartisan cooperation on other trade agreements is possible in Washington, DC. If you are genuinely serious about reducing poverty, you need to help us make sure this Nation does not become a protectionist nation. The tendencies are to say, Let us just wall ourselves off from competition. But if we become a protectionist nation, if we lose our confidence and our capacity to compete in the global economy, it will make it much harder to achieve the common goal of reducing global poverty. Now we are confronted with a really good opportunity, by the way, to deal with global poverty, and that is to complete the Doha round of the WTO negotiations. You know, national interests seem to be kind of more important than a-than reducing barriers and tariffs across the world. You know, local politics has a lot to do with whether or not this Doha round is going to get completed, and I understand that. And I knew that going into the negotiations. We are ready to eliminate all tariffs and subsidies and other barriers to free flow of goods and services, and we expect other nations to do the same. That is what I said to get the Doha round moving. See, we are ready to make the move on agriculture and services and manufacturing, but we expect other nations to do the same thing. We expect other nations to give us market access. I want to be able to go to people here in the United States, producers, and say, We got you market access so you can compete fairly. And that is why we are going to get rid of the subsidies that now exist on the books. The Doha negotiations are at a critical moment. It is-in my view, countries in Europe have to make a tough decision on farming. And the G-20 countries have to make a tough decision on manufacturing. And the United States is prepared to make a tough decision along with them. That is my message to the world. Susan's going to carry that message.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 7, "text": "I am going to carry it to Europe next week at the EU summit. Now is the time for the world to come together and make this world a free trading world, not only for the benefit of our own economies but as an important part of the strategy to reduce poverty around the world. I think we have to expand freedom in order to reduce poverty. Free nations produce the vast majority of the world's economic output. Many of the worst dictatorships are some of the world's most poorest nations. I believe there is a correlation between prosperity and freedom. And this country of ours will continue to pursue an agenda that understands that human liberty is universal. It is just not a U.S. thing; it is its own-liberty is something that everybody yearns for. And freer the world becomes, the more prosperous the world becomes and the more likely people will not be mired in poverty Nations that build institutions that secure the rule of law and respect human dignity also are more likely to create an economic climate that fosters investment and growth. And so we support the rise of free and democratic societies across the world. And the story of freedom is one of the really, really interesting chapters of the 21st century, when you think about it. From Afghanistan to Iraq to Lebanon to Georgia to Ukraine to Kyrgyzstan, people have gone to the polls and elected their leaders. In the last 5 years, more than 110 million people have joined the ranks of the free. That is an astonishing development when you think about it. And it is a positive development for those of us who care deeply about global poverty. As more people gain their freedom, they will also gain the opportunity to build a better life. That is a fact of life. And so this country has got to be confident in our willingness, in our desire to help people- to help free people from the clutches of tyrants. I said in my second Inaugural speech, The goal of this country ought to be to end tyranny in the 21st century. I could have easily have said, One way to reduce global poverty is to reduce tyranny in the 21st century. Free peoples need to do more than cast their ballots. We recognize that. It is just the beginning of a process to reduce global poverty. And so the United States has an obligation to help others build the institutions necessary-in a civil society-necessary to be able to deal in a-with the advent of freedom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 8, "text": "And so we are helping new democracies build free institutions that are responsive to the people's needs. And we are doing so through organizations like the National Endowment of Democracy. We have worked to double its budget over the past 5 years. Those funds support programs that will help form civic organizations. We are helping businesses in new market economies organize trade associations and chambers of commerce. It is the things we take for granted here in America, these funds are meant to do. It is one thing to promote trade; it is one thing to promote freedom, but we have got to recognize that our own aid programs have got to help complement those objectives. In other words, we want results from the money we spend. That is what the American people expect, by the way. See, when we talk about foreign aid, they expect the foreign aid to mean something. I think about people out there that are working hard for a living, and they say, You know, you are spending this money overseas. And the answer is, because not only do we have a moral duty, it is in our national interest to do so. But I have got to be able to tell them, as well, and anybody in elected office has got to be able to say, We are making a difference with the money, see; it is actually producing results. For decades, we provided aid with good intentions. We did not always ask if we were getting good results. One of the great reforms of Colin Powell's tenure as Secretary of State is, he started asking, What are the results of the programs; what are we achieving? Since 2002, we have committed to increase the resources we devote to fighting poverty across the world. As Colin mentioned, since taking office, we more than doubled assistance around the world from 10 billion to 27 1/2 billion. It is the largest increase, by the way, of foreign aid since the Marshall plan. And you get a lot of credit for that, Mr. Secretary. I remember you coming into the Oval Office saying, Let us put our hearts out there for people to see. And one way to do it is by increasing our budgets. I want to remind you what we are doing with that money. We are fighting ENTITY/ENTITY, and we are helping countries fight malaria. We are expanding education for women and girls. We are rewarding developing nations that move forward with economic and political reform.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 9, "text": "And by the way, shortchanging these efforts-Congress has got to understand, in shortchanging these efforts, if they choose to do so in the appropriations process, they would undercut our long-term security and dull the conscience of our country. I urge Congress to serve the interests of America by showing the compassion of America and approve my full funding request for foreign assistance this year. And as we increase the resources, we will increase accountability for those who have received American aid. In many poor countries, it is really important for all of us who are involved in this program to admit that corruption runs deep. And a lot of times, the assistance we have provided has been wasted or put in the pockets of corrupt officials. If we expect the people to support us in our efforts to be robust in our compassion overseas, then we have got to recognize that sometimes that money gets stolen and people do not get the results for the money that they expect. And so we decided to do something about it. We decided that our foreign policy ought to recognize true compassion as measured by real improvements, not just by the amount of money spent. And real improvement is the goal of our assistance. And so we have set up the Millennium Challenge Account. And it was set up under the-in the State Department when Colin was there. And here is what it says, it says, We want to grant you money. We want to give assistance, but you have got to be responsible. You, the recipient, have got to be responsible for fighting corruption, embracing democratic government, encouraging free markets, and investing in the health and education of your people. I remember when we put that out, it was a little controversial, as you remember. I do not see what is controversial in that. I do not see what is wrong with saying to a nation, You do not get any money if you are corrupt. Because we believe countries are capable of getting rid of corruption. I do not see what is wrong with saying, You have got to show real investment in education and health care in order to receive our money. I think if part of the goal is to encourage economic development, we ought to say to countries, in return for U.S. aid, open your markets so you can enhance the prosperity of your citizens. Every nation that applies for a Millennium Challenge grant develops its own priorities and develops its own strategies.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 10, "text": "But one of the things we do-and this is what Danilovich does and his staff does- they develop clear goals that are measurable. So we say, This is what you are going to do? Show us as time goes on that you are doing it. So far, eight nations have compacts in place that is worth over $1 1/2 billion. Additional 15 countries are now negotiating with the Millennium Challenge Account. And we are going to get the money out the door so long as they meet the criterion. But the point I am trying to make to you is that wise use of Government monies can help us achieve objectives which lead to the reduction of global poverty. And so we are just through spending the money without asking for results. We believe countries have got the capacity to change; that is what we believe. We refuse to accept the status quo. It is time for other countries around the world to demand anticorruption regimes. If we are truly interested in reducing global poverty, those of us who are granting money need to stand up with a united voice and say, We are not going to tolerate corruption. One of the things Randy Tobias and others are going to do at the State Department, they are going to apply the same principle I have just described to you to all our development aid. We are going to insist upon transparency and performance and accountability. We are going to ensure that every American aid dollar encourages developing nations to build institutions necessary for long-term success. And we are going to help developing nations achieve economic independence. That is what we are going to do. We are going to get away from this notion about, kind of, just analyzing monies based upon percentage of this, that, or the other. We are going to be generous in our contribution and demand results in return. Now, what is interesting about the goal of eliminating poverty is that about 85 percent of American resources to the developing world come from the private sector. It is one thing for me to talk, and now I am changing from what we are doing to encouraging you to continue doing what you are doing. The truth of the matter is, our generous Nation is-the generosity of our Nation is reflected in the private sector a lot. You know, government helps, and government does a lot. As I said, we have doubled aid, but what our private sectors do is-it is unbelievable, when you think about it. And corporate America has a responsibility.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 11, "text": "And for those of you who represent the NGOs and faith-based groups, thank you for joining the cause as well. Some of the best work in fighting poverty is accomplished in partnership with private institutions. The Global Development Alliance has successfully built 400 worldwide alliances. You have leveraged about 1.4 billion of taxpayers' dollars to over $4.6 billion. In other words, you have taken the money we are spending as kind of a-I would not call it a downpayment, but it is part of a way to really leverage your generosity. And you are making a difference in the lives of millions of people. I am grateful for you. That is what I have really come to say. I have come to assure you that the effort to eliminate global poverty is an integral part of our foreign policy. And I think it needs to be a foreign-part of foreign policy after 2 1/2 years, by the way. I think it needs to be a-I think it needs to be part of the calling of the United States in the 21st century. One of the moral objectives of our time-the great moral objectives of our time is to reduce poverty. I like what Alexis de Tocqueville said about America. Back in 1832, he captured a lot of the spirit of this country. He said this, he said, When an American needs the assistance of his fellows, it is very rare that it be refused. When some unexpected disaster strikes a family, a thousand strangers willingly open their purses. That was the America he saw in the 1830s. It is still got to be the America of the 21st century as well, but not only to help our fellow citizens here at home but for our national interests and our economic interests, and just to answer the call of our hearts It ought to be the center of our foreign policy and the center of the social entrepreneurs in America. We moved hard for the tsunamis, with a military presence that helped organize relief. When the earthquake came in Pakistan, we did not hesitate; we moved. We know that when a neighbor needs assistance, that we have an obligation to help provide it. My assurance to you is that we will continue to stand with our brothers and sisters who are poor, to help as best as we possibly can, and I want to thank you for helping as well. God bless your efforts, and may God bless our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinitiativeforglobaldevelopments2006nationalsummit", "title": "Remarks at the Initiative for Global Development's 2006 National Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-initiative-for-global-developments-2006-national-summit", "publication_date": "15-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 23, "text": "Earlier this week Hillary and I were honored to welcome America's Olympic team to the White House. Our athletes amassed a terrific record. There were powerful moments of courage in victory and defeat that captured the imagination of the entire world. I think most of us wish the world would work more like the Olympics. All the individuals and teams had a chance, gave it their best, and win or lose, were better off for their efforts. As heroic as the feats of the athletes in this Olympics was the way all those involved in the Atlanta games pressed on in the face of adversity. Just 2 weeks ago today a pipe bomb exploded in Centennial Olympic Park. It was a terrorist act aimed not only at the innocent people there but the very spirit of the Olympics. This was brutal evidence that no nation is immune from terrorism and an urgent reminder that we must do everything we can to fight the terrorists. People have more opportunities than ever because people and technology and information travel quickly across national borders. But these things that make us all closer and give us more chances also make us more vulnerable to the forces of organized destruction, to the drug traffickers, the organized criminals, the people who sell weapons of mass destruction, and of course, especially to the terrorists. What happened in the Olympic Centennial Park, that wonderful public space open to all people who visited Atlanta, is symbolic of the world's problem with terrorism. Now, that is why terrorism must be a central national security priority for the United States. We are pursuing a three-part strategy against terrorism. First, we are rallying the world community to stand with us against terrorism. From the Summit of the Peacemakers in Sharm al-Sheikh, Egypt, where 13 Arab nations for the very first time condemned terror in Israel and throughout the Middle East to the antiterror agreements we reached with our G-7 partners in Russia last month to take specific common actions to fight terrorism, we are moving forward together. Our intelligence services have been sharing more information with other nations than ever to stop terrorists before they act, capture them if they do, and see that they are brought to justice. We have imposed stiff sanctions with our allies against states that support terrorists. When necessary, we are acting on our own. A law I signed this week will help to deny Iran and Libya the money they use to finance international terrorism. Second, our antiterrorism strategy relies on tough enforcement and stern punishment here at home.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress256", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-256", "publication_date": "10-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 24, "text": "We made terrorism a Federal offense, expanded the role of the FBI, imposed the death penalty. We have hired more law enforcement personnel, added resources, improved training. And I am proposing a new law that will help to keep terrorists off our soil, fight money laundering, and punish violent crimes committed against Americans abroad. Third, we are tightening security on our airplanes and at our Nation's airports. From now on, we will hand-search more luggage and screen more bags and require preflight inspections for any plane flying to or from the United States. I have asked Vice President Gore to head an effort to deploy new high-technology inspection machines at our airports and to review all our security operations. We will continue to press forward on all three of these fronts. But we cannot cast aside any tools in this fight for the security of our country and the safety of our people. That is exactly what the Republican majority in Congress did by stripping from the antiterrorism legislation key provisions that law enforcement needs to help them find out, track down, and shut down terrorists. Law enforcement has asked for wiretap authority to enable them to follow terrorists as they move from phone to phone. This is the only way to track stealthy terrorists as they plot their crimes. This authority has already been granted to our law enforcement officials when they are dealing with organized criminals. Surely it is even more urgent to give them this authority when it comes to terrorists. And law enforcement has also asked that explosives used to make a bomb be marked with a taggant, a trace chemical or a microscopic plastic chip scattered throughout the explosives. This way sophisticated machines can find bombs before they explode, and when they do explode police scientists can trace a bomb back to the people who actually sold the explosive materials that led to the bomb. In Switzerland over the past decade it is helped to identify who made bombs and explosives in over 500 cases. When it was being tested in our country several years ago, it helped police to find a murderer in Maryland. In the last 2 weeks since the Olympic bombing, our law enforcement officers have been working around the clock, but they have been denied a scientific tool that might help to solve investigations like this one. Our antiterrorism bill would have given us the ability to require tagging gunpowder often used in making pipe bombs. The Republicans in Congress could give law enforcement this antiterrorism tool, but once again they are listening to the gun lobby over law enforcement.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress256", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-256", "publication_date": "10-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 25, "text": "To be selected as their ENTITY candidate by a great party convention, representing so vast a number of the people of the United States, is a most distinguished honor, for which I would not conceal my high appreciation, although deeply sensible of the great responsibilities of the trust, and my inability to bear them without the generous and constant support of my fellow countrymen. Great as is the honor conferred, equally arduous and important is the duty imposed, and in accepting the one I assume the other, relying upon the patriotic devotion of the people to the best interests of our beloved country, and the sustaining care and aid of Him without whose support all we do is empty and vain. Should the people ratify the choice of the great Convention for which you speak, my only aim will be to promote the public good, which in America is always the good of the greatest number, the honor of our country, and the welfare of the people. The questions to be settled in the National contest this year are as serious and important as any of the great governmental problems that have confronted us in the past quarter of a century. They command our sober judgment, and a settlement free from partisan prejudice and passion, beneficial to our selves and befitting the honor and grandeur of the Republic. They touch every interest of our common country. Our industrial supremacy, our productive capacity, our business and commercial prosperity, our labor and its rewards, our National credit and currency, our proud financial honor, and our splendid free citizenship-the birthright of every American- are all involved in the pending campaign, and thus every home in the land is directly and intimately connected with their proper settlement. Great are the issues involved in the coming election, and eager and earnest the people for their right determination. Our domestic trade must be won back, and our idle working people employed in gainful occupations at American wages. Our home market must be restored to its proud rank of first in the world, and our foreign trade, so precipitately cut off by adverse National legislation, reopened, on fair and equitable terms for our supreme agricultural and manufacturing products. Protection and Reciprocity, twin measures of a true American policy, should again command the earnest encouragement of the Government at Washington. Public confidence must be resumed, and the skill, the energy and the capital of our country find ample employment at home, sustained, encouraged and defended against the unequal competition and serious disadvantages with which they are now contending.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenotificationcommitteetherepublicanconventionacceptingthepresidential0", "title": "Remarks to the Notification Committee of the Republican Convention Accepting the Presidential Nomination in Canton, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-notification-committee-the-republican-convention-accepting-the-presidential-0", "publication_date": "29-06-1896", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William McKinley"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 26, "text": "The Government of the United States must raise enough money to meet both its current expenses and increasing needs. Its revenues should be so raised as to protect the material interests of our people, with the lightest possible drain upon their resources, and maintain that high standard of civilization which has distinguished our country for more than a century of its existence. The income of the Government, I repeat, should equal its necessary and proper expenditures. A failure to pursue this policy has compelled the Government to borrow money in a time of peace to sustain its credit and pay its daily expenses. It must be apparent to all, regardless of past party ties or affiliations, that it is our paramount duty to provide adequate revenue for the expenditures of the Government, economically and prudently administered. This the Republican party has heretofore done, and this I confidently believe it will do in the future, when the party is again entrusted with power in the legislative and executive branches of our Government. The National credit, which has thus far fortunately resisted every assault upon it, must and will be upheld and strengthened. If sufficient revenues are provided for the support of the Government, there will be no necessity for borrowing money and increasing the public debt. The complaint of the people is not against the Administration for borrowing money and issuing bonds to preserve the credit of the country, but against the ruinous policy which has made this necessary. It is but an incident, and a necessary one, to the policy which has been inagurated. The inevitable effect of such a policy is seen in the deficiency of the United States Treasury, except as it is replenished by loans, and in the distress of the people who are suffering because of the scant demand for either their labor or the products of their labor. Here is the fundamental trouble, the remedy for which is Republican opportunity and duty. During all the years of Republican control following resumption, there was a steady reduction of the public debt, while the gold reserve was sacredly maintained, and our currency and credit preserved without depreciation, taint or suspicion. If we would restore this policy, that brought us unexampled prosperity for more than thirty years under the most trying conditions ever known in this country, the policy by which we made and bought more goods at home and sold more abroad, the trade balance would be quickly turned in our favor, and gold would come to us and not go from us in the settlement of all such balances in the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenotificationcommitteetherepublicanconventionacceptingthepresidential0", "title": "Remarks to the Notification Committee of the Republican Convention Accepting the Presidential Nomination in Canton, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-notification-committee-the-republican-convention-accepting-the-presidential-0", "publication_date": "29-06-1896", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William McKinley"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 27, "text": "The party that supplied by legislation the vast revenues for the conduct of our greatest war; that promptly restored the credit of the country at its close; that from its abundant revenues paid off a large share of the debt incurred in this war, and that resumed specie payments and placed our paper currency upon a sound and enduring basis, can be safely trusted to preserve both our credit and currency, with honor, stability and inviolability. The American people hold the financial honor of our Government as sacred as our flag, and can be relied upon to guard it with the same sleepless vigilance. They hold its preservation above party fealty, and have often demonstrated that party ties avail nothing when the spotless credit of our country is threatened. The money of the United States, and every kind or form of it, whether of paper, silver or gold, must be as good as the best in the world. It must not only be current at its full face value at home, but it must be counted at par in any and every commercial center of the globe. The sagacious and far-seeing policy of the great men who founded our Government; the teachings and acts of the wisest financiers at every stage in our history; the steadfast faith and splendid achievements of the great party to which we belong, and the genius and integrity of our people have always demanded this, and will ever maintain it. The dollar paid to the farmer, the wage-earner, and the pensioner must continue forever equal in purchasing and debt-paying power to the dollar paid to any Government creditor. The contest this year will not be waged upon lines of theory and speculation, but in the light of severe practical experience and new and dearly acquired knowledge. The great body of our citizens know what they want, and that they intend to have. They know for what the Republican party stands and what its return to power means to them. They realize that the Republican party believes that our work should be done at home and not abroad, and everywhere proclaim their devotion to the principles of a protective tariff, which, while supplying adequate revenues for the Government, will restore American production, and serve the best interests of American labor and development. Our appeal, therefore, is not to a false philosophy, or vain theorists, but to the masses of the American people, the plain, practical people, whom Lincoln loved and trusted, and whom the Republican party has always faithfully striven to serve.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenotificationcommitteetherepublicanconventionacceptingthepresidential0", "title": "Remarks to the Notification Committee of the Republican Convention Accepting the Presidential Nomination in Canton, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-notification-committee-the-republican-convention-accepting-the-presidential-0", "publication_date": "29-06-1896", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William McKinley"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 40, "text": "Well, first let me thank Reverend Jackson. This is the first time I have ever spoken from this microphone. You know, as ENTITY, I am superstitious, and we have had such a good stock market. I do not ever comment on it except I like the way it finished today. I wanted to say just a couple of things very briefly. First of all, I want to thank Dick Grasso for his leadership in the Wall Street Project. A lot of people do not know that the stock market was organized over 200 years ago so that there would be a mechanism through which bonds could be issued to finance America's debts in the war for our independence. So, in the beginning, this stock market had not just a profit motive but a public interest purpose. This man has infused the stock market not only with its greatest success in history but with a public interest purpose, to include all Americans in our prosperity. And we thank him. Most of you were with us today in the afternoon, and I will not make you sit through my speech againor stand through my speech again, even though I'd kind of like to, because this is the first crowd in a long time when I have been guaranteed a standing ovation. I just want to make two points. One, I want to thank Jesse Jackson for being there on this issue for a long time, saying we would never be the country we ought to be until we really had economic opportunity for allthat's what the Wall Street Project is all aboutand that it would be good business, as well as good morality. The second point I want to make, that I made today and I leave with all of you is, this is the only time in my lifetime we have had a booming economy, improvements in all of our social fabric, the absence of crisis at home and domestic threats, and the absence of threats to our security around the world as big as those we faced in the cold war. None of this has ever happened before. The big question before us is, what are we going to do with this magic moment? Are we going to take the long look into the future and do the big things that America needs, or are we going to indulge ourselves in shortsighted frittering away of our present wealth and serenity at home and stability around the world?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswallstreetprojectconferencereceptionnewyorkcity", "title": "Remarks at a Wall Street Project Conference Reception in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-wall-street-project-conference-reception-new-york-city", "publication_date": "13-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 41, "text": "If I am late getting up here, I just had to finish the story. President Zia, Begum Zia, distinguished guests, it is an honor for me to welcome you to the White House this evening. President, our talks this morning underlined again the strong links between our countries. We find ourselves even more frequently in agreement on our goals and objectives. And we, for example, applaud your deep commitment to peaceful progress in the Middle East and South Asia, a resolve which bolsters our hopes and the hopes of millions. In the last few years, in particular, your country has come to the forefront of the struggle to construct a framework for peace in your region, an undertaking which includes your strenuous efforts to bring peaceful resolution to the crisis in Afghanistan-a resolution which will enable the millions of refugees currently seeking shelter in Pakistan to go home in peace and honor. Further, you have worked to ensure that progress continues toward improving the relationship between Pakistan and India. And in all these efforts the United States has supported your objectives and will applaud your success. A great intellectual forefather of Pakistan, Muhammed Iqbal, once said that, The secret of life is in the seeking. Well, President Zia, today the people of the United States and Pakistan are seeking the same goals. Your commitment to peace and progress in South Asia and the Middle East has reinforced our commitment to Pakistan. We want to assure you, Mr. President, and the people of your country that we will not waver in this commitment. It stretches back to Pakistan's first days of independence. It is based on mutual interest, yes, but also on shared visions and goals in the world around us. It is based, as well, on the fact that the people of both our countries sincerely value the good relations and the affinity between us. Our people already work together in significant ways through educational exchanges, tourism, economic cooperation, and through bonds of family and friendship. We have cooperative programs in science and technology and in agriculture, and we hope to explore with the Government of Pakistan various ways of enhancing cooperation. Differences may come between our nations or have come between our nations in the past, but they have proven to be transitory while the ties which bind us together grow stronger year by year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoastspresidentreaganandpresidentmobammadziaulhaqpakistanthestatedinner", "title": "Toasts of President Reagan and President Mobammad Zia-ul-Haq of Pakistan at the State Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-president-reagan-and-president-mobammad-zia-ul-haq-pakistan-the-state-dinner", "publication_date": "07-12-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 101, "text": "Ladies and gentlemen, because this is the only time I am going to be before the press today, at the outset of my remarks I'd like to say a few things about the situation in Iraq. For more than 3 months, the United States and the international community have very patiently sought a diplomatic solution to Iraq's decision to end all its cooperation with the U.N. weapons inspectors. Iraq's continued refusal to embrace a diplomatic, peaceful solution, its continued defiance of even more United Nations resolutions, makes it plainer than ever that its real goal is to end the sanctions without giving up its weapons of mass destruction program. The Security Council and the world have made it crystal clear now that this is unacceptable, that none of us can tolerate an Iraq free to develop weapons of mass destruction with impunity. Still, Saddam Hussein has it within his hands to end this crisis now by resuming full cooperation with UNSCOM. Just yesterday his own neighbors in the Arab world made it clear that this choice is his alone and the consequences, if he fails to comply, his alone in terms of responsibility. Now, let me say to all of you, this is a very good day for the United States. I want to thank Officer Sandra Grace from New Bedford, Massachusetts, and Detective Gary McLhinney from Baltimore for their service, for sharing their stories, for representing their organizations so well, for reminding us why all of those here have worked so hard to pass the laws that in a few moments I will sign, laws to help us honor the memory of law enforcement officers by helping to prevent the kind of gun-related crimes that took their lives and by supporting the families they leave behind. I'd also like to thank Secretary Rubin, Attorney General Reno, Director Magaw, the ATF, Assistant Secretary Johnson, and the others who are here from the Treasury and Justice Departments; Attorney General Curran from Maryland, who joined us today. And a special word of thanks to my good friend Senator Biden, who had to leave; and to Congressman Stupak; Congressman King, who spoke so well and did so much. And thank you, Congressman Fox, for joining us here today in celebration of the work you did that I hope you will be proud of all your life, sir. This is a special day for me personally because I was attorney general of my own State. I was Governor for a dozen years. I have spent a lot of hours riding around in State police cars with officers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationeducationalassistanceforfamiliesslainofficersand", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation on Educational Assistance for Families of Slain Officers and on Penalties for Criminals Using Guns", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-educational-assistance-for-families-slain-officers-and", "publication_date": "13-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 102, "text": "I have been to altogether too many funerals of law enforcement officials killed in the line of duty. And because I come from a small State, very often I knew these people well. I knew their families, their children, their circumstances. Just last weekend I went home to dedicate an airport, and the first people that came running up to me were the three State police officers who were assigned to work the event. And we stood there and relived a lot of old times. And I think, again, we should thank, especially, the Members of Congress who are here; the police officers; Gil Gallegos and the FOP; Thomas Nee and the National Association of Police Officers; Jerry Flynn, the International Brotherhood of Police Officers; Rich Gallo, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association; Sam Cabral, the International Union of Police; and Debbie Geary from the Concerns of Police Survivors. I'd like to ask you all just to give them all another hand. Six years ago when I became ENTITY, one of my most urgent priorities was to put the Federal Government on the side of supporting our police officers and reducing the crime rate. At the time, the crime rate was on the rise; gangs, guns, and drugs were sweeping through our neighborhoods, terrorizing our families, cutting off the future of too many of our children. The thing that bothered me most when I was out around the country seeking the Presidency was that there were so many people who were full of hope and optimism for our country, but when it came to crime, they seemed almost to have given up, to have simply accepted the fact that a rising crime rate was a part of the price of the modern world. We were able to galvanize, all of us together, the energies of the American people to fight back. I never met a law enforcement officer who believed that a rising crime rate was inevitable. Every law enforcement officer I met believed that if we did the right things-if we were tough, yes, but tough was not enough; we had to be smart, too-that if we both punished people who should be punished and did the intelligent things to prevent crime from happening in the first place, that the crime rate could go down. And we passed in 1994 a historic crime bill, along with the Brady law, which among other things focused on community policing, aggressive prevention, and tougher penalties for violent repeat offenders. Now we are ahead of schedule and under budget in putting those 100,000 police on the street.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationeducationalassistanceforfamiliesslainofficersand", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation on Educational Assistance for Families of Slain Officers and on Penalties for Criminals Using Guns", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-educational-assistance-for-families-slain-officers-and", "publication_date": "13-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 103, "text": "We have gone after gangs and drugs with the full authority of Federal law. The Brady law has prevented about a quarter of a million felons, fugitives, and stalkers from buying firearms in the first place. Crime rates have fallen to a 25-year low. All across America, robbery is down; assault is down; murder is down. Respect for the law is on the rise. fewer broken windows, less graffiti, cleaner streets in city after city after city. We must never forget that this victory was won, however, at a very high price for some of our law enforcement officials. We must never forget that police officers put on their uniforms, their badges, go to work every day knowing that that day could be their last, just by doing their jobs. Officer Bradley Arn served on the police force of St. Joseph, Missouri, for the last 7 years. He patrolled the streets by day and worked his way through college by night. At 28, more than anything else, he wanted a better life for his wife and his 2-year-old twin daughters. On Tuesday, just a couple of days ago, he answered a distress call. A career criminal with a semiautomatic gun was terrorizing pedestrians. He responded to the call and was brutally gunned down. According to the police, the murderer had a deadly goal, quote, He wanted to hurt people in black-and-white cars wearing dark blue uniforms. Only the bravery of a fellow officer stopped the shooting spree. Every year there are too many police officers like Bradley Arn who make the ultimate sacrifice to keep us safe. Not very long ago, I went up to the Capitol to honor the two police officers who were killed there. But we have to do more than build monuments to honor these people. We have to take action to prevent more needless tragic deaths, to work for those who have given their lives, and we have to take action to help families they leave behind. Two years ago we acted to provide college scholarships to the families of slain Federal law enforcement officers. Last year I pledged to make those same scholarships available to the families of State and local law enforcement officers and all public safety personnel. Today the legislation I sign honors that pledge. From now on, children and spouses of public safety officials who lose their lives in the line of duty will be able to apply for nearly $5,000 a year to pay for college tuition.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationeducationalassistanceforfamiliesslainofficersand", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation on Educational Assistance for Families of Slain Officers and on Penalties for Criminals Using Guns", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-educational-assistance-for-families-slain-officers-and", "publication_date": "13-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 104, "text": "I should point out that because virtually 100 percent of these families will be people on very modest incomes, they will be eligible also for the $1,500-a-year HOPE tax credit in the first 2 years of college, tax credits for the junior and senior year, expanded work-study programs, student loan programs-a student loan program which in most places allows them to pay the loan back as a percentage of the income that they earn-and the IRA that can be withdrawn from without penalty if the money's used to educate children. Most of that was the product of the bipartisan Balanced Budget Act of 1997. So we believe that if you look at this scholarship amount with the other things that have been passed in the last couple of years, as Peter King said, with overwhelming bipartisan support, Democrats and Republicans working together on these issues, we will be able to protect the families and the children in their education and, in so doing, to honor the families and the law enforcement officers. It is the least we can do, and we have to do it. The bill I am about to sign was enacted in memory of U.S. Deputy Marshal William Degan, the most decorated deputy marshal in our history, who lost his life in a brutal shootout. His son, Billy Degan, was the first young person to benefit from this program. He recently graduated from Boston College, and he is here with us today. I'd like to ask him to stand and be recognized. Now, let me say just a brief word about the other legislation that I am going to sign; Mr. McLhinney talked about it. I am very proud that we are announcing these scholarships, but I cannot wait for the day when there is not a single person eligible for one. And I think that all of us should think about that. We know from painful experience that the most serious threat to the safety of police officers is a criminal armed with a weapon. Most police officers who lose their lives die from gunshot wounds. That is why we fought hard to keep guns off the streets, out of the hands of criminals. Brady background checks, as I said earlier, have prevented nearly a quarter of a million felons, fugitives, and stalkers from buying guns. Last week I announced a new step to close a loophole in the law that makes it easier for gun traffickers and criminals to avoid those checks at private gun shows.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationeducationalassistanceforfamiliesslainofficersand", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation on Educational Assistance for Families of Slain Officers and on Penalties for Criminals Using Guns", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-educational-assistance-for-families-slain-officers-and", "publication_date": "13-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 105, "text": "Make no mistake, the insidious practice of sidestepping our guns laws is not an idle threat. The city of Chicago recently concluded an undercover investigation of gun dealing. And as you saw, I hope, in the morning press, it has just filed suit alleging widespread practices by gun dealers in the Chicago area of selling guns illegally, counseling purchasers on how to evade firearms regulations, even selling guns to purchasers who say they intend to violate the law. We know legitimate gun dealers make every effort to comply with the law, but these charges in Chicago, if proven true, would demonstrate that at least some parts of the gun industry are helping to promote an illegal market in firearms. Such disrespect of our law endangers our people, and we will be watching the progress of this lawsuit closely. The ATF already vigorously investigates gun dealers and other gun traffickers who violate Federal laws. We will continue to work closely with State and local police to trace the crime guns back to their source and prevent illegal gun sales, especially to criminals and juveniles. But there is more we can do to protect our communities and police officers. You have heard a little bit of it from Detective McLhinney, but let me just say again, for several years now criminals who have used guns to commit their crimes have been subject to stiff mandatory penalties under Federal law and virtually every State law in the country. To protect our families and police officers, the bill I sign today will add 5 years of hard time to sentences of criminals who even possess firearms when they commit drug-related or violent crimes. A second conviction means a quarter century in jail. This is very important to try to reduce the threat of violent crime. Just a couple of days ago on Veterans Day, as I have every year since I have been ENTITY, I laid a wreath on the tomb of the unknown servicemen who gave their lives in service to our country. Today it is with great pride that I stand here with many of our law enforcement officers who every day are prepared to make the same sacrifice. Together, we are working to make America stronger in the 21st century. And again, let me thank you all. Now I'd like to ask the Members of Congress and Officers Grace and McLhinney and Mr. Degan, if you would come up here, I'd like for you to stand with us as we sign the bill, please.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationeducationalassistanceforfamiliesslainofficersand", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation on Educational Assistance for Families of Slain Officers and on Penalties for Criminals Using Guns", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-educational-assistance-for-families-slain-officers-and", "publication_date": "13-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 106, "text": "This week, the independent Commission on the September the 11th attacks issued its final report. I appreciate the hard work of the Commission over the past 20 months. They have produced a serious and comprehensive report, and I welcome their recommendations. Indeed, we have already put into action many of the steps now recommended by the Commission, and we will carefully examine all the Commission's ideas on how we can improve our ongoing efforts to protect America and to prevent another attack. The events of September the 11th, 2001, dramatically demonstrated the threats of a new era. In the nearly 3 years since the attacks, we have waged a steady, relentless, determined war on terrorists. We are fighting them in foreign lands so we do not have to face them here in America, and we are taking unprecedented steps to defend the homeland. Since September 2001, America and our allies have captured or killed thousands of terrorists, removed terrorist regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq, convinced Libya to give up its weapons of mass destruction, and put the world's most dangerous nuclear trading network out of business. We are chasing down terrorist enemies abroad and within our own borders. On the homefront, we have dismantled terrorist cells and prosecuted terrorist supporters from California to Florida to Massachusetts. As the Chairman of the 9/11 Commission, Tom Kean, said this week, We are safer today than we were on 9/11. But as Governor Kean also noted, The danger to America has not passed. And no matter how good our defenses are, a determined enemy can still strike us. Yet all Americans can be certain our Government is using every resource and technological advantage we have to prevent future attacks. We have created a new Department of Homeland Security with a single mission, protecting the American people. We have established better communications networks to make information on rapidly emerging threats available to local officials in real time. We are transforming the FBI into an agency whose primary focus is stopping terrorism. And we created a new Northern Command in the Department of Defense with the mission of defending the American homeland. To better protect the country, we have posted Homeland Security personnel at foreign ports, beefed up airport and seaport security at home, and instituted better visa screening for those entering our country. We have placed state-of-the-art equipment in major cities to detect biological agents and stockpiled enough smallpox vaccine for every American, in case of an emergency.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress801", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-801", "publication_date": "24-07-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 109, "text": "It is now been nearly 5 years since an economic crisis and a punishing recession came together to cost far too many Americans their jobs and their homes and the sense of security that they had built up over time. And by the time I took office, my team and I were facing bubbles that had burst, markets that had cratered, bank after bank on the verge of collapse. And the heartbeat of American manufacturing, our auto industry, was flatlining. And all this meant that hundreds of thousands of Americans were losing their jobs each month. And nobody had any idea where the bottom would be. Four and a half years later, our businesses have created nearly 7 million new jobs over the past 36 months. We are producing more of our own energy; we are consuming less that we import from other countries. The cost of health care is slowing. The wealth that was lost from that recession has now been recovered. All of this progress is a testament to the grit and resolve of the American people, most of all. But it is also due in some measurable way to the incredible dedication of the men and women who helped to engineer America's response. Alan Krueger and Jason Furman. Today I can announce that Alan is heading back to teach his beloved students at Michelle's alma mater, Princeton University. When they get together, all they can talk about is Princeton, and they are all very proud, and those of us who did not go to Princeton have to put up with it. And I am proud to say that Jason Furman has agreed to replace Alan as the Chairman of my Council of Economic Advisers. Now, during the crisis, Alan stepped in initially to help engineer our response as Assistant Secretary and chief economist at the Treasury Department. He was so good that we then had to beg him to come back, extend his tour, to serve as the Chairman of my Council of Economic Advisers, where he is been the driving force behind actions that we have taken to help restart the flow of lending to small businesses and create new jobs and arm workers with the skills they need to fill them, to reduce income inequality, to rebuild our aging infrastructure, and to bring down our deficits in a responsible way. the idea that hard work should be rewarded. He is motivated by the principle that no one who works full time in the greatest nation on Earth should have to raise their families in poverty or below poverty levels.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheresignationalanbkruegerchairmanthecouncileconomicadvisersandthe", "title": "Remarks on the Resignation of Alan B. Krueger as Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers and the Nomination of Jason L. Furman To Be Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-resignation-alan-b-krueger-chairman-the-council-economic-advisers-and-the", "publication_date": "10-06-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 110, "text": "His commitment to a rising, thriving middle class shines through in his often passionate presentations andat least for an economist, they are passionate and in the policies that he is pushed, and I know this will continue to be a focus of his research. Alan's wife and son are here today, and I know that they are all looking forward to having Alan back. rockonomics, the economics of rock and roll. This is something that Alan actually cares about; seriously, on Wednesday, he is giving a speech at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. He is got a T-shirt under his suit with a big tongue sticking out. So Alan has become one of my most trusted advisers. But I know that he will continue to do outstanding work, and fortunately, he will still be available for us to consult with him periodically, because he is a constant font of good ideas about how we can further help the American people. So thank you very much, Alan, for all the good work that you have done. Now, I am also proud to nominate another outstanding economist to take his place. Jason Furman is one of the most brilliant economic minds of his generation. You can talk to other economists who know a lot more than I do about it. He is won the respect and admiration from his peers across the political spectrum. His Ph.D. thesis adviser, Greg Mankiw, chaired the Council of Economic Advisers under George W. Bush. Nobel Prize Winner Joe Stiglitz, on the other side of the economic spectrum, hired Jason to work for the CEA under President Clinton. After leaving President Clinton's White House, Jason finished his Ph.D. in economics, quickly acquired a reputation as a world-class scholar and researcher. But public service kept calling, and Jason's kept answering that call because he believes deeply in it. So from working at the World Bank on issues of inequality and international finance to developing new proposals to strengthen our health and retirement programs, he helped to shape some of our most important economic policy debates. And when I asked him to join my team in 2008, even though his baby daughterthat's right you were this big, had just been bornhe agreed to serve once again. middle class families, folks who are working hard to climb their way into the middle class, the next generation. And when the stakes are highest, there is no one I'd rather turn to for straightforward, unvarnished advice that helps me to do my job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheresignationalanbkruegerchairmanthecouncileconomicadvisersandthe", "title": "Remarks on the Resignation of Alan B. Krueger as Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers and the Nomination of Jason L. Furman To Be Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-resignation-alan-b-krueger-chairman-the-council-economic-advisers-and-the", "publication_date": "10-06-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 111, "text": "He understands all sides of an argument, not just one side of it. He is worked tirelessly on just about every major economic challenge of the past 4 years, from averting a second depression to fighting for tax cuts that help millions of working families make ends meet, to creating new incentives for businesses to hire, to reducing our deficits in a balanced way that benefits the middle class. And so Eve, Jason's wife, who is an accomplished writer herself, has put up with a lot of hours with Jason away. Henry and Louisa, who are here, they have made a lot of sacrifices so that their husband and dad could be here working for the American people. So I appreciate you guys for sharing daddy just a little bit longer. And the reason it is important is because, while we have cleared away the rubble of crisis and laid a new foundation for growth, our work is nowhere near done. Inequality is still growing in our society. Too many young people are not sure whether they will be able to match the living standards of their parents. We have too many kids in poverty in this country still. There are some basic steps that we can take to strengthen the position of working people in this country, to help our economy grow faster, to make sure that it is more competitive. And some of that requires political will. Some of it requires an abiding passion for making sure everybody in this country has a fair shot. But it also requires good economists. Alan and Jason appreciate that. So sometimes, the rest of my staff thinks, oh, Obama is getting together with his economists, and they are going to have a wonkfest for the next hour. It is not just numbers on a page. It makes a difference in terms of whether or not people get a chance at life and also, how do we optimize opportunity and make sure that itwe do not have a contradiction between an efficient, growing, free market economy, and one in which everybody gets a fair shot and where we are caring for the vulnerable and the disabled and folks in our society who need help. So a growing economy that creates good middle class jobs, that rewards hard work and responsibility, that is our north star. Jason shares that focus. I know Alan shares that passion. In Jason's new role as the Chairman of the EconomicCouncil of Economic Advisers, he will be working with some of our country's leading economists, including Jim Stock, who has joined us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheresignationalanbkruegerchairmanthecouncileconomicadvisersandthe", "title": "Remarks on the Resignation of Alan B. Krueger as Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers and the Nomination of Jason L. Furman To Be Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-resignation-alan-b-krueger-chairman-the-council-economic-advisers-and-the", "publication_date": "10-06-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 149, "text": "IT IS very hard to keep secrets in government, and I must say that the other day here in this room when we announced the nomination of Gerald Ford as Vice President, that was a pretty well-kept secret. I think, tonight, this is certainly something that Bill Rogers does not expect, and consequently, I think all of us will enjoy the presentation I am now about to make. The Medal of Freedom, as you know, is the highest civilian honor that can be given to an American citizen. Bill Rogers has served for almost 20 years in government, and in those 20 years he has served for 4 years as Attorney General of the United States and 4 1/2 years as Secretary of State. In that period as Secretary of State, he has traveled to 72 countries, has probably made over 150 speeches, formal and many more informal, has had to sit through at least 500 tedious dinners and perhaps 1,000 or even more tedious cocktail parties, but in that period of time, he has represented this Nation, as we all know, with very great dignity. He has made us all very proud of our country and of his representation of that country as Secretary of State. I think that a French Foreign Minister put it pretty well when he summed up. I think it was something like this. He said that Secretary Rogers always says the words that he means, always means the words that he says, but does not always say the words that he means, and he said, I --he went further to say, he said-- I am always happy when he agrees with me, but I am never unhappy when he disagrees with me. That is the mark of a very successful Secretary of State. As you know, of course, we have enjoyed the friendship of the Rogerses for over 30 years. We met 32 years ago at Quonset Point when we were both one of the lowest forms of life, I mean lieutenants, junior grade, in the United States Navy Reserve, and we have been close friends since that time. But tonight, both as a personal friend and recognizing his services during the period I was Vice President and now in the period as President, and representing all of the American people, I have the honor to present to William P. Rogers the Medal of Freedom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthepresidentialmedalfreedomwilliamprogersandthepresidential", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Presidential Medal of 'Freedom to William P. Rogers and the Presidential Citizens Medal to Adele Rogers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-presidential-medal-freedom-william-p-rogers-and-the-presidential", "publication_date": "15-10-1973", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 150, "text": "THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AWARDS THIS PRESIDENTIAL MEDAL OF FREEDOM TO WILLIAM P. ROGERS Prosecutor, Congressional investigator, and Cabinet leader under two Presidents, his brilliant career of public service has spanned more than a third of a century and touched all three branches of Government. As the 63rd Attorney General of the United States, he pioneered in the battle for equal rights. As the Nation's 55th Secretary of State, he played an indispensable role in ending .our longest war and in starting to build a new structure of peace. Through these efforts, the decency and integrity that are William Rogers' personal stamp are now felt more strongly among all people and nations. No man could seek a greater monument. Now, the Secretary, of course, is desperately-will you please be seated is desperately trying to get up here to respond, but I have another award to make tonight, one that I know that even he did not anticipate. I think that we sometimes underestimate the great role that is played by those who stand by our side, and when we think of Mrs. William Rogers--Adele Rogers, as we know her--when we think of her graciousness through the years, of her superb poise, I think that we all would say that she truly deserved the title of being the First Lady of the Cabinet. And consequently, tonight, an award is appropriate for her as well. The President's Citizens Medal has only been awarded once before, to Roberto Clemente posthumously, and so the second President's Citizens Medal will be awarded tonight and awarded to one who does not hold a government position, because the Citizens Medal does not go to people who held government positions, but to one who, standing with her husband, has represented this country at home and abroad with such magnificent dignity and poise and grace. As the Nation's premiere hostess in foreign affairs, Adele Rogers provided a warmth and charm that helped to humanize the climate of diplomacy in a time of vital American initiatives for peace. Her work as a leader in voluntary action and community affairs among her fellow Cabinet and Foreign Service wives set an example for millions in a time of widening horizons for American women. The first woman ever honored with this award, her achievements eloquently prove its credo---that a citizen need not hold public office to render far-reaching public service.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthepresidentialmedalfreedomwilliamprogersandthepresidential", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Presidential Medal of 'Freedom to William P. Rogers and the Presidential Citizens Medal to Adele Rogers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-presidential-medal-freedom-william-p-rogers-and-the-presidential", "publication_date": "15-10-1973", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 151, "text": "creating jobs and economic growth on which our country's prosperity depends . Yesterday's job report showed that despite 11 consecutive months of private sector job growth, despite creating more than 1 million private sector jobs this year, it is not enough. We have to do more to accelerate the economic recovery and create jobs for the millions of Americans who are still looking for work. And essential to that effort is opening new markets around the world to products that are Made in America. Because we do not simply want to be an economy that consumes other countries' goods, we want to be building and exporting the goods that create jobs here in America and that keeps the United States competitive in the 21st century. That is why today I am very pleased that the United States and South Korea have reached agreement on a landmark trade deal between our two countries. I am joined this morning by my outstanding U.S. Trade Representative, Ambassador Ron Kirk, as well as Michael Froman, who was one of our lead negotiators. As you will remember, we did not finalize this agreement on my recent visit to South Korea. The deal was not good enough. It was not good enough for the American economy, and it was not good enough for American workers. As I said in Seoul, I am not interested in signing trade agreements for the sake of signing trade agreements, I am interested in agreements that increase jobs and exports for the American people and that also help our partners grow their economies. So I told Ron and our team to take the time to get this right and get the best deal for America. And that is what they have done. It is a win-win for both our countries. This deal is a win for American workers. For our farmers and ranchers, it will increase exports of American agricultural products. From aerospace to electronics, it will increase our manufacturing exports to Korea, which already support some 200,000 American jobs and many small businesses. In particular, manufacturers of American cars and trucks will have much more access to the Korean market, we will encourage the development of electric cars and green technology in the United States, and we will continue to ensure a level playing field for American automakers here at home. In short, the tariff reductions in this agreement alone are expected to boost annual exports of American goods by up to $11 billion. And all told, this agreement, including the opening of the Korean services market, will support at least 70,000 American jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesouthkoreaunitedstatesfreetradeagreement", "title": "Remarks on the South Korea-United States Free Trade Agreement", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-south-korea-united-states-free-trade-agreement", "publication_date": "04-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 152, "text": "It will contribute significantly to achieving my goal of doubling U.S. exports over the next 5 years. In fact, it is estimated that today's deal alone will increase American economic output by more than our last nine free trade agreements combined. This deal is also a win for our ally and friend South Korea. They will gain greater access to our markets and make American products more affordable for Korean households and businesses, resulting in more choices for Korean consumers and more jobs for Americans. I would add that today is also a win for the strong alliance between the United States and South Korea, which for decades has ensured that the security that has maintained stability on the peninsula continues. It is also allowed South Korea its extraordinary rise from poverty to prosperity. At a time in which there are increasing tensions on the Korean Peninsula, following the North's unprovoked attack on the South Korean people, today we are showing that the defense alliance and partnership of the United States and South Korea is stronger than ever. I am especially pleased that this agreement includes groundbreaking protections for workers' rights and for the environment. In this sense, it is an example of the kind of fair trade agreement that I will continue to work for as President, in Asia and around the world. This agreement also shows that the United States of America is determined to lead and compete in our global economy. We are going to stand up for American companies and American workers, who are among the most productive and innovative in the world. And we are going to compete aggressively for the jobs and markets of the 21st century. But I want to give special thanks to my partner, South Korean President Lee, for his commitment to a successful outcome. And again, I want to thank Ron and Mike for their outstanding work and their entire team for their tireless efforts. They were up late a lot of nights over the last several months. We are going to continue to work with our Korean partners to fully implement this agreement and build on our progress in other areas, such as ensuring full access for U.S. beef to the Korean market. And I look forward to working with Congress and leaders in both parties to approve this pact. Because if there is one thing Democrats and Republicans should be able to agree on, it should be creating jobs and opportunity for our people. Which brings me to the other issue I want to address. Earlier today the Senate voted on two provisions to extend tax cuts for the middle class.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesouthkoreaunitedstatesfreetradeagreement", "title": "Remarks on the South Korea-United States Free Trade Agreement", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-south-korea-united-states-free-trade-agreement", "publication_date": "04-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 153, "text": "I have come to believe that the people of West Virginia arise earlier in the morning than the citizens of any other State. In order to manage my job I have to get up about 6 o'clock in the morning, but I believe from the great crowds that welcome me early each morning as I pass through this State that you rise even earlier than that. The greetings that I have received in passing to and fro through West Virginia are most encouraging. You have been generous, and you have given a profound indication to the country as to where you will stand on the 8th day of November. A short occasion like this renders it difficult to adequately speak on national issues. I have seen this morning an advertisement of a New York retail establishment, in which they state that they are able to offer hosiery at prices which are demonstrated by our officials as 30 to 40 percent less than you can manufacture them in this community, and that the reason they are able to offer them at these prices is due to the depreciated currencies abroad and their ability to take advantage of that lower exchange in securing commodities in competition with your workmen. And in the face of this our Democratic opponents propose to reduce the tariff as it stands. The Republican Party not only proposes to hold the tariff where it stands but through the Tariff Commission, whose authorities were created by the Republican Party in the Smoot-Hawley bill about a year ago, we propose a review of the differences in cost of production at home and abroad and determine if we are justified in an adjustment that should protect your community. If this advertisement is true I am confident that it will show such a change in the costs of production as will make it possible to give to you relief. And I ask you whether the fate of your city and your community and your State will be more safe in the hands of the party which has fathered and for 70 years supported and strengthened the protective tariff than in the hands of the party who have always opposed these policies and who now promise a reduction of these protective tariffs. Our Nation for the past 3 years has been passing through a great crisis. The early stages of the depression were more or less the normal stages of retribution from overspeculation and exploitation of our people. We have experienced them many times before and recovery has speedily followed. But about 18 months ago came a blow to the United States through the collapse of the nations abroad as an aftermath of the World War, the repercussions of which endangered this entire Republic.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarkswestvirginia0", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-west-virginia-0", "publication_date": "29-10-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 154, "text": "The unprecedented action taken by the Republican Party, supported, I am glad to say, by those patriotic members of the Democratic Party who placed patriotism higher than politics, enabled the Nation to escape those dangers, have saved the Nation from chaos and collapse, and brought us into the stage of recovery. Our measures and policies have been turned from defense into measures of attack upon the depression. Since the adjournment of the Democratic House of Representatives, we have seen every day evidences of constant recovery. You will notice if you look at the business statistics of the country the increasing employment month by month. You will notice the increased car loadings which show again the increasing movement of goods. You will find in every quarter of the country the signs of recovery. And if the strategy and if the policies which have directed this great battle for the preservation of the United States and for the institutions and are now operating for recovery shall be continued without change they will bring restored prosperity to the American people. We have carried the first-line of trenches by the reestablishment of confidence in the stability of the United States. And if we can proceed with the battle without change or halt we shall win a victory for the American people that will assure their safety. I wish again to express the appreciation that I have for the support and encouragement from the people of West Virginia. I believe that you will rally to the support of the Republican Party on the 8th day of November as the party of constructive action and give to us a victory which the party deserves for the service it has given over these many years to the American people. I deeply appreciate this greeting. It is encouraging, and it is an indication of the action which you will take on the 8th of November. In the short moment I have here I would like to refer just one moment to the railway problems which we have faced during the past 2 or 3 years. You are interested in the success of the railways. A year and a half ago we were faced with the fact that the earnings of the railways were less than the amount necessary to meet their fixed charges. Over the trough of this depression we were faced with the possibility of receivership of three-fourths of the railways of the United States. Such a failure would jeopardize the policyholders in our insurance companies and the savings in our banks which are invested in our railways. And those of you who have had experience with a railroad in receivership know what the result is to the men who work upon those railways.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarkswestvirginia0", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-west-virginia-0", "publication_date": "29-10-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 155, "text": "You know that once the railways go out of the hands of their responsible managers, the intimate contacts of the men with the management of the railways is gone, contracts and understandings suffer. And of further importance is the fact that by supporting the railways we have been able to support them in the maintenance of a reasonable wage to the men who have to operate the railways of the United States. You will recollect that early in the depression I secured an agreement between the industrial leaders, including the railway leaders and the leaders of labor, that there would be no reduction in wages. That was the first time in the history of 15 depressions in the United States that the first act of depression was not the so-called liquidation of wages--placing the first burden of the readjustment of the depression on the back of the workers. As time went on and the depression deepened, the cost of living decreased, profits vanished, and there were readjustments in wages, but those readjustments represented the contribution of the men to the stability of their own industry. They were not by the violence of strikes and lockouts and social disturbances and destruction to the whole social stability of the United States. They were your voluntary contribution to your own order. We have immediately provided advances to the railways to enable them to repair equipment, to replace their equipment in order that with the gradual resumption of traffics they shall be able to meet that demand, and thus increase and maintain employment. You know and I know that since the adjournment of the Democratic House of Representatives these great measures that we have in action for rehabilitation of the country have begun to have their effect. We have witnessed increase of car loadings from about 490,000 cars a week to over 650,000 a week. This means the recovery of the United States, and it means the recovery of employment to the railway workers. And this is but one segment of the great program and the great problems that are involved in the rehabilitation of our country. There are many others affecting different communities, but everywhere they have begun to have their effect and we have begun to see their results. This is no time, when we are in the midst of the most gigantic battle that our country has ever been plunged into in time of peace, to change that strategy or the policies of battle. I wish to express my appreciation for this greeting. It gives me an opportunity to see some of the people of West Virginia. It gives you an opportunity to look at me.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarkswestvirginia0", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-west-virginia-0", "publication_date": "29-10-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 156, "text": "But it is very encouraging to have you come to the station and give me this welcome. It is an evidence of what you will do on the 8th of November, for it means the support and encouragement of this administration in its work for restoration of employment and agriculture in the United States. We have already made progress on that road. We are making more rapid progress every day. But this is not a time to discuss national issues. It is a time for me to express my appreciation to you for the kindliness of your greeting. I deeply appreciate your coming this morning to give me this greeting. And it is evidence of what you propose to do on the 8th day of November. This is not an occasion at which I could speak at length on our national issues. Many of you realize the difficulties we have passed through in the last 3 years and the battle which we have made to protect our country from great disasters. You know that we have succeeded in a great defensive battle against the sweep of destruction and chaos. You know that we have now turned the forces and agencies in our control towards restoration of employment and the restoration of agriculture. You have seen during the past few months evidence of recovery from these difficulties. They are evidence that the Republican Party has conducted the country wisely; that it has met the Nation's difficulties with courage; that it has devised the means and methods by which our people have been protected and by which they shall continue to make progress to recovery. I wish to express again my appreciation for your coming. It gives me a great hope and a great faith in the battle which we are carrying on. I wish to express my gratitude this time for two things: first, for the basket of apples. They are always gratefully received from Martinsburg. And second, I want to express my appreciation for your coming to greet me. It is always helpful, and besides that it is a sign as to what will happen in Martinsburg on the 8th day of November. I have thought the people of Martinsburg might be interested if I was to read an advertisement. Sometimes we resent reading advertisements, but here happens to be one of peculiar interest to the people of Martinsburg. This advertisement in a New York paper, refers to wool hose. It states that 8,000 pairs of these snug fitting, ribbed, soft English hose have been purchased abroad at the low wool and sterling prices because of the depreciation on that currency. And they are offered for sale at 39 cents a pair.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarkswestvirginia0", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-west-virginia-0", "publication_date": "29-10-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 157, "text": "I am informed that even at the reduced wages--and I understand there have been two or three reductions in wages in your factory in Martinsburg--but even at this reduced wage you cannot manufacture those hose for less than 50 cents a pair. This raises a great question--a question that is an issue in this campaign. The Republican Party stands for the protective tariff. Our Democratic opponents propose to reduce the tariff, and they propose to reduce it in the face of these depreciated foreign currencies, in the face of the fact that living and wages have been decreased abroad as the result of the depreciation of those currencies below the standards of the tariff when that act was passed. Today at reduced wages, the people in Martinsburg are losing employment and suffering reductions of wages. I recently asked the Tariff Commission, a bipartisan body, to investigate the differences of cost of production between those of Martinsburg and those of the places in England where these hose are produced, and to determine whether or not under the flexible provisions of the tariff some relief could be given to the people of Martinsburg. The Democratic Party proposes as one of the issues in this campaign that it will take from that Commission the authority under which such acts could be performed. I want to leave these thoughts with you that here is a town where the well-being of your homes, where the satisfactions and comforts of your life, are today and will be further jeopardized by the transfer of the power of the Government of the United States to the Democratic Party on the 8th day of next November. You will all realize that we have gone through a time of great difficulty. For the last 3 years we have been fighting with forces such as we have never before met in peacetime history of the United States. They have accumulated in strength and in volume at one time to a point where it appeared that we could scarcely save our country from chaos and degeneration. We did, however, through the courage of the American people, through the cooperation of the united action of the whole of the country, and the leadership of the Republican Party, get by and save ourselves from collapse. And we have now turned those agencies and those policies to the problem of recovery in the United States, and those of you who are familiar with the events of the last 4 months will realize that we are moving on that road to recovery.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarkswestvirginia0", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-west-virginia-0", "publication_date": "29-10-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 172, "text": "We want to welcome each of you to the White House. We gather together to draw attention to an issue that is as vital to the future of this country as any that we face. No one should doubt that economic and technological progress will have very little impact unless the spirit of our people remains strong. Calvin Coolidge, a President whom I greatly admire, once said, The government of a country never gets ahead of the religion of a country. I deeply believe that if those in government offer a good example, and if the people preserve the freedom which is their birthright as Americans, no one need fear the future. Unfortunately, in the last two decades we have experienced an onslaught of such twisted logic that if Alice were visiting America, she might think she'd never left Wonderland. We are told that it somehow violates the rights of others to permit students in school who desire to pray to do so. Clearly this infringes on the freedom of those who choose to pray-a freedom taken for granted since the time of our Founding Fathers. This would be bad enough, but the purge of God from our schools went much farther. In one case, a Federal court ruled against the right of children to voluntarily say grace before lunch in the school cafeteria. In another situation a group of children, again on their own initiative and with their parents' approval, wanted to begin the school day with a minute of prayer and meditation, and they, too, were prohibited from doing so. Students have even been prevented from having voluntary prayer groups on school property after class hours just on their own. Now, no one is suggesting that others should be forced into any religious activity, but to prevent those who believe in God from expressing their faith is an outrage. And the relentless drive to eliminate God from our schools can and should be stopped. This issue has brought people of good will and every faith together to make the situation right. We believe that permitting voluntary prayer in public schools is within the finest traditions of this country and consistent with the principles of American liberty. Neither the constitutional amendment that I have endorsed nor the legislative remedies offered by others permits anyone to be coerced into religious activity. Instead, these measures are designed to protect the rights of those who choose to pray as well as those who choose not to. I want to thank all of you and all of those who'll gather on the Capitol Mall this evening for what you are doing on this vital issue.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscandlelightingceremonyforprayerschools", "title": "Remarks at a Candle-Lighting Ceremony for Prayer in Schools", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-candle-lighting-ceremony-for-prayer-schools", "publication_date": "25-09-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 173, "text": "And a special thanks to Senator Helms and Senator Thurmond and Congressman Kindness for all that they have done. And today I'd like to take this opportunity to urge the Senate to move directly on the constitutional amendment now awaiting action. The leadership in the House has the proposed constitutional amendment bottled up and has, thus far, failed to hold the appropriate hearings. Some suggest we should keep religion out of politics. Those in politics should keep their hands off of the religious freedom of our people, and especially our children. Earlier I quoted Calvin Coolidge. He had some other words I'd like to share with you. It would be difficult for me to conceive, President Coolidge said, of anyone being able to administer the duties of a great office like the Presidency without a belief in the guidance of Divine Providence. Unless the President is sustained by an abiding faith in the divine power, I cannot understand how he would have the courage to attempt to meet the various problems that constantly pour in upon him from all parts of the earth. Well, after 20 months I can attest to the truth of those words. Faith in God is a vital guidepost, a source of inspiration, and a pillar of strength in times of trial. In recognition of this, the Congress and the Supreme Court begin each day with a prayer, and that is why we provide chaplains for the Armed Forces. We can and must respect the rights of those who are nonbelievers, but we must not cut ourselves off from this indispensable source of strength and guidance. I think it'd be a tragedy for us to deny our children what the rest of us, in and out of government, find so valuable. If the President of the United States can pray with others in the Oval Office-and I have on a number of occasions-then let us make certain that our children have the same right as they go about preparing for their futures and for the future of this country. And now I understand that we are to light some candles. I think you children are to go down there and someone is to present me with a-there it is. These-candles, as I understand it, will start the ceremony tonight on the Mall. Happy that we have had this opportunity this morning. God bless you all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscandlelightingceremonyforprayerschools", "title": "Remarks at a Candle-Lighting Ceremony for Prayer in Schools", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-candle-lighting-ceremony-for-prayer-schools", "publication_date": "25-09-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 174, "text": "Tonight we celebrate the coming of a new year, a time of expectation and promise. And our policy of peace through strength is paying off in spades. In 6 weeks time, the Soviet Union is due to pull its remaining forces out of Afghanistan. I am confident the Soviets will stick to their timetable and be out by the 15th of February, which will then be a great day for world peace. I am also confident about 1989 because in just 3 weeks George Bush will be sworn in as the 41st President of the United States. He has handled skillfully the selection of his Cabinet, and the transition process is proceeding well and smoothly. Of course, we still reel in shock and horror from the bombing of Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, and we extend our sympathy to the bereaved. The pledge we made to seek out the truth and punish the guilty is a sacred one which George Bush shares. Indeed, President-elect Bush knows as thoroughly as anyone in the world today the nature and problem of terrorism. As chairman of this administration's task force on terrorism he oversaw a report that is the toughest statement to date on the need for strong action-including, when warranted, military action-against terrorists. That report ought to be giving some people sleepless nights right about now. That crime aside, however, there is little to disturb us about the overall state of the Nation as we join together to make merry and sing Auld Lang Syne. But still, during these days, when you turn on the television or read through the newspaper, you might get the idea that what faces George Bush upon his assumption of the responsibilities of the Presidency of the United States will be nothing but a series of impossible choices, heartaches, and just general trouble. Now, I am sure most of this talk is simply evidence that we are about to go through a change of leadership, a moment in time that does funny things to people, particularly in Washington. For some, this is a time to put in their bids on the agenda of the future. For others, this is a time for the jitters because they try to imagine what the future will bring and find it a little confusing. These jitters have been overcome with courage and vision in both the United States and Canada as the way has been cleared for an historic new free-trade agreement to take effect tomorrow.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationnewyearseve0", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on New Year's Eve", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-new-years-eve-0", "publication_date": "31-12-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 194, "text": "It is great to be back in Hillsborough County, one of the strongest Republican counties in New England, and let us hear it for Chairman Chris Egger and the Hillsborough County Republican party, everybody. And I want to extend congratulations to the Hillsborough County Republican party and especially the town committees that are being honored tonight. Because of all of you, Republicans now hold majorities in both Houses of the state legislature. But it really is great to be back at this dinner. I was reminded that I was graciously invited to speak to the Hillsborough County Republican party 11 years ago, and I get an invitation I guess every 11 years to come back. But it was amazing when I think of that year, 2010. It was the year that we won back to the House of Representatives from Nancy Pelosi's Democrat majority. A couple years later, we won the Senate, and then we won back America. And I am here to say, I believe we are on the verge of another great Republican comeback and it starts right here in the live free or die state of New Hampshire. I believe it. And I want to thank a couple of people, and most notably, the man you just heard from. I mean, talk about a good guy, someone who has a heart for public service. I knew a couple others in the course of my life and my career and I count them as friends as well, but I have to tell you, the people of New Hampshire are blessed by the extraordinary and compassionate leadership of Governor Chris Sununu and I am grateful for his esteem and support. I appreciate that overly generous introduction that he made, but Chris knows me well enough to know that the introduction I prefer is a little bit shorter. I am a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order, and it is my honor to be back in the state of New Hampshire. I also want to thank Executive Councilor Dave Wheeler on a lifetime of service and his recognition tonight, and also Speaker Sherm Packard is here. I know they are in session, and Mr. Speaker, we appreciate all the great leadership that you have provided, a Republican majority are providing here in New Hampshire. God bless you. Well, I came here tonight really for two reasons. First and foremost, I wanted to pay a debt of gratitude. To the people of New Hampshire, I just want to say thank you on behalf of myself and my family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 195, "text": " And secondly, after 134 days where the Biden administration and Democrats in Washington have been pushing open borders, higher taxes, runaway spending, more government, defunding the police, abandoning the right to life, censoring free speech, canceling our most cherished liberties, I came here to say enough is enough. I came here to say the time is now for every patriotic American who shares our ideals and values to stand up and fight back against the agenda of the radical left. I learned a lot serving alongside President Donald Trump. Some people think we are a little bit different, but I think what President Trump showed us was what Republicans can accomplish when our leaders stand firm on conservative principles and do not back down. That is exactly what he did for four years. And under President Donald Trump and our administration, it was four years of consequence, four years of results. It was four years of promises made and promises kept. I mean, think about it, think about it. In our 48 months, the Trump-Pence administration achieved the lowest unemployment, the highest household incomes, the most energy production, the most pro-American trade deals, the most secure border and the strongest military in the history of the world. I am writing a book about our time in the White House and almost everybody's excited about it. I cannot wait to unpack all that we did under this President's leadership and with the strong support of the people here in the Republican party on New Hampshire. I mean, in our first three years, think about it, we rebuilt the military and defeated the ISIS caliphate. We revived the economy and created seven million good paying jobs. We cut taxes. We cut regulations at a record pace, became a net exporter of energy for the first time in 70 years. We held China accountable for years of trade abuses and brought jobs back to the USA. And in the face of the worst pandemic in 100 years, we launched the greatest national mobilization since World War II.  But I have to tell you, to provide for the common defense is the first object of the national government, and I am proud to say our record was unparalleled for any administration in history. And I am proud and grateful for that record, not just because I was your Vice President, but I am the proud father of a United States Marine Captain who is currently deployed in service of the United States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 196, "text": "And I am also proud to say one of my unworthy son-in-laws is a Lieutenant and a pilot in the United States Navy. But under our administration, we rebuilt the military, a record $3 trillion in our national defense. And with that renewed American strength, we stood with our allies and stood up to our enemies as never before. Our forces defeated the ISIS caliphate and took down their leader without one American casualty. We isolated Iran as never before, withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal, and just a year ago, we saw Arab nation sign historic peace agreements with Israel for the first time in 25 years. And it was this President and this administration that kept our word to the American people and our most cherished ally when we moved the American embassy to Jerusalem, the capital of the state of Israel. And every day for four years, we stood up the timeless values that have always made this country great. Nearly 300 conservatives confirmed to our federal courts at every level, including Justice Neil Gorsuch, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Justice Amy Coney Barrett. And every single day, we defended all the God-given liberties enshrined in our Constitution and our Bill of Rights for every American of every belief. And we stood without apology every single day for the sanctity of human life. With your support here in New Hampshire, the support of people all across this country, and your prayers, we made history, we made a difference, we made America greater than ever before. I know the Governor said he did not come here to bash the current administration- 134 days, and the Biden-Harris administration has launched an avalanche of big government liberal policies, the likes of which I have never even imagined I'd see in our lifetime. And all of it designed to derail the progress that we made over the last four years. When President Biden takes to the podium in the Congress of the United States, and he announced an explosion of runaway spending, another $6 trillion. And after our administration worked in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic in a bipartisan way, every bill that passed the Congress passed on a bipartisan basis, they forced through the Congress a ENTITY bill to fund to massive expansion of the welfare state. And they passed it on a partisan vote. It is amazing the difference in approach. You heard Governor Sununu talk about the difference in engagement and I will leave that opinion to him. But I will tell you things are a little bit different.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 197, "text": "Our FDA worked closely with research companies and our administration to launch Operation Warp Speed. We cleared out the underbrush, we provided billions in support and we developed two safe and effective vaccines in nine months that are saving lives all across America and all over the world. Their FDA, I saw on the plane when I was flying here today, actually just issued a warning to Americans and I quote, Do not eat cicadas. I did not make that up. I mean, the truth is, they have been so busy on their side. Sometimes I think the left hand does not know what the far left hand is doing. They have literally, they have proposed trillions of dollars in the so-called infrastructure bill that is just a thinly disclosed climate change bill and the Green New Deal. And just as our economy here in New Hampshire and across America is getting back on our feet and Americans are going back to work, they plan to pay for all of this massive spending with military budget cuts and the largest tax increase in 50 years. And we are going to stand strong and send a message from right here in the live free or die state that we are going to stand strong for freedom, and we are going to stand strong for a growing and prosperous America with a limited federal government. After inheriting the most secure border in American history, the Biden administration ended construction on the border wall and canceled policies that had reduced illegal immigration by 90%. And I do not have to tell you they have unleashed the worst border crisis in history. They have bent the knee to international bureaucrats planning to join the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran Nuclear Deal. They formed a commission to pack the Supreme Court, supported more calls for gun control, eroding our second amendment rights. And they have joined the woke chorus accusing law enforcement in America of systemic racism. And President Biden's failed leadership, his home and only been matched by weak leadership abroad. It has set off the worst outbreak of violence in the Middle East in seven years. After our administration stood strong with Israel every day for four years, President Biden restored hundreds of millions of dollars to the Palestinian authority. And he even remained silent as Hamas terrorists were firing thousands of rockets at Israeli citizens. President Biden replaced strength with weakness, moral clarity with confusion, and loyalty with betrayal. But you in New Hampshire know what I know.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 198, "text": "When it comes to the foreign policy of the United States of America, if the world knows nothing else, let the world know this, America stands with Israel. And maybe the most troubling developments to families in the past few months has been the Biden administration's wholehearted embrace on the radical left's all encompassing assault on American culture and values. Under the Biden administration, patriotic education has been replaced with political indoctrination. They abolished our 1776 Commission and authorized teaching critical race theory in our schools. Instead of teaching all of our children, regardless of race or creed or color to be proud of their country, critical race theory teaches children as young as kindergarten to be ashamed of their skin color. Well, let me say, as my friend Tim Scott said, with great effect on the national stage, not long ago, America is not a racist country. It is past time for America to discard the left wing myth of systemic racism. And I commend state legislatures all across the country and governors who are banning critical race theory from our schools. Our founders said that we were to strive for a more perfect union. And so we have done throughout the long and storied history of this country. And while we are not perfect yet, we ought to do justice to all the progress that has been made and recognize that the United States of America is the most just, noble and inclusive nation that has ever existed on the face of the Earth. And the United States military is the greatest force for good the world has ever known. As our soldiers protect us abroad, we also do well to always pay a debt of honor and a debt of gratitude to those who put on a different uniform every day, put on a sidearm. And like my uncle who walked a beat in Chicago for 25 years, count our lives every day as more important than their own. Law enforcement officers in the United States of America are heroes, and they should be honored by every American every day. Last August at Fort McHenry I told the American people that they would not be safe in Joe Biden's America. And it grieves my heart to report to you tonight in Hillsborough county that murders have now increased by more than a third in our largest cities. Democrat efforts to defund the police, withdraw support for law enforcement has set off a violent crime wave that is wreaking havoc in families all across the nation. Black lives are not endangered by police, Black lives are saved by police every day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 199, "text": "We do not need to defund the police. The anti-law enforcement agenda of Joe Biden and the Democrats in Washington and put the lives of law-abiding citizens, every race, and creed, and color first. It is just amazing when you think of that, we are 134 days. In 2020, you remember Joe Biden was campaigning as a moderate when he campaigned, but he is literally governed as the most liberal president since FDR. Even AOC said that President Biden had exceeded Progressive's expectations, And that is saying a lot. But I do not believe for one moment that that is what the American people voted for in 2020. They did not vote to open our borders, to give away safety of our streets, their prosperity, or our freedom, or our future. So I want to say again, coming here to New Hampshire tonight, it is time. It is time for freedom loving Americans to stand up and say, No more. It is time for freedom loving Americans to unite behind an agenda that will bring America back. For all of my years in this movement, I actually first ran for Congress when one of the namesakes of this dinner was still in the White House. I had a chance to meet President Reagan in the Blue Room, my wife and I met him. I will never forget, I sat down next to him. I mean, Ronald Reagan was the reason why I joined the Republican Party, maybe like many of you. But I sat down next to him, felt like I was talking to Mount Rushmore. And I said, Mr. President, I, I said, I just want to thank you for everything you have done for this country and to encourage my generation to believe in this country again. And for all of my life, I will believe in that moment, that the 40th President of the United States of America blushed and said, Well, ENTITY, that is a very nice thing of you to say. But President Reagan articulated an agenda that he never took credit for, because it was an American agenda. He said, I am not a great communicator, I just communicated great things, And President Donald Trump did the same. There is an agenda of a strong and prosperous America built on freedom, and that is our agenda. The truth is our Republican Party has now become the home party for the American agenda. An agenda that believes in a strong national defense in a limited federal government in life, and liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 200, "text": "It is all fallen to us. We have been blessed in this nation. And to whom much is given And you are here tonight, because you know we have an obligation as they did in their time to do in our time, to stand strong for that positive American agenda, a strong military, secure borders, free enterprise, safe neighborhoods, support for law enforcement, America first trade deal, judges that uphold all of our God-given liberties, to fight for the opportunity of every American to choose where their children go to school, whether it is public, private, or parochial. And we, as Republicans, recognize that at the center of our Republic, at the center of our democratic institutions is the principle of one person, one vote. I mean, the truth is after an election that saw several states around the country literally set aside laws enacted by their legislature, now is the time for states to ensure that one person, one vote principle, that it is a center of our system, is protected and guaranteed. And make no mistake about it, that principal's under threat. Under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats in Washington want to nationalize our elections with their bill called H.R. 1. They want to literally codify many of the very practices that create the greatest opportunity for fraud. I mean, none other than New Hampshire's legendary Secretary of State Bill Gardner probably put it best. He said Nancy Pelosi's election bill, which the Senate will take up later this month, is a egregious overreach of federal authority that would render the New Hampshire Constitution null and void. Well, let me make you a promise, with your support, and your efforts, and the efforts of Republicans all across this nation, we are not going to let Nancy Pelosi override New Hampshire's Constitution or the state constitution of any state. And we will never let Nancy Pelosi take the first in the nation primary from New Hampshire! Our founders had a debate at the Constitutional Convention, Mr. Speaker, you know this, about where elections ought to be governed. He says, Right here at the state level, not in Washington DC. It is at the very center of our system and we are going to stand up and that system. We are going to defend state-based election reform, we are going to support voter ID, and we are going to work every day to restore the confidence of every American in every vote.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 201, "text": "And beyond all of that, having to do with prosperity, and security, and the integrity of the ballot, ours will be the party that stands for the religious liberty of every American of every faith, and we will defend the right to life. That is a winning agenda that will unite our country, restore our future. And that is an agenda that'll win back America. I have no doubt in my heart. So tonight in New Hampshire, I want you to be encouraged, I really do, because I am more confident than ever that victory is right around the corner, and not just the down-ballot victories that you delivered here in New Hampshire in 2020, but victories up and down the ballot, because we have seen this movie before. It was 2010 the last time I was at the Hillsborough County Republican Lincoln Reagan Dinner. I was serving as chairman of the House Republican conference. We were in the minority. Coming here to the Hillsborough County Republican Party Dinner, I just knew that if we offered a positive conservative agenda to the American people, we'd win back the House, we'd win back the Senate, we'd win back America. We'd win back the Senate, we'd win back America. And that is just what we did. And we are going to do it again in 2022 and 2024. We have just got to do a couple of things. We have got to tell our story and we have got to come together. Hey, I ran into ENTITY the other day. I mean, that guy, like half his speech was just talking about everything we got done in the first three years of our administration, and then steered this nation through one of the greatest challenges of our lifetime in our last year. I mean, we do not have to accept a future of socialist decline and moral decay. What we proved in the last four years is we can be a nation built on freedom whose government exists to serve its citizens, not the other way around. We can elect leadership that puts America and the American people first. And we can be a nation where every American has the freedom to live, to work, to worship according to the dictates of our conscience. We proved it. But we have got to tell our story and we have got to do one more thing. We have all been through a lot over the past year, a global pandemic, civil unrest, a divisive election and tragedy at our nation's Capitol.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 202, "text": "As I said that day, January 6th was a dark day in the history of the United States Capitol. But thanks to the swift action of the Capitol Police and federal law enforcement, violence was quelled, the Capitol was secured, and that same day we reconvened the Congress and did our duty under the Constitution and the laws of the United States. President Trump and I have spoken many times since we left office. And I do not know if we will ever see eye-to-eye on that day, but I will always be proud of what we accomplished for the American people over the last four years. I will not allow Democrats or their allies in the media to use one tragic day to discredit the aspirations of millions of Americans, or allow Democrats or their allies in the media to distract our attention from a new administration intent on dividing our country to advance their radical agenda. My fellow Republicans, for our country, for our future, for our children and our grandchildren, we must move forward united. Ronald Reagan probably said it best in 1976 after he'd come up short for the Republican Convention. He was called to the podium by President Ford. And he said words that I think speak to our party and our movement today. Ronald Reagan said, We have got to quit talking to each other and about each other, and go out and communicate to the world and carry them the message they have been waiting to hear. Let us press on with a positive agenda. Let us tell the story to our neighbors and friends of everything we were able to accomplish when we put Republican conservative principles into practice in a short period of time, and made a stronger and more prosperous and more secure America. Compelled by that energy that has worked so powerfully in the hearts of generations of Americans. We have got to keep the faith. We have got to keep faith with our founders and our highest ideals. We have got to defend the freedoms enshrined in our declaration and our constitution, and be ready to keep our oath even when it hurts, as the good book says. We have got to keep faith with 74 million Americans who believe we could be prosperous again, who believe we could be strong again and deliver for ourselves and our prosperity a record. And lastly, we have got to keep faith with him who has ever guided this miracle of democracy on these wilderness shores. Keep faith that he is still with the good people of this nation today. God is not done with America yet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepencespeechtranscriptontrumpmayneverseeeyetoeyeonjanuary6", "title": "Mike Pence Speech Transcript on Trump: May Never See Eye To Eye on January 6", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-speech-transcript-on-trump-may-never-see-eye-to-eye-on-january-6", "publication_date": "03-06-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 216, "text": "Wendell Phillips once said that you can always get the truth from an American statesman after he has turned 70 or given up all hope of the Presidency. Well, today I welcome you, President Mubarak, as a friend. Coming from a 76-year-old constitutionally prohibited from seeking another term, you can rest assured those sentiments are genuine and come from the heart. This visit is a particularly happy occasion as it provides the opportunity to congratulate you personally on your reelection to a second term as ENTITY. As a second term veteran myself, however, let me suggest, Mr. President, it does not get any easier. The referendum that approved your second term reflects the strong confidence that the Egyptian people have in your leadership. We share that same confidence. Nevertheless, Mr. President, we both know that governing a country in which there are divergent political views and a lively opposition is a tough job. We respect your work to broaden participation in the political process and are confident it will help create the stable political environment needed for Egypt to move forward. Egypt today, under your guidance, is resuming its rightful place in the forefront of world leadership. This is particularly important at a time when the forces of fanaticism and blind hatred threaten the security and stability of the Middle East. Egypt, by again exerting its wise and calming influence, provides the world hope that the serious challenges facing the Middle East can and will be overcome and that the region will be restored to a happier and more tranquil course. Likewise, President Mubarak, you have wisely and effectively led Egypt onto a course of economic reform and development. We, too, learned in our own efforts to strip away years of government intervention in our marketplace how monumental this task can be, how ingrained is the dependence on intervention, and how powerful are the interest groups that resist change. But we are convinced that such vigorous reform is the surest path to economic progress. And, Mr. President, Americans will stand and work with Egyptians in the cause of growing prosperity, just as we do in the cause of peace. And in saying that, I propose a toast to you, Mr. President, Mrs. Mubarak, the people of Egypt, and to the close and amicable ties that will continue between our peoples and our governments. The elegant and warm reception you have accorded us reflects the best tradition of American friendship and genuine openness. It is a tradition that has deep roots in our culture, too.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhestatedinnerforpresidentmohammedhosnimubarakegypt", "title": "Toasts at the State Dinner for President Mohammed Hosni Mubarak of Egypt", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-state-dinner-for-president-mohammed-hosni-mubarak-egypt", "publication_date": "28-01-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 217, "text": "We value friendship and loyalty to friends. As usual, President Reagan and his graceful spouse have made us feel welcome and quite at home the minute we arrived at the White House this morning. They symbolize the American spirit at its best. My meeting with the President today was another confirmation of my belief that he is a man of wisdom and vision. He is an American in the true sense of the word. I expressed to him my admiration of the relentless efforts he exerted for years to make the world more safe and secure for future generations. His recent achievement in this area will certainly have a lasting effect on world peace and stability. I have no doubt that other steps will follow in the same direction during the months ahead. I am certain that regional conflicts will figure high on the agenda throughout the year. Of these conflicts, the Middle East problems deserve special attention and priority. Strenuous efforts are needed to stop the war, which is still raging in the Gulf, and set the peace process in motion again. We have to demonstrate to all the parts concerned that peace is the only meaningful and effective way to settle disputes and solve problems. With this in mind, Egypt has not hesitated at any point to take pioneering steps in order to make peace. It is for this reason, too, that I have proposed a few days ago a moratorium on all forms of violence and repression. I am quite convinced that this proposal, which is conceived as a preparatory step towards comprehensive peace, reflects the real sentiment of people of good will and human principles everywhere. No one who looks ahead and thinks of the future can accept the continuation of occupation and oppression. No one can, in good conscience, condone a policy of shooting and beating in a land that is holy to all of us. What I am proposing here is a policy of hope and positivity to replace despair and fear. I am sure that I am not alone in that, for I am backed by millions of men and women of courage and conviction everywhere. Let me seize this opportunity to thank all those Americans, Israelis, and others who raise their voices in support of peace and in defense of liberty. Dear friends, American leaders have worked with Egyptian leaders over the years in order to construct a model for friendship and cooperation among nations. In particular, President Reagan has made a great contribution to the development of friendly relations between Egypt and the United States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhestatedinnerforpresidentmohammedhosnimubarakegypt", "title": "Toasts at the State Dinner for President Mohammed Hosni Mubarak of Egypt", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-state-dinner-for-president-mohammed-hosni-mubarak-egypt", "publication_date": "28-01-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 242, "text": "From what I have been able to gather in the brief time I have been in your great city, I learned the pollsters are somewhat divided about the New York City vote. A reporter asked me the other day after looking at both the Gallup and the Harris polls, which was my favorite poll. I did not hesitate for a second. I told him my favorite poll is Muskie. Tell me, Daddy, how was it that after losing a national election in 1960 to President Kennedy and then after losing a State election as Governor in California in 1962 to Pat Brown, how does it happen that Richard Nixon has been able to win his party's nomination for the Presidency in 1968? I told her if she would give me a week I would try to think of some reasons. Not long ago, I was talking to a very wise friend about some of the great political campaigns we had had in this country in past years. We talked about 1948 the campaign that resembles this campaign in so many ways. There was a Midwestern progressive, you will remember, who had won election after election, and he was running against a Wall Street lawyer, who had tried out for the job once before and had been roundly rejected. He has not changed his opinions since then either. He has learned a thing or two about how to win friends and how to influence people-some people, at least in the past few years. It was harassing the Democratic candidate with catcalls and cloud nine ideas about a world that never was. Everybody told the Republican candidate then in '48 that he was a shoo-in. He avoided taking a position on anything more controversial than Mother's Day. And he was for it. The polls and the pundits had buried the Democratic candidate by late September. And not many of them looked to see if he stayed buried. As you may remember, that Midwestern progressive just absolutely refused to cooperate at his own funeral. But I came here to tell you today it is coming, as sure as I stand here. And the Midwestern progressive of 1968 Hubert Humphrey is going to wake up on the morning of November 6 as the new President-elect of the United States. My friend and I talked about another election this one a defeat for the Democrats, but a defeat that foreshadowed victory 4 years later.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorkcityluncheontheallamericanscouncilthedemocraticnationalcommittee", "title": "Remarks in New York City at a Luncheon of the All Americans Council of the Democratic National Committee", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-city-luncheon-the-all-americans-council-the-democratic-national-committee", "publication_date": "27-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 243, "text": "Roman Catholic progressive-spokesman for the cities, the poor farmer, the laboring man, the Negro, and all the great peoples who had immigrated from Europe to enrich America with their talents and their traditions. I do not need to remind any of you of the bitter campaign that followed in 1928. Demagogues had a field day playing on the fear of Catholicism, the fear of foreigners, the fear of the cities, and the corruption that the cities were supposed to contain. Al Smith and Joe Robinson of Arkansas, his running mate fought back, reminding the people that their interests lay in a better deal for the farmer and the worker, and in building a more united and unified nation not ever in cultivating hatred and suspicion of their neighbors. Smith and Robinson lost that election. the forces they set in motion the alliance they called into being gave Franklin Delano Roosevelt and three later Democratic Presidents the basis of smashing victories at the polls that we had never known before. The 1920 census had showed that for the first time more people were now living in the cities than were living in rural areas. jobs, housing, transportation, law and order, relations between the races and ethnic groups. When the Democrats nominated Al Smith, they were nominating a man who had grown up in the city, who understood city problems, who had the energy and the will to master these problems. Maybe maybe Al Smith was ahead of his time. It would take eight more elections before religious prejudice could be overcome and a Catholic could be elected President in the United States. But in a deeper sense, Al Smith was right-right for his time. In nominating him the Democrats were facing the problems of the hour, and they were facing those problems when they occurred. That my friends is the essential difference between the two parties in America. Democrats face problems; Republicans defer problems. It is a lot easier on the party in power to defer problems for somebody else to handle later on. But it is not easy on your country. The problems deferred mean solutions deferred, and that means trouble. It has been called one of the greatest single migrations in the history of the world from the rural areas to the cities of North America greater than the emigration from Europe in the peak years at the turn of the century; greater than the Indian and Pakistani migrations in 1947; greater by far than the Israelite exodus from the land of the Pharaohs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorkcityluncheontheallamericanscouncilthedemocraticnationalcommittee", "title": "Remarks in New York City at a Luncheon of the All Americans Council of the Democratic National Committee", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-city-luncheon-the-all-americans-council-the-democratic-national-committee", "publication_date": "27-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 244, "text": "In the 1950's alone during which Republicans were in office most of the time-nearly 10 million Americans left the farm for the city. That meant not only fewer farms more than a million and a half fewer farms but it meant an unbearable strain on the ability of the cities to provide for their new residents. Did any of you ever hear the Republicans calling for a model cities program to relieve the blight of the slums? Did any of you hear the Republicans saying that we must build 26 million new housing units for families of modest means, as we said in the Congress this year? Did you hear them say that the schools needed Federal help that poor kids were entitled to a head start in life? Did you hear the Republicans urging the country to find jobs and to provide training for rural people who had no skills when they came to the city and wanted to work? Did you find them pressing for help to depressed areas, so that the people might be encouraged to remain in rural America, instead of crowding into the cities? You heard nothing of that. You heard veto. You heard sermons about kennel dogs. You heard talk about rolling readjustments when the country went through three recessions in 8 years of Republican rule. Meanwhile, the fuse of trouble burned. We could either continue to close our eyes to the urgent needs of our people or we could get this country moving toward meeting those needs. I think everyone in this room knows the choice that we made. And for all the Gallup polls and all the pundits in the world, I would not take back that choice that we made. You just cannot expect peace and quiet when you start to deal with and try to handle trouble when people who have lived in the hopeless world of poverty, and malnutrition, and disease, when they suddenly find out that there is a better way to live. Some of what you start to do fails to achieve its objective. And then the apostles of inaction-the people who ignored the Nation's problems when they were in office they began to set up a peevish wail from the sidelines. Turn back, they said, it is too expensive to meet these problems. Forget them and somehow they will go away. But they can be mastered and if we have the vision and we have the will to master them, we can. And we are on the way to mastering them right this minute. An unemployment rate that we have cut in half. Seventeen million children getting additional Federal help in school.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorkcityluncheontheallamericanscouncilthedemocraticnationalcommittee", "title": "Remarks in New York City at a Luncheon of the All Americans Council of the Democratic National Committee", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-city-luncheon-the-all-americans-council-the-democratic-national-committee", "publication_date": "27-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 245, "text": "A million and a half young people going to college with the help of the Federal Government. The high school dropout rate is down 27 percent in the last 5 years. The number of persons living in poverty is down 38 percent in the last 5 years. The cash benefits under social security are up 60 percent in the same period. What it adds up to is meeting America's needs to facing America's problems and facing them now, not deferring them until they have multiplied beyond the power of the next generation to cope with them at all. Now, the choice that you are going to have to make just 9 days from now is clear as a crystal. that Cuba in that period had been lost to communism; that in 1960 an ultimatum hung over Berlin; that in Southeast Asia, Laos was disintegrating, and the situation in Vietnam where he had recommended intervention in 1954 growing steadily worse; that a summit conference had been canceled because of a U-2 flight; that the projected visit of our own American President to Japan had been canceled because of the fear of hostile demonstrators; that the Russian Premier was threatening to bury us economically, and many people feared that he might just do that; that the Congo was in flames and mortal danger was faced all through Africa where they were faced with being taken over by the Communists; and that Indonesia, the fifth largest nation in the world, with more than 100 million people, was sliding toward the same fate; that Chinese power threatened to overwhelm India and the rest of Asia. I could go on and talk about some other problems of that time, too. But I cite it to you today in the light of the ugly and unfair charges that have been made about our security gap and the charges that have been made about our attempts to win peace in the world. On the night of March 31st, with all the sincerity I could command, I said to the American people what I had concluded sometime before; that I wanted 1968 to be a peace year for me instead of a political year for me. Well, we are working very hard at that. It is a matter that we cannot settle in the newspapers. I do not believe we can make much progress here at the luncheon club. But I can tell you that there is not a man in all of this world that wants progress as much as I do. And there is not anybody that is doing any more about it, either.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorkcityluncheontheallamericanscouncilthedemocraticnationalcommittee", "title": "Remarks in New York City at a Luncheon of the All Americans Council of the Democratic National Committee", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-city-luncheon-the-all-americans-council-the-democratic-national-committee", "publication_date": "27-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 246, "text": "I wish I could give you some better news and I wish I could tell you more than I have. I know how each of you feels. I am curious myself a great deal of the time. And particularly you women I live with three or four of them and I know their curiosity always prevails. Grandmother Johnson has been worried for 3 days about what our new granddaughter is going to be named. The press sometimes refers to these things as political observers believe that is what the fellow means that is writing it. But when we say something, you remember it a long, long time. There is one thing when we are dealing with the lives of human beings we must not do. We must not be careless and we must not be soft and we must not play it loose. As eager as I am and I work on it every day and every night, and I have for many, many months I just cannot make news until there is news. As soon as there is news, you will be the first to know it you, the American people and the people of the world. I am thinking now of the words that I uttered when I got off the plane the day President Kennedy was taken from us when I began to try to assume the terrifying responsibilities of the Presidency I said, Give me your prayers. What I need now is not your curiosity, I need your prayers. I have told you about some of the conditions in 1960. I tried to help solve those problems and not add to them. But I have not forgotten them. I cite them lest we forget the shape of the world the last time Richard Nixon held public office. He can make whatever promises he wants to for the future. But I am not going to let him rewrite the history that he made in the past. Now, there is a second choice this year a fellow whose fame until now rested on his ability to stand in college doorways, defying the law, and on encouraging people in his State to feel that they were a part of a separate nation. You line up a few thousand troops on the sidewalks of the city to preserve order. You throw those bureaucrats' briefcases into the Potomac not including the ones, I suppose, that contain the help for the people of Alabama. You turn the most difficult diplomatic and military problems of the country over to General Curtis LeMay. And then you use the Presidential limousine to take care of the protest movement.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorkcityluncheontheallamericanscouncilthedemocraticnationalcommittee", "title": "Remarks in New York City at a Luncheon of the All Americans Council of the Democratic National Committee", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-city-luncheon-the-all-americans-council-the-democratic-national-committee", "publication_date": "27-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 247, "text": "Well, there it is that is a program to establish justice, to insure domestic tranquillity, to provide for the common defense, and to promote the general welfare. It is amazing that somebody did not think of that before. Well, maybe somebody did and is now consigned to the forgotten footnotes of history. He is a man who began fighting for human rights before others began to pay even rhetorical tributes to freedom. He is a man who saw the needs of our schoolchildren, and he introduced one of the earliest and more far-reaching aid-to-education bills. He is a man who introduced Medicare legislation in the United States Senate, and who endured the violent abuses of its opponents. Johnnie Rooney, your great Congressman, who sits at this dais with me today, knows that Hubert Humphrey has been a general in every effort to improve living conditions in the cities of America and to lift the workingman, and the farmers' income, and to open American doors to new immigrants. Hubert Humphrey has faced America's problems all of his livelong life. He has not deferred any of them not even a single day. He has not ignored any of them. He has not offered simplistic solutions that appeal to the voters' fears. He has offered practical solutions that appeal to the best instincts of our people. And when John Kennedy turned to him at the signing of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, he said, Hubert, handing him this pen this is your treaty. And it was the culmination of years of working and planning for a world without nuclear fallout. Hubert Humphrey, wherever he is now, is fighting for a new treaty to halt the spread of nuclear weapons that we have negotiated but it is held up in the Senate because Richard Nixon said, Let us slow down and not take it up now until we can have a political election. because I believed that he was the best qualified man in America to be President, in the event I could not finish out my term. The 4 years since then have convinced me that my judgment was right; that today, in 1968, Hubert Humphrey is beyond question the American public servant who is best prepared by intelligence, by experience, by compassion, and by character to succeed to the highest office in this land.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorkcityluncheontheallamericanscouncilthedemocraticnationalcommittee", "title": "Remarks in New York City at a Luncheon of the All Americans Council of the Democratic National Committee", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-city-luncheon-the-all-americans-council-the-democratic-national-committee", "publication_date": "27-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 248, "text": "You know, Coach Fulmer came up 48 hours ago, and he and Al practiced all this 15 times. We are going to be cited by the Federal Election Commission for this event. Let me tell you you know, I am not running for anything. I can tell you the whole story about this this Tennessee-Arkansas deal. And for all of you who are covering this who are not from one of the two States, let me the game was an unbelievable game, and Arkansas was ahead at the end. And there was only a minute and a half to go, and we seemed to have an insurmountable lead. And our quarterback was trying to kill the clock, a little of the clock. And the Tennessee line broke through the Arkansas offensive line and tackled him behind the line. And he fell, not with his free hand but with the hand on the ball, which squirted out into the arms of Tennessee. Who is responsible for that over there? And what you really do not what Al could not tell you, because he is not like me; I am not running for anything is that I was actually watching this game as this foreign policy crisis was unfolding. And I was talking on the phone, injecting things, and they thought, you know, I was being tougher on what was happening on the phone, and I was really just reacting to the ballgame. But to be fair, to be perfectly fair to Tennessee, I think that you had over 40 yards still to go Coach Fulmer. So it was not like he fumbled on the goal line. And they won the game, and they went on to the national championship. And I paid off my bet, and The Vice President. I will get you some ribs. aand we have had a lot of laughs about it. But I do want to say, you know, I was the first President from my home State ever elected. I owe a lot to Tennessee; if it had not been for the Vice President joining the ticket, I might not have won the first time, almost certainly would not have won the second time, because we made all the record we made together. I like teams, and people, who do not quit, who never say die, and who stick together. I like the fact that this team had a lot of stars, at different times during the year, but won as a team.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthencaafootballchampionuniversitytennesseevolunteers", "title": "Remarks to the NCAA Football Champion University of Tennessee Volunteers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-ncaa-football-champion-university-tennessee-volunteers", "publication_date": "17-08-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 252, "text": "Well, you know, I really appreciate that lesson in history from the Vice President. I will tell you one thing you remember what John Nance Garner said about the Vice Presidency; he said it was not worth a warm what kettle of spit, or something like that. That is before Al Gore got ahold of it. Nobody will ever say that again ever, ever, ever say that again. And just for your information, George Clinton of New York, doubtless a relative of mine the only man in America ever to be the Governor of a State in excess of 20 years he served for 21 years as Governor of New York. It just sort of runs in the family, you know. I want to tell you all first to the White House staff and to all the appointees who are here; to the members of the Clinton/Gore campaign, from our wonderful campaign manager, Peter Knight, on down; and to the members of the people who work for our Democratic Party campaign. I want to say a special word of thanks to Don Fowler and Chris Dodd; they did a wonderful job, all the people at the party. To our terrific Cabinet over here on the left you know, they have labored for 4 years to uphold the dignity of our Government, and they sort of changed their image today. That picture of Warren Christopher in that T-shirt gets out he will be on Letterman and Leno within 48 hours. I thank you all so much. Last night I had a chance to do something really quite wonderful for me. I was able to have a meeting with when I was home in Arkansas with everybody who ever worked for me there at least we invited them all the people who worked for me 20 years ago when I was attorney general, the people who worked for me during all my five terms as Governor. And I told them something I want to tell you; that is, I have always been a very hard-working, kind of hard-driving person. I am always focused on the matter before me. Sometimes I do not say thank you enough. And I have always been kind hard on myself, and sometimes I think just by omission I am too hard on the people who work here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehousevictorycelebration", "title": "Remarks at a White House Victory Celebration", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-victory-celebration", "publication_date": "06-11-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 253, "text": "You have accomplished a phenomenal amount in the last 4 years, and you have proved that even in this vast country of ours, where the Government is only one part of our national partnership and billions upon billions of decisions are made every day by people who are not in our Government thank goodness we are primarily a country of free individuals with a free enterprise system but you have proved again something that was clearly in doubt in 1992 at election time. You have proved that with disciplined, sustained, focused effort, America can be changed for the better. You have proved that we can galvanize the energies of the American people and that we can, in fact, bring the deficit down it is not a permanent feature of American life; we can, in fact, grow the economy on a sustained basis; we can, in fact, improve the education and the educational opportunities of our children; we can, in fact, lower the crime rate; and in fact, if people will help us enough in communities across the country, we can even help to change some of the very difficult cultural patterns that had begun to develop in our country over the last several years. You all did that. Very often, I get the credit for the work you do, and then when something goes haywire, if I make a mistake, you have to try to figure out how to clean it up. And I appreciate that. And I am sure I will give you other opportunities in the year ahead. I just want you to know, all of you, from the Cabinet to the staff, to the appointees, to all the others who are here, you should be very proud of this. This race was won because of the record we made and because of the plans we have and because we have established in the minds of the American people that it is more than talk with us, that we work at it hard every day. All of us, we work hard. a vision, a strategy, hard work, and success. And we have a lot more work to do. But when our work is done and when there is 8 years of sustained, disciplined effort, we will have gone a long way toward preparing our country for this new century. I cannot even imagine what the world is going to be like, but I try to imagine it all the time, 20 or 30 or 40 years from now.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehousevictorycelebration", "title": "Remarks at a White House Victory Celebration", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-victory-celebration", "publication_date": "06-11-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 254, "text": "As we meet here today, the serious crisis in world affairs overshadows all that we do. This country of ours, together with the other members of the United Nations, is engaged in a critical struggle to uphold the values of peace and justice and freedom. We are struggling to preserve our own liberty as a nation. More than that, we are striving to cooperate with other free nations to uphold the basic values of freedom of peace based on justice which are essential for the progress of mankind. As we engage in that struggle, we must preserve the elements of our American way of life that are the basic source of our strength. This is the purpose of this Midcentury White House Conference on Children and Youth. We are seeking ways to help our children and young people become mentally and morally stronger, and to make them better citizens. I think you should go right ahead with this work, because it is more important now than it has ever been. Our thoughts and prayers are with our young men who are fighting in Korea. They are engaged in a battle against tremendous odds. The full effort of the united people of this country is behind them. All of us are aware of the grave risk of general conflict which has been deliberately caused by the Chinese Communist leaders. Their action greatly changes the immediate situation with which we are confronted. It does not change our fundamental purpose to work for the cause of a just and peaceful world. No matter how the immediate situation may develop, we must remember that the fighting in Korea is but one part of the tremendous struggle of our time the struggle between freedom and Communist slavery. This struggle engages all our national life, all our institutions, and all our resources. For the effort of the evil forces of communism to reach out and dominate the world confronts our Nation and our civilization with the greatest challenge in our history. I believe the single most important thing our young people will need to meet this critical challenge in the years ahead is moral strength and strength of character. I know that the work of this conference will be of tremendous assistance in the urgent task of helping our young people achieve the strength of character they will need. If we are to give our children the training that will enable them to hold fast to the right course in these dangerous times, we must clearly understand the nature of the crisis. We must understand the nature of the threat created by international communism. In the first place, it is obviously a military threat. The Communist dominated countries are maintaining large military forces-far larger than they could possibly need for peaceful purposes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforethemidcenturywhitehouseconferencechildrenandyouth", "title": "Address Before the Midcentury White House Conference on Children and Youth.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-the-midcentury-white-house-conference-children-and-youth", "publication_date": "05-12-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 255, "text": "And they have shown by their actions in Korea that they will not hesitate to use these forces in armed aggression whenever it suits their evil purposes. Because of this military threat, we must strengthen our military defenses. We are now engaged in a great program of rearmament. This will change the lives of our young people. A great many of them will have to devote some part of their lives to service in our Armed Forces or other defense activities. In no other way can we insure our survival as a nation. Our objective is not simply to build up our own Armed Forces. Our objective is to help build up the collective strength of the free nations the nations which share the ideals and aspirations of free men everywhere. As a matter of defense, we need the combined resources and the common determination of the free world to meet the military threat of communism. But our problem is more than a military matter. Our problem and our objective is to build a world order based on freedom and justice. We have worked with the free nations to lay the foundations of such a world order in the United Nations. We must remain firm in our commitment to the United Nations. That is the only way out of an endless circle of force and retaliation, violence and war which will carry the human race back to the Dark Ages if it is not stopped now. And this is a point that we must make sure our children and young people understand. The threat of communism has other aspects than the military aspect. In some ways the moral and spiritual dangers that flow from communism are a much more serious threat to freedom than are its military power. The ideology of communism is a challenge to all the values of our society and of our way of life. Some people are most concerned about the Communist threat to our economic system. But, serious as this is, it is only one of the many problems that communism raises. Communism attacks our main basic values, our belief in God, our belief in the dignity of man and the value of human life, our belief in justice and freedom. It attacks the institutions that are based on these values. It attacks our churches, our guarantees of civil liberty, our courts, our democratic form of government. Communism claims that all these things are merely tools of self-interest and greed that they are weapons used by one class to oppress another. We who live in this country know, from our own experience, how false this attack of communism is.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforethemidcenturywhitehouseconferencechildrenandyouth", "title": "Address Before the Midcentury White House Conference on Children and Youth.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-the-midcentury-white-house-conference-children-and-youth", "publication_date": "05-12-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 256, "text": "But there are many people in other parts of the world who have suffered injustice, who have been oppressed, or who stagger under burdens of poverty or disease, to whom the false doctrines of communism have an appeal. Every time our American institutions fail to live up to their high purposes, every time they fail in the proper administration of justice, the forces of communism are aided in their attempt to poison the minds of men everywhere against us and our institutions. Our teachers and all others who deal with our young people should place uppermost the need for making our young people under, stand our free institutions and the values upon which they rest. We must fight against the moral cynicism the materialistic view of life on which communism feeds. We must teach the objectives that lie behind our institutions, and the duty of all our citizens to make those institutions work more perfectly. Nothing is more important than this. And nothing this conference can do will have a greater effect on the world struggle against communism than spelling out ways in which our young people can better understand our democratic institutions. We must teach them why we must fight, when necessary, to defend our democratic institutions, our belief in the rights of the individual, and our fundamental belief in God. These White House Conferences have done much, over the years, to make our people and our Government conscious of our social problems, as they affect children, and to help solve those problems. These conferences have made our democracy work better have aided it to carry out its promise of a better life for all. In this fifth conference of this White House series you are carrying on that great tradition. This year you are mainly concerned with the mental and moral health of our children. And that is exactly what you should be concerned with at this time. I do not claim to be an expert in these things, and I know that I am addressing a conference of experts, but I think there are certain fundamental factors in the development of the American character that it is necessary for us to look to. That reminds me, when I was running the county at home Jackson County we had a welfare department. And it occurred to me that we needed an expert in that welfare department, and I succeeded in getting a couple of fine women to come out and help us carry on that program. The director of welfare came to me one day, all out of breath, and he said, Now Judge, I do not think this thing is going to work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforethemidcenturywhitehouseconferencechildrenandyouth", "title": "Address Before the Midcentury White House Conference on Children and Youth.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-the-midcentury-white-house-conference-children-and-youth", "publication_date": "05-12-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 257, "text": "I find that these experts of yours never washed a dish or pinned a diaper in their lives. It did work, however, and it was a very satisfactory outcome we had with that welfare department. The basis of mental and moral strength for our children lies in spiritual things. It lies first of all in the home. And next, it lies in the religious and moral influences which are brought to bear on the children. If children have a good home a home in which they are loved and understood and if they have good teachers in the first few grades of school, I believe they are well started on the way toward being useful and honorable citizens. I have always considered my mother and father as my first great influence. I was lucky to have picked the right mother and father. I have always considered that my first, second, and third grade teachers made an immense contribution to any character that I may have at the present time. And I do not think I am being old-fashioned when I say that they ought to have religious training when they are young, and that they will be happier for it and better for it the rest of their lives. In the days ahead there will be many cases in which we will have to make special efforts to see that children get a fair chance at the right kind of start in life. For as our defense effort is increased, special problems will be created by the disruption of the lives of many families. When the White House Conference was held in 1940, the nature of the defense problems which lay ahead was not very clear to those who participated. But in the years that followed we found that the defense program created many problems that affected our children. Today we know much more about these problems, and our recent experience in trying to solve them is fresh in the minds of most of us. I know the work of this conference will give us some important guidelines as to how we can handle these matters best. Our defense effort is all-important, but we must do everything we can to see that it does not handicap the lives of children who are affected by it. The delegates to this conference can help us do a better job this time in meeting our defense problems. This is a vital part of the work of helping to make a healthier and happier life for all our children in the years ahead. We must remember, in all that we do at this conference and afterward, that we cannot insulate our children from the uncertainties of the world in which we live or from the impact of the problems which confront us all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforethemidcenturywhitehouseconferencechildrenandyouth", "title": "Address Before the Midcentury White House Conference on Children and Youth.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-the-midcentury-white-house-conference-children-and-youth", "publication_date": "05-12-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 261, "text": "I am pleased to be back in the great State of New Hampshire again. And I am honored to be with the ENTITY and Air National Guard, and with reservists from every branch of our military. You are demonstrating that duty and public service are alive and well in New Hampshire. You stand ready to defend your fellow citizens, and you need to know your fellow citizens are grateful. All of you are balancing jobs and your lives and public service. You care about your communities, and you care about your country. Today I am going to talk about two great priorities for our country. We will promote economic growth and create jobs for America, and we will wage the war on terror until it is won. I want to thank Major General Blair for the introduction and for putting up with my entourage. I want to thank his commander in chief, the Governor of the great State of New Hampshire, for joining us today, Governor Benson, and first lady Denise. I want to thank Major General Joseph Simeone, Brigadier General John Weeden, Brigadier General Benton Smith, Colonel Protzmann Carolyn Protzmann, Lt. Colonel Robert Monahan, and Lt. Colonel Leroy Dunkelberger, State Command Sergeant Michael Rice, Command Chief Master Sergeant Ronald Nadeau. This State is fortunate to have an excellent Governor. You are fortunate to have an excellent congressional delegation as well. I am proud to be here today with two fine United States Senators, my friend Judd Gregg and his wife, Cathy and my friend John Sununu. These Senators are strong supporters of your mission. They appreciate what you do. They vote for strong defense budgets because they know what I know, that any time we put our troops into harm's way, you must have the best training, the best equipment, the best possible pay. Congressman Charlie Bass and Congressman Jeb Bradley, who are with us today, understand that as well. My friend Ruth Griffin is here from the Executive Council of New Hampshire. I appreciate the local officials who have come State and local officials to greet me and to be here with you today. I'd like to give you some advice, but I do not know how to ice skate. Today when I landed, I met a lady named Cathy Rice. It is important for me to herald the armies of the soldiers of compassion, people I meet when I land in respective cities. It is important because it helps our country understand our true strength is not our military might or the size of our wallet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaseairnationalguardbaseportsmouthnewhampshire", "title": "Remarks at Pease Air National Guard Base in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pease-air-national-guard-base-portsmouth-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "09-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 262, "text": "The true strength of America is the hearts and souls of fellow citizens who are willing to help people who need help. You see, Cathy Rice supports provides support services to hundreds of New Hampshire National Guard families. She helps find babysitters and prepares meals and assists with paying bills, helps families when there is a deployment. She knows people stay behind; they worry about their loved ones. She helps fill that void with love and compassion and care. She offers support to the New Hampshire ENTITY National Guard Family Volunteer Program. It is an important part of completing the mission. She does so because she cares about a fellow citizen. I am proud of Cathy. I am proud of her heart. I want to thank her for her service and encourage each and every one of you to love a neighbor just like you'd like to be loved yourself. America's strength is the heart and soul of our citizens. New Hampshire has had citizen soldiers since before America was a country. Militia and volunteers and guardsmen have served from the Revolution to the Civil War to World War II to Desert Storm. Honor and service and courage are great New Hampshire traditions, and you are upholding those traditions. We live in an era of new threats, and the citizens of New Hampshire are stepping forward to meet those dangers. Citizen soldiers have performed mid-air refueling missions for coalition forces in Iraq. You are training members of the Afghan National ENTITY. You are guarding suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay, preparing for homeland security missions. Citizen soldiers are serving on every front on the war on terror, and you are making your State and your country proud. Your lives can be changed in a moment, with a sudden call to duty. I want to thank you for your willingness to heed that important call. And I want to thank your families. I want to thank your sons and daughters, your husbands and wives, who share in your sacrifice, who are willing to sacrifice for our country, and who stand behind you. You are serving at a time of testing for this Nation. And we are meeting the tests of history. We are defeating the enemies of freedom. We are confronting the challenge to build prosperity for our country. Every test of America has revealed the character of America. And after the last 2 years, no one in the world, friend or foe, can doubt the will and the character and the strength of the American people. When you become the President, you cannot predict all the challenges that will come.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaseairnationalguardbaseportsmouthnewhampshire", "title": "Remarks at Pease Air National Guard Base in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pease-air-national-guard-base-portsmouth-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "09-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 263, "text": "But you do know the principles that you bring to the office, and they should not change with time or with polls. I took this office to make a difference, not to mark time. I came to this office to confront problems directly and forcefully, not to pass them on to other Presidents and other generations. The challenges we face today cannot be met with timid actions or bitter words. Our challenges will be overcome with optimism and resolve and confidence in the ideals of America. Because we believe in our free enterprise system, we can be confident in our economy's future. Our economy has been through a lot. When I took office, the stock market had been declining for 9 months, and our economy was headed into recession. And just as we started to recover, the attacks of September the 11th struck another blow to our economy. And then investor confidence was shaken by scandals scandals in corporate America, dishonest behavior we cannot and we will not tolerate in our country. And then we faced the uncertainty that preceded the battles of Afghanistan and Iraq. No, we have been through a lot. We acted to overcome these challenges and acted on principle. Government does not create wealth. The role of Government is to create the kind of conditions where risktakers and entrepreneurs can invest and grow and hire new workers. We acted to create the conditions for job growth so people can find work. When Americans have more take-home pay, more money in their pocket to spend or save or invest, the whole economy grows, and people are more likely to find a job. So I twice led the United States Congress to pass historic tax relief for the American people. We wanted tax relief to be broad and fair as possible, so we reduced taxes on everyone who pays income taxes. We have a Tax Code that penalizes marriage. That does not make sense. So we reduced the marriage penalty. It costs a lot to raise children we understand that in Washington, DC and it costs a lot to pay for their education. So we increased the child credit to $1,000 per child. And when we said, The check was in the mail, we meant it. We recognize that it is counterproductive to discourage investment, especially during an economic recovery. So we quadrupled the expense deduction for small-business investment and cut tax rates on dividends and capital gains. It is unfair to tax the estates of people people leave behind after a lifetime of saving or building a small business or running a farm.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaseairnationalguardbaseportsmouthnewhampshire", "title": "Remarks at Pease Air National Guard Base in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pease-air-national-guard-base-portsmouth-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "09-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 264, "text": "When you leave this world, the IRS should not follow you. So we are phasing out the Federal death tax. I proposed and signed these measures to help individuals and help families, but I did so as well to help small businesses. See, most small-business owners pay taxes under the individual tax rates, and therefore, when we cut all rates, small businesses benefit. We help mom-and-pops and start-ups and small businesses by allowing higher expense deductions. The reason I did so is because I understand small businesses create most of the new jobs in America. If we are worried about job creation, if we want there to be jobs for America, we must encourage small businesses. See, small businesses are the first to usually the first to take risk, the first to hire new people. By helping small businesses, we help the entire economy. These actions are helping people across this State. We have cut taxes on 112,000 small-business owners in New Hampshire. We have reduced the marriage penalty for 192,000 couples. We have increased the child credit for 124,000 families. I know that New Hampshire citizens can spend their money better than the people in Washington, DC. We are following a clear and consistent economic strategy, and I am confident about our future. Last month this economy exceeded expectations and added net new jobs. After-tax incomes are rising. Homeownership is at record highs. Factory orders, particularly for high-tech equipment, have risen over the last several months. Our strategy has set the stage for sustained growth. By reducing taxes, we kept a promise, and we did the right thing at the right time for the American economy. We cannot be satisfied so long as we have fellow citizens who are looking for work. I understand that here in New Hampshire, one out of every five jobs have been lost in the manufacturing sector. We must act boldly from this point forward to create jobs for America. So I want Congress to join me in a six-point plan to encourage job creation. First, we must help small businesses grow and hire by controlling the high cost of health care. I have laid out a plan to do so. We must confront the junk lawsuits that are harming a lot of good and honest businesses. I have laid out a plan to do so. We must have a sound national energy policy. We must keep the lights on and make America less dependent on foreign sources of energy. We must continue to cut useless Government regulations that choke job creation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaseairnationalguardbaseportsmouthnewhampshire", "title": "Remarks at Pease Air National Guard Base in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pease-air-national-guard-base-portsmouth-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "09-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 265, "text": "We must work for a free trade policy that opens up markets and levels the playing field for American workers and manufacturing companies. And we need to make sure the tax relief we passed does not disappear in future years. Now, you are wondering why I would say that. Well, because of a quirk in the legislation, the tax cuts that we passed are scheduled to go away unless we act. See, the child credit goes away in a couple of years. In other words, you get the $1,000 now; it is going down to $700 in a couple years unless the Congress acts. You see, when we passed tax relief, I know most Americans did not expect to see higher taxes come back through the back door. I also understand for job creation, it is important to have certainty in the Tax Code. And so if Congress is really interested in job creation, they will make the tax cuts we passed permanent. And as we overcome our challenges to the economy, we are answering great threats to our security. September the 11th, 2001, moved our country to grief and moved our country to action. We will bring the guilty to justice; we will take the fight to the enemy. We now see our enemy clearly. The terrorists plot in secret. They target the innocent. They defile a great religion. They hate everything this Nation stands for. These committed killers will not be stopped by negotiations; they will not respond to reason. The terrorists who threaten America cannot be appeased. This is a new kind of war, and we must adjust. It is a new kind of war, and America is following a new strategy. We are not waiting for further attacks. We are striking our enemies before they can strike us again. We have taken unprecedented steps to protect our homeland. And for those of you who are here who are on the frontlines of homeland protection, thank you. Thank you for what you are doing. Yet wars are won on the offensive, and our friends and America are staying on the offensive. We are finding them. We are on the hunt. We are rolling back the terrorist threats, not on the fringes of its influence but at the heart of its power. We are making good progress. We are hunting the Al Qaida terrorists wherever they hide, from Pakistan to the Philippines to the Horn of Africa to Iraq. Nearly two-thirds of Al Qaida's known leaders have been captured or killed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaseairnationalguardbaseportsmouthnewhampshire", "title": "Remarks at Pease Air National Guard Base in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pease-air-national-guard-base-portsmouth-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "09-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 266, "text": "No matter how long it takes, all who plot against America will face the justice of America. We have sent a message understood throughout the world, If you harbor a terrorist, if you support a terrorist, if you feed a terrorist, you are just as guilty as the terrorists. And the Taliban found out what we meant. Thanks to our great military, Afghanistan is no longer a safe haven for terror, the Afghan people are free, and the people of America are more secure from attack. And we have fought the war on terror in Iraq. The regime of Saddam Hussein possessed and used weapons of mass destruction, sponsored terrorist groups, and inflicted terror on its own people. Nearly every nation recognized and denounced this threat for over a decade. Last year, the U.N. Security Council in Resolution 1441 demanded that Saddam Hussein disarm, prove his disarmament to the world, or face serious consequences. The choice was up to the dictator, and he chose poorly. I acted because I was not about to leave the security of the American people in the hands of a madman. I was not about to stand by and wait and trust in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein. So our coalition acted, in one of the swiftest and most humane military campaigns in history. And 6 months ago today, the statue of the dictator was pulled down. Since the liberation of Iraq, our investigators have found evidence of a clandestine network of biological laboratories. They found advanced design work on prohibited longer range missiles. They found an elaborate campaign to hide these illegal programs. There is still much to investigate, yet it is now undeniable that Saddam Hussein was in clear violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441. The Security Council was right to demand that Saddam Hussein disarm, and we were right to enforce that demand. Who can possibly think that the world would be better off with Saddam Hussein still in power? Surely not the dissidents who would be in his prisons or end up in mass graves. Surely not the men and women who would fill Saddam's torture chambers or the women in his rape rooms. Surely not the victims he murdered with poison gas. Surely not anyone who cares about human rights and democracy and stability in the Middle East. Now our country is approaching a choice. After all the action we have taken, after all the progress we have made against terror, there is a temptation to think the danger has passed. Since September the 11th, the terrorists have taken lives.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaseairnationalguardbaseportsmouthnewhampshire", "title": "Remarks at Pease Air National Guard Base in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pease-air-national-guard-base-portsmouth-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "09-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 267, "text": "Since the attacks on our Nation that fateful day, the terrorists have attacked in Casablanca, Mombasa, Jerusalem, Amman, Riyadh, Baghdad, Karachi, New Delhi, Bali, and Jakarta. The terrorists continue to plot and plan against our country and our people. America must not forget the lessons of September the 11th. America cannot retreat from our responsibilities and hope for the best. Our security will not be gained by timid measures. Our security requires constant vigilance and decisive action. We must fight this war until the work is done. We are fighting on many fronts, and Iraq is now the central front. Saddam holdouts and foreign terrorists are trying desperately to undermine Iraq's progress and to throw that country into chaos. The terrorists in Iraq believe that their attacks on innocent people will weaken our resolve. That is what they believe. They believe that America will run from a challenge. The United States did not run from Germany and Japan following World War II. We helped those nations to become strong and decent democratic societies that no longer waged war on America. And that is our mission in Iraq today. We are rebuilding schools a lot of kids are going back to schools reopening hospitals. Thousands of children are now being immunized. Water and electricity are being returned to the Iraqi people. Just ask people who have been there. They are stunned when they come back when they go to Iraq, and the stories they tell are much different from the perceptions that you are being told life is like. You see, we are providing this help not only because we have got good hearts but because our vision is clear. A stable and democratic and hopeful Iraq will no longer be a breeding ground for terror, tyranny, and aggression. Our work in Iraq is essential to our own security, and no band of murderers or gangsters will stop that work or shake the will of America. Nearly every day in Iraq we are launching swift, precision raids against the enemies of peace and progress. Helped by intelligence from Iraqis, we are rounding up the enemy. We are taking their weapons. We are working our way through the famous deck of cards. We have already captured or killed 43 of the 55 most wanted former Iraqi leaders, and the other 12 have a lot to worry about. Anyone who seeks to harm our soldiers can know that our soldiers are hunting for them. Our military is serving with great courage. Some of our best have fallen. We mourn every loss. We honor every name.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaseairnationalguardbaseportsmouthnewhampshire", "title": "Remarks at Pease Air National Guard Base in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pease-air-national-guard-base-portsmouth-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "09-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 268, "text": "We grieve with every family. And we will always be grateful that liberty has found such brave defenders. In defending liberty, we are joined by more than 30 nations now contributing military forces in Iraq. Great Britain and Poland are leading two multinational divisions. And in this cause, with fine allies, we have got the Iraqis as well. They care about the security of their country. They love freedom just like we love freedom. Last week, the first battalion of the New Iraqi ENTITY completed its training. Within a year, Iraq will have a 40,000-member military force. Tens of thousands of Iraqi citizens are also guarding their own borders, defending vital facilities, and policing their own streets. Six months ago, the Iraqi people welcomed their liberation. Today, many Iraqis are armed and trained to defend their liberty. Our goal in Iraq is to leave behind a stable, self-governing society which will no longer be a threat to the Middle East or to the United States. We are following an orderly plan to reach this goal. Iraq now has a Governing Council, which has appointed interim Government ministers. Once a constitution has been written, Iraq will move toward national elections. The free institutions of Iraq must stand the test of time. And a democratic Iraq will stand as an example to all the Middle East. We believe, and the Iraqi people will show, that liberty is the hope and the right of every land. Our work in Iraq has been long. We will stay the course. We will complete our job. And beyond Iraq, the war on terror continues. I am confident of victory because I know the character of our military, shown in people like Master Sergeant Jack Negrotti of Plaistow, New Hampshire. Jake is a member of the New Hampshire Air National Guard who is volunteered for overseas deployments 3 times since September the 11th. He served in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Right now Jake is an airport manager at Baghdad Airport, helping make sure our military and humanitarian operations move ahead. People like Jake Negrotti are showing what it means to be a patriot and a citizen. We are honored to have Jake's wife, Donna, and his children, Alicia and Christopher, with us here today. Next time you talk to Jake, Donna, you tell him his President appreciates his service, and his country is grateful. The war on terror has brought hardship and loss to our country, beginning with the grief of September the 11th.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaseairnationalguardbaseportsmouthnewhampshire", "title": "Remarks at Pease Air National Guard Base in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pease-air-national-guard-base-portsmouth-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "09-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 271, "text": "Before I take your questions, let me speak with the American people about the situation in Iraq. This has been tough weeks in that country. Coalition forces have encountered serious violence in some areas of Iraq. Some remnants of Saddam Hussein's regime, along with Islamic militants, have attacked coalition forces in the city of Fallujah; terrorists from other countries have infiltrated Iraq to incite and organize attacks; in the south of Iraq, coalition forces face riots and attacks that are being incited by a radical cleric named Al Sadr. He has assembled some of his supporters into an illegal militia and publicly supported the terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah. Al Sadr's methods of violence and intimidation are widely repudiated by other Iraqi Shi'a. He is been indicted by Iraqi authorities for the murder of a prominent Shi'a cleric. Although these instigations of violence come from different factions, they share common goals. They want to run us out of Iraq and destroy the democratic hopes of the Iraqi people. The violence we have seen is a power grab by these extreme and ruthless elements. Most of Iraq is relatively stable. Most Iraqis, by far, reject violence and oppose dictatorship. In forums where Iraqis have met to discuss their political future and in all the proceedings of the Iraqi Governing Council, Iraqis have expressed clear commitments. They want strong protections for individual rights. They want their independence, and they want their freedom. America's commitment to freedom in Iraq is consistent with our ideals and required by our interests. Iraq will either be a peaceful, democratic country, or it will again be a source of violence, a haven for terror, and a threat to America and to the world. By helping to secure a free Iraq, Americans serving in that country are protecting their fellow citizens. Our Nation is grateful to them all and to their families that face hardship and long separation. This weekend, at a Fort Hood hospital, I presented a Purple Heart to some of our wounded, had the honor of thanking them on behalf of all Americans. Other men and women have paid an even greater cost. Our Nation honors the memory of those who have been killed, and we pray that their families will find God's comfort in the midst of their grief. As I have said to those who have lost loved ones, we will finish the work of the fallen. America's Armed Forces are performing brilliantly, with all the skill and honor we expect of them. We are constantly reviewing their needs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1104", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1104", "publication_date": "13-04-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 272, "text": "Troop strength, now and in the future, is determined by the situation on the ground. If additional forces are needed, I will send them. If additional resources are needed, we will provide them. The people of our country are united behind our men and women in uniform, and this Government will do all that is necessary to assure the success of their historic mission. One central commitment of that mission is the transfer of sovereignty back to the Iraqi people. We have set a deadline of June 30th. It is important that we meet that deadline. As a proud and independent people, Iraqis do not support an indefinite occupation, and neither does America. We are not an imperial power, as nations such as Japan and Germany can attest. We are a liberating power, as nations in Europe and Asia can attest as well. We seek an independent, free, and secure Iraq. Were the coalition to step back from the June 30th pledge, many Iraqis would question our intentions and feel their hopes betrayed. And those in Iraq who trade in hatred and conspiracy theories would find a larger audience and gain a stronger hand. We will not step back from our pledge. On June 30th, Iraqi sovereignty will be placed in Iraqi hands. Sovereignty involves more than a date and a ceremony. It requires Iraqis to assume responsibility for their own future. Iraqi authorities are now confronting the security challenge of the last several weeks. In Fallujah, coalition forces have suspended offensive operations, allowing members of the Iraqi Governing Council and local leaders to work on the restoration of central authority in that city. These leaders are communicating with the insurgents to ensure an orderly turnover of that city to Iraqi forces, so that the resumption of military action does not become necessary. They are also insisting that those who killed and mutilated four American contract workers be handed over for trial and punishment. In addition, members of the Governing Council are seeking to resolve the situation in the south. Al Sadr must answer the charges against him and disband his illegal militia. Our coalition is standing with responsible Iraqi leaders as they establish growing authority in their country. The transition to sovereignty requires that we demonstrate confidence in Iraqis, and we have that confidence. Many Iraqi leaders are showing great personal courage, and their example will bring out the same quality in others. The transition to sovereignty also requires an atmosphere of security, and our coalition is working to provide that security.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1104", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1104", "publication_date": "13-04-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 273, "text": "We will continue taking the greatest care to prevent harm to innocent civilians, yet we will not permit the spread of chaos and violence. I have directed our military commanders to make every preparation to use decisive force, if necessary, to maintain order and to protect our troops. The nation of Iraq is moving toward self-rule, and Iraqis and Americans will see evidence in the months to come. On June 30th, when the flag of free Iraq is raised, Iraqi officials will assume full responsibility for the ministries of Government. On that day, the transitional administrative law, including a bill of rights that is unprecedented in the Arab world, will take full effect. The United States and all the nations of our coalition will establish normal diplomatic relations with the Iraqi Government. According to the schedule already approved by the Governing Council, Iraq will hold elections for a national assembly no later than next January. That assembly will draft a new, permanent constitution which will be presented to the Iraqi people in a national referendum held in October of next year. Iraqis will then elect a permanent Government by December 15th, 2005, an event that will mark the completion of Iraq's transition from dictatorship to freedom. Other nations and international institutions are stepping up to their responsibilities in building a free and secure Iraq. We are working closely with the United Nations envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, and with Iraqis to determine the exact form of the Government that will receive sovereignty on June 30th. The United Nations election assistance team, headed by Karina Parelli, is in Iraq, developing plans for next January's election. NATO is providing support for the Polish-led multinational division in Iraq. And 17 of NATO's 26 members are contributing forces to maintain security. Secretary of State Powell and Secretary of State Rumsfeld and a number of NATO defense and foreign ministers are exploring a more formal role for NATO, such as turning the Polish-led division into a NATO operation and giving NATO specific responsibilities for border control. Iraqis' neighbors also have responsibilities to make their region more stable. So I am sending Deputy Secretary of State Armitage to the Middle East to discuss with these nations our common interest in a free and independent Iraq and how they can help achieve this goal. As we have made clear all along, our commitment to the success and security of Iraq will not end on June 30th. On July 1st and beyond, our reconstruction assistance will continue, and our military commitment will continue.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1104", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1104", "publication_date": "13-04-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 274, "text": "Having helped Iraqis establish a new Government, coalition military forces will help Iraqis to protect their Government from external aggression and internal subversion. The success of free Government in Iraq is vital for many reasons. A free Iraq is vital because 25 million Iraqis have as much right to live in freedom as we do. A free Iraq will stand as an example to reformers across the Middle East. A free Iraq will show that America is on the side of Muslims who wish to live in peace, as we have already shown in Kuwait and Kosovo, Bosnia and Afghanistan. A free Iraq will confirm to a watching world that America's word, once given, can be relied upon even in the toughest times. Above all, the defeat of violence and terror in Iraq is vital to the defeat of violence and terror elsewhere and vital, therefore, to the safety of the American people. Now is the time, and Iraq is the place, in which the enemies of the civilized world are testing the will of the civilized world. The violence we are seeing in Iraq is familiar. The terrorist who takes hostages or plants a roadside bomb near Baghdad is serving the same ideology of murder that kills innocent people on trains in Madrid and murders children on buses in Jerusalem and blows up a nightclub in Bali and cuts the throat of a young reporter for being a Jew. We have seen the same ideology of murder in the killing of 241 marines in Beirut, the first attack on the World Trade Center, in the destruction of two Embassies in Africa, in the attack on the U.S.S. Cole, and in the merciless horror inflicted upon thousands of innocent men and women and children on September the 11th, 2001. None of these acts is the work of a religion; all are the work of a fanatical political ideology. The servants of this ideology seek tyranny in the Middle East and beyond. They seek to oppress and persecute women. They seek the death of Jews and Christians and every Muslim who desires peace over theocratic terror. They seek to intimidate America into panic and retreat and to set free nations against each other. And they seek weapons of mass destruction to blackmail and murder on a massive scale. Over the last several decades, we have seen that any concession or retreat on our part will only embolden this enemy and invite more bloodshed. And the enemy has seen, over the last 31 months, that we will no longer live in denial or seek to appease them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1104", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1104", "publication_date": "13-04-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 275, "text": "New Year's Day will soon be upon us, and with it will come New Year's resolutions. This weekend is a good time to give thanks for our blessings and to resolve to do better in the coming year. One of our greatest blessings as Americans is that we live in a country with a growing economy, where people can pursue their dreams, turn ideas into enterprises, and provide for their families. It is a measure of our economy's resilience that even with high oil prices and softness in the housing market, we are still growing. In November, our economy added jobs for the 51st straight month, making this the longest period of uninterrupted job growth on record. And the fundamentals of our economy are strong. Yet it is more important to remember that behind all these numbers are real people. These people include the entrepreneurs who live their dreams by starting up new businesses. These people include small-business owners who create most of the new jobs in our economy. And most of all, these people include the tens of millions of working moms and dads whose jobs provide for their families. I know that even in this growing economy, some of you have real concerns. Some of you worry about your ability to afford health care coverage for your families. Some of you are concerned about meeting your monthly mortgage payments. Some of you worry about the impact of rising energy costs on fueling your cars and heating your homes. You expect your elected leaders in Washington to address these pressures on our economy and give you more options to help you deal with them. And I have put forth several proposals to do so. In the last month, Congress has responded to some of my initiatives. They passed a good energy bill, they passed a temporary patch to protect middle class families from the burden of the Alternative Minimum Tax, and they passed a law that will help protect families from higher taxes when their lenders reduce their mortgage debt. Congress needs to do more to decrease America's dependence on oil. Congress needs to pass legislation that will help make health care coverage more affordable for small businesses and workers who buy their own policies. And Congress needs to act quickly on the rest of my proposals to help families struggling with rising mortgage payments keep their homes. Most of all, we need to set a good example in Washington by being careful with your money. I am disappointed that leaders in Congress sent me a massive spending bill that includes about 9,800 earmarks.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress407", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-407", "publication_date": "29-12-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 276, "text": "Well, Mr. Vice President, you sure convinced me. I want to thank all of you so much for being here. Somebody's talked to Al Gore about playing Tom Hanks in an autobiography. I want to thank young Ashley Ballard. I wish her well. I thank the chairs and the vice chairs and the executive committee and the host committee, everybody who is responsible for this, this very wonderful night. I thank you all for being here. A lot of you come to a lot of these things, I know, and they may get old to you, but you know it is important. But I want to say something rather unconventional tonight about this dinner. We are doing our best to finance our campaign early and in a disciplined way so that I can spend the maximum possible time doing the job the American people elected me to do in 1992, being ENTITY. But the most important thing you can do is to take the little article and the summary of the record and leave here and make up your mind that between now and November of 1996, you are going to take every opportunity you can to talk to the people you come in contact with about what is really at stake in this election. And I was trying to think if there was some simple and halfway hilarious characterization I could give you about what is really at stake here. I think it is fair to say that everybody has figured out this is a time of great change, and the people who would like to see someone else be elected President have an enormous and psychological advantage because they are telling you, All you have to do to change this country is to destroy the Federal Government. Nothing wrong with the rest of us, it is just them, those slugs in Washington. It is interesting, because nearly all of them have been in Washington a lot longer than I have. I still have a hard time finding my way in from Andrews Air Force Base when I . And they are taking all of your money, and they are squandering it on welfare and immigration and they are just throwing it away and just get rid of them. But you do not have to do anything. I have a harder burden because I think we all have to do things. And I was making this little speech to my senior Senator, Dale Bumpers, a couple of months ago, who is one of the funniest people I ever heard.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 277, "text": "That not since the late 1800's, in the early 1900's, when we moved from being a rural agricultural society to being a more urbanized industrial society, when we moved from being a country in splendid isolation, the one that had to assume the burdens of world leadership in World War I, not since then has there been such a change in the way Americans live and work; as we move from our industrial age into a post-industrial, information-technology-based society of which many of you are the world's most glittering embodiment; as we move from a cold war period when the world is more or less organized around functioning nation-states that are divided into two opposing camps but all more or less capable of delivering basic services and sustenance to their people, into a global economy characterized by free markets and openness and rapid movement of money and management and people and technology, where there are all kinds of pressures to have global integration and a lot of pressures of economic disintegration on individual workers and families and communities throughout the world, of a world in which we think we are moving toward peace but we still see madness everywhere. In other words, there is a lot of good and a lot that is troubling. And we need a vision for what we want America to look like, because all the good things and all the troubling things are occurring in this great diverse cauldron we call the United States, every day. And my vision is that we ought to build an America for the 21st century that is a high-opportunity place where hard-working entrepreneurs can live out their dreams, where we grow the middle class and shrink the under class, where we do what is necessary to help individuals make the most of their own lives and help families and communities to solve their own problems and where we come together across all these lines that divide us, these income and racial and regional and religious and other lines that divide us so that the 21st century can still be an American century, so that we can be the world's force for freedom and peace and human rights and prosperity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 278, "text": "And I think to get there we have to have a lot of new ideas, but I really believe they have to be rooted in old-fashioned American values, things that sound corny like freedom and responsibility and work and family and community, seeking the common good instead of the short-term wedge issue that divides us politically and being willing to do things that are unpopular in the moment because you know that when your children are grown and look back, they will look like the right decisions. That is what I think we have to do. And just let me give you a couple of illustrations why. The Vice President talked about the economy, and I am very proud of our economic record. We have had a very serious strategy, the first time the United States has had one in a long time. We wanted to reduce the deficit while increasing investment in defense conversion to help California and other places, in new technologies, and in education and training. We wanted a vast increase in trade. We wanted to be for free but also for fair trade. And we thought we could do some good economically. But if I had told you on the day I was inaugurated ENTITY that after 30 months the following things would happen, would you have believed it? That we would have 7 1/2 million new jobs, 2 1/2 million new homeowners, 2 million new small businesses, a record number of self-made millionaires, the stock market would be at 4,700, but the guy in the middle had an income that dropped. It has never happened before in the history of the Republic. More than half the people are working harder for the same or lower wages. Because that is the way the global economy affects us today. And if we want a future where we grow the middle class and shrink the under class, we have to figure out how to deal with that. In every State in the country, the crime rate is down, the murder rate is down, believe it or not, notwithstanding the rhetoric in Washington, because the economy is better, the welfare rolls are down, and the food stamp rolls are down. Drug use among people between the ages of 18 and 34 is down. But underneath it, just like on the economy, in spite of a falling crime rate, the rate of random violence and crime by people between the ages of 12 and 17 is up, and the rate of casual drug use by children between the ages of 12 and 17 is up. So we have got to figure out what to do about that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 279, "text": "We have got a lot of heart-wrenching publicity, and everybody was moved by that terrible encounter in which the child lost his life here just a few days ago. But we have become inured to all the children that lose their lives every day in these violence-ridden places in America. The other day we had a study come out of the Justice Department that said that two-thirds of the gang members in America felt justified in shooting someone just because they treated them with disrespect. And within a week, blaring headlines in the East of a 16-year-old boy who shot a 12-year-old, then ran over and stood over him and emptied his gun into him because he thought the 12-year-old treated him with disrespect. It turned out the 12-year-old was the neighborhood wit who made fun of everybody and lost his life for it. Whatever happened to Count to 10 before you say, much less do, something ? Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me ? I joked to somebody in the White House the other day that if I took that approach, everybody treated me with disrespect, there would be no ammunition left in America. You have got a whole generation of kids out there raising themselves, getting out of school an hour or two earlier than any of us ever got out of school, no place to go, nothing to do. We have to figure out what we are going to do to help them, too, because I believe we are a community. So I am proud of the fact that the crime rate is going down. But I am really worried about these kids because when they all get grown, if enough of them do this and the next generation of 12 to 17-year-olds keep doing what they are doing, then the strategies we have for driving the crime rate down will not work anymore. In foreign policy, the Vice President litanized all the things we'd done. I am proud of the fact there are no Russian missiles pointed at our kids for the first time since the dawn of the nuclear age. I am proud of what we were able to do in the Middle East and Northern Ireland and Southern Africa.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 280, "text": "I am proud of the fact that in Bosnia we may be on the verge of a breakthrough because good people now in all those factions, the Muslims, the Croatians, and the Serbs, I think, have seen it is time to make a decent peace and quit killing each other. I am proud of that. The real threat to the world today is that in an open world where you have to have free movement of people and technology, where the Internet is full of wonderful things that we celebrated today, we all are more vulnerable to the forces of organized evil. And there are people that are preying on hatred and paranoia, rooted in religious or ethnic or racial bigotry. And they can still do bad things. They can blow up buses full of kids in Israel. They can break open vials of sarin gas in subways in Tokyo. And yes, they can find out on the Internet how to make a simple bomb that will blow up a Federal building in Oklahoma City. So until we have a way of dealing with that, we have to celebrate our progress, but we have to realize that there have to be some changes in the way we look at ourselves and our responsibilities to get to where we want to go. I believe with all my heart that the best days of the United States are ahead of us if, but only if, we face these changes and if we do it with new ideas rooted in old-fashioned values. Now, the big news in Washington today is the fight about the budget. The budget is more about values than it is about money. Both parties now agree we ought to balance the budget. I say, high time. We never had a structural deficit in the United States of America until 1981. We quadrupled the debt of the country in the 12 years before I showed up. It is so bad that the budget would be in balance today but for the interest we pay on the debt run up in the 12 years before I became ENTITY. We have got to quit this. Next year interest on the debt will be bigger than the defense budget. If we were not paying so much interest on the debt, we could invest more money in California to help you overcome the big defense downsizing and what has traumatized your economy so. So we should balance the budget. And are we interested in balancing the budget consistent with our values? I told you what my values are.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 281, "text": "Their argument is, the people who disagree with us, is that you do not have to believe in all that, you do not have to change anything, all you have got to do is get rid of the Government. We ought to balance the budget, but we do not have to cut education to balance the budget. You want to know what will happen if we stop giving little kids a chance to get off to a good start in school; if the Federal Government walks away from its responsibility to help with smaller class sizes, more computers, and higher standards; if the National Government walks away from its responsibility to give kids the opportunity to serve in national service programs, the AmeriCorps program, to earn their way to college, or get more Pell grants if they are poor or have better access to lower cost college loans like we have done? You raised the costs of higher education. And in the teeth of a bad economy, enrollment in higher education went down here when it should have gone up. We cannot let that happen to the United States. It is not necessary to balance the budget, and it would be wrong. And that is exactly what walking away from our responsibilities in education is. You look at this debate over the environment under the guise of balancing the budget, gutting the ability of the EPA to enforce the clean air law, putting on the budget all these riders, these limitations on our ability to protect our natural resources. You know, Hillary and Chelsea and I went to the West, to Wyoming, and we went to the Grand Tetons and Yellowstone National Parks this summer. We got lucky; we got to do one or two things that most people could not do. We got to feed the wolves in Yellowstone because we happened to be there at feeding time. But basically, everything we did there, any American family could do. They could drive a car up there and fork over 10 bucks. And all across America we have this network of parks preserving our natural heritage. Some of these people say that in order to balance the budget we need to close half the parks or that it is okay to put a big mine right next to Yellowstone, even if we do not know how we are going to protect the water quality. Or it is okay, now that we created a California Desert Protection Act, just not to fund it and hope it will go away and die. Now, I know that sometimes we make mistakes with the Nation's environmental laws.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 282, "text": "I thought it was kind of crazy to see that guy indicted for killing a kangaroo rat on his farm. But that stuff happened for a long time before we showed up. And under Al Gore's leadership, we have actually reduced the burden of crazy regulation. But I am telling you something, the world is not free of environmental problems. The world is not free of public health problems. People died just a couple years ago in Milwaukee because their water supply was poison. Children died just a couple of years ago in the Pacific Northwest from poison meat from E. coli, partly because the Government still inspects meat, as I said yesterday, believe it or not, the way dogs do. That is how your Government inspects meat. They touch it, they look at it, and they smell it. But we wanted to put in new regulations using high-technology equipment to stop E. coli, and there were people that actually voted not once but twice in the House of Representatives under the guise of cutting Government spending to stop us from doing that. So, yes, let us balance the budget, but do not tell me that we should sacrifice the clean air, clean water, and natural heritage of the United States. It is the rightful, rightful legacy of every American to do it. The Vice President talked about the crime bill. We did some important things in the crime bill because people in law enforcement told us to do it. They said, Do not spend all your money on prisons; spend some money to keep these kids out of trouble. And put 100,000 police out there on the street so they can help prevent crime as well as catch criminals. I started the week in Jacksonville, Florida, on Tuesday morning with an African-American Democrat who was elected sheriff in an overwhelmingly white Republican county. Then he got elected sheriff because people thought he'd be a good sheriff and because there was no partisan constituency for crime. Out here in the country, I cannot find anybody for raising the crime rate. It is only in Washington that people say, Well, that is what the Democrats put in the crime bill; we have got to gut the prevention money, and we have got to kill the 100,000 cops. And we will just give the cities and the counties and the States a little less money and we will give it to them in a block grant, and we do not care how they spend it. Now, we know what lowers the crime rate, but we are going to stop doing it anyway.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 283, "text": "Well, I am sorry, we ought to balance the budget, but there is no constituency and no conscience in doing things that you know will interrupt the fight to lower the crime rate. That is one of the great triumphs of the last 5 years, America proved we could lower the crime rate. Before, people did not think we could do it. Let us stop trying to undo it, stick with what works, and balance the budget and still do our justice to the streets of Los Angeles and the other places in the United States. I could give you a lot of other examples, but let me just mention one. And you have heard all this, and the numbers are so confusing it probably makes your head hurt. Let me tell you what the basic facts are. Medicare is a program that provides health care to people over 65. Part A of Medicare is hospital care; it is funded by a payroll tax. Part B is all of the other things you get on Medicare, and it is funded by general tax money and what elderly people pay out of their own pocket. Medicaid is a program that takes care of old people on low incomes and disabled people who need nursing home care or get care in their homes, and it provides medical care for all these poor children and their parents. You know, it is not fashionable to stick up for the poor anymore, but those kids are going to grow up and be part of our country. Why do you think the Los Angeles health care system's in trouble? Because they have got a lot of poor kids to care for. Now, we need to slow the growth of both those programs. They have been growing too fast, and they are crowding out our ability to invest in education and technology and the future. Everybody knows it. And we need to make sure that the so-called Medicare Trust Fund that guarantees hospital care for the elderly is secure. And everybody knows that. The congressional majority has made a decision that in order to balance the budget in 7 years and get $250 billion in tax cuts, they have to take $450 billion out of the health care system over the next 7 years that we thought they were going to have to spend. Now, we should take some money out.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 284, "text": "But I am telling you, we cannot take that much money out without charging elderly people more than they can afford and keep in mind, threequarters of the people in this country over 65 live on less than $24,000 a year we cannot do that without risking closing rural hospitals and urban hospitals, and we cannot do it without hurting all those poor kids. We cannot do it. So I say, of course, let us slow the growth in medical inflation. I do not care what happens to the health care system, this is how much I am going to jerk out. That is inconsistent with our values. This is not about money. This is about our values. Yesterday in Denver I was with the Little Sisters of the Poor, an order of Roman Catholic nuns who spend their whole life serving in ways that most of us could never even dream of doing. And they run a home there for elderly people that you could eat breakfast off of any morning. You'd be proud to have any member of your family there. And they are giving their whole lives to do this. But with all of their sacrifice, they cannot do it unless the rest of us chip in a little money through Medicaid to keep those folks there. And I do not know about you, but I am glad they do it. And if we can balance the budget without gutting them, we ought to. And we can and we will, if I have anything to say about it. I just want to make two more points because California is on the forefront of both these issues. The first is that our meal ticket to the future is our diversity. If we can learn to live together and work together and respect each other, that is our meal ticket to the future. In a global economy, who is better positioned than the United States to take advantage of the blizzard of interconnections that will be the best of tomorrow? So I say to you, when we have issues that are troubling, we need to solve them in ways that bring us together, not use them as wedges used to drive us apart. Welfare reform . I led the fight to reform welfare. While the Congress has been fighting for 3 years, we have given 70 percent of the States permission to get rid of Federal rules to figure out how to move people from welfare to work. I did it not because it is costing you a lot of money. The welfare budget is a tiny part of the Federal budget.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 285, "text": "I did it because it is inconsistent with American values for people to be trapped in dependency when they want to be free, because most parents in this country have to work and people on welfare should be able to work, but they ought to be able to be good parents as well. So I want to change the welfare system, and I do not mind being very tough on requiring people to work. But you have to give them education and training and you have to give them child care, and we ought to collect the child support enforcement that people owe them as well. That is what I believe. So we should do this together. We should not look for some way to put people down; we should look for ways to lift people up. You look at the affirmative action issue, this affirmative action issue. We have to fix some. We have already fixed some. But let me tell you, I have hired hundreds of people in my life. I have worked with all kinds of people. I have been in all kinds of different circumstances. And I believe with all my heart we have not yet reached the point in our country when we are totally oblivious to our gender and racial differences. And as long as we are not, as long as we see troubling reminders of what may lurk in the hearts of people that they never say, I think it is appropriate not for Government to practice reverse discrimination, not for Government to have quotas, not for Government to guarantee anything to somebody who is unqualified to receive it but for the Government to say you should be conscious, you should be aware when you make decisions of the abilities and the potential of all the people in the community without regard to their race or gender. So I say fix affirmative action, but do not throw it away for a short-term political gain until we have solved this problem. And I feel the same way, as all of you know, because of what I said 2 years ago about immigration. I knew we had immigration problems, and I had never dealt with them before 2 1/2 years ago. So I asked former Congresswoman Barbara Jordan to set up a commission to deal with immigration in a forthright, humane, hardheaded way to just try to talk sense and not to use it for political benefits. And we have done more than any previous administration to try to close the borders and send illegal immigrants back.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 286, "text": "We have recommended a disciplined reduction in the annual quota of immigration until we get our own low-skill workers back in the work force and until we can manage our own economy better. Except for the Native Americans that are here tonight and I thank them for being here everybody else here came from somewhere else, and we should never, ever forget that. I will bet you everybody here has disagreed with five or six things I have done in the last 2 1/2 years. And what I try to do is figure out what this is going to look like when my daughter's my age. What is the 21st century going to be like for the United States? And so I do a lot of things that are not popular. But when we do things like that, if you agree that we should keep leading, then you have to step into the breach as well and be heard. All the political advice I got was, Do not you be the first ENTITY in American history to take on the NRA over the Brady bill and assault weapons. Do not do it, because what will happen is they will gut you, and they will gut your Congressmen who stand with you. And all the people who agree with you will find some other reason to vote against them. And sure enough, last fall in '94, that is what happened. I can tell you today that the Democrats would still be in the majority in the House of Representatives if they had not fought to ban assault weapons and for the Brady bill. I do not care what anybody else said. I have looked at those votes district by district, and I know what I am talking about. There were other reasons for the gain, the promise of the tax cut and all that; the Christian Coalition's great outpouring, they had a lot to do with it. But in the close races, the NRA took them down, the people that stood up for taking Uzis off the street and Uzis out of the schools, for making people check to see if they had a criminal or a mental health background. And there are thousands and thousands of people who now have not gotten guns because the Brady bill passed. There are children who are going to live because of the assault weapons ban. And you ought to stand up for those people who did it. Same thing happened with Haiti. People said, You have got to be out of your mind.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 287, "text": "Al Gore and I were 50 percent of all the people in Washington, DC, that thought it was a good idea to send our forces to Haiti. They said, You will never be able to explain this to the American people; everybody knows our national security is not at stake. You know what we said? Those military dictators came to the United States, to New York City, stood in the shadow of the Statue of Liberty, and promised to leave and let President Aristide come back. If the United States can be lied to on its own soil in the shadow of the Statue of Liberty when we say we want every country in our hemisphere to be a democracy, how can we turn away the hoards of people who are risking their lives and dying in the seas from Haiti. How can we ever say we are the force for freedom and democracy? And so we did it. And we did it without firing a shot. When Hillary was trying to decide about going to China, everybody said, This is a really dumb idea. If you go, the people who are against their human rights practices will say you have legitimized them just by going. And then if you say what you need to do, the people that want to have stronger trade relationship will say you are wrecking our relationship. But you know what we decided? All over the world the kind of future we have depends in large measure on how we treat women and their little children, especially their little female children. Do you know just for an example, in all of Asia today, there are now 77 million more boys than there are girls, because little girl children are still being killed because they are not supposed to be worth anything? I can give you a lot of other examples. And so we decided that she ought to go because she could stick up for the women and the children and especially the girl children of this world, and she could talk not only about China and not singling China out but about what is happening in other countries including our own country that is not right. And now it looks like a great decision. I could give you a lot of others, but I will give you one more, because the Vice President had a lot to do with this. We were trying to decide whether to go forward with our campaign to try to stamp out, or at least dramatically discourage, illegal smoking by teenagers. These tobacco companies never lose in court; they never lose anywhere.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 288, "text": "They got a double ton of money, and they will gut you, not because they will get on television and run ads saying we think kids ought to smoke but because they have mailing lists, they can write people, they can inflame people. There are all these wonderful, wonderful Americans who grow tobacco like their families have been growing it for 100 and 200 years. But they can terrify them, and they will give them all kinds of propaganda about how you are going to drive them into the dirt, and those people will become a political force against you. And all the Americans who agree with you, they will find some other reason to be against you. That is why people do not ever take on organized interests. So do not you be you have already been the first ENTITY to take on the NRA; for goodness sakes, do not take on the tobacco companies, everybody else gave that one a pass. But we knew 2 things after 14 months of study. We knew, number one, that for 30 years some of these companies have known that tobacco was addictive and dangerous and that they were consciously marketing it to children. And the second thing we knew was that 3,000 kids a day begin to smoke, and 1,000 of them will end their lives early. So finally, we decided, how in God's name can we walk away from this? A thousand kids a day living a better, fuller, longer life is worth any amount of political sacrifice. There is so many other things like this that I could tell you about, but you get the idea. I do not want you to be upset about what you think is going on in Washington; I want you to be determined to do what you think is best for America, consistent with our values. This debate was inevitable, as inevitable as the sun coming up in the morning, because of the depth of the changes that are going on. Because we are changing the way we work, we are changing the way we live, we have to change the way we do government. Do not you forget we have been around for nearly 220 years now because most of the time when the chips are down, the American people do the right thing. I was born nearly 50 years ago to a widowed mother in a State where the per capita income was barely half the national average. My granddaddy raised me til I was 4. He had a sixth grade education.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksclintongore96dinnerlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Clinton/Gore '96 Dinner in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-clintongore-96-dinner-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 303, "text": "President, I thank you for your wonderful hospitality. Two years ago in this city, world leaders formed the Monterrey Consensus. We pledged to work for government that is responsive to the basic needs of every human being and for policies that promote opportunity for all. At this year's summit, we are embracing the challenge of implementing that consensus to bring all the hemisphere's people into an expanding circle of development. To advance these goals, my Nation revolutionized the way we provide aid, and we substantially increased our aid to developing countries. Under our new Compact for Development, U.S. assistance is linked to good governments, investment in people, and economic freedom. Development assistance should light a path to reform and economic growth rather than perpetuate the need for further aid. The nations of this hemisphere must identify concrete steps to implement the noble ideas of the Monterrey Consensus. We must work to provide quality education and quality health care for all our citizens, especially for those suffering from ENTITY/ ENTITY. We must also chart a clear course toward a vibrant free market that will help lift people out of poverty and create a healthy middle class. We must increase the credit available to small businesses that generate the majority of jobs in all our economies and reduce the time that it takes to start a business. We must strengthen property rights so that land can be leveraged as a source of capital to start businesses or hire new workers. And we must lower the cost of sending money home to the families of hard-working men and women who are earning a living abroad. Over the long term, trade is the most certain path to lasting prosperity. The openness of our market is the key driver of growth in the region and a testament to the United States' belief in the mutual benefits of trade. Last year, about 83 percent of Latin America's exports to the United States, roughly $176 billion worth of goods, entered my country duty-free. My country is committed to free and fair trade for this hemisphere through the Free Trade Area of the Americas and through the growing number of bilateral free trade agreements we have completed and are negotiating. Our NAFTA partners have been vital free trade allies for 10 years now. Our free trade agreement with Chile entered into force on the first of this year. We are completing a free trade agreement with our Central American partners. This week we will launch negotiations with the Dominican Republic, and soon we will begin negotiations with Panama and some of our Andean friends.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheinaugurationceremonythespecialsummittheamericasmonterrey", "title": "Remarks at the Inauguration Ceremony of the Special Summit of the Americas in Monterrey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-inauguration-ceremony-the-special-summit-the-americas-monterrey", "publication_date": "12-01-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 316, "text": "First, I would like to thank Susan Fitz, Fran Jackson; the teachers, Lori Kuzniewski I was in her class Ms. Kristen Mullen's class; Alan Leis, Paula Johnson, your superintendents; John Butterfield, from the education association; Jim and Molly Cameron, from the PTA; all the people who made me feel so welcome at this school today. This is the best of our country's future. I look around this crowd today, and I see people whose roots are all over the world, whose languages are very different, whose cultures are different, whose religions are different, who have come together on this school ground in a common endeavor of learning with a promise that our country opens to all people who are willing to work hard and be good citizens and do their part. It is thrilling for me to be here and look at you. I have a much better view than you do today. And I loved being with the children in the classroom. The best part of this morning so far, for me, has been answering the children's questions. They ask very good questions; some of them I did not want to answer even, they were so good. And it gave me a great deal of hope for the future. You just heard my weekly radio address, so you know that I am very concerned about the overcrowding in our Nation's classrooms. We have, almost suddenly, the largest group of schoolchildren in our Nation's history. I was part of the last large group, the baby boom generation; all of us are now between the ages of 34 and 52. This group in school today is the first group that is larger. One is represented here, all the housetrailers; the other is represented by the dilemma in our largest cities, where we have huge numbers of students and wonderful old school buildings that were unoccupied for many years. Many of them now cannot even be hooked up to the Internet. And we must, as a nation, face this challenge. In the last Congress, we were able to get a big downpayment on my plan for 100,000 more teachers in the early grades to take the average size of the classes down to 18 across America in the first 3 grades. But we have to have the school buildings, as well. And I did present a plan to the Congress, that I will present again early next year, that would enable us to build or modernize 5,000 schools.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityglenforestelementaryschoolfallschurchvirginia", "title": "Remarks to the Community at Glen Forest Elementary School in Falls Church, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-glen-forest-elementary-school-falls-church-virginia", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 317, "text": "If you want the smaller classes, the teachers have to have some place to meet with the students. And I ask all of you, based on your personal experience here and without regard to any political differences you may otherwise have, to please, please help me convince the Congress that it is the right thing for America's children to have the smaller classes, to have more teachers, and to have modern schools. Every single child in America deserves them, and the United States ought to be in the forefront of helping achieve that. And I thank you for that. Let me also say to all of you, I learned when I came here today, because I received a little card from one of the students, that next week is the week you have student elections at the school here. And what I'd like to say is, I hope that all the parents will be just as good citizens as the students are. Because Tuesday is election day in America, as well. For nearly 6 years, I have worked hard to bring our country together across all the lines that divide us, so that America would work the way this school works, so that we could all feel the way I think all of you feel today, coming from your different walks of life to this common ground. America ought to be a place of common ground, where we move forward together. I am grateful for the fact that after 6 years we have nearly 17 million new jobs and the lowest unemployment in 28 years; the highest homeownership in history, over two-thirds of Americans in their own homes for the first time ever; the smallest percentage of our people on public assistance, welfare, in 29 years; lowest crime rate in 25 years. I am proud of that. I am also determined that we take this moment of prosperity, which has given us the first balanced budget since 1969 and a surplus, to meet the long-term challenges of America. We talked about education today. Those of you who come from the rest of the world and have come here as immigrants, who have relatives in other countries, know that there is a lot of financial turmoil in the rest of the world. I have done my best to try to help stabilize the global economy because America depends upon the success of other people in other countries and their being able to have good jobs and raise their children and do better. I have done my best to see America stand on the forefront of world peace.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityglenforestelementaryschoolfallschurchvirginia", "title": "Remarks to the Community at Glen Forest Elementary School in Falls Church, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-glen-forest-elementary-school-falls-church-virginia", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 318, "text": "A week ago yesterday, we announced the latest agreement between the Palestinians and the Israelis, and we hope it will be fully and faithfully implemented. And we will continue the work toward peace in the Middle East. We have to look ahead to what happens when this huge generation of baby boomers retires, which is why I have said we should not spend this surplus on anything until we have reformed the Social Security system and reformed the Medicare system, to make sure that it can be preserved for the people who need it, especially when all the baby boomers retire. We have to continue to work on the fact that many of our people, literally over half of our people, are in HMO's or other managed care plans. And this can be a good thing, because we have to save all the money we can. But it is wrong if a person is in a health care plan and the doctor says, You need to see a specialist, and the plan says no. It is wrong if someone is in a car accident and they have to pass three hospitals that are closer on the way to an emergency room that happens to be covered by the plan. It is wrong if someone is pregnant and during the pregnancy, or someone is sick with cancer and has had chemotherapy and during that treatment, an employer changes health care providers and the person has to change doctors. All of that is wrong. Okay, let us manage the system, but let us put the health care of our people first and let medical decisions be made by medical professionals, not accountants. All these issues are out there, issues that will affect the long-term stability and strength of the United States and our ability to do what should be done in the world. So let me say that I have been very concerned periodically over the last 6 years, and I was especially concerned last year, that in Washington, DC, in National Government, there are not only different parties with different philosophies and different views that is a good thing; we should have different parties, different philosophies, different views, different opinions but there is a great deal of difference in constructive debate and extreme partisanship which keeps things from being done. In the last year, for 8 months, we had extreme partisanship which kept things from being done. And what we need to do is to put the progress of all of our people over the partisanship; we need to put people over politics; we need to celebrate our differences, but work together.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityglenforestelementaryschoolfallschurchvirginia", "title": "Remarks to the Community at Glen Forest Elementary School in Falls Church, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-glen-forest-elementary-school-falls-church-virginia", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 319, "text": "That is what I am hoping will come out of this coming election. I hope that a Congress will be elected on Tuesday that will put the education of our children first and build or modernize these 5,000 schools. I hope the election will produce a Congress that will not spend that surplus until we fix Social Security first, to stabilize our country, to stabilize our economy, and to avoid a situation where when we retire we will have to either lower our standard of living or lower the standard of living of our children because we refused to take this moment to fix the Social Security system. I hope the next Congress will provide the American people with a Patients' Bill of Rights. I hope the next Congress will provide the American people with a bill to protect our children from the dangers of tobacco, the number one public health problem in America today. It is wrong that 3,000 children start smoking every day; 1,000 will die sooner because of this. I hope the next Congress will reach across partisan lines and raise the minimum wage for 12 million Americans. You cannot support a family on $5.15 an hour. We can afford to do it, and we should do it, and we ought to do it as Americans, across partisan lines. I hope the next Congress will produce a genuine and bipartisan system of campaign finance reform, so that honest debate, instead of big money, controls elections. All of these things are within your hands. Look at these children; look at how fortunate we are that they can come together and learn from each other and have the right kind of disagreements and go have an election next week in which they campaign and make their case and everybody votes. We should set a good example. This country is still around after 220 years, having undergone unbelievable changes in the makeup of our citizenry, because more than half the time, more than half the people have been right on the big issues. The future of these children, the future of our country in the 21st century, is riding on it. So I implore all of you, if the education of our children is important to you, if the stability of our country and the stability and cause of peace in the world is important to you, please set a good example. Show up on Tuesday, vote, make your voice heard, and go home and talk to your children about what you did and how it is at the core of everything that makes our country worth living and fighting for. Thank you, and God bless you all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityglenforestelementaryschoolfallschurchvirginia", "title": "Remarks to the Community at Glen Forest Elementary School in Falls Church, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-glen-forest-elementary-school-falls-church-virginia", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 320, "text": "Thank you, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, for telling me I should come here today, thank you. I must say, I would rather be in the choir than in the pulpit. I thank three members of my Cabinet- Secretary of Labor Alexis Herman; the Secretary of Transportation, Rodney Slater; and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Frank Raines-for coming with me, and many members of the White House staff and friends. We are all glad to be here, and we have a happy heart after hearing all the wonderful music and seeing the people here, and especially the children. Sean and Ahjah and the other children gave me the letters and the drawings; I was back there reading them. One letter said, Can Project Spirit come and visit the White House and see the Christmas tree? As a matter of fact, Dr. Hicks, anybody, any of these children in your youth group you want to bring, just bus them on in. We'd be glad to see them, and we will arrange it. I'd like that. Now, the letters contain some interesting things. One young man wrote, I am not trying to get myself in trouble, but I have always had a crush on Hillary. Now, I can certainly understand that. A lot of the letters were serious. They said, can I do more to get rid of violence, guns. A lot of them said very specific things about what they'd like to do to make their schools better. Or, at least, why am I here today, instead of down the street at Foundry, where I normally am on Sunday? Ephesians says we should speak the truth with our neighbors, for we are members, one of another. I believe that. I think that is the single most important political insight, or social insight, in the Bible. And I think it is what should drive us as we behave together. Is my destiny caught up in yours; are your children my children; do you care about my daughter; are we part of the same family of God? It is not enough to say that we are all equal in the eyes of God. We are all also connected in the eyes of God. Now, just because we have responsibilities one to another does not mean we do not have a primary responsibility to ourselves. God helps those who help themselves. So we have responsibilities to ourselves, but we owe a lot to each other.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemetropolitanbaptistchurch", "title": "Remarks at the Metropolitan Baptist Church", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-metropolitan-baptist-church", "publication_date": "07-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 321, "text": "I come here to say that I do not believe our National Government has always been the best neighbor to the City of Washington, Mr. Mayor, Ms. Cropp, Congresswoman Norton, but we are committed to becoming a better neighbor. Washington has gotten a lot of lectures from people in national politics about being more responsible, from making the schools work better, to the streets become safer, to the neighborhoods having more hope and economic opportunity. But in the essence of our Constitution is the idea that responsibility requires freedom. And so I believe in the independence of Washington, DC. I want Washington, DC, to be able to run its own affairs. In this last meeting of Congress we did more things to take loads off of Washington that it should not have and to give Washington responsibilities that it should have. And we must do more. I met with the mayor, the city council, the control board, and a lot of community leaders just a few days ago, a meeting that the Congresswoman requested. And we talked about what we could do together. But I want to say to you that I come here at this Christmas season to say that I hope one of the gifts that I and our administration can leave for the 21st century is a National Capital that is a shining city on the hill for all America, that every American is proud of. I want a National Capital where every child looks like the children that I heard sing and who brought me those letters today, where they are all filled with a spirit of their own goodness, where they all believe they are children of God, where they all are animated to believe that they can have hope to live out their dreams. And this place symbolizes that. Would not you like it if your city and your country worked the way this church did? Would not you like that? And I am not violating the first amendment by saying that. This has nothing to do with the separation of church and state. This has to do with the values we all share. Most people who are not even Christians, who are Jewish people, who are Muslims, who are Buddhist, who are all the different religions we have in our country today, they'd still like it if our country worked more the way this church does-and often the way their houses of worship do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemetropolitanbaptistchurch", "title": "Remarks at the Metropolitan Baptist Church", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-metropolitan-baptist-church", "publication_date": "07-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 329, "text": "I welcomed Prime Minister Thorsteinn Palsson to the White House with particular pleasure, for he is the first Icelandic Prime Minister to make an official working visit to the United States. The Prime Minister and I had a very good and friendly meeting this morning, and we continued our conversation over lunch. Prime Minister, as you are well aware, ties between the United States and Iceland are deep and long-lived. In fact, they go back to the year 1000, when Leif Erikson, a son of Iceland, first came to these shores. I distinctly remember the statue of Left the Lucky in front of Iceland's largest church atop Reykjavik's tallest hill. It was a gift from the American people to Iceland in 1930 for the 1,000th anniversary of the founding of the Icelandic Parliament. Your Parliament, the Althing, is the oldest in the world; and it existed long before most parliamentary systems ever got started. That statue now stands as a reminder of the traditionally close and cooperative ties between our two democratic nations. It also reminds us of how fortunate it is that Icelanders were and remain a brave and seafaring people. On the occasion of the Prime Minister's visit to the White House today, I want again to express my personal thanks and the appreciation of the American people for the gracious hospitality shown by the Icelandic people and Government in hosting my meeting with General Secretary Gorbachev in October of 1986. Prime Minister, I have nothing but admiration for the efficiency and speed with which your entire nation successfully met an immense challenge on such short notice. I was told while there that Icelanders are accustomed to responding to such things as earthquakes and volcanic eruptions. But I am sure, however, they had never previously witnessed the upheaval of a U.S.-Soviet summit, complete with more than 3,000 journalists. But you and your countrymen took it all in stride, and we are all left with an unforgettable impression of your warmth, generosity, and hospitality. In the wake of the Moscow summit, I must note that the talks that the General Secretary and I had in Hofdi House were an important milestone in the development of our current dialog with the Soviet Union, a dialog made possible by the firm determination and unity of the Western alliance of which your nation was a founding member. NATO has more than stood the test of time, and Iceland was there at the beginning. NATO is an alliance of sovereign equals whose members have agreed to share both its benefits and responsibilities.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionswithprimeministerthorsteinnpalssoniceland", "title": "Remarks Following Discussions With Prime Minister Thorsteinn Palsson of Iceland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussions-with-prime-minister-thorsteinn-palsson-iceland", "publication_date": "10-08-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 330, "text": "I want to pick up her speech because I think I can sell it for a lot of money. You are going to see that tonight. Thanks also to the members of NFIB's Board of Directors who I have spent time with. Just took some wonderful pictures with good-looking group, I have to tell you. Together, you have been a powerful voice for America's small businesses. And now you have a true friend and ally in the White House. You know that. You know that. I am honored to be with you today for, really, this historic celebration. This was something when they asked me to do, I did not think about it for more than about a second. I said, I will do it. And let me officially say, on behalf of the American people, happy 75th anniversary to the National Federation of Independent Business. I tell you, you deserve a big happy. Joining us today are some terrific people who work very, very hard. And actually, they are starting to get a lot of credit. In fact, we had our highest poll numbers today. Can you believe this? So they are doing a good job. You know the old story when I was campaigning, I only mentioned that when we were doing well in the polls. When we are not doing well, I do not talk about it. You do the same thing. They are fighting hard for small business and for large business. They are fighting hard for our country, frankly, each and every day. And they are doing a terrific job. Most importantly, I want to thank all of you, the small business owners, who are the engine of American prosperity. And, you know, I have been saying it for a long time, but you really are. You look at even the stats and you look at the numbers. You look at the taxes that are paid. You look at the jobs. It is all about small business. So small businesses, really I say this to Linda McMahon all the time head of Small Business. For many years, Washington tried to hold you back and tear you down, crushing the American small business with crippling taxes and oppressive regulation. But all that has changed starting in November 2016. The Trump administration is with you, and we are with you 100 percent. Instead of punishing entrepreneurship, we are now promoting entrepreneurship. the illegal immigration crisis on our southern border. It is been going on for many, many decades and many years. And it has its ups and its downs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 331, "text": "And all we need is good legislation, and we can have it taken care of. And we have to get the Democrats to go ahead and work with us. Because as a result of Democrat-supported loopholes in our federal laws, most illegal immigrant families and minors from Central America who arrive unlawfully at the border cannot be detained together or removed together, only released. These are crippling loopholes that cause family separation, which we do not want. As a result of these loopholes, roughly half a million illegal immigrant family units and minors from Central America have been released into the United States since 2014 at unbelievably great taxpayer expense. Nobody knows how much we are paying for this monstrosity that is been created over the years legislation that nobody has any idea what they are doing. They do not even know what it means. And you have to see this; it is a mile high. Child smugglers exploit the loopholes, and they gain illegal entry into the United States, putting countless children in danger on the perilous trek to the United States. They come up through Mexico. Mexico does nothing for us. They do nothing for us. They could stop it. They have very, very strong laws. They do nothing for us, and I see it through NAFTA. I see with $100 billion-plus that they make on trade through NAFTA one of the worst deals ever made by this country. And we are trying to equalize it. And we are going to take care of our American farmers, and we are going to take care of our manufacturers, and our manufacturing jobs. But they are making unbelievable amounts of money, and that is not including the drugs that are flowing through our border, because we have no wall and we have no protection. The drugs that are coming in from Mexico and through the southern border is disgraceful. We can do one-on-one with Mexico; one-on-one with Canada. And, by the way, Canada they like to talk. They fought World War II with us. We appreciate it. They fought World War I with us. And we appreciate it, but we are protecting each other. There was a story two days ago, in a major newspaper, talking about people living in Canada, coming into the United States, and smuggling things back into Canada because the tariffs are so massive. The tariffs to get common items back into Canada are so high that they have to smuggle them in.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 332, "text": "They buy shoes, then they wear them. They scuff them up. And I told them, if they do not change their ways and we have a tremendous deficit. People say, Well, there is really not that much of a deficit. energy and timber. And those are the two big things when it comes to Canada. No, we have to change our ways. So hopefully, we will be able to work it out with Canada. We have very good relationships with Canada. We have for a long time. But Canada is not going to take advantage of the United States any longer, and Mexico is not going to take advantage of the United States any longer. And when I campaigned, I said I will either renegotiate NAFTA or I will terminate it and we will start from an even base. And people are afraid of that. You know, I have had so many people they come up, they say, Oh, please do not terminate NAFTA. Yeah, but we know what we have. People are worried because they know what they have. If you look at I love the American farmer more than anybody. They have backed me. I love the American farmer. And by the way I will tell you in a little while because it is in one of my notes the American farmer virtually will not have to pay any more estate tax on their farms when they pass away and they want to leave it to their children. And that goes for almost all small businesses. You will not have the estate tax to pay anymore, which was crippling. That was in our bill. Now, he is too young to be leaving it, so that means he is a beneficiary. And I am honored to have done it, because it was destroying the estate tax small businesses and farms. People were mortgaging them to the hilt to pay the tax, and then they could not pay the interest on the mortgage, and the banks would take them away. You do not have to pay the estate tax any longer. In other words, loopholes if your farm is really big, you start to pay. It is a pretty big level, you know that. These loopholes have created a massive child smuggling trade. Can you believe this? In this day and age, we are talking about child smuggling. We are talking about women smuggling in this day and age. The worst it is been in history because the Internet has led to this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 333, "text": "Since last year, child smugglers who are very, very sophisticated they have learned the loopholes in this horrible, rotten system that the Democrats have to help us fix because we need the votes. We could have the Republican votes, 100 percent. We still do not have enough votes. People do not understand that. We need Democrat votes to get it fixed. These smugglers know these rules and regulations better than the people that drew them. We are stopping them all the time by the thousands. We have no wall. We have no border security. Without a border, you do not have a country. You do not have a country. We can either release all illegal immigrant families and minors who show up at the border from Central America, or we can arrest the adults for the federal crime of illegal entry. And you want to be able to do that. We do not want people pouring into our country. We want them to come in through the process, through the legal system. And we want, ultimately, a merit-based system where people come in based on merit. Keep in mind, those who apply for asylum, legally, at ports of entry, are not prosecuted. The fake news media back there does not talk about that. They are helping they are helping these smugglers and these traffickers like nobody would believe. They know it. They know exactly what they are doing and it should be stopped because what is going on is very unfair to the people of our country. And they violate the law. People that come in violate the law. They endanger their children in the process. And frankly, they endanger all of our children. You see what happens with MS-13, where your sons and daughters are attacked violently. Kids that never even heard of such a thing are being attacked violently, not with guns, but with knives because it is much more painful. Inconceivable here we are talking about business inconceivable that we even have to talk about MS-13 and other gangs. And we are allowing these people into our country? We are taking them out by the thousands. We are taking them out by the thousands. So what I am asking Congress to do is to give us a third option, which we have been requesting since last year the legal authority to detain and promptly remove families together as a unit. We have to be able to do this. This is the only solution to the border crisis. We have to stop child smuggling. This is the way to do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 334, "text": "And ultimately, we have to have a real border not judges. Thousands and thousands of judges they want to hire. When we vet a single federal judge, it goes through a big process. Everybody that is ever met her or him they come, they complain, they do not complain. Now we are hiring thousands and thousands. I will not say it. I refuse to say it. I hope they picked that up back there. They said, Sir, we'd like to hire about five or six-thousand more judges. Now, can you imagine the graft that must take place? You are all small business owners, so I know you can imagine a thing like that would happen. We do not want judges; we want security on the border. We want them to come in through a legal process like everybody else that is waiting to come into our country. And it got so crazy that all of these thousands we now have thousands of judges border judges thousands and thousands. And, by the way, when we release the people they never come back to the judge anyway. They are in your system. And if they are bad, you will have killings, you will have murders, you will have this, you will have that, and you will have crime. You will have crime. And remember, these countries that we give tremendous foreign aid to in many cases, they send these people up and they are not sending their finest. Remember I made that speech and I was badly criticized? Oh it is so terrible, what he said. We want a great country. We want a country with heart. This is maybe a great chance to have a change. But one of them says we want to hire 5,000 more judges. I do not want judges. I want border security. I do not want to try people. Do you know, if a person comes in and puts one foot on our ground, it is essentially welcome to America, welcome to our country. You never get them out, because they take their name, they bring the name down, they file it, then they let the person go; they say show back up to court in one year from now. That in itself is ridiculous. The other thing they have is they have professional lawyers. Some are for good, others are do-gooders, and others are bad people. And they tell these people exactly what to say. they write it down I am being harmed in my country. I fear for my life.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 335, "text": "This is given to them by lawyers who are waiting for them to come up. But, in a way, that is cheating because they are giving them statements. They are not coming up for that reason. They are coming up for many other reasons and sometimes for that reason. We are a great country but you cannot do that. They game the system; they game it. It is so easy for them. They did not go to the Wharton School of Finance. The United States has just surpassed Germany as having the most asylum seekers of any nation on Earth. Can you image that? And Germany we talk about Germany they allowed millions of people in. And, by the way, their crime, from the time they started, is up more than 10 percent. And that is one of the reasons it is at that level is because they do not like reporting that kind of crime, so they put it down as different kind of crime. But their crime is up more than 10 percent since they started taking them in. I heard somebody said that Crooked Hillary Clinton was questioning that statistic. Did not she already have her chance? I will tell you what, when you read the IG report with these really dishonest people and I was never a deep-state guy, but let me tell you, we got some bad people that are doing bad things. But when you read that IG report about how she got away with what she got away with, it is a disgrace. And you ought to see the hearings that are right now on television but that folks are being you know, they are going on to the mainstream, fake news media. They want to focus on immigration because they want to keep the cameras away from the hearings because those hearings are not good for them. In fact, they are a disaster for them. So we have a House that is getting ready to finalize an immigration package that they are going to brief me on later, and that I am going to make changes to. We have one chance to get it right. We might as well get it right, or let us just keep it going. But let us do it right. We have a chance. We want to solve this problem. We want to solve family separation. I do not want children taken away from parents. And when you prosecute the parents for coming in illegally, which should happen, you have to take the children away. Now, we do not have to prosecute them. But then we are not prosecuting them for coming in illegally.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 336, "text": "We want to end the border crisis by finally giving us the legal authorities and the resources to detain and remove illegal immigrant families all together and bring them back to their country. We have to bring them back to their country. Now, think of all that aid that we give some of these countries. Hundreds of millions of dollars we give to some of these countries, and they send them up. Well, I am going to go, very shortly, for authorization that when countries abuse us by sending their people up not their best we are not going to give any more aid to those countries. So this is a responsible, commonsense approach that all lawmakers should embrace Democrats and Republicans. And remember, we need the Democrats. People say, Oh, you have the majority. Well, in the Senate, we have 1, but you need 60. So we will be at if we get 100 percent, we will be at 51. A hundred percent, we will be at 51. So we need nine votes. We need 10, 12, 13 votes. We have to have Democrat support because we need to go not just a majority, unfortunately, which we could get. We need to go to 60 60 out of 100. We need Democrat support. They do not want to give it, because Democrats love open borders. MS-13 gang members from all over the place, come on in we have open borders. And they view that possibly intelligently, except that it is destroying our country. They view that as potential voters. Someday they are going to vote for Democrats. Because they cannot win on their policies, which are horrible. They found that out in the last presidential election. In fact, their only policy was that Donald Trump is a bad guy, he is a bad person. And they said it so many hundreds of millions of dollars of negative ads. Nobody has ever been hit like that. I used to go home I started disliking myself. The problem is they never told anybody what they are doing. They did not talk about tax cuts. By the way, they want to take away your tax cuts, and they want to substantially increase your taxes. They did not talk about crime. So when people got to the booth, they said, Ah, we are going to vote Democrat. We are going to vote but then they get up, they said, But what does she stand for? What do they stand for? They just hate Trump. No, I am going with Trump. We got tremendous Democrat support.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 337, "text": "But you have to stand for something, and you have to stand for safety and security of our country. They have got to go through the process. We got to stop separation of the families. But politically correct or not, we have a country that needs security, that needs safety, that has to be protected. So we are here today to talk about small business and the incredible progress we are making as a country. We really have made unbelievable progress. And we are making with the help and support of our wonderful friends at the NFIB. And you have heard these numbers. And if I would have said these numbers during the campaign, the fake news would have said this is the most ridiculous I would not have said these numbers; I would have said half. And as an example, you saw the poll that was recently taken small-business poll. But nobody would have believed these numbers if I said them during the campaign. We have created more than 3.4 million new jobs since Election Day. Think of what that means. And, by the way, we do need people coming through the border. We do need people. And again, we want people you know, I have a lot of companies moving in, big companies. If you look at Foxconn in Wisconsin, they are coming in. They need thousands and thousands of people. Chrysler is moving from Mexico back into Michigan. Many car companies are coming back into our country. Now they are coming because of all of the things we have done with regulations, with tax cutting. But we need people to take care. We have the lowest unemployment rate 3.8 percent. We need people. So we want people to come in, but they have to be people that can help us and can help these companies fulfill what they want to fulfill. Unemployment claims are at a 44-year low. Maybe the one that makes me happiest is this because I remember I'd go around, I'd say, What do you have to lose? The Democrats have always been with you. They have you know, bad education. All of these different I'd say to the African Americans, I'd say, what you have to do What do you have to do? What do you have to lose? Unemployment for African Americans is at the lowest level in history. It is like, what do you have to lose? I would go around and talk, and some people would say, do not say that, it is not nice.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 338, "text": "jobs, jobs, jobs. And I should not say this to the people in this room, because you will end up not having liked my speech but wages for working people are finally, after 22 years, rising again in our country. I am sorry to do that. It is the only thing you can hold against me, but I think you are also very happy about it, actually. I know you well. According to the NFIB's latest survey, the share of small businesses raising worker and benefit pay has just set a new all-time record. We have broken many records. Business optimism is the highest it is ever been in our country. That means more hardworking Americans are able to support their family, contribute to their community, and live the American Dream. At the center of America's resurgence are the massive tax cuts that Republicans passed and that I signed into law six months ago this week. Not one Democrat voted for the tax cuts, and they are suffering now because they are going to lose a lot of races that they thought they were going to win. They wish they had that vote to do over again. We have numerous states for Senate where I think they are going to be in big trouble. It is the biggest tax cut and reform in American history. Not since Ronald Reagan have they done any major tax cutting. I tell this story all the time. I said, I do not understand it. We are going to cut your taxes. And you cannot get it through. So the leadership came to my beautiful Oval Office. And they talked about the tax reform. What does that mean, 'reform'? Does that mean you are going to raise taxes? What does it mean? We have the Tax Reform Act of 2017. I said, No, I do not want to go 'reform.' Nobody knows what reform means. Then I looked back at all of the times they tried to pass tax cuts. They do not use the word tax cuts; they use the word tax reform. I said, Nobody knows what reform means. They want to know about tax cuts; they do not want to know about tax reform, where we are going to raise your taxes, where we are going to take away your businesses, you are going to take away because tax reform. We are going to take away your farms. They do not want the word reform. They want the word tax cuts. Sir, could you give us a name? I will give you the name. I will give you the name.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 339, "text": "It is called the Tax Cut, Cut, Cut, Cut, Cut Bill of 2017. But even I thought that it was maybe a little bit hokey with all the cuts. So we just called it Tax Cut Bill. They got the word. At the heart of our plan is tremendous relief for working families and small businesses. A typical family of four earning $75,000 a year will see an income tax cut of more than $2,000 in some cases, much more than that slashing their tax bill in half and more. We delivered a historic victory for American small businesses by allowing you to deduct 20 percent of your business income. Capital investment is soaring on small businesses and big businesses, because you can now immediately deduct this, to me, is the greatest of them all every single penny spent on new capital equipment. As you know, we are also bringing back trillions of dollars from offshore that we could not bring back. The companies were unable to do it. From a tax standpoint, the amount they had to pay and almost more importantly, it was just very hard to do. You had to see the forms that had to be filled out. So we had anywhere from $3 trillion to $5 trillion, and now it seems as though, Steve, we are hitting the higher side. Companies are pouring money back into our country, bringing it back from overseas, investing it here. Apple just announced recently they are going to spend $350 billion on an incredible campus and new facilities all over the country. They are bringing money back and like nobody ever thought before. And you have heard me say, when they said $350 billion, I said, You mean $350 million. Because $350 million builds a nice plant. I know how to build under budget and ahead of schedule. I can build a beautiful plant for a lot less than $350 million. So when I heard billion, I said, No, no. You mean $350 million, right? I think of the total amount they are bringing back about $230 billion, and the rest they are putting in. And ExxonMobil is doing the same thing and so many other countries are doing the same thing, different numbers. I still say, however, expensing one year expensing will be the star of what we are doing. We exempted more small business owners from the alternative minimum tax, which you know very well was an enormous waste of your precious time and your very hard-earned money.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 340, "text": "And from now on, most small-business owners will be spared from the deeply unfair estate tax that I talked about. And it is so I am so proud of that, because you are all keeping your businesses. The family, the farms, you are keeping your businesses. As a result of all of these taxes and all of these tax cuts, American businesses now are on a level playing field with your competitors from other countries who have so many advantages, including subsidy by governments. You see what is happening with China. We have no choice. We have no choice. China has been taking out $500 billion a year out of our country and rebuilding China. I always say, We have rebuilt China. They have taken so much. So we are going to get smart, and we are going to do it right. And we are actually getting a lot of support. But we have to do something about it. Now, maybe something happens where they come and they say, We agree, it is been unfair for the last 25 years. We are going to make it fair with other countries, both our friends and our enemies. In many cases, our friends, on trade, have treated us much worse than our enemies. But we know that when the rules are fair, and you can compete, you will win against anyone anywhere in the world. But you have to bring it down to a level playing field. More than 6 million workers have already received a bonus some by your people or a pay raise, or retirement account contribution, or a new job thanks to these tax cuts. And people now are able to go around and look for jobs. They are just not taking a job and they hate it. They hate to wake up in the morning. They do not want to go to work. Now they have got their choice. They have jobs that they can look and they can love. And if you do not love it, you are not going to be good at it. Millions of Americans are now saying, and really saying to everybody, that they are saving money on their monthly utility bills. As a result of our business tax cuts, over 100 utility companies have lowered their prices, saving Americans an additional $3 billion a year. Our historic tax cuts also ended one of the most unfair taxes imaginable Obamacare's individual mandate. Government will no longer punish you if you cannot afford Obamacare's sky-high premiums.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 341, "text": "You pay a lot of money to the government in order not to have to buy in health insurance. So you are paying money so that you do not that is a penalty. But you are paying money so that you do not have to buy healthcare. And we actually thought we had the votes, and then one man, very early in the morning, went thumbs down. But we almost got rid of Obamacare without him. And that was a very sad day for the Republican Party. That was a very sad day for the country when that vote was cast that final vote was cast. I remember it well. Obamacare has been especially brutal for small businesses. You know that better than anybody. As a result of Obamacare, many small businesses, small-business employees, sole proprietors have no good or affordable options. But now they do, because we are opening up our system. I am proud to announce another truly historic step in our efforts to Americans from Obamacare and the Obamacare nightmare, and provide high-quality, affordable healthcare to every American. You know, before Obamacare, there were many people very happy. They had no problem. But then you got thrown to the wind. Alex and the Department of Labor are taking a major action that is been worked on for four months now and now it is ready to make it easier for small businesses to band together to negotiate lower prices for health insurance and escape some of Obamacare's most burdensome mandates through association health plans. You are going to save massive amounts of money and have much better healthcare. It is going to cost you much less. I will tell you, a lot of people big, big percentages of this country are going to be doing that. In fact, while you are in the room together, shake hands, form an association. And in theory, the bigger the association, the better the deal you are going to make. You are going to save a fortune, and you are going to be able to give yourselves and your employees tremendous healthcare. I am really honored by that. Believe me, that is great. With this action, businesses in the same state or businesses in the same industry not just the same state anywhere in the country remember I used to say during the debates, Cross state lines so you can negotiate. You now can cross state lines so you can negotiate. So if 20 or 30 of the businesses in this room get together you get together as a group, an association you pick the meanest, most vicious manager owner to right?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 342, "text": "To negotiate your healthcare and I know a few of the people in here that are going to do very well. You will end up with better insurance for far less money. And, Alex, that is ready as of when? I call our Secretary of Labor, and they say, Sir, he is very busy. I am President of the United States. What do you mean? They said, He is working on healthcare. I said, Well, Department of Labor. We love it. And he is now working on an expansion of that, including even larger groups of people. For the first time ever, sole proprietors will be able to come together and buy lower-cost group insurance instead of getting ripped off by this disaster that we all know as Obamacare. These actions will result in very low prices, much more choice, much more freedom, including in many cases new opportunities to purchase health insurance. You will be able to do this across state lines. I'd say, Alex, I want to cross state lines. He said, Do not worry about it. And nobody else you know, this is something we were able to do within the confines of the existing laws. And the insurance companies and some people are forming their own but the insurance companies are so excited about this. Let them go and they have made so much money off Obamacare, folks. They got so rich with Obama. Take a look at what happened to our premiums. You know, everyone hears about Obamacare being a disaster, except for the insurance companies. So they are going to have to give a little bit of that money back. Every American who owns a small business plays a vital role in creating a safe, strong, and prosperous America. And my administration will never forget that truth. Every day you turn ideas into action, you turn vision into creation I know you well and you turn dreams into reality. That is what you do. You do not even realize that is what you do. That is what you do. You embody the spirit of independence and adventure that turned America from 13 colonies into the most incredible republic in the history of humankind. Do the women understand that? What Oh, look, a couple of women are having the thumb up. You like that? You like that. Now I am happy about it. It is the same spirit that inspired previous generations to cross the plains and tame the wilderness, and to build shining cities that touch the sky.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalfederationindependentbusinesses75thanniversarycelebrationutmsourcelink", "title": "Remarks by President Trump at the National Federation of Independent Businesses 75th Anniversary Celebration", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-federation-independent-businesses-75th-anniversary-celebration/?utm_source=link", "publication_date": "19-06-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 353, "text": "I just visited a vaccination clinic in Virginia, at the Virginia Theological Seminary in Alexandria, Virginia. The seminary and other houses of worship in the area are partnering with the community health centers to offer vaccination and vaccination sites. They are seeing these kinds of partnerships where-and not just there, but we are seeing them all over the country. People are coming together across the different faiths to serve those most in need, with a special focus on vaccinating seniors from all races, backgrounds, and walks of life. It is an example of America at its finest. Get vaccinated-something which can, he went on to say, can save your life and the lives of others. And I was at the seminary clinic to mark an important milestone as well. Yesterday we crossed 150 million shots in 75 days-the first 75 days my administration-on our way to hitting our goal of 200 million shots by the 100th day in office. That, of course, is the new goal I set after passing the original mark of 100 million shots in my first 100 days, doing it in just 58 days. At the time, some said 100 million shots was too ambitious, and then they said, It was not ambitious enough. If we could raise it up higher, I'd do that as well. We have to ramp up a whole-of-Government approach that rallies the whole country and puts us on a war footing to truly beat this virus. getting enough vaccine supply, mobilizing more vaccinators, creating more places to get vaccinated. And we are now administering an average of 3 million shots per day, over 20 million shots a week. On Saturday alone, we reported, more than 4 million shots were administered. We are the first country to administer 150 million shots and the first country to fully vaccinate over 62 million people. I promised an update to the American people every 50 millionth shot, and I am already back to update you a little over 2 weeks, 2 weeks later. I promised in the beginning that I'd always give you the straight scoop, straight from the shoulder, the good and the bad. The good news is, we are on track to beat our goal of 200 million shots in the first 100 days. More than 75 percent of the people over the age of 65 have gotten shots, up from 8 percent when we took office. That is a dramatic turnaround and critical, because seniors account for 80 percent of all ENTITY deaths.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscovid19vaccinationeffortsandexchangewithreporters0", "title": "Remarks on COVID-19 Vaccination Efforts and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-covid-19-vaccination-efforts-and-exchange-with-reporters-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 354, "text": "To help support my goal of safely reopening a majority of K-through-8 schools by my 100th day in office, I directed States in early March to make educators and children-childcare workers eligible for vaccines and to get a goal of getting all who wanted the vaccination to be able to have one and to do it in the month of March. I am pleased to report, according to CDC estimates, over 80 percent of teachers, school staff and childcare workers received at least one shot by the end of March. And that is great progress protecting our educators, our essential workers. And because our vaccine program is in overdrive, we are making it easier to get a vaccination shot. Last week, I announced that by April 19 of this month, 90 percent of all Americans will be within five miles of a vaccination site. And further good news is that we are getting more and more data on just how effective the vaccines are. Fauci recently cited two studies from the New England Journal of Medicine that found fully vaccinated care workers-health care workers on the frontlines had an extremely low infections rate, less than two-tenths of 1 percent, compared to unvaccinated health care workers who had considerably higher infection rates. So we are making incredible progress. New variants of the virus are spreading, and they are moving quickly. While deaths are still down-way down from January-they are going up in some places. What does that mean? I understand that people may find it confusing that the vaccination program is saving tens of thousands of lives, but the pandemic remains dangerous. Time. Even moving at the record speed we are moving at, we are not even halfway through vaccinating over 300 million Americans. This is going to take time. For a two-dose vaccine, it takes weeks from the time you get your first one until you are able to get your second shot, which makes you fully protected. If you get your first shot next week, in mid-April, you will not be fully protected until-until May-late May. If you get your first shot in mid-May, you are not fully protected until late June. So look-now, on the one hand, June is not that far away given how long this has been going on, but it is not here yet either.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscovid19vaccinationeffortsandexchangewithreporters0", "title": "Remarks on COVID-19 Vaccination Efforts and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-covid-19-vaccination-efforts-and-exchange-with-reporters-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 355, "text": "So the virus is spreading because we have too many people who, seeing the end in sight, think we are at the finish line already. We are not at the finish line. We still have a lot of work to do. We are still in a life-and-death race against this virus. Until we get more people vaccinated, we need everyone to wash their hands, socially distance, and mask up in a recommended mask from the CDC. Better times are ahead. And as I have said before, we can have a safe, happy Fourth of July with your family and friends, in small groups in your backyard. How much death, disease, and misery are we going to see between now and then? In January-just the month of January-we lost 95,747-excuse me, 95,774 Americans. In March, that was 37,172 Americans. All told-as you are all about to know-I keep doing this, I know, but I carry this card, every day, with my schedule on it. And on the back, I have a ENTITY update. The total number of deaths in the United States to date is 554,064 dead. What we do now is going to determine how many people we will save or lose in the month of April and May and June before we get to July 4. So, please, until we are further along in this accelerating, successful, but still growing vaccination effort, please wash your hands. While I am asking Americans-the American people to do their job, here is what I am doing. When we first started our vaccination program, the real question is how quickly we could get shots in people's arms. Well, by the end of May, the vast majority of adult Americans will have gotten at least their first shot. That success-that success-is going to save lives and get this country back to normal sooner. On March the 11th, I announced that I was opening up all vaccination sites to all adults by May 1. Many Governors-Democrats and Republicans-responded and decided to beat that date, which was good. Thanks to their hard work and the hard work of the American people, and the hard work of my team, I am announcing today that we are moving that date up from May 1 to April 19, nationwide.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscovid19vaccinationeffortsandexchangewithreporters0", "title": "Remarks on COVID-19 Vaccination Efforts and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-covid-19-vaccination-efforts-and-exchange-with-reporters-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 356, "text": "That means, by no later than April 19, in every part of this country, every adult over the age of 18-18 or older will be eligible to be vaccinated. Many States have already opened up to all adults. But beginning April 19, every adult in every State, every adult in this country is eligible to get in line to get a ENTITY vaccination. And today, in advance of that new national full-eligibility date, I want to make a direct appeal to our seniors and everyone who cares about them. While we have made incredible progress vaccinating three-quarters of our seniors and putting vaccination sites within 5 miles of 90 percent of the public, it still is not enough. To make it easier, my administration is sending aid to community groups to drive seniors to vaccination sites. We are incredibly grateful to all the volunteers, houses of worship, and the civic groups that are helping us in this effort. We take care of one another. And we have to keep it up. As I ask seniors to sign up for their shots now, I also have a message for people under 65. If you know someone over 65 who has not gotten this lifesaving vaccine, call them now. And finally, even after we open up vaccinations to all adults and put a site within 5 miles of 90 percent of the public, we know there are many people who still struggle to get access to a shot. We know that there are a number of seniors and people with disabilities and people in many communities of color who may be isolated and lack access to transportation. That is why we are ramping up transportation to vaccination centers and deploying more mobile units and pop-up clinics in the places close to where people live. That is why we are working with faith-based organizations and other community groups to host vaccination clinics, sign people up for appointments, get help-help them get those appointments. That is why we are sending even more vaccines to community health centers, like the one I was in today, that all together serve nearly 30 million Americans, like the ones I visited today. Two-thirds of the patients at community health centers live at or below the poverty level. To reach them, we are investing nearly $10 billion to expand testing, treatment, and vaccinations for the hardest hit yet most underserved communities. We have vaccinated more people than any other nation on Earth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscovid19vaccinationeffortsandexchangewithreporters0", "title": "Remarks on COVID-19 Vaccination Efforts and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-covid-19-vaccination-efforts-and-exchange-with-reporters-0", "publication_date": "06-04-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 357, "text": "President, it is my honor to welcome you to the Oval Office. Our we just had a very substantive meeting. And it will be my honor to feed you a lunch. I doubt it is going to be the food will be as good as the food I had when I visited your beautiful country. Bilateral relations with the United States and Italy are very good. We have a lot of interchange between our countries, with business as well as travel. And there are millions of Italian Americans who will be pleased, Mr. President, to know we have got good relations. Secondly, we just had a really around-the-world trip as we discussed problem areas and our mutual desire to work together to help solve those problems. We discussed Afghanistan, Lebanon, Kosovo. I briefed the President on the recent Annapolis Conference that we hosted to help get the peace process started between the Palestinians and Israelis. We had a very compatible relation discussion because by and large, we are in agreement on how to advance the solutions to these issues. And finally, I am have expressed and will continue to dialog with the President about my deep concern about Iran. Iran we believe Iran had a secret military weapons program. And Iran must explain to the world why they had a program. Iran has an obligation to explain to the IAEA why they hid this program from them. Iran is dangerous, and they will be even more dangerous if they learn how to enrich uranium. And so I look forward to working with the President to explain our strategy and figure out ways we can work together to prevent this from happening for the sake of world peace. So I am sure proud to have you here, Mr. President, and welcome. It has been a great pleasure for me to accept your invitation. You kindly addressed me 6 months ago when you were in Rome, and we had already then very positive talks. First of all, I wanted to express to President Bush my deep appreciation for the responsibility he wanted to take to foster negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian authorities in view of a peace treaty. Italy is present in several areas of crisis. In this moment, it is an Italian general who is taking the command of the Kabul region in Afghanistan. In Iraq, we give our contribution to the stabilization of the country, participating in NATO training activities. In fact, generally speaking, we share the same concerns, and we express a common commitment.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithpresidentgiorgionapolitanoitaly", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With President Giorgio Napolitano of Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-president-giorgio-napolitano-italy", "publication_date": "11-12-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 360, "text": "I know you need a stretch, but it is going on too long. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vice President, for the wonderful work that you have done in so many ways, and everything that we have done together in the last 5 1/2 years. In 1996, when the American people were good enough to give the Vice President and me another term and made me the first Democratic President in 60 years, since Franklin Roosevelt in 1936, to be reelected, we picked up some seats in the House. And if we had picked up a few more, we would have won the House. In the last 10 days, even though we had the issues and the direction, we were outspent in the 20 closest districts 4 1/2 to one. But we did begin this Unity concept a little too late, but it still did very well. All of our contributors liked it because all three committees were not asking at the same time to give money or raise it. But it was the right thing to do, because we could work on helping particular candidates, targeting particular States, going after particular constituencies, getting our turnout up. This year we are trying to go sooner and do more. And I cannot say enough for what I believe is the vision of the leaders of the House, the Senate, and the Democratic Committee for doing this early and doing it together and in good faith with a good heart. The Vice President gave that wonderful portrait of what is happened the last 6 years through chapter 6. Chapter 7 is, we win if we do the right things; if we do the right things, we win. Honor the past; imagine the future. And we started out a couple of weeks ago honoring the past by announcing grants by private citizens to help us save the Star-Spangled Banner. It is hard to think of anything that embodies our past more. And then Hillary went to Thomas Edison's* home in New Jersey to talk about saving that and then to Harriet Tubman's home, then to George Washington's revolutionary headquarters, then to New York to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the beginning of the women's movement, all honoring the past. But we have also had a lot of interesting lectures at the White House imagining the future. Stephen Hawking, the great physicist from Cambridge, England, came and spoke in a very heroic way, because he suffers from Lou Gehrig's disease, about what we would learn about the larger world in the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinner1", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-1", "publication_date": "05-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 361, "text": "We had poets for the first time in a long time, a genuine poetry reading in the White House with our poet laureates and ordinary citizens, including children, thinking about their future. Steve said that never, at least-I quit looking at the Civil War because I am not sure before that political trends are indicative. But since the Civil War, the party of the President in the President's second term has always lost some seats at midterm. But there is a reason for that which we have determined to erase-and these records are made to be changed-and that is, that generally there is the sense that no matter how well liked the President might be, the term is three-quarters over, so what else is new? Well, when I was reelected, the Vice President and I sat down one day, and I told our people, I said, Look, I want us to drive the agenda of this country until the last hour of the last day of my term in January of 2001. That is what we signed on for. That is what we owe the American people. And if you look at what is happening today, our party-I love what Dick Gephardt said about, when he was the majority leader, how he met with the minority leader and how we tried to work together. Because this election fundamentally is not about the Democratic Party. It is about the American people, and it is about our agenda, which puts progress over partisanship and people over power and unity over division. We believe this country has big challenges. We believe, first, you do not sit on a lead in a global economy and society like the one we are living in. You know, the temptation is, after all the tough years we had, Things are going so well now; why do not we just relax, kick back, and enjoy it? All you have to do is pick up the paper every day to know that it is a reasonably dynamic world we are living in. If someone had told you 5 years ago that Japan would have 5 years of one percent growth a year during which time the stock market there would lose half its value, would you have believed that? Is there a person in this room that really thought that would happen? If there is, I'd like to clean out what little I have got left in my bank account and let you be my investment adviser from now on. I do not mean that in a negative way.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinner1", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-1", "publication_date": "05-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 362, "text": "The way people work and live and relate to each other and the rest of the world is changing at a breathtaking pace. Nobody is smart enough to understand it all and figure out all of its ramifications. When people have the good fortune of good times, they should take their treasure and their confidence and think about tomorrow and deal with the long-term challenges of the country. There are four big issues that I think will sweep across the country this year and carry us home if our party will advance them. Number one, we waited 29 years to get out of the red. Let us do not run out and spend this surplus on a tax cut or a spending program until we save the Social Security system for the 21st century so that the baby boomers do not bankrupt their kids and their ability to raise their grandchildren when we retire. Number two, managed care, on balance, has been a good thing for America because we could not sustain inflation in health care costs at 3 times the rate of inflation in the economy. That was an unsustainable trend that developed in the 1980's. But it is just a device, and it must not be allowed to block quality care. Therefore, we should have a Patients' Bill of Rights that puts quality care back at the center of the health care debate. People should have access to the medical care they need; decisions should be made by doctors, not by accountants; people should not be turned away from emergency rooms or specialists if they need them; and their privacy should not be violated in the medical arena. That is what this Patients' Bill of Rights is all about. It is a first step toward reconciling the imperative of having better management in the health care system with keeping health care uppermost in the health care system. And a lot of you are in the health care business. One of the reasons we need legislation is, it is simply unfair to all the good people out there in health care today that are already complying with the requirements of the Patients' Bill of Rights because they think it is the morally right thing to do. It is unfair for them to be at an economic disadvantage with those who do not . So we need a Patients' Bill of Rights. Number three, we have succeeded in the last 5 1/2 years in opening the doors of college to just about everybody in America. The HOPE scholarship makes the first 2 years of college virtually free to most Americans. It certainly makes community college virtually free to most Americans.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinner1", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-1", "publication_date": "05-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 363, "text": "We now have tax credits for the junior and senior year and for graduate school. The interest deductibility on student loans is back. We have dramatically increased scholarships and work-study positions. We had 100,000 young people go through AmeriCorps. One of you told me you had a child going to California in the AmeriCorps program, and I thank you for that. But no one believes that we still even after all this, we still cannot say that we have the best elementary and secondary education in the world for all Americans. We have an agenda for smaller classes, more teachers, more welltrained teachers, modernized schools, hooking up all the classrooms to the Internet, more after-school programs, more summer school programs for kids in difficult areas with troubled lives-things that we know work-higher standards, greater accountability, more charter schools, more school choice. We have got an agenda, and we think it ought to be supported. So we have a better schools agenda. Number four, after this summer, I take it no one seriously questions the fact that the climate is genuinely changing. The 9 hottest years on record have occurred in the last 11 years. The 5 hottest years in history have occurred in the 1990's. Last year was the hottest year on record; this year every month has been hotter than the same month last year. We still have 40 percent of our water that is not safe for swimming, in spite of all the work since the Clean Water Act passed. We still have problems with safe drinking water in some places. We still have too many toxic waste dumps in some places. If there is one thing America has learned since 1970, it is that we improve the quality of life and the strength of the economy when we clean up the environment in the right way. So this old-fashioned, antienvironmental rhetoric does not hold much water. We have got to face the environmental challenges of today and tomorrow and do them in a way that promotes new markets, new technologies, new jobs, but a cleaner environment and a growing economy. save Social Security, pass a Patients' Bill of Rights, improve the public schools, clean up the environment and improve the economy. In a lot of places our farmers are in trouble. A lot of urban areas, where we have a good empowerment agenda, still have not felt the economic recovery.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinner1", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-1", "publication_date": "05-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 372, "text": "Ladies and gentlemen, I have had a wonderful day here. I do not think I have ever had a bad day in New Orleans. And I am honored to be here with Bill and Andrea, with Vic and Fran Bussie. And Vic, you have done a lot of great things in your life, but you have not given many better talks. I am honored to be here with your bright young mayor, who has established such a fine record and has recently joined the ranks of the happily married. We are proud of him for that, too. Let me say to all of you-I was just sitting here listening to what everybody else was saying, wondering if I could offer any unique perspective. I first came to New Orleans 50 years ago. I hate that. My mother was in nursing school here. And one of the most vivid memories of my lifetime was seeing my mother kneel by the side of the railroad tracks and cry when I went home with my grandmother, because she had been widowed early, before my father-before I was born. And she came down here to get some education so she could support me. And they would not let me in anyplace to hear anybody-- because I was so young. And I saw-I never will forget this-I was walking away from my mother, and I saw Al Hirt sitting there in some big English limousine, reading a newspaper, and he was going to go in and perform. I knocked on his window, told him who I was, and said I had come all the way down here from Hot Springs, Arkansas, and all I cared about was music. I did not want to drink anything; I did not want to gamble; I did not want anything; I just wanted to go hear him play. He took me in and put me on the front table. It is funny what you remember, is not it? I have never forgotten that, and that sort of embodies the generosity that the people of this city and this State have exhibited to me throughout my life. And you did give Al Gore and me, Hillary and Tipper, and our administration the electoral votes of the people of Louisiana twice, and I am profoundly grateful for that. I want to say three or four things I think you ought to think about in this election. When I became President, I ran a long, hard campaign. I was written off for dead three or four times along the way, and three or four dozen times since.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforrepresentativewilliamjjeffersonneworleans", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Representative William J. Jefferson in New Orleans", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-representative-william-j-jefferson-new-orleans", "publication_date": "27-09-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 373, "text": "But Bill Jefferson was one of my first supporters. I remember the first time I came here, when the Jeffersons had me in their home. I met their beautiful, brilliant daughters, and their family members, many of whom are here today. And we went through that campaign, and I found that, to a remarkable degree, we shared the same philosophy. We were proud members of the Democratic Party, but we did not like the fact that our party had been a part of the leadership of 12 years of Republican Presidents when we had the majority in the Congress, and together they quadrupled the debt of the country; and that we were in a terrible recession. Wages had been stagnant for more than a decade. We did not like the fact that people thought because we believed in the United States Constitution and we were against racial discrimination, that somehow we were soft on crime or we thought able-bodied people should not work instead of being on welfare. We thought that the Democratic Party, and African-Americans in general, had been twisted and distorted and used as political whipping boys in campaigns. And we thought Washington was divided by gridlock, and we wanted a change. So I said, give me a chance to change America, to change the direction of the country, change our party, to change our leadership in Washington. I want America in the 21st century to be a place where every person, without regard to race, creed, gender, or anything else, has a chance to live up to his or her God-given potential. And I want America to be the world's strongest force for peace and freedom and justice and prosperity. And my strategy for getting there is to do everything I know how to do to give opportunity for all, demand responsibility from all Americans, and create a community of all Americans. That is what we said we'd do. Now, in 1992, it was an argument. And the people decided to give me a chance, even though I was, in the rather disparaging characterization of the incumbent President, just a Governor from a small southern State. The people decided to give me a chance. They bought our side of the argument. By 1996, there was no argument anymore because the results were beginning to pour in. And now, in 1999, I can look back and say with gratitude and thanks and humility that it has worked out. The results speak for themselves.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforrepresentativewilliamjjeffersonneworleans", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Representative William J. Jefferson in New Orleans", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-representative-william-j-jefferson-new-orleans", "publication_date": "27-09-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 374, "text": "We have the longest peacetime expansion in history; 19.4 million jobs; the lowest unemployment rate in 29 years; the lowest welfare rate in 32 years; the lowest crime rate in 26 years. Today I announced that this year's surplus will be $115 billion, the first time in 42 years we have had a surplus 2 years in a row. And I say that to make this point-and along the way, by the way, with the HOPE scholarship and other financial incentives, we have opened the doors of college to virtually every American. The air is cleaner; the water is cleaner; the food is safer; 90 percent of our kids are immunized against serious childhood diseases for the first time; 100,000 young Americans have served in AmeriCorps in their communities all over this country, including this one, and earned some money for college. And we have been a force for peace and freedom throughout the world. And I am proud of that. What is that got to do with this? Well, I will just give you a few examples. And what is that got to do with the Governor's race, even if it has something to do with our record? And I will give you a few examples of that. Number one, all this started with one vote in August of 1993. The economy started getting better after the election, as soon as I announced my economic plan. But it did not get voted on in Congress until August, because it was fairly controversial. I had cut hundreds of programs but dramatically increased education. And I asked the wealthiest Americans to pay more taxes, and cut taxes on 15 million Americans who were working for modest wages, lower wages, with children in their home. And there was a lot of controversy, and the Republican Party in Congress decided that they would vote against this to the person, that they would not give me one vote, and that they would tell everybody it was a just a tax increase, even though they knew only a tiny fraction of Americans were going to have one. Now, that bill passed by one vote in the United States Senate, Al Gore's vote. And it passed by one vote in the United States House of Representatives. If Bill Jefferson had not voted for that, it would not have happened, the recovery probably would not have occurred, and none of us would probably be standing here today doing this. So I am grateful to Bill Jefferson.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforrepresentativewilliamjjeffersonneworleans", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Representative William J. Jefferson in New Orleans", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-representative-william-j-jefferson-new-orleans", "publication_date": "27-09-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 375, "text": "I am grateful to him for supporting our agenda to reach out to other countries-to Latin America, to Africa-to expand trade of American products, to build up the Port of New Orleans, to bring us closer to other people in other countries. Get guns out of the wrong hands; put more community police on the street; give our kids something good to do. And I am grateful to Bill Jefferson for supporting my education agenda every step of the way, including our plan to hire 100,000 more teachers to get class size down in the early grades, something he is running on; our plan to build or modernize 6,000 schools, which would include his commitment to air-condition the schools that do not have it; our plan to triple the number of our young people who are eligible for after-school programs; set high standards for failing schools, and if they do not turn around, let the parents go to another public school with their kid, but help the schools turn around. We can do that. I have seen that all over America. I am telling you, I have been in the schools in the worst neighborhoods you can imagine in terms of adversity, and I have seen children learning at a high level because of what was done in the school. So, yes, I am grateful to Bill Jefferson. And a lot of what we enjoy today came as a direct result of policies he supported that he played a critical role in bringing to bear. The second point I'd like to make to you is that I believe I am the only person in this room who has actually been a Governor. I know something about this. And I did it quite a long time. I served for 12 years and would have served for 14 if the people had not elected me President. And I am telling you, I loved every day of it. It is a wonderful job if you love people and if you care about good schools, good jobs, and creating strong, healthy, vibrant communities. We have done more in the education area probably than any administration, certainly since the Johnson administration. But most of the money for schools and most of the direction for schools, by State constitutional law, comes from the State, in every State in America. You know, education is very important to me, personally, and to Hillary and to all of our administration. But the President has to protect the American people in many ways; the national security has to come first, and then you have to deal with a whole range of other issues.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforrepresentativewilliamjjeffersonneworleans", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Representative William J. Jefferson in New Orleans", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-representative-william-j-jefferson-new-orleans", "publication_date": "27-09-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 376, "text": "But a Governor has no more important job, none, than education. And a Governor also has to be able to get people together to really get things done. What you want in a Governor is somebody who is smart, committed, with a good heart, who is passionate about what he or she believes but is not particularly partisan. And I can tell you, Bill and I-we all came out of State Government; he and I both did. We are both, frankly, mortified by how partisan that crowd is in Washington. I mean, I always tell him there is plenty of things for us to argue about in the next election, but the people give us a paycheck every 2 weeks to show up for work in the meanwhile. And we are not supposed to fight about everything; we are supposed to work out things and get things done. That is the sort of person he is. And he has a lot of friends in the Congress who are Republicans because they know that he has not responded in kind to the harsh partisanship of their leaders and that he is still willing to work with people of good will to get things done. You cannot be a good Governor unless you are both open to people in both parties but absolutely aggressive in what you believe and what you want to achieve. You need both an agenda and an ability to bring people together. He can do that. And I did this for 12 years; I am telling you, this is important, and he can do it superbly well. The other thing that has not been mentioned-Vic talked about his service in the legislature-he was twice voted, twice, the best member of the Louisiana Legislature. So he knows about this job. I want to thank Anne and Stan and Chris Rice for having us in this magnificent facility. But this facility used to be an orphanage, and I got to thinking, Hillary and I had a very moving event at the White House this week to celebrate our attempts to move people, kids from foster care into adoption, and all the work we have done over the last 7 years-one thing we have done, by the way, on a bipartisan basis-to speed up adoptions. And I got down here today, and when I was over at the school, a woman stopped me and said, Mr. President, thank you for helping to fix the adoption laws. I just adopted two children. So we have worked on this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforrepresentativewilliamjjeffersonneworleans", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Representative William J. Jefferson in New Orleans", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-representative-william-j-jefferson-new-orleans", "publication_date": "27-09-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 377, "text": "Now, I want to say that I want you to think about this as a place where children once lived who had no family. This man knows what it is like to have a difficult time. He knows what it is like to have the support of a good family. He knows what it is like to build a good family, and he and his wife have five magnificent daughters who have done superbly well because they have good parents and a good home. In the end, having now served 12 years as a Governor and 7 years as President, I can tell you, a lot of times you have to make decisions that nobody is smart enough to make. A lot of times decisions come to me that, no matter how smart I think I am, I cannot think my way through. And all you can do is pray to God to give you the wisdom to do it, and listen to your heart, not your head. So the last thing I will say is, remember everything-the man has proven he is had the courage to take a tough decision. He cast a decisive vote on the most important bill that brought us the prosperity we enjoy today. He has wide experience in State Government. He has the capacity to get people together. He clearly has the right agenda. There is no more important agenda for Louisiana's future than getting the education up to world-class levels. But when it is all said and done, what really counts is, do you have a good heart. Keep in mind, 50 years later I still remember my mother loved me enough to kneel down on those railroad tracks and cry when I had to go away. When it is all said and done, you do not remember first and foremost in the last moments of your life the honors you had, the riches you had; you remember who you liked and who you loved, how it felt when the seasons changed, and what it felt like to be really, really important, to matter in the lives of other people. The people of Louisiana will matter to Bill Jefferson if he is the Governor. You should only vote for him if you think he'd be the best Governor. But if you think he'd be the best Governor and you let him be defeated, it would be a terrible thing, because the children here, the children of this State deserve the very best person they can get in experience, in mind, and in heart. God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforrepresentativewilliamjjeffersonneworleans", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Representative William J. Jefferson in New Orleans", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-representative-william-j-jefferson-new-orleans", "publication_date": "27-09-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 378, "text": "It is nice of you to come to meet me at this time of the morning. I believe you have some inkling of why I am here. I am out campaigning for a Democratic victory in November. I have been told that this city of yours is sometimes considered a suburb of New Haven. Well now, I live in a town in Missouri that Kansas City tries to call a suburb. But we were there first, just as you were, and the suburbs are around the other way New Haven is a suburb of this town, and Kansas City is a suburb of Independence. They do not like to be told that. You have a fine slate of Democratic candidates here in Connecticut. I think the world of Bill Benton and Abe Ribicoff. We need them both in the Senate. I do not like to say too much about the Senate because I served 10 years there myself, but if I were to express my opinion they would say I was throwing bouquets at myself. You need John McGuire and Stanley Pribyson in the House to give Connecticut good representation. I am working hard in this campaign because I think it is the most important election in many, many years. The choice the people make this year may decide whether we have prosperity or depression, war or peace. The whole future of our country is wrapped up in the decision next November the 4th. Peace is the most important of all. It is the thing I have been working for with all my heart these past 7 years. I am sure we are on the right road to attain the peace. I am sure we can attain that goal, provided we have the kind of government that will work calmly and steadily no matter what the obstacles may be in the years ahead. That is the kind of government we will have in this country if Adlai Stevenson is elected President next November. He is a man of peace. He is a civilian with much experience in government with a real understanding of our political system and the needs of the plain, everyday people in this country and all over the world. During the war, President Roosevelt sent him to Italy to find out how we could best help the people of that great country rebuild their economy and aid in the struggle against the Nazis. After the war, Adlai Stevenson helped greatly in the task of setting up the United Nations. And now for 4 years past he has been Governor of one of our great States-Illinois. He has given his State a real progressive government a government for the people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 379, "text": "If you have been listening to his speeches you know that he has met the great issues of our domestic policy and our foreign policy wisely and frankly. And I want to say this to you. He does not make one kind of policy speech up here in Connecticut and another kind of policy speech in Virginia or North Carolina or some other Southern State. His speeches are right down the line. What he says he means, and he means it for the whole 48 States and not just throwing out bait hooks to try and get votes. He is for the welfare and benefit of all of them. You had better watch this thing very carefully when you go to the polls on the 4th. Now, on the other side we have the Republican candidate for President. I believe he is a very great general because I appointed him to two of the most important military posts in the Government of the United States. But that does not necessarily qualify him to be a good President in the years ahead. Of course he wants peace as much as the rest of us. Nobody wants war. But in this struggle for peace we have to have more than good intentions. Military life is good training for war and preparation for war. It is not training in the ways of preventing a war. The President of the United States makes the policies of this country that can lead to either peace or war. We must be careful to get the right kind of man in that job. No man can promise you peace with absolute certainty, and I know what I am talking about, but I can say to you that I believe with all my heart, our best hopes for peace lie in the election of Adlai Stevenson to the Presidency. Now I want you to do a little thinking. I am going to ask you to use your head. You know, we have been shoved into world leadership we were shoved into a world leadership which we should have assumed back in 1920, and we did not have the nerve or the stability to do it. And now, whether we like it or not, we are the most powerful nation in the history of the world. And the most important office in the history of the world is the Presidency of the United States. I want you to think about your own welfare. Think about the welfare of the world as a whole, for that is our responsibility. The free world is looking to us to carry on for the welfare of all the people in the world. Every time the President makes a decision, it sometimes affects as many as a billion people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 380, "text": "That is a responsibility that is yours, because you are the Government of the United States. And when you go to the polls on November the 4th you either keep this country in the right groove or you may send it into the most disastrous war in the history of the world. This is a fine time of year to come to your great State of Connecticut. But, I guess that you know I am not here to look at the scenery beautiful as it is. I am here campaigning for the Democratic ticket. You have a wonderful group of Democrats running for office here in Connecticut, and I hope you will vote for all of them. He is one of the hardest fighters in America for your interests. He always is for what is right, and he never dodges tough questions. You know where Bill stands on everything. It will take a real man, a fellow with a big heart and a big understanding of this whole world, to fill the shoes of Brien McMahon. But Abe has shown by his fine, constructive record in Congress that he is the best qualified man for that place. Then for Congress you have John McGuire and Stanley Pribyson I see he has some friends here. Well, I hope you will not just be clapping for him, I wish you would go and vote for him. For our national ticket I think every day that passes makes it clearer that we must elect Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman. Governor Stevenson is demonstrating day after day that he has the qualities of integrity and courage and wisdom which we need in the Presidency. I understand that he went to school right here in Wallingford. Perhaps that is one of the reasons he has a real New England conscience and that is a tough conscience. I know, because I have been associated with a lot of them. And they have tough consciences those consciences make them do right. I must say I have rarely met a man who is so fair-minded and conscientious. He is really talking sense to the American people-in the best tradition of good, New England, town meeting democracy. I hope you have all been listening to Governor Stevenson's speeches. I hope you will be able to see him and hear him when he comes back here to Connecticut. If you do, you will get a real discussion of the facts and the issues involved in this campaign. And that is something you will never get from the other side. Adlai Stevenson has had just the right background of experience for this tremendous job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 381, "text": "The Presidential job now has become the greatest job in the history of the world, and you must have a man to fill it who has a conscience and who understands world affairs, who understands the affairs of the United States, and who has a heart in his breast that thinks of the people. The Governor has been Governor of Illinois, and that is wonderful experience for the Presidency, because he will have the same kind of problems to deal with as the President as he has had to deal with as Governor. They will be on a larger scale, of course. Governor Stevenson has also had wide experience in national and international affairs. During the war he was the right-hand man to the Secretary of the Navy. Then in 1943 President Roosevelt sent him to Italy to study conditions there and recommend the policies we should follow. Stevenson recommended a plan that would put Italy back on her feet and keep her out of the hands of the Communists. That plan he worked out was the forerunner of what later was turned into the Marshall plan that saved the free world in Europe. After the war was over, Governor Stevenson played a very important part in helping set up the United Nations. Twice he represented us at the General Assembly, and he did an outstanding job. I am sure you can see from what I have told you why the Democratic Party is proud of its candidate for President. He is a man of real principle, with the right kind of experience for the job. I wish I could say as much for the Republican candidate. But in all honesty, I cannot . He was a very good general, but unfortunately he has not had the proper experience for political office. He has been in the ENTITY 40 years, and that is a very different type of occupation. Now let me give you an analysis. Suppose, instead of appointing General Eisenhower, who at the time was our most experienced general, to command the forces which were being organized to keep the world free, I had appointed the mayor of my hometown to that job, it would have made just as much sense as for the Republicans to nominate a general to run this country. If you will study our history, you will find that we have never had but two regular professional generals for President, and neither one of them was able to handle the job. Every day the Republican candidate is giving us new proof of why that is true. The General is just no match for professional politicians. He has let the Old Guard Republicans take him into camp, and Senator Taft has become the real commander of the General's campaign.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 382, "text": "Frankly, I am afraid of a professional soldier who lets Senator Taft run over him and then embraces all the worst elements in the reactionary and isolationist wing of the Republican Party. I think you people up here in New England should think that over carefully. The Taft brand of Republicanism will not do you any good up here, and it will not do the country any good, or the peace of the world, either. And I am talking from the heart, because I know what I am talking about. I have not been in the Congress, and I have not been in the Senate of the United States, and I have not been President of the United States for 7 years for nothing. I know what I am talking about. When you go to the polls in November, think of your own interests. Vote for the kind of government that will be in your interests, the kind of government that will be for the welfare of this the greatest Nation in all history, the kind of government that understands world affairs. If you do that, you cannot help but vote for Adlai Stevenson. I appreciate very much this most cordial welcome from this great Silver City. You know, in the West they have three things that they are most interested in, and that is sheep, sugar, and silver. I understand that the sheep you have here is in the form of a lamb chop, and the sugar you get from Cuba, but you are still a silver city, because you take all that silver and work it up. And I have got some of it, too. Frank Maloney, your former mayor and Senator was a great personal friend of mine, and I have been most happy to see Mrs. Maloney this morning, and Senator Maloney's son and grandson. The grandson had a ride with me, and I told his father if he did not look out, I would take him home with me. You people ought to be proud of frank Maloney. He was one of the great Senators of the United States. I served a long time with him in the Senate. I guess if you have not already found out, maybe I had better tell you why I am here today. I am out campaigning for a Democratic victory this November. I do not want to say it under any false pretenses, so I thought you had better know that I am working at one of my five jobs. I am working as the head of the Democratic Party, to see that we get a Democratic ticket elected this fall.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 383, "text": "Now, Connecticut has a great ticket to offer you Abe Ribicoff and Bill Benton for the Senate, John McGuire for Congressman. You cannot do better than to send those people to Congress. That is the sort of people we need down there for the welfare of this country. As for our national ticket, Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman, these two men are two of the best qualified candidates any party ever offered the country. They are good men, and on top of that, they are good Democrats. They understand the people's interests. You can trust them all the way. I have been traveling all across the country, trying to explain to the people the real issues in this election. One of the big issues is whether the Federal Government is going to assume any responsibility for the welfare of the working men and women of this country. Our party believes that the Government should assume some responsibility. The Republican Party, on the other hand, is inclined to leave everything to big business, and hope for the best and that hope never comes out. I do not know any better illustration than the way our two parties stand on the question of keeping full employment in this country. The Democrats are pledged to keep employment high. We have that pledge in our party platform, and our record shows that we mean it. We have got this country out of the worst depression in history, and for the first time in history we have kept the country out of a depression after a big war. That was in 1946. Then when times threatened to get tough, in 1949, we worked hard to reverse the trend and we did it. By 1950, before Korea, mind you, the whole country was coming back to boom times. And now we have more than 62 million jobs in this country, and that does not count any military at all. The Republican Party has a record of just the opposite of that. After World War I, they sat by and let us run up 7 million unemployed in 1921. Ten years later they did even worse, they doubled it to 14 million unemployed by 1932. If they get in again, you have a chance of having 28 million unemployed. And I am sure you do not want that. After World War II, the Democrats set out to pass a law that would put the full weight of the Government behind the task of keeping employment high. And what did the Republicans do? They fought it tooth and nail. The Republican Congressmen voted against the bill, 2 to 1.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 384, "text": "If you want the full story of Republican opposition, to the whole idea of full employment, you ought to read a book called Congress Makes a Law. That book has a complete record of how they tried to scuttle the full employment bill. It was written by a near neighbor of yours, Steve Bailey, the young man who has just been elected mayor of Middletown. It shows the Republicans have not learned a thing since Herbert Hoover's time. I know a lot of people were hoping last July that the Republicans had reformed when they nominated a general for President. But the General could not make the Republicans change their ways. The Old Guard politicians were just too smart for him. In fact, the General seems to like the Old Guard. He sat down at breakfast with Senator Taft the other day, and then let Taft explain that they agreed on all domestic issues. He came out after the Republican Convention in Chicago and said he was going to have a great crusade. Then he sat down, as generals always do, and waited for higher authority to tell him what to do. And Taft did it. You can imagine what that will mean to your jobs in the future. I cannot think of anything worse in the White House than a professional soldier who does not understand the complicated problems we have in this country. He is just a babe in the woods, and Senator Taft controls the woods. I want to urge you to use your judgment. You yourselves have the power in this great Republic of ours to control the Government. Now your interest is in this election-one of the most important elections since the Civil War. If you study the issues, do not listen to all the foolishness that goes on, but study the issues at stake in this campaign. That is what I am out trying to do to call your attention to the issues. We have the greatest responsibility that any nation has had in the history of the world. That whole thing is at stake in this election. Now, if you do those things, if you think of your own interests, if you think of the welfare of the greatest Republic in the history of the world, if you think of the welfare and peace of the world, you will go to the polls on November the 4th, and vote the Democratic ticket. I appreciate this cordial welcome you are extending to me now.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 385, "text": "In case you do not know it, I am out campaigning for the Democratic ticket, because this is the most important election for the peace and prosperity of the country and the world that has happened since the Civil War. You have some fine candidates here in Connecticut. William M. Citron and Stanley Pribyson both fine men. If you send that group to the Congress, you certainly will be well represented down there. The Democratic Party is fortunate in having a great candidate at the head of its ticket this year Adlai Stevenson, the Governor of Illinois. As Governor he has proved his great administrative ability. He will make a great President. He is a man who can be trusted with the great burdens of civilian leadership over the next 4 years. I am particularly happy to be able to stop here in Middletown, because it is the birthplace of our great Secretary of State, Dean Acheson. Dean Acheson has contributed more than almost anybody in this country to the developing of our positive program to stop world communism. I have no doubt about the great place in history that will be accorded Dean Acheson as one of the chief architects of our foreign policy in these critical times. We have developed a sound foreign policy, and it has stopped Communist aggression in its tracks. We have not just stood around and yelled communism, and pointed the finger of shame and lie on people. We have stopped communism by direct action. There was a time when we could count on the enlightened support of enough Republicans to assure the continuation of this policy for holding down communism. That was when Senator Vandenberg was alive and vigorous and in the Senate. But now our foreign programs are under continual attack from the Republican Old Guard-the isolationist Republicans. They have captured the leadership of their party, and the result is plain to read in the Republican record in the Congress. Now a new type of Republican isolationism has come to life an isolationism that says it is all right to recognize our world responsibilities and the responsibilities of the United States, provided it does not cost anything. The saddening thing about this election campaign is that the Republican candidate for President has become a front for isolationism. He has swallowed Senator Taft's foreign policy hook, line, and sinker, in the guise of a budget cut. The General has worked with me, and with General Marshall, and with Dean Acheson, in carrying out our foreign programs, and I had thought he would continue to support them, because he helped to make them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 386, "text": "Instead, we have been treated to the spectacle of a great military figure throwing his reputation and his record to the winds, sidestepping or repudiating all the things that we thought he stood for. The people of this country cannot entrust the great decisions in the years ahead to a man who has surrendered to the Old Guard Republicans. But unfortunately I am sorry to have to say these things because I have been very fond of Ike. I think he is a great general, and it hurts me to see him it hurts me to see him throw all the principles which I gave hill credit for to the winds. But, my friends, it is fortunate for this country that the Democratic Party has a candidate who will stand up and be counted for the things he believes in. He supports our foreign policy, and he will be true to our responsibilities for leadership in the cause of world peace. That is why I am confident that on November the 4th the American people will look after their interests. Now I am out here telling you just exactly what the country and the world is faced with. I am out here asking you to do a little thinking and studying. Study the record, and when you have done that, take your own interests into consideration. Remember that world peace in the free world depends absolutely on the leadership of this great country. We must have a man in the White House 'who understands those things and that man is Adlai Stevenson. I am out campaigning for a Democratic victory in November. I appreciate most highly the courtesies which are extended to me here today. I have been intrigued and overwhelmed by John L. Sullivan. You know, you have a slate of candidates here whom you just met that are certainly an asset to the Democratic ticket this fall. Your candidates for Senators are beyond compare. I hope you are as proud of him as I am. He has been a tower of strength in the House of Representatives and will be a fine successor to Brien McMahon. Bill Benton is my kind of Senator. He is a fighter, and he is always on the right side of the questions where the people's interests are concerned. I want to say that if Tom Dodd can really do to John Sullivan what he says he can, you certainly ought to have him in the Congress. Your Congressman at Large, Stanley Pribyson, is without compare. Now, if you will send a group of people like that down to the Congress, the interests of Connecticut will be well protected in the Government of the United States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 387, "text": "Our national ticket this year is one of the best ever offered to the voters of the United States. You have already been visited by our candidate for President, Adlai Stevenson. You can count on him to measure up to the tough job of President for the next 4 years. One thing about Governor Stevenson that I want to stress to you he really understands and really believes in the basic principles of equality that make our country great. He believes in equal treatment for everybody, no matter who they are or where they come from. Now, that kind of understanding, my friends, is important for a lot of reasons. There is one in particular that I want to stress here this morning. I want to talk to you about the sad fact that the immigration laws of our country do not recognize these basic principles of equality and fair play. These laws, passed by a Republican Congress and a Republican President in the 1920's, say that the Polish, Ukrainian, and Italian people who want to move to this country are less desirable than the people from northern Europe. So each year our doors are closed to all but a few people from southern and eastern Europe. This year we tried to get rid of this unfair law, but the Republicans in Congress with the help of some Democrats passed over my veto that awful McCarran Act. This new act makes our immigration laws even more unfair than ever to the Poles and the Italians and the people of Slavic countries. Men like your own Bill Benton fought hard against this unfair law. I am glad to say he was supported by our vice-presidential candidate. But the Republican candidate for Vice President voted wrong, just as you would expect-and he has voted wrong every time he has had a chance to vote in the Senate, when the affairs of the people were at stake. Now it is true that this new bill bears the name of a Democrat. But he is not my kind of a Democrat at all. I like a Democrat who votes with the interests of the people. The Democrat for whom this bill is named cannot speak for the party. I speak for the party, and he I say is not my kind of a Democrat. I wish we could get some other people to point the scoundrels out in their own party and read them out of it; it would be mighty good for this campaign.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 388, "text": "The Democratic Party platform written this past July contains a promise to get rid of unfair restrictions on immigration, and if it is written on the Democratic ticket this fall, that will be done, because our platforms are not pieces of paper. We write them to put them into effect for the welfare of the people. You will not find anything about the subject in the Republican Party platform. You have heard nothing about it from the Republican candidate for the Presidency, and I will tell you why you do not hear anything about this immigration program from the Republicans. The Republican Party just does not understand the basic principles which have made our country great. Twenty years ago the Republicans adopted this policy of discrimination in our immigration laws, and now 20 years later they voted for it again. They just cannot learn anything. The Republican Party is just as blind when it comes to understanding the economic programs that have pulled this country out of the depression and given us the most prosperous period in the history of the country, or the world. For 20 years the Old Guard Republicans have been fighting the Democratic Party every inch of the way as we developed social security, unemployment compensation, minimum wage laws, and guarantees of collective bargaining. And these Republicans are the men who have now captured the Republican candidate Dock, stock, and barrel. Like a good military man, the General is now taking his marching orders from the Old Guard Republicans headed by Senator Taft. But the people of this country for 20 years now have refused to turn their welfare into the hands of these shortsighted men. Instead, they have placed their trust in the Democratic Party the party of the people, the party that has never let them down. Now, I have urged everybody everywhere I have been to do a little thinking. That is where you will find what they stand for. Study your own interests and find out just how they have been protected over the last 20 years, and who has protected them. Then, when you go to the polls, you will vote in your own interests, you will vote for the welfare of this great Nation, you will vote for the welfare of the free countries in this whole world, you will vote for the most powerful office in the history of the world. You should do some thinking, and you should do some praying, before you go to the polls on November the 4th and remember the welfare of this country. If you do that, I have not a doubt in the world that you will send Adlai Stevenson to the White House for the next 4 years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 389, "text": "I am more than happy to be with you this afternoon. I have had a wonderful morning across Connecticut, and you know the beautiful part about it is I have to tell everybody I am not running for office. The crowds have been bigger than they were in 1948 when I was out asking you to vote for me. Now I am asking you to vote for somebody else. I guess you have heard a rumor as to why I am here. I am out campaigning for the Democratic ticket, if anybody does not know. You have a fine slate of candidates here. You have just seen them. I am very fond of Bill Benton. Abe Ribicoff has made a wonderful Representative, and he will make you a Senator that you will be proud Tom Dodd impresses me as being a man who knows what ought to be done for the welfare of the people, as does Stanley Pribyson. If you send a delegation like that from Connecticut to the Congress, you will get the things in which Connecticut is interested before that body, and get fair treatment, I am sure. As for our national ticket, Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman are two of the finest and most progressive men who have ever run for office. They both have good records of constructive service for the people. They are men who really understand the problems of the everyday man. You can trust them all the way. I have been enjoying the ride along the Connecticut River. This is beautiful country, and a grand time of the year to be here. And I like your river. I am always interested in rivers and what we have done with them and how we have made use of them. The New England pioneers developed the navigation and waterpower of this river for the common good. They built a productive industry along its banks. They made it a channel of commerce and of trade. Then in the 19th century, your river and your valley were exploited mercilessly for private profit. Waste was dumped into the river and it became polluted. And here, of all places, where waterpower was first used for industry, the electricity that could be harnessed from your river is either undeveloped, or being sold to you at about the highest rates in the whole United States. There are great things to be done along this river, to make it perform full service once again for the people of the Connecticut valley. With proper conservation, floods can be stopped.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 390, "text": "Pollution can be checked, navigation can be improved, and new sources of cheaper power can be developed, for your factories and farms and homes. These are all things that you the people of this valley can do with the right kind of cooperation from your towns and cities, and your States and the Federal Government. Now the Democratic Party has always believed that the Government exists to help the people do the things they cannot get done by themselves. We want to give the people of this valley and all New England whatever help you yourselves desire in building up the resources of this great countryside. That is what we have done in other river basins, helping people make the most of their fine rivers. The Republican Party has exactly the opposite philosophy. They believe it is the purpose of Government to help special private interests exploit our national resources for their own private profit. If the Republicans take control in Washington, they will not help you with your navigation problems, or stream pollution, or power-for that might interfere with the enrichment of the manufacturers and the utilities who like things to stay as they are. Do not be fooled by scare stories that somebody in Washington wants to come up here and take this river away from you, or take control of it. They are just afraid you might stand up someday and take control of your resources yourselves. The truth is you can develop and control this river yourselves, and a Democratic government will cooperate with your local and State authorities to help you do it. Then you will really own the river, and be able to enjoy it the way you should, and make it work for you, in your interest, and not in the interests of private power. Now election day comes in November, as you know, on the 4th, and election day is the time when the people of the United States exercise the control of their Government. If you do not take an interest, if you do not get yourselves registered, if you do not go to the polls on the 4th of November, and you have bad government, you have nobody in the world to blame but yourselves. So, if you are going to do right by yourselves, if you are going to do right by your country, if you are going to help the world situation to come out without a third world war, you will go to the polls on November the 4th and you will vote for Stevenson and Sparkman, and we will have 4 more years of good government. I am more than happy to see you again. When I was here in 1948, I was trying to get myself elected President.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 391, "text": "Now I am back working for somebody else. I am working for the whole Democratic ticket, and I hope you will vote for all of them. You have a very, very fine slate of Democratic candidates here in Connecticut. For the Senate you have Abe Ribicoff and Bill Benton, two very able and decent persons. For Congress you have Tom Dodd. He did a fine job in Nuremberg, prosecuting the Nazi war criminals, and a very good job back home in the Justice Department. I know he will be a good prosecutor for your interests if you send him to Washington. You have a very, very fine gentleman running for Congressman at Large in Stanley Pribyson. Now, on our national ticket, Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman are very fine men, with great progressive records of public service. They both have shown that they care about the problems of the plain everyday people of this country. I hope you have been listening to Governor Stevenson's speeches. I hope you will go and hear him speak when he comes back to New England. He is talking sense to the American people, telling everybody where he stands on all the issues. Now there is a little thing I want to mention to you just quietly and under the cover I hope the Enfield Society for the Detection of Horse Thieves and Robbers is still in operation. I know the Society was keeping up its headquarters in Enfield a few years ago. And I hope the Society is all set for some emergencies just in case something happens next November that we do not expect. Because now I am going to give you some quotations now these are not my remarks at all, these are quotes because if the Republicans should win this election, the Society is going to have lots of business after November the 4th. And this is what they said themselves. At least that is what they say about each other, in Chicago, and you would not find me to be one that would deny it. At the Republican Convention last July, there were two groups that had a whale of a fight with one another. One side was the so-called liberal wing of the party, with a lot of New Englanders in it. Now you may remember the so-called liberals spent their time calling the Taft men a bunch of rustlers. And the Taft men returned the compliment with interest, I will say. The so-called liberals were successful so Taft said in stealing the big prize at Chicago. They took the nomination away from Taft and gave it to a very famous general.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 392, "text": "The General kicked out the people who had got him nominated, and he surrendered, lock, stock, and barrel to the Taft crowd the rustlers they had been all so mad about. He surrendered to Taft. He embraced Jenner. He brought McCarthy on the train, and now they are running his campaign for him. It is hard to say who won the battle at Chicago. A vote for the Republicans this year is a vote for Taft, for Taft's foreign policy, for Taft's labor policy, for Taft's domestic policies in general. He has said so, and the General has backed him up. Now that would be a terrible thing for this country, just as those liberal New England Republicans agreed that it would when they fought Taft at Chicago. It would be bad for the country and the peace of the world, and it would be very bad for you. If you will use your judgment, if you will do a little thinking, if you will look at the record, if you compare the men at the head of each ticket, you will vote for yourselves. You are the Government, and if you vote for your own interests, if you vote for the welfare of this great Nation of ours, which is the most powerful Nation in the history of the world, if you will vote for the welfare of this great Nation, and vote for the welfare of the free countries of the world, you will vote the Democratic ticket on November the 4th, and the Government will be safe another 4 years . I certainly am highly pleased to be here again, and I am more than highly pleased at the warmth of this reception. I did not think you would be out looking for a has-been, to see what he would took like, and I feel highly complimented that you were willing to come out and hear me discuss the issues. I am trying to put before the people just exactly what the issues are, and when they know what they are, they will know what to do. You have shown by your voting record that you know the Democratic Party is the party that really works for the people. Maybe I had better tell you, though. I am campaigning for the Democratic ticket. I am working in one of my five jobs as the head of the Democratic Party. You have an excellent slate of Democrats here in Massachusetts. For Congress, Edward P. Boland I am sure he will do the same kind of first-class job for you in Washington that Foster Furcolo has done.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 393, "text": "Now, I understand you are going to elect Mr. Furcolo State treasurer this year. From what he has shown us in Washington, I know he will be a good one. We also have a candidate for Congress in the first District with us on this train, William H. Burns. I know he will make a good Representative of that district, for the Senate. You have a fine young man in the candidate for the Senate, and we certainly do need some young blood in that Senate. Young John Kennedy is a man who has already rendered great service to this State in the House of Representatives, and will keep up the good work in the Senate. For Governor you do not need my telling you anything about Paul Defer for Governor. He is as fine a Democratic leader who will continue his excellent work in the State capital. I want to say a word about the national ticket now, if I may. Here in Springfield you have already had a chance to see Governor Stevenson and listen to what he has to say. He is one of the outstanding men in public service in our generation. When he speaks to the people, he gives them the straight story. Stevenson is a man of great integrity and real feeling for the everyday people of this country. He is a man you can trust in the Office of the President. That is also true of John Sparkman. He is one of our most progressive leaders in the Congress. He has proved by his record of 15 years in the House and Senate that he can be trusted to work for all the people. While I am here this happens to be Roger Putnam's hometown, and while I am talking about men who have given great service to the American people, I want to pay tribute to this hometown's man of yours the former mayor of Springfield, Roger Putnam. Roger Putnam has been down in Washington for over a year now, handling the tough job of Economic Stabilizer. He took over that assignment just after the Republicans had finished their first hatchet job on our price and wage controls. He has since lived through another attempted slaughter by the Republicans, and he has done a grand job in helping to stabilize our economy in spite of all the Republican obstruction. I suppose you know that the Republican candidate for President has been going around the country moaning about the high prices we are paying today, and blaming it all on the Democratic administration. Of course, he does not dare mention the voting record of the Republican Party.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 394, "text": "Maybe nobody's told him that his party in Congress has a long, unbroken record of trying to kill or cripple price and wage and rent controls at every chance they have. Back in 1946 when we needed controls, until our civilian production got back to normal, the Republicans voted almost to a man to kill controls. They finally succeeded, and the cost of living went up 15 percent in 6 months, just as I predicted it would. I am sure you all remember that period, the worst inflationary rise in the history of the country. In 1947 and 1948 I tried to get price control authority back on the statute books, but the Republican good-for-nothing 80th Congress just laughed at my efforts. Then the Korean emergency came along, and by the time we got a controls bill passed and the stabilization agencies established, the cost of living had gone up almost 8 percent in 6 months. Then in early November 1951, we got a general price freeze put on. And what did the Republicans do, once we put a lid on prices? They began a vicious attack on the basic price control legislation. In 1951 they put across the Capehart amendment which by now has added a billion dollars in higher prices to the American people. Last year the Republican Senators voted 7 to 1 to curtail price rollbacks, and 12 to 1 to prevent effective control of black marketing in meat. This year the Republican Congressmen voted 4 to 1 to scuttle all price controls, and 6 to 1 to end all rent controls. And then to top it all off, in 1951, and again this year, the Republicans ganged up with a few Democrats to slash appropriations so that the remaining control authority could not be properly enforced against the chiselers and the profiteers. Despite these Republican attempts to wreck controls, we have been doing a pretty good job to keep inflation down. In the past 20 months, the cost of living has risen less than 4 percent. Prices are higher than they ought to be, and I told you why. But in spite of high prices, most people are better off than they ever were before. The dollar does not buy as much as it once did, but people have a lot more dollars to buy with. The income has gone up a lot faster than prices in these last 20 years twice as fast, in fact. The Hoover dollars were worth a lot, all right, but it took many people an entire day's labor to earn one of them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 395, "text": "And 14 million of our fellow citizens who were unemployed were not able to earn anything at all. So the Hoover dollar did not do them a bit of good. The Republicans have given this country two terrible demonstrations of how they can drive prices down. In 1921 they got prices down 20 percent in a big hurry and there were 7 million people out of work. In 1931 they got prices down 25 percent in 2 years-and it took 14 million unemployed to do that. Any time you hear their candidate talk about cutting prices, and bringing back that Hoover dollar, you had better stop and think how the Republicans go about those things. In the first effort they made 7 million unemployed. In the next effort they made 14 million unemployed, and if you give them another chance, you will probably have 18 million. You will not get steady prices from an outfit like that boom and bust is their stock in trade. Their record speaks for itself. They will not look out for your jobs, your income, or the prices you have to pay. The Constitution provides that the power of government rests in the people, and when the people exercise their right to vote, they exercise the power that controls the Government. Now I am going around the country trying to get the people to think, trying to get people to read the record. I am trying to get them to remember that the record made in the Congress by the Republicans in Congress is the record on which they have to run. They do not want to run on that record. I want you also to study the record of the Democrats in Congress. The majority of the Democrats in Congress have always been for the people, and they always will be for the people. Now, if you want to look out for your own interests, if you want to look out for the welfare of this great Nation of ours, if you want to look out for the welfare of the free nations of the world, and to keep the world free, and to keep communism from this country, the way to do that is to vote for the party that has always been against communism, that has always fought them and convicted them. We have taken action-we have not just talked about it and smeared people just for the benefit of a few headlines. Vote the Democratic ticket and the country will be safe another 4 years. I cannot tell you how much I appreciate this most cordial welcome. I was here 4 years ago when I was campaigning for myself.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 396, "text": "I am campaigning this time just as hard as I was then, because this is one of the most important elections we ever had, and if it is at all possible, I am more anxious that we win this election than I was in 1948 and that is saying a lot. The reason I feel that way, I think this is the most important election this country has had since the War Between the States. Now, you have a wonderful slate of Democrats running for office here in Massachusetts. You have Jack Kennedy for the Senate. I know him very well. I knew his father before him. He has made a wonderful public servant in the House of Representatives, and he will give you the right kind of representation in the Senate. Then for Congress you have Harold Donohue, who has a record that does not need me to tell you about. Your Governor has made a record on which you should endorse him overwhelmingly, and I know you will. And I understand that we are in the hometown of your Lieutenant Governor and you know more about him than I do, so use your judgment, and I know you will send him back. Now the Democratic Party is exceedingly fortunate in having two great men to head its ticket this year Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman. They can stand on their records of long service in the public interest. They are men of integrity and conscience, and they will work in the great tradition of the Democratic Party. I have been all across the country from coast to coast in the last 3 weeks, and I have seen a very prosperous country. This prosperity we have seems to be driving the Republicans crazy. They just cannot understand how the country can be prosperous with Democrats in office. The Republican candidate for President has been doing his best to prove that this prosperity does not exist, that it is all done with mirrors. Now if you can beat that, I will pay it on the line. But he knows people will not believe that. So he has been trying to get across the notion that the Democrats do not know how to keep the country prosperous except by spending money on national defense. It is just one more Republican falsehood to scare you and confuse you in this campaign. I am out here to tell you the truth. Everywhere I go I see signs or people yelling Give 'em hell, Harry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 397, "text": "Well now, that is an awful reputation for a good Baptist to get, and I am telling you what I am doing I am telling the truth and giving you the issues, and that is a lot worse than giving the Republicans hell, because they cannot stand the truth. Right now we have a total national production of about $340 billion. Defense accounts for less than one-sixth of that output. Now in 1945, after the Japanese folded up, I organized a commission to look into the return to civil affairs after World War II; and I sent that committee-two of them, one of them was Senator Benton of Connecticut to see Senator Taft, who was then the Republican leader in the Senate. I had them ask him what his remedy was we had decided that we needed a $140 billion income if we were going to keep people at work. Taft said that was impossible, we would never reach $100 billion income, and the best thing to do was to take all the women out of work and let the men do the work, and then this country could go along and everybody would have jobs. Now, if that is not one for the book, I do not know what is. And he is running their present nominee for President. Now, defense accounts for less than one sixth of that $340 billion output. If it were not for the defense effort, we would be even more prosperous than we are now. The defense effort is making us postpone and put off a lot of things we need, things that will make our country greater and stronger. Our population is growing fast, our cities are growing that means lots of things to do. We need a lot of redevelopment in our cities. We need more houses, better and cheaper houses, more roads, more schools, more hospitals. Out West where I have been, we need a lot more dams and irrigation works, and all those things. We need more food, and more consumers goods of every kind. Thousands of businessmen are ready now to expand their plants or build new ones. They see bigger markets ahead. In the city of Worcester, where you make all kinds of things, and know how to adapt your production fast, there will surely be a lot of good work for you, when defense tapers off. This means there need be no depression in this country, and there will not be, if you keep the kind of government in Washington that understands these things and will help get new production going in the right places at the right time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 398, "text": "That is one thing that the Democratic Party knows how to do. They have shown it. Remember 1949 when things started to slide back, we took quick action then, and by the spring of 1950 we were in boom times again. The defense buildup had nothing whatever to do with it. But the Republicans are right about one thing. They are experts in depression organization. The last time they held office, we had two depressions in 12 years. They do not seem to have any notion of how to get prosperity and growth. For 20 years the Republicans have been voting against almost everything the Democrats have done to help build this country up. Unfortunately, their candidate for President could not change them if he wanted to. He has been a fine general, but the ENTITY is all he has ever known in his whole life. You do not learn much in the ENTITY about what workers and farmers need, or what it takes to keep the country going. If you have never milked a cow, or ploughed a corn row, if you have never worked with your hands, you never can tell what the country needs. And a man who has had social security all his life in the United States ENTITY, does not know what it means to meet a payroll. And he does not know any more about politics than a babe in the woods. He is in the woods and Taft has got the woods under control. The General is surrounded by the Republican Old Guard, and they have taken him to town. I do not think you can take a chance on turning your country over to an outfit like that. You are responsible for what sort of government we have. The Constitution provides that the power of the Government in this Republic rests in the people in you. Now, if you will study the issues and that is what I am out to get you to do I want you to satisfy yourselves, I am not trying to convert you to something unusual, I am trying to get you to look after your own interests. I am trying to get you to think about things. I want you to read the record. I want you to study the record of the Republicans in Congress, which is what their policy will be. They have shown it by their votes. And I want you to study the Democratic record in the Congress. That is what the Democrats have done. That is what they will continue to do. And then I want you to go to the polls on November the 4th and vote for yourselves.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 399, "text": "And when you do that, you will put Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman in the Presidency and the Vice Presidency, and this country will be safe for another 4 years. I am very, very glad indeed to be in Clinton here this evening. This is the home of one of my very good friends, about whom I will speak in a minute. You people in Massachusetts have a most wonderful slate of candidates running. For Senator, you have that able young Congressman, Jack Kennedy. He will make you a great Senator, and I want you to elect him. For Congress, you have had presented to you an able and distinguished Congressman, Phil Philbin. You could not have a better one. And for Governor, you have Paul Dever. You know him by experience. He will make you a good Governor, and you cannot do anything else but elect him. We have a great candidate for President this year, Adlai Stevenson. He will give this country good government and real leadership. Adlai Stevenson has served as Governor of a great State, and has proved his talents as a civilian administrator. He knows the problems of the people, and his experience in Illinois shows that he knows how to make the Government work for the people. Now I have been in politics for 40 years. I have had every reward that the people of the greatest Nation in the world can give to a man. I started in elective public office just 30 years ago next month I was elected to my first elective public office. For 30 years I have been in county government, I have been a United States Senator, I have been Vice President and for the last 7 years I have been President of the United States. And my ability, if I have any, to make that office function, has been, I think, a talent for picking the right man for the right place. Now one of my three secretaries comes from this city right here. You know him. You know what kind of man he is. He is able, efficient, honest, and he has been a tower of strength to the President of the United States. His name is Matt Connelly-I do not need to tell you. Now, just for your welfare and information, and for the information of the country at large, I think I shall elaborate a little bit on the personnel of the Government of the United States in the administrative branch.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 400, "text": "There have been a great many misstatements made about the people who constitute the part of your Government that makes the Government work, and that is the administrative end of the Government. Now I have a Secretary of State, who was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, who was Under Secretary of State, who was the Vice Chairman of the Commission that wrote up the recommendations for the reorganization of the Government. He has made one of the greatest Secretaries of State that the country has ever had. I never was acquainted with him until I came to Washington. Dean Acheson. I have a Secretary of the Treasury who was the Director of the Defense Plants Corporation in World War II. He spent $20 billion building the defense plants of this country, and every dollar of that $20 billion went where it should go. And we won the war as a result of the effectiveness of that Defense Plants Corporation under John W. Snyder. My Secretary of Defense was an Assistant Secretary of War under Stimson. He was an assistant in the reorganization of Germany. He has been Assistant Secretary of State. He is one of the ablest men that the Government has ever had; and his name is Bob Lovett. And I never saw him until I picked him on account of his ability and efficiency. My Attorney General was the Assistant Attorney General of the United States under two Attorneys General. He was Assistant to the Attorney General. I made him a Federal judge in Philadelphia. And when the office of the Attorney General became vacant, I asked him to forego his lifetime job as a Federal judge and come back and become my Attorney General, and he did Judge McGranery. Then I have a Postmaster General who is unique in the history of the United States. He started as a letter carrier more than 30 years ago. He has come up the line every step of the way. He was Assistant Postmaster General when there was a vacancy in the Post Office Department, and on account of his ability and efficiency, I made him Postmaster General the first career man ever to be made Postmaster General in the history of the country. Then I have a Secretary of the Interior, who was Under Secretary of the Interior under Mr. Ickes. And when Mr. Ickes quit, I made Oscar Chapman Secretary of the Interior. He knows more about the Interior Department than any other man who has ever been in that job, and he does an excellent job for the Government. Then I have a Secretary of Agriculture. He was in the Agricultural Department for the last 20 years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 401, "text": "He knows the Agriculture Department from top to bottom. He is the ablest Secretary of Agriculture that has ever been there, and I know something about it, because I started on the farm and I have known all the Secretaries of Agriculture for 40 years and this is the best one we ever had. The Secretary of Commerce is an able and distinguished lawyer and businessman from Ohio, with whom I was not acquainted until I went to Potsdam, and at that time he was Ambassador to Belgium. He was one of my advisers at Potsdam, and on account of his ability I made him Secretary of Commerce-and he is a good one. Now in 1948, I had an able and distinguished former Senator and former Federal judge for Secretary of Labor Lew Schwellenbach. He suddenly passed away in the middle of 1948, a very crucial year. Now you have a very able and distinguished citizen up here in Massachusetts who had been the mayor of Boston, who had been Governor of the great State of Massachusetts. And I asked him to come to see me, and I said to him, I want to place you in my Cabinet as Secretary of Labor. You are taking a chance. I may not be here except to the end of this term, but I would like very much for you to take the Labor Department for me. And Maurice Tobin took it. And he has run it ever since. Now I have two Presidential assistants. These are the Cabinet members that sit around the Cabinet table with me once or twice a week and discuss world affairs and national affairs. And we know where we are going, and what we are doing do not let anybody tell you anything else. One of them was Ambassador at Large and in charge of the revival of Europe. He was Ambassador to Russia for 3 years. He was Ambassador to Great Britain for 2 or 3 years, and when I had a vacancy as Secretary of Commerce, I telephoned him in London and brought him back here and made him Secretary of Commerce. And when this European recovery program Marshall plan came up, I made him the civilian in charge of it. And he is now my assistant and Ambassador at Large to see that that plan comes to its final conclusion. And it has been a great success because we have kept all of Western Europe from going Communist by that Marshall plan. I have another assistant who has been with me nearly ever since I have been President of the United States. He is a coordinator of the difficulties that arise in the administrative end of the Government.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 402, "text": "He is a career man, and he has a Ph.D. He knows what he is doing, and he does an excellent job. Now, my friends, the reason I am rehashing this for you is because there never has been an organization about which so much misrepresentation and so many lies have been told as have been told about my Presidential family that runs the Government of the United States. Now I have three Secretaries. I have a number of Executive assistants and every one of whom is as efficient and able as any group of men that could be gotten together. Dean Acheson was the Deputy Chairman of the organization known as the Hoover Commission, which wrote and recommended the plans for the efficient reorganization of the Government. I have set the administrative end of our Government on a more efficient basis than it has been since the Government was launched. I am not bragging, I am merely telling you facts. And I have sent more reorganization plans to the Congress of the United States than all the other Presidents put together; and I have had more of them turned down by the Republicans and a coalition of Democrats who did not believe in the things that I want to do, than any other President has done. I am telling you all this so you will know the facts, and I am out here now for a specific purpose. I did not have to come out here and work for the election of a candidate for President. But with all the effort that has been put forth in the last 20 years to give you a government of the people, and by the people, and for the people, I felt that it was my duty to come out here and put the issues in this campaign before you, the people. The Republicans cannot discuss the issues because they do not dare. They have been wrong on every program that has come before the Congress of the United States where the interests of all the people are at stake. They will not talk about it. They want to go off on some side issue. The Republican candidate said he was going out on a crusade. He said that at Chicago. But he did not know what the crusade was about until Senator Taft told him. I feel terribly bad about having to say these things, because I was very fond of Eisenhower. I made him Chief of Staff of the United States ENTITY. I sent him to Europe in command of the greatest organization that we are now making to keep the Communists from taking the world. If I had not had that confidence in him, of course I would not have done that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 403, "text": "But he has come back here and he has thrown every principle that he is supposed to stand for out the window in the hope of buying votes he has thrown those principles away. I cannot stand for that, so I am out here to tell you the truth, and that is the only reason in the world that I am going around the country and putting these facts out. I was there, and I can tell you what those facts are; and I know that the people of this United States know me, and they believe me when I tell them the truth. And I want you to do some thinking. I want you to take the situation with which we are faced right now. I want you to study the facts. I want you to look at the record. I want you to find out just exactly the record in Congress of these Republican Congressmen, and the record in Congress of the Democratic Congressmen. That is the policy on which you can base your vote. Then when you have done that, I am going to ask you to go home and pray over it think about the welfare of this Nation, think about your own welfare, think about the welfare of the free nations of the world, and think of the peace of the world. All I have worked for for 7 years has been peace, and to prevent a third world war. And every policy I have pursued has been with that end in view. I want that policy continued, and in order to get that policy continued, I want you to send Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman to Washington as President and Vice President of the United States. It has been a most wonderful day coming through New England. I have enjoyed the scenery, but as you may have heard, I did not come on this trip to look at scenery. I am out here on a campaign trip, working as hard as I can for a Democratic victory in November. You have a very, very fine slate of Democratic candidates running for office here in Massachusetts. You have just been introduced to them. Now you should, for your own welfare and benefit, send Jack Kennedy to the Senate, Helen Cullen to the House, and Paul Dever to the Governor's chair again. Now I hope I hope most sincerely that you are getting acquainted with the Democratic candidate for President, Adlai Stevenson. Governor Stevenson is coming back to New England in a few days now, and I hope you will see him and hear him as often as you possibly can.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 404, "text": "He is the finest new leader to come along since franklin Roosevelt back in 1932. He is talking sense to the American people. And when you hear him, you will know as I do that he is a man you can trust. I want to tell you some things you ought to know about Adlai Stevenson's fine record as Governor of Illinois, but before I do that, I would like to read you an article someone sent me the other day from your local paper, the Sunday Sun for October 5th. I see you have the same opinion of the Sunday Sun that I have of the Kansas City Star. But sometimes, my friends, sometimes these awful newspapers have to print the truth, and this is one time it did. 307 thousand in social security checks were mailed to Lowell last week. Then the article goes on to say, This week will bring increased social security checks to about 800,000 people in greater Lowell. About 8,000, not 800,000 monthly benefit checks mailed during the first week of October will amount to about $307,000. Increases of from $5 to $8.60 each month will go to most retired workers who receive old-age insurance payments. Now I am glad these insurance benefits are being paid, but there is a story behind them I think you ought to know. For it is a good example of exactly what this election is all about. All the people who are getting these benefits have of course been paying premiums into the Treasury for years. And the amounts they and their employers paid in, turned out to be larger than were needed to finance the benefits paid out at the old rate. So extra money was piling up in the Treasury's insurance account. And last spring, I asked the Congress to raise the benefit rates and give this money back to the people who were receiving insurance benefits. It seemed to me that this was only fair-and a good way to help compensate for increases in the cost of living. The Democrats in Congress thought so, too. Our great Majority Leader, John W. McCormack, was one of those who helped to get action. And in May a social security bill, including this change and some other improvements, came up for a vote on the floor of the House of Representatives. The great majority of Democrats voted for it, of course, but twothirds of the Republicans voted against it, and the bill failed to pass. Well, John McCormack and some others, would not take No for an answer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 405, "text": "They brought the bill up again a month later. And they turned the spotlight on the Republicans, who got a lot of heat, I am glad to say. Some of those Republicans got scared and enough of them changed their votes to let the bill go through this second time. The Senate passed it, too. I signed it with great pleasure. And 8,000 people here in Lowell are now getting the benefit. But they would never have gotten a thing if the Republicans had had their way and do not you forget it. Now I tell you the story because the Republican candidate for President spoke in Los Angeles a few days ago and claimed that his party was in favor of improving and extending social security. He asserted, and I quote him directly, The social security law was a bipartisan law to meet a need which had become urgent in the depression. You see, he is starting to say me too it is pretty late in this campaign, though, to start that, and I do not want you to believe it. In the first place, the social security law was not a bipartisan law. The Republicans fought tooth and toenail against the original social security law in 1935, and I was in the Senate and I know what I am talking about. They voted 95 to 1 to recommit the bill in the House of Representatives. That was the real test in the House. Of course, when we licked them on that, they strung along and voted to pass the bill. So now they claim they helped to start social security. They did not do anything of the kind. In 1936 the Republican candidate for President you remember him, All Landon campaigned against social security. He called it a cruel hoax. In the 80th, good-for-nothing Congress, the Republicans took social security protection away from nearly a million people. And in 1949 when the Democrats put through a great expansion of the social security program, most of the Republicans hampered and obstructed and fought against the very improvements their candidate now hints he might be for. You cannot afford to be fooled by this me too line. The Republican Party in Congress has a solid record of opposition to social security. Not so long ago, their candidate did not have much use for it, either. About 3 or 4 years ago, before he became a Republican politician, he was going around the country saying, If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 406, "text": "They will have enough to eat, they will have a bed to sleep on, they will have a roof over their heads. When you hear the Republicans make promises at campaign time, you had better look at their record, and you had better find out how that General feels deep down in his heart. Look into these things, not just on social security but on all the things you want and need, and are entitled to. Do that, my friends, and I am out here to try and get you to think. I am out here trying to get you to look at the record. I am out here to get you to look at the record of the Republicans in Congress, and the Democrats in Congress, and then make up your mind on what is best for you, and what is best for this great Republic of ours, and what is best for the free world. And all I ask you to do is to inform yourselves and vote intelligently. You know, the power of this great Republic rests with you, and that power is exercised on election day. When you neglect to do that, when you neglect to register, when you neglect to vote, and you get bad government, you have got nobody to blame but yourselves, and you get just what you ought to get. I am begging you I am praying with you to use your best judgment for your own welfare, for the welfare of the greatest Nation in the history of the world, and for peace in the world to come. I am asking you to vote to see the greatest age in the history of the world, if you have the right kind of government. And in order to do that, you have got to put forward-looking people in office. And I want to say to you young people that we are faced with the greatest opportunity, we are faced with the greatest age in the history of the world. And we have to have forward-looking people to make that age work for your benefit, and for the benefit of all the people of this great Nation. And you cannot do that if you put people in charge of the Federal government who want to turn the clock back to 1896. Now to do this, after you have satisfied yourselves that it is right for you, and right for the Republic, go to the polls on November the 4th, and vote the Democratic ticket, and you will have 4 more years of good government and forward-looking government.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 407, "text": "I am very happy to stop here in Hillsboro County tonight, because I am told that this county has voted Democratic in presidential elections ever since 1928. That shows that you are a very sensible people, and I am always happy to be among good Democrats. I do not know whether you know it or not, or whether you have suspected it, but I am out campaigning to elect a Democratic ticket this fall. I have enjoyed meeting your candidates here in New Hampshire. I am glad you have a good Democrat running for Governor this year, because I expect poor Sherman Adams will be a nervous wreck after he gets off that campaign train he is on now. This year the Democratic Party has a candidate for President, one of the finest men to serve in public life in this generation-Adlai Stevenson. He is a man of integrity and conviction, and as Governor of Illinois he has proved his abilities as a civilian administrator, and he will make a great President. I have been traveling all across this country and back, from coast to coast, explaining to the people the main issues in this campaign. When you come right down to it, the big issue shows up in the basic differences between our two parties. The Democratic Party has always been the party with a heart for the people. With us the people come first. With the Republican Party, property and profits come first, and come ahead of the people. You people in this city have had firsthand experience with the way this Republican approach works against the people. You have been losing some of your textile mills, and one of the reasons is the Taft-Hartley law passed by the Republican 80th Congress. That act has almost stopped the growth of unions. It has made it easy for employers in non-unionized parts of the country to use every trick in the book to keep workers from organizing and obtaining better wages. That way, wages in other places have been kept down below what you have had to pay here, and this has made is very attractive for the textile companies to move out of New England. Now you might as well make up your minds that the Taft-Hartley Act and all the trouble it has caused is just small change alongside of the damage the Republicans would bring about if they got control of both the White House and the Congress. They have been talking about giving you a change, but it would not be the kind of change you want or would like to have.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 408, "text": "Social security, farm price supports, rural electrification, and other New Deal and fair Deal programs for the benefit of the workers and the farmer would be sabotaged one way or another. That may sound like a pretty strong statement, but it can be backed up by the record the voting record of the Republicans in Congress. That is what the Republicans did in the Both Congress when they had control. In the last 4 years, they have not reformed. In fact, in their platform this year in their platform they endorsed that good-for-nothing, do-nothing 80th Congress that I talked so much about in 1948. They endorsed all it did. For over 20 years now they have been fighting these forward-looking programs that the Democrats stand for, and they want to put the Democrats out of the White House so they can undo most of what the New Deal and fair Deal has done for the people. This year they thought they had their chance by putting up as their candidate for President a great military hero. They figured his popularity would cover up the black record of the Old Guard Republicans. But the General has made it clear that he is taking orders from the same old bunch of Old Guard Republicans. I do not think the people of this country are going to be tricked or fooled into voting for a five-star general who is just fronting for the worst elements in the Republican Party. I came out here on this trip and the other one which I took West to try and inform everybody exactly what this election means. This is one of the most important elections in the history of the country. This election will decide whether we are going to go forward into the greatest age in the history of the world, or whether we are going to try to turn the clock back to 1896. Now you you people make up the Government. You control the Government. It is your privilege to exercise that control on election day. The Constitution of the United States provides that the power of government in this Republic rests with the people-with you. I want you to do some thinking. I want you to think these things over. I want you to study the record. I want you to study the record of the Republicans in Congress. I want you to study the record of the Democrats in Congress, and then when you have done that, I want you to make up your minds in your own interests. I want you to make up your minds for the welfare of the greatest Republic in the history of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformandotherinformalremarksconnecticutmassachusettsandnewhampshire", "title": "Rear Platform and Other Informal Remarks in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-and-other-informal-remarks-connecticut-massachusetts-and-new-hampshire", "publication_date": "16-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 409, "text": "Secretary Shalala has just briefed me on the National Cancer Institute's new recommendations on mammography. These recommendations, based on the latest and best medical evidence, give clear, consistent guidance to women in our national fight against breast cancer. Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer among women. It affects one in eight women in their lifetimes and has touched the families of nearly every American, including my own. We may not yet have a cure for breast cancer, but we do know that early detection and early treatment are our most potent weapons against this dread disease and we know that mammography can save lives. That is why it is important to send a clear, consistent message to women and to their families about when to start getting mammograms and how often to repeat them. After careful study of the science, the National Cancer Advisory Board has now concluded that women between the ages of 40 and 49 should get a mammography examination for breast cancer every 1 or 2 years, in consultation with their doctors. The National Cancer Institute has now accepted these recommendations. Now women in their forties will have clear guidance based on the best science, and action to match it. Today I am taking action to bring Medicare, Medicaid, and the Federal employee health plans in line with the National Cancer Institute's recommendations. First, in the Medicare budget I am sending to Congress today I am making annual screening mammography exams, beginning at age 40, a covered expense without coinsurance or deductibles. Second, Secretary Shalala is sending a letter to State Medicaid directors urging them to also cover annual mammograms beginning at 40 and assuring them that the Federal Government will pay its matching share if they do so. And today I am directing the Office of Personnel Management to require all Federal health benefit plans to comply with the National Cancer Advisory Board's recommendations on mammogram screenings, beginning next year. The Federal Government is doing its part to make sure women have both coverage and access to this potentially lifesaving test. I want to challenge private health insurance plans to do the same. They, too, should cover regular screening mammograms for women 40 and over. Finally, we know there has been much discussion on this issue and a lot of confusion. That is why we are launching a major public education campaign to make sure every woman and every health care professional in America, that all of them are aware of these new recommendations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalcancerinstituterecommendationsmammographyandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on National Cancer Institute Recommendations on Mammography and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-cancer-institute-recommendations-mammography-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "27-03-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 410, "text": "This dinner of the White House Correspondents' Association is unique. It is the first one at which I have made a speech in all these eight years. It differs from the press conferences that you and I hold twice a week, for you cannot ask me any questions tonight; and everything that I have to say is word for word on the record. For eight years you and I have been helping each other. I have been trying to keep you informed of the news of Washington, of the Nation, and of the world, from the point of view of the Presidency. You, more than you realize, have been giving me a great deal of information about what the people of this country are thinking and saying. In our press conferences, as at this dinner tonight, we include reporters representing papers and news agencies of many other lands. To most of them it is a matter of constant amazement that press conferences such as ours can exist in any Nation in the world. That is especially true in those lands where freedoms do not exist- where the purposes of our democracy and the characteristics of our country and of our people have been seriously distorted. I remember that, a quarter of a century ago, in the early days of the first World War, the German Government received solemn assurances from their representatives in the United States that the people of America were disunited; that they cared more for peace at any price than for the preservation of ideals and freedom; that there would even be riots and revolutions in the United States if this Nation ever asserted its own interests. Let not dictators of Europe or Asia doubt our unanimity now. Before the present war broke out on September 1, 1939, I was more worried about the future than many people indeed, than most people. That, however, is water over the dam. Do not let us waste time in reviewing the past, or fixing or dodging the blame for it. History cannot be rewritten by wishful thinking. We, the American people, are writing new history today. The world has been told that we, as a united Nation, realize the danger that confronts us and that to meet that danger our democracy has gone into action. We know that although Prussian autocracy was bad enough in the first war, Nazism is far worse in this. Nazi forces are not seeking mere modifications in colonial maps or in minor European boundaries.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualdinnerwhitehousecorrespondentsassociation", "title": "Address at the Annual Dinner of White House Correspondents' Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-dinner-white-house-correspondents-association", "publication_date": "15-03-1941", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 411, "text": "They openly seek the destruction of all elective systems of government on every continent including our own; they seek to establish systems of government based on the regimentation of all human beings by a handful of individual rulers who have seized power by force. Yes, these men and their hypnotized followers call this a new order. For order among Nations presupposes something enduring some system of justice under which individuals, over a long period of time, are willing to live. Humanity will never permanently accept a system imposed by conquest and based on slavery. These modern tyrants find it necessary to their plans to eliminate all democracies--eliminate them one by one. The Nations of Europe, and indeed we ourselves, did not appreciate that purpose. The process of the elimination of the European Nations proceeded according to plan through 1939 and well into 1940, until the schedule was shot to pieces by the unbeatable defenders of Britain. The enemies of democracy were wrong in their calculations for a very simple reason. They were wrong because they believed that democracy could not adjust itself to the terrible reality of a world at war. They believed that democracy, because of its profound respect for the rights of man, would never arm itself to fight. They believed that democracy, because of its will to live at peace with its neighbors, could not mobilize its energies even in its own defense. They know now that democracy can still remain democracy, and speak, and reach conclusions, and arm itself adequately for defense. From the bureaus of propaganda of the Axis powers came the confident prophecy that the conquest of our country would be an inside job a job accomplished not by overpowering invasion from without, but by disrupting confusion and disunion and moral disintegration from within. Those who believed that knew little of our history. America is not a country which can be confounded by the appeasers, the defeatists, the backstairs manufacturers of panic. It is a country that talks out its problems in the open, where any man can hear them. We have just now engaged in a great debate. It was not limited to the halls of Congress. It was argued in every newspaper, on every wave length, over every cracker barrel in all the land; and it was finally settled and decided by the American people themselves. Yes, the decisions of our democracy may be slowly arrived at. But when that decision is made, it is proclaimed not with the voice of any one man but with the voice of one hundred and thirty millions.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualdinnerwhitehousecorrespondentsassociation", "title": "Address at the Annual Dinner of White House Correspondents' Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-dinner-white-house-correspondents-association", "publication_date": "15-03-1941", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 412, "text": "It is binding on us all. And the world is no longer left in doubt. This decision is the end of any attempts at appeasement in our land; the end of urging us to get along with dictators; the end of compromise with tyranny and the forces of oppression. We believe firmly that when our production output is in full swing, the democracies of the world will be able to prove that dictatorships cannot win. But, now, now, the time element is of supreme importance. Every plane, every other instrument of war, old and new, every instrument that we can spare now, we will send overseas because that is the common sense of strategy. The great task of this day, the deep duty that rests upon each and every one of us is to move products from the assembly lines of our factories to the battle lines of democracy Now! We can have speed, we can have effectiveness, if we maintain our existing unity. We do not have and never will have the false unity of a people browbeaten by threats, misled by propaganda. Ours is a unity that is possible only among free men and women who recognize the truth and face reality with intelligence and courage. It is a total effort and that is the only way to guarantee ultimate safety. Beginning a year ago , we started the erection of hundreds of plants; we started the training of millions of men. Then, at the moment that the aid-to-democracies bill was passed, this week, we were ready to recommend the seven-billion-dollar appropriation on the basis of capacity production as now planned. The articles themselves cover the whole range of munitions of war and of the facilities for transporting them across the seas. The aid-to-democracies bill was agreed on by both houses of the Congress last Tuesday afternoon. I signed it one half hour later. Five minutes after that I approved a list of articles for immediate shipment; and today Saturday night many of them are on their way. On Wednesday, I recommended an appropriation for new material to the extent of seven billion dollars; and the Congress is making patriotic speed in making the money available. Here in Washington, we are thinking in terms of speed and speed now. And I hope that that watchword Speed, and speed now - will find its way into every home in the Nation. We shall have to make sacrifices- every one of us. The final extent of those sacrifices will depend on the speed with which we act Now!", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualdinnerwhitehousecorrespondentsassociation", "title": "Address at the Annual Dinner of White House Correspondents' Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-dinner-white-house-correspondents-association", "publication_date": "15-03-1941", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 413, "text": "I must tell you tonight in plain language what this undertaking means to you- to you in your daily life. Whether you are in the armed services; whether you are a steel worker or a stevedore; a machinist or a housewife; a farmer or a banker; a storekeeper or a manufacturer- to all of you it will mean sacrifice in behalf of your country and your liberties. Yes, you will feel the impact of this gigantic effort in your daily lives. You will feel it in a way that will cause, to you, many inconveniences. You will have to be content with lower profits, lower profits from business because obviously your taxes will be higher. You will have to work longer at your bench, or your plow, or your machine, or your desk. Let me make it clear that the Nation is calling for the sacrifice of some privileges, not for the sacrifice of fundamental rights. And most of us will do it willingly. That kind of sacrifice is for the common national protection and welfare; for our defense against the most ruthless brutality in all history; for the ultimate victory of a way of life now so violently menaced. A halfhearted effort on our part will lead to failure. The concepts of business as usual, of normalcy, must be forgotten until the task is finished. Yes, it is an all-out effort and nothing short of an all-out effort will win. Therefore, we are dedicated, from here on, to a constantly increasing tempo of production a production greater than we now know or have ever known before- a production that does not stop and should not pause. Tonight, I am appealing to the heart and to the mind of every man and every woman within our borders who loves liberty. I ask you to consider the needs of our Nation and this hour, to put aside all personal differences until the victory is won. The light of democracy must be kept burning. To the perpetuation of this light, each of us must do his own share. The single effort of one individual may seem very small. It is not enough for us merely to trim the wick, or polish the glass. The time has come when we must provide the fuel in ever-increasing amounts to keep that flame alight. There is not one among us who does not have a stake in the outcome of the effort in which we are now engaged.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualdinnerwhitehousecorrespondentsassociation", "title": "Address at the Annual Dinner of White House Correspondents' Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-dinner-white-house-correspondents-association", "publication_date": "15-03-1941", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 414, "text": "A few weeks ago I spoke of four freedoms freedom of speech and expression, freedom of every person to worship God in his own way, freedom from want, freedom from fear. They may not be immediately attainable throughout the world but humanity does move toward those glorious ideals through democratic processes. And if we fail- if democracy is superseded by slavery- then those four freedoms, or even the mention of them, will become forbidden things. By winning now, we strengthen the meaning of those freedoms, we increase the stature of mankind, we establish the dignity of human life. I have often thought that there is a vast difference between the 'word loyalty and the word obedience. Obedience can be obtained and enforced in a dictatorship by the use of threat or extortion or blackmail or it can be obtained by a failure on the part of government to tell the truth to its citizens. It springs from the mind that is given the facts, that retains ancient ideals and proceeds without coercion to give support to its own government. That is true in England and in Greece and in China and in the United States, today. And in many other countries millions of men and women are praying for the return of a day when they can give that kind of loyalty. Dollars alone will not win this war. Let us not delude ourselves as to that. Today, nearly a million and a half American citizens are hard at work in our armed forces. The spirit the determination of these men of our ENTITY and Navy are worthy of the highest traditions of our country. No better men ever served under Washington or John Paul Jones or Grant or Lee or Pershing. Upon the national will to sacrifice and to work depends the output of our industry and our agriculture. Upon that will depends the survival of the vital bridge across the ocean the bridge of ships that carry the arms and the food for those who are fighting the good fight. Upon that will depends our ability to aid other Nations which may determine to offer resistance. Upon that will may depend practical assistance to people now living in Nations that have been overrun, should they find the opportunity to strike back in an effort to regain their liberties and may that day come soon! This will of the American people will not be frustrated, either by threats from powerful enemies abroad or by small, selfish groups or individuals at home. The determination of America must not and will not be obstructed by war profiteering.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualdinnerwhitehousecorrespondentsassociation", "title": "Address at the Annual Dinner of White House Correspondents' Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-dinner-white-house-correspondents-association", "publication_date": "15-03-1941", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 415, "text": "It must not be obstructed by unnecessary strikes of workers, by shortsighted management, or by the third danger deliberate sabotage. For, unless we win there will be no freedom for either management or labor. Wise labor leaders and wise business managers will realize how necessary it is to their own existence to make common sacrifice for this great common cause. There is no longer the slightest question or doubt that the American people recognize the extreme seriousness of the present situation. That is why they have demanded, and got, a policy of unqualified, immediate, all-out aid for Britain, for Greece, for China, and for all the Governments in exile whose homelands are temporarily occupied by the aggressors. The British are stronger than ever in the magnificent morale that has enabled them to endure all the dark days and the shattered nights of the past ten months. They have the full support and help of Canada, of the other Dominions, of the rest of their Empire, and the full aid and support of non-British people throughout the world who still think in terms of the great freedoms. The British people are braced for invasion whenever such attempt may come tomorrow next week next month. In this historic crisis, Britain is blessed with a brilliant and great leader in Winston Churchill. But, knowing him, no one knows better than Mr. Churchill himself that it is not alone his stirring words and valiant deeds that give the British their superb morale. The essence of that morale is in the masses of plain people who are completely clear in their minds about the one essential fact- that they would rather die as free men than live as slaves. they are fighting in the front line of civilization at this moment, and they are holding that line with a fortitude that will forever be the pride and the inspiration of all free men on every continent, on every isle of the sea. The British people and their Grecian allies need ships. From America, they will get ships. They need planes. From America, they will get planes. From America they need food. From America, they will get food. They need tanks and guns and ammunition and supplies of all kinds. From America, they will get tanks and guns and ammunition and supplies of all kinds. China likewise expresses the magnificent will of millions of plain people to resist the dismemberment of their historic Nation. China, through the Generalissimo, Chiang Kai-shek, asks our help. America has said that China shall have our help.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualdinnerwhitehousecorrespondentsassociation", "title": "Address at the Annual Dinner of White House Correspondents' Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-dinner-white-house-correspondents-association", "publication_date": "15-03-1941", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 425, "text": "Let me say in all sincerity, Mr. Davis, that you have expressed far better than I could express what I hold to be essential in American citizenship. It was a privilege, sir, to be greeted by you as you have greeted me tonight. No one can too strongly insist upon the elementary fact that you cannot build the superstructure of public virtue save on private virtue. The sum of the parts is the whole, and if we wish to make that whole, the State, decent, the representative and exponent and symbol of decency, it must be so made through the decency, public and private, of the average citizen. Davis was quite safe in saying he hoped I had enjoyed my stay in San Francisco. I should indeed be ungrateful, unappreciative, if I were not deeply touched and moved by the way in which the people of San Francisco have received me; and I have enjoyed to the full the two days and a half I have spent here. I have enjoyed it all and I have enjoyed no part more, General MacArthur, than my ride down the line, reviewing the troops with you. Californians are good Americans, and therefore it is not necessary to appeal to them on behalf of the army and the navy. I shall not detain you long this evening. I am promised by Colonel Pippy the chance, after my speech, of meeting and shaking hands with each of you, in the rooms of the Club. I have just got two thoughts, not connected together, to which I want to give utterance tonight; one suggested by something that Mr. Davis said. It is absolutely essential, if we are to have the proper standard of public life, that promise shall be square with performance. A lie is no more to be excused in politics than out of politics. A promise is as binding on the stump as off the stump, and there are two facets to that crystal. In the first place, the man who makes a promise which he does not intend to keep and does not try to keep should rightly be adjudged to have forfeited in some degree what should be every man's most precious possession-his honor. On the other hand, the public that exacts a promise which ought not to be kept, or which cannot be kept, is by just so much forfeiting its right to self-government.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthebanquettenderedhimtheunionleagueclubsanfranciscocalifornia", "title": "Theodore Roosevelt Address at the Banquet Tendered Him by the Union League Club of San Francisco, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-banquet-tendered-him-the-union-league-club-san-francisco-california", "publication_date": "14-05-1903", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 426, "text": "No man fit to be a public man will promise either the impossible or the improper; and if the demand is made that he shall do so it means putting a premium upon the unfit in public life. There is the same sound reason for distrusting the man who promises too much in public that there is for distrusting the man who promises too much in private business. If you meet a doctor who asserts that he as a specific remedy that will cure all the ills to which human flesh is heir, distrust him, He has not got it. If you meet the business man who vociferates that he is always selling everything to you at a loss, and you continue to deal with him I am glad if you suffer for it. Any man who promises as a result of legislation or administration the millennium is making a promise which he will find difficulty in keeping. Any man who asserts that by any law it will be possible, out of hand, to make all humanity good and wise, is again promising what he cannot perform. It is indispensable that we should have good laws and upright and honest and fearless administration of the laws; and we are not to be excused if we fail to hold our public men to a rigid accountability if they fail, in their turn, to see that we have proper legislation and proper administration. No public man worth his salt will be other than glad to be held accountable in that fashion. But important though the law is, though the administration of the law is, we can never escape having to face the fundamental truth that neither begins to be of the decisive importance that the average individual's character is. In the last analysis it is the man's own character which is and must ever be the determining factor in his success or failure in life , and therefore in the last analysis it is the average character of the average citizenship of a nation which will in the long run determine whether that nation is to go up or down. The one indispensable thing for us to keep is a high standard of character for the average American citizen. Now for my unrelated second thought, and that is to reiterate something that I said this morning. I had the very great pleasure of dedicating the monument to Dewey's fleet for its victory at Manila.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthebanquettenderedhimtheunionleagueclubsanfranciscocalifornia", "title": "Theodore Roosevelt Address at the Banquet Tendered Him by the Union League Club of San Francisco, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-banquet-tendered-him-the-union-league-club-san-francisco-california", "publication_date": "14-05-1903", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 427, "text": "We today were enjoying the aftermath of the triumph, due in part to what Dewey and his officers and men did on the first day of May, five years ago, and in even greater part to what those men did who in the past fifteen years had prepared for the winning of that triumph. I have very great confidence in the capacity of our average soldier or sailor to turn out well, to do admirably when put to the supreme test. But the best man alive, if untrained, if unfitly armed, may be beaten by a poorer man who has had the training and the arms. There is nothing more foolish, nothing less dignified than to indulge in boastfulness, in self-glorification as to the capacity of our soldiers and sailors while denying them the material which we are in honor bound to give them in order that their splendid natural qualities shall be fitly supplemented. I have seen our people send American volunteers against a European soldiery, that , European soldiery armed with the finest type of modern rifle and ours with an old black-powder weapon, which was about as effective as a medieval cross bow; and those who failed to prepare the proper weapons for our people are not to be thanked, because by making drafts of an extraordinary kind upon the other good qualities of the American soldier, we escaped disaster. It is very easy and worse than foolish, it is wicked, to hold the people who at the moment are obliged to use those weapons responsible when the real responsibility lay with the representatives of our people and our people themselves for failing to make the preparation in advance. The business of finding a scapegoat to send loose into the wilderness is neither honorable nor dignified for a self-respecting people to be engaged in. We commemorated today by a monument a great naval victory. We commemorated thereby the foresight, the prudence of the public men, of the great business men, of the shipwrights, the men who worked physically at the armor, the guns, the engines, the hulls, in getting the fleet ready; and, more than that, we commemorated the men who trained that fleet in readiness. Many an officer who was retired before the Spanish War came is entitled to his full share of the credit for what was done in that war, although he never saw it, because he had done his part in actual sea service in training the men to handle the mighty and delicate weapons of war intrusted to their care.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthebanquettenderedhimtheunionleagueclubsanfranciscocalifornia", "title": "Theodore Roosevelt Address at the Banquet Tendered Him by the Union League Club of San Francisco, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-banquet-tendered-him-the-union-league-club-san-francisco-california", "publication_date": "14-05-1903", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 428, "text": "Five years ago today the Charter of the United Nations came into force. By virtue of that event, October 24, 1945, became a great day in the history of the world. Long before that day, the idea of an association of nations to keep the peace had lived as a dream in the hearts and minds of men. Woodrow Wilson was the author of that idea in our time. The organization that was brought into being on October 24, 1945, represents our greatest advance toward making that dream a reality. The United Nations was born out of an agony of war the most terrible war in history. Those who drew up the charter really had less to do with the creation of the United Nations than the millions who fought and died in that war. We who work to carry out its great principles should always remember that this organization owes its existence to the blood and sacrifice of millions of men and women. It is built out of their hopes for peace and justice. The United Nations represents the idea of a universal morality, superior to the interests of individual nations. Its foundation does not rest upon power or privilege; it rests upon faith. They rest upon the faith of men in human values upon the belief that men in every land hold the same high ideals and strive toward the same goals for peace and justice. This faith is deeply held by the people of the United States of America and, I believe, by the peoples of all other countries. Governments may sometimes falter in their support of the United Nations, but the peoples of the world do not falter. The demand of men and women throughout the world for international order and justice is one of the strongest forces in these troubled times. We have just had a vivid demonstration of that fact in Korea. The invasion of the Republic of Korea was a direct challenge to the principles of the United Nations. That challenge was met by an overwhelming response. The people of almost every member country supported the decision of the Security Council to meet this aggression with force. Few acts in our time have met with such widespread approval. In uniting to crush the aggressors in Korea, these member nations have done no more than the charter calls for. But the important thing is that they have done it, and they have done it successfully. They have given dramatic evidence that the charter works. They have proved that the charter is a living instrument backed by the material and moral strength of members, large and small.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressnewyorkcitybeforetheunitednationsgeneralassembly", "title": "Address in New York City Before the United Nations General Assembly", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-new-york-city-before-the-united-nations-general-assembly", "publication_date": "24-10-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 429, "text": "The men who laid down their lives for the United Nations in Korea will have a place in our memory, and in the memory of the world, forever. They died in order that the United Nations might live. As a result of their sacrifices, the United Nations today is stronger than it ever has been. Today, it is better able than ever before to fulfill the hopes that men have placed in it. I believe the people of the world rely on the United Nations to help them achieve two great purposes. They look to it to help them improve the conditions under which they live. And they rely on it to fulfill their profound longing for peace. Without peace, it is impossible to make lasting progress toward a better life for all. Without progress in human welfare, the foundations of peace will be insecure. That is why we can never afford to neglect one of these purposes at the expense of the other. Throughout the world today, men are seeking a better life. They want to be freed from the bondage and the injustice of the past. They want to work out their own destinies. These aspirations of mankind can be met met without conflict and bloodshed by international cooperation through the United Nations. To us in this assembly hall, the United Nations that we see and hear is made up of speeches, debates, and resolutions. But to millions of people, the United Nations is a source of direct help in their everyday lives. To them it is a case of food or a box of schoolbooks; it is a doctor who vaccinates their children; it is an expert who shows them how to raise more rice, or more wheat, on their land; it is the flag which marks a safe haven to the refugee, or an extra meal a day to a nursing mother. These are not the only ways in which the United Nations helps people to help themselves. It goes beyond these material things, it gives support to the spiritual values of men's lives. The United Nations can and does assist people who want to be free. It helps dependent peoples in their progress toward self-government. And when new nations have achieved independence, it helps them to preserve and develop their freedom. Furthermore, the United Nations is strengthening the concept of the dignity and worth of human beings. The protection of human rights is essential if we are to achieve a better life for people. The efforts of the United Nations to push ahead toward an ever broader realization of these rights is one of its most important tasks.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressnewyorkcitybeforetheunitednationsgeneralassembly", "title": "Address in New York City Before the United Nations General Assembly", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-new-york-city-before-the-united-nations-general-assembly", "publication_date": "24-10-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 430, "text": "So far, this work of the United Nations for human advancement is only a beginning of what it can be and what it will be in the future. The United Nations is learning through experience. It is growing in prestige among the peoples of the world. The increasing effectiveness of its efforts to improve the welfare of human beings is opening up a new page in history. The skills and experience of the United Nations in this field will be put to the test now that the fighting in Korea is nearly ended. The reconstruction of Korea as a free, united, and self-supporting nation is an opportunity to show how international cooperation can lead to gains in human freedom and welfare. The work of the United Nations for human advancement, important as it is, can be fully effective only if we can achieve the other great objective of the United Nations, a just and lasting peace. At the present time, the fear of another great international war overshadows all the hopes of mankind. This fear arises from the tensions between nations and from the recent outbreak of open aggression in Korea. We in the United States believe that such a war can be prevented. One of the strongest reasons for this belief is our faith in the United Nations. The United Nations has three great roles to play in preventing wars. it provides a way for negotiation and the settlement of disputes among nations by peaceful means. it provides a way of utilizing the collective strength of member nations, under the charter, to prevent aggression. it provides a way through which, once the danger of aggression is reduced, the nations can be relieved of the burden of armaments. All of us must help the United Nations to be effective in performing these functions. The charter obligates all of us to settle our disputes peacefully. Today is an appropriate occasion for us solemnly to reaffirm our obligations under the charter. Within the spirit and even the letter of the charter we shall go even further. We must attempt to find peaceful adjustments of underlying situations or tensions before they harden into actual disputes. The basic issues in the world today affect the fate of millions of people. Here, in the United Nations, there is an opportunity for the large and the small alike to have their voices heard on these issues. Here the interests of every country can be considered in the settlement of problems which are of common concern. We believe that negotiation is an essential part of this peaceful process. The United States, as one of the members of the United Nations, is prepared now, as always, to enter into negotiations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressnewyorkcitybeforetheunitednationsgeneralassembly", "title": "Address in New York City Before the United Nations General Assembly", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-new-york-city-before-the-united-nations-general-assembly", "publication_date": "24-10-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 431, "text": "We insist only that negotiations be entered into in good faith and be governed throughout by a spirit of willingness to reach proper solutions. While we will continue to take advantage of every opportunity here in the United Nations and elsewhere to settle differences by peaceful means, we have learned from hard experience that we cannot rely upon negotiation alone to preserve the peace. Five years ago, after the bloodshed and destruction of World War II, many of us hoped that all nations would work together to make sure that war could never happen again. We hoped that international cooperation, supported by the strength and moral authority of the United Nations, would be sufficient to prevent aggression. Although many countries promptly disbanded their wartime armies, other countries continued to maintain forces so large that they posed a constant threat of aggression. And this year, the invasion of Korea has shown that there are some who will resort to outright war, contrary to the principles of the charter, if it suits their ends. In these circumstances, the United Nations, if it is to be an effective instrument for keeping the peace, has no choice except to use the collective strength of its members to curb aggression. To do so, the United Nations must be prepared to use force. The United Nations did use force to curb aggression in Korea, and by so doing has greatly strengthened the cause of peace. I am glad that additional steps are being taken at this session to prepare for quick and effective action in any future case of aggression.  To maintain the peace, the United Nations must be able to learn the facts about any threat of aggression. Next, it must be able to call quickly upon the member nations to act if the threat becomes serious. Above all, the peace-loving nations must have the military strength available, when called upon, to act decisively to put down aggression. The peace-loving nations are building that strength. However much they may regret the necessity, they will continue to build up their strength until they have created forces strong enough to preserve the peace under the United Nations. They will do all that is required to provide a defense against aggression. They will do that because, under the conditions which now exist in the world, it is the only way to maintain peace. We intend to build up strength for peace as long as it is necessary. But at the same time, we must continue to strive, through the United Nations, to achieve international control of atomic energy and the reduction of armaments and armed forces. Cooperative and effective disarmament would make the danger of war remote.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressnewyorkcitybeforetheunitednationsgeneralassembly", "title": "Address in New York City Before the United Nations General Assembly", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-new-york-city-before-the-united-nations-general-assembly", "publication_date": "24-10-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 432, "text": "It would be a way of achieving the high purposes of the United Nations without the tremendous expenditures for armaments which conditions in the world today make imperative. Disarmament is the course which the United States would prefer to take. It is the course which most nations would like to adopt. It is the course which the United Nations from its earliest beginnings has been seeking to follow. For nearly 5 years, two commissions of the United Nations have been working on the problem of disarmament. One commission has been concerned with the elimination of atomic weapons and the other with the reduction of other types of armaments and of armed forces. Thus far, these commissions have not been successful in obtaining agreement among all the major powers. Nevertheless, these years of effort have served to bring to the attention of all nations the three basic principles upon which any successful plan of disarmament must rest. First, the plan must include all kinds of weapons. The conflict in Korea bears tragic witness to the fact that aggression, whatever the weapons used, brings frightful destruction. Second, the plan must be based on unanimous agreement. A majority of nations is not enough. No plan of disarmament can work unless it includes every nation having substantial armed forces. One-sided disarmament is a sure invitation to aggression. Disarmament must be based on safeguards which will insure the compliance of all nations. The safeguards must be adequate to give immediate warning of any threatened violation. It must be rounded upon free and open interchange of information across national borders. The task of working out the successive steps would still be a complex one and would take a long time and much effort. But the fact that this process is so complex and so difficult is no reason for us to give up hope of ultimate success. The will of the world for peace is too strong to allow us to give up in this effort. We cannot permit the history of our times to record that we failed by default. We must explore every avenue which offers any chance of bringing success to the activities of the United Nations in this vital area. Much valuable work has already been done by the two disarmament commissions on the different technical problems confronting them. I believe it would be useful to explore ways in which the work of these commissions could now be more closely brought together. One possibility to be considered is whether their work might be revitalized if carried forward in the future through a new and consolidated disarmament commission.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressnewyorkcitybeforetheunitednationsgeneralassembly", "title": "Address in New York City Before the United Nations General Assembly", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-new-york-city-before-the-united-nations-general-assembly", "publication_date": "24-10-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 433, "text": "But until an effective system of disarmament is established, let us be clear about the task ahead. The only course the peace-loving nations can take in the present situation is to create the armaments needed to make the world secure against aggression. That is the course to which the United States is now firmly committed. The United States has embarked upon the course of increasing its armed strength only for the purpose of helping to keep the peace. We pledge that strength to uphold the principles of the Charter of the United Nations. We believe that the peace-loving members of the United Nations join us in that pledge. I believe that the United Nations, strengthened by these pledges, will bring us nearer to the peace we seek. We have learned from hard experience that there is no easy road to peace. We have a solemn obligation to the peoples we represent to continue our combined efforts to achieve the strength that will prevent aggression. At the same time, we have an equally solemn obligation to continue our efforts to find solutions to the major problems and issues that divide the nations. The settlement of these differences would make possible a truly dependable and effective system for the reduction and control of armaments. Although the possibility of attaining that goal appears distant today, we must never stop trying. It would free the nations to devote more of their energies to wiping out poverty, hunger, and injustice. If real disarmament were achieved, the nations of the world, acting through the United Nations, could join in a greatly enlarged program of mutual aid. As the cost of maintaining armaments decreased, every nation could greatly increase its contributions to advancing human welfare. All of us could then 'pool even greater resources to support the United Nations in its war against want. In this way, our armaments would be transformed into foods, medicine, tools for use in underdeveloped areas, and into other aids for human advancement. The latest discoveries of science could be made available to men all over the globe. Thus, we could give real meaning to the old promise that swords shall be beaten into plowshares, and that nations shall not learn war any more. Then, man can turn his great inventiveness, his tremendous energies, and the resources with which he has been blessed, to creative efforts. Then we shall be able to realize the kind of world which has been the vision of man for centuries. This is the goal which we must keep before us and the vision in which we must never lose faith.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressnewyorkcitybeforetheunitednationsgeneralassembly", "title": "Address in New York City Before the United Nations General Assembly", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-new-york-city-before-the-united-nations-general-assembly", "publication_date": "24-10-1950", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 446, "text": "The urgent needs of the American people require our presence here today. first, to check inflation and the rising cost of living, and second, to help in meeting the acute housing shortage. These are matters which affect every American family. They also affect the entire world, for world peace depends upon the strength of our economy. The Communists, both here and abroad, are counting on our present prosperity turning into a depression. They do not believe that we can--or will--put the brake on high prices. They are counting on economic collapse in this country. If we should bring on another great depression in the United States by failing to control high prices, the world's hope for lasting peace would vanish. A depression in the United States would cut the ground from under the free nations of Europe. Economic collapse in this country would prevent the recovery throughout the world which is essential to lasting peace. We would have only ourselves to blame for the tragedy that would follow. In these tense days, when our strength is being taxed all over the world, it would be reckless folly if we failed to act against inflation. High prices are not taking time off for the election. High prices are not waiting until the next session of Congress. The 81st Congress will not get under way for nearly 6 months. Before the new Congress could take action against high prices, it would have to draft new bills, study them, hold hearings, debate and decide whether to pass them. It would be at least 8 months from now before the new Congress could pass the laws we need. Eight months more of inflation would be much too long. It was 8 months ago--November 1947--that I called a special session of this Congress, and recommended a comprehensive anti-inflation program. If it had been enacted, we would have lower prices today. Since last November, prices have gone even higher. As every housewife knows, food prices rose rapidly throughout 1947. Month after month, the cost of clothing, fuel, and rent keeps on going up. The cost of living is now higher than ever before in our history. You all-most of you--have to live on your salaries. All you need do is just go home and ask your wife how living costs are now, as compared to what they were January 1st, 1947. We cannot risk the danger, or suffer the hardship, of another 8 months of doing nothing about high prices.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsmessagethespecialsessionthe80thcongress", "title": "Message to the Special Session of the 80th Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/message-the-special-session-the-80th-congress", "publication_date": "27-07-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 447, "text": "Prices are already so high that last year more than one-fourth of the families of this country were forced to spend more than they earned. Families of low or moderate income are being priced out of the market for many of the necessities of life. They are not able to buy as much as they could buy 2 years ago, and they are paying a lot more for what they can buy. At the same time, industrial prices, which affect all business and employment, are rising, and rising fast. Large price increases have recently been announced by industries that set the pace for the whole economy. Just within the last few days, the steel industry, for example, increased its prices, on the average, by more than $9 a ton. The rise in industrial prices is just as important, in the long run, as the high cost of living. It is already squeezing the independent businessman. It threatens to destroy a fair balance between industry and agriculture. It can end only in catastrophe if it is allowed to continue. In the face of these facts, it is foolish to point at every feeble straw as a sign that the danger is disappearing. In February, some people said that the break in commodity prices meant that inflation was almost over. There are still some people who repeat the old argument which was used by those who killed price control 2 years ago. They said that if we would only take controls off, production would increase, prices would go down, and there would be more for everybody at lower cost. But even with full employment, full use of available materials, and practically full use of plant capacity--all of which we have today--prices are still climbing much faster than production. It is obvious that we cannot rely solely on more production to curb high prices. Instead, we must attack inflation directly. If we do not stop inflation, production and employment will both fall sharply when the break comes. Positive action by this Government is long over-due. I therefore urge the Congress to take strong, positive action to control inflation. I have reexamined the anti-inflation program I proposed to the Congress 8 months ago. In its essentials that program is as sound now as it was then. It has been revised and strengthened in the light of changing circumstances. First, I recommend that an excess profits tax be reestablished in order to provide a Treasury surplus and to provide a brake on inflation. Second, I recommend that consumer credit controls be restored in order to hold down inflationary credit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsmessagethespecialsessionthe80thcongress", "title": "Message to the Special Session of the 80th Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/message-the-special-session-the-80th-congress", "publication_date": "27-07-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 448, "text": "Third, I recommend that the Federal Reserve Board be given greater authority to regulate inflationary bank credit. Fourth, I recommend that authority be granted to regulate speculation on the commodity exchanges. Fifth, I recommend that authority be granted for allocation and inventory control of scarce commodities which basically affect essential industrial production, or the cost of living. Sixth, I recommend that rent controls be strengthened, and that adequate appropriations be provided for enforcement, in order to prevent further unwarranted rent increases. Seventh, I recommend that standby authority be granted to ration those few products in short supply which vitally affect the health and welfare of our people. On the basis of present facts, and unless further shortages occur, this authority might not have to be used. Eighth, I recommend that price control be authorized for scarce commodities which basically affect essential industrial production or the cost of living. I have said before, and I repeat, that many profit margins have been adequate to absorb wage increases without the price increases that have followed. Rising wages and rising standards of living, based on increasing productivity and a fair distribution of income, is the American way. Noninflationary wage increases can and should continue to be made by free collective bargaining. Where the Government imposes a price ceiling, wage adjustments which can be absorbed within the price ceiling should not be interfered with by the Government. The Government should have the authority, however, to limit wage adjustments which would force a break in the price ceiling, except where wage adjustments are essential to remedy hardship, to correct inequities, or to prevent an actual lowering of the living standards. The measures I have recommended make up a balanced program to attack high prices. They are all necessary to check rising prices and safeguard our economy against the danger of depression. If they are made the first order of business by the Congress, as they should be, they can be promptly enacted. Every week of delay will mean additional hardship for the American people. The second reason why I have called the Congress back is that our people need legislation now to help meet the national housing shortage. We desperately need more housing at lower prices--prices which families of moderate income, particularly veterans' families, can afford to pay. We are not getting it. Even more urgently, we need more rental housing--especially low-rent housing. We are not getting it. Most of the housing now being built is for sale, or for rent, at prices far above the reach of the average American family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsmessagethespecialsessionthe80thcongress", "title": "Message to the Special Session of the 80th Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/message-the-special-session-the-80th-congress", "publication_date": "27-07-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 449, "text": "I have recommended time and again that the Congress pass a comprehensive housing bill which would help us obtain more housing at lower prices--both for sale and for rent. A good housing bill, Senate Bill 866, known as the Taft-Ellender-Wagner bill, passed the Senate on April 22. This bill would provide aid to cities in clearing slums and in building low-rent housing projects. It would give extensive aid to the private home building industry. It includes provisions for farm housing, and for research to bring down building costs. It contains many other provisions, all aimed at getting more housing at lower prices and at lower rents. We need it now, not a year from now. If this legislation is passed this summer, it will be possible to start immediately the production of more houses of the kind our families need, and at prices they can afford to pay. If it is not passed now, the 81st Congress will have to start all over again with a new housing bill. In that case, we might lose a full year in meeting our national housing need. This Congress can complete action on this comprehensive housing bill in a few days. I have called the Congress back primarily to deal with high prices and with the housing shortage. Delay on either of these items would be most dangerous. In addition, there are other important legislative measures on which delay would injure us at home and impair our world relations. I therefore recommend that the present session, without allowing anything to interfere with its vital work on legislation concerning high prices and housing, take action on certain other important measures. These measures can speedily be enacted now because of the amount of study already given to them by the Congress. First, the Congress should provide Federal assistance to the States in meeting the present crisis in education. The children in our schools, and the men and women who teach there, have been made the victims of inflation. More children are entering school than ever before. But inflation has cut down the purchasing power of the money devoted to educational purposes. Teachers' salaries, for the most part, have lagged far behind the increased cost of living. The overcrowding of our schools is seriously detrimental to the health and the education of our boys and girls. Every month that we delay in meeting this problem will cause damage that can never be repaired. Several million children of school age are unable to attend school, largely because of lack of facilities or teachers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsmessagethespecialsessionthe80thcongress", "title": "Message to the Special Session of the 80th Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/message-the-special-session-the-80th-congress", "publication_date": "27-07-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 450, "text": "To meet these vital educational needs, the Congress should complete action on Senate Bill 472, which passed the Senate on April the 1st. All that remains to be done is its passage by the House of Representatives. Prompt action by the Congress is also needed to help another group of our people who are suffering from inflation. These are the workers who depend on the protection of the minimum wage law. The present minimum wage law is pitifully inadequate in the face of today's high prices. Proposals to raise minimum wages have long been before the Congress. I urgently recommend that the minimum wage be raised to at least 75 cents an hour at this session. Senate Bill 2062 and its companion House bills would be suitable measures for this purpose. I also urge that action be taken by the Congress to relieve other victims of inflation. These are the people who depend upon the benefits being paid under the old-age and survivors insurance system. The average old-age retirement benefit for a man and his wife is only $39 a month. For a widow with two children, the average monthly benefit is only $49. I urge that they be increased by at least 50 percent and that the age at which women can receive benefits be lowered from 65 to 60 years. I also hope that the protection of this system will be extended to the millions who are not now covered. In our relations with the rest of the world, action is also needed at once, and can be taken quickly, to afford additional proof that we mean what we say when we talk about freedom, humanity, and international cooperation for peace and prosperity. First, the Displaced Persons Act in its present form discriminates unfairly against some displaced persons because of their religion, land of origin, or occupation. These provisions are contrary to all American ideals. This act should be promptly amended to wipe out these discriminations. Furthermore, the present act permits the entry of only 200,000 persons, and charges them against future immigration quotas. I believe strongly that this act should provide for the entry of 400,000 persons over a 4-year period, and they should be outside the normal immigration quotas. Second, many people in the world must wonder how strongly we support the United Nations when we hesitate to assist the construction of its permanent home in this country. Legislation can and should be passed at once to authorize a loan by the United States Government to the United Nations, for the construction of its headquarters buildings in New York City.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsmessagethespecialsessionthe80thcongress", "title": "Message to the Special Session of the 80th Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/message-the-special-session-the-80th-congress", "publication_date": "27-07-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 451, "text": "The International Wheat Agreement is another vital measure on which the Congress should act. This agreement is designed to insure stability in the world wheat market in the years ahead when wheat will be more plentiful. It would guarantee American farmers an export market of 185 million bushels of wheat at a fair price during each of the next 5 years. Since the agreement is in the form of a treaty it requires only ratification by the Senate. Although this agreement should have been ratified by July 1st of this year, we have good reason to believe that it can still be made effective if it is now ratified promptly. Also, I wish to call the attention of the Congress to three other problems on which action can and should be taken at this session. The Congress should reconsider its recent actions which cut sharply into our national electric power policy. submitting to the Congress appropriation requests for certain power projects which must be provided right away. These requests include the TVA steamplant at New Johnsonville, Tenn., and certain other projects on which congressional reductions, if allowed to stand, will delay the production of power for a year or more. These appropriations should be promptly enacted, and at the same time certain crippling limitations should be removed from the law. In the final days before adjourning in June, the Congress passed a bill raising the salaries of some Federal employees. However, this bill neglected long overdue reforms in the Federal pay scales and discriminated unfairly against certain groups of employees. The Congress should take this opportunity to enact more equitable and realistic Federal pay legislation. Finally, I again urge upon the Congress the measures I recommended last February to protect and extend basic civil rights of citizenship and human liberty. A number of bills to carry out my recommendations have been introduced in the Congress. Many of them have already received careful consideration by congressional committees. Only one bill, however, has been enacted, a bill relating to the rights of Americans of Japanese origin. I believe that it is necessary to enact the laws I have recommended in order to make the guarantees of the Constitution real and vital. I believe they are necessary to carry out our American ideals of liberty and justice for all. I hope that there is no misunderstanding of the recommendations I have made. I urge the Congress not to be distracted from these central purposes. At the same time, as I have stated, the Congress can and should act on certain other important items of legislation at this special session.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsmessagethespecialsessionthe80thcongress", "title": "Message to the Special Session of the 80th Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/message-the-special-session-the-80th-congress", "publication_date": "27-07-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 452, "text": "This is a good day for our entire country, and especially for the Northeast corridor and for those in the Middle West who have a real need for consistently good service in rail transportation. Before I begin, let me express my thanks to Senators Cannon and Pell and Kassebaum, Pete Williams, to Representatives Florio, Madigan, and others, who have been so instrumental in passing this historic legislation through the Congress. In the future, with a better Northeast corridor rail transportation, he will be here on time. But he is been instrumental, as you know, in initiating this project, representing the Governors, because when he was chairman of the Conference of Northeast Governors, they made this Northeast corridor project their number one priority. And also, I want to thank Governor Joe Garrahy, who is here, as well as Governor Ella Grasso who could not be with us today, but who currently holds the chairmanship of the Governor's conference on this particular item. Americans sometimes forget that trains are the transportation system of the future, not the past. In a fast-changing world with energy costs, air pollution, deteriorating cities and communities that need to be revived, a need for efficiency, and the changing personal habits of our people, the prospect for rail transportation for people is extremely bright in the years to come. This bill, Senate bill 2253, implements many of my administration's rail priorities. It provides, as many of you know, $750 million over the next 5 years for the Northeast corridor improvement projects to make possible a high-speed transportation corridor between Washington, D.C., and Boston, Massachusetts. It also provides $75 million in well-protected loan guarantees to the trustee of-to the Rock Island Railroad, which will provide an orderly transition for them in making sure that the workers there are protected. I have supported these provisions in the legislation, and I congratulate the Congress for having passed this bill and presented it to me for signing today. My administration has been very concerned about the bankruptcy of the Rock Island Railroad and its adverse effect on crucial rail transportation for the Midwest. The aid for the Rock Island trustee is very important to protect workers who are affected by the bankruptcy of this line, and it will also help in providing an orderly transition for maintaining the essential services in the Midwest. This investment in the Northeast corridor will provide in direct jobs 30,000 person-years of employment.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningintolawthenortheastcorridorappropriationsbill", "title": "Remarks on Signing Into Law the Northeast Corridor Appropriations Bill", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-into-law-the-northeast-corridor-appropriations-bill", "publication_date": "30-05-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 453, "text": "It will also have a heavy emphasis on minority and small business contractors and will provide, in addition, between forty and fifty thousand additional, indirect jobs associated with the improvements in the Northeast corridor. It will also improve riding conditions for more than 50 percent of all the Amtrak passengers and then, by 1990, we anticipate an increase in rail passengers of 5 3/4 million riders because of this legislation. And I think most importantly of all, it will provide the basis for a revitalization of our Nation's industrial base. It will provide land use and improve the analysis of how land can be used in crucial areas, because it will focus on businesses and workers who will be inclined to locate in the area of these vast improvements. It will also help to revive the central cities of the Northeast which have declined partly because of deteriorating rail service which will now be repaired. In short, the total $2 1/2 billion authorized for the life of this corridor project is the largest public investment ever made in the Northeast part of the United States, and its impact is already profound and beneficial. I am especially pleased at the $140 million allocated for station improvements. This money will be tremendously magnified because of associated developments from the private industry sector near these new and improved railroad stations. For example, improvements in the Newark, New Jersey, station have already coincided with $125 million in nearby development. Newark has long needed an assist to commercial activity in that part of the city, and this appears to be accomplishing that goal. Also, South Station in Boston is becoming a major multimodal transportation center, and it will stimulate over $500 million in expected private development in that area. Other benefits of this project, as I have mentioned very briefly in passing, will be lower operating costs, higher patronage by railroad riders, and less congestion of airports, less congestion on our highways, less use of oil, efficiency in the entire Nation's transportation system, and, of course, reduced air pollution-a lot of benefits from one bill. In short, the $750 million in this authorization is vital not simply to the Northeast rail system but also to our Nation's businesses, our Nation's workers, all the cities of our country, and ultimately, of course, to all the American people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningintolawthenortheastcorridorappropriationsbill", "title": "Remarks on Signing Into Law the Northeast Corridor Appropriations Bill", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-into-law-the-northeast-corridor-appropriations-bill", "publication_date": "30-05-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 454, "text": "It is a well-kept secret -- I did not know this was about me. I particularly want to thank the President and the First Lady for opening up the White House, and for keeping the spirit of volunteerism alive and well. Service to others, he believes and I believe, we all believe -- and I have to be the most biased person in this room, but I think this President and this First Lady have done an extraordinary job in taking this concept forward. I want to thank Ray Chambers and Marian Heard -- where is Marian? Right here. The amount they have done for this cause is just hard to quantify. As much as 2009 also marks 20 years since we started a nationwide movement to mobilize citizens, and all backgrounds and all walks, to help their fellow man, let me thank those who were present at the creation -- from our fearless leader here at the White House in Gregg Petersmeyer, who was singled out a minute ago -- and our founding board members, of course, Ray and Marian Heard. And I see so many others here who have done so very much for this cause. Once we were out of the gate, a number of talented people, including Bob -- is Bob here? There is the man, there he is -- joined the fight and helped keep the fire burning and our cause moving forward and touching more lives. And now, most importantly, we have two capable leaders stepping forward to head the Points of Light hands-on network, and they are, as you have heard -- a distinguished Georgian, Marian -- Michelle Nunn and Neil Bush, my son -- our son. And they have our full faith and confidence, and we are very fortunate they are doing the job and just pushing, putting in all the time in volunteer fashion. Of course, Neil and Michelle and the entire Points of Light team cannot do the important work by themselves. They need the support and inspiration of the corporate and civic leaders in this room. And there are countless more around the country, I might add. And I think they are getting it. But let me thank each and every one of you for adding your leadership and your vision to this nationwide, vital cause. In the final analysis, the same realities, the same truths that led us to set this shared movement in motion 20 years ago remain unchanged. And we still believe in the innate propensity of the American people to reach out beyond themselves to help others. That is what this is really all about.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthepointslightinstitute0", "title": "Remarks Honoring the Points of Light Institute", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-points-light-institute-0", "publication_date": "07-01-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 459, "text": "Nancy and I are delighted to welcome you here tonight. It is a great pleasure to have this chance to meet with you more as friends than as representatives of our countries, more for passing a pleasant evening than transacting business. It is inspiring to look around this room, to think of the many languages, cultures, religions, and traditions that are present here tonight. Some might say this gathering is a microcosm of the problems that the world faces but to me this gathering is a sample of the opportunities we have to communicate on a personal level and to cooperate as representatives of our independent nations. This room is occupied by men and women aware of their responsibilities and respectful of the obligations of others. Those responsibilities and obligations are at times in conflict, but our commitment to civility and the proper discourse between nations should never waiver. So long as he touched the Earth, he could not be defeated, but when he lost touch, he grew frail. As long as our governments stay in touch with the hopes and aspirations of our people, the prospects for world peace will be strong. Beneath our diversity, the peoples of the world have similar goals. They look for dignity, peace, freedom, and a chance to prosper. These common dreams will be the source of our strength. George Santayana, an American traveler and philosopher, once said, A man's feet must be planted in his country, but his eyes should survey the world. Well, this is the vision required of each of us and of every world leader. We must uncompromisingly represent the interests of our countries, yet be ever mindful that by our actions, we are determining the future of mankind. In the conduct of your duties, be diligent; in the search for peace, be bold. The people of the world owe a special debt of gratitude to diplomats and their families, who today must cope not only with the frustrations inherent with the profession, but also with personal danger. In the last 15 years, diplomats from over a hundred countries have been victims of terrorist attacks. Fortunately, most have survived those attacks; a few, tragically, have not. Those who perpetrate these dastardly acts should never doubt that every nation considers an attack on any diplomat as a crime against mankind which will not be tolerated in any land. Reflecting on this, we are grateful to the diplomatic community for your courage and your perseverance. May mankind profit by what we do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoastwhitehousedinnerhonoringthechiefsdiplomaticmissions", "title": "Toast at a White House Dinner Honoring the Chiefs of Diplomatic Missions", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toast-white-house-dinner-honoring-the-chiefs-diplomatic-missions", "publication_date": "11-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 467, "text": "It is a great pleasure to be here in Charlotte, and I thank you very much, Jim, for those overly generous words. I can assure you in the months ahead I will do my utmost to live up to those high standards that you have set, and I will give my best efforts to not disappoint you in any way whatsoever. I was looking at the records the other day, and I have been in Charlotte three times in the last 2 years. The last time I was here was in May of 1975. At that time, Jim Martin assembled 105,000 of his closest friends to meet me at the Mecklenburg County Bicentennial celebration. It was a great occasion, and I enjoyed it very, very much. You gave me a very, very warm welcome at that time, and I certainly appreciated that enthusiastic reception. But let me say I am especially pleased to be here and have an opportunity to say a few things that I feel very strongly and very deeply concerning your fine Congressman, Jim Martin. While I am here, I think it appropriate that I say a few words in a salute to some of the other distinguished guests who are here. First, I think it is a very opportune time for me to wish Jim Martin's mother a very happy birthday, which I understand will take place tomorrow. Mom and Pop Martin are well known in Washington because of their very well-known son. Jim is every bit as proud of you, Mrs. Martin, as I am sure you are of him. It would be redundant, but I feel so strongly I want to compliment you on your outstanding Governor, Jim Holshouser. But I likewise would feel it very appropriate for me to compliment you on one of my dearest and finest friends in the Congress, Charlie Jonas and, of course, Annie Elliott. Charlie and I served on the Committee on Appropriations together for a good many years. And I know what a superb job he did, what a hard struggle he made year after year after year to try and get some sense and responsibility in the consideration of the various appropriation bills, but particularly the Labor and HEW appropriation bills. And believe me, that is not an easy job. So, Charlie and Annie Elliott, it is great to see you. Let me also put in a good word for Cornbread Maxwell and Lou Massey1 and the 49'ers of UNC, Charlotte. I wish them the very best.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscharlottereceptionhonoringrepresentativejamesgmartinnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks in Charlotte at a Reception Honoring Representative James G. Martin of North Carolina.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-charlotte-reception-honoring-representative-james-g-martin-north-carolina", "publication_date": "20-03-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 468, "text": "The Ninth Congressional District of North Carolina has been accustomed to winners, and I can personally vouch for the fact that this district has a great reputation in Washington, D.C., and particularly in the House of Representatives. You do not settle just for a good Congressman, you insist on a great Congressman, and Jim and Charlie represent that. You sent Charlie Jonas to Washington on 10 occasions, and as I said earlier, he did a superb job. You sent Jim Martin to Washington on two occasions, and let me urge you as strongly as I possibly can that you send Jim Martin back for at least a third term. I am proud of Jim because I know that he is one of the very strong people that serves in the House of Representatives. And during my 25-plus years there, I had an opportunity to pass judgment on a good many Members of the House. They sort of would come and go like Greyhound buses, as one of our friends used to say. And so I can speak with some authority when I say that you have great representation in Jim, as you did in Charlie Jonas. Jim, when he first went to the Congress in January of 1973, and from then on, has demonstrated an outstanding capability to deal with issues forcefully, intelligently, and with a great deal of plain old North Carolina common sense. And I think those are great attributes for any person in public office. As the first North Carolinian to serve or to sit on the House Ways and Means Committee since 1950 when Mulie Doughton left, Jim has proven beyond any doubt whatsoever that he is a dedicated, powerful advocate of fiscal responsibility in our Federal Government, and I honestly wish that we had a good many more Jim Martins serving in the House of Representatives. I can assure you that my job would be infinitely easier and the country would be far better off. But, in addition to his duties as a Member of that prestigious Committee on Ways and Means, Jim is also the chairman of a Republican conference committee, or task force, as we call them, on health. And he is seeking through that group to study the problems in the broadest possible sense and to find some answers where we have had difficulties in trying to get the best care and the best arrangement and to stop some of these crazy schemes that are coming from some sources where they want to destroy the doctor-patient relationship.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscharlottereceptionhonoringrepresentativejamesgmartinnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks in Charlotte at a Reception Honoring Representative James G. Martin of North Carolina.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-charlotte-reception-honoring-representative-james-g-martin-north-carolina", "publication_date": "20-03-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 469, "text": "Here they want the Federal Government to actually take over the health of this country and run it, as some would propose, as it is being run and not being run very well in some of the countries in Western Europe. Now, Jim has an interest in, as I do, in a subject matter in health where I think we have to do something, and I speak here of catastrophic or prolonged illness. Jim takes a slightly different approach to trying to find an answer to that problem than I do, but we have the same goal. And I appreciate Jim's interest and his involvement in this very critical and very serious matter. Jim knows, as you and I do, that there is no reason people should have to go broke just to get well or to stay well in this great country that we all are proud to be a part of. Jim is also one of the very few just a handful in the House of Representatives or in the Senate who is a scientist in his own right. And, as a result, he recognizes perhaps better than most anybody in the House or in the Senate how serious our energy problem is in this country. Jim had several amendments to the energy legislation which was considered by the House, amendments which were very significantly important to the State of North Carolina, and, as a result of his efforts, at least some progress was made in meeting your unique problems here. And, of course, because of his role as a scientist and a statesman, he has been able to give special emphasis to the role of research and development in trying to develop some of the exotic fuels that are not the answer for tomorrow in the energy field, but can and will be in the decade of the eighties. Jim is also a strong supporter of a program that I think is tremendously important, and I speak now of general revenue sharing. Back in 1972, I helped to lead the fight in the House of Representatives to get the Congress at that time to approve the general revenue sharing piece of legislation and, incidentally, I intend to fight just as hard in 1976 as I did in 1972 for this legislation. As a matter of fact, last year, I think it was in July, I submitted to the Congress a proposal to extend the existing legislation. It is unbelievable that the Congress has been so negligent in acting on this legislation, which currently expires on December 31, 1976.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscharlottereceptionhonoringrepresentativejamesgmartinnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks in Charlotte at a Reception Honoring Representative James G. Martin of North Carolina.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-charlotte-reception-honoring-representative-james-g-martin-north-carolina", "publication_date": "20-03-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 470, "text": "You have to include, Jim, in your budget, the anticipated funding for your next calendar or fiscal year, and, if Congress does not act before that budget has to be put together, your Governor and 49 other Governors either have to reduce services or add taxes, and every mayor and every local official and there are 39,000 of them are placed in exactly the same position. So, it is vitally important that the Congress move on this legislation. Now, let me cite some specific figures the impact of general revenue sharing. The city of Charlotte has received over $20 million in this program since its inception about 4 1/2 years ago, and Mecklenburg County has received more than $10 million. I recommended a 5 3/4-year extension of the legislation and, under that legislation during the full term of its existence, Charlotte would receive $31,600,000 and Mecklenburg County, $15 million-plus. And the figures for the State of North Carolina would be greater under the program I recommended than they have received under the existing program. This is something that we all know has worked well with the Federal Government collecting the money and sending it back to the States and to the local communities with a minimum amount of redtape and a maximum amount of local decisionmaking by the Governors and by the locally elected officials, the people who honestly know what the problems are. I think we ought to encourage this trend of giving the decisionmaking to the people at the local level, and revenue sharing has been probably the most successful Federal program in that regard. Now, in fighting for general revenue sharing, and in many other legislative efforts, Jim has proven his expertise, his deep commitment to service and his truly outstanding representation here for all of you. Let me summarize by saying Jim is a darned good Member of the Congress, and I hope and trust that you will keep working for him in the years ahead. That brings me to another incidental reason I am in North Carolina today. There is a rumor going around that North Carolina is planning a Presidential primary next Tuesday. I heard about it on the plane coming down here this morning. But let me give you a few reasons or a few pluses concerning the state of the Union, and I will talk about that in the remaining time. Things are really looking up for the United States of America, and we should be very proud of that fact. We should recognize, however, that we have been through some very bad times in America in recent years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscharlottereceptionhonoringrepresentativejamesgmartinnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks in Charlotte at a Reception Honoring Representative James G. Martin of North Carolina.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-charlotte-reception-honoring-representative-james-g-martin-north-carolina", "publication_date": "20-03-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 471, "text": "We ought to be frank and honest about it, but there is also no reason whatsoever for us to dwell on it. I think all of us should look to the future, and that future, as I see it, is filled with hope and expectation, promise and fulfillment. And I can say without hesitation or qualification, I am very, very proud to be an American, and I am proud of America. In the last 19 months, as we scan that period of time, really great progress has been made in a number of areas under the most difficult circumstances. Today, America is at peace. Today, there are no Americans committed in combat anyplace throughout the world, and I can assure you that I intend to keep it that way. The best way I know to maintain that is to have what I call peace through strength. And let me say firmly and strongly America's defenses are second to none, and they will continue to be second to none in the next 4 years. In addition to our military strength, America's economic strength is being steadily restored after the worst recession in 40 years. It is easy to get lost in a sea of statistics when we talk about economics. A simple way to look at it is to recall that 19 months ago, everything that was supposed to be going up was going down and vice versa. However, today we are headed in the right direction in every possible economic indicator. Thanks to some commonsense policies and the support of people in the Congress like Jim, at the beginning of this recess, and thanks to the determination and courage and ingenuity of the American people, we are working our way out of this recession, and doing it in the right way. We are on the road to a new prosperity in the United States, and I am not about to take any detours or roadblocks put in the way by a Congress that wants to fool around with our economy in a political and a partisan way. Unemployment is going down, prices are stabilizing, inflation has been cut in half in the last 19 months. In fact, the Labor Department announced just yesterday that consumer prices increased only one-tenth of 1 percent in the month of February, the smallest monthly increase in over 4 years, and that is progress by any standard. On an annual basis, that represents an inflation rate of a little more than 1 percent per year, and that is a whole lot better than the 12 percent that we were experiencing in 1973 and 1974.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscharlottereceptionhonoringrepresentativejamesgmartinnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks in Charlotte at a Reception Honoring Representative James G. Martin of North Carolina.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-charlotte-reception-honoring-representative-james-g-martin-north-carolina", "publication_date": "20-03-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 472, "text": "I will not try to mislead you and say that the news on the inflation front will always be this good in the months ahead. But this new announcement is powerful evidence that we are really getting inflation under control, and we are not going to let down under any circumstances. The rate of growth in Federal spending has been cut in half in the budget that I submitted for the new fiscal year. Charlie Jonas, as I indicated, served with me on the Committee on Appropriations, and we used to go into the budget in detail. He was on several subcommittees; I was on several others. But, he knows, as I know, that for the last 10 to 15 years the rate of growth in Federal spending has been between 10 and 11 percent, much too high. You cannot possibly sustain it, and it is unjustified otherwise. The budget that I submitted for the next fiscal year calls for a reduction in 50 percent of the rate of growth in Federal spending a rate of 5 to 5 percent. If we can get a handle on that rate of growth in this coming fiscal year and maintain that control in the months and years ahead, we can have a balanced budget, and we can have a tax reduction, a sizable tax reduction in 3 years. And that is what we want, and that is what we have to get. Let me speak of some other good economic news. The last report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics indicated that our total U.S. employment in the month of February was 86,300,000. It reached the all-time peak. The rate of unemployment was still too high, but we made substantial progress in that regard. But the main point is we have gone from the depths of a recession in March or April of last year, where we lost several million jobs, and we have regained every one of those jobs numerically. Our aim and objective, with sound policies, is to continue that progress, and we will. But one of the most important factors is and you here in this room represent that consumer confidence is up, and for good reason. Industrial production is up, housing starts are up, the gross national product is up, real earnings for the average American are also up. In short, just about everything is looking up for America this year. There is no reason whatsoever that we should change or alter our course, because we have been right.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscharlottereceptionhonoringrepresentativejamesgmartinnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks in Charlotte at a Reception Honoring Representative James G. Martin of North Carolina.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-charlotte-reception-honoring-representative-james-g-martin-north-carolina", "publication_date": "20-03-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 473, "text": "I want to thank the Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, for joining me, and I also want to thank Deputy Secretary of State Bob Zoellick. He has just briefed me on his trip to Abuja, where he has played a very important role in setting up a peace agreement between the Government of Sudan and a major rebel group in the Darfur region. Last week, we saw the beginnings of hope for the people of Darfur. The Government of Sudan and the largest rebel group signed an agreement and took a step toward peace. Many people worked hard for this achievement. I am particularly grateful for the leadership of President Obasanjo of Nigeria and President Sassou-Nguesso of Congo. Deputy Secretary Zoellick told me of their really fine work, and I had the honor of calling both of them to thank them over the phone the other day. We are still far away from our ultimate goal, which is the return of millions of displaced people to their homes so they can have a life without fear. But we can now see a way forward. Sudan is one of the most diverse nations in Africa and one of the most troubled countries in the world. A 22-year-old civil war between north and south took more than 2 million lives before a peace agreement was made that the United States helped to broker. About the same time, another conflict was raging in the west, and that is in Sudan's vast Darfur region. Darfur rebel groups had attacked Government outposts. To fight that rebellion, Sudan's regime armed and unleashed a horse-mounted militia called the Janjaweed, which targeted not only rebels but the tribes thought to be supporting them. The Janjaweed murdered men, and they raped women, and they beat children to death. They burned homes and farms and poisoned wells. They stole land to graze their own herds. Hundreds of villages were destroyed, leaving a burnt and barren landscape. About 200,000 people have died from conflict, famine, and disease. And more than 2 million were forced into camps inside and outside their country, unable to plant crops or rebuild their villages. I have called this massive violence an act of genocide, because no other word captures the extent of this tragedy. A cease-fire was declared in this conflict in April 2004, but it has been routinely violated by all sides. The Janjaweed continued to attack the camps and rape women who ventured outside the fences for food and firewood.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaceagreementsudan", "title": "Remarks on a Peace Agreement in Sudan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-peace-agreement-sudan", "publication_date": "08-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 474, "text": "The Government took no effective action to disarm the militias, and the rebels sometimes attacked food convoys and aid workers. An African Union force of about 7,200 from the region has done all it can to keep order, but they are patrolling an area nearly the size of Texas, and they have reached the limits of their capabilities. With the peace agreement signed on Friday, Darfur has a chance to begin anew. Sudan's Government has promised to disarm the Janjaweed by mid-October and punish all those who violate the cease-fire. The main rebel group has agreed to withdraw into specified areas. Its forces will eventually be disarmed as well, and some of its units will be integrated into the national army and police. The African Union will meet a week from today, urge its members to help implement this new agreement. We want civilians to return safely to their villages and rebuild their lives. That work has begun and completing it will require even greater effort by many nations. First, America and other nations must act to prevent a humanitarian emergency and then help rebuild that country. America is the leading provider of humanitarian aid, and this year alone, we account for more than 85 percent of the food distributed by the World Food Programme in Sudan. The World Food Programme has issued an appeal for funds necessary to feed 6 million people over the next several months. The United States has met our commitment, but other major donors have not come through. As a result, this month, the World Food Programme was forced to cut rations by half. So I proposed in the emergency supplemental before Congress to increase food aid to Sudan by another $225 million. I hope Congress will act swiftly on this true emergency. To get food to Darfur quickly, I have directed USAID to ship emergency food stockpiles. I have directed five ships and ordered them to be loaded with food and proceed immediately to Port Sudan. I have ordered the emergency purchase of another 40,000 metric tons of food for rapid shipment to Sudan. These actions will allow the World Food Programme to restore full food rations to the people of Darfur this summer. Americans who wish to contribute money to help deliver relief to the people of Darfur can find information about how to do so by going to the USAID web site at www.usaid.gov and clicking on the section marked Helping the Sudanese People. Moving forward, we cannot keep people healthy and fed without other countries standing up and doing their part as well.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaceagreementsudan", "title": "Remarks on a Peace Agreement in Sudan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-peace-agreement-sudan", "publication_date": "08-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 475, "text": "The European Union and nations like Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and Japan have taken leadership on other humanitarian issues, and the people of Darfur urgently need more of their help now. In addition, the Government of Sudan must allow all U.N. agencies to do their work without hindrance. They should remove the visa and travel restrictions that complicate relief efforts. And all sides must cease attacks on relief workers. And finally, the United States will be an active participant in the Dutch-led reconstruction and development conference. It will take place within the next couple of months, to help the people get back on their feet so they can live normal lives in Darfur. Second, America and other nations must work quickly to increase security on the ground in Darfur. In the short term, the African Union forces in Darfur need better capabilities. So America is working with our NATO allies to get those forces immediate assistance in the form of planning, logistics, intelligence support, and other help. And I urge members of the alliance to contribute to this effort. In the longer term, the African Union troops must be the core of a larger military force that is more mobile and more capable, which generates better intelligence and is given a clear mandate to protect the civilians from harm. So I am dispatching Secretary Rice to address the U.N. Security Council tomorrow. She is going to request a resolution that will accelerate the deployment of U.N. peacekeepers into Darfur. We are now working with the U.N. to identify countries that contribute those troops so the peacekeeping effort will be robust. I have called on President-I just called President Bashir of Sudan, both to commend him on his work for this agreement and to urge the Government to express clear support for a U.N. force. The vulnerable people of Darfur deserve more than sympathy; they deserve the active protection that U.N. peacekeepers can provide. In recent weeks, we have seen drastically different responses to the suffering in Darfur. In a recent audio tape, Usama bin Laden attacked American efforts in Sudan and urged his followers to kill international peacekeepers in Darfur. Once again, the terrorists are attempting to exploit the misery of fellow Muslims and encourage more death. Once again, America and other responsible nations are fighting misery and helping a desperate region come back to life. In late 2004 in Darfur, the Janjaweed attacked a village of a woman named Zahara.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspeaceagreementsudan", "title": "Remarks on a Peace Agreement in Sudan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-peace-agreement-sudan", "publication_date": "08-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 483, "text": "Let me begin by saying that the last conversation I had with David Cameron was before the--well, I guess it was not the last one, but a recent conversation was before the match between the United States and England at the World Cup.  And so I advised him that in America, we drink our beer cold. So he has to put this in the refrigerator before he drinks it, but I think he will find it outstanding. And I am happy to give that a shot, although I will not drink it warm. Now, I want to say that all of us in the United States deeply value the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom. And we have been very impressed with the leadership that David Cameron has shown thus far. He has, I think, taken a series of steps on some very tough issues and clearly is prepared to make difficult decisions on behalf of his vision for his country. We already, I think, have established a strong working relationship, as have our teams. And we are confident that that special relationship is only going to get stronger in the months and years to come. We had an excellent conversation, building on--off of the conversations that we have had at the G-8 about the world economy and the importance of our two countries focusing both on the issues of growth, but also on the issues of financial consolidation, that we have long-term debts that have to be dealt with and we have to address them. There are going to be differentiated responses between the two countries because of our different positions, but we are aiming at the same direction, which is long-term, sustainable growth that puts people to work. At the same time, we had a extensive discussion about Afghanistan and the alignment between our two countries in recognizing we have a serious threat to our safety and security that has to be addressed in this region; that we recognize the enormous sacrifices that both British troops and U.S. troops have been making for some time now, but we are convinced that we have the right strategy to provide the time and the space for the Afghan Government to build up capacity over the next several months and years. And this period that we are in right now is going to be critical both on the political front and on the military front, and there is going to be extremely close consultation between our two countries so that we can create a situation in which Afghanistan and Pakistan are able to maintain their effective security and those areas are not able to be used as launching pads for attacks against our people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithprimeministerdavidcamerontheunitedkingdomtoronto", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom in Toronto, Canada", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-prime-minister-david-cameron-the-united-kingdom-toronto", "publication_date": "26-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 484, "text": "We also discussed Iran, and I thanked David for his stalwart support of the United Nations Security Resolution 1929, the toughest sanctions that have been imposed on the Iranian Government through the United Nations Security Council. We now have to make sure that we follow up in terms of implementation, and that was a major discussion point. And the key conclusion that we take out of this last day of conversations, and I suspect this will continue through the evening and tomorrow, is that on foreign policy issues, the United States and the United Kingdom are not only aligned in theory but aligned in fact; that we see the world in a similar way; we continue to share the same concerns and also see the same strategic possibilities. And so I think this partnership is built on a rock-solid foundation and it is only going to get stronger in the years to come. Well, thank you very much for that, and thank you for what you said about the relationship between our two countries, which I believe is incredibly strong, but as you say, I think can get stronger in the years ahead. We have had some very good conversations at the G-8 and a very good meeting here today. I think particularly on the issue of Afghanistan, which is the number-one foreign policy and security policy priority for my Government, making progress this year, putting everything we have into getting it right this year, is vitally important. And we have had very good conversations on that. And as you said, Barack, on all the issues we discussed over the weekend so far--the Middle East peace process, Iran, how we take those forward, and the key relationships that we have in the Gulf and elsewhere--we have a very close alignment, and I think we can work together, and we want to support the work that is being done. On the economy, you rightly say we have a big deficit problem which we have to address. But of course we want to do it in a way that encourages growth, and that is why we are focusing on spending reductions rather than on big tax increases. And as we go into the G-20, I think we can explain that we are aiming at the same target, which is world growth and stability, but it means those countries that have big deficit problems like ours have to take action in order to keep that level of confidence in the economy, which is absolutely vital to growth, to make sure it is there.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithprimeministerdavidcamerontheunitedkingdomtoronto", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom in Toronto, Canada", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-prime-minister-david-cameron-the-united-kingdom-toronto", "publication_date": "26-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 485, "text": "And since I had just discovered that 3 days with pears I was all set for a joke about what should be for dessert and now, Charlie, you have already communicated. You dropped a name here of Margaret Thatcher, so maybe I can substitute something that is even better. In our economic summits, where we all meet around a table, seven trading partner nations, and so forth sometime back when the summit was in England, which meant that Margaret Thatcher was presiding, one of the seven at the table got a little out of line, I thought, and attacked her that she was not being properly democratic in conducting the meeting and so forth. I do not want to embarrass him, but he really sounded off. And when the meeting was over, I fell in step beside her, going down the corridor. And I said, Margaret, he had no right to talk to you like that. He was really out of line. Well, Nancy and I welcome you to the White House. Now that we have finished our luncheon, I'd like to make a few remarks-but do not worry, I will keep it short. I have been trying to follow a joke that I have known for years. It is a story about ancient Rome and how one day, on a weekend afternoon when the little group of prisoners were huddled down in the sand in the Colosseum and the hungry lions were turned loose on them and came charging, roaring at them in front of the crowd, one of them stood up, faced the lions and said a few quiet words. Well, the crowd was infuriated, and Caesar sent for the man; said, What did you say to them that made them act like that? He said, I just told them that after they ate, there'd be speeches. Well, I want to thank all of you Charlie Wick, and the United States Information Agency for initiating this international council. I want to thank each of you for coming here and giving members of our administration the opportunity to speak to you directly. And if I may, I'd like to devote my own time to a brief discussion of economics. This month, October 1987, the American economic expansion that began in the fourth quarter of 1982 enters its 59th consecutive month. Fifty-nine months that makes this the longest peacetime expansion in the postwar era. We have seen the creation of more than 13 1/2 million new jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseluncheonformembersthevolunteerinternationalcounciltheunited", "title": "Remarks at a White House Luncheon for Members of the Volunteer International Council of the United States Information Agency", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-luncheon-for-members-the-volunteer-international-council-the-united", "publication_date": "09-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 486, "text": "Indeed, from the fourth quarter of 1982 through the end of 1986, U.S. gross private domestic investment rose more than 54 percent in real terms. New business incorporations have increased by about one-third. And all around us we see a riot of new technology. Virtually all groups of Americans have benefited from the expansion, but black Americans have made especially striking gains, as black employment has gone up twice as fast as that of whites. the best 5 economic years in black history. Well, now, in a moment I'd like to turn to the connection between this American expansion and the global economy. But first, it is important to understand the causes of America's success. Indeed, it is important to understand what have not been the causes of our success. For example, some have alleged that this expansion has been fueled exclusively by some sort of binge of consumer spending. From the fourth quarter of 1982 through the end of 1986, total outlays on personal consumption in the United States rose only about 19 percent far less than the rise in investment that I just quoted. Perhaps the most widespread misconception holds that American growth has been impelled primarily by the Federal budget deficits. Yes, the deficits are large, and our administration has been working to reduce them. And it now appears that the Federal deficits are on a downward path. The deficit for the fiscal year just ended, as of October 1st, will be 30-percent less than it was in 1986, the previous year. But throughout this expansion indeed, throughout much of the eighties government debt and deficit ratios in the United States have been lower than or equal to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development average. Government debt and deficit ratios have been, and remain, lower than the OECD average. The United States has become a better place to do business. Our administration cut regulations, supported a sound monetary policy, held back the growth of government spending, and, perhaps most important of all, cut tax rates. And as we did so, the return on investment went up. And overall, the American marketplace became freer, more energetic, more open to innovation and to the future itself. Now, for me personally, I suppose the most gratifying aspect of all of this is the effect on our young people. Opportunities summon initiatives Initiatives develop character and a sense of responsibility, a feeling of optimism. The future looks more open and promising to young people than it did before, for the simple reason that it is more open and promising.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseluncheonformembersthevolunteerinternationalcounciltheunited", "title": "Remarks at a White House Luncheon for Members of the Volunteer International Council of the United States Information Agency", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-luncheon-for-members-the-volunteer-international-council-the-united", "publication_date": "09-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 487, "text": "Well, moving from the United States to the global economy, we understand that every aspect of the American experience cannot be directly transferred to other nations and regions. Other geographics, other cultures, other patterns of thought all these must be respected. Indeed, all these contribute to a diversity in the world that we Americans believe should be cherished, not undermined. Yet we believe that certain fundamental elements of our experience are valid for the rest of the world the elements of democracy and economic freedom. Indeed, I believe that the world of the future can be just that a world of liberty, a world in which human rights are respected in the political and economic spheres alike. And I would submit that during these past 6 1/2 years of our administration, this world of the future has already begun to take shape. Economic growth along the Pacific rim has been little short of incredible. And more recently, a second victory for democracy in South Korea, where a free-market economy is already established and flourishing. In Latin America, nation after nation has turned to democracy, nine nations in all becoming democracies since 1979. Latin America's extraordinary effort to create a democratic order is the most stunning and moving political fact of recent years. Low-tax, high-growth policies have spread throughout the Third World, with countries from Botswana to Egypt to Thailand cutting their tax rates. Even China is experimenting with the granting of wider economic freedoms. Here in North America, recent developments hold particular hope for the future. This week the Institutional Revolutionary Party in Mexico chose Carlos Salinas, a forward-looking economist, as its next candidate for President. And the United States and Canada took the first important steps toward an historic free trade agreement, an agreement that could make our two nations the largest free trade area in the world as an example for all the globe. As I said, the global economy of increasing freedom and economic growth is already coming, it is already being built. The Communist nations know this as well as we do. They must either join the new world system or they will become obsolete. It is a decision they must make for themselves. For our part, we can only wait and hope. In the meantime, we can keep on building-building, here in the United States upon our historic, 59-month expansion; building, in each of your countries, upon much that you have already accomplished. Freedom freedom, both political and economic, represents the fundamental condition for genuine peace and economic growth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseluncheonformembersthevolunteerinternationalcounciltheunited", "title": "Remarks at a White House Luncheon for Members of the Volunteer International Council of the United States Information Agency", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-luncheon-for-members-the-volunteer-international-council-the-united", "publication_date": "09-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 488, "text": "I know I have come to the end of the remarks that I wanted to give to you here, but you are epitomizing something that has long been a creed of mine. And that is that we are only in trouble when we are talking about each other, instead of talking to each other. And that has come together in this room. It does not happen too many places in the world, or too often. But all of those of you, Charlie, and all of you who've had a part in this, I think, can be very proud of this great accomplishment. I just want to add two more things. When I spoke about us lifting regulations and so forth to help the economy and all I have always believed that there is nothing government can do as well, other than a certain few things like national security, as the private sector can do if government gets out of its way and sets it free to do it. I remember one of my first experiences with government was as an adjutant for an ENTITY Air Corps base in World War II. There was a warehouse filled with files, and the files containing documents and records and so forth but which upon going at them you recognized that they were of no historical value. And they were totally useless, their time had passed them by. So, we started a message in the usual military style of sending a message, endorsing it up to the next in command, asking permission to destroy those papers so we could make use of the files for current documents. And then the next echelon they endorsed it up and up and up, and finally to the top command. And then back down through the channel it came, and the answer was yes. We could destroy those papers providing we made copies of each and every one. The other one is when I was mentioning taxes. I should make this speech to the Congress- about some who just seem to be dying, they think that our deficit and everything is caused by our tax cuts. Just between you and me and I wish they'd find it out ever since we started cutting the taxes in our administration, the tax revenues for the government have gone steadily up. Once you gave people an incentive to earn more money by saying that you were not going to take half or more of it away from them, they went out and earned more money. And, so, we are going to try to make them understand that, and that would be a help in cutting our deficit, too.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseluncheonformembersthevolunteerinternationalcounciltheunited", "title": "Remarks at a White House Luncheon for Members of the Volunteer International Council of the United States Information Agency", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-luncheon-for-members-the-volunteer-international-council-the-united", "publication_date": "09-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 494, "text": "It is a little surprising that she got this award because you can tell she is a little shy--and lacks enthusiasm. And yet somehow, she seems to be performing pretty well in the classroom. So for 7 years, I have stood in the White House with America's finest public servants and private-sector innovators and our best advocates and our best athletes and our best artists, and I have to tell you there are few moments that make me prouder than this event when I stand alongside our Nation's best educators. Every year on this day, we say publicly as a country what we should be eager to say every day of the year, and that is, Thank you. That is what this event is about. That is why it is one of my favorites. It is a good day with all of you guys here in Washington to say thank you for the extraordinary work that teachers do all across the country. It is also, I guess, a pretty good day for substitute teachers because we have got a lot of folks--we got a lot of folks playing hooky today. Now, among our country's best educators happens to be our Secretary of Education, Dr. John King, Jr. John is someone who, like Jahana, found refuge in school as a youngster. And he found role models in the classroom at a time when he needed them most. And that experience instilled in him the empathy that makes him such a powerful voice for students and for teachers and for principals and superintendents and educators all across the country. I also want to acknowledge Jahana's Senator from Connecticut, Chris Murphy. He is proud of you too. I want to welcome her fellow Teachers of the Year from all 50 States, DC, and our Territories. And we want to welcome the hundreds of distinguished educators from all across the country that joined us this afternoon. I figured this is the last time I was going to do this, so I wanted to invite as many of you as possible, because you are people who are inspiring at every grade level, who are opening minds to math and music; to basic literacy, but also classic literature; to social studies and science, Spanish and special education. In their daily lives, the men and women who teach our children fulfill the promise of a nation that is always looking forward, that believes each generation has a responsibility to help the next in building this great country of ours and making the world a better place.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2016nationalteachertheyearandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2016 National Teacher of the Year and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2016-national-teacher-the-year-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "03-05-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 495, "text": "President Kennedy said, Our progress as a nation can be no swifter than our progress in education. Now, the school where Jahana teaches happens to bear President Kennedy's name. And it is fitting then that the perspective, the approach that she brings to the classroom suits the philosophy that he articulated. It does not matter how bright a student is or where they rank in a class or what colleges they have been accepted to if they do nothing with their gift to improve the human condition. And Jahana cares about the example she sets as much as the exams that she scores. You have got to love what you do, and she loves what she does. And what is remarkable about Jahana's natural talent in the classroom is that when she was growing up in Waterbury, Connecticut, being a teacher was the furthest thing from her mind. In fact, there were times where she did not even want to be a student. No one in Jahana's family had gone to college. No one at home particularly encouraged education. She lived in a community full of poverty and violence, high crime and low expectations. And drugs were more accessible than degrees. As a teenager, Jahana became pregnant and wanted to drop out of school. But her teachers saw something. They saw something in her. And they gave her an even greater challenge, and that was to dream bigger and to imagine a better life. And they made her believe she was college material and that she had the special gift to improve not only her own condition, but those around her. And today, Jahana's principal at Kennedy High says she gets through to her students precisely because she remembers what it is like to be one of them. And she does not forget that everyone in her class brings their own different and sometimes difficult circumstances. And she meets them where they are. And she sees a grace in them, and she sees a possibility in them. And because she sees it, they start seeing it. And that is what makes Jahana more than a teacher; she is a counselor and a confidant. That is how a woman who became a teenage mom is now a mentor to high schoolers in the same city where she grew up. And meanwhile, outside of the classroom, Jahana has been a leader in the afterschool theater program. She put together a Teen Idol singing show. She won the school's Dancing With the Stars competition. I wish I had met you before I started tangoing in Argentina.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2016nationalteachertheyearandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2016 National Teacher of the Year and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2016-national-teacher-the-year-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "03-05-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 496, "text": "Jahana inspires her students to give back. I think she understands that actually sometimes the less you have, the more valuable it is to see yourself giving, because that shows you the power and the influence that you can bring to bear on the world around you. One year, she had been assigned to a group that seemed unmotivated, so she found out what was distracting them. Seven students in one class had recently lost a parent to cancer. So she organized a Relay for Life team through the American Cancer Society, and it became an annual event. Last year, when Jahana went online to register her team, she noticed not 1, not 2, but 14 teams led by former students had already signed up. She organized her students to walk for autism, to feed the homeless, to donate clothes, to clean neighborhoods, and even to register voters. And so it takes a unique leader to get students who do not have a lot to give of themselves. But because Jahana understood those kids, she knew not to set low expectations, but to set high ones and to say to them, you can make a difference. And that is the kind of leader our Teacher of the Year is. She knows that if students learn their worth, then the class rank and the college acceptances and the exam scores will follow. Now, if there is one thing Jahana wishes she had in school, it was more teachers who looked like her, as she already mentioned. And so she wrote and won a State grant to inspire more students to become teachers, but especially to recruit more Black and Latino teachers in her district. And not one of the teachers standing behind me or in front of our children's classrooms chose this profession because they were promised a big payday or a short workday. That I believe. But the main reason teachers do what they do is because they love kids. They love our kids. And yes, we should pay teachers more because what they do is invaluable and essential. And the teachers here, though, will tell you that what would be most helpful, in addition to a little financial relief, would be people understanding how important the work you do is and to appreciate it and not take it for granted.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2016nationalteachertheyearandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2016 National Teacher of the Year and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2016-national-teacher-the-year-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "03-05-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 497, "text": "And so part of the reason this event is so important is for us to be able to send a message to future generations of teachers, to talented young people all across the country to understand this is a dream job; that this is an area where you will have more influence potentially than any other profession that you go into. This is a profession where you have the potential to make more of a difference than just about anything you can go into. So, over the past 7 years, we have looked at every element of our education system with an eye towards boosting the teaching profession. And thanks to our educators and the opinions you have voiced and the leadership that you have shown, we have come a long way since we came into office. One of the first things we did, in the middle of the worst economic crisis in generations, when States and cities were slashing budgets, was to keep more than 300,000 educators in our kids' classrooms. That was part of the Recovery Act. We have taken the first steps towards making sure every young person in America gets the best start possible. And keep in mind that in 2009, when I started here, only 38 States had their own preschool programs. Today, all but four have. We have expanded Head Start programs for tens of thousands of kids who need it. We made turning around America's low-performing schools a national priority. The year before I took office, a quarter of our high school students did not graduate on time. More than a million did not finish high school at all. We are transforming hundreds of America's lowest performing schools. We are also bringing new technology and digital tools to our classrooms to modernize and personalize learning. Three years ago, less than a third of all school districts could access high-speed Internet, and a lot of low-income communities were left behind. Today, 20 million more students and most of our school districts have fast broadband and wireless in the classroom. 99 percent of our students will have high-speed Internet. We are making remarkable progress towards my pledge to train 100,000 STEM teachers by 2021 thanks to the great work of 100K in 10, which, with new commitments to prepare 70,000 more teachers, I want to just announce today, this is a goal that we are going to achieve on time. We are on our way. And we unleashed a Race to the Top, convincing every State to raise its standards so students are prepared for success in college and for future careers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2016nationalteachertheyearandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2016 National Teacher of the Year and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2016-national-teacher-the-year-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "03-05-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 498, "text": "And we listened to parents who wanted subjects like computer science taught in our schools. And we listened to teachers who have shown why cookie-cutter solutions do not always work. We are empowering States and communities to set their own standards for progress with accountability. And because nobody thinks our students need to spend more time filling in bubbles on standardized tests, we are starting to give educators like those behind me the flexibility to spend more time teaching creatively than they are spending teaching to a test. You'd know it better than I do. In too many States, we are underfunding public education. And it is the job of State legislators and of Governors to recognize that the well-being of their State and their communities and their families and their kids requires them to step up. In too many school districts, we still have schools that, despite great efforts by a lot of great teachers, are still not getting our kids prepared the way they need to be prepared. And we have got to be willing to be honest when something is not working and say, all right, let us try something different. But the reason I think-I want to bring this up. This was not in my prepared remarks--but I think it is important. You have got some folks who say resources and money do not make a difference, and the problem is all the teachers' unions. And they want to break up the schools, and they think vouchers are all the answer, or some other approach. And then, on the other side, you have got folks who just know that argument is wrong, but too often it sounds like it is just a defense of the status quo. And the fact of the matter is, is that we do have to do better in too many of our schools. We need more teachers like this in all of you. We do have to have accountability in the classroom. That does not mean forcing you to teach to the test, but we have got to come up with measures that are meaningful so that if somebody does not have the skills that Jahana or these other teachers have, that they can start developing it and we know what to look for. We have got to make sure that we are setting our sights high. And although I am very proud of the work that we have done, I know we are not there yet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2016nationalteachertheyearandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2016 National Teacher of the Year and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2016-national-teacher-the-year-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "03-05-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 499, "text": "And we may have replaced No Child Left Behind, which was a relief for a lot of folks, but the absence of something that was not working as well as it should is not the presence of the kind of work that remains to be done. So, in our country, it is a little harder than in some other countries, because we have got diverse populations, and we have got folks coming from different backgrounds and starting off in tougher circumstances. But our Teacher of the Year here stands as proof that you cannot set expectations high enough for our kids. We just have to find it. We have to unleash it. We have to nurture it. We have to support it. We have to love them. And then, we have to tell them precisely because we love you, you are going to work harder--and you are going to do better. And we are going to stay on you. That is what we have to do. And we cannot just leave it to the teachers, because if our notion is we drop off our kids and then the teacher is doing everything, and then our job is done, it is not going to work. So this is why my administration launched Teach To Lead, to give teachers a greater voice in the policies that affect them every day. And I am going to close by just talking about a letter I received at the beginning of this school year from a teacher in Central Virginia named Danny Abell There is a reason why he got a good spot--because he knew I was going to talk about him. So Danny asked his students if any of them wanted to be a teacher when they grew up. And no one raised their hands. And that worried him. So he wrote me to ask what I'd say if one of my daughters told me she wanted to become a teacher. And I mean this-this is the God's honest truth-if Sasha or Malia wanted to be teachers, I will tell them, I could not be prouder of what you have done. And I'd tell them to be the kind of teachers who do not just show her students how to get the correct answer, but how to be curious about the world and how to care for the people around her and how to analyze facts and evidence and how to tell stories, and how to believe in their ability to shape their own destiny.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2016nationalteachertheyearandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2016 National Teacher of the Year and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2016-national-teacher-the-year-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "03-05-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 517, "text": "Well, I cannot tell you how highly pleased I am to see this turnout at this time of day. You know, I am an early riser myself, but a lot of people are not . I have been up since a quarter to six, looking over this trail that the Union Pacific follows up here, and I have been highly intrigued at what I saw. Coming up that valley, I saw a mare mothering a mule colt. And I saw sheep on one side and a herd of cattle on the other, and I can remember the day when they could not get that close together. You see, my grandfather on one side was strong on cattle and the grandfather on the other side was strong on sheep, and they did not get along very well; but through my mother and father, and diplomacy of the third generation, we see that they can live together very creditably. I also saw this mountain scenery which we do not have in Missouri. We have some hills down in the south part of the State which they call mountains, which is supposed to be the oldest formation in the United States, but when you get down there, there are not any mountains. There are hills up one side and down the other, although the elevation goes up as high as 3,000 feet. I think you are a little higher here than that. I have been looking over a report that the Interior Department has sent to me sent it to the train just as I was about to leave. It is really a sample of the reports that the President is supposed to read and study all the time. You know, I fool them I get up early in the morning and I read them! I think you would be interested in seeing that report. And I have a report like that on the Central Valley of California, on the Colorado River, on the Missouri River, and on the Ohio River, and on all the coast around the United States. And I am supposed to know all about them. Well, I try and get as familiar with them as I possibly can, and I fool them sometimes by being acquainted with things that they think I do not take time to read. This is a map of Idaho and the Snake River Basin, in which it shows the projects that are already in effect and those that ought to be in effect, and those that are partly in effect. Now, from my viewpoint, I have always tried to use as much of the budget as could be distributed for that purpose, for the development of these reclamation and power projects.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksidaho", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-idaho", "publication_date": "07-06-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 518, "text": "But we have some people in these United States who follow the lead of Daniel Webster who did not think the West was any good, who did not think we should do anything with it. We also have some people in the United States who would like to restore the Insull era, when they put the welfare of the few promoters above the welfare of the people. We are faced with it in this Congress. At the last meeting of this Congress they cut the budget for the development of these reclamation and power projects. They are trying to do the same thing right now, and I hope that we may be able to save some of the funds that are necessary for the developments set out in this Columbia River Basin Report. Had we had some of those projects which have been pending for several years, we might to some extent have alleviated the flood in the Columbia River which caused so much damage. I am going to go out to look that situation over. I have looked over the Missouri River Basin. In fact, I am familiar with it from its source to its mouth. And I am somewhat familiar with this situation. I have been to the Columbia River almost from its mouth to the borderline of British Columbia. I was out here when they were building plants which are dependent on the Grand Coulee Dam and the Bonneville Dam. Had we not had that power source, it would have been almost impossible to win this war. I want to see this development out here and in every other section of the country carried out for the welfare of the people as a whole, and not for a few who want to exploit the people. I am coming out here so you can look at me and hear what I have to say, and then make up your own mind as to whether you believe some of the things that have been said about your President. I have been in politics a long time, and it makes no difference what they say about you, if it is not so. If they can prove it on you, you are in a bad fix indeed. They have never been able to prove it on me.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksidaho", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-idaho", "publication_date": "07-06-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 519, "text": "I have to bear so much bad news, I must say that is the only time I have ever been introduced as the bearer of good news. We are glad to see all of you here. We are here to announce some new help for California as you work to come out of the consequences of the earthquake. But first I want to talk about the announcement made just this morning at the Pentagon to which the Vice President referred. This morning we announced the latest round of awards in our technology reinvestment project, which helps companies and workers in defense industries to develop technologies to meet our Nation's commercial and military needs. This is the fourth round of TRP awards we have announced since October. So far, $605 million in competitive Federal grants awarded on merit have gone to firms and communities through this innovative program. It is a cornerstone of our reinvestment and conversion initiative, recognizing that those who worked so hard to win the cold war should not be unduly burdened by cutbacks in military expenditures and that all the work they have done, the expertise they have developed, the barriers that they have broken, should be turned to the advantage of America as we move into the 21st century. The TRP is of special interest to the people of California because California has been on the leading edge of military technology. And converting this know-how for dual use and commercial applications will help our country move into the next century as the economic leader of the world, using things that relate from biomedical and environmental technologies to advanced transportation and communications systems, all rooted originally in our investments in national defense. The projects which have been funded are exciting; they are futuristic; they are farsighted; they have potentially enormous beneficial impact to all the American people. I cannot tell you about all of them-we awarded 50 just today-but let me just mention a couple. One involves the Bay Area Rapid Transit System and Hughes Aircraft. Together they will develop an advanced automated train control system that will identify the precise location of every train, even those in tunnels. That will allow trains to operate at closer distances to each other, and that means the existing infrastructure can double its rider capacity. Another project will establish a technology center in Cerritos, California, to transfer leading-edge composites manufacturing technology to 16,000 small defense and commercial firms just in the Los Angeles area.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthetechnologyreinvestmentprojectandearthquakereliefandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks on the Technology Reinvestment Project and Earthquake Relief and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-technology-reinvestment-project-and-earthquake-relief-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "23-02-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 520, "text": "The University of California at San Diego will work with Alcoa Electronic Packaging and Hewlett Packard to offer displaced defense engineers a 2-year master's program in world-class manufacturing engineering. This will emphasize foreign language training and include an internship in international manufacturing companies. The aim, of course, is to help these folks build on their old skills with new learning to keep them vital and employed and to keep our country competitive in the global marketplace, to provide economic opportunity and shore up military strength, and to ensure that the people who won the cold war will not be left out in the cold. That is what this TRP, the technology reinvestment project, is all about. I will say that on the last round of grants, I think California won-again, I will say, on a purely competitive basis-almost 40 percent of the total dollars. And when you consider the fact that when we started this, the State of California, with 12 percent of the country's population, had over 21 percent of the Nations's military expenditures and has had almost 40 percent of the base closings, the last two rounds of base closings, and over 40 percent of the last round of base closings, it is heartening that in the race for the technologies of the future and, therefore, the jobs of the future, that the whole conversion effort is obviously beginning to work in the way that it ought to work. Let me now say a few words about our continuing efforts to deal with the consequences of the earthquake. In the 5 weeks since the Northridge earthquake, our administration has worked closely with State and local officials, as all of you know, to try to help families, businesses, and communities. We are working to get the whole region back on its feet again. All of you know what the Vice President has already said, that the FEMA Director, James Lee Witt, Secretary Cisneros, Secretary Pena, Mr. Panetta, and many, many others have worked tirelessly to try to deal with the problems that were generated by the earthquake. Immediately after the earthquake, I extended the period for which Federal Government's paid the entire cost of FEMA disaster assistance and increased from 75 to 90 percent the share paid by the Federal Government for FEMA public assistance programs. Now, today we are announcing some loan guarantees which will help to meet the remaining share owed by the State of California.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthetechnologyreinvestmentprojectandearthquakereliefandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks on the Technology Reinvestment Project and Earthquake Relief and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-technology-reinvestment-project-and-earthquake-relief-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "23-02-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 521, "text": "Congress has appropriated new funds for FEMA, for the Small Business Administration, for the Departments of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Education, and Veterans Affairs to rebuild these homes and businesses, to house the homeless, to repair the highways and bridges, to restore the damaged schools and other facilities. I do want to say a word of thanks to Secretary Pena for trying to accelerate the construction process. We stood on one of those totally broken sections of highway, and they said it was going to take a year to fix. I know how mad the drivers get at me when we stop traffic at one intersection for 2 minutes here. I multiplied 2 minutes times whatever the number is to get to one year, and it seemed to me that we ought to try to make the contracts go faster. I thank you for that. Recently, your Governor, Speaker Brown, the Senate president pro tem Bill Lockyer, Mayor Riordan, and other officials have asked if there was any way we could lend California the money they believe is needed to pay the State and local share of the FEMA assistance costs. Today I am asking Secretary Cisneros to offer loan guarantees totaling more than $500 million to jurisdictions affected by the earthquake, including the cities of Los Angeles and Santa Monica, Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, and other towns and communities which suffered damages. This loan guarantee authority we are extending to local governments will enable them to obtain loans from private lenders at below-market rates that will take some of the bite out of the cost of recovery. The assistance will be provided under HUD's Community Development Block Grant Section 108 loan guarantee program. I have asked Secretary Cisneros to work with the local governments to work out repayment terms that meet the needs of local communities. The Secretary is also committed to providing technical assistance in preparing the applications and to expedite the review process. This will ensure that the flow of assistance to those in need in southern California will continue without interruption. I have asked the Federal agencies whenever possible to use their discretionary authorities to waive rules and regulations to expedite the delivery of further assistance. This step today builds on these efforts. It reflects a commitment that our administration has made to the people of California, a commitment to do all that we can to help your people work their way out of this disaster, day-in and day-out, until all the work is done.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthetechnologyreinvestmentprojectandearthquakereliefandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks on the Technology Reinvestment Project and Earthquake Relief and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-technology-reinvestment-project-and-earthquake-relief-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "23-02-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 522, "text": "In recent years, the citizens of southern California, in particular, have endured multiple disasters, from riots to fires and mudslides and now the earthquake. That is what people around here call a character-building experience. I just want you to know that I am committed to ensuring that our Government continues to meet those obligations that we have to give you the opportunity to make a full comeback in the face of this latest setback. Let me just say one other thing, if I might. Even though this is a time of renewal and reconstruction for the people of Los Angeles and California, it is also a day of sadness for many people in that area and for many of the rest of us who believe in the rule of law and appreciate those who enforce it. Yesterday, as all of you know, a rookie policewoman named Christy Lynne Hamilton was shot and killed in the line of duty less than one week after she became a commissioned police officer. A teenager with a semi-automatic weapon hardly gave her a chance to emerge from her patrol car before she was shot down. She received her diploma, as I said, just 5 days ago. At the academy, she was honored by her classmates as being the most inspirational officer candidate. And now her city has lost a policewoman who could have made a difference to people on her beat. Her force has lost its ninth officer this year. Her children have lost a mother. We have pending before the Congress an opportunity to pass crime legislation that is both tough and smart, that would put another 100,000 police officers on the street, a proposal of real value for the cities of California, and at the same time, ban the kinds of semi-automatic weapons that are used for killing people like Cristy Hamilton and which have no justification for sporting or hunting purposes. I hope that we can make this legislation law and that we can do it soon. Many of you in this room have worked for a long time on these issues. Senator Feinstein, in particular, got the semi-automatic weapons ban into the Senate crime bill, and we all thank you for that. All I can tell you is that we are here primarily to celebrate our coming together to overcome the destructive impacts of an act of God.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthetechnologyreinvestmentprojectandearthquakereliefandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks on the Technology Reinvestment Project and Earthquake Relief and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-technology-reinvestment-project-and-earthquake-relief-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "23-02-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 540, "text": "I am thrilled to be back in the great State of Minnesota, with truly some of the most incredible people anywhere on Earth. You know that. And you know, I hate to bring this up--but we came this close to winning the State of Minnesota. And in 2 years, it is going to be really easy, I think. It is been many, many decades since a Republican did that, and I thought I was going to do it. I needed one more visit, one more speech. No, we are very proud of Minnesota. Let me also say congratulations to the Bulldogs on winning the NCAA Championship hockey tournament. And how many are going to the NHL? They are going to do it. So we are honored to be joined tonight by many wonderful Republican leaders, including our incredible House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy. He sends a lot of money this way, I want to tell you. I also want to thank and maybe just ask him to come up-we have all night long, right? Do we have time? You know, there-you know, the whole thing going up the trees and down the trees. Tom Emmer, Congressman, loves this State. I also want to thank Lieutenant Governor Michelle Fischbach for being here. It is too much of a deal. Also, a friend of mine and a man who is been incredible and a great supporter, Minnesota Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka. And finally, the person we are all here to support tonight, somebody who is very special-by the way, loves ice hockey--real ice hockey family. In fact, his brother, you know, the coach of the winning women's team in the Olympics. I will tell you, is this a pretty good sendoff for Pete? He was not supposed to do this, but let us hear him. And as you alluded to, the home of college hockey's National Champions, the University of Minnesota Duluth Bulldogs. I am Pete Stauber, and I am running in Minnesota's Eighth Congressional District because, like President Trump, I love this country. I love our freedoms. And I love our Constitution. President, before your election, you made a promise to visit Minnesota. And you promised more jobs, fewer regulations, and a better economy for everyone. Now, jobs are up, unemployment numbers are at a historic low, small businesses and manufacturers are surging, and optimism is at an alltime high.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 541, "text": "My blue-collar, commonsense conservative message is resonating throughout the 8th District. President, these people support you. And, Mr. President, these are the same people that are going to send me to Washington so together we can unleash the economic engine in Northern Minnesota. So I did not know he was going to do that, and then he takes out a speech and reads it. He is a great guy, and he loves you, and he loves this country. Remember, I used to say in a little jest, but I really meant it, We are going to win so much. It is what we are doing. President, please, we are winning too much. The people of Minnesota cannot stand winning so much. Please, can we take it easy? So we have created 3.4 million new jobs since election day-3.4. And I have said before, if I would have said that to you during the campaign, those very dishonest people back there, the fake news-- Very dishonest. And we have some people, too, doing that. For instance, I just got back, as you know, from Singapore, where I met Kim Jong Un. And we had a great meeting, great chemistry. They did not want us too. But they-you know, it is like nice to do that. And very interestingly, at first everybody was amazed-amazed that we had the meeting. They could not believe it the first 24 hours. They said, I cannot believe it. You remember that, a while ago? What is the big deal with the meeting? In other words, their bosses said, You cannot say that. So we had a meeting. The President gave away so much. He met with them. What am I supposed to do? Now, sentence one says, a total denuclearization of North Korea. That is what it says. We got back our hostages. And I did not pay $1.8 billion to get back our hostages. We got back our great fallen heroes, the remains. In fact, today already 200 have been sent back. They stopped shooting missiles over Japan. They stopped all nuclear testing. They stopped nuclear research. They stopped everything that you'd want them to stop. And they blew up sites where they test and do the testing. And Kim Jong Un will turn down-and I will tell-he will turn-Chairman Kim will turn that country into a great, successful country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 542, "text": "A year and a half ago, nobody thought that was possible. In fact, before I was elected, everybody assumed we were going to war. In Seoul, you have 28 million people living 30 miles off the border. They do not even need nuclear weapons for that. They have thousands of cannons aiming right on top of Seoul. You could have lost millions and millions of people. But I got along with Kim Jong Un. And these people-you remember, I said, I cannot believe it- He is given away so much. You know what I gave away? But right now you are so safe, and such a great event took place. And all over Asia, they are celebrating the great achievement that we made because you were the ones that put me here. We made-that we made-all over Asia. Everybody knows what a great achievement this is not only for us, but for North Korea, for South Korea, for Japan, for China, for everybody. And I have to say, you know, you have been reading where I have been putting very large tariffs on China. We hit the $250 billion mark. But I want to say, and we have to do that because it has to be balanced, it has to be fair. China and President Xi has really helped us a lot at the border of North Korea. Really helped us a lot, and he is a friend of mine. He is a friend of mine. So you should be very proud of yourselves for what took place, because that was very close to war for many years. And now we can have something where everybody is going to live in peace for a long period of time. So unemployment numbers are among the best in the history of our country. African American unemployment is at its lowest level in the history of our country. Hispanic American unemployment has reached its lowest level ever recorded-the history of our country. And remember I'd go into big stadiums like this that were packed? And by the way, you are very good at real estate. Did you see the thousands and thousands of people outside? That will never be reported by the fake news. But the thousands of people that could not get in. And it would be great if the cameras could take a shot of the arena. So usually, they do not do it. Although honestly, when you have many thousands of people like we have tonight-you know, I was at an event 3 weeks ago where a person from the New York Times said, There was only a thousand people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 543, "text": "I did not even have to do it. And they wrote a slight correction. They were off by many thousands of people. It is fake news, I am telling you. But usually, they do not show the arena. They just show my face. So people would say, Did you have many people there? They have only showed your face. And we all have ego, but I do not want to show my face. I want to show the crowds. Unemployment among women has reached the lowest level, as of today, in 65 years. And most importantly of all, America is respected again. We are fighting to protect American iron, aluminum, and steel and to protect our incredible and very brave miners. But I will tell you, to keep this incredible momentum, I think maybe the most successful that the country has ever had. I think we are now at the most successful level that the country has ever seen. And let me just tell you, because I hear a couple of the fakers, the other day, said, Well, I think it is Obama's economy. They want to put on more regulations. They want to take back your tax cuts, which are massive. They want to take them back, and they want to raise the hell out of your taxes. So we need more Republicans. We have got to get out there in the midterm. We have got to get more Republicans. A vote for a Democrat for Congress is really a vote for Nancy Pelosi and her radical agenda. Democrats want to raise your taxes; increase your regulations; shut down American energy; take over American health care, which has been a disaster with Obamacare; and ship away American jobs. And that is what they will do. If anything bad happens to this country, it will be a disaster for all of you. Make America Great Again. And that is exactly what we are doing. And you know what our new phrase is in 2 years. So the Democrats want open borders. Let them come in from the Middle East; let them come in from all over the place. And by the way, today I signed an Executive order. We are going to keep families together, but the border is going to be just as tough as it is been. Democrats do not care about the impact of uncontrolled migration on your communities, your schools, your hospitals, your jobs, or your safety. Democrats put illegal immigrants before they put American citizens. Illegal immigration costs our country hundreds of billions of dollars.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 544, "text": "So imagine if we could spend that money to help bring opportunity to our inner cities and our rural communities and our roads and our highways and our schools. So we have already started the wall. We got $1.6 billion. They want to do anything they can to obstruct and to make sure it does not happen. Oh, we have a single protestor. So we have a single protestor. He is going home to his mom. And tomorrow the fake news will say tomorrow, Massive protests at the Trump rally. So we are going to make it great for Americans. And we are going to take care of people. And we do want people coming across our border, going through our ports of entry, but we want people to come in through merit, not just through luck or happenstance. We want them to come in through merit. And we need people, because we have so many companies now-and you know very well in Minnesota what is happening. They just gave me a runthrough. What is happening in Minnesota is incredible. But we have so many companies moving back into our country. We need people to help, but we want them to come in through the merit system, not a system where we get MS-13 and everybody else that other countries do not want. And the Democrats' open border policies have also allowed MS-13 to break into our country and drugs to pour into our streets. And we are stopping it. We have taken out of our country-and actually-can you believe I have to say this-we have liberated towns. Like it was captured by a foreign country. We have liberated towns out in Long Island. We have taken them out of our country by the thousands. And these countries that send them back, we are putting in legislation-we are not giving them anymore aid. When they send people up. They are sending-you remember those words? They are sending-well, let me tell you, they are sending-and they are not sending their finest. That I can tell you. And what we are doing-what we are doing-we give hundreds of millions of dollars of aid to countries. We have a horrible deal, as an example, with NAFTA and Mexico. They make over a hundred billion dollars on that horrible trade deal where factories were emptied. So many bad things have happened, and we are going to make it a part of NAFTA.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 545, "text": "Because you have to mark up thousands of miles coming through Mexico-you come up thousands of miles coming through Mexico, and we are going to stop it. Because he needs a haircut more than I do. But the media never talks about the American victims of illegal immigration. I know them well. I know so many of them. I campaigned with them. What is happened to their children, what is happened to their husbands, what is happened to their wives. The media does not talk about the American families permanently separated from their loved ones because Democrat policies release violent criminals into our communities. We need safety. We need safety. They do not bring cameras to interview the angel moms whose children were killed by criminal aliens who should have never been here in the first place, not even close. They do not want to talk to the angel moms. But as your President, I will always fight to protect American families. I will always fight for an immigration system that defends our borders and takes care of our sovereignty as a nation. I will never sacrifice the safety and security of the American people. And I will never be silent in the face of vicious smears and attacks and the heroic agents and officers of ICE and the Border Patrol who save millions-just the job they do-save thousands and thousands of lives and are so brave and are so tough. If you want to create a humane, lawful system of immigration, then you need to retire the Democrats and elect Republicans to finally secure our borders. Because we need Democrat votes. We have a majority of one in the Senate. We need Democrat votes in the Senate. We need additional votes in the House. We will have the greatest borders, the greatest walls. We need Republicans to get out and put Republicans in. In case you do not know, in the Senate, we need, unfortunately, 60 votes. We have 51 votes. We need Democrats. They will do anything to obstruct, anything to make it as uncomfortable as possible. We are building it. We are building the wall. Under the previous administration, America's rich, natural resources-of which your State has a lot-were put under lock and key, including thousands of acres in Superior National Forest. Tonight I am proudly announcing that we will soon be taking the first steps to rescind the Federal withdrawal in Superior National Forest and restore mineral exploration for our amazing people and miners and workers and for the people of Minnesota, one of the great natural reserves of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 546, "text": "And we will do it carefully. And maybe, if it does not pass muster, we will not do it all. But it is going to happen, I will tell you. We have already taken it, as you know, a long way down the road. It is going to make it, from an environmental standpoint, better. As a result of our massive tax cuts, millions of Americans are receiving much bigger paychecks. We have eliminated record numbers of job-killing regulations. By the way-so, a few days ago, it was 500 days. In 500 days, we have cut more regulations than any President in the history of our country, whether it is 4 years, 8 years, or in 1 year-in one case, 16 years. We have cut more regulations in 500 days than any President, even our 16-year President. We have opened up energy exploration in ANWR in Alaska. They have been trying to do that from before the days of Ronald Reagan. We repealed the core of Obamacare. The individual mandate where you pay a fortune for the privilege of not paying for insurance for health care. And let me tell you, we just repealed it. And we would have repealed and replaced Obamacare, although we have gone a long way toward doing that anyway-we just had to do it a longer route. Because we had a gentleman, late into the morning hours, go thumbs down. That was not a good thing for our people, for our country, whether you are Democrat or Republican. We have his vote. We have everybody's vote. We were going in for a routine repeal and replace, and he went thumbs down. We are bringing back our jobs from other countries. We are bringing back our companies from other countries. Many, many companies are coming back to our country. And as far as trade is concerned with other countries, we want fair and reciprocal trade. We do not want stupid trade like we had for so long. We have been ripped off by almost every country on Earth, our friends and our enemies. And I hate to say it, our friends do a bigger and better job than the enemies. And even before we finish off with the trade deals-and we will finish off with the trade deals. People do not realize we have the cards. Because we are the piggy bank that everybody was robbing for 30 years. We are like the piggy bank. Let us go get some more. You look at the European Union.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 547, "text": "They put up barriers so that we cannot sell our farm products in. And yet they sell Mercedes and BMW and the cars come in by the millions. And we hardly tax them at all. They do not take our cars. We are going to sell you millions of cars. By the way, you are not going to sell us any. We will not be taken advantage of anymore. We have such potential. We just secured a record $700 billion in funding to rebuild our military, which was in very sad shape. 716 billion. We are ordering new planes. We make the best in the world. We are ordering new ships. We are ordering new military equipment. And we even gave our great warriors a raise. For the veterans, we passed the largest VA reforms in half a century. You could not fire anybody that worked in the VA. They were sadistic in some cases, they were lazy, they were this, they were that. You could never fire anybody, because the accountability, you could forget it. So we passed a bill that they have been trying to pass for almost 40 years. Jim, I am sorry to tell you, you are fired. And even more important-and I did not think I'd be saying this so soon because I would campaign on this-I used to go out during the campaigns-and you know it because I was in Minnesota a lot. But one that is really important to me. And I used to say to myself, I wonder why doctors do not just take care of our great vets. We just passed Veterans Choice legislation. That gives our veterans the care they deserve, the care they earned. Now look, so our veterans were waiting on line for 9 days, for 12 days, for 3 weeks. Someone on line with a minor problem, they ended up having a terminal disease. Now, I said during the campaign, before I knew too much about it, but there is a lot of common sense in life. I say, instead of one of our great veterans waiting for 2, 3, 4, 5 weeks, why do not we let them go see a doctor and pay the bill? And that is what we are doing. And you know, I went to people-I thought about it-I thought, oh, I think I am such a genius. But I went to the vet groups, I went to every- Yes, we have been trying to get that passed, sir, for 30 years. I did not know that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 548, "text": "But what I did know is, I knew how to get it passed, and we got it passed. And by the way, we passed another one. They travel all over the world if they have the money. If they do not , they do not know what to do. If we have drugs that have not been approved yet, but are showing tremendous promise, it did not matter. You could not get it. And the reason was, they did not want to do anything that is going to hurt you. You are not going to be around for 5 weeks. In 5 weeks-I kept saying, Why cannot we do something? If people had the money, they'd travel to Africa, to Asia, to Europe trying to find the cure. They wanted hope. And they could not get it. And this is also-like Veterans Choice, for many years people have tried pass it. And Kevin was a great help, I have to tell you. Kevin McCarthy, who just left the stage, was a great help. And we got right to try passed. And 4 weeks ago, I signed final legislation, and we are very proud. Between the insurance companies and the health care companies and the pharmaceutical companies, it was incredible. But we did that, and now we are bringing down the prices for prescription drugs, way down. So we have made this incredible progress together with your help, with the help of the millions and millions of people that-well, some polls got it right. But they showed up, and the beginning of that night, people are saying, You know, this could be a big problem for the Democrats. They were not liking what they were seeing. They were seeing too many of those hats. They were seeing too many people with-you know that. That was one of the most incredible evenings. Because that is a movement, the likes of which this country has never seen before. You know, we talk about the forgotten men and women. They pay taxes. They do all of the things. And believe me, our people are the smartest and the hardest working. You ever notice they always call the other side-and they do this on- the elite. I have a much better apartment than they do. the deplorables. You know, I was watching when Crooked Hillary made-and by the way, is it--hey, excuse me. Have you been watching what is been going on with the Inspector General's report?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 549, "text": "I do not think their wife and husband are too happy about that. What do you think? What do you think? No, but have you been seeing this whole scam? Have you been-do you believe what you are seeing? How-no matter what she did, no matter how many crimes she committed, which were numerous, they wanted her to be innocent. And they just wanted to take all of us. They wanted to put us in trouble. And it is not working too well, I will tell you. But you look at the corruption. Did you ever see anything like it? Really, today more things-that is why they are building up immigration so you cannot see what is going on in Congress. They are building up immigration. They do not want to show what is happening in Congress where this whole scam has been revealed. So they want to stay on immigration where Obama had bigger problems than anybody, where Bush had problems, where other Presidents-they want to stay on immigration because they do not want to go into the halls of Congress, which has totally revealed the Russian scam that is going on. I will tell you something, we want to get along with Russia. Between our military, our oil that we are doing. She wanted to have windmills. We want to compete with the oil. All the things we have done, including sanctions. You know, I wish Crooked Hillary won that election. It would have been a lot better for Russia. So what we want to do is we want to elect more Republicans so that we can deliver on all of the things I am talking about. And I will be honest with you, we are going to deliver anyway. We are going to lift millions of Americans from welfare to work, from dependence to independence, and from poverty to prosperity. We are going to lift them. You know, one of the greatest things about all the jobs we have created-to me, the greatest-is that people now do not get stuck in one job and they hate it. They do not want to get up in the morning. They have many, many options. It is a beautiful thing taking place. They can get something-I have always said, you know, when I make speeches on how to be successful-I always say, like the first thing, you have got to love it. You have got to love it. You have got to love your job or you are never going to be good.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 550, "text": "These people now that did not have any options-they were hanging on to one job that they hated. They have many, many choices. They get the job they want. And for the first time in 20 years, wages are rising. We are going to build new airports, and we are going to build railways and highways and waterways all across this magnificent land. We have spent, because of horrible decision-making, $7 trillion in the Middle East. And if we want to fix a window, it is , like, a big deal. Remember during the debates, I'd talk about growth. We need growth. Nobody has ever seen growth like we are having right now. President, congratulations on the growth of the United States. And we break every attendance record every single time, just about. We are going to put new steel into the backbone of our country, and we are going to make that steel right here in the United States. We are going to breathe new hope into our communities. We will do it all with American hands and American heart and American pride. And everything we do, we will stand up for our citizens. We will fight for our country. We will stand up for America. And we are going to stand up for the great State of Minnesota. And you are seeing that. Your great State was pioneered by men and women who braved the wilderness and the winters to build a better life for themselves and for their incredible families. They did not have a lot of money; they did not have a lot of luxury. But they had grit, and they had faith, and they had courage, and they had each other. They loved their families, they loved their country, and they loved their God. Together, we are renewing the miracle of the great American Midwest. Do you remember not so long ago, we were producing those cars and we producing all of this stuff? And since then, so many companies went to Mexico and went to other places. We are standing on the shoulders of great American patriots who put down the railroads, built up the highways, and dug out the most amazing Panama Canal, losing thousands of lives in doing it. They crossed the oceans, trekked the deserts, scaled the mountains, created the most incredible republic the world has ever seen. Our beautiful ancestors won two world wars, defeated fascism and communism, and put a man on the face of the Moon. And I think you saw the other day, we are reopening NASA.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmakeamericagreatagainrallyduluthminnesota", "title": "Donald J. Trump Remarks at a Make America Great Again Rally in Duluth, Minnesota", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-make-america-great-again-rally-duluth-minnesota", "publication_date": "20-06-2018", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 551, "text": "I am most grateful for the generous remarks that you have expressed in welcoming me and the members of my party to your country. As I stand here I think back 22 years ago when I first visited this country and had the opportunity to know the Italian people. For 2 weeks, at that period, as a new young Congressman, I traveled through this country studying the needs of this nation for the Marshall Plan. I visited Rome, Naples, Milan, Turin, and Trieste. I had the opportunity to see a nation then in deep economic troubles, a nation which many thought would be unable to recover from those troubles and regain its economic and political strength. But when I returned to the United States and, along with my colleagues, reported to the Congress, I was confident of the future of Italy because, first, I had seen a great Italian leader, De Gasperi,1 and I knew that he would provide, with his colleagues, the leadership that this nation needed. I also reported with great confidence because I had seen a remarkable people, a people who, in adversity had very great strength, a people who had contributed so much to our country and who now, in this land, were to contribute so much to its recovery--and the recovery of Italy, economically and politically--so that it now ranks among the first nations of the world, so that it now stands as one of the strong allies of the Western Alliance. That recovery is due both to its leaders and to its peoples and I pay tribute to both as I stand here today. Now we look to the future. We look to the future with the new leaders, the leaders that you will provide in your government and that we will provide in ours. As we look to the future we will look to the new purpose of our alliance and of our association together. As I think of that purpose I think of the words of another American President who visited this nation just 50 years ago. His words were spoken before their time but now their time has come. Our task is to set up a new international psychology, to have a new, real atmosphere where what men once considered theoretical and idealistic turns out to be practical and necessary. President, the contribution that you, personally, and that your people have made to the strength of NATO has helped to turn the ideal of collective security into a practical reality. Now, as we seek a new international atmosphere, the strength of the Western Alliance has never been more necessary. A good ally listens 'to her partners.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivaltheairportrome", "title": "Remarks on Arrival at the Airport in Rome", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-the-airport-rome", "publication_date": "27-02-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 552, "text": "I hope I have Joe Lieberman's remarks on the White House television camera back there somewhere. Thank you so much, Senator Lieberman, for we are about to start our 30th year of acquaintance, Senator Lieberman and I are. When I first met him, I had no gray hair. Now I have more gray hair than he does. I thank Joe Lieberman and Cal Dooley for their leadership of this organization; my friend Simon Rosenberg, who has come a long way since he was in the Clinton-Gore war room in 1992. And he did a great job there. And I, too, want to acknowledge Al From and thank him for the inspiration he is given all of us. I want to thank all the Members of Congress who are here and the candidates here who aspire to be in the House or the Senate. I want to reiterate what Joe Lieberman said, and I did not think I could say this 6 months ago, but we now have, I believe, a reasonable chance to pick up enough seats not only to have a majority in the House, which everybody knows and even our adversaries acknowledge, but even in the Senate, thanks in no small measure to the extraordinary people who are running for the Senate seats on our side. Now, let me say, I suppose I do not have to say much tonight because I will be preaching to the saved. But I think it is worth analyzing where we are and where we are going and why the New Democratic coalition is important and why it is important to us to keep faith with the ideas that got this group started, with the ideals, and to keep always pushing to tomorrow. You know, there are a lot of people who say, Well, this election is going to be about change, even if they think the Clinton-Gore team has done a good job or the Democrats have done a good job. This election is about change. Well, I think it ought to be about change, too. I was educated about this issue very well about 10 years ago. Some of you heard me tell this story before, but it is one of my favorite and most instructive political stories. When I was Governor of my State, every year in October, this month, we'd have a State Fair.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 553, "text": "And I always had Governor's day at the State Fair, and I'd go out there and give an award to the oldest person there and the couple that had been married the longest and the person with the largest number of great-grandchildren. And then I'd go in this big old shed and get me a little booth, and I'd sit there. And in October of not it was '89, and there was a Governor's race the next year, and I had been Governor by then for 10 years. And this old guy in overalls came up to the Governor's booth, and he said, Bill, are you going to run next year again? And I said, I do not know, but if I do, will you vote for me? He said, I always have, and I guess I will keep on doing it. And I said, Well, are not you tired of me after all these years? And I got kind of and I said you know how politicians are, we hate it when somebody says something like that. So I got kind of hurt, and I said, Well, gosh, I mean, do not you think I have done a good job? He said, Oh yeah, you have done a good job, but you got a paycheck every 2 weeks, did not you? He said, That is what we hired you to do. What we have got to figure out is whether you have got anything left to do. No matter how good a job you do, elections are always about tomorrow, and they should be. America has been changing and sort of reinventing itself on the great pillars of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence for over 200 years, and that is why we are still here. And this coalition came into being and the whole sort of New Democrat/ Third Way movement came into being because we thought not that our party should abandon its principles but that we should break out of a shell and adopt policies that would bring us together and move us into the future. I just want to make a few points as we look to that future. First of all, in 1992, when I went out to the people in New Hampshire and all these other States and into the country and asked then-Senator Gore to join me, and we said, Look, we have got this vision of America in the 21st century.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 554, "text": "We want this to be a country where everybody who is responsible enough to work for it has opportunity, where no matter how diverse we get, we are still coming together in one community, where we are still the world's leading force for peace and freedom and prosperity. We want to take this opportunity, responsibility, community agenda and come up with concrete policies and ideas to get the economy moving again, to bring the crime rate down, to bring the welfare rolls down, to empower poor people, to get more young people into college, to raise the standards of our schools and have more choice and competition there. We have got some ideas. And all we were doing is making an argument. And against our argument, what the Republicans said was what they have been saying about Democrats for 30 years, you know, They are too liberal. You cannot trust them with your money. They will raise your taxes. They never met a Government program they did not like. They sleep next to a bureaucratic pile of rules at night. You know, they would not defend the country if their life depended on it. You know, you have heard all that stuff. They had this sort of cardboard cutout image of Democrats that they tried to paste on every candidate's face at election time. And things were sufficiently bad in this country the economy was in terrible shape; the society was divided; the crime rate and the welfare rolls were exploding that people decided to take a chance on the argument. And then we set about trying to turn this country around and made some very tough decisions. And some of our Members paid very dearly for it for the '93 economic plan to turn this country around, for voting for the Brady bill and the crime bill to bring the crime rate down. And about 4 years later, the people decided to give us a they renewed our lease because they could feel things were beginning to change. And then in '98 we had a historic victory in the congressional elections because we had an agenda to keep building on it. We said, Now give us a chance to save Social Security and pass a Patients' Bill of Rights and build and modernize schools. Give us a chance to do some things that will really make a difference here. And now we come up to 2000, and I want to make the following points. Some of them have been made before. You need to memorize this. And the members of the other party unanimously opposed our economic policy; almost all of them are against our crime policy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 555, "text": "We finally, thank goodness, reached an accord on welfare policy, after two vetoes, and that is good. But still there is this sort of partisan rancor when we have evidence that the direction we have taken is right. The people in this room have been part the Members of Congress in this room have been part of the longest peacetime economic expansion in history, the lowest unemployment rate in 29 years, the lowest welfare rolls in 32 years, the lowest poverty rates in 20 years, the first back-to-back budget surpluses in 42 years, and the lowest crime rates in 26 years. the family and medical leave law, which the previous administration vetoed; doubling the earned-income tax credit; the empowerment zone program, which the Vice President has done so ably; the community financial institutions that are making loans to people that could not get money otherwise; the charter schools we are up to 1,700 from one when I took office; the HOPE scholarships that have opened the doors of college, at least the first 2 years, virtually to every person in this country now; AmeriCorps, which has given over 100,000 young people in its first 5 years a chance to serve their communities, something it took the Peace Corps 20 years to do. So we have been full, all of us, of these ideas, and we have worked along. So when we go into this election cycle, I want you to say, with all respect, you have to make a decision about not whether to change. Since I signed the telecommunications bill, over 300,000 new high-tech jobs have been created. We got this E-rate so we could provide discounts to rural schools and poor schools in the inner cities, so we could hookup all of our classrooms and libraries to the Internet by the year 2000, and it looks like we are going to make it. I was out in California last weekend doing some work for our congressional and Senate candidates in our party, and I was with a lot of people. This great company, eBay you all ever buy anything on eBay on the site? Not working for the company, over 20,000 Americans are now making a living doing business on eBay. They do not work for eBay. They are just doing business on eBay. Over 20,000 people making a living, including a substantial number of former welfare recipients.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 556, "text": "So what we have tried to do is to come with new ideas and policies that will really work, and it is not an argument anymore. So say to people, We are for change. The question is, what kind of change are you for? And the way I look at it, we have spent the last 6 1/2 years trying to turn the country around and get it going in the right direction, and things are going well now. But I would like to suggest that the change we need is to say, Okay, now we are moving in the right direction. Let us reach for the stars. Let us write the future of the 21st century. Let us imagine every challenge and every opportunity we have got out there that is really big and go get it. Let us do not change by taking a U-turn and going back to what got us trouble in the first place. You can trust this coalition of people to deal with the aging of America. We are going to double the number of seniors in 30 years. I hope to still be one of them. The baby boomers will then be with us for at least another 20 years. We may or may not ever get an agreement with the Republicans on Social Security reform, but in good conscience, with this surplus, we must at least take the life of Social Security out beyond the reach of the baby boom generation. We have to do that. If we do not agree on anything else, all it takes to take the life of the Social Security Trust Fund beyond the life of the baby boom generation is to commit to take 5 years of interest savings from saving the Social Security taxes, sometime in the next 15 years, and put them in the Social Security Trust Fund. If we do not do anything else, it'll take us out to 2050, and we ought to do it. We ought to modernize Medicare. We ought to employ the most modern practices that you find in the private sector, and I think we ought to add a prescription drug coverage because if we were creating that program today, we would never create it without drug coverage. And 75 percent of the seniors in this country do not have affordable drug coverage. It will keep a lot of them out of hospitals. It will lengthen and improve the quality of their lives. It is the right and decent thing to do, and we can do it if we are also prepared to have some savings in the traditional program. We ought to take the lead in this. We should do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 557, "text": "The second thing we ought to do is to keep working on the schools. We ought to have more charter schools. We ought to have a no social promotion policy. But we ought to give every kid who needs it an after-school program or a summer school program. We ought to modernize these schools, and we ought to hire the 100,000 teachers. You know, if you ever wonder what the difference in the parties is, you ought to look at the debate going on in education now in the House of Representatives. Now, when the electorate was breathing down their throat in 1998 at the end of the congressional session, the Republicans worked with us to make a huge downpayment on 100,000 teachers to lower class size. And we gave the States money for 30,000 of them. And you ought to read the glowing statements made by such Democratic sympathizers as Dick Armey. In 1998, just last year, the chairman of the House Education Committee, lots of others say, This could have been a Republican program. We are helping these teachers. They thought it was a great idea at election time. No electorate breathing down their throat, they have refused to fund the program anymore and taken out the dedicated funding for the teachers that is already there. This is about big ideas. We have got the largest student population, the most diverse student population in history. They need more and better trained teachers. They need higher standards. They need accountability and they need options so that the kids who are not cutting it do not fail, but find a way to succeed. We have the crime rate, the lowest rate in 26 years. Why do not we have a real goal now? Why do not we adopt as a national goal that we are going to be the safest big country in the world? If we have we have got you may think that is crazy, but everybody thought it was crazy when we said we'd balance the budget, too. I could never have been elected President if I said, If you will vote for me, within 6 years I will give you two surpluses in a row. People'd say, He seems like a nice young fella. We'd better send him home and get him a little help. He is out of his mind. If you do not envision this, it will not happen. Why should we say, We have got the lowest crime rate in 26 years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 558, "text": "But if we are serious about it, we are going to have to do more in prevention. We already have the highest percentage of people behind bars of any country in the world. We are going to have to say there is no rational distinction between a flea market and a gun show and a gun shop. We are going to have to put 50,000 more police out there in the neighborhoods where the crime rate is still too high. We are going to have to do things that help communities that are driving their crime rates down do it everywhere. But I think the Democrats ought to say, We are not satisfied with the lowest crime rate in 26 years. We will never be satisfied until America is the safest big country in the world, and we think we can help to make it that way. Let us talk about the economy. Number one, not everybody is a part of it; and number two, it is changing so fast, if we do not keep working we cannot keep the growth going. So let me just offer you a few ideas that I think are important. These empowerment zones are wonderful, and I want to get more of them. But it is not fair for all the places that are not part of it not to have some help from us to bring enterprise there. If we have learned one thing, we have got the strongest recovery of the last 30 years, also the highest percentage of private sector jobs. We have the smallest Federal Government since President Kennedy was here. But we have not yet figured out how to bring enterprise to every community that has not been part of this recovery. So for those of us who represent and live in the Mississippi Delta or in Appalachia or in represent many of the inner-city areas or a lot of the small towns and rural areas all over this country or the Native American reservations, I have proposed a modest but, I think, important plan. What I want the Congress to do is to pass laws that give us the same incentives to Americans with money to invest in poor areas in America, we give them to invest in poor areas in Central America and the Caribbean and Africa and Asia and throughout the world. The second thing I'd like to say is that I like what we are doing, hooking up all these classrooms to the Internet, and the E-rate allows us to hook them up in rural areas and poor urban areas.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 559, "text": "But if you think about it, I believe we could revolutionize the economy of these left-behind places if access to the Internet were as pervasive as access to telephones. So why do not we adopt that as a goal, study it, figure out how to achieve it, say we will not permit there to be any digital divide. That is the policy we have taken with regard to our schools. That is what the E-rate's all about. But what if their parents all had it, too? What if their parents had access to that? What if we why should we be content with the economy we have? If we do not reach our goal, it will be a lot better than it would otherwise, and we will keep things going. I think we ought to think of that. Let me just mention two other things. First of all, I want to mention something that may be sort of politically impolite, but one issue in which our caucus, in my view, is still divided too often in the wrong way, and that is the issue of trade. Here is what I think. You see it all over the world today. There is a move toward protectionism all over the world today, even in places that are doing well. Because we have not figured out how to put a human face on the global economy. Because we have not figured out how to tell people that, sure, there will be more dynamism in this economy, but here is what we are doing to protect the basic rights of working families. Here is what we are doing to try to protect the basic integrity of the environment. Here is what we are trying to do to make sure everyone can benefit from this. So our party needs to take the lead in pushing for trade, but for doing it in a way that says we are determined to put a human face on the global economy. Because if we do not , it is not just in America; you see this everywhere. I see it in the Europeans. I see it in Asia again. I see it the economy is now the strongest, here, it is been in a long time, and yet, the impetus for continuing to trade is not there. We have got 4 percent of the people and 22 percent of the wealth. So if we want to keep strong and wealthy and growing, we have got to do something with the other 96 percent of the people out there.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 560, "text": "I have got this big trade meeting coming up we all do in Washington State, in Seattle, in December. And I hope we can try to break down some barriers in other countries. But why should people break their barriers down if they think America's trying to have it both ways? So I think we have to go back at this. And lastly and I think maybe the most important thing of all for the next generation I vetoed that tax bill that the Congress passed, the Republicans in Congress passed, because I was convinced that if I signed it we not only could never meet our obligations to our children and to our seniors and to our future in our investments in science and technology, I was convinced we would never finish the work of paying down our debt. Now, we are paying down our debt now. And if we stay on the plane that I asked Congress to adopt in the budget, we will be debt-free in 15 years, for the first time since Andrew Jackson was President in 1835. Now, why should the Democratic Party be for that? In conventional terms, we are the more liberal party. Why should we be for that? Everybody in this room who is 40 years of age or older, who studied economics in college, was told that a Government should always carry some debt. We were all taught that. Because we are living in a global economy. You look at what happens to these countries that try to hide their money; people still get it out. Interest rates are set in a global economy. If we get America out of debt, it means that all the Americans can borrow more cheaply. If the Government is out of debt, it means lower interest rates for businesses in this country, for home loans, for car loans, for college loans. It means more jobs and higher incomes. It means when our friends overseas who are not as fortunate as we are get in trouble the way the Asians did in the last 2 years, they can get out of trouble at lower cost. I believe, if we do this, it would do more than anything else we could do to guarantee a whole generation of prosperity. Whatever happens in the future, we know not every day of every month of every year from now on will be as good as the last 6 1/2 years have been, but whatever happens in the future, it will not be as bad as it would have been if we keep getting this country out of debt. So I hope all of you will support that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewdemocratnetworkdinner0", "title": "Remarks at a New Democrat Network Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-democrat-network-dinner-0", "publication_date": "06-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 561, "text": "Well, ladies and gentlemen, I used to think that I was reasonably astute at public affairs, but I do not have any better sense than to get up here and try to speak behind Mayor Powell, Cathy Bessant, and Jesse Jackson. Let me say to all of you, it is wonderful to be here. Madam Mayor, thank you for making us feel so welcome and for your sterling leadership. I am delighted to be here with Jackie, your hero and my friend who is all of our heroes. I am going to go in and shop in a minute-add to the local community. Thank you, Reverend Jackson, for believing that we could keep hope alive in every city and rural area in this country and it could be good business to do so. Joe Stroud of Jovon Broadcasting; my good friend Al From, the Democratic Leadership Council; David Wilhelm, the former Chairman of the Democratic Party from Illinois, who is here with me today. I want to thank Senator Durbin and Congressman Costello, two of the ablest, finest people in the United States Congress. I want to tell you that they are joined here today by other Members of Congress, including Congressman Jim Clyburn, who came all the way from South Carolina; Congressman Paul Kanjorski from the State of Pennsylvania; and Congressman Dale Kildee from Michigan all of whom care about this community and communities like it all across America. I thank them. And I want to thank your neighboring mayor, Clarence Harmon, for coming over from St. Louis, and your former mayor, Gordon Bush, for being here with me. And I want to thank Secretary Cuomo, Secretary Glickman, Secretary Slater, and all the other people from the administration. We have had a great time these last 2 days, going across America. We are going to finish this day, first by shopping at Walgreens, and then we are going to get on an airplane and fly to South Dakota, where we will begin tomorrow at the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. So from Appalachia to the Mississippi Delta to East St. Louis to Pine Ridge, it has been a wonderful trip. But let me ask you something. If you look around this crowd today, I have to make-this is a happy day, a happy day. But I want to say one serious thing off of this subject today, because of a remark that was made earlier by Cathy, that I believe in community development-emphasis, community.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityeaststlouisillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Community in East St. Louis, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-east-st-louis-illinois", "publication_date": "06-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 562, "text": "You have been very good to me, to the First Lady, to Vice President Gore, and Mrs. Gore. You have supported our initiatives and especially the Vice President's leadership of all of our community development. We have people from all kinds of backgrounds, all different colors, all different religions. Everybody-all different ages, working for something good. So this is the first chance, my first stop in Illinois since the tragic string of shootings in Illinois and Indiana these last couple of days, that have come to end with the apparent suicide of the alleged gunman. Now, I do not want to say a lot, but I think it is important to note that while we have to wait for all of the details to come in, the early reports indicated that this shooting spree against Jews, Orthodox Jews, against the young Asian students, taking the life of a former basketball coach at Northwestern, an African-American, all were motivated by some blind racial hatred against anybody who did not happen to be white. Is not it ironic that this occurred during the time we celebrated the birth of our Nation on the Fourth of July? That action was a rebuke to the very ideals that got us started. They are also a stern reminder to us that even as we celebrate this, even as we stand up against racial and ethnic and religious hatred in Kosovo, in Northern Ireland, and the Middle East and Africa, we have still got work to do here at home. We must search the hearts of our citizens and search the strength of our communities, that Congress should pass the hate crimes legislation, but we should rid our hearts of hatred immediately. Now, I want to tell you what got us going on this. In 1992, when I ran for ENTITY, I came to East St. Louis, and I said I wanted to create a country in the 21st century where there was opportunity for every citizen, responsibility from every citizen, and a community of all American citizens. I said that we ought to have a new role for Government, that Government could not solve all the problems, but walking away from them did not work very well, either; and that we had to focus on creating the conditions and giving people the tools to make the most of their own lives and to get together across lines that had divided them for too long.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityeaststlouisillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Community in East St. Louis, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-east-st-louis-illinois", "publication_date": "06-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 563, "text": "Goodness knows, in the inner cities and the rural areas of our country, lines have divided those who worked hard but had no money and those who had plenty of money but did not believe it could be very well spent in the inner city or in rural areas. retail returning, new jobs, new residents, new hope, Walgreens putting up 400 stores across America, many of them in innercity areas. You heard what Cathy said about opportunities. Let me tell you, the economists talk about something in our inner cities called the purchasing power gap. Let me tell you what that means. That means most people in East St. Louis, even though the unemployment rate is higher than the national average, most people get up and go to work every day. And if you take the money that you earn here as against the money you are able to spend here because of the jobs that are here and the stores that are here, in America as a whole, there is 25 percent more money earned than spent in the inner cities. In Los Angeles, it is 35 percent; in East St. Louis, it is 40 percent. So you can handle this Walgreens and a lot more besides, and we want to see them coming here. And we thank Bank of America for the library, and we thank those involved in the hotel, the bank, the homes being built near here. We also want you to know that we want to do our part. Secretary Cuomo's housing and urban development block grants, along with Bank of America and many department stores, are helping Jackie build the Jackie Joyner-Kersee Center near here. So this is what Vice President Gore and I have tried to do with our empowerment zones and our community banks and our vigorous enforcement of the Community Reinvestment Act. It says you are supposed to loan money everywhere in America. That law has been on the books for 22 years, but over 95 percent of the money loaned under it, billions of dollars, has been loaned since the Clinton-Gore administration has been in office, and I am proud of that. We made East St. Louis an enterprise community in our first round of empowerment zones and enterprise communities way back in 1994, and because you have done so well, East St. Louis is designated as an empowerment zone for our second round, which means more money being spent here by the Government, more tax incentives for the private sector to put businesses here and to hire the people from East St. Louis and give them good jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityeaststlouisillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Community in East St. Louis, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-east-st-louis-illinois", "publication_date": "06-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 564, "text": "Senator Durbin, Congressman Costello, and every Member of the Congress here is committed to creating that second round of empowerment zones and funding them this year. We need help from Republicans and Democrats alike. Now, let me tell you why else we came here today. We want to make two points which all the previous speakers have made. Starting with what the mayor said about location, location, location, accessibility-boy, that was a good rap, was not it? I like that. The first point we want to make is, when the Walgreens' president comes, or when an executive from Bank of America comes, or when Mel Farr comes, and comes to places like this or the Mississippi Delta or Appalachia, the other places we are going, is, hey, there are business opportunities out here. If you have got people who want to go to work and people with money to spend, and they are both in the same place, it is a good place to invest. The second thing we are doing is promoting what you have heard referred to as the new markets initiative. Now, let me just tell you what that is. That is a bill we are going to put before the Congress that says that, if people invest in any high unemployment, high poverty area anywhere in America, inside or outside one of our empowerment communities, they can get a tax credit for the money they put up, and they can go to the bank and borrow money and have it guaranteed, a guaranteed loan by the Federal Government, which will lower the interest rates, which will mean it will be much cheaper for people to invest in communities like East St. Louis than it otherwise would be. Now, the Government is not going to do it, nobody is going to put any money here if they think they are going to lose it. If you put up $100 and you invest it and I give you a 25 percent tax credit, if it is a bad investment, you still lose $75. But it makes it more likely that people will do it. It makes it more likely that they will take a look. It makes it more likely that you will build the kind of relationships which will make people know you and trust you and want to build a common future with you. And that is what we are trying to do. It is not a handout, but it is darn sure a hand up, and you are entitled to it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityeaststlouisillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Community in East St. Louis, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-east-st-louis-illinois", "publication_date": "06-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 565, "text": "And let me say to all of you, it is something that is good for the rest of America. We have had almost 19 million new jobs; the longest peacetime expansion in history; the lowest African-American and Hispanic unemployment rates ever recorded in this country to date. But the unemployment rates are still higher than they are for the rest of the country. Incomes are rising, but they are still lower than they are for the rest of the country. Look, we are all going to have to work hard at this. Nobody's got all the answers. People make these investments one at a time, just like Mel Farr sells his cars one at a time. You can only build one Walgreens on this spot, and somebody had to come up with the money. Somebody had to make the decision. Somebody's got to hire all the people that work here. Somebody's got to train them. Somebody's got to make all these decisions. But what we can do is to create an environment in which more people will want to hold hands with you and walk into the 21st century, so that nobody is left behind, and we all go forward together. You know, in 1960, Look magazine said East St. Louis was an all-American city. It was because of stockyards and shipping yards. It was because of private enterprise. And I just want to make one last point to everybody else in America who is looking at this. I spent a lot of time as your President, now, trying to figure out, how can I keep this economic good time going? When we started, nobody believed we could have an economic expansion that would go on this long. When we started, no conventional economist believed you could have unemployment rates under 4 1/2 percent nationwide without having inflation and high interest rates which would wreck everything. But, you know, all of these young, technological geniuses are figuring out all this new computer technology, and it is rifling through what we all do, and it is making us more productive. And we are doing a good job. But now I say to myself every day when I get up, now, what can I do to keep this going? The only way to keep it going-more growth with no inflation; more jobs and higher wages without bringing it to a halt-is to have new people working and new people buying, new people producing. Those are the people you move from welfare to work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityeaststlouisillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Community in East St. Louis, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-east-st-louis-illinois", "publication_date": "06-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 581, "text": "As we celebrate this last New Year of the 20th century, I want to speak to you about the debt we owe to those who make every season a season of peace for America, the men and women of our Armed Forces. Almost 1.4 million Americans are serving our country on active duty today. Nearly a quarter million of them are overseas, doing what needs to be done as no one else can, whether that means thwarting Iraq's ambition to threaten its neighbors or the world with weapons of mass destruction, or standing watch in Korea on the last fortified frontier of the cold war, or safeguarding the peace in Bosnia, or helping our neighbors in Central America or the Caribbean dig out from natural disasters, or simply giving us the confidence that America will be forever strong, safe, and secure. We rely on our Armed Forces because this is still a dangerous world. We are proud of them because they are the best in the world. And we remember today what makes them the best, not just the quality of our weapons but the quality of our people in uniform. We should never ask them to do what they are not equipped to do, and we should always equip them to do what we ask. The more we ask, the greater our responsibility to give our troops the support and training and equipment they need. to give our troops the tools to take on new missions, while maintaining their readiness to defend our country and defeat any adversary; to make sure they can deploy away from home, knowing their families have the quality of life they deserve; and to make certain their service is not only rewarding but well rewarded, from recruitment to retirement. I am confident our military is ready to fulfill this mission today. Our troops continue to execute complex and dangerous missions far from home with flawless precision, as we have just seen in the Persian Gulf. Our challenge is to retain the ability to do this as we carry out our entire defense strategy. For this reason, we asked Congress to add $1.1 billion to this year's budget to keep our readiness razor-sharp and to improve recruitment. I have also worked with our military leaders to ensure their highest readiness priorities are reflected in our budget request for the year 2000. The budget I will submit to Congress for next year will provide an increase of over $12 billion for defense readiness and modernization through a combination of new spending and budgetary savings. This is the start of a 6-year effort that will represent the first long-term sustained increase in defense spending in a decade.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress76", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-76", "publication_date": "02-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 628, "text": "The members of the Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident have just briefed me on their report. It examines the reasons for the accident. It presents recommendations on what we must do to help prevent such a tragedy from occurring again. And I look forward to reading and reviewing it in thorough detail. And let me give my heartfelt thanks to the members and staff of the Rogers commission. They have performed their task with distinction, and it was an arduous one. To a nation still suffering from the trauma of the loss of the Challenger and her brave crew, it was often a painful duty. Their investigation was thorough and comprehensive and completed within the mandated time. They went in with their eyes wide open and were unflinching in pursuit of the facts. Though saddened and chastened, our nation will be stronger because of their courage and dedication. And as we push forward in our conquest of space and push forward we will our shuttle program will be safer and better prepared for the challenges that lie ahead. I want to thank the Congress for letting the Commission proceed unfettered with its investigation, and also the staff of NASA, the Department of Defense, the Federal Aviation Administration, the National Transportation Safety Board, and others, whose cooperation made the Commission's report possible. And today we see once again that our true faith as a nation lies in our free and open society. In America we learn from our setbacks as well as our successes. And although the lessons of failure are hard, they are often the most important on the road to progress. We have learned in these past few months that we are frail and fallible, but we have also learned that we have the courage to face our faults and the strength to correct our errors. Because we do not hide our mistakes, we are not condemned to repeat them. Because we are an open society, we have room to grow. We can count on their courage to pull us through the hard places I am speaking now of the American people, because we base our trust on the American people. And that is why we can look to their wisdom, creativity, to show us the way to the future. This has been a difficult passage for America, but we will go on just as the crew of the space shuttle Challenger would have wanted us to. We will use every ounce of American skill, ingenuity, and gumption; and we will work twice as hard and be twice as vigilant.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceivingthefinalreportthepresidentialcommissionthespaceshuttle", "title": "Remarks on Receiving the Final Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-receiving-the-final-report-the-presidential-commission-the-space-shuttle", "publication_date": "09-06-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 629, "text": "When the Committee representing your Federation brought me the invitation to address you this evening, I did not receive them with any very profound enthusiasm. To be confidential for a moment, I may confess that an invitation to make a speech is not the rarest experience that comes into a President's life. But I listened with, I hope, proper politeness, down to the point where your spokesman started explaining that you were to devote an evening to the consideration of a budget. Then I began to take real interest, for the budget idea, I may admit, is a sort of obsession with me. I believe in budgets. I want other people to believe in them. I have had a small one to run my own home; and besides that, I am the head of the organization that makes the greatest of all budgets, that of the United States Government. Do you wonder, then, that at times I dream of balance sheets and sinking funds, and deficits, and tax rates, and all the rest? Yes, I regard a good budget as among the noblest monuments of virtue. It is deserving of all emulation; but there are other topics that afford more obvious inspiration to popular oratory. So when I found that you actually wanted a budget speech, I felt a warming sense of gratitude. Anybody who would deliberately ask for a budget speech ought to be accommodated. I accepted the invitation, and now I want to begin by extending my hearty compliments to my audience. Your practical interest in the budget plan, your adoption of it as the basis of your great charity system, is a fine accomplishment. Wherever the same plan has been adopted, in the financing of benevolences, philanthropies and charities through the Community Chest method, it has been productive of the best results. It has eliminated the waste of indiscriminate charity; but that is not by any means its most commendable accomplishment. Far more useful, I think, is the service it has done in organizing these works of human helpfulness so that we may be sure they will not do more harm than good. Nothing is finer than the open hand and the generous heart that is prompt free and unselfish giving. But modern social science knows, also, that ill directed charity is often directly responsible for encouragement of pauperism and mendicancy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstelephoneremarksthefederationjewishphilanthropicsocietiesnewyorkcityassembled", "title": "Telephone Remarks to the Federation of Jewish Philanthropic Societies of New York City, Assembled at the Hotel Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/telephone-remarks-the-federation-jewish-philanthropic-societies-new-york-city-assembled", "publication_date": "26-10-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 630, "text": "The best service we can do for the needy and the unfortunate is to help them in such manner that their self respect, their ability to help themselves, shall not be injured but augmented. But, being down, nobody gets up again without honest effort of his own. The best help that benevolence and philanthropy can give is that which induces everybody to help himself. Your Federation for the Support of Jewish Philanthropic Societies in New York is the central financial agency, I am told, for no less than ninety one various philanthropies, which receive annual support aggregating $7,000,000. Among them are hospitals, orphanages, a great relief society, a loaning organization, a home for Aged and Infirm. The Young Men's Hebrew Association and the Young Women's Hebrew Association do social and educational work of the greatest value. Especial attention is devoted indeed to educational effort for which technical schools are maintained. That is, of course, precisely what we should expect from a great Jewish organization; for the Jews are always among the first to appreciate and to utilize educational opportunities. Into this entire system of communal services, reaching to every possible department of social relations, the Federation brings order and a proper inter relationship. Duplication of services, which always means multiplication of expense and division of results, is avoided. The man or woman who gives through this agency, knows that the most good will be done, at the least expense. All administrative costs of the organization have averaged less than four cents on the dollar. Other Community Chest activities, which in recent years are getting spread all about the country, make like showings of efficiency and economical management. They have been able, just as your Federation has been able, to enlist the best abilities, the most skilled direction, the widest experience, in systematizing operations that ordinarily are haphazard and wasteful. But, with all of my regard for the strictly business aspect of this splendid modern program, I must emphasize once more that to me the greatest good of these communal organizations of benevolence lies in their immeasurably greater capacity for real good. There is an impressive array of testimony that the average dollar of indiscriminate, well meaning, ignorant donation to charity is mostly wasted. You seek no cold and heartless elimination of sentiment from your charitable works. You have, however, sought to substitute sense for sentimentality; and that is altogether to be desired.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstelephoneremarksthefederationjewishphilanthropicsocietiesnewyorkcityassembled", "title": "Telephone Remarks to the Federation of Jewish Philanthropic Societies of New York City, Assembled at the Hotel Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/telephone-remarks-the-federation-jewish-philanthropic-societies-new-york-city-assembled", "publication_date": "26-10-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 634, "text": "I love you back. Thank you, Secretary Castro, not just for the introduction, but for the great work he is doing on behalf of the American people every single day. I'd like to begin my remarks with a story. I love you too! But look, I have got to tell you this story here. So on an evening about 75 years ago, in the Boyle Heights neighborhood of Los Angeles, a young man proposed to the woman of his dreams. Any of us who've done that and I have know at that moment he was feeling pretty nervous. And fortunately for him, she said yes. And because apparently he was making the kind of money I was making when I proposed to celebrate, they went to a hot dog stand. But things took a wrong turn. Authorities suddenly pulled up, lined them up, patted them down, demanded to see their IDs, just because they were Mexican American. And when the young man handed over his wallet, the officer pulled the cards out of it and just dropped them on the sidewalk, and then he said, Now you pick them up. I remember getting on my knees and picking them up, that young man said decades later. And we can imagine his fear and his humiliation. What had been a beautiful day had suddenly become an example of occurrences that were happening far too often. And imagine how easy it would have been for him at that moment to turn to despair and to allow the anger and the resentment to feed a cynicism and for him to decide that America could never change. And Ed Roybal never lost faith in himself or in his country. And less than 25 years after he was brought to his knees on the streets of Los Angeles, Ed stood under the Capitol Dome to represent those very same streets in the Congress of the United States of America. He dedicated his life to the idea that America can change, that our Union can become more perfect. And today, his legacy lives on not only in the legislation he passed and the improvements he made in his district, but also in his daughter Lucille, who is here tonight. And he helped start the Congressional Hispanic Caucus because he knew that we are stronger together than we could ever be alone. And that is the same reason I ran for this office 8 years ago, not because I believed in what I could do, but because I believed in what we could do together.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalhispaniccaucusinstituteannualawardsgala2", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute Annual Awards Gala", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-hispanic-caucus-institute-annual-awards-gala-2", "publication_date": "08-10-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 635, "text": "But thanks to the members of the Hispanic Caucus, thanks to people like Nancy Pelosi who is standing here tonight thanks to the determination and fundamental optimism of the American people, we have made progress. When I took office, the unemployment rate was on its way to 10 percent. The unemployment rate among Latinos hit 13 percent, and we have brought that down to 6.4 percent. When I took office, we were losing about 800,000 jobs a month. Today, our businesses have created jobs for a record 67 months in a row, more than 13 million new jobs overall. When I took office, more than 15 percent of Americans, including nearly one in three Hispanics, lacked health insurance. Today, we have covered another 17 million Americans, including 4 million Latinos, and only 9.2 percent of Americans are uninsured. For the first time on record, more than 90 percent of Americans have health insurance. For the first time ever, insurance companies cannot discriminate against anybody with a preexisting condition. When I took office, we were still too often stuck in a cold war mentality that began before many of us were even born. And today, for the sake of our people, and our entire hemisphere, we have reestablished relations with Cuba, we have turned the page on the failed policies of the past. We have strengthened our relationship with Latin America. We have put forward a plan to invest $1 billion in our shared security and prosperity in Central America. When I took office, hardworking young people Americans in every way but on paper lived in constant fear of deportation. Today, more than 680,000 DREAMers live and study and work freely and openly in the country they have always called home. We have got smarter enforcement priorities, because it makes no sense to focus on separating families when we can be going after felons instead. We are taking new steps to reach out to folks who are eligible to become citizens and attract immigrant entrepreneurs and educate STEM students. We are going to help more husbands and wives of American citizens get their green cards without separating them from their families. And the deferred action policies I announced last year will help millions of mothers and fathers remain in the United States of America with their families, and although it is taking us longer than we hoped, I know we are on the right side of the law, and we are going to keep fighting to prove it. And we have not won every battle. We have still got a lot more work to do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalhispaniccaucusinstituteannualawardsgala2", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute Annual Awards Gala", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-hispanic-caucus-institute-annual-awards-gala-2", "publication_date": "08-10-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 636, "text": "But when the cynics told us we could not change our country for the better, they were wrong. The high school dropout rate is near the lowest on record, and Latino students are making some of the fastest gains. More Americans are graduating from college. The deficits are down by two-thirds. The amount of foreign oil we buy is down. Why are some of the folks who are running for my office so down on America? Well, no, I am definitely not doing that. But by most measures, we are better off now than we were 7 years ago. And that we know. Of course, none of it comes up in their debates. I mean, they have invented this new reality where everything was terrific back in 2008 when the unemployment and uninsured rates were rising and DREAMers lived in fear of deportation and we were engaged in two wars and bin Laden was still at large. And then, I came along and messed it all up. repealing Obamacare, gutting Wall Street reform, allowing power plants to pollute the air our children breathe. And there is nowhere where they want to go further backwards than on immigration. It was not that long ago that my predecessor, George W. Bush, a Republican a conservative Republican from Texas, with whom I disagreed with on a whole lot of things, made immigration reform one of his core priorities. We cannot build a unified country, he said, by inciting people to anger or playing on anyone's fears or exploiting the issue of immigration for political gain. That is what he said. Think how much better our economy would be if the rest of his party got the message. Think about how much better off our country would be if Republican politicians had not spent years precisely trying to scare voters with tales of immigrants flooding across our borders and taking our jobs and destroying America as we know it, even though we know that when you look at what is happening at the borders, it is the lowest rates of immigration that we have seen since the 1970s. A clear majority of Americans, including a lot of Republican voters, support reform. That is one of the reasons we got a bipartisan bill through the Senate in 2013. But now some of the very same Republican politicians who championed reform in the past some of whom sponsored these efforts suddenly, they want nothing to do with it. In these circumstances, I always say, do not boo, vote. They cannot hear the boos, but they can hear your vote.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalhispaniccaucusinstituteannualawardsgala2", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute Annual Awards Gala", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-hispanic-caucus-institute-annual-awards-gala-2", "publication_date": "08-10-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 637, "text": "turning against what is right the moment the politics of your base gets tough. Leadership is not fanning the flames of intolerance and then acting all surprised when a fire breaks out. Saying clearly inflammatory things and then saying, well, that is not what I meant until you do it again and again and again. So we have got to decide whether or not we, as Americans, are willing to stand up against this kind of bigotry that the same cruel impulse that Ed Roybal spent a lifetime fighting against. The anti-immigrant sentiment that has infected our politics is not new, but it is wrong. It was directed at Irish folk. It was directed against Italians. There have been generations of immigrants that have been subject to this same kind of attitude, with some of the same stereotypes. And unless you were one of the First Americans unless you are Navajo or Cherokee somebody somewhere came from someplace else. I believe we need an immigration system that is fair and orderly and lawful. I believe that people who come here illegally should have to pay a fine and pay their fair share of taxes and get registered and get right with the law and go to the back of the line before they earn citizenship. But when I hear folks talking as if somehow those kids are different from my kids, as if they are less worthy in the eyes of God, that somehow their families are less worthy of our respect and consideration and care, as if somehow back in the day, everybody had their papers in order when they came here, but now suddenly, nobody has their papers in order I believe we are better than that. If you want to be taken seriously as a leader, you cannot just be against everything. You have got to be for something. You cannot just feed on fear. You should be feeding hope. You should be for fixing our immigration system. You should be for allowing DREAMers and their parents, who have been here for years, to live without fear in the country they love. You should tell the truth, which is that illegal border crossings are lower than they have been in decades and that economists agree that immigration does not hurt our economy, it grows our economy, creating jobs, raising wages for Americans. You do not hear those facts very often, but those facts those are facts. And you have got to recognize that America's greatness does not come from building walls. Our greatness comes from building opportunity. Our greatness comes from building an economy that works for everybody.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalhispaniccaucusinstituteannualawardsgala2", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute Annual Awards Gala", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-hispanic-caucus-institute-annual-awards-gala-2", "publication_date": "08-10-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 638, "text": "Today every man no matter where he stands stands in the center of the world. And we Americans, who want to reduce the distance between friends, believe that no man comes from so far off that he cannot find a welcome among us. So today we welcomed you as a guest in our country. And tonight we welcome you as a guest in our home. About you tonight, Mr. Chairman, though you have come from halfway across the world, you see old friends and you see others who have a deep interest in your country and want to know it better. For most of us, Burma has traditionally been a land of beauty and serenity, of golden temples, elephants, deep forests, and precious gems. But we know that behind that exotic exterior, your country is a land of hardworking people whose goals are very similar to ours. We love our children and we believe in living in peace with our neighbors provided they stay on their side of the fence, and out of our melon patch. to national independence, to progress, and to peace. Both our countries emerged from a colonial past and treasure independence all the more for that. Both have been blessed by Providence with a bountiful land. On the world scene, we both place high value on the just resolution of international differences and on the search for universal peace. This search has led us along different paths for our situations and our responsibilities have not been the same. But the ultimate goal is there one in which we both can share. For our part, I can assure you, Mr. Chairman, that just as we shall never shirk our responsibilities, so shall we never fail in our efforts to find a secure and just peace. For the present, the problems of our world place burdens upon us all. And we must be prepared to live with them until all nations have finally become convinced that aggression and terror have no place in human society. The day of peace will eventually come-a day when all nations will be able to live in their own way, free from threat and fear. When that day arrives, we shall be able to devote all our talents and resources to the war against the real enemies of mankind-poverty, sickness, and illiteracy in a vast cooperative effort. Thus shall we raise the hopes and enrich the lives of people throughout the world. Meanwhile, tonight in this room, we are among friends. And we should, for the moment, put aside our cares and. concerns and enjoy each other's company.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentstoastdinnerhonorgeneralnewinburma", "title": "The President's Toast at a Dinner in Honor of General Ne Win of Burma", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-toast-dinner-honor-general-ne-win-burma", "publication_date": "08-09-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 639, "text": "Let me begin by thanking Smith and Elizabeth for having us into this magnificent, beautiful place, for the Democrats again and specifically for Mel Carnahan; and for being such good friends and for being willing to be called Smith Barney and Bailey Smith and other names. I am sure there is a reward for you in heaven for enduring those slings and arrows. I want to thank the other Senators who have come here to express their support for you. I see Senator Boxer back there, Senator Murray, and Senator Cleland. But this is quite an outstanding turnout of your prospective colleagues. I also want all of you to know that I have a different take on this than everybody this race than everybody here who is not from Missouri, because Mel and Jean Carnahan have been friends of mine for along time. Robin has worked with me, and their children I have had a chance to know. I want you to know that you did a good thing tonight, contributing to his campaign, because he was a great Governor and because he is a good man and a good friend and because he will be a good Senator. I am for him in part because when only my mother thought I could be elected President in 1991 and my wife, as she never lets me forget Mel Carnahan was a Lieutenant Governor involved in a very difficult primary for Governor. He had all he could say grace over, and he still endorsed me for President in the Missouri primary. It was a brave and good thing to do, and I will never forget it. And I was the Governor of Arkansas. I was raised idolizing Harry Truman. When I was a young man here in the Senate, I worked for Senator Fulbright and got to watch Stuart Symington up close. And I may be the only person here who is actually known Senator Ashcroft for more than 20 years, besides Mel. We served together as attorney general and as Governor, and we always had a very cordial, personal relationship. But I can tell you that he actually believes all those things that the Republicans say. And I say that not to make you laugh but to say, you know, one of the things I do not like in a lot of these campaigns is, we get into all this name-calling and demonization. We act like, you know, what is really bad about our opponents is, they are doing these bad things, and they do not really believe them. That is not true about him. We can laugh about this, but that is what they think about us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforgovernormelcarnahan", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Governor Mel Carnahan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-governor-mel-carnahan", "publication_date": "09-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 640, "text": "They think we are always playing to some crowd or another. And I think it is important to point out that most of us on both sides actually believe in what we are doing. It is what gives the political system integrity. The main reason that I want to see campaign finance reform, since I am not a candidate for anything anymore, and the main reason I really respect Smith because, you know, if we have campaign finance reform, it'll cost him a little less money, but then he will have to open his home and have evenings where we actually debate the issues, instead of hustle you for money. But the major reason we need to reform the campaign finance system, in my judgment, is that it is almost all the money goes to voter communication, and it is wrong to have unequal levels of voter communication. The people need to hear a full debate on both sides and have a full ability to evaluate the personalities of candidates on all sides in order to make good decisions. And the second main reason we need it is that the people in office and the people who want to get in office have to spend too much time raising money, and they are exhausted all the time, and they do not have enough time to read and think and talk to other people. I would say the third reason you need it is the reason all the press says, which is, you know, the corrupting influence of big money. The truth is that over 90 percent of the time way over 90 percent of the time the people in both parties in the Senate and in the House vote their convictions. And way over 90 percent of the time the people that give you money never ask you for anything, except to keep in touch with them and discuss the issues and talk about things and listen to them if they have got something on their minds. Anyway, to get back to the point I was making, I know both these men. And I do not have to demonize John Ashcroft. When we were young men together, we worked as attorney general together; we worked as Governor. I had a very cordial relationship with him. But he believes in how he is voted in the Senate, and I do not . And we should stop pretending that it does not make any difference who wins, or that it is all some game dominated by who gives money and all that. They won in the elections of '94. We won when we beat the contract on America. The people ratified our decision in '96.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforgovernormelcarnahan", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Governor Mel Carnahan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-governor-mel-carnahan", "publication_date": "09-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 641, "text": "We got together briefly in the welfare reform bill and in the Balanced Budget Act of '97. Then our approach was ratified in the '98 election. And then we won again when I vetoed their huge tax bill in '99, which would have undermined our ability to save Social Security and Medicare, balance the budget, pay off the debt, and keep investing in our future. But we have now had we have got an ongoing debate here about what kind of country we are going to be, what our responsibilities to each other are, and where we are going. Now, I know this man very well, Carnahan. I know him very well. We worked together for years. I went to Missouri more than any other State when we were promoting welfare reform because he did the best job of any Governor in America in requiring people who were able-bodied to get training and to go into the workplace and getting big businesses to help him, but also caring about the welfare of poor people, to make sure that the children had health care and the people had a decent place to live and the child care was there and the transportation was there. He did it right. And if he is in the Senate, he will do it right. I can also tell you that for Democrats, because we believe in activist Government, it is very important that we keep a certain number of innovative Governors coming into the U.S. Senate all the time, because they understand how this stuff works. And it is important that you have people from our part of the country elected to the Senate, so that we can defend it when we have to take tough votes on sensible gun safety measures, for example. It is not a hard vote for people who have no significant rural voters, no significant percentage for getting the NRA mailings all the time. It will be a hard vote for him. And he will take it, and he will do the right thing, but then he will know how to defend it, which is very, very important. But I want those of you who do not know Mel Carnahan to know you have an extraordinary opportunity here. I know this guy. He was there with me when I was practically all alone and running fifth in the polls in New Hampshire. You want somebody that will stay hitched in the tough times and take a decision when it is not selfevidently the right thing to do. He has been a fabulous Governor, and you heard him reel off the issues.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforgovernormelcarnahan", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Governor Mel Carnahan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-governor-mel-carnahan", "publication_date": "09-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 651, "text": "That is a nice crowd on a nice, cool day. We are here today to celebrate and expand our historic campaign to rescue American workers from job-killing regulations. Before I came into office, American workers were smothered by a merciless avalanche of wasteful and expensive and intrusive Federal regulation. These oppressive, burdensome mandates were a stealth tax on our people slashing take-home pay, suppressing innovation, surging the cost of goods, and shipping millions of American jobs overseas millions and millions and millions. Nearly 4 years ago, we ended this regulatory assault on the American worker, and we launched the most dramatic regulatory relief campaign in American history by far. For every one new regulation issued, we pledged that two Federal regulations would be permanently removed. We not only met that ambitious goal which, at the time, people said was impossible we vastly exceeded it. For every one new regulation added, nearly eight Federal regulations have been terminated. As you can see behind me, we have removed the gigantic, regulatory burden Americans have been forced to carry for decades, freeing our citizens to reach their highest potential. Our historic regulatory relief is providing the average American household an extra $3,100 every single year. And we are going up from that number. We are going up from that number. Joining us today is Vice President Mike Pence. We had a great day in Georgia yesterday, cutting regulations like nobody has ever seen before. And Small Business Administrator I love her name Jovita Carranza. They do an incredible job. I also want to thank the many State and local, tribal leaders who join us in this great cause. We appreciate it. What we have achieved together is truly without precedent never happened before. The previous administration added over 16,000 pages of heavy-handed regulations to the Federal Register. Under my administration, we have removed nearly 25,000 pages of job-destroying regulations more than any other President by far in the history of our country, whether it was 4 years, 8 years, or, in one case, more than 8 years. The prior administration piled up more than 600 major new regulations a cruel and punishing regulatory burden that cost the average American an additional $2,300 per year. These regulations also inflicted a steep economic toll on African American communities. By contrast, our reforms are putting more money into the pockets of hardworking Americans.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksderegulation", "title": "Remarks on Deregulation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-deregulation", "publication_date": "16-07-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 652, "text": "In addition to saving every family more than $3,000 per year, my administration has just issued another reform that my Council of Economic Advisers estimates will lower the price of new vehicles by more than $2,200 per vehicle. And I think we are going to get that up to $3,500 per vehicle. And, by the way, the vehicles will be better, they will be stronger, and they will be safer. Our regulation cuts are also delivering massive savings on broadband Internet services, and some home energy bills will be really historically cut it is actually amazing as well as historically low gasoline prices. At the same time, we saved our oil companies we are now the largest since we have been here the largest energy source in the world. But we saved them. They had a hard time a number of months ago and, frankly, for a long time but we have saved them. But $1.99, they were telling me and, in some cases, lower than that . We are bringing back consumer choice in home appliances so that you can buy washers and dryers, showerheads and faucets. So showerheads you take a shower, the water does not come out. You want to wash your hands, the water does not come out. So what do you do? You just stand there longer or you take a shower longer? Because my hair I do not know about you, but it has to be perfect. Dishwashers you did not have any water, so you the people that do the dishes you press it, and it goes again, and you do it again and again. So you might as well give them the water because you will end up using less water. So we made it so dishwashers now have a lot more water. And in many places in most places of the country, water is not a problem. They do not know what to do with it. They do not have a problem. And old-fashioned incandescent lightbulbs I brought them back. I brought them back. They are cheaper and they are better. That is important to all of us. And we brought them back, and they are selling like hotcakes. We stopped the egregious abuse of the Clean Water Act, which extreme activists have used to shut down construction projects all across our country. When I signed that legislation, I had many farmers and construction people standing behind me people that have not cried since they were a baby.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksderegulation", "title": "Remarks on Deregulation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-deregulation", "publication_date": "16-07-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 653, "text": "Some of them never even when they were a baby, and they were crying. Many people were cry we gave them back their life. They took away their land. They took away their rights. They took away their life. By reining in EPA overreach, my administration has returned the agency to its core mission of ensuring clean air, clean water, and a truly pristine natural environment. Our air now and our water is as clean as it is been in the last four decades. Yesterday, our country achieved yet another groundbreaking milestone by completing a sweeping overhaul of America's badly broken infrastructure approval process. It was totally out of control. Instead of taking up to 20 years to approve a major project, we are cutting the Federal permitting timeline it is already been done to a maximum of 2 years or less; in some cases, even less than one year. It is possible that it will not be good environmentally or safety-wise, in which case, at least in a period of a year or 2, we will raise the hand and you will not make it. But most projects will make it, but you will not go for 10, 15, 18 or 20 years. There are many horror stories that we could relay. We are reclaiming America's proud heritage as a nation of builders. My administration has also eliminated massive regulatory barriers in our battle against the China virus. These actions save countless lives, speeding up the production of equipment. That means ventilators like nobody has ever seen before. We are now making ventilators for countries all over the world. And medicine accelerating the delivery of lifesaving treatments and ensuring that we will have a vaccine in a record time. We are doing fantastically well on that. That'll be for another time, another meeting. But we are doing, on therapeutics and vaccines, incredibly well. No administration in history has removed more red tape more quickly to rescue the economy and to protect the health of our people. When you think of it, we are all set up; that as we get the vaccine or therapeutic and we are set up, militarily we are going to be delivering it in record time. We put an investment upfront. And we have logistical people generals, great people they are going to be delivering this all over the country as soon as we have it. And we have made tremendous progress. You have been reading about it. In total, we have taken more than 740 actions to suspend regulations that would have slowed our response to the China virus.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksderegulation", "title": "Remarks on Deregulation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-deregulation", "publication_date": "16-07-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 654, "text": "This includes lifting restrictions on manufacturers so that our great autoworkers could produce more than 100,000 ventilators. So we have done over 100,000 in 100 days. And we did not have ventilators. We were not set up for ventilators. We became a country that is making a lot of them, helping so many others countries that are never going to be in a position to make them. And we have saved a lot of lives. And there is never been a person in our country even though we started with almost nothing; I say the cupboard was bare when we took over. We started with nothing. There is never been a person in our country even though we had just absolutely no we were we were going on empty never been one person that needed a ventilator that did not get it. Take a long time to get them done. Not one person has ever needed a ventilator that did not get it. We made telemedicine thank you. The people here, they get no credit for it. I do not want any credit. They should get the credit, but they get no credit. But we have done a great job helping so many other countries now. We made telemedicine available to all American patients and allowed doctors to work across State lines. I will tell you, the telemedicine is something that is really gone up by thousands and thousands of percentage points of percent. Because what happened is people that would not even think of using telemedicine, all of a sudden, started using it, and it is really turned out to be good. Really, really turned out to be good, and it solved a lot of problems. Furthermore, I have ordered Federal agencies to look for ways to make these health care reforms totally permanent. Vice President Pence is also working closely with State, local, and tribal leaders to streamline occupational licensing. Over 30 States have taken steps to reduce these barriers to unemployment and to employment, and including a State that I love very much I have a little history in that State the great State of Alaska. In Idaho, Governor Brad Little, who is here today with us as well, set a new record for regulatory relief. The American people know best how to run their own lives. They do not need Washington bureaucrats controlling their every move and micromanaging their every decision.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksderegulation", "title": "Remarks on Deregulation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-deregulation", "publication_date": "16-07-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 655, "text": "With each regulation we cut, we are not only returning the money and the power to our citizens, we are draining the Washington swamp, and they are not happy about it I can tell you that. I think you know that. I want to just, as ENTITY, say that I will always fight to defend your rights and your freedoms. We will fight very hard for your rights and your freedoms. The hard left wants to reverse these extraordinary gains and re-impose these disastrous regulations. They want to take what we have taken off, Jim, and they want to they want to put them back on. And I guess they can do that. You will fight them for a little while, but eventually you will lose. And they want to bury our economy under suffocating, relentless landslides of Washington redtape like we had before I got here. We must never return to the days of soul-crushing regulation that ravaged our cities, devastated our workers, drained our vitality and right out of our people and thoroughly crippled our Nation's prized competitive edge. We have great, great people. Our entire economy and our very way of life are threatened by Biden's plans to transform our Nation and subjugate our communities through the blunt-force instrument of Federal regulation at a level that you have not even seen yet. You have not even seen it yet. They want to go many times what they put you under in the past. Under the unity platform Joe Biden published with socialist Bernie Sanders, they are proposing and this is all in writing; it is done; they agreed they are proposing to reenter the job-killing, unfair Paris Climate Accord, which will cost our country trillions of dollars trillions and trillions of dollars and put us in a very, very bad competitive position relative to the world. Not surprising to you, China will be greatly advanced under this ridiculous agreement, and so will Russia, so will many other countries. They propose to mandate net-zero emissions from all new homes and buildings, skyrocketing the cost of construction and putting the goal of homeownership out of reach for millions destroying the look of the home, the beauty of the home. I am somebody that is built many homes, many buildings. If you take a look at this, it does not look good. But they have put it out of reach, from a cost standpoint.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksderegulation", "title": "Remarks on Deregulation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-deregulation", "publication_date": "16-07-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 656, "text": "They want to eliminate carbon from the U.S. energy industry, which means abolishing all American oil, clean coal, and natural gas. The result of this Federally mandated shutdown would be the wholesale destruction of the entire energy industry and many other industries, the economic evisceration of entire communities, and the unfettered offshoring of millions of our best jobs to foreign countries and foreign polluters. Millions and millions of jobs would go. Thousands and thousands of countries would be at a level that you have never seen. Companies would be disappearing left and right, just like they did with NAFTA, which we terminated for the USMCA, which was another beauty that we have done not for now, but another great beauty. But thousands of companies, plants, factories would be closed. Under this dismal future, energy would be unaffordable for the vast majority of Americans, and the American Dream would be sniffed out so quickly and replaced with a socialist disaster. The Democrats in DC have been and want to, at a much higher level, abolish our beautiful and successful suburbs by placing far-left Washington bureaucrats in charge of local zoning decisions. They are absolutely determined to eliminate single-family zoning, destroy the value of houses and communities already built, just as they have in Minneapolis and other locations that you read about today. Your home will go down in value and crime rates will rapidly rise. Joe Biden and his bosses from the radical left want to significantly multiply what they are doing now. And what will be the end result is you will totally destroy the beautiful suburbs. Suburbia will be no longer as we know it. So they wanted to defund and abolish your police and law enforcement while at the same time destroying our great suburbs. The suburb destruction will end with us. Next week, I will be discussing the AFFH rule AFFH rule, a disaster and our plans to protect the suburbs from being obliterated by Washington Democrats, by people on the far left that want to see the suburbs destroyed, that do not care. People have worked all their lives to get into a community, and now they are going to watch it go to hell. The Biden-Bernie plan would also use the weapon of Federal regulation to tie the hands of our police departments by abolishing cash bail think of that. They killed somebody? Crime in New York City up 368 percent from just a short while ago.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksderegulation", "title": "Remarks on Deregulation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-deregulation", "publication_date": "16-07-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 657, "text": "They got rid of a lot of police, and they are in the process of doing it a billion dollars. When I first heard about it, when you first heard about it, you did not think it was real. But they are actually trying to put it into play. It will mean the end of this country. So by getting rid of bail, they are incentivizing jail and prison closures they want to get rid of prisons; they do not think anybody should go to prison setting loose violent criminals; appointing left-wing social justice prosecutors, like you have in Philadelphia, where people creating and doing the most criminal of acts are let go, in many cases immediately, and making our wonderful cops our great, great police, cops subordinate to distant bureaucrats who have never spent a day in their lives fighting crime. Unlike the Socialists, we believe in the rule of the people, not the rule of the unelected bureaucrats that do not know what they are doing. We believe in the dignity of the individual, not the iron grip of the State. Our regulatory reforms are vital not only to the success of our economy, but the strength of our democracy and the survival of liberty itself. My administration will continue pressing forward until we have made every last vestige of Washington fully, completely, and totally accountable to the citizens of the United States. the doctors who care for our country, the truckers who sustain our country, and the farmers and ranchers who preserve our country in all of its majestic beauty. God bless you and God bless America. We must have said something right. I guess we said it absolutely right. It is about our country. It is about our country. We want to be strong, we want to respect everybody, but we have to have strong law enforcement. And that is taking place in the areas that we are responsible for. We want others to call us for help. We were going into Seattle, all set to go, and then they did it themselves. Minneapolis we said, Get the guard in there. They have done a fantastic job. As soon as they showed up, it was like a knife cutting through butter. You saw that, right? It was not the police's fault in in any of these places. The police are, generally speaking, they do a great job. That is not what they wanted to do. But the National Guard came in, and we did a great job. No problem after that, do you notice?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksderegulation", "title": "Remarks on Deregulation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-deregulation", "publication_date": "16-07-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 658, "text": "We just passed a statues and monument Executive order. They see that beautiful look at it right there. It is so beautiful the Washington Monument. If they had the choice, they'd take it down. And I guarantee you they'd rename it. They want to rename it. They do not know what they want. They just want to destroy our country. So we have many exciting things that we will be announcing over the next 8 weeks, I would say. Things that nobody has even contemplated, thought about, thought possible, and things that we are going to get done and we have gotten done and we have started in most cases. But it is going to be a very exciting 8 weeks, a 8 weeks, like I think, Mike, we can honestly say nobody has ever going to see 8 weeks like we are going to have. Because we really have we have we are taking on immigration, taking on education, we are taking on so many aspects of things that people were hopelessly tied up in knots in Congress. They cannot they have been working on some of these things for 25, 30 years. But you will see levels of detail, and you will see levels of thought that a lot of people believed very strongly we did not have in this country. We are going to get things done that they have wanted to see done for a long, long time. So I think we will start sometime on Tuesday. We will be discussing our one plan on suburbia, but that is one of many, many different plans. Then we are going into the immigration the world of immigration, the world of education. We are going into the world of health care very complete health care. And we have a lot of very exciting things to discuss. But cutting of regulation has been really something that I felt we could do, and we could do fairly easily. Nothing is easy in this country. We had statutory requirements where we'd do phase one, and then we'd have to wait 90 days. We'd do phase two, and we'd have to wait 60 days. You'd do phase three, and we are set Let us do phase four, sir. But we were able to do things that nobody has ever been able to do, or even close, on deregulation. I do not know who thought of this idea, but it is actually quite, quite simple and quite good. I do not love having that big sucker hanging over my head. But I do want to thank you all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksderegulation", "title": "Remarks on Deregulation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-deregulation", "publication_date": "16-07-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 676, "text": "You know, this is really not a rally, you know this, this has to do with workers, programs, all the things we love, but this is really, we call it a friendly protest. And you know what we are protesting? We are protesting stupidity. But hello, I will tell you what Ohio, how good have you been? What did we win by? And your governor's here, and he just said you are winning by a lot more this time than last time. I am thrilled to be here in Dayton, the home of the Wright Brothers, wow. I wonder what they would think when they see some of these F-35s and these crazy planes that we make nowadays that go thousands of miles an hour, right? But I want to just thank the very hard working patriots who are the backbone of America. You are the backbone of America. This is an amazing group of people. You know, I am going to another very nice spot in Ohio where we do have a rally, but I cannot imagine you have many more people than we have here, but they will, about 10 times more. No, this is for us and our friends and workers. We want workers. 43 days from now, We are going to win this state. We are going to win four more years in the White House. You had your best year in the history of your state and the history of our country last year. And we had it until the plague came in, and now we are building it up again rapidly, but you had the best year, and we are going to have next year will be the best year we have ever had. I believe that. You will see that in the third quarter. But we are here today to talk about jobs. We are talking about jobs, a very favorite subject of mine to know and to understand that the choice in November is going to be very simple. They keep saying socialism. They have got over that one, that one's passed already. Joe Biden spent the last 47 years shipping your jobs to China, and foreign countries. You know that. And I have spent the last four years bringing the jobs back to our country, and back to Ohio.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 677, "text": "On November 3rd, Americans will decide whether we lift our nation to soaring new heights of prosperity, or whether we will allow a Joe Biden, Sleepy Joe, to shut down our economy, impose a four trillion, that is with a T, by the way, $4 trillion tax hike, abolish Ohio clean coal, oil, natural gas, and ship your jobs and factories and dreams overseas to China and countries that you have never even heard of. If we win, Ohio wins, and most importantly, in all fairness, America wins. Because you finally have a president who puts America first. And I do put America first. I guess that is why almost four years ago, that is why I did this, right? It is because of this, probably more than any other reason. I never saw anything so stupid in my life. I watched the worst trade deals, and we have reversed many of them, almost all of them now, but we have reversed them. And again, we were having the greatest year we have ever had, and it is going to be back very soon. You take a look at what is happening. We are joined today by a real good friend of mine. Somebody that is been with me from the beginning. And I have been with him from the beginning, Ohio Governor, Mike DeWine. I will tell you another one, Mike Turner. Thanks for all the help too, both of you, really appreciate it. And a man, I do not know if you know him. He should become legendary, because when we did not have a lot of support, I had a guy named Bob Paduchik, do you know Bob? He kept saying, every time I said, You know, we are not getting the kind of support from the top people. We won this state by a lot. It is a lot of it back there too, a lot of fake news. But they were going around Mike, hey Mike, they were going around saying, Well, Trump may not be able to, in order to when you have to win Ohio, right? And then for a year, I heard, You cannot win unless you win the great state of Ohio. But they did not say the great state, I say the great state. And I heard it. I heard it for so long. And then we won that night by what? We won by a lot. In fact, it was the first indication that that was going to be a tough night for the Democrats.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 678, "text": "They said, Ladies and gentlemen, not only did Trump win Ohio, he won by a hell of a lot more than we anticipated. And then we won, look at these guys. That is why I love these guys. Nobody's messing with these guys. You know, they are great workers, but we use them also for security. If everyone gets a little bit rough, you will take care, right fellas? But we won it big, and that was the beginning of one of the most exciting nights in history, because we did something in 2016 that was amazing. And I will tell you, honestly, there is more enthusiasm now, and this is fact. In fact, they have a new thing. First of all, you know, we are working very hard on getting a third Supreme Court Justice. The only thing I will say, for the women, it will be a woman. Does anybody here, please raise your hand if you have the courage, is there anybody here that insists that it will be and should be a man? Supreme Court Justice, most powerful, most important, just the most important, you know, when you become president, they say, This is the single most important thing a president does, is pick Supreme Court And by the way, by the end of the first term, we will have 300 federal judges, a record. So let us give me a free poll. We do this, I have such fun with it. We do it. If they go out, they charge hundreds of thousands of dollars. They interview like 19 people, which mean nothing. Here we got a lot of people. So give me a free poll, who would like to see a woman Justice of the Supreme Court. Who would like to see a male Justice of the Supreme Court. What is that all about? It will be, I have five that we are vetting right now. And we are looking forward to it. And it will probably announce it on Saturday, maybe Friday, but Saturday. And it is a big day for our country. It is a big day for you. It is a big day for Ohio. I always love, why'd you say that? Like big day for Ohio, and I do it somewhat routinely. Do you ever notice when Biden goes out, and he always picks the wrong location. Like if he is in Ohio, it is great to be in the state of Florida. And he looks around, and he does not see too many palm trees.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 679, "text": "He says, Are we in Florida? He did that seven times. How do you do that? When you do that, you just walk off the stage. You can make the greatest remainder of the speech, there is nothing you can do to save it. But the people of Dayton know better than anyone, the terrible damage that Biden has inflicted over his nearly 50 years, 47 years to be exact. Can you believe it? For 47 years, Joe Biden shook the hands of American workers, and then stabbed them in the back. I mean, think of it, all over, and they raked in cash. They raked in big money. I will tell you. What did I say, Where is, Where is he? You know, we did that for fun. We did a t-shirt. That thing sold, we come up with these little gems. He is in the basement with his father. He had no job, he was thrown out of the military, he was thrown out. He had no job. And then he goes to Ukraine, and he gets $183,000 a month. Although he had no experience whatsoever, knew nothing about the subject of the company, which you know, was energy. energy. I think they got an upfront payment of three million just to be able to get them. I'd take that one myself. Then they go to China, he walks out with one point five billion to manage, which is millions of dollars a year. The whole thing is crazy and the fake news does not want to cover it. They do not want to cover it. Did you see the interview the other day with Anderson Cooper, the other night? We have a debate coming up and who knows, look he is been doing this You know what, he is been doing it for 47 years. I have been doing it for three and a half years, so he should be able to beat me I would think, he is much more experienced. But he betrayed you, he lied to you, he abused you, which is why it is time to retire Joe Biden, this is serious stuff. Do we have any Teamsters here? All right, well, I did a big favor for the Teamsters, they had trucking company. They saved 30,000 jobs, but then every year they always endorse the Democrat, does not matter, good or bad. And James Hoffa, I am so disappointed in that guy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 680, "text": "So I called, I said, I'd love to get their support. They have already endorsed sleepy Joe Biden. It is like automatic, but you know who does not endorse him, all the workers underneath and they will either throw him out or he will retire. You get tired of it, it is like automatic. They endorse the Democrat because the Democrats do whatever the hell they want. But the workers, the people underneath, the real people, they are with us all the way. I have hired thousands and thousands of Teamsters, all the concrete work on buildings in Manhattan. It is almost like a habit. But I saved this company, a big company, good company, great people. We saved it. And then you say unrelated, totally unrelated, Hey, we'd love to have you. You always have to remember things. On November 3rd, we must turn the page forever on the failed corrupt political class. They get so much things that are so unfair to the rest of our country and that is why they are always with that top level of Democrat but the workers are with us. Globalists are out, you know that right? Globalist destroyed, they helped destroy this country. I will tell you if I did not come along, I really mean it. This country was, it was going down and we stopped it. If you look at your Second Amendment, if you look at so many different things, no matter what it is. You look at our jobs, our jobs prior to the plague and now coming back. You take a look at car sales are record setting. It is amazing because we had such a good foundation. We closed it up, we saved millions of lives. We had no choice, we had to do that. And then we opened it and now we are rocking and it is going good. But the Democrats really waged war on the American workers for half a century. Look what they have done. Biden's policies destroyed 60,000 factories and killed four point, think of it, four point five million manufacturing jobs. We brought back 700,000 when they said, right, they said the magic wand, you cannot do it, manufacturing jobs are gone. Biden championed the NAFTA disaster and China's entry into the World Trade Organization, which was a total catastrophe. That is when China started going up like a rocket. They are considered in the world trade, they are considered a developing nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 681, "text": "By being a developing nation they get all sorts of advantages over us. So we have been protesting it and we do things that you would not believe. You do not even want to hear about it because it is disgraceful. And therefore for years and years, they had big advantages over the United States but no more. What followed was the nothing short, and think of it, nothing short of a blue collar carnage and it was in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and North Carolina, New Hampshire, Michigan. You know how many car plants we are bringing back to Michigan. Nobody's ever seen it. For 40 years, they did not build a plant. And now they are building them all over. And I tell countries, I told a great gentleman, he just retired, Prime Minister Abe of Japan. I said, Shinzo, you got to build plants here, you cannot do this. You are building your cars in Japan and sending them. He said, Well, that is not up to me, that is up to the company. That is all right, Shinzo, I know you can do it. The next day they announced five plants, I mean, what can I tell you? I know my people, it is up to Shinzo, it was not up to anybody else, but he is great. The workers of America will never forget Biden's economic treachery. They will remember in November after Biden betrayed and think of it, all the betrayals on NAFTA and China, 40% of all of the manufacturing jobs were shipped out of Dayton. And now the good thing is your roads, you did not have a lot of traffic. By 2016, the per capita income in Dayton had fallen 12% below the national average of $50,000. Remember this, this all happened I mean, these numbers are incredible what is happened in three years. Ohio lost one in three manufacturing jobs, two out of three iron and steel mill jobs. And now of course his ideology has changed. He is so far left that he is just so you understand, he has no choice. You see where Kamala, Kamala, she another great one that one. You see her poll numbers, her poll numbers were going down and I cannot nobody treated him worse than Kamala, right? And she said the Harris administration and working with Joe Biden, did you see that? And I heard that, I actually heard that live, although it is not real live, I will tell you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 682, "text": "I mean, if he makes it, it is going to be I am going to come back to Dayton and I am going to say what the hell happened? I will have lost to the worst presidential candidate in the history of politics. I really believe that. The guy cannot speak without the teleprompter, although I am telling you, I am telling you, I think she says. I hope you are Thank you. I tell you the country cannot afford it. One thing I have learned is that President Xi of China, President Putin of Russia, Kim Jong-un, North Korea, every one of these leaders, they are not shot. And we cannot have somebody that is sleepy. Oh, would they like to see him though? Did you see, would they like to see Joe? It is their dream to see Joe. How about Iran, you think around might like to see Joe Biden? They'd go back, they say give me another $150 billion. We gave them 150 billion. We gave them one point eight billion in cash. You know what that looks like, one point eight billion in cash? And I will tell you what, if and when we win, we will get a call within about nine seconds after the victory and it'll be Iran, it is going to want to make a deal. We want them to make a deal. They just cannot have a nuclear weapon. You cannot have a nuclear weapon. But I told people, I said, Do not talk to them now, look, they want to wait. If they could do that, if China could do it, I mean, think of it. If Russia could do it, by the way, nobody's been tougher on Russia than me with the sanctions. No, you never heard of Nord Stream until I came along. I said to Germany, let me get this straight. We defend Germany, right? We defend Germany and that is it. They do not pay what they are supposed to pay, they are delinquent, they are delinquent. So I said to Angela and I like Angela, but I said, but she is smart, why should she pay if she does not have to. So I said, Angela, so we defend you against Russia and you pay billions of dollars to Russia. Explain to me what is that all about? But you never heard about that stuff. We'd give tank busters to Ukraine.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 683, "text": "We sell them in theory, I do not know if we will ever get the money. We sell them. But he gave pillows, maybe he got them from Mike Lindell, the pillow man. You think when Obama sent pillows over to Ukraine, I send tank busters, they sent pillows. Let me tell you, we have been very rough but at the same time we get along. I like Putin, he likes me. I get along or I got along with President Xi, but I do not know, after what happened here I am having a hard time with China, I really am. They are buying a lot, the trade deal has been incredible. They have been living up to it in all fairness. But it means less now, you understand. If we would not have been hit with this pandemic, which they could've stopped, it would have meant a lot. But it just means a lot less to me right now. So now after selling you out and bleeding you dry, Biden is back asking for your vote. The guy, when he was in prime time, which for him was about halftime. Long time ago, I had a friend, a senator, a Democrat, believe it or not. I used to get along with Democrats very well, actually better than the Republicans, but I will not say that. But I asked him, Who is your smartest senator? And he gave me a name. Well, now he is a lot dumber than it used to be, I can tell you. And you can take the gloves up because they do all this disinformation, they make up phony stuff. Like the military with what he said, I think it is a disgrace and he should apologize. I have 27 people that said, no way, it did not happen. So when they do that, you take the gloves off, that is all. And nobody's done for the military what I have done. We have totally rebuilt our military. We have the greatest weapons in the world. We have gotten raises for our great warriors. Our vet just got a 91% approval rating, the highest in the history of the V.A., our vets. They gave it a 91, the V.A., gave it a 91% approval rating. Nobody's done more, nobody. We have weapons, the likes of which nobody's ever seen before. Hope to God we do not have to use them but nobody has them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 684, "text": "Not China, not Russia, nobody has the weaponry that we have. We have the greatest weapons in the world and hopefully do not have to use them. Just remember that, we have the I call it the super-duper missiles, like at a level that nobody's ever seen before. You do not see them either. I hear a noise over there. I call it super-duper, because super-duper is easier for people to understand then hydrosonic. But we have the greatest two point five trillion dollars we spent. The greatest weapons that this world has ever seen without a question, I do not have to say what they are. In fact, the fake news said, He just gave away classified information. I said, No, I just said we have the greatest weapons. I did not tell you what they are. I could, because as president I am allowed to do it. I mean, Hillary Clinton is the one that gives her white classified information. I mean, he comes in and all he wants to do is go to war with everybody. If I listened to that idiot, we'd be right now in World War Five. Sir, we saw some movement in China. I think we should go to war with them. And I think Russia, let us do them both at the same time. Let us also go in right now to North Korea. Hey, do you remember North Korea? We were supposed to be at war with North Korea. You know what the press said? First they said it was amazing and those people lost their job, probably. It is amazing what I have done, they said. No, we are supposed to be at war. They have a lot of nuclear stuff, it would not be easy. Although, I tell you what I took over our military was totally depleted. We had a depleted mil-, we had old planes, we had old everything. And now it is a beautiful brand new we have F-35s that you cannot see. We have all new rockets, all new missiles, brand new planes, the bombers, the tankers, the jet fighters. What we have done is incredible. And we had to do it, somebody had to do it. Somebody said, well, we are sort of doing some damage to our budget. I said, Look, I want to have a strong military.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 685, "text": "If I see some people, some soldiers from foreign lands, right, walking up or running up the White House lawn, the beautiful south lawn of the White House. I am not going to be saying, We did not do too well with the military, but we kept it under control in the budget, right? No, the military supersedes everything. I do not know, to me, I have always heard the Supreme Court. But to me, the most important thing has always been the military, our defense and our offense if needed. Joe Biden should not be asking for your support. He should be begging for your forgiveness and he should be. Biden supported the disastrous Trans-Pacific Partnership. This building would not be here if you ever did that one. Which would have been a death sentence for the U.S. auto industry and other industries. He supported the horrendous Korea deal, okay. Although I guess he had he was vice, Hey, you know what is interesting with Biden? So he always says, Why did not the president do this. And why did not the president do that? That is been there for 47 years, but he just left like three and a half years ago. You know what I mean, he was there. And I keep saying, Why did not you do it? Why did not you do it? Why did not you do it sleepy Joe? But the Korea deal and I say it all the time. She said, This will create 250,000 jobs. The problem was the jobs were all produced in South Korea, so that did not work out to well. Anyway, I renegotiated the deal in its entirety, now it is a good deal. That was a rip, I will tell you. And the pro-China Paris Climate Accord, it is pro-everything, it is pro-everybody but us. That would have cost us trillions of dollars, and we would have had the privilege of closing down Dayton's probably 25% of your companies. You could have never, you could have never done it. And you know when I did it, I thought I'd be scorned. They understood it. With every decision, Joe Biden twisted a knife into the hands and heart of the American worker. But these brutal betrayals ended the day I took the oath of office, that is true. I mean, I saw so much stupidity, the endless wars and we are almost out of Afghanistan as you know.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 686, "text": "Not easy to get out because we have people in this country, the military industrial complex. Eisenhower called it the military industrial complex, and it does exist. It is not easy to get out, but we are very close to getting out and getting out of the Middle East. We are down to very little in Iraq. We are down to almost nothing in Syria, but I will be honest with you, we kept the oil. Somebody said, You still have some soldiers in Syria? I said, That is why they kept the oil. We kept the oil. We should have done that in Iraq. Remember I used to say a long time ago before I was, Do not go into the Middle East, but if you are going to go in and keep the oil. Well, we went in and we did not keep anything and all the death, the blood in the sand, I call it the blood in the sand, that worthless sand. All of that death that has been caused for no reason. It was the worst decision in the history of our country going into the Middle East. 8 trillion and nothing but death and millions of lives if you look at both sides, I will look at both sides. Somebody would say, Oh, I should not be looking at the other side. I look at both sides/ a lot of innocent people were killed. We lost incredible soldiers. I see the coffins, the caskets come in in Dover and I see it. Why did they do this? My first week, I withdrew from the transpacific partnership and saved that whole business of so much and what I had to do is I extended for a short time and then totally ended NAFTA. And we did the USMCA, Mexico, Canada. We have a great deal. You always liked to have an unhappy person at the other sides. But they had a free rip at us for years and years and years, NAFTA. How many buildings, how many factories did you lose right here? Where they moved over to Mexico, moved up to Canada, moved all over the place, but that is not going to happen anymore. The new deal makes it very prohibitive to do that. In 2017, I signed a historic executive order making it really something. You got to do a couple of little expressions it is called buy American and hire American. You know life is crazy in politics. Biden runs for president like two or three times, right? And I used to call him 1% Joe.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 687, "text": "And that was primetime for him, right? Now that primetime is long over, he ends up winning the nomination. But had if Elizabeth Warren left and been loyal to her communist ideology, dare say socialist, but it is communist. It was pretty close. But had she left before Super Tuesday, Biden would've lost every state, but she took the votes away from Bernie. When they talk about sportsmanship, he got screwed by Hillary Clinton badly, but not as badly as this time, this was worse. Because all Pocahontas had to do is leave a day early. She did not even have to endorse him. And the votes that she got, which were not many, but far more than he needed, because he lost a couple of states by literally a small amount of votes. He would've gotten most of those votes. Sleepy Joe, who says Sleepy Joe? Who says Bernie? Bernie had more spirit. Joe's got no spirit, it is dead as a rock. The only spirit he is got is spirit to beat me. And historically that does not do that well. If you look at old races when somebody's getting votes because they do not like somebody, you know there is an ideology that let us face it does not like me too much. Somebody said, We do not like his personality. I said, I always thought I had a good personality. They do not like my personality. Who the hell cares about my personality, right? I do not like their personality either, but they get the job done. Who cares about their personality? But when Sleepy Joe was vice president and other countries flooded our market Thank you very much. Have you ever tried opera? But other countries flooded our market with subsidized washing machines. You remember that disaster? Does anybody know about the Whirlpool plant in Clyde, Ohio? And the head of Whirlpool came to see me. I was president-elect and he called and I do not know, for some reason I have heard of Whirlpool and I have heard of it all my life, I guess. I did not know much about it. They made washing machines and I never knew, I knew they were dumping steel on us and dumping certain things. But I did not know they were dumping washing machines. And he was a good guy, came up to my office and he said, They are putting us out of business, South Korea, China, they are dumping washing machines.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 688, "text": "They make washing machines. They dump them into our market. They put everybody out of business. Then they charge you a lot of money when everyone's gone. Just like other people do right now, unfortunately, but we are trying to track them down. Somehow it hit me. So we put a 50% tariff on all washing machines coming into our country. And I visited with Jim Jordan. You know Jim Jordan? That he works with our guys here, your guys. And we went up and saw the plant and then making thousands a day. I mean, they gave me a number, it cannot be positive. I think they said like 20,000 a day. I said, How the hell can you make that many washing machines? But you know what I am talking about Congressmen, right? They are making thousands of washing machines a day and it is a vibrant company again, it was dead, it was going to close. But I evened up the score, I put the tariffs and now what they are doing is LG and Samsung, and these companies that made the washing machine they are now coming into the United States. And in order to avoid the tariff, they are building plants in the United States and that is okay and that is what we should be doing. We are going to be doing it a lot more too. We are going to be doing it a lot more. Biden allowed other countries to target our steel industries and it was like a disaster for our steel industry, but we took historic action to end these practices and place strong tariffs on foreign aluminum and steel. And it brought back our steel. Now steel plants are opening or being upgraded in Toledo, Marion, Cuyahoga Heights, Mingo Junction, and all across the Midwest. For defense, you need it. You do not want to talk war. You do not want to talk about that, but if we had a problem, what are you going to do? Well, we do not have any steel mills. Let us see if we can get some steel from China. But sir, you are fighting them. No, we had to save our steel. We had to save our aluminum industry and we have done it. We have done a great job, but you have a lot of steel mills going up right here in Ohio. And a lot of them being expanded. As vice president, Biden did nothing as China stole our intellectual property, flooded our markets with dumped goods. They are the greatest in the world at that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 689, "text": "I go to my guys, they said, What about doing a little movement on the dollar? Sir, we cannot do that. Well, China does it. China, you talk about a manipulation. Man, it is like a yo-yo. Let us see, let us raise it. Let us lower it, lets do this and that. But we actually called them on it, did not we Congressman? Turner, by the way, you did such a good job. You are a hell of a lawyer. You could represent me any day. He actually did represent me. And then you had Jordan into it. They liked him though, do not they huh? They like Jim. And they poisoned our communities with fentanyl. You know that? Instead, Biden allowed China to ravage our towns, raid our factories and rip apart our communities. That is what they did. And then he goes in and he brings his son. Hey, see if you can give him some money. I went to Steve Schwarzman. Steve Schwarzman is like one of the biggest guys on Wall Street, Blackstone. He does a lot of business with China said, Steve, what are the chances of somebody walking into an office in China and in 10 minutes, walking out with 1.5 billion to manage? He said, Zero. He said, I could not do it and I have this great company. Then he says, You are not getting your billion dollars unless you get rid of that damn prosecutor. And then they says, They got rid of the prosecutor. I am so angry at Republicans. I am so angry, but a lot of things are happening. You are seeing, you are reading the papers also. A lot of things are happening. You know they spied on my campaign and we caught them. And by the way, that is Biden, that is Obama. They spied on my campaign. Comey and all the sleazebags, they spied on my campaign and we caught them. I stay out of it. I just say, I am trying like hell to stay out of it. Barry is shaking his head sort of like that is the weakest yes, but it is true. But it is true, I am trying to stay out of it. I tell you what, these people are bad people. They have done things. What they have done to General Flynn and to other people is a disgrace.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 690, "text": "And many others, but Joe Biden's agenda is made in China. My agenda is made in the USA. And I took the toughest ever action to stand up to China and their decades of pillaging, plundering, looting, including these massive tariffs. Do not forget, I charged tariffs. They targeted our great farmers. Do we have any farmers here? We gave the farmers $28 billion. Because they were targeted for 28 over a two-year period, 12 and 16. Did you get your check? And you might not be in business if I did not do that. She gave me the right answer. It is always dangerous to do that. No, I never got the money. She got the money. But once again, Joe Biden has sided with China over America. Look, you think this guy's going to be tough in China? And then he takes ads. He is going to be tough on China. This guy, they looted him and Obama. And in all fairness, not just the eight years, this has gone on for 25, 30 years. Probably the biggest reason I decided to run and give up one of the greatest lives anyone's ever had for this, for this. But you know why I like it? Because we have done more in the first three and a half years than any administration in the history of the country. And I say that and these fake news people do not even question it. There is nobody done what we have done. All of the things, we could go on forever. But Biden vowed to remove those tariffs. He wants to remove the tariffs. You know when I made the deal with China, I said I have to leave the tariffs on. They wanted one thing, the removal of the tariffs, and I would not do it. We would not do it. But Biden said the other day, he wants to take the He does not know what a tariff is first of all. Sleepy Joe would like to remove the tariffs off China. They are paying billions of dollars a year. Could we take them off? The radical left, which likes China, the radical left would walk into his office. I have not exactly used it too much today. And they will say, Here President, sign this. Do you have a pen? That is the deal with China. But he gave China free rein to continue ransacking the American Heartland. And you know, look, they were targeting you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 691, "text": "The reason nobody took on China was China said, We are going to go after your heartland. And they said that to the presidents. And I said, Go ahead, do it. They all said, We have got to do it sometime. They told me that. I mean, they told me that loud and clear. We did not lose anything with the farmers. They said, Somebody's got to do it. And I said, Here is what we are going to do. We are going to let them target you. We are going to charge them tariffs and going to give you back the money that you lost, that you were targeted for. And we are going to have tens of billions leftover for the treasury. Nobody else ever told him that. He is too scared to stand up to the radical left of his own party. And he is terrified of standing up to China, but I believe he is much more scared of the radical left than he is of China. You see the reports and news reports. They want him to win at any cost. If Biden is elected, China will own America. And if Biden is elected, you will have a depression the likes of which this country has never seen before. That is what they are going to have. Does anybody mind paying more tax? I like politics. I just always liked it. It is lucky I liked it because I never did it before. He is got no experience. And now that I look around yesterday, I was in the Oval Office, I said, Oh, excuse me. No, but a lot of it is common sense. That is why we call it protest. We are studying some of the things. I will tell you one quick story. So we are building an aircraft carrier long before my term, the Gerald Ford. And they decide on the catapults. You know the catapult? That throws the plane into the air. For years, it is been 50 years, whatever longer, it is been steam, simple, beautiful steam throws her off You ever see those airplanes? I came in and they said, Oh, it is got tremendous cost overruns. That is strange because they have been building them for years. You know about this. So anyway, I am supposed to go over and take a tour. I went to take a tour of the ship, find out why it is so late. I will not tell you how many billions of dollars it is over budget.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 692, "text": "Other than that, it is wonderful. The elevators that bring the planes up, they do not work. So if you have a problem, you can get your plans up. They are down stuck in a garage, down at the bottom. So I go over and they want me to meet the admiral, but I said, No, no, no. I do not want to meet the admiral yet. I meet with the admirals a lot. I got a lot of admirals. I like the admirals. I want to meet with the catapultors. Sir, why would you want to meet with the catapultors for? So I went there and you know they did a new system. So instead of steam, which is simple and great and powerful and good. And they know how it works for years and years, they decided to go all electric. Now if you take a little glass of water, take this glass of water, you throw it and that is the end of that. You bring somebody in from MIT, how the hell do you fix it? And we are dealing with the ocean and rockets being shot at the ship and the rough stuff. So I said, No, I want to meet with a catapultor. One's been doing it for over 20 years I think he said. I said, What do you think of our new system of electric catapults? That is actually it is what I expected it to be on. I said, What do you think of steam? That if it breaks down, I can fix it with a blowtorch or this hammer, I can fix it. And if the waves hit it, sir, all it does is cool it down a little bit, sir. It is actually good for it, good for the surrounding steel. I said, Why did they do the electric? Then I wanted to see the architect and I saw a representative, the architect of ship. Now this is a ship that costs $15 billion. And I looked at the architect. I said, Have you designed a ship before? I said, You know, they have a $900 million cost overrun for electric catapults, and they are no good even if they were. I said to the guy, Why is it that they did away? Sir, we could do it much faster. I said, All right, well, that makes sense.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 693, "text": "But the catapulter said, But sir, it does not matter because it takes one minute and 52 seconds, if you are Mario Andretti's team, to get a plane hooked in. So the steam generates during that minute and a half and it is all set to go. I said, That makes sense. That makes sense. So it is $900 million in cost overruns and here is the story. They spent much more money and it is no good. Then they have the elevators. Now, tractors use hydraulic, right? You know, they could do anything. Lightning hits the damn thing and nothing happens. So they have these big elevators that lift the planes up. They are lifted by magnets. I know about that. So instead of using powerful hydraulic that never breaks, they have magnetized elevators. I tell you this because you are workers and you guys understand this. It is what we do is so stupid. So they have hundreds of millions of dollars in cost overrun for stuff that is no good. And two years ago I told them it is no good. You might as well rip it out because it is never going to work. You put hydraulic in the elevators and you go back to steam and it is such a shame to see the kind of money that was squandered by people that have no idea what the hell they are doing. And you would understand that. I'd only tell that story to really sort of a group like this because you guys understand it. It is mechanical engineering at a very easy level. Hundreds of millions of dollars wasted for something not as good. Our politicians spent trillions and trillions of dollars rebuilding foreign nations, fighting foreign Wars, and defending foreign borders. But now we are finally protecting our nation, rebuilding our cities. We are bringing our jobs, our factories, and our troops back home to the USA where they belong. When the terrible plague arrived from China, we mobilized American industry like never before. We rapidly developed lifesaving therapies reducing the fatality rate by 85%. We have done such a good job, except in terms of public relations because the press just will not accept that. Think of what we have done with the ventilators. Europe is almost 30% greater excess mortality than the United States. They do not want to say it. And now, as you know, you heard today, Europe had a tremendous outbreak. You know, they say, Well, Europe, Europe, Europe.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 694, "text": "Sadly, very sadly, I hate it, but they had a big outbreak that caused a stir in the market today. We launched the most ambitious vaccine program ever created. And we will deliver a vaccine before the end of the year, but it could be a lot sooner than that, a lot sooner. The Democrats, they are all saying, We want a vaccine. That is when they thought we could not get it, right? Because if we relied on them, this vaccine would have taken two or three years more because of the FDA, and I have mobilized the FDA, and it is incredible. But it would have taken two or three years more. So when they heard that we were getting the vaccine, they started knocking it. So they put politics over life and death. By the way, we are rounding the corner in any event, but we are going to have a vaccine very soon, is a great vaccine, great, great vaccine. And it is pretty sad when the Democrats try and make that into a political issue. We will end this pandemic in the next year. The third quarter will end just before November 3rd. You will see numbers, the likes of which no country has ever seen. I guess you are going to have to remember that. And if they are good, I hope you are going to remember it too, but they are going to be great. Somebody predicted 25% and then somebody said 35% GDP increase. Nobody's ever heard of a number like that. But that is the kind of thing we are doing. Under my leadership, we built the strongest economy in the history of the world, and now we are doing it again. In the past four months, we have added a record smashing 10.6 million jobs, never been close to that. And you know, as good as the stock market's doing, it is a headwind knowing you have an election. Things happen in elections, some bad things, some stupid things. If we win and when we win the election, you are going to see things roar because that is what people want. That is what the market wants. And that is what the workers want. Biden keeps talking about a nationwide shutdown. My plan is to crush the virus. Biden plan and Biden's really plan is to, and it is not that he wants to crush America, but he will just out of gross incompetence. Biden will surrender to the virus, just like he surrendered to China.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 695, "text": "And just like he surrendered to the radical left, including his own running mate who is running the show. Well, I will tell you something. Elizabeth Warren did do a great number on Bloomberg. I tell you. One question and that was the end of him. How you enjoying politics, Mike? 1.8 billion wiped out in one question. That was the most expensive question in history. To protect our workers during the pandemic, I suspended the entry of new foreign workers who threatened American jobs. You do not mind that, do you folks? As the economy reopens, I want to ensure American workers that we are putting America first and our jobs are put first. Everything is now put first for the USA. And by the way, we are up to mile 330 on the wall. We are setting records on not allowing all of these. When you look at the traffickers. They traffic in women and drugs and other things, but they traffic in women, the drug dealers always. Setting records now on the wall because we have 330 miles. We are averaging 10 miles a week and we will be finished with the wall very soon. And it is had a huge impact. So one of the most radical things that will happen, and there is no way he can get away with this because he was banning fracking for a year. He is running, running, he is banning fracking. And then all of a sudden, now all of sudden he said, Well, I did not really say that. Remember, it is always the first thing they say with a politician. He wants to ban fracking and outlaw Ohio energy production. And you are a big energy producer, whether you know it or not. So he is going to ban fracking. And even if he did not want to, the whole radical left, their plan is to ban fracking. They want to ban fracking. They do not want any fossil fuels. Just a few days ago, Biden reiterated his plan to require net zero carbon emissions. So you do that. This requirement would end all investment in fracking and it would just shut down everything. Our country, do you see the rolling blackouts they have in California? I do not think we want too many of them in Ohio. Would anybody like a few rolling blackouts? Like we'd like to watch president Trump tonight. I am sorry, darling, but we have no energy. We have no energy. We are going to get it from the wind.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 696, "text": "The wind, the wind has got a wonderful, wonderful energy. The wind, when it is blowing it is just fine for about 20% of the time. By ending fracking, Biden would destroy 700,000 to a million Ohio jobs and your energy prices would go through the roof. When Biden was Vice President, they deliberately killed 40% of all coal mining jobs and the rest were coming fast. I saved it. I put our miners back to work, clean coal. I call it clean coal. And while I am President, America will remain the number one producer of oil and natural gas anywhere in the world and Ohio workers will continue leading the way. And that is what we are doing. And just in concluding, over the next four years, we will build America into the manufacturing, super power of the world. And we will end our reliance on China and all other faraway lands that nobody in this beautiful facility, whatever the hell you make here, I do not know, but it looks good to me. But nobody ever heard of it. You have lands that would go to that nobody ever even heard of. Where are you sending this money? We are sending it to such and such a country. I never heard of it. We will make our medical supplies right here in the United States. We will cut your taxes and taxes for middle class families at a level never seen before. You know, we gave you the biggest tax cut in the history of our country. We gave you the biggest regulation cut in the history of our country. And we are going to give you additional regulation cuts. That is one of the reasons you had the jobs. You know, in many ways, the regulation cutting was perhaps as important or more important. And we are going to expand opportunity zones to ensure that no community is left behind. And they have been a tremendous success, especially for the African American, Hispanic community. We worked hard on it. We will enforce immigration rules that defend American families, raise American wages, and always put the interests of American workers first. We will enact fair trade deals that ensure more products are proudly stamped with that beautiful phrase Made in the USA, right? In God We trust. And they took the word God out of the Pledge of Allegiance. You saw that. I was listening to this Pledge of Allegiance and I said, That is strange. They must've made a mistake.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 697, "text": "And then it was getting ready to happen a third time, and somebody heard that the public was enraged, including me by the way. And by the way, we want the NFL to stand and put their hand on their heart. I thought we taught them that lesson about two years ago. The commissioner tried it again. People are angry about it. People love our country. You love our country. You love our flag. You love our anthem. This November, if you want jobs, if you want opportunity, if you want safety, and if you want a President who defends the dreams of workers in Dayton and Akron and all across Ohio in America, then you need to get out and vote for Trump, Mike Pence. And I love Mike, but it is not Pence Trump, okay? You know, when he said that the other day. He said the Harris Biden administration. And Mike called me up. He said, You never have to do that. Mike Pence has done a great job. I will tell you. This was a group of people, workers, and this is what it was told to me as, and we had a lot of fun and we have a lot of fun, but it is very serious business. November 3rd and before, depending on whether or not you have those fake ballots or whatever. I mean, that thing is going to be one of the great catastrophes. When they have small races, they cannot account. People steal the ballots. People do not get the ballots. They do not send them to a Republican area or maybe a Democrat area, whatever, it is still wrong. But they do not send them out. Then they harvest them, which they are not allowed to do. They have in Nevada, the Governor said he signed an order that they do not have to sign. We need no signature verification. Because they could not get people to sign, so they said, We will just send them in. This is a real affront to our democracy. And the Democrats know it and they say, Well, he is not for our great heritage. He is fighting our vote. No I am not fighting our vote. You have ballots that you go out and you can get, you could request as you know, you can request them and that is fine. But if you are not requesting them, when you get millions of ballots, 80 million they say all over the United States, where the hell are they going? Who is sending them?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcampaignspeechtranscriptvandaliaohioseptember21", "title": "Donald Trump Campaign Speech Transcript Vandalia, Ohio September 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-campaign-speech-transcript-vandalia-ohio-september-21", "publication_date": "21-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 698, "text": "My arm still hurts from the last time or one of the last times I came to St. Louis. I tried to fire a 90-mile-an-hour fastball on opening day got up there about 60, maybe. But I love coming to your town. Those of you who have traveled I want to thank those of you who traveled from outside this great city of St. Louis to come to support Talent. The Show Me State my attitude is, show me a good Senator, and I am going to back him. And we have got a great Senator in Jim Talent. I appreciate his spirit. I appreciate his working with the White House. He is an independent enough guy to tell us if we are not doing right. Tough, principled, unwilling to yield when he stands for when he believes he is correct. Every time I am with him, he is always talking about the citizens of Missouri. I say, What about Texas? So I am proud to stand here with him. And I think the people of Missouri will be wise to send this good man back to the United States Senate. It is good to meet your mother-in-law. It is a smart thing to bring the mother-in-law through the photo op line. I was also thrilled to meet Michael and Kate and Chrissy, Jim and Brenda's children. See, what is important to the Talents is putting their family first. That is what I like about Jim Talent. He is got his priorities absolutely straigh faith, family, and the United States of America. And Laura sends her love to all our friends here in Missouri. I was proud of her trip recently to the Middle East. She is sending a strong message as part of the freedom movement, and that is, you cannot be free unless women have a free role in society. But more importantly, she is a wonderful mother, wonderful wife, and a great First Lady for the United States. And I want to thank the senior Senator. That is appropriate to call you senior, but you are a little older than Talent, at least. Kit Bond has served this State with great distinction for a long time. And I am proud of your Governor. It still amazes me that you are old enough to meet the age requirement. He is the youngest looking Governor in America. And I appreciate your leadership in the statehouse, Matt. And the Lieutenant Governor is with us, Pete Kinder.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 699, "text": "I have known Pete a long time, and I appreciate your serving, Pete, and joining Matt and making this State be all that it can be. I want to thank Congressman Kenny Hulshof as well, and his wife, Renee. Kenny is a bright star in the House of Representatives from the great State of Missouri. I love talking to Kenny. Every time I see him he says soybeans. I thank Mike Gibbons and his wife, Liz. I want to thank Rod Jetton, the speaker of the statehouse, and his wife, Cassie. I want to thank all of you all who serve. Somebody told me they thought Ambassador Danforth would be here tonight. I do want to say that he represented our country so well. I asked Jack Danforth from the State of Missouri to help resolve the Sudan civil war, the conflict between north and south. And unfortunately, Darfur has obscured the great progress that Ambassador Danforth made on behalf of peace. And when it is all said and done, Jack, your contribution to helping solve that problem will go down in history as one of the great humanitarian gestures by our country, led ably by you. I want to thank all the folks who helped put on this fundraiser. It is an incredibly successful evening and which speaks not only to your hard work but also to the admiration that your Senator has earned by the people of Missouri. We have got a lot to do in Washington. One of the things I like about Talent is he understands that our job in Washington is to confront problems, not pass them on to future Congresses. That is what the American people expect from those of us who have been elected. And we have got some problems we got to solve. Now, we dealt with one of our problems, and that is our economy. We had some tough times for a while because of the enemy attack and the down cycle of our economy. I do not know if you know this or not, but in the last 2 years, we have added over 3.5 million new jobs. More Americans are working today in our country than in the Nation's history. And I appreciate the fact that Jim understands we cannot rest, that the job of Government is not to create the wealth but an environment in which people are willing to risk capital, an environment in which there is a reasonable chance for America to stay competitive in the world. And one way to do that is to make sure we finally get an energy policy out of the United States Congress.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 700, "text": "When I first got to Washington, I recognized that our country was too dependent on foreign sources of energy. And so I went to the Congress and said, Here is a strategy that will encourage more conservation, a strategy that will use research and development dollars to make it more likely we will have more renewable sources of energy, a strategy that says we can explore for oil and gas in environmentally friendly ways in America, a strategy that recognizes we need to use nuclear power, a strategy we need clean coal technology, a strategy that says we can use soybeans to refine biodiesel They got it out of the House, and thanks to Jim Talent's leadership and Kit Bond's leadership, they are going to get a good bill off the Senate floor. I am going to sign a bill. For the sake of national security and for the sake of economic security, Congress needs to get me a good energy bill by the recess, by the summer recess break this year. Smart policy will enable us to grow out of our hydrocarbon society, which we are going to have to do. I went to a refinery in Virginia the other day it is an unusual kind of refinery; it is a refinery that refines biodiesel and saw a new C.A.T. engine that can burn 100 percent biodiesel with no exhaust. See, technology is going to enable us to diversify away from our old habits, which will be good for our country, good for our economy. And the United States Congress can help that diversification process through wise policy. Jim Talent understands that, and I am going to keep pushing hard to make sure the rest of the United States Senators understand that. I appreciate the fact that we passed a good, tough budget out of the United States Senate. I hope you appreciate that as well. We have got to show the people of this country that we can be wise about how we spend your money. Notice I did not say the Government's money how we spend your taxpayers' money. And so I said to them, Here is a way to cut our deficit in half, meet our priorities, but it requires fiscal discipline. And I want to thank Jim Talent for his understanding that you cannot be all things to all people when it comes time to spending the taxpayers' money. You have to set priorities. You have to have goals, and you must show fiscal discipline. We passed a good budget.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 701, "text": "I am looking forward to working with this good Senator to make sure the appropriation process stays stuck to the budget. I am also working on Social Security for a reason. The reason is, is that there is a huge problem looming for a younger set of Americans. I just came from Hopkinsville, Kentucky Hopkington, Kentucky, and I told the people there what I have been telling folks all across the country, that if you get your check, you have nothing to worry about. I mean, the Social Security system is just fine for people receiving their check. But because baby boomers like me are getting ready to retire see, my retirement age shows up at 2008 which is a convenient year. But the problem for younger workers is there is more than just me retiring. As a matter of fact, about 73 million of us are set to retire. And I do not know about the rest of you baby boomers here, but I plan on living longer than the previous generation. As a matter of fact, I am trying to exercise on a daily basis so that I do live longer. And not only that, but we have been promised greater benefits than the previous generation. So you have got a lot of baby boomers living longer, getting greater benefits, with fewer people paying into the system. In 1950 I do not know if you know this or not but 16 workers paid for every retiree. So we have got a problem, folks. It is not a problem for people who receive their check. It is a problem for people coming up. It is a problem not for the grandparents but the grandchildren. And so I think now it is time to do something about it, and so does Jim Talent. And I have laid out some proposals. One of them is, why do not we just slow down the growth rate of benefits for some of the wealthier citizens. Their benefits will grow but not as quite as fast as Congress of the past thought they ought to grow. It is called progressive indexing, which, by the way, will get most of the problem solved. I also think younger workers ought to be allowed to take some of their own payroll tax and set up in a voluntary personal savings account. Right now the Government gets a whopping 1.8 percent on your money when we hold it in the payroll tax. With a conservative mix of bonds and stocks, you can get at least 4 1/2 percent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 702, "text": "You compound that difference over time, somebody is going to have a pretty sizable nest egg they can call their own. The reason I like Jim Talent is because he wants to promote an ownership society in America. He and I reject this business about the investor class only pertains to a certain group of people. We believe everybody in this country ought to own assets. We believe everybody ought to have the ability to pass on their assets to whomever they choose. We know that when you own something, you have a vital stake in the future of the United States of America. Now is the time to not only fix Social Security for generations to come but to make Social Security a better deal for all Americans. And when we get that done, we are going to reform the Tax Code. I put together a group of Democrats and Republicans to make some recommendations. I know I will have a strong ally in Jim Talent in making sure the Tax Code is more fair, is less large, and accomplishes the mission, and that is to collect revenues for our Government in a fair, honest way. Do you realize that I read a report the other day where some person estimated from the IRS that there is about $325 billion a year in people avoiding taxes. And part of it has to do with the complexities of the Tax Code. For the sake of an economy that grows and for the sake of a better America, we have got to reform the Tax Code of the United States, and we will. I have got a good ally in Jim Talent when it comes to legal reform. One sure way to make sure this country is not competitive is to allow these frivolous and junk lawsuits to continue to plague people who are trying to run businesses. We got too many lawsuits in America, plain and simple. I want to congratulate Matt for getting good legal reform out of the legislature. We ought to do the same thing in Washington. We got a good class-action reform bill out, and I want to thank Jim for his work on that. I think we are going to get an asbestos bill out here pretty quick, which would be good news. We need one other bill that is really important. You know, when I went to Washington, I said, Well, most of these legal matters can be solved at the State level, until I began to look at the effect on the Federal budget of these junk and frivolous lawsuits against docs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 703, "text": "Because of these lawsuits, doctors either get run out of business, or the premiums go up which cost you or the taxpayers more money or they practice defensive medicine in order to stay out of the courts. It is estimated that these lawsuits cost the Federal Government about $28 billion a year. Even for all the money we spend, that is a lot. We want people to have their day in court if they get injured by a lousy doc, but we got to do something about these frivolous lawsuits. I proposed a good piece of legislation that is now stuck in the United States Senate. Jim Talent is a strong backer for medical liability reform at the Federal level, and I want to thank him for his support. I remember when Jim ran for the Senate, he said he would be Missouri's health care Senator, and he has kept that promise. We worked together to strengthen Medicare by giving seniors more choices and by modernizing the system to include a prescription drug benefit. Talent understood what I know what kind of system is it where we pay for surgery from a heart attack but not the medicine to prevent the surgery from being needed in the first place? It was an antiquated, outdated system that needed market incentives in the program and needed to be brought up to date for the sake of our seniors. The Medicare bill that Jim helped pass out of the United States Senate is a good piece of legislation that will mean better quality of life for our seniors in America. And finally, an issue I know is dear to his heart is association health plans. You know, too many small businesses cannot afford health insurance for their employees. And there is a practical way to deal with the problem, and that is to allow small businesses to pool risk across jurisdictional boundaries so they can buy insurance at the same discounts that big companies get to do. It is a sensible approach to helping deal with health care costs. It makes a lot of sense. Talent is the author of that idea on the Senate floor, and I look forward to working with him to get association health care plans past. And I want to thank you for your leadership on that issue. There is a lot of issues that we could be talking about here, and he said, when I got up here, he said, Make sure you keep it relatively short. These people paid a lot of money. I do want to talk about a couple of other things, though.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 704, "text": "Because of Jim Talent's leadership and steadfast support, our party will continue to support faith-based and community groups as a way to help heal hurt in America. You know, I gave a speech the other day at Calvin College, and I talked about Alexis de Tocqueville. He had interesting observations about America in 1832. He talked about the strength of America being in the souls of our citizens and that people were able to find great comfort and solace and strength through civic organizations, voluntary organizations where people come together to help heal the hurts of society. That was true in 1832, and it is darn sure true today in 2005. The strength of this country lies in the hearts and souls of our citizens. And the Federal Government should not fear should not fear the presence of faith to help deal with social problems, as a matter of fact, ought to welcome faith programs and to help deal with social problems. I appreciate Jim's willingness to join me in promoting a culture of life in America. I want to thank Jim for helping defend the institution of marriage from being redefined by activist judges. And speaking about judges I want to thank both Senators from Missouri for understanding that every nominee a President sends up must have a fair hearing in the Judiciary Committee, an expeditious hearing in the Judiciary Committee and then an up-or-down vote on the floor of the United States Senate. I nominated a fantastic woman named Priscilla Owen over 4 years ago to the bench, Fifth Court. She is a fantastic lady, tops in her law school class. In our State, you got to run for Supreme Court, and she ran for Supreme Court, got endorsed by Republicans and Democrats, won something like 80 percent of the State because she is a great judge. For 4 long years her nomination was held up for pure partisan reasons 4 years and finally, as a result of never giving up and being steadfast and strong, she got her vote. I want to thank Senators Talent and Bond for supporting this great woman. We got another confirmation that needs to get done too. It is time for the United States Senate to stop playing pure politics, stall politics, and give John Bolton an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. People look at the Government and say, What is going on with all this filibustering? Why cannot people come together and do what is right for the country? Listen, the United Nations needs reform, and I have got a man who can go up there and reform it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 705, "text": "And John Bolton needs a vote. People are tired of this. Focus on the people's business; stop playing politics; get something done for the good of the country. And that is the attitude Jim Talent brings to the Senate floor, and I appreciate that a lot. Jim Talent also understands the war on terror goes on. He is a strong, strong supporter of our military, and I want to thank you for that. You know, we have a duty to make sure these troops get the best possible equipment and the best possible training. And we are fulfilling that obligation. You know, our strategy is clear on the war on terror. We are going to find them overseas so we do not have to find them face them here at home. We will defeat them there in order to protect the homeland. The only way to defend America is to stay on the offense against these people, and that is exactly what the United States of America will continue to do. One is through good intelligence and good movement of troops and good work with the allies. And there is another way to stay on the offense against the terrorists, and that is to spread freedom. There is nothing that frightens these ideological killers more than democracy. It scares them a lot. They cannot survive in a democracy. They can survive in places where tyrants have discouraged hope, suppressed people. They cannot survive in an open society. See, they cannot stand the light of freedom. One, we will be tough as heck and stay on the offense, but we will also have great faith in the capacity of freedom to transform hateful societies to hopeful societies, to transform the conditions that create hate to the conditions that create hope. And that is what you are seeing around the world. It is a fantastic period in American history. If you have got young children, I hope you explain to them what they are seeing. It was not all that long ago that those poor people lived under the barbaric clutches of the Taliban. These people were so barbaric that young girls were not even allowed to go to school, and if their mothers dared speak out, they were taken to the public square and whipped. We liberated Afghanistan for our own sake. Remember, Afghanistan was the home of Al Qaida and its training camps. I laid out a doctrine that said, If you harbor a terrorist, you are as guilty as the terrorists.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 706, "text": "And we told the Taliban to get rid of Al Qaida, and they would not do it, and so it is important that when you say something, you mean it. It is important that when you say you are going to do it that you go ahead and do it, for the sake of peace. But as importantly, 25 million people were liberated in Afghanistan. It is fantastic to think about that. I have had a lot of friends go over to Afghanistan, and Karen Hughes was there early on after the liberation, and she went again. I will tell you a great American story. My barber was raised in Afghanistan. And she came over here to there was a revolution or civil war or whatever you want to call it, and she decided to stay in America, raised her three kids here, and used her great talents and enthusiasm for her country to raise money to build two schools. What kind of a country is it where you got a barber to the President working hard, using her influence and her contacts and her friends to raise money quite a bit of money, by the way to build schools in a faraway country, spectacular country that encourages compassion not only at home but abroad. Afghanistan is changing for the better, and as it does, the world will be more peaceful. Listen, we got rid of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. Saddam Hussein was a threat to peace. I am sure you were amazed, as was much of the world, at the 8 1/2 million people who defied the car bombers and the killers and the suiciders to say as loud as they possibly can, You will not prevent us from voting and exercising our rights as free citizens. And now we are standing with the Government as they struggle against these suiciders. And our mission is clear there as well, and that is to train the Iraqis so they can do the fighting, make sure they can stand up to defend their freedoms, which they want to do. And then our troops are coming home with the honor they earned. And the world will be better off with a free Iraq and a free Afghanistan in the broader Middle East. Ukraine had a freedom revolution. Lebanon is now having a freedom revolution. Listen, freedom is on the march. And the role of the United States of America is to stand with freedom lovers and reformers and believers in the power of democracy. And when we do so and as we do so, we will leave a foundation of peace behind for our children and grandchildren.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorjamesmtalentstlouismissouri", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator James M. Talent in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-james-m-talent-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "02-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 707, "text": "We congratulate you all. We are delighted that the Chair of the District of Columbia Control Board, Andrew Brimmer, and Councilwoman Charlene Drew Jarvis are here. And I want to thank Secretary Daley in spite of the fact that he was making fun of my penchant for animal stories of all kinds. I mean, I do not come from Chicago--I come from the country. But my wife comes from Chicago. I want to thank Earnie Deavenport, too. Several years ago the Eastman Company loaned me an executive when I was Governor of Arkansas, and we established the first statewide total quality management program in the country. It was what gave me the idea to start what eventually became the reinventing Government project headed by the Vice President, which among other things has now given us the smallest Federal Government since John Kennedy was here. And I will give $5 to anyone in the audience who can honestly say you have missed it. I say that because the Federal employees have done a very good job of increasing their output and the quality of their service while downsizing their numbers so that we can take advantage of technology, get the deficit down, get the economy going again. So we have learned from you. And I have talked with Earnie many times about the importance of trying to apply these lessons to other areas of human endeavor. I also think there are applications-if you look at the success in many law enforcement departments around the country, there are law enforcement applications here because the thing that a belief in continuous progress through not only doing the right things but doing the right things right gives you is the conviction that you can repeat whatever you are doing right in one place somewhere else. So I really am delighted to see you here. But I think, for me, because I have seen this work over and over and over again in the private as well as the public sector, that is what cries out for application to our public institutions, whether it is in education or health care or in law enforcement. If the city of Boston could go virtually 2 1/2 years without a single child being killed by a handgun, until-unfortunately, they had an incident last week, but they went 2 1/2 years. No city in the United States that big has been able to do that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthemalcolmbaldrigenationalqualityawards1", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-awards-1", "publication_date": "19-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 708, "text": "It must therefore follow that if other people did the same thing in the same way and then you started the kind of contest you have here in the market system so everybody tried to keep continuously improving their process, that we would become a safer country. In health care, we have all these-you know, managed care, on balance, has been a good thing for America, because we have managed some inefficiency out of the system. But now people are genuinely worried about who is making the decisions about their health care and whether quality will continue to be the most important value in the health care system. I think all of us want it to be; even those of you who may have responsibility in your organization for holding down health care costs, the last thing in the world you want is for your employees not to have access to the health care that they need. And goodness knows, in education-I have said this so many times, the poor people in the press who have to cover me get tired of hearing it, but the most frustrating thing about American education today is that every problem in education has been solved by somebody somewhere, and nobody's figured out how to have everybody else follow suit so that you launch the kind of competitive process that you come here to celebrate today. So, for all these reasons, I love coming here. And I always feel that by the time I get up to speak, there is no point in my saying anything. I told Mrs. Baldrige I kind of hated to walk out here. You all were so enthusiastic, you should have been outside listening to all this energy being emanated from this room. It is wonderful to be in a place where people do not think it is too corny or too embarrassing to be exuberant about what they do. Can you imagine what would happen in this country if everybody wanted to wave a flag for the place they work every day? Can you imagine that? I am sure somewhere in this room there is some cynic saying, This is too hokey. I cannot believe they are doing this. Where do you spend more time than at work? Why should not you want to wave a flag? We want to cheer about our families, cheer about the places we work, cheer about the clubs we associate with. This country would work a lot better if everybody felt like they could cheer about the place they work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthemalcolmbaldrigenationalqualityawards1", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-awards-1", "publication_date": "19-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 709, "text": "That is why I always try to make these awards, and why I think it was a stroke of genius to establish them, although I bet even when they were established, the founders could never have imagined what the far-reaching impact would be, that most States would follow suit, that countries would follow suit. There is this idea now embodied in our four winners today, in 3M Dental Products, in Merrill Lynch Credit, in Solectron, and XBS, that you can always get better and that you can organize not only to do the right things but to do the right things right in a way that elevates the people who work for the enterprise, serves the general public better, and obviously supports the bottom line. It is nice to think that. If you get a multiple-choice question like that, it is not too easy to make an A. None of us do all the time. But we come here to celebrate what we can do at our best. I'd also like to thank the Department of Commerce, Secretary Daley, the National Institute of Standards and Technology for the support that they give to this endeavor. But most of all, I just want to say, just think about where this idea was 10 years ago and where it is today. Think about how many of the groundbreaking reforms that have been recognized in Baldrige Award winners in the past that are now just standard industry practice. Think about what it would be like if everybody would so shamelessly try to learn what their competitors are doing and do it at least that well and then figure out how to do it better, if in every area of human endeavor you did that. What do we celebrate? The stake the employees have in the company, the flexibility, the innovation, the creativity, the spirit of enterprise. It has brought America back. When I became President, and even when I was running for President, I saw that the 1980's, while they had been very tough on American business, had also produced a remarkable understanding that was widely shared throughout the country about what had to be done to be internationally competitive. And I always saw a big part of my duty here as just to have Government policies that would reinforce what is right and get out of the way of what is right, so that we could create the conditions and give people the tools so that everybody could do what you are doing. And we have tried to do that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthemalcolmbaldrigenationalqualityawards1", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-awards-1", "publication_date": "19-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 710, "text": "I appreciate what Secretary Daley said about the turtle on the fencepost; that is one of the things I always say in the Cabinet meeting. It took us 3 months, and we did not have to translate all my aphorisms to people who never had the privilege of living in rural areas. We have tried to do three simple things to help you. One, get the deficit down and balance the budget so that we could keep interest rates down, improve interest rates not only for businesses but for individuals and on home mortgages, and two consequences of that are that we have an all-time high rate of homeownership-it is above two-thirds for the first time in the history of America-and we have record levels of business investment, which is becoming very important now because we are able to sustain a little higher rate of internal growth as you see a little turmoil around the world. I want to say a little more about that in a minute. When the Congress adopted the balanced budget amendment-I mean act-in 1997, back in August, and I signed it, the deficit had already dropped by 92 percent below its high in 1992. It went from $292 billion a year down to $23 billion a year. And I want to make a point about that, because I am sure you found this in your company. When you get this award, you can come here and celebrate, and you do not even have to think about how hard and often controversial some of the changes you had to make were to get to this point. Well, when we decided we were going to bring the deficit down, it was like pulling fingernails out around this place. And the bill in 1993 passed by one vote in both Houses. Now all of us think we are geniuses. If it had gone wrong, half the people that live in town could have said, I told you they were fools. And now we are going to balance this budget, and we are going to have a healthier economy. And that is very important because it frees you to do what you do best. The second thing we have tried to do is to change the conditions in which you operate by opening more of the global economy to American companies. We have had over 200 trade agreements in the last 5 years, by far the largest number ever. And the Uruguay round, finished back in 1993, amounts to the largest tax cut on American goods in history. And now we are the number one exporter in the world again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthemalcolmbaldrigenationalqualityawards1", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-awards-1", "publication_date": "19-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 711, "text": "I think it is very important that we continue to press ahead in that. I believe very strongly that it was a mistake when we were unable to get enough votes in the House of Representatives to renew the President's fast-track trade authority to negotiate comprehensive bills. Not because nobody ever loses in trade in America. But most of the job loss in America comes from technological change and old-fashioned business failure. Some of it does come from change in the trading rules. What is the answer to that? You can either say, Well, we are just not going to change any more rules and try to pretend that we will not be subject to these global forces, or you could say, We are going to change the rules, create more jobs, raise more incomes, and do a heck of a lot better job than we have been doing in the past with the people who are dislocated through no fault of their own. We have 4 percent of the world's people and 20 percent of the world's income. And the developing economies are growing at roughly 3 times the rate of the advanced economies like the United States, Japan, and Europe. Now again, you do not have to be a mathematical genius to figure out if you have 4 percent of the people and you have got 20 percent of the income and you would like to stay roughly as well off as you are and maybe, if you are very clever, get a little better off, you have to sell something to the other 96 percent of the people in the world, especially if their growth rates are faster than yours. Now, that does not mean that we should forget about the people who are dislocated from trade or from technology or even from old-fashioned business failures-people who have to start again. That brings me to the third thing that I want to say, which is that in addition to balancing the budget and having sensible economic policies, having an aggressive trade policy, we must have a policy that invests in our people and recognizes that in every company here rewarded, you were rewarded in part because you recognized that by far the most important resources you had were the people who were working for the company. With all respect, nobody was up here waving a flag for the Xerox machine back home- -you know, or the whatever. Whatever the widget is, nobody was doing that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthemalcolmbaldrigenationalqualityawards1", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-awards-1", "publication_date": "19-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 712, "text": "You are waving the flags for yourselves and your colleagues that are here because you know that basically creativity and continuous improvement requires people who can think and then who are free to act along the lines that they think and work out things together. The very intellectual processes that you are trying to make permanent and embed in the daily work of your companies require a level of thinking and reasoning skills that mean that we have to be committed in America to universal excellence in education. Now, not everybody needs a college degree in physics. But everybody needs more than a high school diploma today, and everybody needs the ability to keep on learning for a lifetime. That is why we have tried to say-implement the national education goals and to oversimplify it by saying every 8-year-old should be able to read, every 12-year-old should be able to log on to the Internet, every 18-year-old should be able to go to college, every adult should be able to keep on learning for a lifetime. And we are trying to set up a system where that will be true for every American, because it will help more companies to do what you have done. In this last balanced budget, I think 30 years from now when people look back on it, they will say, Aside from the fact that we balanced the budget for the first time in a generation, the most important thing about that bill was it opened the doors of college to every American who would work for a college education, with a tax credit called the HOPE scholarship that virtually makes the first 2 years of college virtually tax-free to every American and other tax incentives and more Pell grants. That is very important that we are setting the stage for promoting a comprehensive reform of America's schools, kindergarten through 12th grade, based on national standards and accountability for them and real production so that all schools will be organized for performance for all the children. And I want to compliment Secretary Daley's brother on the remarkable work that has been done in Chicago to try to totally change the culture of education there to make it more like a continuous quality operation, systematically in the way that all of you have achieved. So we are trying to do that. And as I said, we also have to do that for people who lose their jobs or who are drastically underemployed. What else do we have to do? We want to set up-we have doubled funds for dislocated workers in the last 5 years to invest in their training.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthemalcolmbaldrigenationalqualityawards1", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-awards-1", "publication_date": "19-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 713, "text": "I'd like to see us consolidate all these Government programs and give the workers a skills grant. Most people who are out of work have got enough sense to figure out what they could learn to get a better job or to get a new job. And I'd like to see anybody that qualifies just get a skills grant that they can take to the nearest educational institution of their own choosing and get the education they need to become a productive member of society and have a great chance to get a good job in an organization like the ones we honor today. I'd like to see us, when a community is hard hit by a big plant closing, go in there like we did when the military bases closed. People are out of work, and you have great capacity. They deserve a chance to have everybody work together to get them started again. So we need to do more on that. But that is the right answer, not to run away from the global economy, not to say we are not going to trade. The right answer is to do more, more quickly for the people that are dislocated. I guess what I am saying is, we are still trying to get it right here. The objective is to give every American the chance to live up to their God-given capacity and live out their dreams. The objective is to give people the power they need to not only have successful careers but to build strong families and strong communities. The objective is to help people balance the demands of work and family, a problem that I hear in every place I go. The objective is to help our country balance our obligation to grow the economy and preserve the environment, something we have proved, repeatedly, we can do over the last 30 years. The objective is to reach out to the rest of the world and get the benefits of the global economy while meeting its challenges instead of pretending they do not exist. We are, whether we like it or not, all interconnected, one with another, in this country and, increasingly, beyond our borders. I have spent an enormous amount of time in the last month-enormous-trying to help come to grips with the financial difficulties you are reading about every day in the Asian markets. Because a huge percentage of our exports go to Asia. They are our neighbors now for all practical purposes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthemalcolmbaldrigenationalqualityawards1", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-awards-1", "publication_date": "19-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 714, "text": "And it is in our interest that those countries be able to be stable, growing, increasingly healthy countries from which we not only buy but to which we sell, countries that together we can build a stable future. Instead of have a part of the world in the 20th century that called Americans there to fight and die in three wars, better to be a part of the world that participates in- -three new stages of the global economic revolution in the 21st century. We still have a lot of challenges out there. It bothers me some of the things little kids can see on the Internet at night. It bothers me that people who know how to do it can figure out how to build bombs and have access to dangerous weapons just by having the technological availability of it. There are a lot of things that bother us about it. There are troubling questions of our competitive laws and how they should apply to new technologies that have to be worked out. That is why we all have to be committed to the idea that we can continuously improve. Or in the language that was quoted from David Kearns, that our endeavor is a journey without an end. That is frustrating to some people; they always want to get there. But, you know, the older I get, the more I like the journey. So I thank you. I thank you for making America a better place. I thank you for your enthusiasm and for being a model for other American workplaces. And I ask you when you go home to share with your friends and neighbors, who may not work with you, the idea that this country is like where you work. America is still around after 220 years because we have a Constitution which said, if you want the country to always get better, you have to make it possible for people to always get better. And you have to give them the freedom to fail and mess up. I mean, that is what the Bill of Rights is all about. That is what the Constitution is all about, limiting the powers of Government and mandating, in effect, partnerships. That is what the flexibility of the Constitution is all about, so we could change over time to adapt to new circumstances without giving up our values. That is the kind of country you live in. And if it is going to be everything it ought to be in the 21st century, it has to do, as a nation, what you are trying to do every day at work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthemalcolmbaldrigenationalqualityawards1", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-malcolm-baldrige-national-quality-awards-1", "publication_date": "19-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 723, "text": "Twenty-six days ago the people of Los Angeles suffered a devastating earthquake. Sixty-one people died; thousands of homes were destroyed; thousands of people were hospitalized. Highways were broken and twisted by the violent movement of the earth. Because of the extent of the damage, I have just approved $8.6 billion in emergency disaster assistance for the people of California to help them rebuild roads and other public structures, to fix gas lines, provide small business loans, and help pay the expenses of people who have lost their homes. Many have lost everything. With $900 million in aid already on the way, the total payment nears $10 billion, the largest Federal disaster assistance ever. Our country's mission, as it is after every national disaster, is to help our people recover from this tragedy and to get on with the business of everyday life. Across much of our country, everyday life has been interrupted by heavy snow and harsh winter cold. So please take care of yourselves and your neighbors who may need help. When we respond to others in need, we show that bad weather or earthquakes or floods can bring out, in the words of President Abraham Lincoln, the better angels of our nature. By the way, Abraham Lincoln was born in a log cabin in Kentucky 185 years ago today. He became President just as our country was coming apart, and he lived in the White House during the 4 most troubled years in American history. From here he appealed to the best in the American people when they were going through their worst. Here his hand trembled as he set his pen to the proclamation that declared slaves thenceforth and forever free. In freeing the slaves, Lincoln freed America. A war to preserve the Union as it was became a struggle to redeem the promise of our Declaration of Independence, which holds that all men are created equal. Lincoln went to Gettysburg, the bloodiest battlefield on our continent, to dedicate a cemetery for the war dead. There he asked America to resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain, that this Nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that Government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the Earth. We call Lincoln the Great Emancipator, but we might also call him the Great Conciliator because no person in our history ever did more to bring us together, this vast nation of great diversity, of many political and religious beliefs and all its ethnic backgrounds.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress575", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-575", "publication_date": "12-02-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 724, "text": "As the Civil War neared its close, many of the victors approached the vanquished with pride and with punishment. But Lincoln called for humility and forgiveness. His second Inaugural Address contained none of the bitterness toward others, none of the petty partisan attacks that had grown so frequent in those days. With malice toward none; with charity for all, he said, with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up that Nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan- to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves, and with all nations. At that moment, it was as if Lincoln had stretched out his long arms to gather up the people from every region and every corner of the country to make our Nation whole, to shepherd it beyond the war and move it forward. Only one month later, he was gone, his life taken on Good Friday, 1865. Lincoln's legacy has touched us all down through the ages. Few now remember that he signed the homestead law giving 160 acres of land to pioneer families in search of better lives. A son of a frontier family himself, he signed a law to create land-grant colleges, which have educated America's sons and daughters ever since. Lincoln's work allowed people from ordinary backgrounds like his own to rise in life and accomplish extraordinary things. Our job here is to build up and strengthen the great American middle class, to give opportunity to all, to help our communities rid themselves from crime and drugs, to help families protect themselves from bankruptcy due to spiraling health care costs, to move people away from lifetime welfare toward full-time work, and to allow everyone who works hard to get ahead and compete and win in the new global economy. Still the question recurs, can we do better?- just as Lincoln asked us when he said, The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty, and we must rise with the occasion. Fellow-citizens, we can not escape history, he said. We... will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us.... We, even we here, hold the power and bear the responsibility....", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress575", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-575", "publication_date": "12-02-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 752, "text": "It is nice to have dinner with a group of friends. This is a very important dinner because, through your generosity, we are going to keep control of the Senate and the House, and America will be better off for it. She sends her love. Generally when I say that, people groan, and I take it to mean they wish she'd have come and not me. I understand that. I will tell you something about Laura. She is a heck of a First Lady and a great wife and mom. I love her dearly. I want to thank Senator Lamar Alexander for his leadership on this incredibly successful dinner. I appreciate Speaker Denny Hastert. He is a great Speaker of the House. And through your generosity, he is going to stay Speaker of the House. I want to thank the majority leader of the United States Senate, Bill Frist. He too is a great leader, and I appreciate calling him friend. I want to thank Senator Elizabeth Dole, who is the NRSC chairman; CongressmanTom Reynolds, the NRCC chairman. Those are initials for, like, let us raise money and get the Senate in Republican keep the Senate in Republican hands and House in Republican hands. I want to thank the Members of the Senate and Congress for working so hard. I want to thank the Members of the all the Members of the Congress who've joined us tonight. I appreciate the members of my Cabinet who are here. I want to pay special tribute to the Republican National Committee chairman, Ken Mehlman, for the fantastic job he is doing on reaching out to people from all walks of life. I want to thank the President's Dinner leadership, especially Ken Thompson and his wife, Kathylee, for the fantastic job you all have done and everybody up here has done. I want to thank the Duke Ellington School of the Arts Show Choir for being here today. I am proud to be the head of a party that has a positive and hopeful and optimistic vision for every single person who lives in this country. And I am proud to be a head of a party that is driving the debate on all the key domestic and foreign policy issues. Because of our achievements, the American people see us as the party of reform and optimism and results, the party that is moving this Nation forward. All of us in Washington have a duty to the people who sent us here. Political parties can take one of two approaches.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresidentsdinner0", "title": "Remarks at the President's Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presidents-dinner-0", "publication_date": "14-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 753, "text": "One approach is to lead, to focus on the people's business, to take on the tough problems. And that is exactly what our party's done. The other approach is to simply do nothing, to delay solutions, obstruct progress, refuse to take responsibility. Members of the other party have worked with us to achieve important reforms on some issues. Yet too often, their leadership prefers to block the ideas of others. We hear no to Social Security reform. We hear no to confirming Federal judges. We hear no to a highly qualified U.N. Ambassador. We hear no to medical liability reform. On issue after issue, they stand for nothing except obstruction, and this is not leadership. It is the philosophy of the stop sign, the agenda of the roadblock, and our country and our children deserve better. Political parties that choose the path of obstruction will not gain the trust of the American people. If leaders of the other party have innovative ideas, let us hear them. But if they have no ideas or policies except obstruction, they should step aside and let others lead. Because we acted to pass the largest tax relief in a generation, our economy is growing again. We have created more than 3.5 million new jobs during the last 2 years. More Americans are working today than ever before in our Nation's history. To keep this economy growing and creating jobs, we need to make the tax relief permanent. We need to get rid of the death tax forever. And we can do something else about taxes. I have appointed a bipartisan panel to examine our incoherent, out-of-date Tax Code. When their recommendations are delivered, I am looking forward to working with the United States Congress to give this Nation a Tax Code that is progrowth, easy to understand, and fair to all. Our party is the party of economic growth, and our party is the party of spending restraint. I have submitted the first budget to actually cut nonsecurity discretionary spending since Ronald Reagan was the President. Now the Congress needs to act to hold nondiscretionary spending below last year's level. The budget we submitted adheres to an interesting principle. We need to have a fiscally responsible highway bill that modernizes our roads and bridges and improves safety and creates jobs. We are on our way to cutting this deficit in half in 5 years, and I want to thank the Members of Congress for holding the line and doing what is right for the American taxpayer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresidentsdinner0", "title": "Remarks at the President's Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presidents-dinner-0", "publication_date": "14-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 754, "text": "In order to make sure this economy grows, we need an energy bill. Four years ago, I presented Congress with a comprehensive energy strategy that encourages conservation, renewable sources of energy like ethanol and biodiesel, that says we can use nuclear energy in a clean way, that recognizes the need to spend money on clean coal technology. It is an energy plan that will make us less dependent on foreign sources of energy. For the sake of national security and for the sake of economic security, Congress needs to get a bill to my desk before the August recess. We are proudly the party of free and fair trade. During my administration and thanks to the good works of Congress, we have opened up markets for millions of consumers of U.S. products. And now we have an opportunity to continue to open up new markets with CAFTA, the Central American and Dominican Republic Free Trade act. Right now most of the goods coming from the Central American countries enter into our country duty-free. Yet our goods are not received in their countries duty-free. For the sake of free trade, for the sake of fair trade, for the sake of good jobs, for the sake of promoting young democracies in Central America, Congress must pass CAFTA. Ours is the party of the entrepreneur and small business. Ours is the party of litigation reform. We are the party that continues to free our entrepreneurs from needless regulations and protect honest job creators from junk lawsuits. I applaud the Speaker and the leader for getting bipartisan class-action reform and bankruptcy reform through the Congress. Now we need asbestos litigation reform. And to stop junk lawsuits that are running good doctors out of practice and running up the cost of medicine, we need Federal medical liability reform. Ours is the party that challenges the soft bigotry of low expectations, that worked to stop the practice of just shuffling kids through school, grade after grade, without them being able to read and write. Ours is the party that set high standards, believes in local control of schools, and insists that every child learn to read and write, so no child is left behind in America. We set a clear agenda to make health care more affordable and to give American families greater access to coverage and more control over their health decisions. In 2003, we strengthened Medicare by giving seniors more choices and adding a prescription drug benefit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresidentsdinner0", "title": "Remarks at the President's Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presidents-dinner-0", "publication_date": "14-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 755, "text": "We have kept our commitment to our Nation's seniors, and now we must move forward with more community health centers to help the poor, improved health information technology, expanded health savings accounts and association health plans, so that small businesses can pool risk and buy insurance at the same discount that big companies are able to do. Ours is the party that set the goal to encourage ownership in America. We want more people owning their own business. I am proud to report more people own a home than ever before in our Nation's history, and more minority families are owning a home today than ever before. We need to expand ownership to our retirement system. Recently, I have been spending time talking about an important issue, and that is Social Security reform. And the reason I have is because I believe the job of the President is to confront problems and not pass them on to future Presidents and future generations. We have got a problem when it comes to Social Security. No, you do not have a problem if you are getting your check now or if you were born prior to 1950. You will get your check. The problem is for a younger generation of Americans who are paying payroll taxes or getting ready to pay payroll taxes into a system that is going broke. Let me give you the math right quick, let you know why I am talking about it all across the country. As a matter of fact, my retirement age is 2008 quite convenient. And we are living longer, and we have been promised greater benefits by Congress. And the real problem is there is fewer people paying into the system. In 2017, the system goes into the red. In 2027, it is $200 billion short. In 2041, it is bankrupt. It is not right to sit here in Washington, DC, knowing the system is going bankrupt for younger Americans and not do anything about it. So I am going to keep talking about it and keep putting ideas out. I have laid out some plans that would nearly fix all of the Social Security problem.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresidentsdinner0", "title": "Remarks at the President's Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presidents-dinner-0", "publication_date": "14-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 756, "text": "I will tell you another idea we need to do is we need to give workers the option that Congress has given itself, and that is to be able to take some of their own money, some of their own payroll taxes and set it aside in a personal savings account they call their own, a personal savings account that will let them earn a better rate of return on their money, a personal savings account they can leave to whomever they want, a personal savings account the Government cannot take away or spend on special programs. Ours is the party that believes in ownership. We want to extend the so-called investor class to all walks of life. We believe everybody should have an asset they can call their own. And we have a fantastic opportunity to strengthen and save Social Security for a generation of Americans to come and to give more Americans the great pride of owning something they call their own. Congress needs to act on this issue. Strengthening Social Security requires honesty and courage, and the party I am proud to lead will do our duty. Our children's retirement security is more important than partisan politics. Our party will continue to support the faith-based and community groups that bring hope to harsh places. We will continue to promote a culture of life in which every person is valued and every life has meaning. And we will defend the institution of marriage from being redefined forever by activist judges. And speaking about judges, the American people made it clear they want judges who faithfully interpret the law, not legislate from the bench. I applaud Senator Frist and Senator Specter and Senator Hatch and other Members of the United States Senate in confirming some outstanding nominees who have waited a long time for a vote, Priscilla Owen and Janice Rogers Brown and Bill Pryor. I will continue to urge the Senate to fulfill its constitutional responsibility by giving every judicial nominee an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. And speaking of confirmations, the Senate must promptly confirm John Bolton, my nominee to be our Ambassador to the United Nations, so we can get on with the business of reforming that institution. My most solemn duty and the most solemn duty of those of us in Government here in Washington is to protect the American people. We will be relentless; we will never tire in chasing down the terrorists; we will confront them abroad so we do not have to face them here at home. We carried out the largest reorganization of Government in a half-century to form a single Department with a single mission, protecting America from attack.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresidentsdinner0", "title": "Remarks at the President's Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presidents-dinner-0", "publication_date": "14-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 757, "text": "The tireless efforts of the men and women of the Department of Homeland Security and Federal and State and local first-responders protecting our Nation and making this country more secure. And as they do so, they need to have all the tools to be able to help defend this country. And that is why I call upon the United States Congress to renew all the provisions of the PATRIOT Act. The PATRIOT Act is an important piece of legislation. It gives those folks who are on the frontline of fighting terror the same tools, many of the same tools that are used to track down drug kingpins or tax cheats. If those tools are good enough to track down drug kingpins, they ought to be good enough in this war on terror to give to our law enforcement so we can better defend this country. And we are making progress. Since September the 11th, 2001, we have closed down terrorist networks. We brought to justice many of the key leaders of Al Qaida. We are disrupting their finances. There is no place they can hide from the United States of America and our allies and friends. The best way to secure this country in the long run, though, is to spread democracy and freedom. We believe everybody has a deep desire in their heart to live in a free society. We believe mothers all around the world want to raise their children in a free and peaceful world. And the people of Afghanistan showed clearly the desire of those who have lived under tyranny to take the risks necessary to live in a free society. Think about how far that country has come in a brief period of time. We enforced doctrine that said, If you harbor a terrorist, you are just as guilty as the terrorist. And by removing the Taliban, America and the free world are safer. But at the same time, we gave the Afghan people a chance to live in a free and democratic society. And for the first time in the history of that country, for the first time in thousands of years, millions of people went to the polls to vote. And the first voter was a 19-year-old girl in Afghanistan. Freedom is on the march from the Ukraine to Afghanistan to the Palestinian Territory to Lebanon and to Iraq. By removing Saddam Hussein from power, America and the free world are safer. By removing Saddam Hussein from power, the people of Iraq have a chance to live in a free society.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresidentsdinner0", "title": "Remarks at the President's Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presidents-dinner-0", "publication_date": "14-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 768, "text": "President, the American people welcome you to the White House on this, the occasion of your first state visit to the United States. You have been an inspiration to the American people. You have been a genuine inspiration to the American people and to freedomloving people around the world, people who still marvel at the price you paid for your conviction, a conviction that our country embraces but still struggles to live up to, the conviction that all men and women are created equal and therefore ought to have a chance to live up to the fullest of their God-given potential and to have an equal say in the affairs of their land. Your captivity symbolized the larger captivity of your nation, shackled to the chains of prejudice, bigotry, and hatred. And your release also freed your nation and all its people to reach their full potential, a quest too long and so cruelly denied. But your story, thankfully, for all South Africans and for the rest of us as well, does not end with your freedom; it continues into what you have sought to do with your freedom. South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white. Now, instead of focusing on the past 342 years, when South Africa did not belong to all who lived in it, you are building a future of trust and tolerance. White South Africans might have fled in fear of retribution, but instead, they have had the courage to stay and to join you in building a new future for all the people of your land. Watch South Africa as it comes together, and follow South Africa's example. As an American, and as a child of the southern part of our country who grew up in a segregated environment and saw firsthand its horror and its debasement of all of us who lived in it, I must add that, as you well know, Mr. President, your presence here has special significance for Americans. We have been especially drawn to the problems and the promise of South Africa. We have struggled, and continue to struggle, with our own racial challenges. So we rejoice, especially, in what you have accomplished, and we hold it out. And as we hold it out as an example to others, so we also hold it out as an example to ourselves. President, I know how proud you are to have your daughter, Zinzi, with you on this trip, and I am proud to have her as my dinner partner tonight.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksstatedinnerforpresidentnelsonmandelasouthafrica", "title": "Remarks at a State Dinner for President Nelson Mandela of South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-state-dinner-for-president-nelson-mandela-south-africa", "publication_date": "04-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 769, "text": "I want to add my congratulations to Nancy Maynard and to say hello to my friend Wilma Mankiller and to all of you in Atlanta at the Unity '94 Convention. I want to say a special word of congratulations, too, to the four minority journalist associations meeting together for the first time at this groundbreaking occasion. I must say that all of us have heard a lot about your meeting and have been following it with great interest. We are living in an extraordinary time when people in America and all across the world are searching for common ground and new solutions in a time of change. This has been a great week for America. The King of Jordan and the Prime Minister of Israel shared the stage on the White House lawn, opened a new era of dialog and cooperation between their people. At the same time, halfway around the world, the President of Russia made an announcement that by the end of August, for the first time since the end of World War II, all Russian troops would be gone from Germany and Central and Eastern Europe, a significant goal of our policy with Russia over the last year and a half. Over and over, we have learned from experiences like these that people can transcend great historical, political, and cultural obstacles in the name of progress of humanity. And we have also learned that here at home, the American people are our greatest asset as we try to meet the challenges of the coming century. All of us can take pride that we have helped Arabs and Israelis and other former enemies to bridge their own differences. But their examples must also inspire us to strengthen our own sense of community and to celebrate the rich diversity of the American culture. The job of your associations is to see that more Americans of diverse backgrounds, races and ethnic heritage have an equal chance in journalism. It is also to make sure that the Nation sees the faces and hears the voices of nonwhite Americans whose ideas and achievements too often are ignored. And my job here in Washington is to ensure that every citizen has an equal chance at the American dream. I have said it many times, and I firmly believe that we do not have a single person to waste, that every person, no matter what his or her background, has an idea, a vision, an opinion to share that can enrich our Nation. That is why I have been fighting to create new opportunities for people who work hard, take responsibility, try to make something of their lives.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 770, "text": "I believe everybody has something to give, and we have to make it possible for everyone to give his or her best. One of my proudest accomplishments as President is the people I have appointed to serve in this administration. If you look at the top positions in the White House and the Cabinet today, you will see the most able, talented group ever assembled. These appointees also happen to make up the most diverse administration in the history of our Republic. If you look at our nominations to the Federal bench, you will see that a higher percentage of them have been rated well qualified by the American Bar Association than in any previous administration since these rankings have been made. A majority of those appointees are people of color and women, not a minority but a majority for the first time ever. None of these people were chosen because they were African-American or Hispanic or Asian-American or American Indian or because they were women. They were selected because they were the best qualified for the job. And they are proof that the American dream is still alive and within reach of those who choose to pursue it. Still, we cannot ignore the burdens and barriers that prevent too many of our people from moving forward in their lives still today. It is our job to renew the American dream. I sought the Presidency because I was worried that our country was going in the wrong direction. The deficit was going up; the economy was on the decline. Washington was placing heavier and heavier burdens on the backs of middle class Americans, and we were coming apart when we ought to be coming together. I believed then and I believe now that our job in this time is to restore the economy, rebuild our sense of community, empower individuals to take responsibility for their own lives, and put Government on the side of ordinary Americans. In just 18 months we have begun to renew that American dream. Our economic strategy will produce the smallest Federal bureaucracy in 30 years and 3 years in a row of deficit reduction for the first time since Harry Truman was President, while providing tax cuts for 15 million working American families and millions of small businesses. What is been the result of this economic strategy? Well, the economy has created 3.8 million new jobs; inflation is the lowest in two decades. Just today we have seen more evidence that this strategy is working. Today's report shows that the gross domestic product of the United States grew at a very impressive rate of 3.7 percent in the last quarter while inflation remained low.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 771, "text": "And more important, we are reaching out with greater energy and compassion to responsible working families who too often have to struggle to make ends meet. Already in just a year and a half, through the increase of the earned-income tax credit, 15 million working parents have been able to get lower income taxes to encourage them to stay in the work force and to be good parents without having to go on welfare. We have made it easier for millions and millions of young people to get college loans by making those loans available with lower interest rates and more flexible repayment schedules. We have established more job training and school-to-work apprenticeships to help young people who are not going to college find and keep good jobs. We have sought tax incentives and grant money to stimulate economies in needy areas, through things like our empowerment zones and enterprise communities and new community development banks, the reform of the Community Reinvestment Act and making low income housing credits permanent. Some of these achievements, to be sure, have come easier than others. But I knew when I asked for this job that progress would not always be easy and that we'd have to fight for the kind of change that we need. Very often it takes years to get things done the Brady bill, 7 years; the family leave law, 7 years; years for motor voter. But these things all work because these things together and the efforts we are making have brought us to a pivotal, exciting moment in our history. on the verge of an historic victory in the toughest, largest, smartest Federal attack on crime in the history of the United States; not only making peace in the Middle East but trying to bring more peace to the families and children of America. Just think for a minute about what this crime bill means for all of us as citizens, for us as mothers and fathers, husbands and wives and children. Look at the cost of crime to our sense of community and to the idea that we are an American family, to our sense of personal freedom; the cost of crime to our efforts to empower every individual, including too many young people who are growing up in terribly difficult circumstances. Crime is holding too many of us back from reaching the American dream, splintering families, making people afraid of their neighbors, interfering with our children's education, robbing us of our literal sense of personal freedom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 772, "text": "No matter what other goals we seek for ourselves and our families and our children and for our country, we simply have to be able to live together with a shared respect for law and order and civility. The most important thing about this crime bill is that it creates a whole new way of thinking about how to deal with crime, one that does not pit one group of Americans against another. It does not ask us to make a false choice between tough punishment and strong prevention. It calls for a sensible balance between the two. It does not ask us to make a false choice between going after criminals and going after guns. It recognizes that those sorts of debates divided us for too long while more and more children were dying on our streets. The crime bill strengthens the police, our system of punishment, and our means of prevention. It will put 100,000 more police on our streets, a 20-percent increase in the number of police officers patrolling our neighborhoods. More police trained and properly deployed means lower crime and prevention. The bill includes a ban on assault-style weapons, something few people ever dreamed would be accomplished. It includes a ban on ownership of handguns by minors. It will send a strong message to criminals that behavior that is criminal and repeated will not be tolerated and that punishment will be tough and swift. And it will invest $9 billion in crime prevention over the next 6 years, something that law enforcement officers in every State and city asked us to do so that we could give young people more safe places to go, more positive role models, more opportunities to fulfill themselves in healthy constructive ways. And we have a program to make our schools safe so that our children can learn again in the absence of fear. For 6 years, this crime bill was debated over and over again. Because after intense argument and disagreement, a majority of people were able to find common ground. They were able to put people over politics. Now, I want Congress to put this bill on my desk within 2 weeks so that I can sign it before our children go back to school. Now, if you think 6 years was long enough to wait for a crime bill, then surely we can all agree that 60 years is far too long to wait before all American are guaranteed health security that can never be taken away. And health security, after all, is another crucial piece of the American dream. Many people across our country know what it is like to dig and scrape all their lives to have the opportunities that you have been given and that you have earned.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 773, "text": "If you are like me, you actually know somebody without health insurance or somebody at risk of losing their health insurance. You know somebody whose coverage is so meager, they avoid the doctor because it costs too much. You know people who are eager to work but are trapped in the welfare system because it is the only way they can be assured of health care coverage for their children. We know these people because there are millions and millions of them out there, people who struggle all their lives and play by the rules so that they can move forward, make progress, build security for their families only to be knocked off the ladder because of the pink slip, the catastrophic illness, or a simple change in jobs. Indeed, we are moving in the wrong direction in our health care system. We are moving in the wrong direction when 5 million hardworking people, people with jobs, have lost their insurance in the last 5 years. Ever since I began pushing for reform, I have made it clear that I was open to suggestions about how to achieve it. I have listened to concerns about the approach we originally proposed. And in response to what all kinds of Americans told us, I have agreed that we should modify that approach to make it simpler, less bureaucratic, more flexible, to do more for small business. But I remain committed, and I hope all of you will be committed to giving every American health security, health that is guaranteed in law. We must have a system, I believe, where everyone shares responsibility, a private system that works. That is certainly what the vast majority of Americans want, because today the hardworking middle class Americans have that kind of coverage. Today we have moved a step closer to health care security. The House Speaker, Tom Foley, and the majority leader, Dick Gephardt, said they would put forward a bill that achieves universal coverage and controls costs. They have met their goal and the goal of the American people in doing that. The House bill tells the American people that they have been heard. It is simpler, more flexible, more sensitive to small business. Protections for small businesses have been strengthened. The bill is being phased in over a longer period of time. All Americans can keep their health plan and their doctor, and everybody will have coverage. We know from experiences across the country that this will work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 774, "text": "We have seen in State after State that if you have insurance reforms that sound very good without expanding to universal coverage, what is usually going to happen is that the cost of insurance goes up and then people's options for health care or even the number of people with health insurance, go down. But we also know from looking at the example of Hawaii that a private system of universal coverage in which employers and employees share responsibility for paying for private insurance premiums will not only control costs but will also lead to greater coverage and a healthier population. After all, in Hawaii, nearly everything is more expensive than any place else in the United States, but health care premiums for small business are 30 percent cheaper. Now, after 60 years of waiting, after 14 years in which costs have been going up dramatically, after a decade in which more and more Americans are losing coverage instead of getting coverage and most of those who lose their insurance are working people it is time to say to every American, if you change jobs, if you get sick, if you are laid off, if your child has a serious illness, you will always be able to afford health care as a citizen of the richest nation on Earth. Tomorrow I am going to Independence, Missouri, to Harry Truman's hometown, to talk about health care. Harry Truman was a man of great decency, common sense, and courage who believed that America would be much stronger if every American had health security. And he fought hard for it, though he did not succeed. And because he was right, President after President, Presidents of both parties have fought for that goal. Well, now it is up to us to fulfill their vision and once again to renew the American dream. It is time to build on our economic progress, build on the success of the crime bill, build on the progress we are making toward world peace, and take this next critical step by passing real, substantive health care reform. Well, I am not familiar with all the details of the gaming law. Let me say this. I have worked hard with Secretary Babbitt to work with the Native American tribes throughout the country I said I am not familiar with the details of the legislation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 775, "text": "I can tell you that for the last 18 months, Secretary Babbitt, on my behalf, has worked hard to try to work through the Indian gaming issue, to be supportive of the tribes, to protect and promote their legitimate rights, and also to urge that the income from gaming be used to diversify the economic activities of the tribes and to strengthen economic possibilities for Native Americans over the long run. So I am going to do my best to do that. As you know, there are a lot of thorny controversies between the States. A lot of States feel pressure to expand gaming beyond the reach of the Native American groups, and this has been a very difficult issue. But I think that our administration has worked very closely with the tribes. And I think we have shown our good faith in trying to protect these activities. I am not familiar with the specifics of the law, so I cannot comment on that. I am not sure that I can answer that question. And I am fairly sure that if I do, my answer will be blown all out of proportion to anything else I say today. But let me say that I believe that all of us in positions of responsibility with influence should strive to make our decisions through a process that involves all the American people, their insights, their understanding, their experience and it takes advantage of their talents. That is why I have worked so hard to have the most diverse administration in American history. And I believe we have proved beyond question that you can have diversity and excellence. That is another one of those false choices people are always trying to put on the American people. So if it is true for the United States Government, it ought to be true for the American press as well. I do not think I should say more than that, but I think that ought to be enough to say. Undocumented workers would not receive under our plan a health security card unless they had jobs anyway, so they got it because they were in the workplace. But under our plan we have a significant expansion in funds for public health units which are open to all people today and where a lot of the vaccinations, for example, are done today. In my State, over 80 percent of our children, including even upper middle class children, are vaccinated through the public health units.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 776, "text": "So what we attempted to do to deal with this clear and present problem in the United States is to have a substantial increase in funding for public health and to do outreach so that we can vaccinate all the children and give basic health services to the children who are within the United States. Well first, let me say that I do not agree with the characterization there. If you look at the work that the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department has done, it is been more active than any civil rights division in a generation under the leadership of Deval Patrick. Look at a lot of the other issues in which they have been involved. If you look at the work that Henry Cisneros did in highlighting and directly confronting the problems in Vidor, Texas, in public housing, if you look at the work that we have done in trying to involve at the grassroots level community groups of minorities in things like developing the empowerment zone concepts, the community development banks, I think it is plain that this is an administration that is committed to stamping out racism, both in a negative sense by standing up to it and in a positive sense by working to bring people together to overcome it. If you can think of anything else I can and should do, I would be glad to have your recommendations and your suggestions. But the idea of stamping out racism, in my view, permeates everything I do. When I try to give kids a better life, a safer street, a better future, and I keep telling the American people we do not have anyone to waste, we have got to have everybody in here together one of the earlier questions referred to how the administration or what my opinion was about the way things were covered given the makeup of the press I have been repeatedly criticized by various sources in this town for trying to be more diverse and try to reach out and to achieve greater diversity, although no one has ever said that we could not have excellence and diversity at the same time. So I am trying to build the fight against racism into everything we do, both in a positive and negative sense. But I will say again, if anybody there not just you, Dorothy, but anybody has any other suggestions about what I can do, I would be happy to hear them, and I will do my best to respond. Well, what I have said is that we have to achieve universal coverage. The fight now is over how best to do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 777, "text": "And what I have to tell you is there is a big argument about whether it can be achieved in any way other than the way I have proposed. I will not sign a bill that I think makes a false promise to the people of the United States. We have got to sign a bill that achieves full coverage for the American people. If you do not do it, you cannot contain costs, you cannot give the breaks that small business needs over the long run. You cannot achieve these things. So, yes, if Congress passes a bill that is different from the one I originally proposed, would I veto it? It depends on whether it achieves full coverage. If it is a credible attempt to do that, then I am open to it. But it must be a credible, credible bill to do that. And that is the only thing I ask all of you to focus on now. Instead of letting the political rhetoric control this debate on health care, let us ask simply what will work. The other day let me just give you this in closing because this is very important, and if I do not achieve anything else today in this conversation that I have had with you, which I have enjoyed immensely, if I can achieve agreement with you on this, it would be something profound to me. I have studied it for years and years. But the more complex it gets, the more you understand that in the end it comes down to some simple choices. In every nation that has covered everybody, quality health care can be provided at lower costs than in the United States, the only nation that does not cover everybody. Will it work? We are going in the wrong direction. We are losing coverage and exploding cost. I am not going to sign a bill that I think perpetrates these problems on the American people. If someone else can figure out how to get universal coverage in a different way than I have achieved it, I would be open to that. I have not seen it yet. That is why the American Medical Association, the National Medical Association, the American Nurses Association, other physicians' groups, and huge numbers of businesses and consumer groups have endorsed our approach. So that is what we ought to be doing. We should not be trying to get ourselves into word games now about what mechanism is appropriate. And I know my plan will work if we share responsibility and cover everybody.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsteleconferenceremarksandquestionandanswersessionwiththeunity94convention", "title": "Teleconference Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session With the Unity '94 Convention in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/teleconference-remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-with-the-unity-94-convention", "publication_date": "29-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 784, "text": "This week, we received a powerful confirmation that America's economy is growing stronger. The Department of Labor reported that America added 308,000 jobs in March, the highest monthly job growth number since the spring of 2000. And since August, we have added over three-quarters of a million new jobs in America. The unemployment rate has fallen from 6.3 percent last June, to 5.7 percent last month. Over the last year, the unemployment rate has fallen in 45 of the 50 States. This is good news for American workers and good news for American families. Inflation is low, and interest rates and mortgage rates are near historic lows. Worker productivity is high, which means rising wages for American families. After-tax disposable income is up 10 percent since the end of 2000. And more Americans own their own home than at any time in history. People are finding jobs, and the Nation's future is bright. America's families and workers have reason to be optimistic. Tax relief put this economy on the path to growth. Since 2001, we have cut tax rates for everyone who pays income taxes. We have reduced the marriage penalty in our Tax Code. We raised the child credit to $1,000 per child, and we have reduced taxes on dividends and capital gains. This tax relief is critical because all workers are keeping more of what they earn, and small businesses, which create most of the new jobs in America, have the resources to expand and hire. As our economy adds more jobs, we will need to make sure all Americans are prepared to take advantage of new opportunity. We must help current workers and future workers learn the skills they need today and in the years to come. Our economy has increasing demand for workers with advanced skills, such as teachers, health care workers, and environmental engineers, but too many Americans do not have these kinds of skills. So on Monday, I will travel to North Carolina to propose reforms of our Federal job training system, to give our workers the help they need. Better job training will mean better jobs for American workers. We must also make sure our schools are preparing the next generation of workers. We have already taken action to improve our elementary schools with the passage of the No Child Left Behind Act. This good law is raising standards and hopes for all our children. But we must also address the needs of older students in high schools and colleges.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress785", "title": "George W. Bush The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-785", "publication_date": "03-04-2004", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 803, "text": "This is not my normal custom, but I have been working the last 15 or 20 minutes on the Rhodesian question, and something came up at the last minute. This is an afternoon ceremony that is very significant to us. I think that my own background in environmental questions and in matters that relate to the quality of life has been one of intimate and deep concern. And when I was elected president, my major purpose in dealing with Federal Government agencies that relate to energy or to environment, to the quality of life in every way, was one of appointing people in whom I had complete confidence and, also, who had the confidence of those intensely committed environmentalists and conservationists in our country. At the same time, of course, in order for us to be effective, there must be a working relationship that cannot create insuperable barriers between those who are interested in development of jobs on the one hand, those who want to protect the quality of the outdoors, the purity of life on the other. I think that we have been successful so far, without abridging anyone's deep commitment and integrity in past statements and beliefs on the one hand, and adequate progress on the other. And I am very proud this afternoon to have a chance to introduce these men and women who will be serving in such important positions. Charles Warren is a man whom I first met when I was in Plains being briefed on the major questions concerning energy. He is a person who has been very effective in California, in the legislature, in devising and drafting and implementing major and very innovative decisions concerning the energy question, environmental questions, protection of the coastal regions, not only from a present-day point of view but as they would impact on the lives of people in years to come. And I think at some considerable sacrifice to himself, financially, but because of his interest in this subject, he is agreed to come and serve with us. And he will be the Chairman of those who will advise me on matters that relate to environmental quality. I am very glad that you have come to be with us. And I express my appreciation to you and look forward to working closely with you. Among my closest friends in the world are two people who mean a lot to me, and I think in the past and in the future will mean a lot to our country. One of them is Dr. Peter Bourne, who helped me in Georgia to set up one of the finest drug treatment programs in the Nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsswearingceremonyremarkstheswearingthechairmanthecouncilenvironmentalqualitythe", "title": "Swearing-In Ceremony Remarks at the Swearing In of the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality, the Deputy Director of ACTION, and the Administrator and Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/swearing-ceremony-remarks-the-swearing-the-chairman-the-council-environmental-quality-the", "publication_date": "11-03-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 804, "text": "He is recognized as the foremost expert on alcoholism, drugs, their impact, and the way to control them properly. His wife, Mary King, is also one who has been very close to me. When I was campaigning for ENTITY, whenever I came to Washington, not having enough support or finances to afford a hotel room, I always slept on their folding bed and they always took me in. And I am very excited to know that Mary King, who is an expert on health care in all its forms, on the proper utilization of volunteer Americans, who has a sensitivity and a courage that is absolutely superlative, is willing to serve in an agency that will spread this kind of knowledge throughout the world. The ACTION program is one that is involved with the Peace Corps, with VISTA, and with the recruitment and use of Americans--sometimes outside Government itself--who are willing to serve this country and other nations who are friends of ours. I am very grateful that Mary King is going to be the Deputy Director of ACTION. And when I asked her to serve, she said that she would do it if I would be present at her swearing-in ceremony. Nothing could have kept me away. Mary, I am very proud of you. And I know this is going to be a great experience for you and for me both. This is one that, in a practical way, administers the laws evolved by the Congress and the President to make sure that the agencies of Government and business world, as well, are oriented toward the protection of the quality of life. And this requires men and women in administrative positions who are knowledgeable about law, who are thoroughly familiar with the rules that have been laid down in an administrative way, and who can deal with forcefulness and understanding with the State and local governments and with private industry to make sure that in the face of progress, which is inevitable, that we do not destroy what is precious to us. Doug Costle has had broad experience in this field and will be the Director of this agency, and another very close friend of mine, Barbara Blum, who helped me get many of the Georgia laws passed against formidable opposition because of her courage and tenacity and because of her knowledge of environmental questions while I was Governor of Georgia. And I am very grateful that they are willing to serve as the two top leaders in this important agency, the Environmental Protection Agency.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsswearingceremonyremarkstheswearingthechairmanthecouncilenvironmentalqualitythe", "title": "Swearing-In Ceremony Remarks at the Swearing In of the Chairman of the Council on Environmental Quality, the Deputy Director of ACTION, and the Administrator and Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/swearing-ceremony-remarks-the-swearing-the-chairman-the-council-environmental-quality-the", "publication_date": "11-03-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 805, "text": "It is my honor to welcome your family here to the Roosevelt Room. And I am proud to welcome Bill Donaldson as the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Bill will be a strong leader of the SEC and a forceful advocate for the interests of investors. He is the right man at the right time. We are so honored you have agreed to accept this challenge, really appreciate it. Bill Donaldson spent a career preparing for this challenge. He has served as a founder of a leading investment banking firm, chairman of the New York Stock Exchange, the founding dean of the Yale School of Management. He has set high standards throughout his entire career. He will lead an active and energetic agency. They have last year filed a record number of actions for financial reporting and disclosure violations, sought the removal of more than 100 corporate officers and directors on the grounds of misconduct, and ordered corporations and executives to return to investors hundreds of million dollars in improper gains. This administration is committed to the enforcement of the security laws. We are committed to creating a climate of confidence in our markets. In the 2004 budget, I am asking Congress to increase SEC funding by 73 percent over the year 2002. We want to make sure the SEC has the tools necessary to pursue its important mission. This Nation is increasingly a nation of stockholders, who invest for their families and for their futures. Americans should be confident in the information they use in order to make investment decisions. All investors deserve to be treated fairly in the Tax Code as well. Investors should not be punished for saving and investing in America's future. Investors should not be- should be rewarded for taking risk in the marketplace. The Tax Code ought to treat these people fairly, and so that is why I have proposed that Congress end the unfair and unwise double taxation of dividends. This measure could improve corporate governance in America as well. Companies across America attract investors in a number of ways. One such way is to promise rapid growth, is to say, Even though we may not have cashflow, the future of our company is magnificent. Another way, of course, is to promise a steady source of income in the form of dividends. With dividends serving as a stronger foundation for long-term value, companies that pay them will have less motive to artificially inflate profits just to cause temporary increases in stocks. Our law should not discriminate against those companies that focus on stable, long-term growth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheswearingceremonyforwilliamdonaldsonchairmanthesecuritiesandexchange", "title": "Remarks at the Swearing-In Ceremony for William Donaldson as Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-swearing-ceremony-for-william-donaldson-chairman-the-securities-and-exchange", "publication_date": "18-02-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 814, "text": "Throughout our history and particularly in recent years, America's taken on an ever-increasing role as peacemaker taking the initiative time after time to try to help countries settle their differences peacefully. I do not need to recite the list of diplomatic efforts spanning all administrations in which we have been instrumental in ending war and restoring peace. Well, let us ask them, which country has nearly 100,000 troops trying to occupy the once nonaligned nation of Afghanistan? Which country has tried to crush a spontaneous workers' movement in Poland? And what country has engaged in the most massive arms buildup in history? Or, let us put the question another way. What country helped its World War II enemies back on their feet? What country is employing trade aid and technology to help the developing peoples of the world and actively seeking to bring peace to the Middle East, the South Atlantic, and to southern Africa? The answer is clear, and it should give us both pride and hope in America. Today, I know there are a great many people who are pointing to the unimaginable horror of nuclear war. I welcome that concern. Those who've governed America throughout the nuclear age and we who govern it today have had to recognize that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. So, to those who protest against nuclear war, I can only say, I am with you. Like my predecessors, it is now my responsibility to do my utmost to prevent such a war. No one feels more than I the need for peace. Throughout the first half of my lifetime, the entire world was engaged in war, or in recovering from war, or in preparing for war. This stretch of 37 years since World War II has been the result of our maintaining a balance of power between the United States and the Soviet Union and between the strategic nuclear capabilities of either side. As long as this balance has been maintained, both sides have been given an overwhelming incentive for peace. In the 1970's, the United States altered that balance by, in effect, unilaterally restraining our own military defenses while the Soviet Union engaged in an unprecedented buildup of both its conventional and nuclear forces. As a result, the military balance which permitted us to maintain the peace is now threatened. If steps are not taken to modernize our defense, the United States will progressively lose the ability to deter the Soviet Union from employing force or threats of force against us and against our allies.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationnuclearweapons0", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on Nuclear Weapons", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-nuclear-weapons-0", "publication_date": "17-04-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 815, "text": "It would be wonderful if we could restore our balance with the Soviet Union without increasing our own military power. And ideally, it would be a long step in ensuring peace if we could have significant and verifiable reductions of arms on both sides. But let us not fool ourselves. The Soviet Union will not come to any conference table bearing gifts. Soviet negotiators will not make unilateral concessions. To achieve parity, we must make it plain that we have the will to achieve parity by our own effort. Many have been attracted to the idea of a nuclear freeze. Now, that would be fine if we were equal in strategic capability. We cannot accept an agreement which perpetuates current disparities. The current level of nuclear forces is too high on both sides. It must be the objective of any negotiations on arms control to reduce the numbers of nuclear weapons. Since World War II, the United States has attempted to get Soviet agreement to such reductions countless times. We began back when we alone had such weapons. We were never able to persuade the Soviet Union to join in such an understanding, even when we proposed turning all nuclear material and information over to an international body and when we were the only nation that had nuclear weapons. We are preparing a new arms reduction effort with regard to strategic nuclear forces and are already in negotiations in Geneva on intermediate-range missiles threatening Europe. Our objective in these talks is for the elimination of such missiles on the strategic nuclear forces. We will aim on those at substantial reductions on both sides leading to equal and verifiable limits. We will make every effort to reach an agreement that will reduce the possibility of nuclear war. If we can do this, perhaps one day we can achieve a relationship with the Soviet Union which does not depend upon nuclear deterrents to secure Soviet restraint. I invite the Soviet Union to take such a step with us. And I ask you, the American people, to support our efforts at negotiating an end to this threat of doomsday which hangs over the world. Thank you, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationnuclearweapons0", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on Nuclear Weapons", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-nuclear-weapons-0", "publication_date": "17-04-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 816, "text": "We also saw the resilience and the goodness of decency of the American people. They are not looking for a handout, they just want a fair shot. My dad used to have an expression when he lost his job up in Scranton. When I was in grade school, my dad would say, and we had to move in with my grandparents. When he went down south from Scranton to Wilmington, Delaware looking for a job. And he used to always say that, The fact is Joey, I am not looking for government to solve my problems but I hope like hell they can at least understand my problems. He finally got a job, we could afford to buy a small home. He worked hard to build a decent middle class life. It was not easy for him, but he had an expression. As I said, a job joy about a lot more than a paycheck. It is about your dignity. It is about respect. It is about your place in the community. It is being uable to look your kidney eye and say, Honey, it is going to be okay. You deserve a president who understands what you are going through. Who sees you where you are and where you want to be. The last thing you need is a president who ignores you, looks down upon you, who just does not understand who in God's name we are. The destabilizing effect it is having on our government is unconscionable. He did not take the necessary precautions to protect himself or others. How can we trust him to protect this country? Governor, you have seen how he picks fights with states and pits them against one another. We lose anywhere from 700 to a thousand people every single day in America, worse than any country in the world. 80% of those deaths have been seniors over 60 years of age. Nationally, the infection rate among Latinos is almost three times higher than that of white non-Latinos and the death rate as well as three times higher. More than 40,000 Latinos have died from ENTITY. My heart goes out to all those families who got up this morning and there was an empty chair around the kitchen table. Or go to dinner tonight and the person that should be there is gone. They have lost part of their soul. They have lost part of their life. It is all about family. With you and I it is all about family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenlasvegasspeechtranscriptoctober9", "title": "Joe Biden Las Vegas Speech Transcript October 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-las-vegas-speech-transcript-october-9", "publication_date": "10-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 817, "text": "My heart goes out to everyone struggling with the economic crisis caused by the neglect, the simple neglect of this President. Nearly 11 million jobs lost since the beginning of this crisis. And they still have not come back, including 136,000 jobs here in Nevada. Temporary layoffs have turned to permanent layoffs. And the problem of long-term unemployment, once you get beyond a certain point, history shows us that they never get a job again. All told, there are now 30 million workers who either lost hours, lost paychecks, or lost their jobs entirely. Roughly 700,000 people have dropped out of the labor force last month. We are still down 647,000 manufacturing jobs nationwide since the crisis has started. And our balance of payments deficit is going up. And here in Nevada, the unemployment rate is 13.2%, the highest in the nation because of President Trump's negligence. The culinary union, has recently said publicly that 50% of their members are still out of work. Tourism in June was down 70% from a year ago. President Trump will be the first president in modern history since Hoover to leave office with fewer jobs than he had when he came into office. Here in Nevada, after seeing over 200,000 jobs created in the last seven years of the Obama-Biden administration, Nevada has actually seen jobs go down under the Trump presidency. He is leaving us with what he calls, he says is a V-shape recession. It is a K-shaped recession where those at the top keep going up and the middle-class and everyone else keeps going down, getting worse. Means essential workers who sacrificed to keep us going through this pandemic are being left behind by the most unequal recovery in modern history. You get this, the top 100 billionaires in America have done pretty well. Just in the pandemic, the top 100 billionaires have made an additional $300 billion, top 100. But you get the bottom half of that K and it is a downward slide. You are left to figure out how you are going to pay your bills, put food on the table. How to balance doing your job with being a teacher for your kids because of the negligence of the President, they cannot go back to school because they have not provided the wherewithal for schools to open. You are asked to risk your neck because you cannot work from home where the risk of ENTITY are kept outside.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenlasvegasspeechtranscriptoctober9", "title": "Joe Biden Las Vegas Speech Transcript October 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-las-vegas-speech-transcript-october-9", "publication_date": "10-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 818, "text": "That is because you are a police officer, a firefighter, a nurse, or you are working on an assembly line in customer service or a checkout counter, or here in Vegas in hospitality. If you are a housekeeper, a casino worker, the ones who built this very stage. Governor Sisolak, your members of Congress are doing everything they possibly can to help turn things around. You followed science and put public health and safety. You made tough calls that saved lives. Working around the clock so we can reopen schools and the economy safely. Your members of Congress, have done the same. And the House passed what they call the HEROES Act months ago. Would have provided billions of dollars to help states keep first responders on the job. The safety measures needed, the PPP needed to open our schools and businesses but Donald Trump and Mitch McConnell, Republican leader did nothing to move the legislation. Nothing in June, nothing in July, nothing in August, nothing in September, things getting worse and worse and worse. And as people struggled and suffered, what did they focus on? If this was not so serious, you'd think I am making it up. What they focused on is more tax cuts for the wealthy, not a joke. They are proposal adds another $30 billion tax cut for millionaires and billionaires. Cutting the means by which we fund the Social Security system, leading the actuary of Social Security to say if they do it, by 2023, mid-2023, there'll be no money for Social Security. And a relentless effort to eliminate, as Alejandro said, the Affordable Care Act, which provides healthcare coverage for 22 million people, over 100 million with pre-existing conditions. This is going on at the same time he is already cost 10 million people their health insurance because their companies have gone bankrupt. Instead of focusing on our needs, your needs, he is trying to take your healthcare away. He is literally before the Supreme Court as I speak to strike down the entire Affordable Care Act, take away that healthcare for 20 million Americans. And complications from ENTITY like lung scarring and heart damage could well become the next pre-existing condition. Striking down the Affordable Care Act would toss out the rule that allows our children to be covered on their parents' insurance policy until age 26. Take us backward when insurance companies could change a woman more for healthcare than a man for the same procedure, just because she is a woman.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenlasvegasspeechtranscriptoctober9", "title": "Joe Biden Las Vegas Speech Transcript October 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-las-vegas-speech-transcript-october-9", "publication_date": "10-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 819, "text": "And just as he vowed to terminate as I said earlier the funding for Social Security. The idea that in just a few years could put at risk 410,000 Nevadans that rely on a dignified retirement because of Social Security. And during all this, not once did President Trump call a high-level meeting of Democrats and Republicans to the White House to resolve these issues. I have served with a lot of presidents, never, no matter how good or bad you thought they were did they fail to try to bring parties together in the White House to reach a settlement. He spent so much time hiding in the bunker in the White House or on the bunker of his golf course, playing hundreds of rounds of golf. And then this Tuesday, what'd he do? He said, End the discussions. He was not even starting them. One thing for sure, Donald Trump shows no urgency to deliver hardworking Americans, like the family I grew up in. What they need now desperately. For exactly two months since the emergency small business program that your congresspeople voted, for has closed down two months of small business owners in Nevada and across the country, waiting, hoping, for just a little extra help to be able to stay open. By the way, the largest employers in America are small businesses. How many more dreams will be extinguished because of the selfishness of this President and the Republican leaders in Congress? Make no mistake, if you are out of work, if your business is closed, if your child's school was shut down, if you are facing eviction, as millions are, over 20 million Americans worry about whether they are going to be able to pay their mortgage next month. None of that seems to matter to Donald Trump. You are a firefighter, police officer, who depends on state and local budgets. He is turned his back on you as well, because they have got to balance their budgets. They are being laid off all over America. When Barack and I were elected, we inherited the worst recession short of the Great Depression in history. He put me in charge of what is called the Recovery Act. We passed and needed to get out into the economy within 18 months to prevent a depression. We did it with less than two tenths percent of waste or fraud. And I was able to see to it that the states in order to keep moving, keep teachers, firefighters, first responders, all employed. I was able to get $140 billion in aid out to the states.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenlasvegasspeechtranscriptoctober9", "title": "Joe Biden Las Vegas Speech Transcript October 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-las-vegas-speech-transcript-october-9", "publication_date": "10-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 820, "text": "Right here in Clark County, I was able to bring to $1.2 billion to keep your economy going. We have that ability now. The House has already passed a similar piece of legislation. And we started the longest sustained recovery in American history. But you know what Mitch McConnell said about help with the states. I am not making this up. What in the hell is he talking about? Folks, we are so much better than this. We can turn this crisis into progress. We contain this virus and fully reopen our economy. We make up 4% of the world's population and we have 20% of the world's deaths. If we just follow the science, expand testing and tracing, social distance, washing our hands, implementing nationwide mask mandates. On the economy, bring the Congress back together to pass real relief to help people who've lost their unemployment checks as well. And then implement a comprehensive agenda that I have laid out to make bold investments so we can build back better. He keeps talking about the Republicans. Some Republicans, a lot of them are acknowledging and supporting me, but a lot of them also are talking about, Well, Biden's going to spend all this money. The independent analysis put out by Moody's, a Wall Street firm did a detailed analysis of my recovery plan and the President's. And here is what they said, it is off of Wall Street, that my plan will create 18.6 million jobs in four years. It is not going to raise a penny in tax for anyone making less than $400,000 a year. And how am I going to pay for all this? I am going to ask the big corporations and the wealthy to start paying their fair share. You realize that the Fortune 500 companies, 92 of them making billions of dollars, do not pay a single penny in taxes. Donald Trump paying $720 in taxes? The money we raise by eliminating the $1.3 trillion of his $2 trillion tax cut that affects the super wealthy and corporations, we are going to invest in working people. We are going to grow the middle class to make sure everyone's included on the deal. The kinds of investment that will stimulate the economy, including industries like tourism and hospitality. It means the analysis shows creating millions of good paying union jobs. Making sure our future is made in America. We and the President in the White House gives out $600 billion in contracts per year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenlasvegasspeechtranscriptoctober9", "title": "Joe Biden Las Vegas Speech Transcript October 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-las-vegas-speech-transcript-october-9", "publication_date": "10-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 821, "text": "While I am President, it is going to go to no outfit that does not make it in America, the whole thing, and sell it in America. I mean it. Making the climate safer, saving hundreds of millions of barrels of oil. We will deal with climate change by creating millions of union jobs that build a climate resilience of our cities and our towns fighting back stronger, more frequent wildfires. By the way, did you hear what the President said about hurricanes this summer? He was told about how they are coming across the warm water in the Atlantic and the closer they get to the shore, the worse they get. You know what he said, Alejandro? He said, Maybe we should drop an atomic weapon on them and blow them up. As we say in my religion, Bless me father for I have sinned. Under my plan, small business come out the other side of this crisis with access to capital and the ability to deal with their debts. We are going to get $50 billion in new capital, especially for minority owned businesses and small businesses. We are going to make another hundred billion dollars in low-interest loans available to these businesses, creating jobs, increasing economic growth and increasing incomes. We are not just going to praise you, we are going to pay you with a good wage. Ensure you have strong benefits. We will ease the burden of the major cost in your life. We will build the Affordable Care Act, writing knew health insurance options, not for-profit public options, which give private insurers a real competitor. We are going to increase subsidies for premiums and lower your costs. Increase plans that will lower deductibles and lower out of pocket expenses. And we are going to take on the pharmaceutical industry with a plan that will slash costs of prescription drugs by 50%. The reason I am not going to more detail, you have been out here a long time, let us give me one example. If in fact Medicare is able to negotiate for all the drugs they buy and say you are not going to be able to sell them to them unless you pay the price we are suggesting, that would drop by 60% the cost the cost of drugs. We will work with the states to ensure that every three, four year old will get access to free, high quality preschool. We are going to make sure low and middle income families never have to spend more than 7% of their income to care for young children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenlasvegasspeechtranscriptoctober9", "title": "Joe Biden Las Vegas Speech Transcript October 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-las-vegas-speech-transcript-october-9", "publication_date": "10-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 822, "text": "Because if we truly want to reward work in this country, we have to ease the financial burdens that created the care for families that are caring for raising a child and an aging loved one. Look at the professional caregivers out there, home health care workers, childcare workers, who are more often women. Women of color immigrants, are too often underpaid, under seen and undervalued. That is why my Build Back Better plan will elevate the compensation, benefits and dignity of caregiving workers and early childhood educators. We are also going to triple the funding for Title I schools like the one behind me here, which served high number of children from low-income families. We are going to make four years of public college and universities tuition free for any family that makes less than $125,000 a year. We are going to make community college and job training programs free for all hardworking Americans that qualify. And if you are buying your first home, we are going to provide a $15,000 tax credit to help you get there. We are going to protect Social Security. Look, I am not going to lay it out, but go to joebiden.com. We pay for all this and we grow the economy at the same time. The fact is, President of the United States can only see the world from Park Avenue. He thinks Wall Street built this country and CEOs. I see the world from where I grew up in Scranton, Pennsylvania and Claymont. Communities like some that you live in. I know the middle-class working people built this country. The measure of economic success has been what our families are talking about around the kitchen table. Are you able to look your kid in the eye and say, Honey, it is going to be okay? How many times do you know somebody This morning I had to say, look, I know those tires are bald, but you got to ride on them for another 20,000 miles. We just do not have the money. We just cannot do it now. Who is going to tell her she cannot go back to school because we cannot continue to borrow the money to keep her in that community college? There was a discussion that took place around my table and I am sure yours as well. I made a speech I worked really, really hard on and thought really hard about before I made it in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, on the battlefield last week.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenlasvegasspeechtranscriptoctober9", "title": "Joe Biden Las Vegas Speech Transcript October 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-las-vegas-speech-transcript-october-9", "publication_date": "10-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 824, "text": "First of all, I'd like to say that we are delighted to have you here. This is our first dinner, or supper, in the Rose Garden, and it is worked out very well. This is kind of a test of NATO's influence with the weather. I would like to say, too, before anyone gets the wrong impression about our military commitment and our strength, although these representatives of our military bands can play the violin very beautifully, they also know how to fight. I have enjoyed very much being with our President this evening, Prime Minister Ecevit. I have learned a lot about politics from him. We have several very distinguished Members of the Congress here, and I called one over to meet him tonight, Senator Bob Morgan from North Carolina. And when he came over, Prime Minister Ecevit told him that he used to live in North Carolina and worked for the Winston-Salem newspaper, and he said, I have even got Tar Heel cuff links on. So he is taught me a great deal. This is a wonderful occasion for us. Very seldom in the history of our Nation and very seldom in the history of the White House, which has been here since 1801-except for a brief interlude when some of Jim Callaghan's 1 people got here in 1812- -have we had such a delightful and distinguished group of guests. As a matter of fact, you are not exactly guests, because you are partners of ours in one of the finest and most noble endeavors in the history of the United States of America. We are proud of our relationship. Yesterday was Memorial Day, and throughout our country we paused to recognize the tremendous contribution in past years of men and women who have given their lives and offered their lives in the defense of our Nation, what it stands for, our principles, our ideals. And it is a great reminder of what NATO has meant to us, too. We know what can be the price of preserving precious ideals. We know the value of a partnership formed in a time of danger, a time of war. We know the value of strong and able and deeply committed allies. And this is what NATO means to us. For 30 years now, almost 30 years, the strength of NATO has permitted democracy and freedom to flourish. And it is with a great gratitude and a sense of common commitment and common purpose that we have gathered here for these 2 days of deliberations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandturkishprimeministerbulentecevitdinnerhonoringtheheads", "title": "Toasts of the President and Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit at a Dinner Honoring the Heads of Delegation at the North Atlantic Alliance Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-turkish-prime-minister-bulent-ecevit-dinner-honoring-the-heads", "publication_date": "30-05-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 825, "text": "This Alliance has guaranteed our own security here in the United States, and it is been of great value to us. It is one of the things that we cherish most highly. For us, therefore, it has been a matter of necessity to be a partner with you in the North American 2 Alliance, and it is also been a fulfillment of what to us has been in the past, and still is, a moral obligation. that through strength can come peace, and that in awareness of a common resolution among free men and women there can be a conviction of potential adversaries that is better for mutual respect and the preservation of peace. We want a strong defense. We have assured that. We want a general commitment to peace and mutual disarmament. And both those elements of our desires can be guaranteed only through the accurate image of a capable and deep commitment to mutual strength. I think the United States is particularly well qualified to be the host of NATO, the members of the North American Alliance. Throughout our country there are tens of millions of people who look upon your countries as their second homeland. And it would be impressive to you if you could have shared the 2 years of campaign experience that I enjoyed around this Nation or rather that I experienced around this Nation to witness the deep sense of pride and a desire to protect the heritage that Americans share with their relatives in your own home countries. So, that, I think, qualifies us to be the host for this notable occasion. In a few minutes we will leave here and go down on the front lawn to witness again one of the great ballet performances available throughout the world. And the heritage of common beliefs, common ideals, and also common culture and enjoyment, is what we enjoy from the older countries in the European area. We feel that we share a common commitment to democracy, we share a common commitment to liberty, we share a common commitment to the rule of law. So, I would like to propose a toast on behalf of the people of the United States of America to the people whom you represent as our allies in Canada and in the European area, to the North American Alliance, the guardian of safety, the servant of freedom, and the instrument of peace.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandturkishprimeministerbulentecevitdinnerhonoringtheheads", "title": "Toasts of the President and Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit at a Dinner Honoring the Heads of Delegation at the North Atlantic Alliance Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-turkish-prime-minister-bulent-ecevit-dinner-honoring-the-heads", "publication_date": "30-05-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 851, "text": "We have been through an arduous campaign. It has been almost unique as a campaign of education in the great domestic and international problems which have arisen out of events of the last 15 years. I have endeavored to place these problems before the people as I see them from the facts and experience that have come to me in these past years. I wished the people to realize more intimately the difficulties with which their Government has been confronted, the disasters which have been averted, and the forces which have been mobilized for their support and their protection. I hope from these discussions that the people will realize the great crisis that we have successfully passed and the unprecedented measures taken which have been designed solely that we might protect and restore the system of life and of government endeared to us over 150 years--a government that has given to us protection from distress and allayed the forces which would otherwise have wrecked our homes and our firesides. But more than that, I hope I have given an understanding of these measures that have been designed for counterattack upon this crisis. These measures are now demonstrating their strength and effectiveness not only at home but abroad, evidences of which are multiplying throughout the country in the return of more than half a million men to work monthly, and that we have again resumed the road toward prosperity. I might add that the figure which I have given during the last few days of the return of 1 million men to work since the adjournment of the Congress have been added to during the day today by the estimates of the American Federation of Labor which increased the estimates, which I have given to you, by nearly 300,000 men. I wish to emphasize the greatest function of the American citizen, the one which each of us should perform tomorrow. The ballot is that most sacred individual act which preserves the great system of self-government which we have inherited and which should carry forward at any cost. It is a direct opportunity for every man and woman to express their views in terms of equality with every other citizen as to the policies and kind of a government that they wish carried out in the next 4 years. And I have a deep feeling that the choice that you make now is more than the choice for another 4 years. There is great divergence in the philosophy of government between the parties which may affect events over a generation; a mistaken choice may hazard the welfare of our children and our children's children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationfromelkonevada", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation From Elko, Nevada.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-from-elko-nevada", "publication_date": "07-11-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 852, "text": "I have been fighting that the wrong course may not be adopted, not by appeal to destructive emotion, but by truth and logic. I have tried to dissolve the mirage of promises by the reality of facts. I am a believer in party government. It is only through party organization that our people can give coherent expression to their views upon public issues. There is no other way except by revolution, but we in America have ordained that the ballot shall be used for peaceful determination and not violence. We are a nation of progressives. We differ strongly as to the method to progress. I differ widely with the principles and views advocated by our opponents, but it is not my purpose to review them at this moment. I feel deeply that the Republican Party has been the party of progress in our history from the days of Abraham Lincoln. It has built the progress of the Nation upon the foundations of national principles and national ideals. We are a nation of homes from which the accomplishment of individuals is nurtured by the maximum freedom in an ordered liberty. The ultimate goal of our progress is to build for security and happiness in these homes where the inspiration of our religious faiths will implant in our children those principles of social order and idealism, and where our Government will contribute in safeguarding their future opportunity for them. The action of our Nation has been modified and benefited by the enfranchisement of women. They equally with the men bear the shocks from economic disaster. With them lies largely the guardianship of the fundamental ideals, because concentrated in their lives and their responsibilities is a solicitude for the preservation of the home and the inspiration for the future. And in these labors our Government can contribute to strengthen their accomplishment and their influence. Our women give with lavish hands, not only to childhood, but, as well, to the creation of those conserving customs upon which are builded all the blessings of our ordered Government. They thus give to government a large measure of the true strength of its foundations. It is but just that they receive back, in return, all that the Government can give them to assure them of security and the enlargement of the equal opportunity to their children and to themselves, to widen the field for the use of their own powers of mind and spirit. It is they who are mobilizing new public regard to our obligations to home and children of the future; it is they who are mobilizing the public opinion on the maintenance of peace in the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationfromelkonevada", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation From Elko, Nevada.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-from-elko-nevada", "publication_date": "07-11-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 853, "text": "The men of our country carry the frontline of battle through their initiative, their enterprise, their hopes, their courage. The immediate question before our country is in whose direction shall be the measures by which we shall emerge from our present difficulties. In the longer view our problems are the questions that the world should have peace; that the prosperity of the Nation shall be diffused to all, and that we shall build more strongly the ideal of equal opportunity amongst all our people; that we shall secure that obedience to law which is essential to assurance of life in our institutions; that honesty and righteousness in business shall confirm the confidence of our people in our institutions and laws; that our Government shall contribute to leadership in these matters. It is my deep conviction that for the welfare of the United States the Republican Party should continue to administer the Government. Those men and women who have supported the party over these many years should not be led astray by false gods arrayed in the rainbow colors of promises. They have but to review the performance and the sense of responsibility, the constructive action, the maintenance of national ideals by the Republican Party, in every national crisis including the present, always in opposition to the destructive forces of sectional and group action of our opponents. Election Day is more than a day set aside for casting of our several ballots. There is a solemnity in the feeling of that day, the sense of being in the presence of a great invisible power when the united people of a great nation give their final judgment on great issues. We cannot feel that any human power alone can give us such emotions; rather we must trust that we are sensing the movements of that Ruler of the universe in whose beneficence and in whose favor we have been blessed throughout our history. As a final word, I wish to convey my deep gratitude to the many hundreds of thousands of people who have come to stations and to meetings to welcome and encourage me during this past month and to the many millions more who have responded to me over the radio.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationfromelkonevada", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation From Elko, Nevada.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-from-elko-nevada", "publication_date": "07-11-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 854, "text": "I am speaking to you today from a ship. It is a special kind of ship, and it will perform a very special mission. This vessel will not be armed with guns, or with any instruments of destruction. But it will be a valiant fighter in the cause of freedom. It will carry a precious cargo--and that cargo is truth. It is well named, for it will be carrying a message. It will be carrying a message of hope and friendship to all those who are oppressed by tyranny; it will be carrying a message of truth and light to those who are confused by the storm of falsehood that the Communists have loosed upon the world. This vessel is a floating radio transmitter which is to broadcast the programs for the Voice of America. It will be able to move from place to place, beaming our campaign of truth to people behind the Iron Curtain whom we have thus far been unable to reach. The Courier is a small ship--it is not as big as a destroyer but it is of tremendous significance. Its significance lies in the fact that it will carry on the fight for freedom in the field where the ultimate victory has to be won--that is in the minds of men. As the world stands today, free peoples must have strong military forces to protect themselves against aggression. But the final solution for the ills that plague the world can never lie in armies and navies and air forces. The final solution cannot be reached until all nations are willing to live together in peace. The rulers of the Kremlin are trying to make the whole world knuckle under to the godless, totalitarian creed of communism. They are busy everywhere spreading propaganda to stir up fear and hate and to set nation against nation. The free nations of the world have not yielded to the onslaught of Soviet propaganda. We have undertaken to answer propaganda with the truth--for we know that the truth is the best answer. To bring the truth to peoples everywhere, we are using magazines, newspapers, motion pictures, libraries, and information centers in all parts of the world. We must use every means to combat the propaganda of slavery. This ship is an important part of that campaign. Our arguments, no matter how good, are not going to influence people who never hear them. Our' arguments, no matter how good, are not going to influence people who never hear them. The purpose of this ship is to help get our message through.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbroadcastfromthevoiceamericafloatingradiotransmittercourier", "title": "Address Broadcast from the Voice of America floating Radio Transmitter Courier.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-broadcast-from-the-voice-america-floating-radio-transmitter-courier", "publication_date": "04-03-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 855, "text": "There are so many people who are proud of you--your parents, family, faculty, friends--all who share in this achievement. To all the moms who are here today, you could not ask for a better Mother's Day gift than to see all of these folks graduate. I have to say, though, whenever I come to these things, I start thinking about Malia and Sasha graduating, and I start tearing up and----it is terrible. I do not know how you guys are holding it together. I am a Columbia College graduate. I know there can be a little bit of a sibling rivalry here. But I am honored nevertheless to be your commencement speaker today, although I have got to say, you set a pretty high bar, given the past 3 years. But I will point out Hillary is doing an extraordinary job as one of the finest Secretaries of State America has ever had. We gave Meryl the Presidential Medal of Arts and Humanities. Sheryl is not just a good friend, she is also one of our economic advisers. Keep your friends close and your Barnard commencement speakers even closer. Now, the year I graduated--this area looks familiar----the year I graduated was 1983, the first year women were admitted to Columbia. Sally Ride was the first American woman in space. Music was all about Michael and the moonwalk. We had the Walkman---- No, no moonwalking. We had the Walkman, not iPods. Some of the streets around here were not quite so inviting. Nothing worse than commencement speakers droning on about bygone days. But for all the differences, the class of 1983 actually had a lot in common with all of you. For we too were heading out into a world at a moment when our country was still recovering from a particularly severe economic recession. It was a time of change. It was a time of uncertainty. It was a time of passionate political debates. You can relate to this because just as you were starting out finding your way around this campus, an economic crisis struck that would claim more than 5 million jobs before the end of your freshman year. Since then, some of you have probably seen parents put off retirement, friends struggle to find work. And you may be looking toward the future with that same sense of concern that my generation did when we were sitting where you are now.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddressbarnardcollegenewyorkcity", "title": "Barack Obama Commencement Address at Barnard College in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-barnard-college-new-york-city", "publication_date": "14-05-2012", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 856, "text": "Of course, as young women, you are also going to grapple with some unique challenges, like whether you will be able to earn equal pay for equal work, whether you will be able to balance the demands of your job and your family, whether you will be able to fully control decisions about your own health. And while opportunities for women have grown exponentially over the last 30 years, as young people, in many ways you have it even tougher than we did. Some folks in the financial world have not exactly been model corporate citizens. No wonder that faith in our institutions has never been lower, particularly when good news does not get the same kind of ratings as bad news anymore. Every day you receive a steady stream of sensationalism and scandal and stories with a message that suggest change is not possible, that you cannot make a difference, that you will not be able to close that gap between life as it is and life as you want it to be. My job today is to tell you, do not believe it. Because as thing--as tough as things have been, I am convinced you are tougher. I have seen your passion, and I have seen your service. I have seen you engage, and I have seen you turn out in record numbers. I have heard your voices amplified by creativity and a digital fluency that those of us in older generations can barely comprehend. I have seen a generation eager, impatient even, to step into the rushing waters of history and change its course. And that defiant, can-do spirit is what runs through the veins of American history. It is the lifeblood of all our progress. And it is that spirit which we need your generation to embrace and rekindle right now. The question is not whether we have got the solutions to our challenges; we have had them within our grasp for quite some time. We know, for example, that this country would be better off if more Americans were able to get the kind of education that you have received here at Barnard, if more people could get the specific skills and training that employers are looking for today. We know that we'd all be better off if we invest in science and technology that sparks new businesses and medical breakthroughs, if we developed more clean energy so we could use less foreign oil and reduce the carbon pollution that is threatening our planet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddressbarnardcollegenewyorkcity", "title": "Barack Obama Commencement Address at Barnard College in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-barnard-college-new-york-city", "publication_date": "14-05-2012", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 857, "text": "We know that we are better off when there are rules that stop big banks from making bad bets with other people's money; when insurance companies are not allowed to drop your coverage when you need it most or charge women differently from men. Indeed, we know we are better off when women are treated fairly and equally in every aspect of American life, whether it is the salary you earn or the health decisions you make. The question is whether, together, we can muster the will--in our own lives, in our common institutions, in our politics--to bring about the changes we need. And I am convinced your generation possesses that will. And I believe that the women of this generation--that all of you--will help lead the way. Now, I recognize that is a cheap applause line when you are giving a commencement at Barnard. It is--in part, it is simple math. More and more women are outearning their husbands. You are more than half of our college graduates and master's graduates and Ph.D.'s. After decades of slow, steady, extraordinary progress, you are now poised to make this the century where women shape not only their own destiny, but the destiny of this Nation and of this world. But how far your leadership takes this country, how far it takes this world, well, that will be up to you. You have got to want it. It will not be handed to you. And as someone who wants that future--that better future--for you and for Malia and Sasha, as somebody who is had the good fortune of being the husband and the father and the son of some strong, remarkable women, allow me to offer just a few pieces of advice. Do not just get involved. It is been said that the most important role in our democracy is the role of citizen. And indeed, it was 225 years ago today that the Constitutional Convention opened in Philadelphia and our Founders, citizens all, began crafting an extraordinary document. Yes, it had its flaws, flaws that this Nation has strived to protect * over time. Questions of race and gender were unresolved. No woman's signature graced the original document, although we can assume that there were founding mothers whispering smarter things in the ears of the Founding Fathers. What made this document special was that it provided the space--the possibility--for those who had been left out of our charter to fight their way in.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddressbarnardcollegenewyorkcity", "title": "Barack Obama Commencement Address at Barnard College in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-barnard-college-new-york-city", "publication_date": "14-05-2012", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 858, "text": "It provided people the language to appeal to principles and ideals that broadened democracy's reach. It allowed for protest and movements and the dissemination of new ideas that would repeatedly, decade after decade, change the world, a constant forward movement that continues to this day. And now that new doors have been opened for you, you have got an obligation to seize those opportunities. You need to do this not just for yourself, but for those who do not yet enjoy the choices that you have had, the choices you will have. One reason many workplaces still have outdated policies is because women only account for 3 percent of the CEOs at Fortune 500 companies. One reason we are actually refighting long-settled battles over women's rights is because women occupy fewer than one in five seats in Congress. Now, I am not saying that the only way to achieve success is by climbing to the top of the corporate ladder or running for office. Although, let us face it, Congress would get a lot more done if you did. That I think we are clear about. But if you decide not to sit yourself at the table, at the very least you have got to make sure you have a say in who does. Before women like Barbara Mikulski and Olympia Snowe and others got to Congress, just to take one example, much of federally funded research on diseases focused solely on their effects on men. It was not until women like Patsy Mink and Edith Green got to Congress and passed title IX, 40 years ago this year, that we declared women too should be allowed to compete and win on America's playing fields. Until a woman named Lilly Ledbetter showed up at her office and had the courage to step up and say, you know what, this is not right, women are not being treated fairly, we lacked some of the tools we needed to uphold the basic principle of equal pay for equal work. So do not accept somebody else's construction of the way things ought to be. It is up to you to right wrongs. It is up to you to point out injustice. It is up to you to hold the system accountable and sometimes upend it entirely. It is up to you to stand up and to be heard, to write and to lobby, to march, to organize, to vote. Those who oppose change, those who benefit from an unjust status quo, have always bet on the public's cynicism or the public's complacency.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddressbarnardcollegenewyorkcity", "title": "Barack Obama Commencement Address at Barnard College in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-barnard-college-new-york-city", "publication_date": "14-05-2012", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 859, "text": "Throughout American history, though, they have lost that bet, and I believe they will this time as well. But ultimately, class of 2012, that will depend on you. Do not wait for the person next to you to be the first to speak up for what is right. Because maybe, just maybe, they are waiting on you. Never underestimate the power of your example. The very fact that you are graduating, let alone that more women now graduate from college than men, is only possible because earlier generations of women--your mothers, your grandmothers, your aunts--shattered the myth that you could not or should not be where you are. I think of a friend of mine who is the daughter of immigrants. When she was in high school, her guidance counselor told her, you know what, you are just not college material. Well, she was stubborn, so she went to college anyway. She got her master's. She ran for local office, won. She ran for State office, she won. She ran for Congress, she won. She is America's Secretary of Labor. So think about what that means to a young Latina girl when she sees a Cabinet Secretary that looks like her. Think about what it means to a young girl in Iowa when she sees a Presidential candidate who looks like her. Think about what it means to a young girl walking in Harlem right down the street when she sees a U.N. Ambassador who looks like her. This diploma opens up new possibilities, so reach back, convince a young girl to earn one too. If you earned your degree in an area where we need more women, like computer science or engineering, reach back and persuade another student to study it too. If you are going into fields where we need more women, like construction or computer engineering, reach back, hire someone new. Until a girl can imagine herself, can picture herself as a computer programmer or a combatant commander, she will not become one. Until there are women who tell her, ignore our pop culture obsession over beauty and fashion and focus instead on studying and inventing and competing and leading, she will think those are the only things that girls are supposed to care about. Now, Michelle will say, nothing wrong with caring about it a little bit. And never forget that the most important example a young girl will ever follow is that of a parent. Persevere. No one of achievement has avoided failure--sometimes catastrophic failures. But they keep at it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddressbarnardcollegenewyorkcity", "title": "Barack Obama Commencement Address at Barnard College in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-barnard-college-new-york-city", "publication_date": "14-05-2012", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 860, "text": "They learn from mistakes. You know, when I first arrived on this campus, it was with little money, fewer options. But it was here that I tried to find my place in this world. I knew I wanted to make a difference, but it was vague how, in fact, I'd go about it. I--but I wanted to do my part to shape a better world. So, even as I worked after graduation in a few unfulfilling jobs here in New York--I will not list them all----even as I went from motley apartment to motley apartment, I reached out. And I started to write letters to community organizations all across the country. And one day, a small group of churches on the South Side of Chicago answered, offering me work with people in neighborhoods hit hard by steel mills that were shutting down and communities where jobs were dying away. The community had been plagued by gang violence, so as--once I arrived, one of the first things we tried to do was to mobilize a meeting with community leaders to deal with gangs. And I'd worked for weeks on this project. We invited the police, we made phone calls, we went to churches, we passed out flyers. The night of the meeting, we arranged rows and rows of chairs in anticipation of this crowd. And finally, a group of older folks walked in to the hall and they sat down. And this little old lady raised her hand and asked, Is this where the bingo game is? And later, the volunteers I worked with told me, that is it, we are quitting. They'd been doing this for 2 years even before I had arrived. They had nothing to show for it. I did not know what I was doing. And as we were talking, I looked outside and saw some young boys playing in a vacant lot across the street. And they were just throwing rocks up at a boarded building. They had nothing better to do--late at night, just throwing rocks. Before you quit, answer one question. What will happen to those boys if you quit? Who will fight for them if we do not ? Who will give them a fair shot if we leave? And one by one, the volunteers decided not to quit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddressbarnardcollegenewyorkcity", "title": "Barack Obama Commencement Address at Barnard College in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-barnard-college-new-york-city", "publication_date": "14-05-2012", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 861, "text": "We went back to those neighborhoods, and we kept at it, and we registered new voters, and we set up afterschool programs, and we fought for new jobs and helped people live lives with some measure of dignity. And we sustained ourselves with those small victories. We did not set the world on fire. Some of those communities are still very poor. But I believe that it was those small victories that helped me win the bigger victories of my last 3 1/2 years as President. And I wish I could say that this perseverance came from some innate toughness in me. I got it from watching the people who raised me. More specifically, I got it from watching the women who shaped my life. I grew up as the son of a single mom who struggled to put herself through school and make ends meet. She had marriages that fell apart, even went on food stamps at one point to help us get by. And she earned her degree and made sure that, through scholarships and hard work, my sister and I earned ours. She used to wake me up when we were living overseas--wake me up before dawn to study my English lessons. And when I'd complain, she'd just look at me and say, This is no picnic for me either, buster. And my mom ended up dedicating herself to helping women around the world access the money they needed to start their own businesses; she was an early pioneer in microfinance. And that meant, though, that she was gone a lot, and she had her own struggles trying to figure out balancing motherhood and a career. And when she was gone, my grandmother stepped up to take care of me. She only had a high school education. She got a job at a local bank. She hit the glass ceiling and watched men she once trained promoted up the ladder ahead of her. Rather than grow hard or angry each time she got passed over, she kept doing her job as best as she knew how and ultimately ended up being vice president at the bank. And later on, I met a woman who was assigned to advise me on my first summer job at a law firm. And she gave me such good advice that I married her. And Michelle and I gave everything we had to balance our careers and a young family. But let us face it, no matter how enlightened I must have thought myself to be, it often fell more on her shoulders when I was traveling, when I was away.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddressbarnardcollegenewyorkcity", "title": "Barack Obama Commencement Address at Barnard College in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-barnard-college-new-york-city", "publication_date": "14-05-2012", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 862, "text": "I know that when she was with our girls, she'd feel guilty that she was not giving enough time to her work, and when she was at her work, she'd feel guilty she was not giving enough time to our girls. And both of us wished we had some superpower that would let us be in two places at once. And the reason Michelle had the strength to juggle everything and put up with me and eventually the public spotlight was because she too came from a family of folks who did not quit. Because she saw her dad get up and go to work every day even though he never finished college, even though he had crippling MS. She saw her mother, even though she never finished college, in that school, that urban school, every day making sure Michelle and her brother were getting the education they deserved. They never indulged in self-pity, no matter how stacked the odds were against them. Those are the folks who inspire me. People ask me sometimes, who inspires you, Mr. President? Those quiet heroes all across this country--some of your parents and grandparents who are sitting here--no fanfare, no articles written about them, they just persevere. They just do their jobs. They meet their responsibilities. I am only here because of them. They may not have set out to change the world, but in small, important ways, they did. They certainly changed mine. So whether it is starting a business or running for office or raising a amazing family, remember that making your mark on the world is hard. It takes patience. It takes commitment. It comes with plenty of setbacks, and it comes with plenty of failures. But whenever you feel that creeping cynicism, whenever you hear those voices say you cannot make a difference, whenever somebody tells you to set your sights lower, the trajectory of this country should give you hope. Previous generations should give you hope. What young generations have done before should give you hope. Young folks who marched and mobilized and stood up and sat in, from Seneca Falls to Selma to Stonewall, did not just do it for themselves; they did it for other people. That is how we achieved women's rights. That is how we achieved voting rights. That is how we achieved workers' rights. That is how we achieved gay rights.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddressbarnardcollegenewyorkcity", "title": "Barack Obama Commencement Address at Barnard College in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-barnard-college-new-york-city", "publication_date": "14-05-2012", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 894, "text": "I am so happy to be back in ATL. Can we hear it for Rick Hart? He is the head of the Georgia There you are. You just tore it up. Rick is the head of the Georgia Students for Biden, the co-chair. And I will tell you one of the things that I love about Joe Biden, and he says it often. He understands his long life of service and dedication to public service, but he is always uplifting those who are the emerging leaders, and Rick Hart is one of them. So can we give it up for Rick, because that is what it is all about. That is what it is all about. It is about everybody taking on their role of leadership, knowing that we have so much at stake in this election. And so I came back to Atlanta. I love Atlanta. Last time I was here, it was before the pandemic. I spoke on the stage here at Morehouse in March of last year. And come into especially if you are black and hold elected office in America, coming to Atlanta is like coming back to the womb. Because Atlanta represents so much about who we are as America. Atlanta represents the hopes and the dreams and the fight to make real the promise of America. Atlanta is a place that has produced leaders who have been national leaders and international leaders. Who have always understood that hope will fuel the fight. Faith will be what grounds us in knowing what is possible. But then you got to just organize the folks, and bring people together, and recognize that nothing we have ever achieved as a nation by way of progress, came without a fight. And so that is what we have in front of us. We have for the next 11 days Georgia, a fight for the soul of our nation. This is a fight that we are engaged in, because we believe in the ideals of our country. We believe in our democracy. We know that America's democracy will always be as strong as we the people are in our willingness to fight for those ideals. And let us look at what is at stake. So we are dealing with a pandemic, and we are dealing with partly because of that, four crises that are occurring at one time in our nation. We are looking at because of the pandemic, a public health crisis. Where we have seen over 220,000 Americans lose their lives in just the last several months.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptskamalaharriscampaignspeechtranscriptatlantageorgiaoctober23", "title": "Kamala Harris Campaign Speech Transcript Atlanta, Georgia October 23", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/kamala-harris-campaign-speech-transcript-atlanta-georgia-october-23", "publication_date": "23-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Kamala Harris"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 895, "text": "Many of whom tragically in their last days on earth, could not even be with their family, with people they love, because of the nature of this pandemic. We are looking at over eight and a half million folks who have contracted the virus, thankfully have lived, but are looking at untold long-term consequences. Doctors are talking about things like lung scarring. And in the midst of this public health pandemic, we have a Donald Trump who thanks to Bob Woodward, we know knew back on January 28th, he knew the deal about ENTITY. He had been informed that it can kill people, that it is five times as likely to kill as the flu. He knew it could harm children. And he sat on that information and he did not tell the American people. Can you imagine what you might've done had you known what he knew on January 28th? How folks might've said, I got to buy some extra toilet paper, at the very least. But also how the fact is that even in Donald Trump's America before the pandemic, folks were working two and three jobs to try and pay the bills and pay the rent. Joe Biden I believe in our America, nobody should have to work more than one job to pay their bills and pay their rent and put food on the table. And he sat on this information. And then had the gall, had the nerve to say it was a hoax, to muzzle the public health experts. To suggest that he keeps a ledger, and you are on one side of his ledger if you do not wear a mask, you are on another side of his ledger if you wear a mask. And he is in the United States Supreme court where his boy Bill Barr, trying to sue to get rid of the Affordable Care Act. And let us step back for a moment and think about this. This man from the time he was Even before he was running for office when he questioned the legitimacy of the birthplace of the first black president of the United States, has been so weirdly obsessed with trying to get rid of whatever Barack Obama created. We do not need presidents who have weird obsessions. What is that about? So he is in court right now trying to get rid of the Affordable Care Act, which brought health coverage to over 20 million Americans. You know anybody who has diabetes, high blood pressure, breast cancer, lupus. And he wants to get rid of the thing that brought care and dignity to tens of millions of Americans.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptskamalaharriscampaignspeechtranscriptatlantageorgiaoctober23", "title": "Kamala Harris Campaign Speech Transcript Atlanta, Georgia October 23", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/kamala-harris-campaign-speech-transcript-atlanta-georgia-october-23", "publication_date": "23-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Kamala Harris"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 896, "text": "This is one of the reasons Donald Trump got to go. We are in the middle of all these crises, the economic crisis. Over 30 million people in just the last several months had to file for unemployment. We are looking at families that are getting up at the crack of dawn, to drive to sit in their car in a food line for hours. Praying that they can get to the end of the line before the food runs out. One in five mothers in America is describing her children under the age of 12 as being hungry. We are in the midst of a hunger crisis in America. And you see again, on the one hand you have Joe Biden who says Let me tell you how I measure the economy and how well it is doing. I measure the greatnesses of the economy based on how working people are doing. Which is why Joe Biden and I are saying, One, taxes will not be raised on anyone making less than $400,000 a year. We are saying that we know one of the greatest ways that we achieve access to economic health and intergenerational prosperity is home ownership. So we will have a $15,000 tax credit for first time home buyers, to help you with down payments and closing costs to buy a home. We understand working families need childcare, but nobody should have to pay more than 7% of their income in childcare. On the other hand you have Donald Trump. Who measures how well the economy is doing based on the stock market. Who as one of his first orders of business, passed a tax bill benefiting the top 1% and the biggest corporations of America. I will tell you, Joe Biden and I will make it one of our highest priorities to get rid of that tax bill, and do what we know needs to be done to invest that money in working families. Public health crisis and economic crisis is being compared to the great depression. So on one hand you have Joe Biden, who has the knowledge and the courage enough to use the term and speak those words, black lives matter. On the other hand you have Donald Trump, who refuses and will never say, Black lives matter. And people have asked me, they say, Well, ENTITY By the way senator is not on my birth certificate. We have seen that pattern going back to him questioning the legitimacy of Barack Obama, going back to Charlottesville. When people were peacefully protesting racial injustice in America, a woman was killed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptskamalaharriscampaignspeechtranscriptatlantageorgiaoctober23", "title": "Kamala Harris Campaign Speech Transcript Atlanta, Georgia October 23", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/kamala-harris-campaign-speech-transcript-atlanta-georgia-october-23", "publication_date": "23-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Kamala Harris"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 897, "text": "And on the other side, you had a bunch of neo-Nazis wearing swastikas, carrying Tiki torches, slurring, throwing out anti-Semitic and racist slurs, and Donald Trump said, Well, there are fine people on both sides. A president of the United States who referred to Mexicans as rapists and criminals. A president of the United States who made as one of his first policy initiatives, a ban on Muslims entering our country. And then stood on that stage and would not condemn known white supremacist, and then double down and said, Well, they should stand back and stand by. This is not reflective of who we believe we are as a nation. We need a president who acknowledges systemic racism, who acknowledges the history of America, and uses that bully pulpit and that microphone, in a way that speaks truth with an intention to address the inequities and bring our country together. So I come from California. I was born in Oakland, California. And we have some. The West Coast has been burning because of those wildfires. California, Oregon, Washington, the Gulf States have been battered by these storms. People in the Midwest, farmers have lost whole season of crops because of the floods. So Joe Biden says, We need to embrace science. We need to deal with it. This is something that is hurting people. It is something that we can address in a way we also create jobs by investing in infrastructure, investing in building renewable energy. That is going to be about jobs. Joe Biden knows the seriousness of environmental justice issues. He knows that of all of the areas where people live in America with poor air quality, 70% of the people in those areas are people of color. Joe Biden knows what is going on at Flint. Joe Biden says, We need to address this and we need to pay attention to science. On the other hand you have Donald Trump, who recently when he was asked about the wildfires in California And the reporter said something like, Well, so the scientists are basically saying these fires, what is happening, the scientists are saying, 'there is a connection between this drastic changes in the climate and these wildfires.' You know what the president of the United States said in response? Science does not know the president of the United States. And what we see is a through line, right, on that issue and the first issue.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptskamalaharriscampaignspeechtranscriptatlantageorgiaoctober23", "title": "Kamala Harris Campaign Speech Transcript Atlanta, Georgia October 23", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/kamala-harris-campaign-speech-transcript-atlanta-georgia-october-23", "publication_date": "23-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Kamala Harris"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 898, "text": "An inability to do the job of Commander in Chief of the United States, whose first responsibility is to concern themselves with the health and safety of the American people. Now, you all know And Atlanta helped me when I ran for Senate, and I am now the only black woman in the United States Senate. Only the second in America's history to be elected to the United States Senate. And I am going to tell you because I have been there now for almost four years. The Senate is so important on all these issues. We need to take back the white house, there is no question about that. We also need to take back the Senate. We need to take back the Senate. It is the senators that will make decisions about advise and consent on who sits in the United States Supreme Court, right? One of the reasons I became a lawyer is because I was inspired by Thurgood Marshall and Charles Hamilton Houston and Constance Baker Motley, right? They are the ones who fought for Brown v. Board of Education. They are the ones who have fought for civil rights. Who sits in the United States Supreme Court has everything to do with our fight for equality. Well, it is going to be the president who nominates somebody, but it is the Senate who advise and consent will make the decision about whether it goes through. And right now we are seeing that battle in full relief, with this illegitimate process they have engaged in to try and fill the seat of the great Ruth Bader Ginsburg, while people are voting in an election. The majority of American people say, Let us decide who will be our president, and then let that person decide who fills that seat? The United States Senate is where there will be a decision on whether we put on the floor a bill that my brother Cory Booker from New Jersey and I wrote, called the George Floyd Justice and Policing Act. A bill that says like Joe Biden and I say, We should ban chokeholds and carotid holds, because George Floyd would be alive today if that were the case. A bill that says, Let us have a national registry of police officers who break the law, because that is the right thing to do. It says, We need to have a national standard for excessive use of force. Because it is not right that in some places when there is excessive use of force the question asked is, Was it reasonable? When we all know you could not reason a way just about anything. We need to change the standard.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptskamalaharriscampaignspeechtranscriptatlantageorgiaoctober23", "title": "Kamala Harris Campaign Speech Transcript Atlanta, Georgia October 23", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/kamala-harris-campaign-speech-transcript-atlanta-georgia-october-23", "publication_date": "23-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Kamala Harris"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 899, "text": "Those kinds of decisions, yes they get made from the White House, and we will make them. It also gets made in the Senate. And so that brings me to Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff. And Georgia you got to send them to the United States Senate. Let them represent Georgia on all these issues. So I am here, Atlanta, Georgia, to ask you to do what I know you already know how to do so well. Which is to talk to folks about what is at stake. Which is to remind people on the issue of voting. That we have got so many reasons. One has to do with again, Atlanta, it has to do with John Lewis. It has to do with those men and women who shed blood on that Edmund Pettus Bridge and so many other places, for our right to vote. And so voting is about honoring those ancestors. Honoring what they fought for and what they sacrificed for our right to vote. Voting is because there is so much at stake. Everything that we discussed. Everything that affects our lives. And voting also is because we are not going to let anyone mess with our right to vote. Because here is how I think about that. Step back and think about And I have been spending a lot of time all over. I have been to Florida this week. I was in North Carolina this week. I will be in Ohio tomorrow. Ever since and even before they gutted the Voting Rights Act in 2013, a whole lot of really powerful people including in this state, because otherwise we would be talking about Governor Stacey. A whole lot of powerful people for quite some time, have been trying to suppress our vote. Have been trying to confuse us about the process, to make it difficult. Oh, you can fill out your ballot and then put it in one envelope. But then you need to put it in another envelope and make sure that is signed. Trying to confuse us, trying to make it difficult. They are messing with the post office. And we have to at some point sit back and think, Why are they trying to make it so difficult and confusing for us to vote? And I think the answer is because they know our power. They know our power. And so I am here to say Atlanta, let us not let anybody take our power from us. We know the power of our voice. We know at election time the power of our voice is expressed through our vote. We are not going to let anybody take us out this game.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptskamalaharriscampaignspeechtranscriptatlantageorgiaoctober23", "title": "Kamala Harris Campaign Speech Transcript Atlanta, Georgia October 23", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/kamala-harris-campaign-speech-transcript-atlanta-georgia-october-23", "publication_date": "23-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Kamala Harris"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 919, "text": "Whoopi Goldberg, thank you for what you said and what you have done and for all the time you have given and the time you are willing to give because you never forgot where you came from and never stopped caring about how other people are doing who are not as fortunate as you are. Thank you, and God bless you. I want to thank all the dinner chairs and Chairman Fowler and your State chairman, Tom Byrne, and my former colleagues Jim Florio and Brendan Byrne, and Peter Duchin, who I have been enjoying for a year or two now, since I was a younger man. I want to say a special word of appreciation to Ray Lesniak because it is his birthday tonight, so I know we are all glad . I want to thank Senator Lautenberg for what he said and for what he is done in Washington, for standing up especially for the environment under a period of incredibly intense assault from the majority in Congress. Yes, you ought to clap for him because he did that. And as he leaves the United States Senate, I'd like to thank Senator Bradley for his 18 years of service to New Jersey and to America, for many, many years of friendship, counsel, and advice to me, and for the support that he gave this administration in the last 3 1/2 years. I know we all wish him well, and we know that the next chapter of his life will doubtless be just as exciting as the ones that have gone before. Thank you very much, Bill, and God bless you. You know, there have been a lot of sort of asides tonight about why Congressman Torricelli is not here. I think he is here for you, because he is down there voting on something you care about. And I have a message for those if there was some designed effort to keep him from coming up here tonight, guess what? He is still going to get the contributions, and we still know where he is, and we know what is at stake, and we are going to elect him in November, so it does not make any difference. One thing you know about Bob Torricelli is that he will stand up and fight for you with every fiber of his being. He does not do anything halfway; he is full of passion. He will fight for the water you drink, the land you live on, the air you breathe, the education of your children, the safety of your streets, and the example of your country as a beacon of freedom and democracy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 920, "text": "He is been leading the fight to protect Sterling Forest here, the watershed for most of northern New Jersey. He wrote a section of the Superfund act that is focused on the chemical sites that are polluted here, something I am determined to see us finish the work on and another reason I do not want to see any further attempts to erode our investment in environmental protection. Bob Torricelli will protect all that. So I ask you to do what you can for the next 6 months to send Bob Torricelli to the United States Senate. Bill Bradley's shoes may be impossible to fill, but the people of New Jersey deserve someone fighting for them who is on their side and fighting for their future, not someone in the grip of an ideological theory that will only undermine our ability to go forward together. So I ask you again, do what you can, send him to the Senate. Do what you can for yourselves and your children and your future. We need Bob Torricelli, and I am going to depend on you to deliver New Jersey for us. Ladies and gentlemen, I do not want to keep you a long time tonight, but I want to just give a speech that in some ways is not particularly political. And after, I am going to ask you to do something that is intensely political. Usually these fundraisers we all know that our political system would not work without them, but a lot of times I think you come and go and you have your blood stirred, but I wonder if, when you leave, you think you have done your part and that is all there is to it. I want to talk to you tonight about what I believe is really going on in this country now, what I think is really at stake in this election, and why I hope you believe your financial contributions are only the beginning of your responsibilities as citizens for the next 6 months. We are clearly living through a time of change as profound as any the United States has endured in a hundred years in terms of the ways we work and live. Every so often our country is confronted with huge challenges, either to our very existence or at least to the ideals with which we started, that all of us are created equal and that we have inalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and that the Government is instituted to promote the general, the common welfare. We had a lot of trouble getting started in working that out.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 921, "text": "Then we had to fight a great Civil War to hold the country together and to redeem the promise of equality by extending it when it had to be extended. And then, 100 years ago, we faced a period of change rather like today, when we moved from the farm to the factory, from the country to the city. There were vast new opportunities, but there was a lot of uprooting; a lot of people's lives were dislocated. And the progressive era began, with Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson saying that the power of the United States Government should be used to curb the abuses of that era and to make sure its benefits could be extended to all Americans. They had the antitrust laws, the child laws, the environment protection laws, all designed to let us have the benefits of the new industrial age without being broken by it, without having our identity as a nation, our character as a people, our ideals as expressed in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution savaged. That is what it was all about. And then we underwent the Depression and World War II, and President Roosevelt and the Congress and the leaders of that time had to, first of all, defeat the opponents of freedom who would have killed our way of life beyond our borders and rally the American people to overcome that profound Depression and find a way to build a safety net under this country so that we could manage our economy in ways that did not permit it to crash again and break the lives of so many millions of people. Then we had to gird ourselves for the cold war, which we did, and wait for our victory to come, because communism was always founded on a total misunderstanding of human nature and the human condition. Now we are going through another period of change, economic and social change and the way we relate to the rest of the world, sort of like what happened 100 years ago. Now we have moved from a cold-war world to a global society, not just a global economy. big companies dramatically downsizing; new companies starting at a rapid rate; a lot of people doing exceedingly well; other people left behind; other people feeling uncertain about their future. When I ran for President in 1992, I got into that race because I was convinced we could no longer just sit by and let it happen, that we needed an aggressive response.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 922, "text": "I still believe our vision for the future should be animated by three things: One, the desire to give the American dream of opportunity to every person in this country without regard to their race, their gender, their station in life, where they live, and what they are up against. Two, the understanding that we cannot achieve that in the world in which we are living unless we find a way to come together to respect our diversity, to bridge all those gaps of race and religion and region and ethnicity. This country now has, more or less, 200 different racial and ethnic groups. It is an astonishing thing that we can find ways to come together around our core values and our respect for one another's differences. And I am sick and tired of seeing elections used as wedges to divide people one from another, to try to get people who are in the majority to look down on those who are not , and then hope we can pick up the pieces after the election. We should be uniting the American people and going forward together. And the third thing we have to do is continue to be the world's greatest force for peace and freedom and prosperity. And as I have said many times, that sounds great and everybody is for that in general, but often in particular they are not. When I took the action I did in Haiti and Bosnia, in becoming the first President to try to do something in Northern Ireland, all of the things we have done in the Middle East, what all the polls said was the most unpopular decision of my administration, trying to keep Mexico from collapsing, everything I did, I did because I know that our country has got to try to be the world's greatest source of energy for peace and freedom and prosperity, and because I know that 20 years from now we can be the strongest country in the world, but others will grow stronger, and we have to work with Russia, we have to work with China, we have to work with a uniting Europe, we have to work with emerging countries, to have them define their greatness in a way that helps us all to go forward in peace and prosperity. How will these other countries define their greatness? Will it be as we do, by how well they educate their people and what their economic achievements are and what their cultural achievements are and whether they can help their less fortunate neighbors? Or will it be by whether they can bully people just because they are smaller than they are? We cannot walk away from this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 923, "text": "You cannot live in the world we are going toward and pretend to stay within your own borders. So that is what I tried to do in 1992. And ever since I have been in this office, everything I have done can be explained in terms of either trying to create opportunity or to bring us together around our basic values and respecting our diversity or maintaining our leadership for peace and freedom. And you heard Senator Lautenberg talking about it. We are moving in the right direction. It is also true that there are a lot of challenges out there. In the economic arena, we have at least three big challenges, do not we? In New Jersey, you know what one of them is. We have to figure out what to do about all these people who get downsized from big companies but who still have a lot of good years left. And we are working on that. In the next few days, I am going to have a lot of companies in the country come in, and we are going to highlight the companies that have been able to avoid that and have been able to do things that really help their employees if they have to leave. We have got to find a way, secondly, to give all of our working people a greater sense of economic security. I have heard Senator Bradley talk about this. If you cannot guarantee somebody the same job with the same company for a lifetime, then they have to know if they work hard and play by the rules, they will always be able to get new training for new work, they will always have access to health care, and they will always be able to have a pension they can carry around with them, even if they change jobs. They have to be able to know that. And lastly, we have to remember that here in New Jersey and throughout this country, in spite of the 8 1/2 million jobs, there are vast expanses within our inner cities and in our rural areas that have not felt any new investment opportunity. And do not kid yourself, when you have new jobs and growth, you also drive down the welfare rolls, you drive down the crime rate, you drive down the despair that people feel. So we have to find a way to bring free enterprise back to the inner cities and back to the rural areas of America. I know we can do it. If we can do it for other countries, we can do it for our own.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 924, "text": "If you look at this great country of ours, and you ask, how can we come together instead of be driven apart, you have to start with our basic values. We need to build up families and the integrity and strength of childrearing, not tear it down. That is why I have said many times, I am all for welfare reform that is tough on work if people can work, but I do not want to hurt the children. We should be supportive of good parenting and work. All of us try to succeed as workers and parents. That is what we should want poor people to do, too. Everybody should be able to succeed in that way. We have to create an educational system that gives everybody genuine opportunity. And that means, among other things, what I was doing here in New Jersey a couple of weeks ago, which is ensuring that we hook up every classroom and every library, even in the poorest schools in America, to the information superhighway in the next 4 years. We can do that, and we can revolutionize education if we do it. We have got to continue our work to lower the crime rate by having more police on the street, more prevention strategies, being tough in keeping the assault weapons ban in the Brady bill and not giving them up, and by actually doing something to give our young people something to say yes to as well as something to say no to. We can bring the crime rate down; we can make our streets safe again; we can make our neighborhoods whole again. We know how to do it. We have to continue this fight to protect the environment. It is woefully short-sighted to believe that we can walk away from our obligations to clean up the messes we have made and protect ourselves from making further ones and gain anything economically by it. Yes, we have to find smarter ways to do it. Our administration has worked hard to find ways to grow the economy and clean the environment. But if we walk away from that, we will not go into the 21st century as a country that is stronger with stronger families and stronger communities and a stronger future. All of these things we must do. We have to keep working and reaching out to the rest of the world, even when it is frustrating, when there are no easy answers. And to do it, we have to have an idea of Government that is fundamentally different from that embraced by the congressional majority.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 925, "text": "If you listen to them, what they say is, Government is the source of all of our problems; this new world is going to be so wonderful; if we could just get Government out of the way, all of our problems would be solved; what we need is empowerment defined as more choice and freedom from Government. If you listen to our crowd, what do we say? We are not for big Government anymore where it is not necessary. Just remember, folks, when election time comes, they bad-mouth the Government, but we are the ones that reduced it. But we did it in a way that treated those Federal workers with dignity. We gave them generous early retirement packages and severance packages and time to find other jobs. And we did not try to make some big thing out of it. We just did it because it needed to be done. But we believe that there is a different sort of empowerment. We believe that real opportunity means not only choice but the ability to exercise the choice. You remember the great French writer Anatole France said the rich and poor are equally free to sleep under the bridge at night. Now, that is what choice is without the capacity to exercise it. We believe our job in Washington is to give people the ability to make the most of their own lives as individuals, workers, as citizens, in families, in communities, and as citizens of this great Nation. That is what we believe, the power to make the most of their own lives. We cannot guarantee results for people, but if we do not make sure everybody has got a chance to do the most that they can with their lives and live out their dreams, this country will never be what it ought to be in the 21st century. That is the main choice you face in 1996. And let me say, in terms of the election, why you have to work at it. And you have to talk to people about what the nature of this time is, what the nature of this period of change is, and what should we be doing. And every one of you who can afford to be here tonight has a voice, a mind, a spirit that can be brought to bear on your friends and neighbors. And you need to take this opportunity to use this election as elections should always be used, as a genuine educational opportunity to learn about where we are. And every question then becomes, how do we do this in a way that gives everybody a chance to make the most of their own lives?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 926, "text": "How do we do this in a way that brings the American people together and does not divide them? How do we do this in a way that maintains our leadership in the world for peace and freedom? So it is not a question of whether we balance the budget. We have reduced the deficit more than our predecessors. The question is, how we balance the budget, not whether we do it. So in every case, I ask you to think about this. You can look at the budget of 1995, which I vetoed, at the environmental initiatives, at the differences between us. Who is right about family and medical leave? Were we right to say that you should not lose your job if you have got to take a little time off when a baby is born or a parent is sick or a child is in the hospital? We now have gotten a bipartisan study of the family and medical leave law that says one in six American workers covered by the law have taken advantage of it, and about 90 percent of the businesses say it did not cost them any money to comply and did not cause them any problems. I think that is what we are about. All we did was to empower people to succeed at work and at home. That is what we should be doing. Were we right to fight for the 100,000 police and the assault weapons ban and the Brady bill? All I know is that the crime rate is down all across America now for 3 or 4 years in a row because of more police and prevention. All I know is that no lawful hunter has lost his or her weapon, but there are 60,000 people who did lose their weapons, the 60,000 people with criminal records who tried to buy a handgun and could not do it because of the Brady bill in the last year and a half. Were we right to fight for national service, to give people a chance to serve their community, solve the problems, work with people of different backgrounds, and earn some money to go to college, or were they right to say that is a luxury we cannot afford?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 927, "text": "Were we right to change the student loan laws so that more people could borrow money to go to college on better terms and pay it back as a percentage of their income so that if you have a high tuition cost but you want to be a schoolteacher, a police officer, a nurse, or somebody else doing public service and you know you are not going to be rich, you still can always borrow the money to go to college, and you can still always pay it back? I believe we were right about that. All we were trying to do was to give people the means to make the most of their own lives, to seize the American dream, to come together instead of being divided, to stand up for the things we believe in around the world. That is all we did, and it makes all the difference. So I say to you, this is not like 1992 when the question was the status quo or change. The question is, which road will you walk into the 21st century? And I tell you, I see pictures in my mind all the time that give me the answer. The other day I was at Eastern High School in Washington, DC, where all of the students are African-American except the Russian exchange students, a program you have done a lot of work on. There they were, reaching for unity over diversity. There they were, struggling to come out of poverty. There they were, asking not for a guarantee, but just for a good education and a chance at the American dream. And if I have got anything to do about it, they are going to get it. That is what they are going to get. I got two letters from two married couples I got to know not very long ago because they had desperately sick children. I know as the father of only one child, there must be no greater pain in the world than having a child die before you do. And both these couples lost their children, but they got to be good parents because of the family and medical leave law that they helped us fight for. I think we were right, and I think that is the kind of change we want. I got a letter that I signed today back to a man who is now in his mid-sixties who lost a job 4 years ago at an aerospace plant, did not know where to turn.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 928, "text": "But he wrote us, and because we found him the kind of training program that others are trying to eliminate, that man started his life over again in his early sixties and is working again and has dignity and is supporting himself and his family. That is what I believe we ought to be doing. It is not about big Government programs. It is not about yesterday's ideas. This is about which road we will walk into the future. It is about whether we will walk it together. I was over there today at the high school. We were at the high school; Senator Lautenberg talked about it. We did this antismoking program. And I was talking to the mayor on the way in about what kind of community it was. It was, except they had not only Christians and Jews among the student body, they had Hindus and Muslims among the student body, even there. I am telling you, this business of trying to drive a stake between people in this country based on their race, their ethnic background, or their religion has got to stop. We have got to stop it. We have got to stop it. Now, you do not have to guess about this; look around the rest of the world. Which road do you want to walk into the future? And I know that either I or my successors will make some mistakes in our judgments about what the United States should do around the world. But basically, it is right for us to continue to reach out to other countries. It is right for us to support peace and freedom and to try to expand our own prosperity by expanding that of others. It is right for us to be partners with other countries, even when we are tired and we want to lay our burdens down, because it is the only way to fight terrorism, the only way to fight drug dealing, the only way to fight organized crime; it is right to do that. So you get to decide about that, which road will you walk into the future. And I want to ask you when you leave here tonight to think about what else you can do for the next 6 months. I appreciate the money you have given Bob Torricelli and the Democratic Party and our efforts. I am grateful for that. But it is not enough, because the American people are trying to get a grip on this period of change. You should feel privileged to live in this time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticdinnerjerseycitynewjersey", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic Dinner in Jersey City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-dinner-jersey-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "07-05-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 929, "text": "Please be seated, unless you do not have a seat. I appreciate the chance to come to this vital facility to meet the workers who make it go, meet the planners who keep it modern, and meet some of the people who benefit from the electricity that is generated out of here. I come knowing our Nation faces some great challenges. The biggest challenge we face is the security of our people. We have got to make sure that America is secure from the enemies which hate us. And we have got to make America secure by having an economy that grows so people can find work. On the first front, to make sure America is secure, we are making good progress. The 2 years from September the 11th-we got hit. We got hit by people who cannot stand what America believes in. We love freedom, and we are not going to change. Therapy will not work with this bunch. So we will bring people to justice. It does not matter how long it takes. America and many of our friends will find those who would harm the American people and bring them to justice. The only way to win the war on terror is to stay on the offensive. We can do a lot of things here at home. We can support our first-responders. We can make sure our law enforcement agencies talk to each other. But the best way to make sure the homeland is secure is to hunt these killers down one by one and bring them to justice, which the United States of America will do. As part of making sure America is secure, I laid out a doctrine that said, If you harbor a terrorist, if you feed a terrorist, if you hide a terrorist, you are just as guilty as the terrorists. To provide money to terrorists, you are guilty. And we will hold you account. And the Taliban found out what we meant. We gave an ultimatum to Mr. Saddam Hussein. We said, Get rid of your weapons. He ignored not only the United States but the civilized world. No terrorist organization will ever get a weapon of mass destruction from Mr. Sad-dam Hussein. This Nation yearns for peace, but we understand the nature of the enemy. For those of you who have got relatives in the United States military, I want to thank you, for a grateful nation. And you thank them, on behalf of the Commander in Chief and the people of this country, for the sacrifices they are willing to make on behalf of the rest of us. Economic security is on my mind.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedetroitedisonpowerplantmonroemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Detroit Edison Powerplant in Monroe, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-detroit-edison-powerplant-monroe-michigan", "publication_date": "15-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 930, "text": "I am sure the numbers are beginning to look better, but there is still people looking for work. My attitude is, so long as somebody is looking for work, then we have got to continue to try to create the conditions necessary for job growth. We want the moms and dads to be able to make a living, to be able to put food on the table for their children. National security means economic security for every single citizen. And one of the lessons we learned a while ago was that a reliable, affordable electrical power is essential for economic growth in America. It is an essential part of an economic plan. If you are interested in creating jobs, you'd better have energy. You are not going to have an economy grow without reliable sources of energy. Lights went out last month-you know that. It might have been good for candle sales, but it certainly was not good for-job growth. It recognizes that we have got an issue with our electricity grid, and we need to modernize it. We need to make sure it works in the future. The first thing we are going to do is find out what went wrong and address the problem. Secretary of Energy Spence Abraham, right here, from the State of Michigan, is leading that investigation. We want the facts. We will put the spotlight of truth on the facts, and then we will deal with it. But also, it is clear that the power grid needs an overhaul. As we go into an exciting new period of American history, we want the most modern electricity grid for our people. When I first got in in Washington, I put out a plan, a national energy strategy. I felt like we needed an energy strategy for the country. If energy is an issue, first of all you need a strategy and a plan. And we laid one out. And part of that plan modernizes-called for the modernization of the electricity grid. We need more investment. We need research and development to make sure we are -as we invest new technologies, they are the latest and best for the people of this country. We also want to make sure voluntary reliability standards for utilities are now mandatory reliability standards. We want mandatory reliability standards, so people can count on the deliver-to have their electricity delivered. This is part of the plan I announced, as well as we have got to make sure that the energy we use, we have the best technologies to make sure we burn it as clean as we can.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedetroitedisonpowerplantmonroemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Detroit Edison Powerplant in Monroe, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-detroit-edison-powerplant-monroe-michigan", "publication_date": "15-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 931, "text": "That is why I have a strong initiative for clean coal technology. We want to make sure we encourage conservation. But the truth of the matter is, we need to become less dependent on foreign sources of energy, For the sake of economic security. We lead the world in new technologies when it comes to energy, and we not only can find new ways of producing energy and make sure we do so in an efficient way, we can make sure we do so in a clean way. You know right here what I am talking about, at this plant. We lead the world in technologies to make the production of energy cleaner. And so therefore, I am confident in predicting to the American people, not only can we promote job security and increase jobs, but we can do so in way that protects our environment. And I believe we have a duty to do so. I believe a responsible nation is one that protects the environment. And that is what I am here to discuss- -those moments when the Government does not help, when the Government stands in the way. For example, powerplants are discouraged from doing routine maintenance because of Government regulations. And by routine maintenance, I mean replacing wornout boiler tubes or boiler fans. So I changed those regulations-my administration did. And I am here to explain why we did, in a way that I hope the American people can understand. Before I begin, I do want to thank Tony Earley for that introduction. I just had a great tour of your facility, Tony, by Paul- Paul Fessler. He said to make sure I did not bring up the Michigan-Notre Dame game. So I will not bring it up. I am traveling today with Marianne Horinko, who is the Acting Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency. She understands that we can grow our economy and protect the environment at the same time. When we talk about environmental policy in this Bush administration, we not only talk about clean air; we talk about jobs. And I believe we can do both, and so does Marianne. I want to thank you for your service. I thank Paul for the tour, and I was joined on the tour by Mike Smith, who is a senior union committeeman, Local 223. I appreciate Mike taking me around and introducing me to some of the fellow workers in the plants. You are providing a service. For all the workers who work here, I want you to know you are providing an important service. You are creating the conditions so people can find a job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedetroitedisonpowerplantmonroemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Detroit Edison Powerplant in Monroe, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-detroit-edison-powerplant-monroe-michigan", "publication_date": "15-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 932, "text": "You are working hard to make sure somebody can turn on a light switch, and they can realize the comforts of modern life. Thanks for what you do. I am also traveling today with Members of the United States Congress, Congresswoman Candice Miller and Congressman Fred Upton. I want to thank you all for coming. We have got the secretary of state, Terri Lynn Land, with us, the attorney general, Mike Cox, the speaker of the house, Rick Johnson, members of the-all working hard at the State level. And finally, Mayor Al is with us, the mayor of Monroe. You must be filling the potholes--picking up the garbage--that is the way to go. Today when I landed, I met Claire Jennings. Let me describe right quick--it sounds like they know you, Claire. One of the things I try to do when I come to communities is to herald those folks who are volunteering their own time to make the world a better place. It is amazing the people I have been able to meet in our country. We have got all kinds of people from all walks of life taking time out to mentor a child or to take care of a-somebody who is lonely, to help heal a broken heart, surround somebody who hurts with love. It is really the strength of our country. I am proud of our military. I intend to keep our military strong. But the strength of the country is the heart and souls of our citizens. It is the willingness of people to lend a helping hand. What Claire has done is, she decided to enhance the wildlife growth around this plant. It is a wonderful-she is done a wonderful job, as have coworkers, in making sure the 800 acres here at the Monroe plant is spectacular to look at. And it will leave behind something like a legacy for future generations. So Claire, I want to thank you for setting a good example. I am glad you brought your daughter too. I said as plainly as I could that I believe we can grow our economy and protect the quality of our air at the same time. And we made progress doing just that. Let me give you a statistic or two. Our economy has grown 164 percent in three decades. And yet, according to a report that the EPA is releasing today, air pollution from six major pollutants is down by 48 percent during that period of time. So you nearly double your economy, and yet pollution is down by nearly 50 percent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedetroitedisonpowerplantmonroemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Detroit Edison Powerplant in Monroe, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-detroit-edison-powerplant-monroe-michigan", "publication_date": "15-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 933, "text": "That should say to people that we can grow our economy, that we can work to create the conditions for job growth, and that we can be good stewards of the air that we breathe. And this plant is a good example of that achievement. Since 1974, the power generated from here has increased by 22 percent. You have created more power so more people can live a decent life. And yet, the particulate matter emissions have fallen by 80-81 percent. You are good stewards of the quality of the air as well. You work hard in this plant to put energy on the grid, and at the same time, you are protecting the environment. There is reason for this progress, and it is because our Nation made a commitment. Starting in the Clean Air Act of 1970, we set high goals. Let us work together to achieve these priorities. This administration, my administration strongly supports the Clean Air Act, and I believe that by combining the ethic of good stewardship-in other words, convince people that it is an important goal- and the spirit of innovation, we will improve the quality of our air even further, and, at the same time, make sure people can find a job. There is more to do, and so I want to talk about three ideas that-three commonsense steps that I put out to help us meet the new air quality standards and further improve quality of life. I hope you find that they make sense. They certainly do to me. They are commonsense ways to deal with our environment. First, we are going after the pollution that comes from diesel vehicles. We worked with the energy companies and the agricultural concerns and the manufacturers; we worked with environment groups; we worked with union groups to come up with a commonsense policy. We developed one, and it is now being implemented. Oil companies will lower the sulphur in diesel fuel. We will enforce new emission limits on diesel truck engines. And we are going to put forward new rules that will control pollution from off-road vehicles like heavy construction equipment. The stakeholders came; we developed good policy. Everybody is on board, and now we are headed toward a cleaner-cleaner quality air for all Americans. Again, you heard the CEO talk about this legislation. Clear Skies legislation will help cut powerplant emissions without affecting job growth and/or jobs at this plant. We are interested in reducing the nitrogen oxide, sulphur dioxide in mercury, coming out of the powerplants around America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedetroitedisonpowerplantmonroemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Detroit Edison Powerplant in Monroe, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-detroit-edison-powerplant-monroe-michigan", "publication_date": "15-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 934, "text": "We have put forth a plan; we brought people in a room; we discussed it with them. The stakeholders agreed; union workers-union leaders have agreed; utilities have agreed; manufacturing companies have agreed to a plan that will reduce those three key pollutants by 70 percent over a reasonable period of time. We have got an interesting approach. It is been tried in the past. We put mandatory caps on emissions. Instead of the Government telling utilities where and how to cut pollution, we will work with them to create a cap, how much to cut and when we expect it cut by, but you figure out how. You are a lot better in figuring out the how than people in Washington, DC. Each year, each facility will need a permit for each ton of pollution it emits. Companies that are able to reduce their pollution below the amount can sell the surplus to others that need more time to meet the national goal and the national standard. The system makes it worthwhile for companies to invest earlier in controls and therefore pollute less. It ensures that high standards are met in a commonsense way that is cost-effective and saves jobs. And under the legislation, communities that have had trouble meeting air quality standards will finally have a clear and a more effective method to get them help. I am going to be talking about this tomorrow at the White House. I will be doing it in Washington because I expect Congress to act. Instead of playing politics with environmental legislation, we need to come together and do what is right for American workers and American families. Finally, I want to speak to one other matter. We need to fix those and have-we are in the process of fixing what they call New Source Review regulations. After I explain it, I think it will make sense as to why we are doing it. The old regulations, let me start off by telling you, undermined our goals for protecting the environment and growing the economy. The old regulations on the book made it difficult to either protect the economy or-protect the environment or grow the economy. Therefore, I wanted to get rid of them. I am interested in job creation and clean air, and I believe we can do both. One of the things we have got to do is encourage companies to invest in new technologies, convince utilities to modernize their equipment, so they can produce more energy and pollute less. In other words, as technologies come on, we want to encourage companies to make investment in those technologies.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedetroitedisonpowerplantmonroemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Detroit Edison Powerplant in Monroe, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-detroit-edison-powerplant-monroe-michigan", "publication_date": "15-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 935, "text": "Yet old regulations, the ones we are changing, actually discourage companies from even making routine repairs and replacing old equipment. Regulations intended to enhance air quality made it really difficult for companies to do that which is necessary to not only produce more energy but to do it in a cleaner way. Powerplants and companies wanted to make one change they could afford. The regulators could come in and order them to change everything, making every change a massive multiyear battle. That is the reality here at Monroe plant. The people who are trying to modernize this plant and do their job on behalf of the people of Michigan found out that the regulations were so complex that they could be interpreted any different way. And when you have complex regulations that are open for interpretation, guess what happens? And then you have litigation, and then things grind to a standstill. So a lot of planners and people who were charged with providing electricity and to protect the air decided not to do anything. They did not want to have to fight through the bureaucracy or fight through the endless lawsuits. They become old and tired, which means people start losing their jobs, which means our economy is not robust so people can find work if they are looking for work, which means some cases, energy costs are higher than they should be. And so we decided to do something about it-I did. It is been in the process for a while, and I decided to move, particularly when I heard stories like this one here at Monroe. In 1999, Detroit Edison made a decision to upgrade the turbine steam generators here. For the men and women who work at that plant, you understand, when I say vital decision, that it is a vital decision. The company wanted to give more efficient- wanted this plant to have new, efficient blades on the turbines, which will allow more electricity to be generated with the same amount of coal without causing emission increases. It seems like a commonsense policy. If I were running this plant, I would want to modernize it so we could produce more energy for the same amount of input and continue doing a good job of protecting the quality of the air. That is the kind of corporate behavior that I appreciate. Yet when the company took the plan to the EPA, the first thing that happened is they had to wait a year for an answer. They said, We have got a good way to do something, but please tell us if we can move forward.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedetroitedisonpowerplantmonroemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Detroit Edison Powerplant in Monroe, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-detroit-edison-powerplant-monroe-michigan", "publication_date": "15-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 936, "text": "And when the answer did come back, it was so complicated, because the rules are so complicated, that Detroit Edison decided to delay part of the project until its experts could decipher the details of the ruling. On the one hand, the rules are so complex that the answer coming back was even more complex, evidently, because nothing happened for a while. That does not make any sense. The quicker we put modern equipment into our powerplants, the quicker people are going to get more reliable electricity. If we are interested in job creation in America, we'd better have the most modern facilities to make sure that electricity is available so people can expand their job base. The rules created too many hurdles, and that hurts the working people. And so, as I said, we decided to do something about it. We began to review the old rules and regulations. And we wanted to do so in a careful way. The EPA held five public meetings. In other words, we said, If you have got a problem with the change, please bring them forward. Or you support the change, bring them forward. We wanted to hear from people, and the EPA did a good job of collecting data. In December, we issued the first set of rules to clarify and simplify regulations for manufacturers to do projects in an energy-efficient way and to promote policy that would discourage pollution. And now we have issued new rules that will allow utility companies like this one right here to make routine repairs and upgrades without enormous costs and endless disputes. We simplified the rules. We trust the people in this plant to make the right decisions. It makes sense to change these regulations. It makes sense for the workplace environment. It makes sense for the protection of our air. Not only do I believe that, but union leaders believe that. Manufacturers believe that. The utilities believe that. A bipartisan coalition in Congress believes it. We have done the right thing. The people at this plant wanted to put the most modern equipment, use the most modern technology to make sure the people of Michigan got energy at a reasonable and affordable price and at the same time protect the environment. Government policy prevented them from doing so. We have changed the Government policy for good of the people of this country. I mentioned the challenges we face, but I am an optimist, because I understand America. It is been my privilege to see the character of the American people. We set goals, and we work together to achieve those goals.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedetroitedisonpowerplantmonroemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Detroit Edison Powerplant in Monroe, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-detroit-edison-powerplant-monroe-michigan", "publication_date": "15-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 959, "text": "I was going to say, thank you, Laura, for those kind remarks. This is one of the great afternoons for Laura and me. We love to recognize our teachers. Actually, this is an annual event started by Harry Truman. And I am glad to be a part of a tradition here at the White House, saying thanks to our teachers. I admire teachers and like teachers so much, I married one. Laura is a great advocate for literacy and a strong supporter for America's teachers, and I am really proud to have her by my side during these unbelievable times and this great experience of serving our country-other than being a fine introducer. The thing I like about teaching is, teaching is such an optimistic profession. I know when teachers look out at their classrooms, you see more than a child at play or at study. You are able to see a child with big dreams and big hopes. You see future doctors and scientists and entrepreneurs and inventors, and I hope you see even a teacher or two. You dedicated your lives to the formation of young minds. You are giving our children the skills they need to succeed in life and equally important, the courage and the drive to realize those dreams. Our Nation is grateful for your hard work. We appreciate what you do, and we are honored you are here at the White House. I want to thank our Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings. She believes strongly in the classroom teacher, and she believes in the potential of every child. I am pleased to recognize Senator Sam Brownback, for the State of Kansas. I am glad you are here-and his wife, Mary; thank you for coming. thank you all for taking time to honor the teachers who are here. Sam Bennett from Florida- say hello to the Governor-Ron Poplau of Kansas-no wonder you all are here-and Susan Barnard of Washington State. Everybody here has been introduced to Kim Oliver, but you have not met her parents, Vincent and Veronica. I want to thank all the Teachers of the Year from around our country who are here. I really-Laura and I really enjoyed having our picture with you. But nevertheless, it is thanks from the bottom of our hearts. I thank Dr. Tom Houlihan, who is the executive director of the Council of Chief State School Officers. That is one of the sponsoring organizations. I want to thank Margery for being here. That is also a sponsoring organization of this event.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2006nationalandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2006 National and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2006-national-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "26-04-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 960, "text": "Kathleen Murphy is the president of ING, is here with us, as well as Tom Waldron, who is the executive vice president. These are the sponsoring groups of this important occasion. I also want to thank the chief state school officers who are with us. It is a job that requires compassion and determination and extraordinary patience. And as Laura hinted, or maybe did not hint, I was probably one of those kind that tested your patience. You are helping young people to learn the basics of reading and writing and adding and subtracting. You are serving as mentors and, probably most importantly, as role models. You help kindle young imaginations, and you inspire a love of learning. It is a pretty significant job description, when you think about it. And the teachers we honor here today are excelling at that job. Your daily efforts help young Americans grow into successful adults. In other words, you are building the future for the country. We ask a lot of our teachers, and we owe you a lot in return. And when I first came to office, I worked with members of both political parties-believe it or not, it is possible here in Washington to occasionally do that-to increase funding from the Federal level but also to pass the No Child Left Behind Act. The spirit of the No Child Left Behind Act basically says, society has a deep obligation to challenge the soft bigotry of low expectations, that we believe every child can learn, and therefore, we believe it makes sense to determine whether or not every child is learning. And if not, there ought to be extra help so that no child in our society is left behind. We are beginning to see good results, thanks to our Nation's teachers. The 2005 Nation's Report Card showed America's fourth graders are posting the best scores in reading and math in the history of the test. African American and Hispanic fourth graders set records in reading and math last year. America's eighth graders earned the best math scores ever recorded. Eighth grade Hispanic and African American students achieved their highest math scores ever. We are making really important strides toward closing an achievement gap in America, and I want to thank our teachers for your hard work. I have recently launched the American Competitiveness Initiative, which will help our students do better in math and science. We need to train 70,000 high school teachers to lead AP courses in math and science. I know we have got some AP teachers here, and I want to thank you for that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2006nationalandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2006 National and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2006-national-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "26-04-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 961, "text": "It is okay to be a mathematician or a scientist-as a matter of fact, it is cool. We want to make sure that we help students who struggle with math get extra help to make sure that-to make sure they have a chance to be able to earn the high-wage jobs of the 21st century. If we ensure that America's children have the skills they need to succeed in life, we will make sure America succeeds in the world. Improving the quality of education for young Americans requires good laws and good policies, but ultimately it depends on good teachers. And that is why we are here on the South Lawn, to honor really good teachers. The Teacher of the Year, Kim Oliver, teaches kindergarten at Broad Acres Elementary School in Silver Spring, Maryland. Broad Acres is Montgomery County's highest poverty school, a place where 90 percent of the children qualify for federally-subsidized meals and about 75 percent have parents who do not speak English at home. It is a school filled with the kind of students that inspired Kim Oliver to become a teacher. Kim decided to become a teacher at a young age. It is really interesting for teachers to hear what she said. She said, As a young child, I loved and admired my day care teacher, Mrs. Chandler. I wanted to be just like her. Chandler made me feel special, as if I were the only child in her class. Kim Oliver had many friends growing up who came from unstable and impoverished homes. She says, I watched so many of my friends live up to the low expectations that were set for them. To this day, I find myself wondering, what if my disadvantaged friends had 12 years worth of Mrs. Chandlers in their lives? Kim went on to say, I chose to become a teacher to motivate and inspire the neediest students, who many have written off, and let them know they can achieve and succeed in life regardless of what the statistics may show. I love that attitude. I think you are beginning to get the drift of why she is the Teacher of the Year. When Kim Oliver arrived at Broad Acres in 2000, the school was threatened with forced restructuring by the State as a result of poor academic performance. Oliver took a leadership role at the school. That is what good teachers do; they take the lead. She became a teacher-leader and helped lead a collaborative effort to improve the curriculum, instruction, and assessment. She helped establish instructional planning sessions and formal procedures to examine student work and improve student performance.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2006nationalandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2006 National and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2006-national-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "26-04-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 962, "text": "She noticed that many parents at the school lacked the language skills to be able to read to their children and to be able to help with their school work. And so she and her colleagues purchased cassette players and recorded books on tape for the students to take home and share with their families, which made it a lot easier for parents who struggle with English to help their children. Kim Oliver also organized a regular Books and Supper Night, where families could check out books from the library and read together before sharing a dinner, which fostered learning and family involvement in their children's education. If you can get the parents involved in the child's education, you have a much better chance of succeeding. She set high expectations. Good teachers set high expectations. She provided needed assistance. She involved families, and she helped turn that school around. Within 2 years of her arrival, kindergarten students at Broad Acres were mastering early reading skills at higher rates than other schools in the district. After 3 years, Broad Acres students were meeting or exceeding all requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act. She has a rare gift for touching hearts and minds, inspiring in her students to aim high and believe in their potential. A Broad Acres parent says, She knows how to talk to the children so they will listen. And all her students know that she cares about them. She made them all feel like they were smart and could learn anything. One of her colleagues says, When you walk into Ms. Oliver's classroom, one cannot help but notice that this is a special place. She is dedicated to her school community and committed to excellence, and she has been an instrumental force in improving student achievement at her school. I have high expectations for each of them. I teach them that they can accomplish anything with hard work and persistence. Kim Oliver understands that the key to helping children succeed is fighting the soft bigotry of low expectations. America is blessed to have teachers like Kim Oliver. We are blessed to have teachers like all those who are gathered here at the White House. We thank you for the love and devotion you have shown our children each day. May God continue to bless your work, and may God continue to bless our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2006nationalandstateteacherstheyear", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2006 National and State Teachers of the Year", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2006-national-and-state-teachers-the-year", "publication_date": "26-04-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 994, "text": "It seems to me that this is becoming a spring tradition. For the fourth year in a row, the football team from the Naval Academy is here to receive the Commander in Chief's Trophy-the Rose Garden should be called the Yard. This year's team was among the Navy's best ever. That says a lot. This is a team that had the most rushing yards in the Nation. That says a lot. You had the highest graduation rate of any football team in the country. That says even more. You made it to the bowl game. And you beat ENTITY. I thank you all for coming. Deputy Secretary of the VA Gordon Mansfield; Secretary Don Winter of the Navy; General Pete Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff-and, I might add, the first marine to serve in that capacity; Admiral G, Ed Giambastiani-that is hard for a Texan to say, but it is not hard to tell you how much I admire Admiral G and Pete Pace; Admiral Mike Mullen, Chief of Naval Operations, thank you for coming, Chief; General Jim Conway, Commandant of the Marine Corps; and Ellen Moyer, the mayor of Annapolis. Vice Admiral Rod Rempt-Rod, I notice that you gathered up my speech. Just remember, page three follows page two. But it is good to have you again. Coach Paul Johnson-you talk about a winner, this guy knows how to build winners. I am proud to welcome you and your staff. I appreciate very much the members of the football team that have joined us, and I thank all of the Naval Academy supporters who are here. The Navy's fourth consecutive winning season may not sound like much to people who do not follow football, but it is a remarkable feat considering that the team was 0 and 10, 6 years ago. And here they are, standing in the Rose Garden with the Commander in Chief. It says a lot about resilience and a lot about determination and a lot about correcting past mistakes. Coach Johnson has put together a really good coaching staff, and I appreciate very much, Coach, you motivating these players toward championship-toward the championships that you have earned. The season started with three wins in a row, including a blowout over Stanford. You beat Air Force in Colorado Springs. You beat ENTITY by 12 points, the fifth win in a row for the Naval Academy. They tell me that is a pretty big deal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthecommanderchiefstrophytheunitedstatesnavalacademymidshipmen", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Commander in Chief's Trophy to the United States Naval Academy Midshipmen", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-commander-chiefs-trophy-the-united-states-naval-academy-midshipmen", "publication_date": "02-04-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 995, "text": "You earned a spot in the Meineke Car Care Bowl-Meineke Car Care Bowl. Boston College. I watched it. I was impressed by the 322 yards you earned. I know you are disappointed with the one-point loss, but you cannot be disappointed with the effort. I appreciate the fact that your class is the first in school history to win four straight Commander in Chief trophies, the first to go 8 and 0 against ENTITY and Air Force, and the first to play in four straight bowl games. That is a lot of firsts. Your class won 35 games in 4 years. The only Navy class to win more games graduated in 1909. I do not know whether William Howard Taft welcomed the team in 1909, but I can tell you, the 43rd President is proud to welcome such champions here to the Rose Garden. One of the reasons your team was so successful this year, of course, is because you had a captain from Texas. Five different Navy players rushed for more than 100 yards in a game this season. That is more than any other team in the Nation. I appreciate the fact that one of your quarterbacks stepped in for an injured starter and went on to score four touchdowns in a single game. I would like to say his name; I will probably bungle it. I will just say, the guy is from Hawaii. I appreciate the fact that Keenan Little became the first player in Navy history to score defensive touchdowns against Air Force and ENTITY in the same season. I am proud to be up here with a fellow Texan from Lewisville, Texas-the mascot of one of the high school teams in Lewisville, believe it or not, is the Fighting Farmers. He gained 134 yards against Air Force. When he was named MVP, he wisely-wisely-gave the credit to his offensive line. You know, it is interesting-how would you like to be the punter on the Navy team who went full-two full games without showing up on the field? Veteto-Greg is his first name-was, like, the punter on the team, and for two games in a row, he was never used. The team had a special leader in Eddie Martin. I do not know if the country knows this, but he was diagnosed with cancer last year. He did not play any games this year, but he always led the team out of the locker room for every home game. And so, Eddie, I appreciate the inspiration you have provided for your team and for the Academy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthecommanderchiefstrophytheunitedstatesnavalacademymidshipmen", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Commander in Chief's Trophy to the United States Naval Academy Midshipmen", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-commander-chiefs-trophy-the-united-states-naval-academy-midshipmen", "publication_date": "02-04-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 996, "text": "I know you are fighting a brave battle, and a lot of people will pray for your full recovery. When you signed up for the Naval Academy, you signed up for more than playing football. I am glad Coach Johnson-I am sure Coach Johnson was glad that you said, I want to be a football player at the Naval Academy. But you signed up to become officers in the finest military the world has ever known. But you cannot have the finest military the world has ever known without men and women who volunteer to wear the uniform, just like you have done. You volunteered after September the 11th, 2001. I vowed after September 11th, 2001, that I would use the full power of our Government to protect the American people from harm, and I meant what I said. And therefore, anybody who signed up afterwards knew what they were getting into. It is a remarkable country when people make such a noble decision to serve their country in a time of war. And I am proud to be the Commander in Chief of such decent, honorable, sacrificing men and women. The lessons you have learned on the football field and at the Naval Academy will serve you well on the battlefield. You learned the importance of teamwork and leadership and strong personal character. And you are going to put those qualities to the highest possible use, and that is to protect the American people and to lay the foundation of peace for generations to come. The Navy and Marine Corps are on the frontline of fighting and winning the war against the extremists, radicals who would do this country harm. Every day we are on the offense against an enemy. My attitude is, I would rather defeat them over there so we do not have to face them here. And the Marine Corps and the Navy are helping to lead that charge. The sailors and marines on the high sea are sending a clear message to the world that we stand for strength, and we stand for peace. Former Navy football players have distinguished themselves in the line of duty. Marine First Lieutenant Brian Stann comes to mind, the class of '03. He won the Silver Star. Ron Winchester of '01, J.P. Blecksmith of the class of '03. Another gave his life in flight over the Pacific, Navy Lieutenant Commander Scott Zellem, the class of '91. The United States of America will not forget their sacrifices. We will complete our missions so that their sacrifices will not have gone in vain.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthecommanderchiefstrophytheunitedstatesnavalacademymidshipmen", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Commander in Chief's Trophy to the United States Naval Academy Midshipmen", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-commander-chiefs-trophy-the-united-states-naval-academy-midshipmen", "publication_date": "02-04-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 997, "text": "I am about to sign into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964. I want to take this occasion to talk to you about what that law means to every American. One hundred and eighty-eight years ago this week a small band of valiant men began a long struggle for freedom. They pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor not only to found a nation, but to forge an ideal of freedom--not only for political independence, but for personal liberty--not only to eliminate foreign rule, but to establish the rule of justice in the affairs of men. That struggle was a turning point in our history. Today in far corners of distant continents, the ideals of those American patriots still shape the struggles of men who hunger for freedom. Yet those who founded our country knew that freedom would be secure only if each generation fought to renew and enlarge its meaning. From the minutemen at Concord to the soldiers in Viet-Nam, each generation has been equal to that trust. Americans of every race and color have died in battle to protect our freedom. Americans of every race and color have worked to build a nation of widening opportunities. Now our generation of Americans has been called on to continue the unending search for justice within our own borders. Yet many are denied equal treatment. We believe that all men have certain unalienable rights. Yet many Americans do not enjoy those rights. We believe that all men are entitled to the blessings of liberty. Yet millions are being deprived of those blessings--not because of their own failures, but because of the color of their skin. The reasons are deeply imbedded in history and tradition and the nature of man. We can understand--without rancor or hatred--how this all happened. Our Constitution, the foundation of our Republic, forbids it. The principles of our freedom forbid it. Morality forbids it. And the law I will sign tonight forbids it. That law is the product of months of the most careful debate and discussion. It was proposed more than one year ago by our late and beloved President John F. Kennedy. It received the bipartisan support of more than two-thirds of the Members of both the House and the Senate. An overwhelming majority of Republicans as well as Democrats voted for it. It has received the thoughtful support of tens of thousands of civic and religious leaders in all parts of this Nation. And it is supported by the great majority of the American people. The purpose of the law is simple.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioandtelevisionremarksuponsigningthecivilrightsbill", "title": "Radio and Television Remarks Upon Signing the Civil Rights Bill", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-and-television-remarks-upon-signing-the-civil-rights-bill", "publication_date": "02-07-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 998, "text": "It does not restrict the freedom of any American, so long as he respects the rights of others. It does not give special treatment to any citizen. It does say the only limit to a man's hope for happiness, and for the future of his children, shall be his own ability. It does say that there are those who are equal before God shall now also be equal in the polling booths, in the classrooms, in the factories, and in hotels, restaurants, movie theaters, and other places that provide service to the public. I am taking steps to implement the law under my constitutional obligation to take care that the laws are faithfully executed. First, I will send to the Senate my nomination of LeRoy Collins to be Director of the Community Relations Service. Governor Collins will bring the experience of a long career of distinguished public service to the task of helping communities solve problems of human relations through reason and commonsense. Second, I shall appoint an advisory committee of distinguished Americans to assist Governor Collins in his assignment. Third, I am sending Congress a request for supplemental appropriations to pay for necessary costs of implementing the law, and asking for immediate action. Fourth, already today in a meeting of my Cabinet this afternoon I directed the agencies of this Government to fully discharge the new responsibilities imposed upon them by the law and to do it without delay, and to keep me personally informed of their progress. Fifth, I am asking appropriate officials to meet with representative groups to promote greater understanding of the law and to achieve a spirit of compliance. We must not approach the observance and enforcement of this law in a vengeful spirit. Its purpose is not to divide, but to end divisions--divisions which have all lasted too long. Its purpose is to promote a more abiding commitment to freedom, a more constant pursuit of justice, and a deeper respect for human dignity. We will achieve these goals because most Americans are law-abiding citizens who want to do what is right. This is why the Civil Rights Act relies first on voluntary compliance, then on the efforts of local communities and States to secure the rights of citizens. It provides for the national authority to step in only when others cannot or will not do the job. This Civil Rights Act is a challenge to all of us to go to work in our communities and our States, in our homes and in our hearts, to eliminate the last vestiges of injustice in our beloved country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioandtelevisionremarksuponsigningthecivilrightsbill", "title": "Radio and Television Remarks Upon Signing the Civil Rights Bill", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-and-television-remarks-upon-signing-the-civil-rights-bill", "publication_date": "02-07-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 999, "text": "I hope you all had a good weekend. Nobody likes paying taxes, particularly in times of economic stress. But most Americans meet their responsibilities because they understand that it is an obligation of citizenship, necessary to pay the costs of our common defense and our mutual well-being. And yet, even as most American citizens and businesses meet these responsibilities, there are others who are shirking theirs. And many are aided and abetted by a broken tax system, written by well-connected lobbyists on behalf of well-heeled interests and individuals. It is a Tax Code full of corporate loopholes that makes it perfectly legal for companies to avoid paying their fair share. It is a Tax Code that makes it all too easy for a number--a small number of individuals and companies to abuse overseas tax havens to avoid paying any taxes at all. And it is a Tax Code that says you should pay lower taxes if you create a job in Bangalore, India, than if you create one in Buffalo, New York. Now, understand, one of the strengths of our economy is the global reach of our businesses. And I want to see our companies remain the most competitive in the world. But the way to make sure that happens is not to reward our companies for moving jobs off our shores or transferring profits to overseas tax havens. This is something that I talked about again and again during the course of the campaign. The way we make our businesses competitive is not to reward American companies operating overseas with a roughly 2-percent tax rate on foreign profits, a rate that costs tens--that costs taxpayers tens of billions of dollars a year. The way to make American businesses competitive is not to let some citizens and businesses dodge their responsibilities while ordinary Americans pick up the slack. Unfortunately, that is exactly what we are doing. These problems have been highlighted by Chairmen Charlie Rangel and Max Baucus, by leaders like Senator Carl Levin and Congressman Lloyd Doggett. And now is the time to finally do something about them. And that is why today I am announcing a set of proposals to crack down on illegal overseas tax evasion, close loopholes, and make it more profitable for companies to create jobs here in the United States. For years, we have talked about ending tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas and giving tax breaks to companies that create jobs here in America. That is what our budget will finally do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstaxreform0", "title": "Remarks on Tax Reform", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-tax-reform-0", "publication_date": "04-05-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1000, "text": "We will stop letting American companies that create jobs overseas take deductions on their expenses when they do not pay any American taxes on their profits. And we will use the savings to give tax cuts to companies that are investing in research and development here at home, so that we can jump-start job creation, foster innovation, and enhance America's competitiveness. For years, we have talked about shutting down overseas tax havens that let companies setup operations to avoid paying taxes in America. That is what our budget will finally do. On the campaign, I used to talk about the outrage of a building in the Cayman Islands that had over 12,000 businesses claim this building as their headquarters. And I have said before, either this is the largest building in the world or the largest tax scam in the world. It is the kind of tax scam that we need to end. And that is why we are closing one of our biggest tax loopholes. It is a loophole that lets subsidiaries of some of our largest companies tell the IRS that they are paying taxes abroad, tell foreign governments that they are paying taxes elsewhere, and avoid paying taxes anywhere. And closing this single loophole will save taxpayers tens of billions of dollars, money that can be spent on reinvesting in America. And it will restore fairness to our Tax Code by helping ensure that all our citizens and all our companies are paying what they should. Now, for years, we have talked about stopping Americans from illegally hiding their money overseas and getting tough with the financial institutions that let them get away with it. The Treasury Department and the IRS, under Secretary Geithner's leadership and Commissioner Shulman's, are already taking far-reaching steps to catch overseas tax cheats, but they need more support. And that is why I am asking Congress to pass some commonsense measures. One of these measures would let the IRS know how much income Americans are generating in overseas accounts by requiring overseas banks to provide 1099s for their American clients, just like Americans have to do for their bank accounts here in this country. If financial institutions will not cooperate with us, we will assume that they are sheltering money in tax havens and act accordingly. And to ensure that the IRS has the tools it needs to enforce our laws, we are seeking to hire nearly 800 more IRS agents to detect and pursue American tax evaders abroad.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstaxreform0", "title": "Remarks on Tax Reform", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-tax-reform-0", "publication_date": "04-05-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1009, "text": "I am going to be here for a while. Well, it is wonderful to be in Alaska. And I look forward to spending some quality time here. And I have gotten such a wonderful welcome all across the State, so I want to thank all of you. I want to acknowledge the presence of our Lieutenant Governor here-thank you so much, Byron Mallott. Sometimes, you get some hecklers. I did have my team look into what other Presidents have done when they visited Alaska. I am not the first President to come to Alaska. Warren Harding spent more than 2 weeks here, which I would love to do. But I cannot leave Congress alone that long. When FDR visited-Franklin Delano Roosevelt-his opponents started a rumor that he left his dog Fala on the Aleutian Islands and spent 20 million taxpayer dollars to send a destroyer to pick him up. Now, I am astonished that anybody would make something up about a President. But FDR did not take it lying down. I do not resent attacks, and my family does not resent attacks. But Fala does resent attacks. President Carter did some fishing when he visited. And I would not mind coming back to Alaska to do some fly fishing someday. You cannot see Alaska in 3 days. I may not be President anymore, but hopefully, I still get a pretty good reception. I am going to-the. And just in case, I will bring Michelle, who I know will get a good reception. In fact, on Monday, Governor Walker and Byron personally gave me a fishing license. But there is one thing no American President has done before, and that is travel above the Arctic Circle. So I could not be prouder to be the first and to spend some time with all of you. Before I begin my remarks, I want to thank our veterans who are in the audience, because we have so many Alaska Natives who serve our country and defend us. And in fact, I have met some World War II vets and Korean war vets. And we want to make sure that they know how much we appreciate everything that they have done on our behalf. So we appreciate them very much. And I want to thank everybody in Kotzebue for something else, which is taking such good care of my team over the past week. I know that when I come to town there are a lot of people who come first, and it is a big footprint.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskotzebuemiddlehighschoolkotzebuealaska", "title": "Remarks at Kotzebue Middle High School in Kotzebue, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kotzebue-middle-high-school-kotzebue-alaska", "publication_date": "02-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1010, "text": "But all of them have told me incredible stories of your kindness. I heard that you stuffed them full of all kinds of meat at Cariboufest. John Baker, who was the winner of the 2011 Iditarod, let them play with his Husky puppies. I heard about offers to go berry picking on the tundra, last night's cultural night. And I heard that you are even teaching them some Iupiaq. They are probably a little better than me. But the teams that advance my trip, they spend a lot of time far away from home. They do great work. Most of them are really young people. So I just want to say thank you to all of you for making them feel so at home even when they are 4,000 miles away. So I have had a great week here in Alaska. the Great One, Denali. We restored its Alaska Native name. I know that it is been a long time coming for Alaskans. I have had a chance to sit in the cockpit of a floatplane. But the Secret Service did not let me fly it. I still enjoyed it. We had a chance to hike to the Exit Glacier in Kenai Fjords National Park. I went out on Resurrection Bay and saw dolphins and a humpback whale and otters and puffins. And in Dillingham, just earlier today, I watched Alaska Native fishermen bring in their salmon catch and a tribal elder prepare it in the traditional way. I had a chance to visit a middle school where Alaska Native youth performed a traditional Yup'ik dance. It is on video. So the warmth and hospitality has been incredible, and I am so grateful for it. We talk a lot about the pioneering, independent spirit of America. It is something that we are very proud of as Americans. But what is clear is that, up here, it is not just a spirit, it is not just a slogan, it is a way of life. The-and it is out of necessity. You cannot just drive down to the shopping mall to get what you need. Help, if you need it, is a long way away. This far north, everybody has to look out for each other. And even with all those efforts, there is still isolation, and there is poverty, and it can be harsh. And that means that you depend on each other. Now, I grew up in Hawaii, which obviously, the weather is a little different.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskotzebuemiddlehighschoolkotzebuealaska", "title": "Remarks at Kotzebue Middle High School in Kotzebue, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kotzebue-middle-high-school-kotzebue-alaska", "publication_date": "02-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1011, "text": "And I know you have the same spirit here, the notion that we are all in this together. And that is all the more profound in a place above the Arctic Circle. We know that Alaska is big, and sometimes, I have to describe for people in the lower 48, if you dropped it on the lower 48, it would stretch from Florida to California, from the Dakotas to Texas. So the people of Alaska can be just as different as all the differences that exist across America. But even though we all look different and come from different places and believe in different things, we all stand united around some similar values. We all want a chance at opportunity. We all want to be able to pass down our traditions and our culture and our language to our kids. We all want the same chance at the American Dream as everybody else. We believe that every community deserves access to great jobs. And that is why, to boost commerce in the Arctic and to maintain America's status as an Arctic power, we have called for the accelerated replacement of the Coast Guard's heavy-duty icebreaker, and we are planning for construction of more icebreakers. And I am urging Congress to make sure we have got the resources to do this. To boost tourism, I am asking Congress to speed up maintenance and modernization of our national parks in time for the centennial next year, including right here in Alaska. We believe every child deserves a shot at a great education. One of the initiatives I am proudest of is something we call ConnectEd, and it is a program we started to close the technology gaps in our schools and connect 99 percent of America's students to high-speed Internet by the year 2018. And if you want to see the difference this can make in a child's life, look at Nanwalek, on Alaska's southern coast. Like a lot of Alaskan communities, you can only get there by boat or by plane. But today, with the help of Apple, all 80 of its students, most of whom are Native-Alaska Natives, now learn in classrooms with fast Internet and iPads and digital content. Most of these kids do not have Internet at home. But in the classroom, they have got the tools to compete with any child around the world. And I know you are taking advantage of this program here in Kotzebue, with wireless Internet and 3-D printing. And that is great, because that is what we want for all these kids.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskotzebuemiddlehighschoolkotzebuealaska", "title": "Remarks at Kotzebue Middle High School in Kotzebue, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kotzebue-middle-high-school-kotzebue-alaska", "publication_date": "02-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1012, "text": "We want nothing less than the best. And as President, one of the reasons I am here is to tell you that I am behind those efforts. I want to make sure these young people know we care about them and we are fighting for them. We believe every American deserves access to quality, affordable health care. And since I signed the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare--we signed it 5 years ago-since then, 16 million Americans have gotten covered. More than 18,000 Alaskans have been able to purchase private plans through healthcare.gov. Thanks to the leadership of Governor Walker and Lieutenant Governor Mallott, another 17,000 are projected to gain access to health insurance under Medicaid next year. So we appreciate that. And that means more Alaskans can get things like mammograms and physicals. It will save this State an estimated $20 million in costs of care for people who cannot afford to pay for it. So it is going to make a difference. We also believe in being good stewards of our land and our planet for the next generation. And that is what I want to spend the rest of my time talking about. One of the reasons I came up here is to really focus on what is probably the biggest challenge our planet faces. If there is one thing that threatens opportunity and prosperity for everybody, wherever we live, it is the threat of a changing climate. I do not need to tell people here in Alaska what is happening. And over the past few years, I have been trying to make the rest of the country more aware of a changing climate, but you are already living it. You have got longer, more dangerous fire seasons in Alaska, thawing permafrost that threatens homes and infrastructure. Melting sea ice that contributes to some of the fastest coastal erosion in the world. I met Alaska Natives whose way of life that they have practiced for centuries is in danger of slipping away. On Monday, one Alaska Native woman told me she does not want her way of life to go on the endangered species list. And I have talked with folks whose villages are literally in danger of slipping away. So on my way here, I flew over the island of Kivalina, which is already receding into the ocean. That is what Millie was talking about. Waves sweep across the entire island at times, from one side clear across the other.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskotzebuemiddlehighschoolkotzebuealaska", "title": "Remarks at Kotzebue Middle High School in Kotzebue, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kotzebue-middle-high-school-kotzebue-alaska", "publication_date": "02-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1013, "text": "And for many of those Alaskans, it is no longer a question of if they are going to relocate, but when. If another country threatened to wipe out an American town, we'd do everything in our power to protect it. Well, climate change poses the same threat right now. And that is why I care so deeply about this. If we do nothing, temperatures in Alaska are projected to rise between 6 and 12 degrees by the end of the century. That means more melting, more fires, more erosion, more thawing of the permafrost, more warming after that. And it threatens all of us with hardship, not just people up north. There are not many other places in America that have to deal with those questions right now. And that is why, over the past 6 years, we have been working to do something about it. We are the number-one producer of oil and gas. But we are transitioning away from energy that creates the carbon that is warming the planet and threatening our health and our environment, and we are going all in on clean, renewable energy sources like wind and solar. And Alaska has the natural resources to be a global leader in this effort. America right now harnesses three times as much electricity from the wind and 20 times as much from the sun as we did back in 2008. That is how much progress we have already made. And Alaskans now lead the world in the development of hybrid wind energy systems for remote grids, which help, obviously, villages that are not hooked up to a big power grid. And you are expanding your solar and biomass resources. So Kodiak Island, for example, recently achieved 99.7 percent of its electricity from renewable sources. Its wind power alone displaces more than 2 million gallons of diesel fuel every year. So people are saving money and helping the environment. And today Kodiak Island announced a $3 million public-private partnership that will make the island the first in the world to adopt new technology that lets it stabilize and store the energy it generates from the wind. And I know you guys have started putting up solar panels and wind turbines around Kotzebue. And because energy costs are pretty severe up here, for remote Alaskan communities, one of the biggest problems is high energy costs. So we are going to deploy more new clean energy projects on Native lands, and that is going to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, promote new jobs and new growth in your communities.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskotzebuemiddlehighschoolkotzebuealaska", "title": "Remarks at Kotzebue Middle High School in Kotzebue, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kotzebue-middle-high-school-kotzebue-alaska", "publication_date": "02-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1014, "text": "in our buildings, in our cars, our trucks, our homes, our appliances. And all that saves billions of dollars for consumers along the way. So more than 15,000 Alaska homeowners have cut their energy bills by 30 percent on average, and that saves folks here in Alaska more than $50 million a year. Anchorage became the first city in the world to replace more than a quarter of its roadway lighting with LED lighting, and that saves the city $260,000 a year, cuts its energy consumption from lighting by nearly 60 percent. In the town of Tok, the school district replaced its expensive diesel heating and power systems with one fueled by biomass; saved enough money to rehire the counselor, the music teacher, and the boiler operator. And last month, I announced the first set of nationwide standards to end the limitless carbon emissions from our power plants. And that is the most important step we have ever taken on climate change. So the good news is, we have made a lot of progress in the last 6 years. But I am here to tell you we have got to do more. And for the sake of our kids, we have got to keep going. America has to lead the world in transitioning to a clean energy economy. Now, as we make this transition, we have also got to take more seriously our obligation to help those communities that are already at risk so that they can become more resilient in the face of climate change. Because some of it we are not going to be able to avoid. And so communities are already going to be affected, and that is especially pressing here in Alaska. And that is why today I am announcing that the Denali Commission will serve as a central coordinator in building what we call climate resilience, helping people adapt. And this is going to cut through bureaucracy and redtape, frees up communities like yours to develop and implement solutions for events like coastal erosion and flooding, and permafrost degradation. And the Denali Commission is also committing $2 million to support voluntary relocation efforts for vulnerable rural communities. The Department of Housing and Urban Development is going to consult with Arctic coastal tribes, on a nation-to-nation basis, on your unique needs. And we are also going to help communities build more resilient infrastructure. We should see if we can invest in communities before the disaster strikes to prevent it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskotzebuemiddlehighschoolkotzebuealaska", "title": "Remarks at Kotzebue Middle High School in Kotzebue, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kotzebue-middle-high-school-kotzebue-alaska", "publication_date": "02-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1015, "text": "So today we are announcing more than $17 million in USDA rural water grants for infrastructure projects in remote Alaskan communities, including one right here in Kotzebue. And we are launching a new competition to support cutting-edge energy efficiency solutions. So the Department of Energy is going to offer technical assistance and advice. If your communities come up with the best strategy for sustainable, efficient energy that is tailored for your community, you are going to get Federal support to make your plans a reality. And to help Alaskans better plan for sustainable development, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency and the National Science Foundation are leading a public-private collaboration to create the first-ever publicly available, high-resolution, satellite-based elevation map of Alaska by next year and the entire Arctic by the year after that so that we know exactly what is taking place all across this great State. So before we came up here, we had a conference down in Anchorage, not just with Americans but from-leaders from around the world. And I told them that when it comes to climate change, there is such a thing as being too late. And you know this better than anybody. I want you to know, as your President, I am here to make sure that you get the support that you need. But we should be optimistic about what can be accomplished, because there is nothing that we cannot do if we work together. America is full of dreamers. We push new frontiers by choice. Whether we live in the Arctic Circle or on the Hawaiian Islands, whether we are in big cities or small towns, we are one people. And our future is only as good as the efforts that we put into it. But when people are determined and hopeful and generous, as the people here in Kotzebue are, it makes me optimistic. It tells me that this country's best days are still ahead. So I want to thank all of you. I especially want to thank the young people for being here today. God bless you. God bless the United States of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskotzebuemiddlehighschoolkotzebuealaska", "title": "Remarks at Kotzebue Middle High School in Kotzebue, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kotzebue-middle-high-school-kotzebue-alaska", "publication_date": "02-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1016, "text": "You have come here this afternoon for something more than a mere formality. This structure is worthy to rank among the foremost of the Capital's architectural achievements; and you and I have gathered here to pay tribute to the beauty and dignity of line and form wrought by those who conceived and executed this building. But we are conscious of a larger meaning in this brief ceremony, of the role that the Federal Reserve plays in the broad purpose which this Government must serve. That purpose is to gain for all of our people the greatest attainable measure of economic well-being, the largest degree of economic security and stability. It cannot be attained by that System alone, but neither can it be reached without the proper functioning of our monetary and credit machinery. That machinery must be steadily perfected and coordinated with all other instruments of Government in order to promote the most productive utilization of our human and material resources. Only in that way can we hope to achieve and maintain an enduring prosperity, free from the disastrous extremes of booms and depressions. Only in that way can our economic system and our democratic institutions endure hand in hand. Nearly a quarter of a century has passed since the Federal Reserve System was established. Its creation, out of the nation's banking experience from the beginning of the Republic, was due to the statesmanship of President Wilson, and to the courageous leadership in the Congress for which the Senior Senator from Virginia, Carter Glass, will always deserve the Nation's gratitude. It is fitting that President Wilson's portrait in bronze should have the place of honor in the main entrance to this building. And it is appropriate that the words inscribed under it should be taken from his first inaugural address. We shall deal with our economic system as it is and as it may be modified, not as it might be if we had a clean sheet of paper to write upon; and step by step we shall make it what it should be. Those penetrating words admirably apply to our banking system, which must be constantly alert to changing conditions in order that it may be prepared to adapt itself to the growing and changing needs of our people in their daily life and work. The Federal Reserve System, as it was originally established, was adapted to the pre-war world and brought about a great improvement in the money system. Steps were taken in 1917 to adapt it to the urgent necessities of a war-ridden world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheopeningthenewfederalreservebuilding", "title": "Address at the Opening of the New Federal Reserve Building.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-opening-the-new-federal-reserve-building", "publication_date": "20-10-1937", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1017, "text": "In mobilizing the country's gold reserves and in facilitating the Government's vast financing operations, the Reserve System performed a vital role in the winning of that war. It is clear now, in retrospect, that if further changes to meet post-war conditions had been made in our banking system in the 2920's, it would have been in a far better position to moderate the forces that brought about the great depression. But from the end of the war until we were in the midst of economic collapse a decade later, no changes were made in the banking structure to make it function more effectively in the public interest. Since that time the nation has done much to improve its banking system. It must continue step by step to make the banking system what it should be. We must not complacently suppose that we have achieved perfection. We have provided for the insurance of deposits for the benefit of the great mass of small depositors. By the Banking and Security Exchange Acts of 2933,1934 and 1935, the Federal Reserve System was given increased power to improve banking conditions and to aid the Government in combating practices which were evil in their results. Those powers have been concentrated to a greater degree than before in a single public body, so that they can be used promptly and effectively in accordance with the changing needs of the country. 1937 is not 1913; nor do we want to turn the hands of the clock back. The Federal Reserve System, tested by nearly. a quarter of a century of operation, is a public institution capable of adaptation to future, as it has been to past needs and conditions. It is a piece of machinery vital to the Nation's steady progress towards the goal of a sounder banking system capable of contributing its full share to lasting economic progress and well-being. The Board of Governors, whose building we are dedicating today, was reconstituted by the Banking Act of 1935. To this public body the Congress has entrusted broad powers which enable it to affect the volume and the cost of money, thus exerting a powerful influence upon the expansion and contraction in the flow of money through the channels of agriculture, trade and industry. In this way much can be done towards the maintenance of more stable employment. Much can be done to aid in achieving greater stability of the true value of the dollar. By their nature these important powers are of public concern and the responsibility for their exercise is properly vested in a public body.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheopeningthenewfederalreservebuilding", "title": "Address at the Opening of the New Federal Reserve Building.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-opening-the-new-federal-reserve-building", "publication_date": "20-10-1937", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1030, "text": "I stand before you in this house, the seat of one of the world's greatest legislatures, with feelings of profound friendship and respect. I bring with me the warm greetings and good wishes of the people of the second largest democracy on Earth, the United States of America, to the people of the largest democracy, the Republic of India. Not long ago, both of our people's governments passed through grave crises. In different ways, the values for which so many have lived and died were threatened. In different ways, and on opposite sides of the world, these values have now been triumphant. It is sometimes argued that the modern industrial state with its materialism, its centralized bureaucracies, and the technological instruments of control available to those who hold power must inevitably lose sight of the democratic ideal. There are those who say that democracy is a kind of rich man's plaything, and that the poor are too pre occupied with survival to care about the luxury of freedom and the right to choose their own government. This argument is repeated all over the world mostly, I have noticed, by persons whose own bellies are full and who speak from positions of privilege and power in their own societies. Their argument reminds me of a statement made by a great President of the United States, Abraham Lincoln. He said, Whenever I hear anyone arguing for slavery, I feel a strong impulse to see it tried on him personally. The evidence, both in India and in America, is plain. It is that there is more than one form of hunger, and neither the rich nor the poor will feel satisfied without being fed in body and in spirit. Is human freedom valued by all people? India has given her affirmative action and answer in a thunderous voice, a voice heard around the world. Something momentous happened here last March not because any party in particular won or lost, but rather, I think, because the largest electorate on Earth freely and wisely chose its leaders at the polls. In this sense, democracy itself was the victor in your country. Together, we understand that in the field of politics, freedom is the engine of progress. India and America share practical experience with democracy. We in the United States are proud of having achieved political union among a people whose ancestors come from all over the world. Our system strives to respect the rights of a great variety of minorities, including, by the way, a growing and productive group of families from your own country, India.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnewdelhiindiaremarksbeforetheindianparliament", "title": "New Delhi, India Remarks Before the Indian Parliament.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/new-delhi-india-remarks-before-the-indian-parliament", "publication_date": "02-01-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1031, "text": "But the challenge of political union is even greater here in your own country. In the diversity of languages, religions, political opinions, and racial and cultural groups, India is comparable to the continent of Europe, which has a total population about the same size as your own. Yet India has forged her vast mosaic of humanity into a single great nation that has weathered many challenges to survival both as a nation and as a democracy. This is surely one of the greatest political achievements of this century or any other century. India and the United States are at one in recognizing the right of free speech-which Mahatma Gandhi called the foundation-stone of Swaraj or self-government and the rights of academic freedom, trade union organization, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. All these rights are recognized in international covenants. There are few governments which do not at least pay lip service to them. And yet, to quote Gandhi once more, No principle exists in the abstract. Without its concrete application it has no meaning. In India, as in the United States, these rights do have concrete application, and they have real meaning, too. It is to preserve these rights that both our nations have chosen similar political paths to the development of our resources and to the betterment of the life of our people. There are differences between us in the degree to which economic growth is pursued through public enterprise on one hand and private enterprise on the other hand. But more important than these differences is our shared belief that the political structure in which development takes place should be democratic and should respect the human rights of each and every citizen in our countries. Our two nations also agree that human needs are inseparable from human rights; that while civil and political liberties are good in themselves, they are much more useful and much more meaningful in the lives of people to whom physical survival is not a matter of daily anxiety. To meet these ends orderly economic growth is crucial. And if the benefits of growth are to reach those whose need is greatest, social justice is critical as well. India is succeeding in this historic task. Your economic challenges are no secret, and their seriousness is well understood in the West. But what is far less well understood is the degree to which Indian social and economic policy has been such a success. In the single generation since your independence was gained, extraordinary progress has been made. Your economy ranks among the 10 largest in the whole world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnewdelhiindiaremarksbeforetheindianparliament", "title": "New Delhi, India Remarks Before the Indian Parliament.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/new-delhi-india-remarks-before-the-indian-parliament", "publication_date": "02-01-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1032, "text": "You are virtually self-assured and self-sufficient in consumer goods and in a wide variety of other products, such as iron and steel. There have been notable increases in production in nearly every important sector of your economy increases which reflect an economy of great technological sophistication. This kind of growth is doubly important to try to reduce trade barriers and to promote both bilateral trade and mutual responsibility for the whole world's trading system. But most important are the advances in human welfare that have touched the lives of ordinary Indians. Life expectancy has increased by 20 years since your independence. The threat of major epidemics has receded. The literacy rate in your country has doubled. While only a third of Indian children went to school in the years just after independence,. nearly 90 percent of primary-age Indian children now receive schooling. Nine times as many students go to universities as they did before. I mention these gains that we tend to overlook in our preoccupation with the problems that quite properly face and engage our attention. India's difficulties, which we often experience ourselves and which are typical of the problems faced in the developing world, remind us of the task which lie ahead. But India's successes are just as important, because they decisively refute the theory that in order to achieve economic and social progress, a developing country must accept an authoritarian or a totalitarian government, with all the damage to the health of the human spirit which comes with it. We are eager to join with you in maintaining and improving our valuable and mature partnership of political and economic cooperation. It is a sobering fact, for instance, that in a nation of so many hundreds of millions of people, only a few American business leaders are now involved, on a daily basis, in the economic and commercial life of your country. We need to identify more areas where we can work together for mutual benefit and, indeed, for the benefit of the whole world. In the area of development, I am deeply impressed with the creative direction that the Government of India has taken in the new economic statement. You have committed your nation unequivocally to rural improvement and the creation of rural employment. This policy now faces a test of implementation and, especially, the test of bringing its benefits to the very poorest areas of your rural population. The seriousness and the determination, however, of your commitment is a cause for optimism. We want to learn from you and to work with you however we can.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnewdelhiindiaremarksbeforetheindianparliament", "title": "New Delhi, India Remarks Before the Indian Parliament.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/new-delhi-india-remarks-before-the-indian-parliament", "publication_date": "02-01-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1033, "text": "In agriculture, there are also exciting new areas of technology on which we can work together. After a decade of importing grain, India now stands with a surplus of nearly 20 million tons. This is a tribute to the growing productivity of your agriculture and the competence, also, of your administrative services. We applaud the grain reserve program that you have begun, and we would welcome the opportunity to share with you our resources and our experience in dealing with storage problems that surpluses bring with them. Our countries must be in the forefront of the effort to bring into existence the international food reserve that would mitigate the fear of famine in the rest of the world. At the same time, we must recognize that today's surpluses are likely to be a temporary phenomenon. The best estimates indicate that unless new productive capacity is developed, the whole world with its rapidly growing population may be facing large food shortages in the mid-1980's. The greatest opportunities to increase agricultural productivity exist here in India and elsewhere in the developing world. These opportunities must be seized not just so that Indians can eat better, but so that India can remain self-sufficient and, perhaps, even continue to export food to countries with less agricultural potential than you have. In the past, America and India have scored monumental achievements in working together in the agricultural field. I would like to see an intensified agricultural research program aimed both at improving productivity in India and at developing processes that could then be used elsewhere. This program could be based in the agricultural universities of our two countries, but would also extend across the whole frontier of research. And beyond research, I would like to identify joint development projects where research can be tested and put to work. Perhaps Prime Minister Desai and I may now instruct our governments to focus on these matters and to come up with specific proposals within the next few months. One of the most promising areas for international cooperation, which I have already discussed with your Prime Minister, is in the regions of eastern India and Bangladesh, where alternating periods of drought and flood cut cruelly into food production. Several hundred million people live in this area. They happen to be citizens of India, Bangladesh, and Nepal. Great progress has already been made between your nations in resolving questions concerning water.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnewdelhiindiaremarksbeforetheindianparliament", "title": "New Delhi, India Remarks Before the Indian Parliament.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/new-delhi-india-remarks-before-the-indian-parliament", "publication_date": "02-01-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1034, "text": "And we are prepared to give our support when the regional states request a study that will define how the international community, in cooperation with the nations of South Asia, can help the peoples of this area use water from the rivers and the mountains to achieve the productivity that is inherent in the land and the people. Sustained economic growth requires a strong base in energy as well as in agriculture. Energy is a serious problem in both our countries, for both of us import oil at levels that can threaten our economic health and expose us, even, to danger if supplies are interrupted. American firms are already working with Indians in developing the oil-producing area off the shores of India, near Bombay. We also have a long record of cooperation in the development of nuclear power, another important element of India's energy plans. Our work together will continue in this field, as well. But Prime Minister Desai and I had warm and productive discussions about this field. We have notified him that shipments of nuclear fuel will be made for the Tarapur reactor. And because of an accident that did occur in your heavy water production plant, we will make available to India, also, supplies from our reserves of heavy water. Additionally, we stand ready to work with you in developing renewable energy resources, especially solar energy. And the lack of a massive, existing infrastructure tied to fossil fuel use will make the application of solar and solar-related energy vastly easier here than it will be in my own country, where we are so heavily dependent upon other sources of energy. However, the inherently decentralized nature of solar energy makes it ideal as a complement to your government's stress on developing self-reliant villages and communities. The silent void of space may seem remote from these challenges. But the intricate electronics of a space satellite can be as useful to earthbound farmers as a new plow. The Indian and American Governments will tomorrow exchange diplomatic notes confirming that the United States will program its Landsat Earth resources satellite to transmit data directly to a ground receiving station that India will own and operate. This satellite service will provide India with comprehensive topographic and minerals information and timely data on the ever-changing condition of weather, agricultural, water, and other natural resources. Under the terms of the agreement, India will make available to neighboring countries any information that affects them. Also, India has already reserved space on board the American space shuttle in 1981 to initiate a domestic communications satellite system, using a satellite designed to Indian specifications.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnewdelhiindiaremarksbeforetheindianparliament", "title": "New Delhi, India Remarks Before the Indian Parliament.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/new-delhi-india-remarks-before-the-indian-parliament", "publication_date": "02-01-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1035, "text": "We are very pleased that our space technology, together with India's superb space communications capability, will serve the cause of practical progress in your country. Our scholarly exchanges have already enriched the lives of Americans who participated in them. And I hope the same has been true of Indian participants. In matters of culture and the arts, we know how much we have to gain. Not only India but also the rest of Asia and Africa and the Middle East have much to offer us. I hope to expand the opportunities for our own citizens to appreciate and to enjoy the strong and varied culture in the nations of your part of the world. In global politics, history has cast our countries in different roles. The United States is one of the so-called super powers; India is the largest of the nonaligned countries. But each of us respects the other's conception of its international responsibilities, and the values that we do share provide a basis for cooperation in attacking the great global problems of economic justice, human rights, and the prevention of war. This pursuit of justice and peace and the building of a new economic order must be undertaken in ways that promote constructive development rather than fruitless confrontation. Because India is both a developing country and also an industrial power, you are in a unique position to promote constructive international discussion about trade, energy, investment, balance of payments, technology, and other questions. I welcome your playing this worldwide leadership role. I know that there will be times when we will disagree on specific issues and even on general approaches to larger problems. But I hope and believe that our shared interests and our common devotion to democratic values will help us to move toward agreement on important global and bilateral issues. But neither of us seeks to align with the other except in the pursuit of peace and justice. We can even help each other to alleviate differences which might exist between ourselves and other nations. Our two countries are part of a democratic world that includes nations in all stages of development, from Sweden and Japan to Sri Lanka and Costa Rica. We share many common problems. But we also share an obligation to advance human rights not by interfering in the affairs of other nations, not by trying to deny other nations the right to choose their own political and social system, but by speaking the truth as we see it and by providing an admirable example of what democracy can mean and what it can accomplish.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnewdelhiindiaremarksbeforetheindianparliament", "title": "New Delhi, India Remarks Before the Indian Parliament.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/new-delhi-india-remarks-before-the-indian-parliament", "publication_date": "02-01-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1036, "text": "The danger of war threatens everyone, and the United States is trying to help reduce that danger in the SALT negotiations with the Soviet Union, in talks aimed at a comprehensive ban of the testing of all nuclear explosives anywhere on Earth, and in our own policy of restraint on conventional arms transfers. We are also working hard to restrict the proliferation of nuclear explosives. We are seeking to help the process of peace in Africa and the Middle East. And we are taking steps to forestall, along with the Soviets, great power rivalry and the escalation of military presence in your own Indian Ocean. India is pledged to peaceful cooperation with your neighbors, and India is an important part of almost any United Nations peacekeeping force. India is a present and frequent member of the Security Council and has been in the forefront of campaigns against colonialism and against apartheid. The motto of my country is In God We Trust; India's is Satyameva Jayte- Truth Alone Prevails. I believe that such is the commonality of our fundamental values that your motto could be ours, and perhaps our motto could also be yours. Our nations share the goals of peace in the world and human development in our own societies. And we share, as well, the conviction that the means that we employ to reach these goals must be as much in keeping with the principles of freedom and human dignity and social justice as are the goals themselves. This affinity of belief is as strong a tie as there can be between any two nations on Earth. The values that Americans and Indians share have deeply affected my own life. I come to you as a national leader, yes, in the hope that my visit will mark a new and a higher stage in the steadily improving relations between our two countries. But in a more personal sense a sense that is very close to my own heart I come also as a pilgrim. This morning I had the honor of laying a wreath on the memorial to Mahatma Gandhi. In that sacred place, so simple and so serene, I recalled anew the ways in which Gandhi's teachings have touched the lives of so many millions of people in my own country. When I was growing up on a farm in the State of Georgia, in the heart of the Southern United States, an invisible wall of racial segregation stood between me and my black classmates, schoolmates, playmates, when we were old enough to know what segregation was. But it seemed then as if that wall between us would exist forever.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnewdelhiindiaremarksbeforetheindianparliament", "title": "New Delhi, India Remarks Before the Indian Parliament.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/new-delhi-india-remarks-before-the-indian-parliament", "publication_date": "02-01-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1037, "text": "And though the rubble has not yet been completely removed, it no longer separates us from one another, blighting the lives of those on both sides of it. Among the many who marched and suffered and bore witness against the evil of racial prejudice, the greatest was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. He was a son of Georgia and a spiritual son of Mahatma Gandhi. The most important influence in the life and work of Dr. King, apart from his own religious faith, was the life and work of Gandhi. Martin Luther King took Gandhi's concepts of nonviolence and truth-force and put them to work in the American South. Like Gandhi, King believed that truth and love are the strongest forces in the universe. Like Gandhi, he knew that ordinary people, armed only with courage and faith, could overcome injustice by appealing to the spark of good in the heart, even, of the evil-doer. Like Gandhi, we all learned that a system of oppression damages those at the top as surely as it does those at the bottom. And for Martin Luther King, like Mahatma Gandhi, nonviolence was not only a political method, it was a way of life and a spiritual path to union with the ultimate. These men set a standard of courage and idealism that few of us can meet, but from which all of us can draw inspiration and sustenance. The nonviolent movement for racial justice in the United States, a movement inspired in large measure by the teachings and examples of Gandhi and other Indian leaders some of whom are here today changed and enriched my own life and the lives of many millions of my countrymen. I am sure you will forgive me for speaking about this at some length. I do so because I want you all to understand that when I speak of friendship between the United States and India, I speak from the heart as well as the head. I speak from a deep, firsthand knowledge of what the relationship between our two countries has meant in the past and how much more, even, it can mean for all of us in the future. how our political and spiritual values can provide the basis for dealing with the social and economic strains to which they will unquestionably be subjected. The experience of democracy is like the experience of life itself always changing, infinite in its variety, sometimes turbulent, and all the more valuable for having been tested by adversity. We share that experience with you, and we draw strength from it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnewdelhiindiaremarksbeforetheindianparliament", "title": "New Delhi, India Remarks Before the Indian Parliament.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/new-delhi-india-remarks-before-the-indian-parliament", "publication_date": "02-01-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1038, "text": "We are about to mark an important anniversary, but it'll be no cause for celebration. Eight years ago tomorrow, the Sandinista Communists came to power in the Central American country of Nicaragua. It may be hard to remember now, the great hopes with which their revolution was first greeted. The hated dictator Anastasio Somoza had been toppled, and the world looked forward to a bright future for Nicaragua. Little did we think then that the future the Sandinistas were planning for Nicaragua would be darker than anything that suffering country had ever before experienced. The Sandinistas spelled out their plans for subversion and aggression throughout Central America in the secret, but now notorious, 72-Hour Document, and it was not long before they started carrying them out. Arms shipments began flowing to the Communist guerrillas throughout Latin America-in El Salvador, Honduras, Colombia, and other countries. closing churches and extinguishing the free press . The ranks of political prisoners swelled into the thousands, and beatings, torture, and official murder became the order of the day. Meanwhile, the Sandinistas began a campaign of slaughter against the peaceful Miskito Indians. One in every ten Nicaraguans is now a refugee-leaving home, family, and friends to escape the oppression inside that country. If the Sandinistas get their way, the torment of that sad country will soon spread throughout the entire region, engulfing the young democracies that surround Nicaragua. As I said in New York a few months ago, the democratic aspirations of millions in Central America now hang in the balance. The elected leaders of neighboring Central American countries know that until democracy comes to Nicaragua their own democracies will never be safe. free, fair, and regularly scheduled elections in Nicaragua, the establishment of a genuinely democratic system and all the freedoms such a system depends on and encourages-freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of worship. This is what the Nicaraguan freedom fighters are fighting for, and this is why we must support them. We have worked in many ways to counter the spread of communism in Central America and those nations I have mentioned that are threatened by Nicaragua. We have instituted economic assistance to the region, military assistance to threatened democracies, and, together with our Central American allies, vigorous efforts to negotiate a peaceful and democratic outcome. But we know from experience that the Sandinistas will never negotiate seriously unless they see that the freedom fighters are a force to be reckoned with.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationunitedstatesassistanceforthenicaraguandemocratic2", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on United States Assistance for the Nicaraguan Democratic Resistance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-united-states-assistance-for-the-nicaraguan-democratic-2", "publication_date": "18-07-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1039, "text": "Gee, it is really great to be back in New Hampshire and particularly in Keene, and I thank you all very, very much. Let me assure you that New Hampshire is vitally important, and you can put us on the road to victory next Tuesday. Actually, the purpose of my visit can be summed up in just a very, very few words. I believe very strongly in a strong and prosperous American automobile industry, but I am here to say that this year there is absolutely no reason to trade in your Ford on a new model. Some of those new models might be mighty expensive. Actually, I am looking forward to your questions, but first let me make just a very few brief remarks. I have been ENTITY now for almost 19 months. When I took office in August of 1974, America was faced with some of its most pressing and serious problems in our country's history. Our economy had gone haywire with prices going up at an annual rate of more than 12 percent and everything else slowing down. Our national resolve to meet our international commitments was being called into question by both our allies and our adversaries. Underlying these serious problems was a crisis of confidence in our Government, a crisis of the spirit among our American people. With the understanding of the American people, with your prayers and your support and your help, I set about to do what I could to meet those challenges, to put America at peace with itself and throughout the world. The past 19 months have seen many of these efforts succeed. I believe my policy of common sense and a realistic approach to America's problems has helped restore confidence in our great Government. As I said on my first day as ENTITY, truth is the glue that holds government together, and as long as I am ENTITY, I intend to be forthright, candid, frank with all of the American people and make this system work the way it should work. The inflation rate that was over 12 percent has been cut almost in half. That is still not good enough, but that is progress by any standard and we are going to keep making that kind of progress in the months ahead with the right kind of policies that we are pursuing right now. We have recovered 2,100,000 jobs since last March. That is 96 percent of all the jobs that we lost during the recession. Unemployment is still too high, but we are headed in the right direction.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksandquestionandanswersessionpublicforumkeene", "title": "Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session at a Public Forum in Keene.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-public-forum-keene", "publication_date": "19-02-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1040, "text": "The Commerce Department announced just yesterday that personal income has risen by 9.2 percent in the past year, well above the current inflation rate. That means real earnings, real purchasing power is climbing; that is good news for every American. We are on the attack, and we will stay on the attack and win this important victory over inflation and unemployment and every other economic enemy of the American people. In foreign affairs, we have pursued a policy of peace through strength. That policy has been successful, so successful that tonight we can say that America is at peace with every nation on Earth, and we will keep it that way in the future. We will keep it that way by keeping our defenses strong. As long as I am ENTITY, America's defenses will be strong and ready without equal in the world in which we live. Our strength makes it possible for us to negotiate with other great powers of the world from a position that commands their respect and invites their cooperation. We are now negotiating with the Soviet Union for a further reduction in the level of strategic nuclear arms, a reduction in the potential terror and destruction that each nation can inflict upon each other. We have entered these negotiations with our eyes open, our guard up, and our powder dry. Yankee traders have always known the score, and we continue in that great tradition in 1976. With our military strength we can strengthen peace and not return to the cold war. One way to reduce the dangers to peace in the world is to have a reliable, responsible, and effective intelligence-gathering capability. I have taken steps, as I am sure you know, to reorganize and reform America's intelligence community, to make it an instrument of peace and an object of pride for the American people. ability by destroying it, as some would like to (to. I have no intention of seeing the intelligence community dismantled, and I know you do not want it dismantled either. The irresponsible release of classified information by people who should know better must cease. The abuses of the past must be corrected and never, never repeated. I have made concrete recommendations to ensure that the intelligence community keeps out of politics and out of people's private lives. As ENTITY, I intend to see that the Federal Government is under the people's control and not the other way around. We must never forget that a government big enough to give us everything we want is a government big enough to take from us everything we have.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksandquestionandanswersessionpublicforumkeene", "title": "Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session at a Public Forum in Keene.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-public-forum-keene", "publication_date": "19-02-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1041, "text": "But the American people know that it is not enough to talk about the evils of big government. They know that it just is not realistic nor is it wise to turn back the clock and undo all the progress we have made with the help of responsible and constructive government programs. It is easy to say we ought to cut $90 billion or so from the Federal budget. It is easy to say we ought to toss a lot of very worthwhile programs into the laps of the individual States and let them administer those programs if the local taxpayers will assume the extra burden. It is easy to say that people who do not like the way the programs are administered in one State can just Vote with their feet and move to another State. I have always believed that Americans, Democrat or Republican, vote with their heads and not with their feet. Oh, it is easy to say that the Social Security Trust Fund upon which 32 million Americans---older and disabled in our society--that that trust fund should be invested in the stock market, making the Federal Government a major stockholder in most American businesses, but that is the best blueprint for back door socialism that I ever heard. I want to improve the social security system, not cripple it. I want to make sure that program is strong, sound, and certain, not only for the present generation of beneficiaries but for every generation of working men and women, and that is what I intend to do. I want to improve the Medicare system. I want better and more comprehensive medical coverage for our older citizens. There is absolutely no reason why older Americans or their loved ones should have to go broke just to get well or stay well in the United States of America. We have to be realistic about what the Government can do and what it cannot do, but we must also recognize that there are certain things that Government must do and do better if we are to continue the progress we have made in the past. We have a great, great country, and I am proud to be an American, and I am proud of America as you are. We have our problems, and we are not afraid to admit them. But I think it is high time people stopped running America down. We should brag about America. I think it is time we remembered that we are the most richly blessed nation in the history of the world. We have special gifts, special resources, and special responsibilities greater than any nation on Earth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksandquestionandanswersessionpublicforumkeene", "title": "Remarks and a Question-and-Answer Session at a Public Forum in Keene.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-and-question-and-answer-session-public-forum-keene", "publication_date": "19-02-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1062, "text": "Governor Shapp, I am deeply grateful for your very kind and generous remarks. The Sun always shines in Pennsylvania. They came here in the snows of winter over a trail marked with the blood of their rag-bound feet. The iron forge that gave this place its name had been destroyed by the British when General Washington and his ragged Continental ENTITY encamped here exhausted, outnumbered, and short of everything except faith. We gather here today, the 200th anniversary of our independence, to commemorate their sacrifices even before we celebrate the glorious Declaration. Americans will remember the name of Valley Forge as long as the spirit of sacrifice lives within their hearts. Here the vein of iron in our national character was forged. In the 18th century the colonial American was far more free and far more prosperous than his European cousin. Englishmen regarded us with some envy as appropriate subjects to share their grinding tax burdens. After Concord Bridge and Breed's Hill, the British generals were impressed with our marksmanship and fighting spirit, but they still dismissed Washington's militiamen as a rabble of arms. Many years later, when he was 91, a veteran of Concord was interviewed and asked why he took up his rifle against his King. Well, then, what did all the fighting mean? We had always governed ourselves, and we always meant to. Without Jefferson's eloquence, those are the words of the American people's Declaration of Independence. That was the straight talk that brought some 11,000 ordinary Americans farmers, workers, tradesmen, and shopkeepers-into this valley of sacrifice in the bitter winter of 1777. They did not die amid the banners and the fearful sounds of battle. They weakened slowly and quietly succumbed to cold, sickness, and starvation. Yet their courage and suffering those who survived as well as those who fell-were no less meaningful than the sacrifices of those who manned the battlements of Boston and scaled the parapets of Yorktown. In the battle against despair, Washington and his men kept freedom's lonely vigil. The leader and the led drew strength and hope from one another. Around the winter campfires that dotted these fields, the flame of liberty was somehow kept burning. Something happened at Valley Forge. That ragged, starving ENTITY here emerged and changed in a way that can be sensed but never fully described. They suffered, they trained, they toughened, they buried their dead, and they stayed. They stuck it out.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksvalleyforgepennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-valley-forge-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "04-07-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1063, "text": "When spring melted the snows and green returned to this beautiful countryside, a proud and disciplined fighting force marched out of this valley to victory, into the pages of history, unaware of the greatness they had done and oblivious of our gratitude. As Abraham Lincoln noted long afterwards at another sacred site in Pennsylvania, nothing we can say here today can further consecrate or hallow this ground. But we can rededicate ourselves to the spirit of sacrifice shown at Valley Forge, Gettysburg, the Argonne Forest, Anzio Beach, and Iwo Jima. Not all sacrifices are made in war. The sturdy wagon trains that have returned here, the wonderful people who drove them, and those along the way who rededicated themselves to the great principles of the Declaration of Independence offer heartwarming proof that our American adventure has just begun. Our Bicentennial is the happy birthday of all 50 States, a commonwealth, and self-governing territories. It is not just a celebration for the original Thirteen Colonies. Americans are one people, and we can still hear them saying, We have always governed ourselves, and we always mean to. The earliest English settlers carried the Bible and Blackstone's Commentary across the Atlantic among their few cherished possessions and established their own stir-governments on a strange and hostile coast. American families in prairie schooners like these took with them on the overland trails the principles of equality and the God-given rights of the Declaration of Independence. Their restless search for a better life was begun in the spirit of adventure, but it was the spirit of sacrifice that sustained them. They suffered cruel winters, savage attacks, blazing deserts, and bloody feet. Many were buried beside the trail, but many stuck it out, dug in, and built permanent settlements where women stood the same sentry duty as the men. In the West, the Declaration's promise of legal and political equality for women was first broadened. The American pioneers knew that in their wilderness homes they could not be colonials ruled by a distant government. They had assurance that in due course they could govern themselves as full citizens of equal States. Their children and future generations would have all the rights of Washington, Jackson, and Lincoln. Though prosperity is a good thing, though compassionate charity is a good thing, though institutional reform is a good thing, a nation survives only so long as the spirit of sacrifice and self-discipline is strong within its people. Freedom is always worth fighting for, and liberty ultimately belongs to those willing to suffer for it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksvalleyforgepennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Valley Forge, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-valley-forge-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "04-07-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1100, "text": "This meeting, insofar as it involves a talk from me, is sort of an added number on my schedule. I have no text, and I think I have no particularly brilliant ideas. But I must say that the great pleasure of meeting with a group of people that you know to be friendly, who wish well to you and to the cause for which you struggle, is a very warm feeling. And this inspires me to tell you a little bit of what we are trying to do, how truly simple it is, and therefore, to see whether we may not draw even a little closer together because of the simplicity of these ideas and, I think, the fact that we see all right-thinking Americans should be for, in general this kind of thing. Carter Glass once went to a great university. He was to receive an honorary degree of doctor of laws; and the dean of the law school, in presenting him to the president of the university, read a long citation. This citation had to deal largely, almost exclusively, with the long record of Carter Glass's integrity, his absolute unimpeachable honesty as a public servant throughout his life. It dwelt on this theme in numerous ways and I think even quoted examples. My friends, I think I should decline to receive this decoration, because if the time has come when the American people and their great institutions of learning find it proper or necessary or desirable to decorate a man and give him awards because he is honest in the public service, then I despair of the Republic. This, he said, is something you can demand of your public servants; you do not .have to reward them for it. You can demand it through the proper use of your authority as an American citizen, through the ballot box, and you can see that you get good men--honest men and women in government. ' ' We are very apt, when we speak about government in Washington, to think of some rather amorphous, distant, bewildering, comprehensive, complex thing. We do not really know what we mean when we say government. We realize there is a President up there, and a few leaders in the Senate and the House, and we sort of have them visualized; and the rest of it is just a bunch of bureaucrats. government is nothing in the world but men and women that you select and send to fill the several offices.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebreakfastlosangelesgivenrepublicangroupssoutherncalifornia", "title": "Remarks at the Breakfast in Los Angeles Given by Republican Groups of Southern California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-breakfast-los-angeles-given-republican-groups-southern-california", "publication_date": "24-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1101, "text": "Now of course, there is an organization roughly outlined by a Constitution, and more crystallized through our laws as the decades have gone on. But the only thing that comprises government is men and women. Now those men and women, therefore, must be the people that you carefully select. Frankly, that is all that the administration that you people have sent to Washington is trying to do. what is the good of 160 million people? That must be, of course, the purpose in their hearts, but take a look at their heads. You have to send people who are, by their reputations in their own localities, fitted to tackle such complex jobs as now plague a government. They have to be men that have established some success. And you have got to work out in your own mind, What kind of man do I believe is a good Senator, a good Congressman, a good Governor? Incidentally, may I pause to say, you have so many good ones in California, you seem to know more about this, maybe, than I do. we must not have doctrinaires. We outlined, through our forefathers, a great set of principles in the Constitution, and that Constitution--through our Supreme Courts, through actions of the Congress and the Chief Executive down through the years--has been molded and modeled to our needs. It is just as senseless, today, to talk about the social security of today in the same terms we would have talked about social security when there were free lands everywhere, and this country was a debtor country with great assets and resources yet to be explored, as it is to talk about taking off here and flying to the moon, instead of waiting for the 50 years that it is going to take for the scientists to show how to do it. It is just that silly, to talk about going back to that kind of thing. Now, how do we get a man that is that flexible, that adjustable? We want men that can take and listen to facts, who are not so doctrinaire that every fact that is brought in front of them, if it does not agree with their preconceptions, it is just thrown out in the woodpile. And I want to assure you that in the last 20 months I have watched some very great people making up the executive department--I have watched them work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebreakfastlosangelesgivenrepublicangroupssoutherncalifornia", "title": "Remarks at the Breakfast in Los Angeles Given by Republican Groups of Southern California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-breakfast-los-angeles-given-republican-groups-southern-california", "publication_date": "24-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1102, "text": "I do not know of a single one who comes in with the theory--into the Cabinet meeting, or anywhere else--and with this theory fixed in the back of his mind forces everything to conform to it. On the contrary, every one of them is supported by his own selected group of associates, of advisers throughout this country--from trade associations, from every kind of professional group, from businessmen--everywhere. Those people are the ones that come in and help formulate the policies that this group then tries to translate into recommendations for the legislature to consider. that throughout the ten governmental departments, through the heads of agencies, of the FOA, and the Office of Defense Mobilization, and everything else, there is a very earnest attempt on the part of these people to get the opinion of the United States. There is a very great conviction there that the commonsense of the United States--if we avoid both extremes, and take the commonsense judgment of the United States, you have got a pretty good guide as to where we should move in legislation and in programs. I commend, therefore, the kind of man whom you know to be absolutely unimpeachable in his honesty, who has shown by his standing in the community that he deserves the respect of that community, and who has been something of a success, either as a young man or at any stage of life. And finally, a man who has got the flexibility of brain, in this day and time, to try to adjust the basic principles in which we believe, the liberty of the individual and his rights, and adjust to the problems that face us every day, whether it be in Indochina, Formosa, or whether it be right here in your great city of Los Angeles. That is the kind of people that we need so desperately in Washington. And I think that you people who helped to send this administration there, if you will look at the character and types of people now occupying the executive positions, all the way from the Secretary of State on down to the newest appointee, that you can take some pride in the people that have been selected. And largely, after the Cabinet is selected, remember, all these other people are selected by those Cabinet officers. This same applies, of course, in the Congress, by their very nature being so representative.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebreakfastlosangelesgivenrepublicangroupssoutherncalifornia", "title": "Remarks at the Breakfast in Los Angeles Given by Republican Groups of Southern California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-breakfast-los-angeles-given-republican-groups-southern-california", "publication_date": "24-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1103, "text": "Our leaders--particularly Senator Knowland and his senior associates in the Senate, Joe Martin and the great Charlie Halleck, a very great lieutenant, their associates in the House--are really doing a remarkable job. So, as we face this coming election, recognizing as we do that if you are going ahead with a positive program--and I am not going to take up your time this morning to outline this program again; it has been recited time and again in the newspapers, it has been on the television. As a matter of fact, some of you may know I made a little speech about it last night. Now, of course, none of us is in detail going to agree entirely with that program, because no program, if it is made up as I have been trying to describe to you, is reflective of any single person's complete ideas. But if it follows the general purpose, the good of 160 million people, if it is supported by honest men and women who want nothing in the world but the good of those people, and if it has been intelligently, broadly based, then I think we have got something that we ought to be able to sell. One of the troubles, of course, is that anyone who takes something of that kind to carry to the people is robbed, really, of the drama of the extremes. It is much easier, you know, to get up and say everybody is a so-and-so except my little gang and me, than it is to go out and sell a really constructive truth, because we tend to take it for granted. Well, I think that the Administration, probably, is not capable of telling anybody how to dramatize these truths, these programs, and carry them out so that people will overwhelmingly accept them. I believe that if you carry the truth to the people, that there will be only one decision from the mass of 160 million Americans. I am going to end this little talk with a little story. Not long ago, I went out to Illinois to the State Fair, and on the way I happened to pick up a paper that was on my airplane. And Paul Hoffman had had a little trouble there at Studebaker--you remember he had asked his union to take a lower wage, a wage they agreed was in conformity with the average. Studebaker had been well above it, I understood, so he asked them to go to two dollars-and-something an hour.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebreakfastlosangelesgivenrepublicangroupssoutherncalifornia", "title": "Remarks at the Breakfast in Los Angeles Given by Republican Groups of Southern California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-breakfast-los-angeles-given-republican-groups-southern-california", "publication_date": "24-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1104, "text": "I WANTED to take this opportunity, as we arrive here, to say just a few words of greeting to all of you because it will not be possible for me to do what both Mrs. Nixon and I would particularly like to do, and that is to greet every one of you personally. In coming before you, I first want you to know that because this platform is so small, we could only get the men on the platform. I am very proud to be here in Montana, and I will introduce these people. You know them all so well, but I think you all want to welcome your people from Montana, as they are here. Now, all of you will have noted that this is a totally bipartisan group. And that is the spirit in which this visit has been arranged. I want to say first that I have many pleasant memories of visits to this State. I have been to a number of cities. I recall visits to Butte and Billings and to Great Falls and to Bozeman and also, of course, to the State capital, to Helena. I am very proud that this is the first time I have had a chance to visit Montana as ENTITY of the United States. I am also equally proud that Mike Mansfield arranged that this is the first time I have had any chance ever to come to Kalispell in this area. I am glad to be here in this beautiful part of the country. Now, as you have probably noted, the Majority Leader of the Senate and ENTITY of the United States have regular meetings, usually at breakfast, in addition to the meetings that we have in the Cabinet Room, concerning legislation. I am sure that many of you wonder what those meetings concern. Well, obviously they concern the affairs of state. They naturally involve matters on which we sometimes disagree, disagree not as partisans, but disagree because there are areas where different people, working toward the same goal, might want to take different roads. But I think you will all be glad to know that there is one subject on which we have no disagreement whatever. That is on the beauty of the Big Sky Country. I want to say something about your representatives, both the Republican as well as the two Democrats, in the Congress of the United States from Montana. Many people ,who come to Washington-they get Potomac fever, and that means they really get so taken with Washington they.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalkalispellmontana", "title": "Remarks on Arrival at Kalispell, Montana.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-kalispell-montana", "publication_date": "25-09-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1105, "text": "I have never yet met a Senator or a Congressman from Montana who did not love Montana most of all, and that is true of yours, I can assure you. I think I can tell you why. There is a story--I do not know whether it is true or not; I could not believe it when I saw it in my notes, and I was not able to check it with Mike or Dick or Congressman Melcher on the way put--there is a story about a big wind that came up in Helena, the State capital, so big, as a matter of fact, that it turned the Goddess of Liberty statue around so that it was facing away from the city. There were those, not from Montana, of course, and not from Helena, who said that what really was happening was that the Goddess of Liberty was turning her back on the city. I think what the Goddess of Liberty was really doing was turning out so that she could really see this beautiful country. This is a beautiful country, and you can be very proud to live in it. And as I speak of this country, I think it is particularly appropriate that it is the Big Sky Country. There is still lots of ground out here, lots of beautiful territory for people to see, for people to visit, for people to live in. That brings me to a point on which here is total agreement among all of us on this platform, although we might have different ways to achieve that goal. We want an open country, we want open cities, and we also want an open world. At the present time we are ending the longest war in the history of the United States. a whole generation of peace. I think that is what Americans want most of all. When I noticed the high school students were here, the various bands that have been playing, when I see so many young people, and when I see your parents, I know that is what you want. As you know, from here we are going on to Portland and then up to Alaska to welcome the Emperor of Japan. Later, I will have the opportunity to visit Mainland China, the People's Republic of China. Let me just tell you what these visits have to do with this generation of peace. They are not going to solve all differences between nations, particularly with regard to those great differences that exist between the Government of the United States and the Government of the People's Republic of China, with which we do not have diplomatic relations at this time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalkalispellmontana", "title": "Remarks on Arrival at Kalispell, Montana.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-kalispell-montana", "publication_date": "25-09-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1106, "text": "They do mean that a step has been taken toward a goal. When nations have differences, they can either talk about them and negotiate about them or they can fight about them. If 10 to 15 years from now the People's Republic of China is still isolated from the rest of the world, and particularly with no communication with the United States of America, there is a great danger that due to that isolation we might end in finding that our differences were ones that we could not talk about, and we might end up fighting about. I believe we have got to avoid that. I believe the time to start avoiding that is now, to make this an open world in which we negotiate rather than confront those who differ with us around the world. In that goal, let me say we have bipartisan support. I think we have the support of all generations. There is one other thing I would like to say before we have a chance to meet some of you. As we build this generation of peace, we also want a new prosperity that is based not on war, but on peace, in which production for peace provides the jobs that Americans need. It is something that we can build. It is something that this State can contribute to and that all of you can contribute to. Finally, let me say that in this Nation in these years ahead we want this Nation to continue to have not only those areas that can produce, as the great agricultural area of Montana produces, for making this the best fed, the best dressed nation in the world but also the beauty of this country, which this State has in such remarkable degrees. A couple of months ago, among the many visitors that stream through the Oval Office of the White House, was a tremendously interesting group of teenagers from the State of Washington. They had ridden bicycles clear across the country. They called themselves Cyclemates. As they rode across the country they stopped at various places. It, of course took them weeks to arrive in Washington. I said, Now, you tell me you have been to the parks, you have been to all the States, what was the most beautiful place you saw? And they said, Glacier Park, of all the the places in the United States. Not only did they like that place but they also liked the people. So, I say, as we meet you here, and with this little California rain falling right now, that I am glad to be here. Nixon is glad to be here to receive such a warm welcome.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalkalispellmontana", "title": "Remarks on Arrival at Kalispell, Montana.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-kalispell-montana", "publication_date": "25-09-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1107, "text": "I think the record should show that this is one of those spontaneous things that we always arrange whenever the President comes in to speak, and it will be so reported in the press, and we do not mind, because they have to call it as they see it. But on our part, believe me, it is spontaneous. You are here to say goodby to us, and we do not have a good word for it in English the best is au revoir. We will see you again. to serve our next President as you have served me and previous Presidents because many of you have been here for many years with devotion and dedication, because this office, great as it is, can only be as great as the men and women who work for and with the President. This house, for example I was thinking of it as we walked down this hall, and I was comparing it to some of the great houses of the world that I have been in. Many, and most, in even smaller countries, are much bigger. Many in Europe, particularly, and in China, Asia, have paintings of great, great value, things that we just do not have here and, probably, will never have until we are 1,000 years old or older. It is the best house, because it has something far more important than numbers of people who serve, far more important than numbers of rooms or how big it is, far more important than numbers of magnificent pieces of art. This house has a great heart, and that heart comes from those who serve. We said goodby to them upstairs. And I recall after so many times I have made speeches, and some of them pretty tough, yet, I always come back, or after a hard day and my days usually have run rather long I would always get a lift from them, because I might be a little down but they always smiled. And so it is with you. I look around here, and I see so many on this staff that, you know, I should have been by your offices and shaken hands, and I would love to have talked to you and found out how to run the world everybody wants to tell the President what to do, and boy, he needs to be told many times but I just have not had the time. But I want you to know that each and every one of you, I know, is indispensable to this Government. I am proud of this Cabinet. I am proud of all the members who have served in our Cabinet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeparturefromthewhitehouse", "title": "Remarks on Departure From the White House", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-departure-from-the-white-house", "publication_date": "09-08-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1108, "text": "I am proud of our sub-Cabinet. I am proud of our White House Staff. As I pointed out last night, sure, we have done some things wrong in this Administration, and the top man always takes the responsibility, and I have never ducked it. We can be proud of it 5 1/2 years. No man or no woman came into this Administration and left it with more of this world's goods than when he came in. No man or no woman ever profited at the public expense or the public till. That tells something about you. You did what you believed in. And I only wish that I were a wealthy man-at the present time, I have got to find a way to pay my taxes and if I were, I would like to recompense you for the sacrifices that all of you have made to serve in government. But you are getting something in government-and I want you to tell this to your children, and I hope the Nation's children will hear it, too something in government service that is far more important than money. It is a cause bigger than yourself. It is the cause of making this the greatest nation in the world, the leader of the world, because without our leadership, the world will know nothing but war, possibly starvation or worse, in the years ahead. With our leadership it will know peace, it will know plenty. We have been generous, and we will be more generous in the future as we are able to. But most important, we must be strong here, strong in our hearts, strong in our souls, strong in our belief, and strong in our willingness to sacrifice, as you have been willing to sacrifice, in a pecuniary way, to serve in government. There is something else I would like for you to tell your young people. You know, people often come in and say, What will I tell my kids? They look at government and say, sort of a rugged life, and they see the mistakes that are made. They get the impression that everybody is here for the purpose of feathering his nest. That is why I made this earlier point not in this Administration, not one single man or woman. And I say to them, there are many fine careers. This country needs good farmers, good businessmen, good plumbers, good carpenters. I remember my old man. I think that they would have called him sort of a little man, common man.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeparturefromthewhitehouse", "title": "Remarks on Departure From the White House", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-departure-from-the-white-house", "publication_date": "09-08-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1109, "text": "He was a streetcar motorman first, and then he was a farmer, and then he had a lemon ranch. It was the poorest lemon ranch in California, I can assure you. He sold it before they found oil on it. But he was a great man, because he did his job, and every job counts up to the hilt, regardless of what happens. Nobody will ever write a book, probably, about my mother. Well, I guess all of you would say this about your mother-my mother was a saint. And I think of her, two boys dying of tuberculosis, nursing four others in order that she could take care of my older brother for 3 years in Arizona, and seeing each of them die, and when they died, it was like one of her own. Yes, she will have no books written about her. Now, however, we look to the future. I had a little quote in the speech last night from T.R. As you know, I kind of like to read books. I am not educated, but I do read books and the T.R. quote was a pretty good one. Here is another one I found as I was reading, my last night in the White House, and this quote is about a young man. He was a young lawyer in New York. He had married a beautiful girl, and they had a lovely daughter, and then suddenly she died, and this is what he wrote. This was in his diary. He said, She was beautiful in face and form and lovelier still in spirit. As a flower she grew and as a fair young flower she died. Her life had been always in the sunshine. None ever knew her who did not love and revere her for her bright and sunny temper and her saintly unselfishness. When she had just become a mother, when her life seemed to be just begun and when the years seemed so bright before her, then by a strange and terrible fate death came to her. And when my heart's dearest died, the light went from my life forever. That was T.R. in his twenties. He thought the light had gone from his life forever but he went on. And he not only became President but, as an ex-President, he served his country, always in the arena, tempestuous, strong, sometimes wrong, sometimes right, but he was a man.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeparturefromthewhitehouse", "title": "Remarks on Departure From the White House", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-departure-from-the-white-house", "publication_date": "09-08-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1110, "text": "And as I leave, let me say, that is an example I think all of us should remember. We think sometimes when things happen that do not go the right way; we think that when you do not pass the bar exam the first time I happened to, but I was just lucky; I mean, my writing was so poor the bar examiner said, We have just got to let the guy through. We think that when someone dear to us dies, we think that when we lose an election, we think that when we suffer a defeat that all is ended. We think, as T.R. said, that the light had left his life forever. The young must know it; the old must know it. It must always sustain us, because the greatness comes not when things go always good for you, but the greatness comes and you are really tested, when you take some knocks, some disappointments, when sadness comes, because only if you have been in the deepest valley can you ever know how magnificent it is to be on the highest mountain. And so I say to you on this occasion, as we leave, we leave proud of the people who have stood by us and worked for us and served this country. We want you to be proud of what you have done. We want you to continue to serve in government, if that is your wish. Always give your best, never get discouraged, never be petty; always remember, others may hate you, but those who hate you do not win unless you hate them, and then you destroy yourself. And so, we leave with high hopes, in good spirit, and with deep humility, and with very much gratefulness in our hearts. I can only say to each and every one of you, we come from many faiths, we pray perhaps to different gods but really the same God in a sense but I want to say for each and every one of you, not only will we always remember you, not only will we always be grateful to you but always you will be in our hearts and you will be in our prayers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeparturefromthewhitehouse", "title": "Remarks on Departure From the White House", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-departure-from-the-white-house", "publication_date": "09-08-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1124, "text": "Vice President, Secretary Riley, Secretary Herman, Deputy Secretary Thurm, all the Members of Congress who are here, and Mrs. Udall, thank you for coming. Ladies and gentlemen, before I make my remarks about this legislation that we have all worked on, I'd like to say a few words about yesterday's United Nations Security Council resolution on Iraq. Comply now with the U.N. resolutions and let the UNSCOM inspection team go back to work. Iraq's announcement this morning to expel the Americans from the inspection team is clearly unacceptable and a challenge to the international community. Let me remind you all again I will say this every time I discuss this issue these inspectors, in the last 6 years, have uncovered more weapons of mass destruction potential and destroyed it than was destroyed in the entire Gulf war. It is important to the safety of the world that they continue their work. I intend to pursue this matter in a very determined way. I think it is fair to say that this is one of those days in public service that these Members of Congress in both parties work for and live for and put up with a lot of the hassles of public life for. We have been on a journey for the last 5 years to a new century that is now just around the corner, driven by a vision to provide opportunity to everybody who is responsible enough to work for it, to continue to lead the world for peace and freedom and prosperity, and to bring our people together, across all the lines that divide us, into one America. And we are clearly making progress. Our economy is the strongest in a generation; crime, welfare, and unemployment are falling. I think all of us believe that the best way to sustain and build on that progress is to make sure that all of our people have a world-class education. In my State of the Union Address, I challenged our people to join me in a nonpartisan effort to make sure that every 8-yearold can read, every 12-year-old can log on to the Internet, every 18-year-old can go on to college, every adult can continue to learn for a lifetime. For the very first time, I feel that we are determined to finish that part of our journey. Congress and the United States of America have answered the call. When I sign this bill into law, I will have the privilege of signing into the record books what is plainly the best year for American education in more than a generation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthedepartmentslaborhealthandhumanservicesandeducationand0", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-departments-labor-health-and-human-services-and-education-and-0", "publication_date": "13-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1125, "text": "First, we are taking historic steps to make sure that every child in America can meet the high national standards of academic achievement that the Israels spoke about so that every children can master the basics. This bill represents a genuine breakthrough in what is now quite a long effort by many people to achieve national academic standards in the United States. For the first time, we will have workable and generally agreed-upon standards in math and reading. And for the very first time, Congress has voted to support the development of voluntary national tests to measure performance in fourth grade reading and eighth grade math. The tests will be created by an independent, bipartisan organization and will be piloted in schools next October. The importance of this cannot be overstated. Our children rise with the expectations we set for them. We know that every child can meet high standards if we set them and measure our progress against them. I want to especially thank Senator Bingaman and Representative Miller and everyone else who worked on this particular part of the legislation. This legislation also takes concrete steps to help our children meet the standards and, indeed, to achieve all our national education goals. It will help every 8-year-old in America read on his or her own by funding the America Reads challenge and expanding national service so that our AmeriCorps members can recruit trained literacy tutors for our schools. Already, over 800 colleges and universities and numerous other organizations are providing tens of thousands of volunteer tutors that are going into our schools every week to help make sure our children can read. We can give our children the extra attention and practice they need so that we can assure that they will be able to read independently by the end of the third grade if we continue to pursue this. Second, the bill takes significant steps to ensure that every 12-year-old can log on to the Internet. I must say, I had ambivalent feelings when I realized that Mr. Israel was logging on to the Internet and reading what was on the website about the exam. Some day somebody may figure out how to find the actual exam on the website. This measure nearly doubles nearly doubles our national investment in education technology. It puts us well on the way to connecting every classroom and library to the information superhighway by the year 2000, something the Vice President has made a particular commitment to. And I want to emphasize something else, because I met with a group of young people yesterday in their twenties who were hammering me on this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthedepartmentslaborhealthandhumanservicesandeducationand0", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-departments-labor-health-and-human-services-and-education-and-0", "publication_date": "13-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1126, "text": "They said, What difference will it make if you connect every classroom in the country to the information superhighway if the teachers are not trained to use the technology, and the kids know more than they do? So I want to emphasize that a big part of this legislation provides investments to make sure that our teachers have the training they need to maximize the use of this new technology. Third, the bill, along with the college tuition tax credits I signed into law this summer and the improvements in the college loan program we have been implementing since 1993, will make it possible for every 18-year-old who is willing to work for it to go on to college. And it gives us the chance to make the 13th and 14th years of education as universal as a high school diploma is today. This measure includes the largest increase in Pell grant scholarships in two decades, raising the maximum grant, and serving an additional 220,000 students. I might add that the Congress and I thank the members of this committee who are here has added in the last two budgets another 300,000 work-study positions as well. The bill also promotes innovation and expands public school choice, helping parents, teachers, and community leaders to open some 500 new charter schools and clearing the way for 3,000 such schools by early in the next century. It recognizes that learning begins in the earliest years of life and significantly expands investment in Head Start. It challenges teachers to reach higher standards along with students and honors those who do by helping 100,000 more teachers seek certification for the National Board of Teacher Standards as master teachers. Let me emphasize the significance of the 100,000 figure. The year before last, there were only 500 teachers in the entire country who had been certified as master teachers. Because of the unique training and performance required to gain this certification, it is our firm belief and I know Secretary Riley believes this if we can get one master teacher certified in every school building in America, it will change the entire culture of teaching across the country and elevate the quality of education dramatically. The bill brings more to our efforts to build the discipline and order and safety and positive activity into the lives of our children, with $40 million to help schools stay open late, on the weekends, and in the summer, to help keep young people off the streets and out of trouble, along with job training for out-of-school youth. Now, let me emphasize the importance of this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthedepartmentslaborhealthandhumanservicesandeducationand0", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-departments-labor-health-and-human-services-and-education-and-0", "publication_date": "13-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1127, "text": "Most juvenile crime is committed between the hours of 3 in the afternoon and 7 at night. While the crime rate has dropped in America dramatically, it is only in the last 2 years that it is begun to level off among young people. But we ought to look at this in a positive way. This is an opportunity to take kids who otherwise do not have the institutional support they need, who are capable of getting a good education and being good, productive citizens, and giving them the institutional framework within which to do that. It also helps a lot of them whose parents have to work until later in the evening and cannot be at home. So it may sound like a little money, but a little money given to a school on a tight budget for this purpose can make all the difference in the world in the lives of a lot of our young people. So I am very pleased by that. And again, I want to thank all the Members who are here for what they have done. I hope now we will use this momentum in education to take some new steps, to pass finally a GI bill for America's workers that would enable us to give a certificate to any American who needs it to take to the nearest educational institution to learn new skills to reenter the workplace, and to meet the quiet crisis of crumbling and crowded school buildings across America. We have more children in our schools than at any time in our history, with serious overcrowding problems and serious building deterioration problems, which I believe we should help to address. Let me say, finally, that this bill continues our efforts to strengthen families on many other fronts. It expands educational opportunity for recent immigrants, children with disabilities, children growing up in our poorest neighborhoods. It significantly increases funding for biomedical research, from cancer to Parkinson's disease and we are particularly glad to have Mrs. Udall with us today to the astonishing human genome project. And I would like to thank Congressman Porter and Congressman Obey and Congressman Spratt for the work that they have done on this particular thing. And I would like to especially thank Congressman Upton for the work that he is done on the Parkinson's issue. This is a remarkable, remarkable bill with an astonishing bipartisan commitment to keep our country on the front ranks of medical research. Finally, it will help to make new, very powerful ENTITY therapies more available to needy patients.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthedepartmentslaborhealthandhumanservicesandeducationand0", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1998", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-departments-labor-health-and-human-services-and-education-and-0", "publication_date": "13-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1173, "text": "Ladies and gentlemen, our overriding purpose here in Glasgow is to raise the ambitions of our commitments to keep within reach our goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. But setting ambitious targets is only half of the equation, as you all know. We also have to concrete-have concrete plans for how we are going to meet those goals and decarbonize our economies to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. To start, to state the obvious, we have to immediately scale up clean technologies that are already commercially available and cost-competitive, like wind and solar energy. In the United States, we have set a goal of deploying 30 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2030, creating tens of thousands of good-paying union jobs for American workers and meeting the power needs of almost 10,000 American homes every year. We can do this now. At the same time, we recognize that our current technology alone will not get us where we need to be. developing, demonstrating, and commercializing new clean energy technologies by 2030 so that we can-they can be widely deployed in time to meet our 2050 net-zero goals. We need to invest in breakthroughs, and I welcome the U.K.'s leadership on the Glasgow Breakthrough agenda. Innovation is the key to unlocking our future. That is why the United States is working to quadruple funding for clean energy research and development over the next 4 years. And we will lead a year of action in 2022 to advance clean technologies globally. Over the past 2 days, I have announced several U.S. Government-led initiatives to help develop and scale clean energy transmission, but we cannot achieve our goals through government action alone. I am looking at some of the men and women in front of me that can help accelerate and develop clean energy technologies. The United States and the World Economic Forum are launching the First Movers Coalition. The First Movers Coalition is starting with more than two dozen of the world's largest and most innovative companies. steel, shipping, aluminum, concrete, trucking, aviation, chemicals, and direct air capture. These companies will be critical partners in pushing for commercially viable alternatives to decarbonize the industrial-these industrial sectors and more, and while championing the U.S. innovation of good-paying jobs at the same time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksacceleratingcleantechnologyinnovationanddeploymenttheunitednationsclimate", "title": "Remarks on Accelerating Clean Technology Innovation and Deployment at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, United Kingdom", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-accelerating-clean-technology-innovation-and-deployment-the-united-nations-climate", "publication_date": "02-11-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1174, "text": "And the U.S. Government is going to use our enormous market power as the world's largest buyer of goods and services-some $650 billion in acquisitions annually-to do the same. The Government purchases that much. Together, these policies, God-willing, will spur a wave of new and better products into the market, and new companies and projects that will create good-paying jobs. So we are attacking the challenge from both ends. We are sending the demand signal loud and clear, and investing in research and development to expand supply. We do not just want to innovate in the industrial sector; the agricultural sector also has a vital role to play. As stewards of the land, our farmers belong on the frontlines of the climate fight. And together with the United Arab Emirates, I am proud to announce the launch of the Agriculture Innovation Mission for Climate, AIM for Climate. This is something we first proposed at my Leaders' Summit on Climate. Over the last 6 months, we have worked for more than-with more than 75 partners to catalyze public and private investment in climate-smart agriculture and food system innovation. Today, along with 75 partners, we are going to launch a $4 billion initial investment globally. And the United States is planning to mobilize a billion of that $4 billion over the next 5 years. And I invite all of you to join us in working to double the investment by the time we meet at COP27. As with every aspect of the climate crisis, no one can do this alone. We need all of us working together. And as we do, the United States will lead by example and share with the world our considerable powers of innovation. And, as my grandfather would say, with the grace of God and the good will of the neighbors and the creek not rising, we are going to make a lot of progress. All kidding aside, I think there is virtually nothing we are unable to do, particularly when we do it together. And, again, I want to thank all the private sector for their work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksacceleratingcleantechnologyinnovationanddeploymenttheunitednationsclimate", "title": "Remarks on Accelerating Clean Technology Innovation and Deployment at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, United Kingdom", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-accelerating-clean-technology-innovation-and-deployment-the-united-nations-climate", "publication_date": "02-11-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1181, "text": "It is a great pleasure to come back to a city where my accent is considered normal, and where they pronounce the words the way they are spelled ! I take especial satisfaction in this day. As the recipient of an honorary degree in 1956 from Boston College, and therefore an instant alumnus, I am particularly pleased to be with all of you on this most felicitous occasion. This university, or college, as Father Walsh has described, was founded in the darkest days of the Civil War, when this Nation was engaged in a climactic struggle to determine whether it would be half slave and half free or all free. And now, 100 years later, after the most intense century perhaps in human history, we are faced with the great question of whether this world will be half slave and half free, or whether it will be all one or the other. And on this occasion, as in 1863, the services of Boston College are still greatly needed. It is good also to participate in this ceremony which has honored three distinguished citizens of the free world--President Pusey, Father Bunn, and our friend from the world of freedom, Lady Jackson. Boston College is a hundred years old-old by the life span of men, but young by that of universities. In this week of observance, you have rightly celebrated the achievements of the past, and equally rightly you have turned in a series of discussions by outstanding scholars to the problems of the present and the future. Learned men have been talking here of the knowledge explosion, and in all that they have said I am sure they have implied the heavy present responsibility of institutions like this one. Yet today I want to say a word on the same theme, to impress upon you as urgently as I can the growing and insistent importance of universities in our national life. I speak of universities because that is what Boston College has long since become. But most of what I say applies to liberal arts colleges as well. My theme is not limited to any one class of universities, public or private, religious or secular. Our national tradition of variety in higher education shows no sign of weakening, and it remains the task of each of our institutions to shape its own role among its differing sisters. In this hope I am much encouraged by a reading in this last week of the remarkable encyclical, Pacem in Terris.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthebostoncollegecentennialceremonies", "title": "Address at the Boston College Centennial Ceremonies", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-boston-college-centennial-ceremonies", "publication_date": "20-04-1963", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1182, "text": "In its penetrating analysis of today's great problems, of social welfare and human rights, of disarmament and international order and peace, that document surely shows that on the basis of one great faith and its traditions there can be developed counsel on public affairs that is of value to all men and women of good will. As a Catholic I am proud of it; and as an American I have learned from it. It only adds to the impact of this message that it closely matches notable expressions of conviction and aspiration from churchmen of other faiths, as in recent documents of the World Council of Churches, and from outstanding world citizens with no ecclesiastical standing. We are learning to talk the language of progress and peace across the barriers of sect and creed. It seems reasonable to hope that a similar process may be taking place across the quite different barriers of higher learning. From the office that I hold, in any case, there can be no doubt today of the growing meaning of universities in America. That, of course, is one basic reason for the increasing urgency with which those who care most for the progress of our society are pressing for more adequate programs in higher education and in education generally. It is for this reason that I urge upon everyone here and in this country the pressing need for national attention and a national decision in the national interest upon the national question of education. In at least four ways, the new realities of our day have combined to intensify the focal role of the university in our Nation's life. First, and perhaps most obvious, the whole world has come to our doorstep and the universities must be its student. In the strange geometry of modern politics, the distant Congo can be as close to us as Canada, and Canada, itself, is worth more attention than we have sometimes given. Crises we did not create require our participation. Second, there is indeed an explosion of knowledge and its outward limits are not yet in sight. In some fields, progress seems very fast; in others, distressingly slow. It is no tribute to modern science to jump lightly to the conclusion that all its secrets of particle physics, of molecular life, of heredity, of outer space, are now within easy reach. It is that wherever we turn, in defense, in space, in medicine, in industry, in agriculture, and most of all in basic science, itself, the requirement is for better work, deeper understanding, higher education.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthebostoncollegecentennialceremonies", "title": "Address at the Boston College Centennial Ceremonies", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-boston-college-centennial-ceremonies", "publication_date": "20-04-1963", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1183, "text": "And while I have framed this comment in the terms of the natural sciences, I insist, as do all those who live in this field, that at every level of learning there must be an equal concern for history, for letters and the arts, and for man as a social being in the widest meaning of Aristotle's phrase. This also is the work of the university. And third, as the world presses in and knowledge presses out, the role of the interpreter grows. Men can no longer know everything themselves; the 20th century has no universal man. All men today must learn to know through one another--to judge across their own ignorance--to comprehend at second hand. Those who would practice them must develop intensity of perception, variety of mental activity, and the habit of open concern for truth in all its forms. Where can we expect to find a training ground for this modern maturity, if not in our universities? Fourth and finally, these new requirements strengthen still further what has always been a fundamental element in the life of American colleges and universities--that they should be dedicated to the Nation's service. The phrase is Woodrow Wilson's, and no one has discussed its meaning better. What he said in 1896 is more relevant today than ever before, and I close with a quotation from him. I offer it to you with renewed congratulations, and in the confident hope that as the second century opens, Boston College will continue to respond--as she did in her beginnings-to the new needs of the age. It is not learning, said President Wilson, but the spirit of service that will give a college place in the public annals of the Nation. It is indispensable, he said, if it is to do its right service, that the air of affairs should be admitted to all its classrooms... the air of the world's transactions, the consciousness of the solidarity of the race, the sense of the duty of man toward man the promise and the hope that shine in the face of all knowledge .... The days of glad expansion are gone, our life grows tense and difficult; our resource for the future lies in careful thought, providence, and a wise economy; and the school must be of the Nation. Boston College for too years has been of the Nation and so it will be for the next hundred.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthebostoncollegecentennialceremonies", "title": "Address at the Boston College Centennial Ceremonies", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-boston-college-centennial-ceremonies", "publication_date": "20-04-1963", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1198, "text": "I was sitting here this afternoon thinking that whoever put this head table together should really be our President. Because I can tell you that we could use a good consensus politician in the White House. This is the first time that I have heard of Armistice Day being celebrated in October. Of course, you all remember, we call it Veterans Day now but you could still fool me with some of the old campaigners who are here tonight. Even so, I do not think any veteran could appreciate my feelings on this night except maybe General Custer. And I do not know of any chief Executive or otherwise who has ever been surrounded by so many Indians. It kept me awake all last night. Finally, around 4 a.m. this morning, the ghost of Al Smith appeared at my bedside. He said, ENTITY, I have seen the guest list for that dinner, too, and I cannot sleep either. Then Al Smith gave me a tip. He told me to handle you like he had once handled another audience. Soon after his first election as Governor of New York, Al Smith went to visit the State prison at Sing Sing. He was asked to speak to the inmates, but he did not know quite how to start or what to say. Then he was reminded that to be a guest of the State's prison meant that you were no longer a citizen. Then he said, My fellow convicts. That did not sound quite right either, so Governor Smith then waved his arms in a grand gesture and said, Well, anyhow, I am glad to see so many of you here. That is my salutation to all of you for now. But as the resident prisoner of the big white jailhouse, I do anticipate the very great pleasure of saluting one of you soon with the greeting, Fellow convict. I am so honored to have the pleasure of being here with my good friend, His Excellency, Archbishop Cooke, tonight. Although-looking at the company he is keeping I was tempted to lean over and ask him, Are not you really in the wrong pew? I resisted the temptation because of the ecumenical nature of this gathering. To be completely fair, I would have then had to put the same question to Governor Rockefeller or Mayor Lindsay. Nixon, of course, is hoping that the Archbishop has come here to witness a resurrection. He appears to be so confident these days that he is already planning to change the name of Washington, D.C., to Resurrection City.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorkcitytheannualdinnerthealfredesmithmemorialfoundation0", "title": "Remarks in New York City at the Annual Dinner of the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-city-the-annual-dinner-the-alfred-e-smith-memorial-foundation-0", "publication_date": "16-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1199, "text": "He is sitting here hoping that the Archbishop perhaps will pass the collection plate a second time. He even suggested to me as I came in that I use my good offices to ask another little favor of the Archbishop just a small miracle of loaves and fishes. Governor Rockefeller is sitting over there smiling and thinking, Well, they almost got me to the church on time. Mayor Lindsay, to his left and our left, always looking far ahead, is offering up a slightly different prayer, Get me to the church. I think it is a shame, Your Excellency, that Gene McCarthy has refused to come to church. He has chosen to go off and fast in the desert instead. I am happy to say, however, that we have another famous American here to console us. We are all proud of Spiro Skouras.1 These days, my friends, I also find myself saying on occasions a nonpartisan prayer. Watching the race from the sidelines, I remember a story that Lincoln once told after he became President. It concerned the man who had once stood right up on the gallows before he got a last-minute reprieve. A year later he was on the way to the gallows again for another crime, and he rode in a slow-moving wagon while hundreds of townspeople rushed to get a front seat at the ceremony. The prisoner stuck his head out of the wagon and shouted, You needn't be in such a hurry, boys. This could be my last press conference. Pretty soon you will not have Lyndon Johnson to kick around any more. But I am very grateful that I could be here in this company tonight. I do appreciate more than I can say the statements of warmth and welcome by Mayor Lindsay and Governor Rockefeller, the very generous references by Vice President Nixon, and the constancy and devotion of Vice President Humphrey. I want to keep my comments as nonpartisan as possible, so I will include you, Mr. Archbishop, in that final benediction. Just the other day one of our foremost newspapers quoted some of those famous inside sources to charge that a certain important archdiocese suffered from government by crony. Well, as I have said before, These are the New York Times that try men's souls. In all seriousness, my friends, it is a great honor to appear at this traditional charitable dinner in honor of that great American, Al Smith, a dinner that was sponsored so long and so faithfully and so well by that great American, Francis Cardinal Spellman.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewyorkcitytheannualdinnerthealfredesmithmemorialfoundation0", "title": "Remarks in New York City at the Annual Dinner of the Alfred E. Smith Memorial Foundation.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-york-city-the-annual-dinner-the-alfred-e-smith-memorial-foundation-0", "publication_date": "16-10-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1215, "text": "When you were describing the initiatives in New Haven involving the Yale Child Study Center, it struck a particularly responsive chord because when I met my wife over 25 years ago at the law school, she was also working with the Yale Child Study Center. We are delighted to be joined here by leaders of law enforcement and leaders of law enforcement organizations; Montgomery County Council member Marilyn Praisner. And I want to say a special word of welcome to Congressman Bud Cramer of Alabama, who has supported the 100,000 police program. We thank you, sir, for your presence here. This is an important time for us to be making this announcement because the holiday season is always focused on our children, and properly so. I want our children to be at the center of our attention every day, every week, all year long. Today we come here to talk about new actions to help millions of children who are exposed every year to violence, either as witnesses or victims. For many, many of them, it is very difficult to be a child because there is too much violence, too much cruelty, too much incivility. Children experience these things in our society at younger and younger ages. That is why we have worked hard-the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, and others in our administration-to strengthen families, to bring safety and order to our schools, our communities, our streets. We passed a crime bill with tougher penalties and more prevention. We have enforced zero tolerance for guns in schools, expelling more than 6,000 students in 1997 who brought weapons to schools. We have expanded and want to continue to expand after-school programs to keep children off the streets during the after-school hours when juvenile crime soars. We do have- the chief mentioned the 100,000 police program, the community policing program. We have now funded about 91,000 of those 100,000 police. We are ahead of schedule and under budget, and I hope we can keep going. With these efforts and with the efforts of countless parents and teachers, principals, judges, police officers, and others, real progress is being made, as you have heard. New crime statistics released by the Justice Department this past weekend show that overall crime has dropped to its lowest level in 25 years. Property and violent crime are down more than 20 percent since 1993, the murder rate down by nearly 30 percent. The juvenile murder rate has dropped 17 percent in one year, and juvenile arrest rates are now down 2 years in a row.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingthechildrenexposedviolenceinitiative", "title": "Remarks Announcing the Children Exposed to Violence Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-the-children-exposed-violence-initiative", "publication_date": "29-12-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1216, "text": "And there are still far too many children who are victims of violence; too many being abused and neglected; too many still witnessing serious violence with traumatic effects on them that, as you have already heard, will last a lifetime. As the First Lady's Zero To Three conference last year showed, children's exposure to violence has tremendous negative consequences for them and for all the rest of us. A child who experiences serious violence is 50 percent-50 percent-more likely to be arrested as a juvenile and nearly 40 percent more likely to be arrested as an adult. If you want to keep the crime rates going down, you have to do more to break the cycle of violence to which children are exposed. Today we launch a new Child Exposed to Violence Initiative, sponsored by the Justice Department, directed by Deputy Attorney General Holder. The aim of the initiative is to combat violence against children, to prevent children who are exposed to violence from being victimized a second time by the justice system. As part of the initiative, I announce today four specific actions. First, I am asking the Justice Department to send legislation to Congress to impose tougher penalties against those who expose children to violence. I believe it is time to send a message through the court that when a man assaults or kills someone in the presence of a child, he has committed not one horrendous act but two; time to ask why a bank robber who unintentionally kills an innocent bystander can be charged with felony murder, but a repeat child abuser who unintentionally kills a child cannot be. Second, I am directing the Justice Department to develop and distribute the critical information State and local law enforcement agencies need to do a better job of responding to the needs of children who have been victimized by a crime. Too often children are victimized anew by a criminal justice system that is designed by and for adults. With the help of the Justice Department's new training videos and in-thefield user guides, the first of which we are releasing today, criminal justice agencies all over our Nation can begin to provide children who have been exposed to violence with the healing they need and deserve. Third, today we announce $10 million in Federal Safe Start grants to 12 cities to develop the kinds of comprehensive responses to children exposed to violence that New Haven has pioneered and that the chief so ably described just a few moments ago.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingthechildrenexposedviolenceinitiative", "title": "Remarks Announcing the Children Exposed to Violence Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-the-children-exposed-violence-initiative", "publication_date": "29-12-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1217, "text": "As a new Congress convenes, we must take steps to speed up the economic recovery and to strengthen public confidence in the integrity of American corporations. This week in Chicago, I announced my growth-and-jobs plan, specific proposals to help workers, employers, and investors across America. For unemployed Americans whose benefits expired on December 28th, I asked Congress to act to extend those benefits. Congress did so quickly, and I signed the extension of unemployment benefits into law this week. For Americans who face the greatest difficulty finding work, I propose special reemployment accounts. These accounts will provide up to $3,000 to help pay for training, moving expenses, or other costs of finding a job. For all income-tax payers, I propose speeding up the tax cuts already approved by Congress, because Americans need that relief today. Instead of gradually reducing the marriage penalty between now and 2009, we should do it now. Instead of waiting until 2008 to move more taxpayers from the 15-percent bracket to the 10-percent bracket, we should make that change now. Instead of slowly raising the child credit to $1,000 by 2010, we should raise it now. When these changes are made, 92 million Americans will keep an average of $1,083 more of their own money. And for America's 84 million investors and those who will become investors, I propose eliminating the double taxation on stock dividends. Double taxation is unfair and bad for our economy. It falls especially hard on seniors, many of whom rely on dividends for a steady source of income in their retirement. Abolishing double taxation of dividends will leave nearly 35 million Americans with more of their own money to spend and invest, which will promote savings and return as much as $20 billion this year to the private economy. Overall, my tax cut proposals will add nearly $59 billion to the economy in 2003 alone. Our Government is also acting to restore investor confidence in the integrity and honesty of corporate America. In response to the abuses of some corporations, we passed serious reforms, and we will vigorously enforce them. Our Corporate Fraud Task Force has obtained convictions or guilty pleas in over 50 cases. More than 160 defendants have been charged with criminal or civil wrongdoing. In my budget for the coming year, I will also propose major increases in funding for the prosecutors of corporate crime. My 2004 budget funding for the Securities and Exchange Commission will be 73 percent higher than 2002 levels.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress721", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-721", "publication_date": "11-01-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1218, "text": "I now light the National Community Christmas Tree on the lawn of the White House in Washington. I have come out here to Independence with my family to celebrate the great home festival. For of all the days of the year Christmas is the family day. The moving event of the first Christmas was the bringing forth of the first born in the stable in Bethlehem. There began in humble surroundings the home life of the Holy Family glorified in song and story and in the hearts of men down through the centuries. The great joys and mysteries of that event have forever sanctified and enriched all home life. The Christmas tree which we have just lighted in the South Grounds of the White House back in Washington symbolizes the family life of the Nation. That is why I have made the journey back to Independence to celebrate this Christmas Day among the familiar scenes and associations of my old hometown. These family ties reach out tonight to embrace the town, the State, the country, all of America--the whole world. The hallowed associations of Christmas draw all hearts toward home. Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace, good will to men. We needed the strength of giants and heroic courage to bring nature and the elements under control; to build our towns-and that is particularly true here in Independence-and to extend our frontiers. We all know what the covered wagon symbolized. But with all our strength we have always had a deep feeling of compassion--a human sympathy for the underdog, the oppressed of all lands, for all who bear heavy burdens. That is a part of the American spirit. I have been thinking of all these things here in my home on North Delaware Street in Independence. I am speaking to you from our family living room. As I came up the street in the gathering dusk, I saw a hundred commonplace things that are hallowed to me on this Christmas Eve--hallowed because of their associations with the sanctuary of home. I saw the lighted windows in the homes of my neighbors, the gaily decked Christmas trees, and the friendly lawns and gardens. The branches of the trees were bare and stark but somehow they looked familiar and friendly. I looked at all these familiar things--the same things that you all will see tonight as you go toward home. These are the thoughts--simple, commonplace, everyday thoughts--that we all share tonight. They are the thoughts that bind us together, one to another.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioremarkstheoccasionthelightingthecommunitychristmastreethewhitehouse", "title": "Radio Remarks on the Occasion of the Lighting of the Community Christmas Tree on the White House Grounds", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-remarks-the-occasion-the-lighting-the-community-christmas-tree-the-white-house", "publication_date": "24-12-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1219, "text": "I have had an extremely useful set of meetings with leaders familiar with the problems and prospects of the major geographic areas of the world. And as all of you are aware, international affairs have entered an extraordinarily interesting period, a period of fluidity in which several regional problems -- Afghanistan, Cambodia, Angola, the Middle East, to name just a few -- have renewed prospect for resolution. Many of the parameters of these complex regional problems are in flux. And therefore, it is important to converse with the men and women who are the most influential leaders on the scene. I enjoyed meeting with the European leaders. During my lunch with President Mitterrand and in discussions with President Cossiga of Italy, with the King of the Belgians, with President Soares of Portugal, King Juan Carlos of Spain, the President of the Federal Republic of Germany, Prime Minister Ozal of Turkey, I emphasized that our relationship with Europe and the North Atlantic alliance remains central to our foreign policy and our security interests. And they all assured me that their countries shared this strong commitment to the alliance and considered it the key to their past and their future security. The meetings with the Presidents of Egypt and Israel and with the King of Jordan form part of a larger effort to bring peace to the Middle East. And I made clear the continuing readiness of the United States to facilitate this effort in a manner that is consistent with the security of Israel and the security of our Arab friends in the region as well. We discussed what new opportunities may exist for our diplomacy, the importance of moving forward to take advantage of the positive elements in the current situation. The meeting with Prime Minister Bhutto of Pakistan, an important new leader, addressed a number of important issues, including our common interest in promoting Afghan self-determination in the aftermath now of the Soviet troop withdrawal. The emergence of democracy in Pakistan is something that we Americans all salute. Consistent with this development, we also discussed what might be done to promote greater prosperity and security in south Asia and particularly between Pakistan and India. With the President of India we talked about the good nature of our relationship and the opportunities for improving the climate of peace in the region. He expressed to me his interest in the talks that their Prime Minister has had with the Prime Minister of Pakistan.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencetokyo0", "title": "The President's News Conference in Tokyo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-tokyo-0", "publication_date": "25-02-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1220, "text": "The Agriculture Act of 1962 represents an important step forward in our program to increase farm income while reducing costs to the Government of the farm program, and holding the accumulation of farm surpluses. Last year under the 1961 program we made excellent progress. This is reflected in improvement also in the economic health of rural communities. I notice that deposits in country banks in farm States are already up 10 percent from 1960, and industries which supply farmers have reversed unfavorable trends. This bill will permit us to increase the gains we have made in all of these sectors of the economy. I understand that feed grain stocks would have climbed to more than 3 billion bushels by 1964 without the farm legislation the 87th Congress has enacted. With this legislation stocks should go down to near the needed reserve levels by 1964. I think that this is an important point--with this legislation stocks should be down to near the needed reserve levels by 1964. Similarly, as a result of this bill, wheat carryover stocks in a few years will be reduced to half of the 1961 level. This legislation brings to a successful conclusion nearly 40 years of public discussion, some 10 years of congressional debate, and a long record of active support by farm groups for what is called two price wheat legislation. Now wheat producers and wheat processors can plan confidently for the future instead of having to operate from year to year under emergency bases. I am especially pleased by the pilot program in the bill to explore means of turning farm lands to nonagricultural purposes, and to broaden the authority of the existing watershed and lending programs of the Department of Agriculture. These may be the most important provisions of this legislation, for it opens up possibilities for constructive and continuing programs of multiple use of private and public conservation projects, expanded open air space areas around cities, and economic development of some of our less developed areas. With this bill we can also continue our efforts to expand the Food for Peace program, and encouraging at the same time our prospects for expanded commercial trade. I am confident that this act will help us sustain prosperity, reduce burdens of surpluses, and maintain stable food prices.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponsigningthefoodandagricultureact1962", "title": "Remarks Upon Signing the Food and Agriculture Act of 1962", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-signing-the-food-and-agriculture-act-1962", "publication_date": "27-09-1962", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1227, "text": "Tonight I want to begin by congratulating the men and women of the 112th Congress, as well as your new Speaker, John Boehner. And as we mark this occasion, we are also mindful of the empty chair in this Chamber, and we pray for the health of our colleague and our friend Gabby Giffords. It is no secret that those of us here tonight have had our differences over the last 2 years. The debates have been contentious; we have fought fiercely for our beliefs. That is what a robust democracy demands. That is what helps set us apart as a nation. But there is a reason the tragedy in Tucson gave us pause. Amid all the noise and passion and rancor of our public debate, Tucson reminded us that no matter who we are or where we come from, each of us is a part of something greater, something more consequential than party or political preference. We are part of the American family. We believe that in a country where every race and faith and point of view can be found, we are still bound together as one people, that we share common hopes and a common creed, that the dreams of a little girl in Tucson are not so different than those of our own children, that they all deserve the chance to be fulfilled. That too is what sets us apart as a nation. Now, by itself, this simple recognition will not usher in a new era of cooperation. What comes of this moment is up to us. What comes of this moment will be determined not by whether we can sit together tonight, but whether we can work together tomorrow. That is what the people who sent us here expect of us. With their votes, they have determined that governing will now be a shared responsibility between parties. New laws will only pass with support from Democrats and Republicans. We will move forward together or not at all, for the challenges we face are bigger than party and bigger than politics. At stake right now is not who wins the next election. After all, we just had an election. At stake is whether new jobs and industries take root in this country or somewhere else. It is whether the hard work and industry of our people is rewarded. It is whether we sustain the leadership that has made America not just a place on a map, but the light to the world. We are poised for progress. Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back, corporate profits are up, the economy is growing again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1228, "text": "But we have never measured progress by these yardsticks alone. We measure progress by the success of our people, by the jobs they can find and the quality of life those jobs offer, by the prospects of a small-business owner who dreams of turning a good idea into a thriving enterprise, by the opportunities for a better life that we pass on to our children. Now, we did that in December. Thanks to the tax cuts we passed, Americans' paychecks are a little bigger today. Every business can write off the full cost of new investments that they make this year. And these steps, taken by Democrats and Republicans, will grow the economy and add to the more than 1 million private sector jobs created last year. But we have to do more. These steps we have taken over the last 2 years may have broken the back of this recession, but to win the future, we will need to take on challenges that have been decades in the making. Many people watching tonight can probably remember a time when finding a good job meant showing up at a nearby factory or a business downtown. You did not always need a degree, and your competition was pretty much limited to your neighbors. If you worked hard, chances are you'd have a job for life, with a decent paycheck and good benefits and the occasional promotion. Maybe you'd even have the pride of seeing your kids work at the same company. And for many, the change has been painful. I have seen it in the shuttered windows of once booming factories and the vacant storefronts on once busy Main Streets. I have heard it in the frustrations of Americans who've seen their paychecks dwindle or their jobs disappear, proud men and women who feel like the rules have been changed in the middle of the game. In a single generation, revolutions in technology have transformed the way we live, work, and do business. Steel mills that once needed 1,000 workers can now do the same work with 100. Today, just about any company can set up shop, hire workers, and sell their products wherever there is an Internet connection. Meanwhile, nations like China and India realized that with some changes of their own, they could compete in this new world. And so they started educating their children earlier and longer, with greater emphasis on math and science. They are investing in research and new technologies. Just recently, China became the home to the world's largest private solar research facility and the world's fastest computer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1229, "text": "The competition for jobs is real. But this should not discourage us. It should challenge us. Remember, for all the hits we have taken these last few years, for all the naysayers predicting our decline, America still has the largest, most prosperous economy in the world. No workers are more productive than ours. No country has more successful companies or grants more patents to inventors and entrepreneurs. We are the home to the world's best colleges and universities, where more students come to study than any place on Earth. the idea that each of us deserves the chance to shape our own destiny. That is why centuries of pioneers and immigrants have risked everything to come here. What do you think of that idea? What would you change about the world? What do you want to be when you grow up? The future is not a gift. It has required each generation to sacrifice and struggle and meet the demands of a new age. We know what it takes to compete for the jobs and industries of our time. We need to outinnovate, outeducate, and outbuild the rest of the world. We have to make America the best place on Earth to do business. We need to take responsibility for our deficit and reform our Government. That is how we will win the future. The first step in winning the future is encouraging American innovation. None of us can predict with certainty what the next big industry will be or where the new jobs will come from. Thirty years ago, we could not know that something called the Internet would lead to an economic revolution. What we can do--what America does better than anyone else--is spark the creativity and imagination of our people. We are the nation that put cars in driveways and computers in offices; the nation of Edison and the Wright brothers, of Google and Facebook. In America, innovation does not just change our lives. It is how we make our living. Our free enterprise system is what drives innovation. But because it is not always profitable for companies to invest in basic research, throughout our history, our Government has provided cutting-edge scientists and inventors with the support that they need. That is what planted the seeds for the Internet. That is what helped make possible things like computer chips and GPS. Just think of all the good jobs--from manufacturing to retail--that have come from these breakthroughs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1230, "text": "Half a century ago, when the Soviets beat us into space with the launch of a satellite called Sputnik, we had no idea how we would beat them to the Moon. But after investing in better research and education, we did not just surpass the Soviets, we unleashed a wave of innovation that created new industries and millions of new jobs. Two years ago, I said that we needed to reach a level of research and development we have not seen since the height of the space race. And in a few weeks, I will be sending a budget to Congress that helps us meet that goal. We will invest in biomedical research, information technology, and especially clean energy technology, an investment that will strengthen our security, protect our planet, and create countless new jobs for our people. Already, we are seeing the promise of renewable energy. Robert and Gary Allen are brothers who run a small Michigan roofing company. After September 11, they volunteered their best roofers to help repair the Pentagon. But half of their factory went unused, and the recession hit them hard. Today, with the help of a Government loan, that empty space is being used to manufacture solar shingles that are being sold all across the country. In Robert's words, We reinvented ourselves. reinvented ourselves. And to spur on more success stories like the Allen Brothers, we have begun to reinvent our energy policy. We are not just handing out money. We are issuing a challenge. We are telling America's scientists and engineers that if they assemble teams of the best minds in their fields and focus on the hardest problems in clean energy, we will fund the Apollo projects of our time. At the California Institute of Technology, they are developing a way to turn sunlight and water into fuel for our cars. At Oak Ridge National Laboratory, they are using supercomputers to get a lot more power out of our nuclear facilities. With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil with biofuels and become the first country to have a million electric vehicles on the road by 2015. We need to get behind this innovation. And to help pay for it, I am asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. I do not know if you have noticed, but they are doing just fine on their own. So instead of subsidizing yesterday's energy, let us invest in tomorrow's.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1231, "text": "Now, clean energy breakthroughs will only translate into clean energy jobs if businesses know there will be a market for what they are selling. By 2035, 80 percent of America's electricity will come from clean energy sources. Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all, and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen. But if we want to win the future, if we want innovation to produce jobs in America and not overseas, then we also have to win the race to educate our kids. Over the next 10 years, nearly half of all new jobs will require education that goes beyond a high school education. And yet as many as a quarter of our students are not even finishing high school. The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations. America has fallen to ninth in the proportion of young people with a college degree. And so the question is whether all of us, as citizens and as parents, are willing to do what is necessary to give every child a chance to succeed. That responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our homes and communities. It is family that first instills the love of learning in a child. We need to teach our kids that it is not just the winner of the Super Bowl who deserves to be celebrated, but the winner of the science fair. We need to teach them that success is not a function of fame or PR, but of hard work and discipline. Our schools share this responsibility. When a child walks into a classroom, it should be a place of high expectations and high performance. But too many schools do not meet this test. That is why instead of just pouring money into a system that is not working, we launched a competition called Race to the Top. To all 50 States, we said, If you show us the most innovative plans to improve teacher quality and student achievement, we will show you the money. Race to the Top is the most meaningful reform of our public schools in a generation. For less than 1 percent of what we spend on education each year, it has led over 40 States to raise their standards for teaching and learning. And these standards were developed, by the way, not by Washington, but by Republican and Democratic Governors throughout the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1232, "text": "And Race to the Top should be the approach we follow this year as we replace No Child Left Behind with a law that is more flexible and focused on what is best for our kids. You see, we know what is possible from our children when reform is not just a top-down mandate, but the work of local teachers and principals, school boards and communities. Three years ago, it was rated one of the worst schools in Colorado, located on turf between two rival gangs. But last May, 97 percent of the seniors received their diploma. Most will be the first in their families to go to college. And after the first year of the school's transformation, the principal who made it possible wiped away tears when a student said, Thank you, Ms. Waters, for showing that we are smart and we can make it. That is what good schools can do, and we want good schools all across the country. Let us also remember that after parents, the biggest impact on a child's success comes from the man or woman at the front of the classroom. In South Korea, teachers are known as nation builders. Here in America, it is time we treated the people who educate our children with the same level of respect. We want to reward good teachers and stop making excuses for bad ones. And over the next 10 years, with so many baby boomers retiring from our classrooms, we want to prepare 100,000 new teachers in the fields of science and technology and engineering and math. If you want to make a difference in the life of our Nation, if you want to make a difference in the life of a child, become a teacher. Your country needs you. Of course, the education race does not end with a high school diploma. To compete, higher education must be within the reach of every American. That is why we have ended the unwarranted taxpayer subsidies that went to banks and used the savings to make college affordable for millions of students. And this year, I ask Congress to go further and make permanent our tuition tax credit, worth $10,000 for 4 years of college. Because people need to be able to train for new jobs and careers in today's fast-changing economy, we are also revitalizing America's community colleges. Last month, I saw the promise of these schools at Forsyth Tech in North Carolina. Many of the students there used to work in the surrounding factories that have since left town.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1233, "text": "One mother of two, a woman named Kathy Proctor, had worked in the furniture industry since she was 18 years old. And she told me she is earning her degree in biotechnology now, at 55 years old, not just because the furniture jobs are gone, but because she wants to inspire her children to pursue their dreams too. As Kathy said, I hope it tells them to never give up. By the end of the decade, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. Today, there are hundreds of thousands of students excelling in our schools who are not American citizens. Some are the children of undocumented workers, who had nothing to do with the actions of their parents. They grew up as Americans and pledge allegiance to our flag, and yet they live every day with the threat of deportation. Others come here from abroad to study in our colleges and universities. But as soon as they obtain advanced degrees, we send them back home to compete against us. It makes no sense. Now, I strongly believe that we should take on, once and for all, the issue of illegal immigration. And I am prepared to work with Republicans and Democrats to protect our borders, enforce our laws, and address the millions of undocumented workers who are now living in the shadows. I know it will take time. But tonight, let us agree to make that effort. And let us stop expelling talented, responsible young people who could be staffing our research labs or starting a new business, who could be further enriching this Nation. The third step in winning the future is rebuilding America. To attract new businesses to our shores, we need the fastest, most reliable ways to move people, goods, and information, from high-speed rail to high-speed Internet. South Korean homes now have greater Internet access than we do. Countries in Europe and Russia invest more in their roads and railways than we do. China is building faster trains and newer airports. Meanwhile, when our own engineers graded our Nation's infrastructure, they gave us a D. America is the nation that built the transcontinental railroad, brought electricity to rural communities, constructed the Interstate Highway System. The jobs created by these projects did not just come from laying down track or pavement. They came from businesses that opened near a town's new train station or the new off-ramp.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1234, "text": "So over the last 2 years, we have begun rebuilding for the 21st century, a project that has meant thousands of good jobs for the hard-hit construction industry. And tonight I am proposing that we redouble those efforts. We will put more Americans to work repairing crumbling roads and bridges. We will make sure this is fully paid for, attract private investment, and pick projects based * what is best for the economy, not politicians. Within 25 years, our goal is to give 80 percent of Americans access to high-speed rail. This could allow you to go places in half the time it takes to travel by car. For some trips, it will be faster than flying, without the pat-down. As we speak, routes in California and the Midwest are already underway. Within the next 5 years, we will make it possible for businesses to deploy the next generation of high-speed wireless coverage to 98 percent of all Americans. This is not just about--this is not about faster Internet or fewer dropped calls. It is about connecting every part of America to the digital age. It is about a rural community in Iowa or Alabama where farmers and small-business owners will be able to sell their products all over the world. It is about a firefighter who can download the design of a burning building onto a handheld device, a student who can take classes with a digital textbook, or a patient who can have face-to-face video chats with her doctor. All these investments--in innovation, education, and infrastructure--will make America a better place to do business and create jobs. But to help our companies compete, we also have to knock down barriers that stand in the way of their success. For example, over the years, a parade of lobbyists has rigged the Tax Code to benefit particular companies and industries. Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and it has to change. So tonight I am asking Democrats and Republicans to simplify the system, get rid of the loopholes, level the playing field, and use the savings to lower the corporate tax rate for the first time in 25 years without adding to our deficit. To help businesses sell more products abroad, we set a goal of doubling our exports by 2014. Because the more we export, the more jobs we create here at home.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1235, "text": "Recently, we signed agreements with India and China that will support more than 250,000 jobs here in the United States. And last month, we finalized a trade agreement with South Korea that will support at least 70,000 American jobs. This agreement has unprecedented support from business and labor, Democrats and Republicans, and I ask this Congress to pass it as soon as possible. Now, before I took office, I made it clear that we would enforce our trade agreements and that I would only sign deals that keep faith with American workers and promote American jobs. That is what we did with Korea, and that is what I intend to do as we pursue agreements with Panama and Colombia and continue our Asia-Pacific and global trade talks. To reduce barriers to growth and investment, I have ordered a review of Government regulations. When we find rules that put an unnecessary burden on businesses, we will fix them. But I will not hesitate to create or enforce commonsense safeguards to protect the American people. That is what we have done in this country for more than a century. It is why we have speed limits and child labor laws. It is why last year, we put in place consumer protections against hidden fees and penalties by credit card companies and new rules to prevent another financial crisis. And it is why we passed reform that finally prevents the health insurance industry from exploiting patients. Now, I have heard rumors that a few of you still have concerns about our new health care law. If you have ideas about how to improve this law by making care better or more affordable, I am eager to work with you. We can start right now by correcting a flaw in the legislation that has placed an unnecessary bookkeeping burden on small businesses. What I am not willing to do--what I am not willing to do--is go back to the days when insurance companies could deny someone coverage because of a preexisting condition. I am not willing to tell James Howard, a brain cancer patient from Texas, that his treatment might not be covered. I am not willing to tell Jim Houser, a small-businessman from Oregon, that he has to go back to paying $5,000 more to cover his employees. As we speak, this law is making prescription drugs cheaper for seniors and giving uninsured students a chance to stay on their patients'--parents' coverage. Instead of refighting the battles of the last 2 years, let us fix what needs fixing, and let us move forward.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1236, "text": "Now, the final critical step in winning the future is to make sure we are not buried under a mountain of debt. We are living with a legacy of deficit spending that began almost a decade ago. And in the wake of the financial crisis, some of that was necessary to keep credit flowing, save jobs, and put money in people's pockets. But now that the worst of the recession is over, we have to confront the fact that our Government spends more than it takes in. Every day, families sacrifice to live within their means. They deserve a Government that does the same. So tonight I am proposing that starting this year, we freeze annual domestic spending for the next 5 years. Now, this would reduce the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade and will bring discretionary spending to the lowest share of our economy since Dwight Eisenhower was President. This freeze will require painful cuts. Already, we have frozen the salaries of hard-working Federal employees for the next 2 years. I have proposed cuts to things I care deeply about, like community action programs. The Secretary of Defense has also agreed to cut tens of billions of dollars in spending that he and his generals believe our military can do without. Now, I recognize that some in this Chamber have already proposed deeper cuts, and I am willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without. But let us make sure that we are not doing it on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens. And let us make sure that what we are cutting is really excess weight. It may make you feel like you are flying high at first, but it will not take long before you feel the impact. Now, most of the cuts and savings I have proposed only address annual domestic spending, which represents a little more than 12 percent of our budget. To make further progress, we have to stop pretending that cutting this kind of spending alone will be enough. I do not agree with all their proposals, but they made important progress. And their conclusion is that the only way to tackle our deficit is to cut excessive spending wherever we find it, in domestic spending, defense spending, health care spending, and spending through tax breaks and loopholes. This means further reducing health care costs, including programs like Medicare and Medicaid, which are the single biggest contributor to our long-term deficit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1237, "text": "The health insurance law we passed last year will slow these rising costs, which is part of the reason that nonpartisan economists have said that repealing the health care law would add a quarter of a trillion dollars to our deficit. medical malpractice reform to rein in frivolous lawsuits. To put us on solid ground, we should also find a bipartisan solution to strengthen Social Security for future generations. We must do it without putting at risk current retirees, the most vulnerable, or people with disabilities, without slashing benefits for future generations, and without subjecting Americans' guaranteed retirement income to the whims of the stock market. And if we truly care about our deficit, we simply cannot afford a permanent extension of the tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans. Before we take money away from our schools or scholarships away from our students, we should ask millionaires to give up their tax break. It is not a matter of punishing their success, it is about promoting America's success. In fact, the best thing we could do on taxes for all Americans is to simplify the individual Tax Code. This will be a tough job, but members of both parties have expressed an interest in doing this, and I am prepared to join them. Now is the time for both sides and both Houses of Congress, Democrats and Republicans, to forge a principled compromise that gets the job done. If we make the hard choices now to rein in our deficits, we can make the investments we need to win the future. Let me take this one step further. We should not just give our people a Government that is more affordable, we should give them a Government that is more competent and more efficient. We cannot win the future with a Government of the past. We live and do business in the Information Age, but the last major reorganization of the Government happened in the age of black-and-white TV. There are 12 different agencies that deal with exports. There are at least five different agencies that deal with housing policy. The Interior Department is in charge of salmon while they are in fresh water, but the Commerce Department handles them when they are in saltwater. Now, we have made great strides over the last 2 years in using technology and getting rid of waste. Veterans can now download their electronic medical records with a click of the mouse. We are selling acres of Federal office space that has not been used in years, and we will cut through redtape to get rid of more.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1238, "text": "In the coming months, my administration will develop a proposal to merge, consolidate, and reorganize the Federal Government in a way that best serves the goal of a more competitive America. I will submit that proposal to Congress for a vote, and we will push to get it passed. In the coming year, we will also work to rebuild people's faith in the institution of Government. Because you deserve to know exactly how and where your tax dollars are being spent, you will be able to go to a web site and get that information for the very first time in history. put that information online. If a bill comes to my desk with earmarks inside, I will veto it. I will veto it. The 21st-century Government that is open and competent, a government that lives within its means, an economy that is driven by new skills and new ideas--our success in this new and changing world will require reform, responsibility, and innovation. It will also require us to approach that world with a new level of engagement in our foreign affairs. Just as jobs and businesses can now race across borders, so can new threats and new challenges. No single wall separates East and West. No one rival superpower is aligned against us. And so we must defeat determined enemies, wherever they are, and build coalitions that cut across lines of region and race and religion. And America's moral example must always shine for all who yearn for freedom and justice and dignity. And because we have begun this work, tonight we can say that American leadership has been renewed and America's standing has been restored. Look to Iraq, where nearly 100,000 of our brave men and women have left with their heads held high. This year, our civilians will forge a lasting partnership with the Iraqi people, while we finish the job of bringing our troops out of Iraq. The Iraq war is coming to an end. Of course, as we speak, Al Qaida and their affiliates continue to plan attacks against us. Thanks to our intelligence and law enforcement professionals, we are disrupting plots and securing our cities and skies. And as extremists try to inspire acts of violence within our borders, we are responding with the strength of our communities, with respect for the rule of law, and with the conviction that American Muslims are a part of our American family. We have also taken the fight to Al Qaida and their allies abroad. In Afghanistan, our troops have taken Taliban strongholds and trained Afghan security forces.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1239, "text": "By preventing the Taliban from reestablishing a stranglehold over the Afghan people, we will deny Al Qaida the safe haven that served as a launching pad for 9/11. Thanks to our heroic troops and civilians, fewer Afghans are under the control of the insurgency. There will be tough fighting ahead, and the Afghan Government will need to deliver better governance. But we are strengthening the capacity of the Afghan people and building an enduring partnership with them. This year, we will work with nearly 50 countries to begin a transition to an Afghan lead, and this July, we will begin to bring our troops home. In Pakistan, Al Qaida's leadership is under more pressure than at any point since 2001. Their leaders and operatives are being removed from the battlefield. We will not relent, we will not waver, and we will defeat you. American leadership can also be seen in the effort to secure the worst weapons of war. Because Republicans and Democrats approved the new START Treaty, far fewer nuclear weapons and launchers will be deployed. Because we rallied the world, nuclear materials are being locked down on every continent so they never fall into the hands of terrorists. Because of a diplomatic effort to insist that Iran meet its obligations, the Iranian Government now faces tougher sanctions, tighter sanctions than ever before. And on the Korean Peninsula, we stand with our ally South Korea and insist that North Korea keeps its commitment to abandon nuclear weapons. This is just a part of how we are shaping a world that favors peace and prosperity. With our European allies, we revitalized NATO and increased our cooperation on everything from counterterrorism to missile defense. We have reset our relationship with Russia, strengthened Asian alliances, built new partnerships with nations like India. This March, I will travel to Brazil, Chile, and El Salvador to forge new alliances across the Americas. Around the globe, we are standing with those who take responsibility, helping farmers grow more food, supporting doctors who care for the sick, and combating the corruption that can rot a society and rob people of opportunity. Recent events have shown us that what sets us apart must not just be our power; it must also be the purpose behind it. In south Sudan--with our assistance--the people were finally able to vote for independence after years of war. Thousands lined up before dawn. People danced in the streets. One man who lost four of his brothers at war summed up the scene around him.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1240, "text": "This was a battlefield for most of my life, he said. And we saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. The United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia and supports the democratic aspirations of all people. We must never forget that the things we have struggled for and fought for live in the hearts of people everywhere. And we must always remember that the Americans who have borne the greatest burden in this struggle are the men and women who serve our country. Tonight let us speak with one voice in reaffirming that our Nation is united in support of our troops and their families. Let us serve them as well as they have served us, by giving them the equipment they need, by providing them with the care and benefits that they have earned, and by enlisting our veterans in the great task of building our own Nation. Our troops come from every corner of this country. And yes, we know that some of them are gay. Starting this year, no American will be forbidden from serving the country they love because of who they love. And with that change, I call on all our college campuses to open their doors to our military recruiters and ROTC. It is time to leave behind the divisive battles of the past. It is time to move forward as one Nation. We should have no illusions about the work ahead of us. Reforming our schools, changing the way we use energy, reducing our deficit, none of this will be easy. All of it will take time. the costs, the details, the letter of every law. Of course, some countries do not have this problem. If the central government wants a railroad, they build a railroad, no matter how many homes get bulldozed. If they do not want a bad story in the newspaper, it does not get written. And yet, as contentious and frustrating and messy as our democracy can sometimes be, I know there is not a person here who would trade places with any other nation on Earth. We may have differences in policy, but we all believe in the rights enshrined in our Constitution. We may have different opinions, but we believe in the same promise that says this is a place where you can make it if you try. We may have different backgrounds, but we believe in the same dream that says this is a country where anything is possible, no matter who you are, no matter where you come from.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1241, "text": "That dream is why I can stand here before you tonight. That dream is why a working class kid from Scranton can sit behind me. That dream is why someone who began by sweeping the floors of his father's Cincinnati bar can preside as Speaker of the House in the greatest nation on Earth. That dream--that American Dream--is what drove the Allen Brothers to reinvent their roofing company for a new era. It is what drove those students at Forsyth Tech to learn a new skill and work towards the future. And that dream is the story of a small-business owner named Brandon Fisher. Brandon started a company in Berlin, Pennsylvania, that specializes in a new kind of drilling technology. And one day last summer, he saw the news that halfway across the world, 33 men were trapped in a Chilean mine, and no one knew how to save them. And so he designed a rescue that would come to be known as Plan B. His employees worked around the clock to manufacture the necessary drilling equipment, and Brandon left for Chile. Along with others, he began drilling a 2,000-foot hole into the ground, working 3 or 4 hour--3 or 4 days at a time without any sleep. But because he did not want all of the attention, Brandon was not there when the miners emerged. He'd already gone back home, back to work on his next project. And later, one of his employees said of the rescue, We proved that Center Rock is a little company, but we do big things. We do big things. From the earliest days of our founding, America has been the story of ordinary people who dare to dream. That is how we win the future. We are a nation that says, I might not have a lot of money, but I have this great idea for a new company. I might not come from a family of college graduates, but I will be the first to get my degree. I might not know those people in trouble, but I think I can help them, and I need to try. I am not sure how we will reach that better place beyond the horizon, but I know we will get there. We do big things. The idea of America endures. And tonight, more than two centuries later, it is because of our people that our future is hopeful, our journey goes forward, and the state of our Union is strong. God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressbeforejointsessionthecongressthestatetheunion16", "title": "Barack Obama Address Before a Joint Session of the Congress on the State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-16", "publication_date": "25-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1242, "text": "I tell you what. Thanks for sharing your story and it is what this country's all about. And I wanted to talk, I want to thank the speakers ahead of me. I tell you what. My granddaughter's with me today. And she went to a school that Coach Lawson went to for a little while in Washington. And apparently Coach telling me she is recruiting some of the girl's basketball team from where my granddaughter went to school. And she showed me Coach, she showed me a video you were doing for your team, where you made the distinction between competing and winning, the heart of winning and competing. You can work hard, but did you compete with everything you had? Competing because you know what is at stake, what is at the heart of winning. My good friends, Congressman, excuse me, G.K. Butterfield and David Price, who represent the first and fourth districts with decency and honor, they can tell you we are doing both, working hard and we are competing like we never did before because so much is at stake for this nation. The very soul of the nation is at stake. Folks, as my coaches used to say in college, it is go time. It is the most important election in our lifetimes. We are going to make all the difference here in North Carolina. The stakes of this election, remind me of something my dad used to say when he lost job up in Scranton, Pennsylvania when I was a kid, when coal died and he moved down to Delaware. He used to always say, Joey, a job is about a lot more than a paycheck.- It is about your dignity. It is about respect. It is about your place in the community. Then he said, it is the God's truth, if I heard it once I heard it 20 times. It is about being able to look your kid in the eye and say, Honey, it is going to be okay. When I grew up surrounded by a lot of hard work and folks in Scranton, Pennsylvania and Claymont, Delaware were we moved. How many people today though, think they can look their kid in the eye right now and say, It is going to be okay, and mean it. Over half the people in America say if they got a bill for $400 they did not expect in one month, they would not be able to pay it. They'd have to borrow the money or they'd have to sell something.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidennorthcarolinaspeechtranscriptoctober18", "title": "Joe Biden North Carolina Speech Transcript October 18", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-north-carolina-speech-transcript-october-18", "publication_date": "18-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1243, "text": "Just this week, 1,200,000 people filed for unemployment. Folks are worried about making their next mortgage payment or rent payment. Whether their healthcare will be ripped away in the middle of a pandemic. They see folks at the top, they are doing better than ever while they are left to wonder, Who is looking out for me. More than 217,000 Americans dead because of ENTITY. On Friday, we saw the highest number of new cases in one day since July. Yet, the other night Trump said in one of his rallies, We have turned the corner. Turn the corner? He continues to lie to us about the circumstances. Experts say we are likely to lose as many as 200,000 additional lives nationwide between now and the end of the year. All because this President cares more about his Park Avenue perspective on the world, the stock market, than he does about you. Because he refuses to follow the science. It is estimated that if we just wore masks, if we just wore masks, we'd save between now and the end of the year, a hundred thousand lives. His own head of the CDC said that. What is really sad about this? The President knew how dangerous this virus was all the way back in January. And he hid it from the country. He is on record. He told Bob Woodward in a taped interview that the disease was deadly, much worse than the flu. And here is what he did. According to the New York Times three, four days ago, his Administration gave Wall Street investors, a head's up, but he did not tell us, just his friends on Wall Street. That is why they made so much money by selling short. But what happened to the rest of us? He tried to claim with Woodward, he did not want to panic the American people. After all, this is the same man who looks at Americans who put their lives on the line for this nation, like so many tens of thousands here in North Carolina have done. Like my son Beau did after a year in Iraq, winning the Bronze Star, conspicuous service medal, he looks at them, he calls them suckers and losers. They are the backbone of this country. And now as a consequence of all this overwhelming lying, negligent, and irresponsible action has come, how many chairs were empty at the dining room table last night because of his negligence? Folks, we are so much better than this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidennorthcarolinaspeechtranscriptoctober18", "title": "Joe Biden North Carolina Speech Transcript October 18", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-north-carolina-speech-transcript-october-18", "publication_date": "18-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1244, "text": "Despite the crisis we face, we have enormous opportunity if we just build. We just got to stand up and take it back. Look, we can build an economy that gets everyone a fair return on their work, an equal chance to get ahead. The question is, how do we break that cycle where in good times you lag behind. In bad times, you get hit the hardest and first. Well, the answer is about justice, criminal justice, police reform. I know this nation is strong enough to do both, honestly face systemic racism and provide safe streets for our families and small businesses, that too often bear the brunt of looting and burning. We have no need for our armed militias roaming America's streets. This is the United States of America. And we should have no tolerance for extremist white supremacist group marching, menacing our communities. But what, but if you say we have no need face racial injustice in this country, as he says, you have not opened your eyes to the truth. George Floyd's six year old daughter, who I met with in the family. I knelt down to say hi to her. And she looked at me, she said, Mr. Vice President, daddy changed the world. Daddy changed the world. Jacob Blake's mother, with whom I met, said violence did not her son and this nation needs healing. And then said she prayed for the police officers. Doc Rivers, a basketball coach, choking back tears when he said, We are the ones getting killed. It is amazing why we keep loving this country and this country does not love us back. Think about what it takes to be a Black person to love this country today as it does, its deep love for this country. We need leadership to deescalate tensions, open lines of communication and brings us together. As president that is precisely what I will do. But true justice is also about jobs, good paying jobs, financial stability. It was right here in Durham, on Parrish Street a century ago that an oasis of black owned businesses thrived, even in the era of Jim Crow. Parrish Street was one of the first examples of flourishing black middle-class community in America. A place that offered the country a glimpse of what we could become if we chose to live up to our founding values. Giving families of color a real shot at a home, start a small business, send a child to college debt free so they can build wealth and pass opportunity down through generations .", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidennorthcarolinaspeechtranscriptoctober18", "title": "Joe Biden North Carolina Speech Transcript October 18", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-north-carolina-speech-transcript-october-18", "publication_date": "18-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1245, "text": "That is what built every other middle-class group in America. That is how we deliver equality and equity. Another example, more and more women are dropping out of the workforce in this recession, whether in cities or in suburbs. I have a plan to deal with this pandemic. Providing funding for PPE and other resources for schools to reopen safely. Easing the caregiving crisis so many families are experiencing, squeezed between raising your kids and caring for an aging, loved one. In the middle of this pandemic, why did Republicans have the time to hold a hearing on the Supreme Court instead of addressing this significant economic needs of local communities? I will tell you why. For real not hyperbole, I will tell you why. It is about wiping Obamacare off the books. That is what it is about. Because their nominee has said in the past the law should be struck down. If they get their way, 100 million Americans will lose their protections for pre-existing conditions. Complications of ENTITY, over 7 million people infected will become the next preexisting condition, allowing insurers to jack up your premiums or deny your coverage altogether. And women will again be charged more for their health just because they are women. I will build on the Affordable Care Act so you can keep your private insurance. You can choose a Medicare like option. We are going to increase subsidies that lower your premiums and deductibles out of pocket spending. Look, your governor has been working hard to expand Medicaid, but it is being blocked by Republican legislature. My plan will automatically enroll 357,000 uninsured North Carolinans in a public option for free, automatically. And it is going to make a life-changing difference for so many families. But we can only do any of this if we come together as a country. We need to revive the spirit of bipartisanship in this country. When I say that, and I said that from the moment I announced, I am told that, Well, maybe that is you used to be able to do that, Joe. That was your reputation when you were in the Senate and Vice President. Well, I am here to tell you they can and they will and they must if we are going to get anything done in America. I am running as a proud Democrat, but I will govern as an American president. I promise you. I will work as hard for those who do not support me as those who did.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidennorthcarolinaspeechtranscriptoctober18", "title": "Joe Biden North Carolina Speech Transcript October 18", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-north-carolina-speech-transcript-october-18", "publication_date": "18-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1246, "text": "That is the job of a president, a duty to care, to care for everyone in America. Folks, and you too have a sacred duty. And Senator Harris and I are asking you for your trust and support. We will always have your back, I promise you. Early voting started on Thursday. You can vote early in person until the 31st. You have got a governor's race, a Senate race, a record number of black women on the ballot. Folks, they are ready to deliver for North Carolina families. When I announced my candidacy, I had not planned on running again to be very blunt. And I have said it before. My son had just died and I had no interest. And then I saw those folks coming out of the fields in Charlottesville, carrying torches. Close your eyes, remember what it looked like. They are veins bulging, shouting anti-Semitic bile. The same bile that was shouted in the streets of Germany in the thirties. And a young woman was killed that was protesting the opposite direction. And when asked to comment, this President said something no other president has ever said in the history of the United States of America. He said, There were very fine people on both sides. Folks, I mean it when I say this it is time to restore America's soul. It is time to rebuild the backbone of America, the middle class. We can do this. The blinders have been taken off the American people and they have seen what is happened. It is time to unite America. Look, I will never forget what President Kennedy said when I was a kid and we are going to the moon. Every kid in the school had to hear his speech. He used the line in that speech my Senate colleagues and the White House heard me use all the time, it made the most impression on me. He asked the unasked question, Why are we doing this? We refuse to postpone America's work that must be done. The only thing that can tear America part is America itself. We choose hope over fear. We choose unity over division. And yes, we choose truth over lies. God bless you all. And may God protect our troops.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidennorthcarolinaspeechtranscriptoctober18", "title": "Joe Biden North Carolina Speech Transcript October 18", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-north-carolina-speech-transcript-october-18", "publication_date": "18-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1249, "text": "I am looking around at this crowd, and I see a few faces old enough to remember that boardwalk that went along -- -- all the way along Ocean Avenue there. And this is a very special occasion for Barbara and me, and we are delighted to be here. And I am very pleased to be honored by the chamber. I was afraid you might be feeling I had dishonored the community with some of the excesses that have taken place out here, but I want the record to show that when the bottom fell off of the starboard engine on our boat the other day -- -- it was not an encounter with a lobster trap. The Coast Guard guy went out and took a look at the reef off the point there and started to tell me that he thought maybe, accidentally, I had hit a rock. And I told him, Look, rocks do not grow in these waters. I have been here for 65 years running around in a boat -- find some other answer. Even if there is metal on the rock out there, I did not hit that rock. And as Commander in Chief of the Coast Guard, he changed his mind as I was talking to him, and -- -- we now think it was a submerged board. Barbara -- this Barbara -- thank you very much, Barbara Aiello, for this honor and for welcoming us to the community that we do love so much. I am delighted to be back at the Shawmut, where many of our press are staying and other friends that are traveling with us, and this hospitality -- a few of them greeting us over here -- the people working at the Shawmut. But it is a wonderfully warm feeling that we get from all of you, our neighbors in Kennebunkport and Kennebunk Beach and, of course, Kennebunk. And it is a special time for me being here. We are doing some work, but I have confessed at the very outset that this is a pure, total vacation. And I am not going to look busy in order to convince people in America that it is something other than a vacation. Some of you have been on the golf course when I play, and that is -- -- and other challenges. One of them now is, we have a fleet of plastic toys that Barbara bought at some -- I hope it was at a sale.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonhostedthechambercommercekennebunkportmaine", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon Hosted by the Chamber of Commerce in Kennebunkport, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-hosted-the-chamber-commerce-kennebunkport-maine", "publication_date": "30-08-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1250, "text": "There are many cars and little scooters and all out there, and it is a hazard to get out the front door, get into the car or into the boat, just to escape all these kids' playthings. But one of the great joys for us has been having our grandchildren here, and I expect that those in Kennebunkport will recognize a familiar scene as we prepare this year's Christmas card. I am not going to comment on the fishing -- a vicious assault on my -- -- vicious assault on my ability. How would he call it? This morning, we got up and, through what was a rather heavy fog, went down to Whistler off Cape Porpoise and then down off of Woods Island. I was driving the boat, placing the boat so that Sandy Boardman, who was with me, could catch a bluefish -- and she did. And I think they should knock off that advertisement on the front of the Portland paper that shows a bluefish with a big X through it -- -- telling me that, yet a 13th day, I have not caught one. I am going to appeal to them on that one. that this is a place where we really enjoy ourselves -- but more than that, kind of refurbish our souls and get our batteries all charged up and enjoy life really to the fullest. It is a point of view. You can feel it in the land and in the water here. And I know that people that are members of this chamber and other visitors that we have here with us understand exactly what I am talking about. Barbara has told you that I have been coming here every summer since 19 -- well, I was born in '24. And the only one I missed was the summer of 1944 when, like many of you, I was in the service. Our kids live in five different States -- one in Cape Elizabeth and the others, four different States -- and for them, this is an anchor to windward because not far from where this picture was painted my mother was born in a house still standing right there -- not too far from St. Ann's Church. So, enough of the reminiscence, but it means renewal to us, a moment to reflect. And as Barbara said, some of my colleagues in the Government have had an opportunity to come here for substantive meetings.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonhostedthechambercommercekennebunkportmaine", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon Hosted by the Chamber of Commerce in Kennebunkport, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-hosted-the-chamber-commerce-kennebunkport-maine", "publication_date": "30-08-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1251, "text": "Today I cannot wait to show off this heaven to the Prime Minister of Canada, his wife, and his four kids, who will be visiting us around the corner. And the other day it was the Prime Minister of Denmark and his charming wife. And as some of you all remember -- in May, I believe it was -- we had the President of the French Republic here. And it is more than just inviting them to a lovely place, because I have found, as I will with Mulroney, that with both the Danish Prime Minister, Mr. Schluter, and Mr. Mitterrand, you could converse and you could relax and you could really get to know each other in a wonderful setting. And though I do not believe foreign policy is determined on whether a foreign leader likes you or not, I do think it makes a difference if you can develop a good personal relationship. And you, our neighbors, have helped us in that regard, as we have had some distinguished foreign visitors here. I appreciate the Outstanding Citizen Award. I do not know what the vote was on this one -- -- but I want to tell you a true story. This came as a little bit of -- well, it was good for my ego, that tends to mount when you get into this job from time to time. But they decided to name a public school after me. I think it was a junior high school, or maybe an elementary school, in Midland, Texas, where we lived for 12 years. The vote was either 4 - 3 or 3 - 2 in favor of naming the school for me. So, Barbara, I hope it was a little more one-sided than that in this -- giving me this significant honor. But I really am pleased to accept it. I know that the chamber of the Kennebunks is made up of a lot of entrepreneurs, and I would be remiss at a meeting like this if I did not ask you to give me strong support as I go back to Washington to fight for a capital gains tax differential. I believe that small business -- providing jobs to those who do not have jobs -- small business entrepreneurs really are the backbone of this country in many ways. And I am absolutely convinced that John Kennedy was right years ago -- 25 years ago or more -- when he talked about the need to have a differential in the capital gains and, indeed, to call for a reduction in the capital gains tax because it stimulates the economy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonhostedthechambercommercekennebunkportmaine", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon Hosted by the Chamber of Commerce in Kennebunkport, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-hosted-the-chamber-commerce-kennebunkport-maine", "publication_date": "30-08-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1252, "text": "It encourages risktaking; it rewards those who go out and employ others and start new businesses. And I am just convinced that it is good; I am convinced that it will help with our deficit, not inhibit the efforts I am making to get this budget deficit down in accord with the Gramm-Rudman targets. And so, I would ask your strong support to your very able congressional delegation as we now go back to battle for what I think is a good incentive for business people, men and women, small business entrepreneurs -- those who have the courage to go off on their own and start new businesses wherever they may be. And I ask for your help. Incidentally, I do believe we are going to get a good agreement on the budget deficit reduction package. I think it will be accomplished without raising the taxes on the American working man in this country. It is not that the working man is paying too little in taxes; it is that the Government continues to, for a lot of reasons, to spend too much. And I am going to continue to try to hold the line on taxes. And, again, I need your support there. Right here in Kennebunk you have had some -- Kennebunkport -- you have had some examples of people that have been successful. The owner at the White Barn Inn may be with us today. We have an opportunity to create value in our businesses by taking a longer view. This would be easier without the burdensome weight of the capital gains tax. George Bergeron -- he runs a landscaping operation with a very unusual name. I loved it when I saw that. But let me tell you about this guy. Planning for his retirement, he says, I left my work to go into business for myself. I took the risks and went the American way for the sake of my retirement. Would not it be ironic, he continues, if just as I was ready to cash in, the Government took such a big piece of the profit from me? The backbone of our recovery -- in October it'll be the longest in the history of the United States -- comes from the small business man or woman, who then makes it work and goes out and gives jobs to other people. The best answer to poverty in this country is a job, and I want to keep this economic expansion going.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonhostedthechambercommercekennebunkportmaine", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon Hosted by the Chamber of Commerce in Kennebunkport, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-hosted-the-chamber-commerce-kennebunkport-maine", "publication_date": "30-08-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1253, "text": "I was told to say just a few words, but let me end with just a little reference to the times we are living in, regarding our foreign policy and the challenges we face as a country. What would you tell a young kid in Poland today? And I had in my mind as he asked me the question the numbers of people in Chicago and in Detroit, and indeed some in Maine, who have come to this country from Poland -- the arms of the Statue of Liberty outstretched, then in the past as it is, thank God, still today. And I thought about it, and then I thought about the change, the political change that is taking place in Eastern Europe -- change far more dramatic than I could have conceived when I was in the Congress, say, 20 years ago. And I said, If I were a kid in Poland, I'd always want to see the United States -- I am thinking on this -- to see the United States as a beacon. If I were a kid in Poland, I'd want to stay there. I'd want to participate in the change because we are living in a fascinating time. And you look at what is happening in the Soviet Union, the changes of perestroika -- reform, glasnost -- openness. The aspirations for freedom are there. And you see the changes again in Poland, where you have a Communist government change through free elections to a government that contains people mainly out of the Solidarnosc movement, the labor union movement. We are living in exciting times. If we do our job right, if we handle the relationship with the Soviet Union properly, and if we then are smart enough and intelligent enough to delicately have the role of the United States be one of helpfulness in Eastern Europe, I think we can see a world where the peace is much more enhanced, or the threat of war -- nuclear war, conventional war -- greatly reduced. And it is an exciting time to be growing up in the United States, and it certainly is an exciting time to be the President of the United States of America. I like my job. I am going to work hard for you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonhostedthechambercommercekennebunkportmaine", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon Hosted by the Chamber of Commerce in Kennebunkport, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-hosted-the-chamber-commerce-kennebunkport-maine", "publication_date": "30-08-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1254, "text": "This afternoon the people of the United States mourn the passing of the leader of a branch of the Government, the eight Justices of the Court pay final homage to their Chief and friend, and a loving family bids farewell to a kind and gentle soul. William Hubbs Rehnquist accomplished many things in his good life and rose to high places. And we remember the integrity and the sense of duty that he brought to every task before him. That character was clear in the young man of 18 who signed up for the ENTITY Air Corps during the Second World War. The Nation saw that character in his more than three decades of service on our highest Court. And the Nation saw it again last January the 20th, when the Chief Justice made his way onto the Inaugural platform. Many will never forget the sight of this man, weakened by illness, rise to his full height and say in a strong voice, Raise your right hand, Mr. President, and repeat after me. It was more than a half-century ago that Bill Rehnquist first came to the Supreme Court as a law clerk. As he would later recount the story, he made that trip from Milwaukee in the middle of the winter in an old blue Studebaker with no heater. He recalled that as he began the journey, he patted that car and thought, Do not let me down, baby. After a year-and-a-half in the Chambers of Justice Robert Jackson, Bill Rehnquist left DC and headed for Phoenix with an even greater love for the law and with something more, a beautiful fiancee named Natalie Cornell. She would share his walk in life for nearly 40 years. All who knew the Chief know how he cherished Nan and their time together and how much he missed his wife in the years without her. In every chapter of his life, William Rehnquist stood apart for his powerful intellect and clear convictions. In a profession that values disciplined thought and persuasive ability, a talent like his gets noticed in a hurry. Still in his forties, he became the 100th Justice of the Supreme Court, and one of the youngest in modern times. After he moved to the center chair, William Rehnquist led the Court for nearly two decades and earned a place among our greatest chief justices. He built consensus through openness and collegiality. He was a distinguished scholar of the Constitution and a superb administrator of the judicial conference. He understood the role of a judge and the place of courts in our constitutional system.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefuneralserviceforchiefjusticetheunitedstateswilliamhrehnquist", "title": "Remarks at the Funeral Service for Chief Justice of the United States William H. Rehnquist", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-funeral-service-for-chief-justice-the-united-states-william-h-rehnquist", "publication_date": "07-09-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1255, "text": "He was prudent in exercising judicial power and firm in defending judicial independence. On the bench and as a leader of the Federal courts, Chief Justice Rehnquist was always a calm and steady presence. In his thinking and in his bearing, he personified the ideal of fairness, and people could sense it. Inside the Court, no man could have been a finer steward of the institution, its customs, and its history. As long as William Rehnquist was presiding, colleagues and advocates knew that the proceedings would be orderly, on time, businesslike, and occasionally humorous. Once during an oral argument, a lawyer criticized his opponent's position by saying, I doubt very much it will fool this Court. The Chief Justice replied, Do not overestimate us. In his time on the Court, William Rehnquist served with 16 other justices, and by all accounts, each one of his colleagues regarded the man with respect and affection. Justice William Brennen once said to a visitor, I cannot begin to tell you how fond all of us are of him personally. Throughout this city of government, people saw William Rehnquist in that same way. He carried himself with dignity but without pretense. Like Ronald Reagan, the President who elevated him to Chief Justice, he was kindly and decent, and there was not an ounce of self-importance about him. It is rare that it is a rare man who can hold a prominent position in Washington, DC, for more than 30 years and leave behind only good feelings and admiration. That is what William Rehnquist did. His law clerks knew him as a demanding boss who pressed them, as one said, to read carefully, write clearly, and to think hard. But the clerks also became an extension of the Chief's family, joining him for walks around the Capitol, or for lunch or dinner, or games of tennis or charades. His clerks remember those times with fondness. And even more, they remember his vast store of knowledge and his daily example of clear thinking and character. To work beside William Rehnquist was to learn how a wise man looks at the law and how a good man looks at life. The Chief Justice was devoted to his public duties but not consumed by them. He was a renaissance man, a man who adored his family, a man who always kept things in balance. He read works of history and wrote a few fine ones of his own.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefuneralserviceforchiefjusticetheunitedstateswilliamhrehnquist", "title": "Remarks at the Funeral Service for Chief Justice of the United States William H. Rehnquist", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-funeral-service-for-chief-justice-the-united-states-william-h-rehnquist", "publication_date": "07-09-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1272, "text": "The will of the American people, expressed through their unsolicited suffrages, calls me before you to pass through the solemnities preparatory to taking upon myself the duties of President of the United States for another term. For their approbation of my public conduct through a period which has not been without its difficulties, and for this renewed expression of their confidence in my good intentions, I am at a loss for terms adequate to the expression of my gratitude. It shall be displayed to the extent of my humble abilities in continued efforts so to administer the Government as to preserve their liberty and promote their happiness. So many events have occurred within the last four years which have necessarily called forth--sometimes under circumstances the most delicate and painful--my views of the principles and policy which ought to be pursued by the General Government that I need on this occasion but allude to a few leading considerations connected with some of them. The foreign policy adopted by our Government soon after the formation of our present Constitution, and very generally pursued by successive Administrations, has been crowned with almost complete success, and has elevated our character among the nations of the earth. To do justice to all and to submit to wrong from none has been during my Administration its governing maxim, and so happy have been its results that we are not only at peace with all the world, but have few causes of controversy, and those of minor importance, remaining unadjusted. In the domestic policy of this Government there are two objects which especially deserve the attention of the people and their representatives, and which have been and will continue to be the subjects of my increasing solicitude. They are the preservation of the rights of the several States and the integrity of the Union. These great objects are necessarily connected, and can only be attained by an enlightened exercise of the powers of each within its appropriate sphere in conformity with the public will constitutionally expressed. To this end it becomes the duty of all to yield a ready and patriotic submission to the laws constitutionally enacted, and thereby promote and strengthen a proper confidence in those institutions of the several States and of the United States which the people themselves have ordained for their own government. My experience in public concerns and the observation of a life somewhat advanced confirm the opinions long since imbibed by me, that the destruction of our State governments or the annihilation of their control over the local concerns of the people would lead directly to revolution and anarchy, and finally to despotism and military domination.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinauguraladdress27", "title": "Inaugural Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/inaugural-address-27", "publication_date": "04-03-1833", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Jackson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1273, "text": "In proportion, therefore, as the General Government encroaches upon the rights of the States, in the same proportion does it impair its own power and detract from its ability to fulfill the purposes of its creation. Solemnly impressed with these considerations, my countrymen will ever find me ready to exercise my constitutional powers in arresting measures which may directly or indirectly encroach upon the rights of the States or tend to consolidate all political power in the General Government. But of equal, and, indeed, of incalculable, importance is the union of these States, and the sacred duty of all to contribute to its preservation by a liberal support of the General Government in the exercise of its just powers. You have been wisely admonished to accustom yourselves to think and speak of the Union as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity, watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety, discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned, and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of any attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts. Without union our independence and liberty would never have been achieved; without union they never can be maintained. Divided into twenty-four, or even a smaller number, of separate communities, we shall see our internal trade burdened with numberless restraints and exactions; communication between distant points and sections obstructed or cut off; our sons made soldiers to deluge with blood the fields they now till in peace; the mass of our people borne down and impoverished by taxes to support armies and navies, and military leaders at the head of their victorious legions becoming our lawgivers and judges. The loss of liberty, of all good government, of peace, plenty, and happiness, must inevitably follow a dissolution of the Union. In supporting it, therefore, we support all that is dear to the freeman and the philanthropist. The time at which I stand before you is full of interest. The eyes of all nations are fixed on our Republic. The event of the existing crisis will be decisive in the opinion of mankind of the practicability of our federal system of government. Great is the stake placed in our hands; great is the responsibility which must rest upon the people of the United States. Let us realize the importance of the attitude in which we stand before the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinauguraladdress27", "title": "Inaugural Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/inaugural-address-27", "publication_date": "04-03-1833", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Jackson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1274, "text": "Governor, I am very grateful for what you said and grateful for what you are doing. It is hard enough to be a Governor; even if you have been doing it as long as Roy hasit still requires some effort. And to do that and still be willing to travel around the country and represent the Democratic Party and deal with the challenges we have had to face in this last year takes somebody with a heart of gold, and a steel backside to be on the plane all the time, and a pretty tough skin to take some of the slings and arrows that they fling at you. And I do not think we could have had a better leader for our party than Roy Romer in this last year. And I am very grateful to you. Thank you, Mrs. Webb, for being here and for what you said. Wilma and I had a good talk at lunch about the kind of the afterglow of the experience we had in bringing the G- 8 conference here a few months ago. When I saw Sharon, I told her that for the rest of my life every time I saw her I would imagine her riding into the arena on that beautiful horse. I was almost willing to take odds she would have ridden in here on that horse today. But it was a great experience for us. And it was a great thing for me to be able to show that part of America to the other world leaders and to the rather vast retinue that came with them from all over the world. And I can tell you, they were just fascinated because I was kind of carping at lunch I go a lot of places, but very often I might as well just be moving around from Federal office building to Federal office building in Washington. Sylvia Mathews is hiding her head. I get off the airplane; I get in a limousine; I go to a government office building; I talk to three people over a cup of coffee; I go get briefed for an hour; I go to a dinner; I sleep a little bit and turn around and come home. And it does not really matter what country I am in. I am always ragging them about that. But you were able to show all these people something really special about Colorado, about the West, and about the diversity and texture of America. And that is important because we have the same problems in dealing with each other around the world as sometimes we do in Washington.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteeluncheondenver", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Luncheon in Denver", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-luncheon-denver", "publication_date": "22-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1275, "text": "That is, the harder that you work and the less interpersonal time you have, the more likely you are to be driven by whatever the difference of the moment is being exaggerated by people who either work for you or work for them or write about it in the political press, and you wind up drifting apart. So the fact that I mean, you really did further the interest of the United States in building a more cooperative, peaceful world simply by letting them see real people living real lives in an interesting and, for them, a novel context. So I thank you for that. Roy said one other thing that I want to reiterate. I want you to know that I thank you for being here, and you have to understand that there is a significant connection between your presence here and what happens in Washington and what has happened in Washington for the last 5 years. I do not think anyone would dispute the proposition that this country is in better shape than it was in 1992. And in 1992 when I ran for ENTITY, I wanted to take our country in a new direction based on our oldest values of work and family and opportunity and responsibility, community and world leadership, the things that America has stood for throughout this entire century, and most of it for most of our existence. But it was obvious that we needed, among other things, a different notion of Government that the arguments that I read as a Governor and every Governor I knew, including yours, had the same reaction. We'd read in the paper every day, wherever we lived out here in the hinterland, about some fight they were having in Washington. And it looked to me like they were having a fight about whether the Government should try to do everything when we were broke and could not , or whether the Government should do nothing and just sit on the sidelines because Government was the source of all of our ills. Where we lived and worked and the people we worked with, we did not think either one of those things was true. So the first thing I did was, I went there with a determination to try to get decisionmakers in Washington to rethink the notion of Government and the role of Government in moving America forward and in bringing America together. And I believe that the role of Government is to give people the tools they need and establish the conditions so they can make the most of their own lives. And therefore, I think we should do those things which promote both opportunity and responsibility among citizens.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteeluncheondenver", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Luncheon in Denver", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-luncheon-denver", "publication_date": "22-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1276, "text": "We should do those things which bring us together, across the lines that divide us, into one America. And we should do the things that are necessary to maintain our leadership for peace and prosperity and freedom in the world, because all those things are necessary if we are going to have a 21st century which can be, and I believe will be, the best time in all of human history for the people of our country and hopefully for people around the world. When I became ENTITY, my economic policy was unanimously opposed by the other party in Congress unanimously. Not a single one of them voted for my economic plan in 1993. And they said it would be the ruination of America; it would deepen the recession; it would explode the deficit. Well, 5 years later that plan has produced $810 billion worth of deficit reduction. The deficit is 92 percent smaller than it was when I took office 92 percent. That is before it is very important you understand it that is before the bipartisan balanced budget agreement kicks in. One reason we were able to have a bipartisan balanced budget and agree on how to do it is, it is not so hard once 90 percent of the heavy lifting is behind you. And I think it is important to emphasize that. The second thing that we were able to do is to develop a national crime policy. And again, the leaders of the other party opposed my crime policy. I sometimes get tickled when I read in the paper, they talk about how the ENTITY adopted Republican positions on crime. Now, it is no secret; I have got a good personal relationship with Senator Dole and a fair and a high estimation of him. I awarded him the Medal of Freedom. The angriest I ever heard him on the floor of the Senate was when he was unsuccessful in filibustering the crime bill. He tried to kill it. The NRA was against it, said I was going to take everybody's guns away. And they said, If you put 100,000 police on the streets it would not make a lick of difference just as sort of a boondoggle. They attacked us for being for after-school programs for kids and preventive programs to keep kids out of trouble in the first place. But our crime bill was basically written out of the experience of police officers and prosecutors and community leaders who were in communities where they were already lowering the crime rate by doing what was in our bill.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteeluncheondenver", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Luncheon in Denver", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-luncheon-denver", "publication_date": "22-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1277, "text": "So we passed the bill with 100,000 police officers and with tougher punishment where appropriate, but with prevention measures and with the assault weapons ban. And 5 years later, we have had 5 years of steeply dropping crime, and the murder rate has dropped 22 percent in the last 3 years in this country. Now, you know here in Denver you have just been through it the crime rate is still too high, and there is still too much violence in this country. But we are going in the right direction. And that happened because of a political choice the American people made, and they knew how to make it in part because they heard the messages of the competing candidates. And we had a huge fight about it. In welfare, the same thing is true. I did not mind letting the States set the level of assistance to people on welfare because they had been, in effect, doing that for 25 years anyway. Before I ever signed the welfare reform law, there was a difference of more than 4 to one more than 4 to one between what a family on welfare could get in the State where the benefits were the lowest and the State where the benefits were the highest 3 1/2 to one. I do not want to overexaggerate3 1/2 to one. I just redid the math in my head. And I had no problem in requiring people who are on welfare who are able-bodied and able-minded to go to work. I thought that was important, because we were talking around our table half the welfare caseload was becoming people who were just permanently on welfare, almost, and sometimes intergenerationally. And that has nothing to do with compassion. You are not being compassionate when you leave people in a position of dependency when they do not have to be there. On the other hand, it is important, it seemed to me, when you require people who can work to work, not to ask them to hurt their children in doing it. After all, the biggest problem working families have today, many working families, is balancing the demand of taking care of their kids and taking care of their job. And I hear people even with very comfortable income levels, when they are honest, say they feel conflicts between their obligations to their children and their obligations at work. And I think that it is not an exaggeration to say the most important job that any society has, ever, is raising good, strong, ethical children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteeluncheondenver", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Luncheon in Denver", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-luncheon-denver", "publication_date": "22-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1278, "text": "So why should we expect people on welfare to sacrifice the most important job of society to do what is the most important job, arguably, in the short run to give them the self-respect and the independence they need to contribute to our common welfare? So I vetoed two bills because they took away medical care and nutrition for kids and they did not give enough money for child care and because I wanted more money to put people to work in high unemployment areas. Once we resolved those things, I signed that bill. We had the biggest drop in welfare rolls in history, 3.8 million fewer people on welfare than the day I became ENTITY. So we are moving in the right direction. And we proved you could grow the economy and improve the environment at the same time. Now we have to prove we can do that with greenhouse gas emissions to deal with the climate change issue. There is no question, if you just look at the evidence, that we can do it. So what I want you to know is that every time you see something like that that is good, that is a product of a choice because we had a fight about all those issues. We had an honest debate, a partisan debate about these issues. In this last year we passed a balanced budget agreement that had overwhelming bipartisan support, but there were elements that our side brought to it. We said, okay, we want to balance the budget, and we do not mind giving families the tax cut; we do not mind giving businesses the tax cut if we invest properly in giving all Americans access to college we want tax breaks for that; we want to spend some money to provide health insurance coverage to the children of working families who do not have it. We have got enough money for 5 million more kids to get health insurance in working families with low incomes. That is half the uninsured kids in the country. And we got the biggest new investment in education since 1965. That was because of choices that we made in Washington that the people who were there would not have been able to make if you had not helped us get there. There is a direct connection between your presence here and the things that are in that budget. And just this last week let me just close with this I had a week it was a killer of a week. And what you saw probably in the headlines was the work we were doing on Iraq, but let me tell you what else went on last week.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteeluncheondenver", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Luncheon in Denver", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-luncheon-denver", "publication_date": "22-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1279, "text": "We signed a bill that we worked on for 2 years to overhaul the way the Food and Drug Administration regulates medical devices, pharmaceuticals, and the foodstuffs they regulate 2 years. It passed by voice vote everybody. And the way it came out, I believe the public interest is dramatically advanced, because if you have got a safe drug or if you have got a safe medical device, for goodness sakes, you want it on the market as quick as possible. So we had to strike all those balances. Well, the public interest side of that a lot of that work over the last 2 years came from people that you helped to elect and from attitudes that you helped to advance. I signed a bill dramatically overhauling the foster care and adoption procedures and clearing away a lot of the obstacles to quicker adoption, even for children that have serious health problems. And my wife has worked on these subjects for 25 years. And all these advocates from all over the country came in, and I met a family that had adopted 20 children, including 3 of them who were wheelchair-bound. And to see these people who care about these kids you know, just last year we put in a $5,000 tax credit for adoption. But you need to know we all talk about how we believe in family values there are hundreds of thousands of kids out there that need a home that are trapped in a foster care system. And one of my staff members after it was over came up to me with tears in his eyes the guy has nothing to do with the human services area he came up to me, and he had tears in his eyes and said, I just want you to know that I spent 9 years of my childhood in one foster home after another. And this is going to change entire lives for people. And then I went to Wichita, Kansas, to the Cessna plant and saw what that company is doing to take hardcore welfare recipients and put them through training programs and guarantee them jobs. And a lot of these women have been severely beaten by their spouses or partners, have no money, are high school dropouts. Cessna provides housing, a 3-month training program, a 3-month pre-job program, and a guaranteed job for anybody who can finish. And I saw people speaking they had two of these women speaking. If you'd been told that 6 months ago they were on welfare and had less than a high school education, you would not have believed it. You would have thought they were members of the Wichita City Council.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteeluncheondenver", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Luncheon in Denver", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-luncheon-denver", "publication_date": "22-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1280, "text": "And I expect they both could be if they put themselves up for election now. We announced you saw yesterday, we announced that we are going to have the first permanent peace talks between North and South Korea, in the four-party context we proposed, since the end of the Korean war. We are working through a very difficult situation in Iraq and, I think, in an appropriate way. And I know those things have dominated the news. But if you think about what happened in America for Americans this week, there were a couple of times when all of us just looked at each other and said, You know, this is what we got in public life to do. And what I want you to understand is, the decisions that are made and the way they are made are made by real human beings who have real views and real convictions, in conflict with other real human beings who also have honest views. You know, I had a long talk with Senator Lott yesterday. I like Senator Lott. You know, we lived across the river from each other in our former lives, and it is nice having the Senate Majority Leader without an accent. We like each other. We understand each other. I had to give him 5 pounds of barbecue when Mississippi beat Arkansas in football. I like him. And he would tell you the same thing. We really look at the world differently. We see things differently. We have honest differences of opinion. That is what is kept this country going for 220 years. I believe history will record that at this moment in time our views were right and that we prepared the world prepared America for a totally new world. And you should never let that sort of fashionable rhetoric demeaning the whole act of contributing to your democracy so people who believe what you do can hold up their side that is there is something wrong with that. Tonight when you go home, you think about being at this lunch; you think about those adopted kids; you think about the people who are going to get drugs that will keep them alive; you think about those women that can now be going into the work force because their kids do have food and medicine and child care; you think about the doors of college being opened to everybody for the first time in the history of this country. You think about all that and be proud.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteeluncheondenver", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Luncheon in Denver", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-luncheon-denver", "publication_date": "22-11-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1281, "text": "I want to thank Bill Gingrich and others at BIA for arranging on relatively short notice this wonderful meeting. I want to pay my respects to our outstanding congressional delegation -- our two Congressmen are here -- and our senior Senator Warren Rudman, here with us today. But you are well represented in Washington with these four outstanding individuals. I am very sorry if I am late -- a little trouble parking the 18-wheeler. A few things have happened since I spoke to you 2 years ago at the BIA. For one thing, I got a new job. And I am very pleased on both counts. It really is great to be back and see so many old friends. Last week I made an address to the joint session of Congress, spelling out my policies and my priorities as America moves into a new decade -- a whole new century 11 short years away. And I offered my hand to the Congress in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation and said, Together we can build a better America. And this week, I am traveling to different parts of the country to talk as directly as possible to the American people. And it is no coincidence that this very first stop is here in New Hampshire. But John Sununu, you know, the new Chief of Staff, had his way, and here we are. Some said I just wanted to come back and drink with the boys at the Alpine Club again right here. What a great evening that was, I will tell you. A year ago at about this time, I was here in New Hampshire under different circumstances -- literally a year ago. I had just been defeated in Iowa. 50 a.m. my first morning here, outside on a cold day -- a little colder, as I remember, than today even -- holding my coffee in one hand and shaking hands with some of the guys at the factory in another . And the columnists had begun to write my political obituary. And let me tell you why I say that. Governor Sununu was at my side, Judd Gregg and, of course, his dad, Hugh. And I had so many people, including many in this room, who helped me assemble a statewide organization, A - 1 in every single way. And you never can forget in American politics the importance of people being involved. Sensible ideas work; we can do the job, and we can do it without new taxes. And the foundation that we built held firm; it never cracked or crumbled.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmembersthebusinessandindustryassociationnewhampshiremanchester", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire in Manchester", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-business-and-industry-association-new-hampshire-manchester", "publication_date": "13-02-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1282, "text": "And the steadfast support that I received gave me the chance to pick myself off of that canvas, and the rest, as they say, is history. Thank you, New Hampshire. But as Judd reminded us, the journey goes back longer than just a year ago today. It goes back to '79 and '80, when I first ran for ENTITY. In 1980 things were different in America. Inflation and interest rates were peaking at unprecedented highs for our country. Our workers were out of jobs. And America's respect around the world was on the decline. And since then, under the leadership of a great ENTITY, America is once again proud and prosperous. And our economy is now in its 75th month of expansion -- the longest period of uninterrupted economic growth during peacetime in our nation's history. And our people are back at work. In fact, the proportion of Americans with jobs is at a post-World War II high. And America is once again respected around the world as a resolute force for peace and freedom. And because we did strengthen this country, I am optimistic about our chances to enhance the peace worldwide. We are headed in the right direction, and I mean to keep us headed in the right direction. We have made tremendous progress, and I mean to build on that progress. Last Thursday night, I presented to the Congress a realistic plan for dealing with the Federal budget. attention to urgent priorities, investment in the future, an attack on the deficit, and no new taxes. And this budget plan represents a commitment to meet our national priorities and at the same time keep faith with our promise to the American people on the tax front of no new taxes. There are some areas in which we would all like to spend more, but we cannot until we get our fiscal house in order and bring the Federal budget deficit down. In the next fiscal year, under current law with no changes or new taxes, revenues will grow by over $80 billion -- $80 billion more revenue to the Federal Government in 1 year under existing law. And that is an increase of nearly 8 1/2 percent. And that should be enough to finance our priorities and bring the deficit down without taxes. And right here I'd like to salute Warren Rudman for his role in disciplining both the executive branch and the Congress by being a part of that historic Gramm-Rudman-Hollings bill. Yes, it requires tough choices.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmembersthebusinessandindustryassociationnewhampshiremanchester", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire in Manchester", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-business-and-industry-association-new-hampshire-manchester", "publication_date": "13-02-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1283, "text": "Mine is a budget plan that will work, but not with business as usual. It will require a partnership with the Congress. And as I said on Thursday night, my team and I are prepared to work with the Congress; to negotiate in good faith with the leadership; to work day and night, if that is what it takes, to meet budget targets; and to produce a budget on time. I have spoken about priorities; let me just share with you briefly what those priorities are. First, let us make sure that America remains the greatest and the most productive nation on the face of the Earth. We should begin to invest now in ways that will make America more competitive in the future. more funds for basic research; a permanent tax credit for R&D, for research and development; a strengthened role for science and technology in our national policy deliberations. When I was Vice ENTITY, I chaired a task force on regulatory relief, which was intended to help survey the wilderness of government regulation to determine which rules were hurting private productive activity and which were helping. And we did a lot of good early on. We got rid of some needless regulation, and still protecting the safety in the workplace and things of that important nature. But the work of this task force will continue, and its mission expanded, however. The Vice President, Dan Quayle, will head this new task force on competitiveness to explore a range of issues, from regulatory reform to training for the work force of the future. a package of bills to improve education in America. Chance favors only the prepared mind. Our children deserve every break that we can give them because they do represent our future. And so, for America to be prepared for the future, our children must be educated for the future. And part of our education effort must be in the area of drugs. Education is still our best means of prevention. And we will fight drugs on all fronts, not only education but treatment, interdiction, and law enforcement. But for those who are already hooked on drugs, we have got to expand treatment. For those who are dealing drugs, I want them to know how serious we are about stopping them. And I have asked for and will insist on tougher penalties. And, yes, that does include the death penalty for those drug kingpins. I believe it will inhibit the continued flow of drugs into this country. And I think the dealers who prey on our kids should know what is coming when they get caught.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmembersthebusinessandindustryassociationnewhampshiremanchester", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire in Manchester", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-business-and-industry-association-new-hampshire-manchester", "publication_date": "13-02-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1284, "text": "The kids of America will not become the broken debris of a failed war on drugs -- period. We simply cannot have that. And a drug-free America has to be the foundation of a healthy, stronger America. the air we breathe, the water we drink, the beautiful land we live on. And we do need a new attitude, a new commitment to preserving our planet. the infants; the pregnant women; children living in poverty; and, yes, the elderly. And we must protect the homeless. Greater support is needed for emergency food and shelter, for health service, and for clinics for the mentally ill. And I have asked for those funds to confront the problems of the homeless, recognizing that most of the work in this field, as in education, will be done at the local and the State and the neighborhood level. We must never let the Federal Government preempt and push aside the activities of our citizens at the family and neighborhood level. The Government, as I said the other night, cannot stand on the sidelines -- not in the face of the national shame of the homeless or the depressed stage of our education. What I also want to say is that government is not the only answer, though. Government has a role. Government's got to do its part, but it cannot do everything. And without the will of the people, it really cannot do anything. The essence of our government is that it is a democracy of, for, and by the people. To be successful in the years ahead, our mission must also be of, for, and by the people. I do not think there is ever anything wrong in life for saying, Thank you very much. say thank you; but more importantly, now that I am the 41st ENTITY of the United States, to look ahead, to thank you for what you can do in the future, and encourage you to give it your all. Join me with a spirit that I know is the spirit of not only this BIA but also the people of New Hampshire, generally, and together we will keep America moving forward, always forward, on a journey that leads to a better America of absolutely limitless opportunities. Thank you all, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmembersthebusinessandindustryassociationnewhampshiremanchester", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Business and Industry Association of New Hampshire in Manchester", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-business-and-industry-association-new-hampshire-manchester", "publication_date": "13-02-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1310, "text": "First, let me say to all of you that when we came in here tonight, I think it is fair to say that Hillary and Al and Tipper and I were literally overwhelmed by this reception. I knew there was a lot of enthusiasm, but it did not all quite add up until I realized that we had caused your exams to be delayed. And I want you to know that we are having such a good time, we'd be delighted to come back about this time next term if you want. I want to thank Dr. Williams for his magnificent invocation. I thank Dr. Woodall for the remarks he made, for making us welcome here, and for the example that he and Mr. Spencer, the principal here, all the teachers here, and all the students and teachers from this school and the other schools here represented. I thank you for what you are doing and for the example you are setting for America. I'd like to thank all of our musicians and the choir for playing and singing for us. And I want to thank Melissa for speaking so well. Were not you proud of her? Did she do a great job, or what? I am glad I never had to run against her for anything. I also want to thank all these wonderful people from Pennsylvania who have come here, all the officials and citizens from this area and from Philadelphia and nearby areas. Let me say, there was a lot of talk tonight keying off Reverend Williams' invocation about vision. I'd like to say something else, if I might, out of respect to others. It is a good thing to have a vision, because otherwise you never know where you are going. So you have to have one. I ran for ENTITY, beginning in 1991, because I thought our country was drifting and because I believed that if you look at these young people here one elementary school in this area has kids from 50 countries speaking 13 languages and if you look at all these young people and their parents and everybody in this room, and you imagine what the world is going to be like, and you know it is going to get smaller and smaller, and we are going to have more and more relationships, and the borders will become more and more open, it is hard to imagine any country in the world that is remotely as well positioned as America to give people the chance to make the most of their own lives. But we had to have a vision. My vision for the 21st century was pretty simple.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1311, "text": "I wanted us to have a country for the children of the Gores and the Clintons and all the other kids in our country where every person who was a responsible citizen would have a genuine opportunity to live out their dreams. I wanted us to have a country where over all the differences between us we would relish those differences, our racial, our religious, our cultural differences; our serious differences we would debate seriously. But we would honor our common humanity and our shared values as Americans enough to say, what unites us is so much more important than what divides us; we will build one America in the 21st century. And I wanted us to continue to be the country, as we grew more diverse and, therefore, had deeper and deeper ties with more and more other people around the world. I wanted America to recognize that because of our wealth and position, we have not only the opportunity but a responsibility to continue to be the world's leading force for peace and freedom and prosperity for others. It is good for ourselves to do the right thing in trying to build the rest of the world and build closer ties. Now, it is a good thing to have a vision; you cannot get started without it. The Vice President talked about Tommy Lasorda and Mike Piazza. My favorite baseball player of all time, because he was such a wonderful speaker, was Yogi Berra. You know, Yogi Berra said, We do not know where we are going, but we are making good time. So you have to have a vision. But you have to have something else, too. You have to have people who are willing to act on it. I hope you could see with the four of us up here, we like being together. We see ourselves as a family, and we see our allies as a family. When I came to Washington, I wanted to do something about homelessness, but Tipper Gore helped me do it. I wanted to raise the consciousness of America about all kinds of things that we sort of kept hidden under the rug but were hurting people. Mental health was one of the most important. Tipper Gore helped me do it. I wanted to prove that we could have a smaller Government we now have the smallest Federal Government since 1962 but I wanted to do it in a way that would not just throw good Federal employees in the street and that would enable us to do more. The Vice President made it possible for us to do that; he led that effort.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1312, "text": "I wanted to prove that we could grow the economy and improve the environment by doing things like building new cars that would triple gas mileage. The Vice President has led our efforts there, and in dealing with all the promise of new technology in trying to hook up all our schools and libraries to the Internet, and in managing a big portion of our relations with Russia, South Africa, and other countries. I can say without qualification that no Vice President in history has had so much responsibility or done so much good. So the vision requires an action. And if it had not been for Hillary, for all the good intentions in the world, we would not have done nearly as much to advance the cause of health care or child care or education or to observe the millennium. We would not have been able to do it. When I see Joe Hoeffel standing up here talking and I know he is going to be a strong force on the committees that he is gotten; I see another new Congressman out there, my longtime friend Bob Brady from Philadelphia. I know that they will be implementers of a vision. Or Chaka Fattah, who got you all worked up, up there, when he stood up; do you know what he did? He passed a bill in the Congress last year that I was for, but I could not have passed it. I could not have done it. But he went around to Republicans and Democrats alike and said, You know, I come from Philadelphia. There are a lot of poor kids there that have never had a real chance. They come from poor families. They live in tough neighborhoods, but they have got good minds. Will you help me pass a bill that will provide the necessary financial support for college students to come in and mentor these kids in middle schools so they will go on to college? And we did it because of that. Now, I will give you one other example. Last time I came here as ENTITY was in 1993, to a conference on entitlement reform. Entitlement reform is a fancy way of saying with everybody living longer and the baby boomers about to retire, all the rest of you are not going to be able to afford to pay our medical and retirement bills unless we do something. That is what entitlement reform means. And I said, You know, I have got this economic plan, and it is not going to be very popular with a lot of people because it has a lot of tough decisions.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1313, "text": "We are asking people who are the wealthiest people in America to pay a little more in income taxes, sometimes a lot more if they were really well off. We are asking people who are used to getting Government programs to do without a few hundred of them until we get this budget in balance. But if we do it, we will lower interest rates, cutting home mortgages and the interest rates on car payments and credit cards, and we will get investment back in the country. We will have jobs coming back in the country. And the money you will save on the stock market going up and the interest rates going down will be far greater than the money those of us who are well off had to pay in a little more taxes. It was very controversial, and people said, Oh, it will bring an end to the economy. It will end the American economy as we know it. It will drive us into recession. Well, you heard what the Vice President said about the country with the longest peacetime expansion in history, the lowest peacetime unemployment since 1957, and all of that. What you should know is that this county, this county has had, since that economic program passed and the interest rates started going down, 1,800 new businesses and 44,000 new jobs, the highest growth in the State of Pennsylvania. The decisive vote that made all that possible was cast in Congress by Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky. We won by one vote in the House, and it was tied in the Senate. The decisive vote in the Senate was cast by Al Gore. Now, the point I am trying to make is we had a good vision, but somebody has got to carry the water; somebody has to make the decisions; somebody has to push the rocks up the hill; somebody has to take that step and jump off the diving board; someone has to move. People have to act on their vision. That is why I said last night and that is why that sign says, Let us get to work. We have a good vision, but we must act. And for all of you, I thank you. I wanted to come here to this school because this school district represents what I think America ought to do. I know not every school district has the resources. So if we want everybody to end social promotion but have summer school and afterschool programs, we have to provide the funds from Washington to help the school districts do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1314, "text": "If we want to turn around schools that are not working, we have to provide help from Washington. And we are doing that. But I want people to see this school district all over America, on the news tonight, in the articles tomorrow. I want people to know we came here to a place that has done important things, to give kids who need it extra help, to have high standards, to do things that will create a vision that people will want to act on. I think to have a motto like learn and live to serve is a stunning thing, and I hope you will live by it all your lives. Every high school graduate in this school district gets a license, a driver's license-sized copy of the diploma, and on the back it has the computer skills the graduate has mastered. That is a driver's license to the future. I would like to see that modeled in other places all across America, as well. So you have already heard what we have to say, but it is plain that America is working again. But every one of you knows if we had time to do it, I'd give everybody a piece of paper, and I'd ask you to write down you might do this when you go home tonight. I'd ask you to write down somewhere between three and six things no more than six that you believe are the long-term challenges that will face you young people in the 21st century and what is it that we could do now that would pave the way to a better future for you. I can tell you that I did my best in the State of the Union last night to say, Okay, we have got America working again, but what are the long-term challenges? And you have heard them talked about tonight, and I will not belabor them. But let me say, we have to build strong communities in the 21st century that gives everyone a chance at opportunity. That means we have to do more to have the kind of economic opportunity in places where unemployment is high and people make low wages that you have here. That means putting more money in there. It means teaching adults better skills. It means teaching those who are first-generation Americans to read better, if that is what it takes. It means continuing to drive the crime rate down.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1315, "text": "It means making all communities livable communities, to set aside the land that we need to set aside, to have the green space, to manage the traffic, to do the things that will make people free and happy if they live anywhere in America. These are the kinds of things we have to do. It means reconciling work and family. One of the best things that the Gores have done is, for the last 7 years, they have had a conference in Tennessee every year on the challenges modern families face. And most all of them relate somehow or other to the need to balance work and family, a challenge that faces Americans in all income groups. I will bet there is not a family here that has not at some point in the last couple of years faced some sort of challenge of balancing your responsibilities to your children to your responsibilities to your work. That is why we want a child care plan that includes help for stay-at-home parents when the children are very young, but real help for working people that cannot afford quality child care on their own. Because in America, when I look at all of you, I want you to be free and confident, when you start your families, that you can do what you want in your work life, but you know that your first responsibility is to raise your children, and you are going to be able to succeed at that responsibility. The Vice President told you that rather gripping story about the HMO's. The truth is we have to manage the health care system; it is like any other system. We have to keep the costs as low as possible. But the quality of our people's health counts most. That is why we say you ought to be able to see a specialist if you need one. You ought to be able to go to the nearest emergency room. You ought to be able to have your medical records private and all of the other things in our Patients' Bill of Rights, because we have got to balance the need to save money with the fundamental necessity of providing quality health care to all Americans. And I'd just like to say one other thing. We have said a lot about education tonight, but I would like to say something about the very first subject I talked about last night in the State of the Union, and that is the aging of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1316, "text": "And again I want to say, this is an issue that should be of primary importance not to today's retirees but to tomorrow's retirees, their children, and their grandchildren yet unborn. Because when the baby boomers retire and that includes the parents of just about all of the students here; people between the ages of 34 and 52 were the people born in the generation after World War II, the largest group of people in history in America, young people, until the present class of students which numbers over 53 million. Now, when we retire, we are going to double the number of seniors by the year 2030. And what we have got and the average life expectancy is already 76 years old plus; for the young people here, it is probably about 83 years. But we do not want to get into a position where our retirement is a financial burden to our children and undermines our children's ability to raise our grandchildren. So when I tell you that we ought to set aside roughly 75 percent of this surplus we have got for the next 15 years to save Social Security and to save Medicare, and in the process, since we will be saving the money, we will be paying down the national debt, giving us the lowest level of debt we have had as a nation since before World War I in 1917, keeping interest rates down, investment high, jobs creation going, and incomes rising I say that not just for those of us who will be older but for our kids and our grandkids. And I hope you will see it that way. This is a big test for us. We have not had this kind of situation in a long, long time. And very rarely do societies have the luxury of being financially strong enough, militarily secure enough, and having enough information about the future to make the kind of decisions that I asked the American people to make last night. Yes, we ought to give some tax cuts, but they ought to be the right kind. They ought to be for child care. They ought to be for helping us to deal with our environmental challenges. They ought to be for people saving for their own retirement, because Social Security will never be enough for that. They ought to be for raising children. But we can save this money now and lift a burden from the young people here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1317, "text": "Do you really want to run the risk of squandering this surplus that we have worked so hard for until we know for sure that our retirement will not compromise the integrity of their lives and their ability to raise their children as we have tried to raise them? Now, the young people here are going to have a fascinating time. The Internet is already growing by, you know, millions and millions of new pages every week. It is the fastest growing communication mechanism in human history. People are able to move around as never before, and even if you cannot leave town now, you have got people from all over the world right next door. We are learning things that we have never imagined before. We are on the verge of not only unlocking the mysteries of the human gene but actually finding medical treatments to cure or even prevent things from Alzheimer's to arthritis to all kinds of cancers. I went to the auto show in Detroit the other day, and one thing I am looking forward to I love this job, and I am not looking forward to 2 years from now being barred from being ENTITY by the Constitution's two-term limit. But one thing I am looking forward to, now that I have been to the Detroit auto show, is getting back in those cars, because the cars of the future are going to be environmentally sound and hilariously fun to drive and safer. But we have to do our best in this time to, first of all, make it safe, dealing with the challenges of nuclear and chemical and biological weapons, to give you the strongest communities possible, to build one America across our lines of diversity, and to think about the future. When I ran for ENTITY in 1992, before I ever made the decision to run, a young man who is now not quite so young, he is a graduate student, named Sean Landris was driving me around Los Angeles. I was an anonymous, virtually anonymous Governor of Arkansas. But Sean Landris knew something about me and the speeches I had made and the things I was interested in, and he said, Are you going to run for ENTITY? And he had a little tape deck in his car, and he put this tape deck in and this old Fleetwood Mac song, Do not Stop Thinking About Tomorrow, which was made before he was born. And I believe that those of us in positions of responsibility have no higher responsibility than to think about your tomorrows.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1318, "text": "And may I thank Congressman Kildee for being with us. Of course, single out for special recognition Ann Lynch, the president of the National PTA. And, of course, Ted Sanders, who is our Under Secretary at Education and who really is a man of commitment and has done an outstanding job all across the board for education . I want to welcome Mr. Stair, the president of ServiceMaster, this year's -- right here -- this year's sponsor of the National Parents and Teachers Association Week. And we are grateful to you, sir. And a special welcome to the teachers and the parents, and, of course, the students you are outnumbered, but you are here - from communities in and around our Washington area, representing the many millions who, together, make up the real strength of the PTA. And I want to begin today by sharing with you the results of a recent poll of the Nation's fourth graders. These days we all live by instant polling. Bart Simpson, George Bush, Paula Abdul, Bo Jackson, or E, none of the above. And they did not pick A, C, or D, or sad to say, B. Children picked parents as their heroes by a landslide. And Bo Jackson was third and they did not dare give me the rest of the results. But the fact of the matter is that parents are our children's first teachers. And I guess Barbara, in her reading to kids, exemplifies this pretty darn well; now it is grandkids for us. But it is more than a matter of helping our kids do their homework, teaching them how to read, or showing them through our own interests that learning is a lifelong pursuit. Our kids look to us for the moral values that guide and shape our lives. And we know children look to us, and it is up to us to give our kids something to look up to. Ann Lynch is right on the mark when she says that the difference between a good school and a great school is the parents. And those of us in government, at the Federal level and in the statehouses and right down to the local school boards, have a responsibility to ensure that parents are at the center of educational reform. Together, let us work to meet a common challenge; let us find a way to help children who lack the advantages that come from a loving home and caring parents. I am convinced that our efforts to improve our schools are at a critical turning point now.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthenationalparentsandteachersassociationweekproclamation", "title": "Remarks on Signing the National Parents and Teachers Association Week Proclamation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-national-parents-and-teachers-association-week-proclamation", "publication_date": "21-02-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1319, "text": "Twenty years ago tonight, on distant shores, America's sons were engaged in a great battle in mankind's greatest war. One hundred years ago tonight on these shores America's sons were engaged in bitter battles of our own cruel civil war. How we are observing this historic day says much about America. In Europe, America's sons meet tonight in peace with yesterday's allies--and adversaries alike--to plan the works of future unity instead of worrying about the wounds of past conflict. Here in Washington tonight we gather to honor an institution of higher learning which was established as an act of compassion in those times of callous strife 100 years ago. The character of our Nation is comprised of many traits. We honor courage. We value commonsense. But, across our 188 years, the great cementing influence has always been compassion. In our purposes abroad and at home we have always heeded the injunction of the Apostle, who told us long ago, Be ye of one mind, showing compassion one of another. Yet, our wealthy society is tolerating a worrisome burden of wasted human lives. Tonight, too many of our people are unschooled, untrained, and underemployed. Too many are mentally handicapped, too many more are handicapped for life by the environments and the experiences of their childhoods. America needs these talents. We must not and we cannot let them go to waste. education, charity, and piety. education, compassion, and morality. In the next 24 hours the research that comes forth around the world would fill seven sets of the Encyclopedia Brittanica. In the next year the output of such research would require a man to read around the clock--day and night--for the next 460 years. In the next 10 years the sum of human knowledge will multiply twofold. When knowledge is advancing at this pace, a compassionate nation cannot afford to leave any segments of our society behind to form, and to perpetuate, a human slag heap. We must express our compassion in a greater commitment to education. Here at Gallaudet we have a proud example of what education and compassion have achieved. This was the first--and is still the only--college in the world for the deaf. But since President Lincoln signed Gallaudet's charter, no boy or girl has been turned away because of the poverty of their parents. Universal education has brought our society to its present high level of success.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthegallaudetcollegecentennialbanquet", "title": "Remarks at the Gallaudet College Centennial Banquet", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-gallaudet-college-centennial-banquet", "publication_date": "06-06-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1348, "text": "I have just had word of the first attack against the soft underbelly of Europe. I am going to ask you not to say anything about it after you leave here, until midnight ends. American and British forces, and some French observers, have attacked and landed in Sicily. The operations have just begun, and we will not get definite news until later in the day, but the news will be coming in all the time from now on. This is a good illustration of the fact of planning, not the desire for planning but the fact of planning, which we have had since the administration began over a year ago in Washington. With the commencing of the expedition in North Africa with complete cooperation between the British and ourselves, that was followed by complete cooperation with the French in North Africa. The result, after landing, was the Battle of Tunis; and we all know the number of prisoners we took. From that time on we have been working in complete harmony, which in effect was the invasion of Europe, which is under way tonight. There are a great many objectives, and of course the major objective is the elimination of Germany that goes without saying the elimination of Germany out of the war. And as a result of this step which is in progress at this moment, we hope it is the beginning of the end. Last autumn, the Prime Minister of England called it the end of the beginning. I think you can almost say that this action tonight is the beginning of the end. We are going to be ashore in a naval sense- air sense- military. Once there, we have the opportunity of going in different directions, and I want to tell General Giraud that we have not forgotten France as one of the directions. One of our prime aims, of course, is the restoration of the people of France, and the sovereignty of France. Even if a move is not directed at this moment to France itself, General Giraud can rest assured that the ultimate objective- we will do it, and in the best way is to liberate the people of France, not merely the southern part of France, just for a while, but the people of northern France Paris. And in this whole operation, I should say rightly that in the enormous planning we have had the complete cooperation of the French military and naval forces in North Africa. We have seen what has happened, or is happening at the present moment in Martinique and Guadeloupe, and becoming worse. Well, that is a very major part toward the big objective.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinformalannouncementtheattacksicilystatedinnerhonorgeneralgiraud", "title": "Informal Announcement of the Attack on Sicily at a State Dinner in Honor of General Giraud", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/informal-announcement-the-attack-sicily-state-dinner-honor-general-giraud", "publication_date": "09-07-1943", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1357, "text": "But he is doing a heck of a job. I am so proud of my friend. It is become clear to all the hard-working FEMA employees that I did not pick Joe Allbaugh because of his haircut. But I picked him because he is a good man who knows how to run a very important organization. And I am proud of my friend. I am proud of the job he is doing. And I am proud of the work that the FEMA employees all across the country are doing on behalf of America. I am here to thank you all. I was up in the operations room, thanking the folks who are working 12 to 13, 14, 15 hours a day, still, to this day. I had the honor of going to New York City; I saw what they call dirty boot operations, from Sacramento and Puerto Rico all FEMA employees, all people who love their fellow Americans, all who want to join in to say loud and clear to the evildoers, Your actions will not stand in America. Joe said it best. After all, yours was an organization that was used to dealing with, generally, acts of nature, hurricanes or tornadoes and fires or floods. And then all of a sudden, some evil people came and they declared war on America. And your agency and the good working people, true Americans, had to rise to the occasion. And for that, the people of New York and Connecticut and New Jersey and Pennsylvania and every other State in the Union are proud of the job you are doing. So on behalf of the American people, I say thanks from the bottom of our hearts for the FEMA employees. I also want to talk about the battle we face, the campaign to protect freedom; the willingness of the American people to not only repair the damage done but the willingness of our Nation to stand united, to say loud and clear that freedom will stand, that you can tear down our buildings but you cannot tear down our spirit, that we are strong and united in the cause of freedom not only here in America but all around the world. This will be a different kind of campaign than Americans are used to. It is a campaign that must be fought on many fronts. And I am proud to report that we are making progress on many fronts. Not only have the FEMA employees showed the world what it is like to stand up and help a neighbor in need; we are also beginning to make progress on the financial front.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfederalemergencymanagementagencyemployees", "title": "Remarks to Federal Emergency Management Agency Employees", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-federal-emergency-management-agency-employees", "publication_date": "01-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1358, "text": "As you may remember, I made it clear that part of winning the war against terror would be to cut off these evil people's money; it would be to trace their assets and freeze them, cut off their cash flows, hold people accountable who fund them, who allow the funds to go through their institutions, and not only do that at home but to convince others around the world to join us in doing so. Thus far, we have frozen $6 million in bank accounts linked to terrorist activity. We have frozen 30 Al Qaida accounts in the United States and 20 overseas. Also, on the military front, we are making progress. We have deployed 29,000 military personnel and 2 carrier battle groups, as well as an amphibious-ready group and several hundred military aircraft. We have called about 17,000 members of the reserve to active duty, as well as several thousand National Guard operating under State authority. As I said, this is a different kind of war. It is hard to fight a guerrilla war with conventional forces. And as I said to the Congress, they will make us proud. In this new kind of war, one that requires a coalition, we are making good progress on the diplomatic front. At our request, the United Nations unanimously enacted a binding resolution requiring all its members to deny financing support or safe harbor to terrorists. We have had 46 declarations of support from organizations including NATO, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, the Organization of the Islamic Conference, and the Organization of American States. And slowly but surely, we are going to make sure they have no place to hide. Slowly but surely, we are going to move them out of their holes and what they think is safe havens and get them on the move. We are a nation who has got a long-term view, a nation that is come to realize that in order to make freedom prevail, the evildoers will be forced to run and will eventually be brought to justice. Now, along those lines, we are taking any threat seriously here at home. The FBI has conducted hundreds of interviews and searches, issued hundreds of subpoenas, and arrested or detained more than 400 people as it investigates the attacks. About 150 terrorists and their supporters, as well, have been arrested or detained in 25 different countries. In my speech to the Congress, I said, sometimes the American people are not going to see exactly what is taking place on their TV screens.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfederalemergencymanagementagencyemployees", "title": "Remarks to Federal Emergency Management Agency Employees", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-federal-emergency-management-agency-employees", "publication_date": "01-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1359, "text": "You see, we have said to people around the world, This could have happened to you. This could have easily have taken place on your soil. So you need to take threats seriously as well. We are beginning to share intelligence amongst our nations. We are finding out members of the Al Qaida organization, who they are, where they think they can hide. And we are slowly but surely bringing them to justice. We are slowly but surely calling their hand and reining them in. And along these lines, this weekend, through the collaborative efforts of intelligence and law enforcement, we have arrested a known terrorist who was responsible for the deaths of two U.S. citizens during a hijacking in 1986, a terrorist by the name of Zayd Hassan Safarini. He is not affiliated with Al Qaida, yet he is an example of the wider war on terrorism and what we intend to do. Here is a man who killed two of our own citizens when he hijacked a plane in Pakistan. By the way, obviously, there is only two Americans that is two too many but there was a lot of people from other countries, as well, involved. And he was convicted and sentenced to death, yet he only served 14 years. Well, we arrested him; we got him; we brought him into Alaska. And today the United States of America will charge him with murder. Sometimes we will have success in the near term; sometimes we have to be patient. Sometimes we will be able to round somebody up who threatens us today; sometimes it may take us awhile to catch him. But the lesson of this case, and every case, is that this mighty Nation will not rest until we protect ourselves, our citizens, and freedom-loving people around the world. freedom to worship, freedom to govern, freedom to speak, freedom to assemble. We will not be cowed by a few. Together, we are going to bring these people to justice. And that is exactly what we are going to do. I want to thank you all so very much for your hard work and for your love for America. May God bless you all. May God continue to bless America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfederalemergencymanagementagencyemployees", "title": "Remarks to Federal Emergency Management Agency Employees", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-federal-emergency-management-agency-employees", "publication_date": "01-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1360, "text": "Thanksgiving is a week from today, and Christmas will quickly follow. This is really a time of joy for our families. Unfortunately, this is also a season of dread for too many Americans. Holiday travelers faced with the prospect of long-delayed and canceled flights and lost baggage and other problems have become all too often an occurrence. In other words, there is a lot of people that are worried about traveling because they have had unpleasant experiences when they have been flying around the country. And so this is a topic that I have just discussed with Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters and the Acting Administrator of the FAA, Bobby Sturgell. It is one thing to analyze the problem, but the American people expect us to come up with some solutions. And that is what we have been talking about. And one of the reasons we have a sense of urgency about this issue is that these problems that we have been discussing are clear to anybody who has been traveling. Airports are very crowded; travelers are being stranded; and flights are delayed, sometimes with a full load of passengers sitting on the runway for hours. These failures carry some real costs for the country, not just in the inconvenience they cause, but in the business they obstruct and family gatherings they cause people to miss. We can have an aviation system that is improved. And that is what we are talking about. Secretary Peters and Acting Administrator Sturgell have been working with the airline industry on practical improvements. I want to announce a series of preliminary actions to help address the epidemic of aviation delays. First, the military will make available some of its airspace over the east coast for use by civilian airliners this Thanksgiving. These new routes will help relieve air congestion from Maine to Florida for nearly 5 full days surrounding the holiday. Second, the FAA is taking new measures to head off delays. Bobby Sturgell will impose a holiday moratorium on all nonessential projects so that the FAA can focus its personnel and equipment exclusively on keeping flights on time. The FAA is also partnering with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to reduce bottlenecks in the New York metro area, which is the source of most chronic delays. Third, the Department of Transportation and the FAA are encouraging airlines to take their own measures to prevent delays. I am pleased to get the report from Secretary Peters and Acting Administrator Sturgell.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithsecretarytransportationmaryepetersandfederalaviation", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters and Federal Aviation Administration Acting Administrator Robert A. Sturgell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-secretary-transportation-mary-e-peters-and-federal-aviation", "publication_date": "15-11-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1361, "text": "Airlines have agreed to make more staff available to expedite check-in and boarding, to set aside extra seats and even extra planes to help accommodate passengers affected by cancellations and delays. They agreed to bring in additional ticket kiosks and baggage handling gear as well as rolling staircases. Fourth, the Federal Government is using the Internet to provide real-time updates on flight delays. People in America have got to know there is a web site called fly.faa.gov; that is where the FAA transmits information on airport backups directly to passengers and their families. If you are interested in making sure that your plans can-are not going to be disrupted, you can get on the web site of fly.faa.gov. As well, if you want to, you can sign up to receive delay notices on your mobile phones. In other words, part of making sure people are not inconvenienced is there to be good transmission of sound, real-time information. Fifth, we are proposing new regulations to help ensure that airline passengers are treated fairly. We are proposing to double the amount of compensation passengers receive when they are forced off overbooked flights. For example, a passenger forced to wait more than 2 hours for another flight would receive a minimum of $800 under our idea, instead of the current $400. We want people who are responsible for moving passengers to understand that there will be consequences for these delays, all aiming to get the system to work better. We are proposing a requirement that airlines collect better data on flight delays and provide that data to the Department of Transportation. We are evaluating a number of other recommendations for the airlines, including mandatory contingency plans to aid stranded passengers and penalties for chronically delayed flights. Finally, the Department of Transportation and the FAA are working on innovative ways to reduce congestion in the long run. While short-term improvements in flight operations and passenger treatment can help, they do not cure the underlying problem. In certain parts of our country, the demand for air service exceeds the available supply. As a result, airlines are scheduling more arrivals and departures than airports can possibly handle, and passengers are paying the price in backups and delays. The key to solving this problem is managing the demand for flights at overloaded airports, and there are a variety of tools to do this in a fair and efficient way. For example, fees could be higher at peak hours and at crowded airports, or takeoff and landing rights could be auctioned to the highest value flights.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithsecretarytransportationmaryepetersandfederalaviation", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters and Federal Aviation Administration Acting Administrator Robert A. Sturgell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-secretary-transportation-mary-e-peters-and-federal-aviation", "publication_date": "15-11-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1362, "text": "Market-based incentives like these would encourage airlines to spread out their flights more evenly during the day, to make better use of neighboring airports, and to move the maximum number of passengers as quickly and efficiently as possible. It has shown results in other areas of our economy; in other words, other parts of our economy use congestion pricing. Some States offer discounts to drivers who use E-ZPass, which reduces long waits at the toll plaza. Phone and electricity companies balance supply and demand by adjusting their rates during peak usage hours. Applying congestion pricing to the aviation industry has the potential to make today's system more predictable, more reliable, and more convenient for the travelers. Over the past 7 weeks, Federal officials have raised this idea with airlines and airport representatives in the New York area. And I have asked Secretary Peters and Acting Administrator Sturgell to report back to me about those discussions next month. My administration will work swiftly to carry out the measures I have announced today. But to reform our aviation system in a way American consumers deserve, we need action from the United States Congress. In February, my administration sent Congress an FAA modernization bill that would improve the aviation system for all involved. The bill would upgrade aviation technology by adopting a safer and more automated air travel control system based on GPS technology, instead of the radar and radio-based systems designed during World War II. In other words, if we really want to solve this problem, it is time for Congress to modernize the FAA, and we have given them a blueprint to do so. The bill would employ market pricing to reduce congestion and ensure that airports manage their schedules efficiently. The bill would establish a new financing mechanism and governing structure to ensure that these reforms are carried out in wise and cost-effective ways. There are people in Congress who understand the need to act, starting with Senators Trent Lott and Senator Jay Rockefeller. They are leaders in this area of modernization of our-of the FAA. They understand that business as usual is not good enough for American travelers. I look forward to working with them to get a good bill passed as soon as possible. By working together, we can restore the confidence of America's consumers, improve the efficiency of America's airports, and bring order to America's skies.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithsecretarytransportationmaryepetersandfederalaviation", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Secretary of Transportation Mary E. Peters and Federal Aviation Administration Acting Administrator Robert A. Sturgell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-secretary-transportation-mary-e-peters-and-federal-aviation", "publication_date": "15-11-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1363, "text": "Let me begin by thanking Ash Carter, our Secretary of Defense; General Joe Dunford, Vice Chair Paul Selva, and all of our commanders here. The purpose of this meeting, something I do on a regular basis, is to allow me to hear directly from those who are charged with the most solemn responsibility of maintaining the finest fighting force that the world has ever known and keeping the American people safe. It is in these meetings that we have been able to set broad strategy, identify areas where we have to improve, address the health of the force. And I can say to the American people that they are extraordinarily lucky and I am extraordinarily lucky to be served by such extraordinary patriots. This will be my last meeting with them. And so part of my goal here is just to say thank you to them and let them know how much I appreciate the counsel, the advice, the leadership that they have consistently shown throughout my time in office. But in addition to saying thank you, I will get their views on the fact that we still have a lot of active threats around the world and we still have men and women in harm's way around the world who are busy protecting our homeland and our vital interests and our allies. And we have got to make sure that during this transition period that there is a seamless passing of the baton, that there is continuity, and that any issues that still remain and obviously, we still have major fights against ISIS in Mosul and in Syria; Afghanistan is still active that in all of these areas we are doing everything we can to make sure that the next President will benefit from the same kinds of outstanding advice and service that these people around the table have provided me. So it has been, as I have said repeatedly, one of the greatest honors and privileges of being President is serving as Commander in Chief to such outstanding people. And I could not have done it without all of you. And I know that my optimism about America going forward is in part because we have such an amazing military, not only one that knows how to fight, but also knows how to uphold the values of rule of law and professionalism and integrity and recognizes our constitutional structure and maintains strict adherence and respect for civilian authority and democratic practices in determining how we use the awesome force of the American military. So I just want to say thank you to all of you. And with that, we have got to do some work. I appreciate it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksduringmeetingwithdepartmentdefenseleadership", "title": "Remarks During a Meeting With Department of Defense Leadership", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-during-meeting-with-department-defense-leadership", "publication_date": "04-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1364, "text": "Let me just say I am proud of Alaska's congressional delegation and grateful for their help and support and for the way they represent their State in Washington. I was interested to read one report on whether the meetings were a success or not this morning. It seems that TASS, the Russian news agency, says that I was a failure at trying to eat a pigeon egg with my chopsticks. And I got it on the second stab. But we traveled almost 20,000 miles to Hawaii, Guam, and finally, Chinato the cities of Beijing, Xi'an, and Shanghai. We saw the wonders of that country and the fine antiquities of the old civilization. Now, I had it all in mind that I was going to talk about coming through the darkness and then finally seeing the lights of the coast of Alaska down below -and the coastline there, and that we knew that we were seeing America again, and we were home. So, the lights that we saw were the lights of Fairbanks, and believe me, we knew we were home, and it was just fine. It was a poem about the American soldiers returning from the trenches in the First World War. They admired the grandeur and the oldness of Europe, but their hearts longed for the newness of their own country. So it is home again and home again, America for me. The blessed land of room enough beyond the ocean bars, Where the air is full of sunlight and the flag is full of stars. Well, it is good to be back in our blessed land. We went to China to advance the prospects for stability and peace throughout the world. And we went to illustrate, by our presence, our sincere desire for good relations. We went to meet again with the Chinese and review our concerns and our differences. And we went to China to further define our own two countries' relationshipand, by defining it, advance it. And I feel that we have progress to report. I had long and thoughtful meetings with the Chinese leadership, comprehensive meetings. We each listened carefully to what the other had to say. We discussed and agreed to cooperate more closely in the areas of trade, investment, technology, and exchanges of scientific and managerial expertise. We concluded an important agreement on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. We agreed that in this imperfect world, peace in its most perfect form cannot always be reachedbut it must always be our goal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponreturningfromchina", "title": "Remarks Upon Returning From China", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-returning-from-china", "publication_date": "01-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1365, "text": "And we, the people of China and the United States, must make our best efforts to bring greater harmony between our two countries. It is a good thing for the world when those who are not allies remain open to each other. And it is good to remember that competitors sometimes have mutual interests, and those interests can make them friends. I told the Chinese leaders, as I told the students at Shanghai University yesterday, that we must continue to acknowledge our differences, for a friendship based on fiction will not long withstand the rigors of the world. But we agreed that there is much to be gained from mutual respect. I was heartened by some of the things that we saw. The Chinese have begun opening up their economy, allowing more farmers and workers to keep and sell on their own some of the fruits of their labor. The first injection of free market spirit has already enlivened the Chinese economy. I believe it has also made a contribution to human happiness in China and opened the way to a more just society. Yesterday, before we left, we sat in a Chinese home at one of the now-called townshipsthey were once called communes-the farm communes where they raise the foodstuffs for all of China, but now there is a difference. They owe a portion of what they produce to the government, but then over and above that they can produce on their own and sell in a free marketplace. And in this home, it was most interesting. This young couple, their little son, his mother and father living with them, and he was telling us all the thingsand he built that home himself, and a very fine job it wasand then told us of how they are saving and what they are saving to buy next. It could have been in any home in America, talking about the problems of making ends meet and that they were saving for this or that for their future. And I was also impressednot only by them but by all of the Chinese that we metby their curiosity about us. Many of the Chinese people still do not understand how our democracy works or what impels us as a people. So, I did something unusual. I tried to explain what America is and who we areto explain to them our faith in God and our love, our true love, for freedom. They will never understand us until they understand that. It was a breathtaking experience and in some ways, I think, a ground-breaking experience.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponreturningfromchina", "title": "Remarks Upon Returning From China", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-returning-from-china", "publication_date": "01-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1366, "text": "I want to talk to you today about a wonderful thing that is happening in our country. But already it is changing our country, and I think it may change it forever. I am talking about the recent progress in America's schools. You may remember the day a year ago when the National Commission on Excellence in Education came out with its report on what was wrong with the Nation's schools. The Commission documented 20 solid years of decline-decline in academic standards and discipline, decline in authority and in scholastic results. The Commission said a rising tide of mediocrity was wiping out America's reputation for the best education system in the world. That report was electrifying, and its current swept the country. Parents and teachers got together, marshaled their resources, and began to turn the situation around. So now, i year later, we can report that together we have met the rising tide of mediocrity with a tidal wave of school reforms. Get back to basics, tighten standards, heighten academic requirements, and remember discipline in the classroom is vital. In short, make sure that Johnny and Mary can read and write, and make sure their school is allowed the peace without which no student can learn and no teacher can instruct. I want you to listen to some of the things that have happened since the Commission made its recommendations. Thirty-five States have raised high school graduation requirements. Twenty-one States are reviewing steps to make textbooks more challenging. Eight States have lengthened the school day; seven have lengthened the school year. And every State in the Union has put together a task force to improve its educational system. School districts across the country are moving toward requiring 4 years of English in high school and 3 solid years each of math and science. Many legislatures are currently developing workable and fair merit pay plans. Many States have increased teachers' salaries. The private sector, too, is playing a big part in the reforms. Local businesses are adopting local schools, sending in their executives and employees to work with students and teachers to make education more exciting and more pertinent to the 1980's. We are seeing a willingness to reconsider what our schools should be teaching. In the State of Maryland, a commission concluded students are not being taught enough about American traditions of freedom and liberty. A bipartisan panel came up with a plan to teach students that most basic of democratic arts, the art of citizenship.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationeducation3", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on Education", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-education-3", "publication_date": "12-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1375, "text": "I feel that I must talk to you today without mincing words about the danger of reaction that confronts this country. You are faced this coming election day with a fundamental decision that will affect you every year and every day for the rest of your lives. You are about to choose not merely between the Democratic and Republican Parties, but between two different kinds of government. Now, you have had an ample demonstration of what those two kinds of government are, and I am going to expound on them a little bit. The Democrats are for the people. The Republicans are for special interests. And that is the basis of this campaign. This Republican do-nothing 80th Congress amply demonstrated that they are a special interest Congress, and I want to urge you with everything I have to send Paul Douglas to the Senate, and Kent Keller to the House. If you do that, this special interest program of the Republican Party will have a terrible blow. We are hearing a lot of propaganda these days to the effect that there is no real difference between the Democratic and Republican Parties. That is a malicious untruth, to put it mildly. When you elected Franklin Roosevelt in 1932, you found out what a difference there is between Democratic and Republican administrations. The very course of your lives was changed. The dark Republican days of discouragement and fear gave way to new hope and revived energy, as the Democratic administration went to work for the people. The Democratic administration went to work for the people. Just as soon as these Republicans got control of this Congress, they went to work for the special interests. We, the Democrats, have been working for all the people for the past 16 years. You remember how the Democratic administration aided the farmer, until now farm income is ten times what it was in 1932. You remember how we saved millions of homeowners and farmowners from foreclosure and eviction. You remember how we rescued the banking system, brought truth into the sale of securities, and established the Federal deposit insurance law. We established social security. Respect for human rights was written into the statutes of the American Government by the Democratic Party. We wrote into law for the first time the collective bargaining principle in labor relations, which protects the entire Nation. We enacted a minimum-wage law and started a program for slum-clearance and low-rent housing. We began the great multipurpose operations in river valleys, which have brought irrigation, electric power, navigation, and flood control to vast areas of the United States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheuniversitysouthernillinoiscarbondaleillinois", "title": "Address at the University of Southern Illinois, Carbondale, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-university-southern-illinois-carbondale-illinois", "publication_date": "30-09-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1376, "text": "Under the Democratic administration, employment has risen to record-breaking heights. And the profits of business are larger than ever before. Despite the obstructionists and the isolationists, we prepared our country against danger from abroad. Under Democratic leadership, the people gained an overwhelming victory in war against the forces of tyranny abroad. And while we were making the greatest of all military efforts, at the same time, the American people maintained their liberties, their living standards, and their social gains. We also continued the fight to expand our civil liberties by new measures against discrimination. After V-J Day, a Democratic Congress and a Democratic administration, working together, set out upon the great tasks remaining before us. We accomplished swift reconversion. We avoided a postwar recession, and reached a peak of more jobs, higher civilian production, and better standards of living than ever before. That is an accomplishment that nobody can appreciate. Not very much has been said about that, but we had no riots and no bloodshed. We did not have people crying for jobs. We did not have the farmers marching on Washington. We did not have returning soldiers marching on Washington, because we took care of them in educational institutions and absorbing them back into the economy of the country without a debacle. We enacted the Employment Act of 1946, pledging all our resources and efforts to the maintenance of prosperity. We brought the United States to a position of unquestioned leadership in world affairs. Do not let anybody tell you anything different. I repeat--for 16 years the Democratic administration has been working in the interest of all the people. For 14 of the 16 years, the Democratic president was supported by a Democratic Congress. We were able to go steadily forward in fulfilling our pledges to the people. And then--and then!--in 1946, something happened--something bad and dangerous to the country. That was the year of the congressional elections, when most of the people stayed home and failed to vote. Those who did vote gave you a Republican Congress--that notorious Republican 80th do-nothing Congress. There are 531 Members in the Congress, but when we speak of a Congress, we speak of its control and its leadership. Its control and its leadership are doing their best to turn the clock back. They are trying to go back to the 1920's, or even as far back as 1898, some of them would like Congress to.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheuniversitysouthernillinoiscarbondaleillinois", "title": "Address at the University of Southern Illinois, Carbondale, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-university-southern-illinois-carbondale-illinois", "publication_date": "30-09-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1377, "text": "The Congress that has done its best to put an end to Democratic progress is the 80th Congress. This Congress proved quickly that the Republican Party had learned nothing from experience. The Republican leadership set out to follow the same disastrous policies they had followed under Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover. The first bill that was introduced in the 80th Congress was the rich man's tax bill sponsored by the Republican leadership. It was a bill for the benefit of wealth and privilege at the expense of the people and the financial stability of this whole Nation. I vetoed it. In fact, they had to study that bill three times, because I vetoed it three times. They finally passed a modified version, which was not quite so bad, although bad enough, as the first one they sent to me. At every point, that Republican-dominated Congress has shown itself to be the legislative puppet of the most reactionary forces in American life, the puppet of big business, the puppet of the special lobbies--the real estate lobby, the power lobby, the grain speculators' lobby, and many others I could name. There have been more lobbies in Congress in the last 2 years than were altogether there in the whole history of the Congress before that time, and they spent money like water to get what they wanted. Some Republican newspapers have reproached me for speaking this out in public. They would like me to conduct this campaign so as not to hurt anybody's feelings. All I am doing is telling you the facts for your benefit and welfare. The Democratic Party led the way to give workers a voice in their own destiny. The Wagner Act of 1935 was passed for that purpose. What did this puppet Congress do? They passed the reactionary Taft-Hartley Act. Instead of improving the Wagner Act as I recommended, they cut and hacked away at the workers' newly-won rights. With the great growth of population in this country in recent years, we have begun to burst at the seams in our schools. That situation endangers the education of your children. We urgently need a national program to aid the States in meeting the present shortage of teachers and schools. But the Republican Party, as usual, cannot see the need for this forward step. In spite of the pleading of parents and teachers and school administrators all over the country, this puppet 80th Congress refused to pass the aid to education bill.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheuniversitysouthernillinoiscarbondaleillinois", "title": "Address at the University of Southern Illinois, Carbondale, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-university-southern-illinois-carbondale-illinois", "publication_date": "30-09-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1378, "text": "As a result, millions of American children are failing to get the good education that is their birthright here in the United States. The big business Republicans have set an economic trap for the American consumer. They have baited that trap with glib assurances that everything will be all right, if you just let nature take its course, everything will be taken care of. And when they say nature, they mean themselves. The people have been fooled before by that bait. I hope we are not nibbling at it again. We nibbled at it under Harding, Coolidge, and Hoover. You know what happened to us under that circumstance. At every point the Republicans have shown plainly that they are trying to turn back the clock to the 1920's. They do not want the Government to do anything about housing, about high prices, about social security and education and conservation. They do not want the Government to work constructively in the interest of the farmers and the workers and the small businessman. They are interested in but one thing--the profits of big business. Where is the Republican Party getting the millions of dollars it is pouring into this campaign? From big business, who know that if the Republicans win, they will get their money back many times over--until the crash comes. Today big business is rubbing its hands in the hope of having another boom-and-bust spree under a Republican administration. They are in the same greedy state of mind that brought about the crash of 1929 and the Hoover depression. Then Wall Street had the spree, and the people had the headache that lasted for several years afterwards. No one can look at the record of the past 2 years without realizing that the Republican 80th Congress has started down the same path as the Republican administrations of the 1920'S. They have sent out their best orators to make high sounding speeches and to make big promises. But the road down which they are trying to lead you is the same road that nearly led us to ruin in 1930. You cannot afford to let these reactionaries have their way. Already, the big business Republicans have begun to nail the American consumer to the wall with the spikes of greed. Are you going to let them get away with it? And that is to get out on election day and vote. This election concerns the security of your homes and your lives and your jobs next year, and the year after, and the year after that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheuniversitysouthernillinoiscarbondaleillinois", "title": "Address at the University of Southern Illinois, Carbondale, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-university-southern-illinois-carbondale-illinois", "publication_date": "30-09-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1379, "text": "It is an honor to be with you again. I am really pleased to be here in Northern Ireland. The Prime Minister is a man of his word. He is a man of great ability, deep conviction, and steady courage. He has my admiration, and he has the admiration of the American people. Our two countries are joined in large tasks because we share fundamental convictions. We believe that free nations have the responsibility to confront terrorism. We believe free nations must oppose the spread of weapons of mass destruction. And we believe that free nations must advance human rights and dignity across the world. We believe that the just demands of the international community must be enforced, not ignored. We believe this so strongly that we are acting on our convictions. America and Britain have been partners in Afghanistan, where a terrorist regime has been replaced by a government committed to justice and to peace. At this moment, our military forces are fighting side by side in Iraq to defend our security and to free that nation from oppression. Our Governments are working to help bring about a settlement in the Middle East that protects the rights of Israelis and Palestinians, that promotes the peace, that promotes security, that promotes human dignity. In Northern Ireland, the Prime Minister and I are committed to helping the parties take the final steps toward a lasting peace. Later this week, Prime Minister Blair and the Taoiseach will release a plan setting out the remaining actions that must be taken to realize the promise of the Good Friday agreement. I support and my Government strongly supports their efforts. At the meeting this afternoon, I will urge Northern Ireland's political leaders to adopt this plan as their own. This is an historic moment, and I ask all the communities of Northern Ireland to seize this opportunity for peace. Prime Minister Blair and I are also reviewing the course of the battle in Iraq. We are spending a lot of time talking about that country's future beyond war and beyond tyranny. As the Prime Minister mentioned, our armed services are conducting themselves with great courage and, at the same time, great humanity. I am proud of our forces. I am proud of the British forces. We are both proud of the Australian forces. We share sacrifices. We share grief. We pray for those families who mourn the loss of life, American families, British families. And as this war has progressed, the world has witnessed the brutal desperation, the true character of the Iraqi regime.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithprimeministertonyblairtheunitedkingdom8", "title": "The President's News Conference With Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom in Hillsborough, Northern Ireland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-prime-minister-tony-blair-the-united-kingdom-8", "publication_date": "08-04-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1380, "text": "The world is also witnessing the liberation and humanitarian aid our coalition is bringing to that country as a new day begins in Iraq. In fighting this war, we are taking every precaution to protect innocent life. We are showing respect for the Iraqi people, respect for their culture. Iraq will be free. After the current regime is removed, our coalition will work to restore electricity and water supplies, medical care, and other essential services in Iraq. We will move as quickly as possible to place governmental responsibilities under the control of an Interim Authority composed of Iraqis from both inside and outside the country. The Interim Authority will serve until a permanent government can be chosen by the Iraqi people. The rebuilding of Iraq will require the support and expertise of the international community. We are committed to working with international institutions, including the United Nations, which will have a vital role to play in this task. This work when the war is finished will not be easy, but we are going to see it through. A free Iraq will be ruled by laws, not by a dictator. A free Iraq will be peaceful and not a friend to terrorists or a menace to its neighbors. A free Iraq will give up all its weapons of mass destruction. A free Iraq will set itself on the path to democracy. The end of Saddam's regime will also remove a source of violence and instability in the Middle East. Prime Minister Blair and I are determined to move toward our vision of broader peace in that region. We are committed to implementing the roadmap toward peace, to bring closer the day when two states, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace and stability. Peace in the Middle East will require overcoming deep divisions of history and religion. Yet we know this is possible; it is happening in Northern Ireland. We are proving that old patterns of bitterness and violence, the habits of hatred and retribution, can be broken when one generation makes the choice to break those habits. And now this process of healing must be carried forward. The United States and the United Kingdom accept our responsibilities-accept our responsibilities for peace. We accept our responsibilities for security. Across the world, we are meeting these responsibilities together. America has no finer ally than the United Kingdom and no finer friend than the Prime Minister. And I am grateful for his leadership in these crucial days.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithprimeministertonyblairtheunitedkingdom8", "title": "The President's News Conference With Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom in Hillsborough, Northern Ireland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-prime-minister-tony-blair-the-united-kingdom-8", "publication_date": "08-04-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1381, "text": "You know--folks, thank you. Before I begin my somewhat formal remarks, walking in here today and seeing you guys sitting on that beam-first Local ever to endorse me was a guy named Tommy Schrank in Elsmere, Delaware, Local Ironworkers. And he asked me to come out to a site. They took me up on an elevator outside. There was four of them, crazy sons of guns like you all, sitting and having their lunch on a beam, I guess, about 12 stories above the ground. And thank God you are. You have got to not only have some brains, but you got to be coordinated to be an ironworker, man. And I was told that-they said, you know, they have done a cutout of number 46, the Vice-the Presidency. And I am thinking, Well, maybe I can take it home. And you guys did that on your time. I am not going to try and take it home. And I want to thank your soon-to-be new, full-blown, full-bore ironworker. Marty is already trying to get her to Boston, but that is another thing I got to warn you about. But, folks, look, it is an honor to be here with Vice President Harris and with the Labor Secretary, Marty Walsh, a proud member and former president of the Laborers' Local Union 222-223 up in Boston. And our Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, has got a few things we are going to build. Ben Cardin, who is been a friend for a long time; and Chris Van Hollen, who is a really close friend; and an outstanding Congressman, Anthony Brown, and other elected officials that are here. Look, all of whom fight for working people, in Maryland and in every-and every other State. Because if it happens here, it happens around the world-happens around the country. It is been an honor to be with the ironworkers of Local 5. And we talk about building a future that is made in America. We are talking about you. You know, one of the press persons said to me-and I cannot remember who-about 3 months ago, that-I do not know if it is factual or not, but he said, You have used the word 'union' as President more than any other President in American history. I am not sure that it is true.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningexecutiveordertheuseprojectlaboragreementsforfederalconstruction", "title": "Remarks on Signing an Executive Order on the Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects in Upper Marlboro, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-executive-order-the-use-project-labor-agreements-for-federal-construction", "publication_date": "04-02-2022", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1382, "text": "I promised you you'd have a union President. You know, we talk about whether Wall Street built America. There are good folks on Wall Street; they are not bad folks. the middle class. And the people who built the middle class are organized labor-unions, unions. Unions did it. And the Executive order I am going to sign today is going to help ensure that we build a better America, we build it right and we build it on time and we build it cheaper than it would have been otherwise. You know, the Executive order is making sure that Federal construction projects get completed on time and under budget, saving taxpayers money, clearing construction zones quickly, and ensuring that everything the Federal Government signs to contract to build is built to last. You guys really, genuinely, are the best in the world. To do that, we are using a tool that ironworkers here know very well, called project labor agreements. I know you all know it, but folks who may be watching this may not fully understand it. Simply put, these are agreements that contractors, subcontractors, and unions put in place before a construction site gets underway, before the construction begins. They ensure that major projects are handled by well-trained, well-prepared, highly skilled workers, and they ward off problems. They resolve disputes ahead of time, ensuring safer work sites, avoiding disruptions and work stoppages that can cause expensive delays down the line. And that makes a big difference for the American taxpayer. Because when big construction projects are completed efficiently and with the highest degree of professionalism, it is good for the American taxpayer. We do not talk about it though. We do not talk about how you all save the American taxpayers money. It is good for families who live in those communities. All across the country, the Federal construction projects are being built as I speak. And it means that modernization of your local waterways will get done sooner, will not cost twice as much as expected. And when the next storm comes, the power will more likely stay on and homes and businesses will be better protected from flooding. It means new air traffic control towers at the local airports will be up and running more quickly, so flights are safer at the airports and more efficient. It means new housing will be built on our military bases; will be of the highest quality, which these servicemembers deserve. It will hold up better and make life easier for our military families.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningexecutiveordertheuseprojectlaboragreementsforfederalconstruction", "title": "Remarks on Signing an Executive Order on the Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects in Upper Marlboro, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-executive-order-the-use-project-labor-agreements-for-federal-construction", "publication_date": "04-02-2022", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1383, "text": "The Executive order I am going to sign will help defuse problems before they arise. They are going to improve coordination between contractors, subcontractors, and workers on the job site. It is going to help guarantee a consistent supply of high-quality, highly trained workers. You know, what people do not understand if they are not-do not know the industry is, you know, it is like you going to college, kid. This is not something you walk up and show up in a day and raise your hand, I need a job. You work like the devil for it. Fortunately, you get paid while you are doing it, and you are able to do it, but it is an education-full-blown education you are getting in your trade. Well, you will have a voice on the work site, full commitment to getting the job done. And it is going to raise the bar on quality for some of those vital projects we are going to be building. And we are going to make sure that Federal construction projects are staffed with good-paying union jobs. One of you actually came up to me today and said, Joe, you said you are going to do that, and you are doing it. Well, when President Obama asked me to run the Recovery Act, I made sure every single job I could get was a union job, prevailing wage. Because I have noticed when folks are getting paid a decent wage, everybody in the community does better, everything looks better. They are jobs you can raise a family on. Or as my dad would say, They are jobs you can put your head on the pillow at night and just have a little breathing room -a little security, a little breathing room. And that is good for nearly 200,000 workers on Federal construction contracts right now. It is good for everybody. I do not want to get going because I will keep you here too long, because you know all of what I am about to-what I have said, and you know what I have done, and you know what we are doing, and you know what-I know what you are doing. A week ago, I went to Pittsburgh to tour a former steel mill that is now a cutting-edge manufacturing research and development hub. Right before I left to the trip, I got word that a bridge collapsed. You saw it on television. It looked as bad in person as it did at the time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningexecutiveordertheuseprojectlaboragreementsforfederalconstruction", "title": "Remarks on Signing an Executive Order on the Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects in Upper Marlboro, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-executive-order-the-use-project-labor-agreements-for-federal-construction", "publication_date": "04-02-2022", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1384, "text": "The bridge had been rated in poor condition, like, I might add, over 3,000 bridges in Pennsylvania, 45,000 across the Nation. It had been rated that way for the last 10 years. When I got there, folks told me something close to a miracle had occurred. Because of a snowstorm that morning, school openings were late and commutes were delayed. So when that bridge collapsed-and it was well over a hundred feet off the-two-almost two-I do not -I did not -I do not know the exact, but probably from down to the creek that it went over and the ravine, probably a couple hundred feet. When it collapsed, instead of a bus with a couple people on it-being packed with school buses full of children, the people on their way to work on the bridge that is one of the busiest bridges-you know, there are more bridges in Pittsburgh than any other city in the world; with the three rivers-the bridge was empty, relatively empty. Fortunately, no one was killed, but for a snowstorm. Just imagine the challenges we face and the opportunities to build a better America, and extend it far beyond roads and bridges now that we can-know we have to do. We passed that infrastructure bill. Across the country right now there are countless buildings, ports, airports, power stations, and other Federal construction projects that need to be modernized and built for the future. We cannot count on miracles, like happened in-out in Pittsburgh, to prevent tragedies that are waiting in plain sight. the American worker, the hardest working, best trained workers in the world; American workers who, given just half a chance, have never, ever, ever, ever, ever let their country down, and gotten the job done getting the job done for the American taxpayers, getting the job done right the first time. You know, folks, there is a law that is existed for a long time that has too many exceptions like this one had, and that is that-buy American. As President of the United States, I award contracts. And I am now making it the case-and it is working; it is one of the reasons those jobs were up-is unless the product that I am purchasing for the American people was made in America and all of its component parts are made in America, we ain't buying it. We are just simply not buying it. It is not a violation of any international laws either.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningexecutiveordertheuseprojectlaboragreementsforfederalconstruction", "title": "Remarks on Signing an Executive Order on the Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal Construction Projects in Upper Marlboro, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-executive-order-the-use-project-labor-agreements-for-federal-construction", "publication_date": "04-02-2022", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1426, "text": "I arrived a few moments ago, and I remember the first time I ever heard your president speak. I knew that she had worked for Vice President Gore, and I thought it was so interesting to hear the head of a national association who was speaking without an accent. I want to say a special word of appreciation to your first vice president, Ellen Sanders, who is participated in White House and congressional meetings on health reform, and to Diane Weaver, the president of the Association of Nurse Executives, who cosponsored this breakfast. I am very proud to share the stage today with all the fine nurses in the executive and the legislative branches whom you have honored. And I thank you for doing that. And I thank them for their service. I also want to say a special word of thanks to all of you and to the ANA for the courage and the vision you have demonstrated by fighting for health care reform, and the right kind of health care reform, long before it was a hot issue. As you know, the position paper you put out on national health reform probably more closely parallels the recommendations that our administration has made than that of any other professional health care group in the country. And I thank you for that very much. I want to thank you, too, for recognizing my mother, who worked for 30 years and then some as a nurse and was deeply proud of what she did. 30 in the morning, always telling me stories that indicated that there was literally nothing in the world more important to her than dealing with a person frightened, in pain, with a caring and effective manner. This award will help to expand the frontiers of nursing in the areas of women's health, something that she would have been very proud to be a part of. My mother, as all of you now know, completed her memoirs, which became her autobiography, shortly before she died. She went over about half of it and was able to do the final editing. And it was my privilege after she passed away to work with the author and just try to make sure all the facts were right. I got very stern instructions from her. She said, Now, if you have to do this, do not change one word I said about you -- especially the part about your manners not always being great. But I was very pleased with the two book reviews that her book got yesterday, one by the great American author Joyce Carol Oates in the New York Times and then another one here in the Washington Post.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1427, "text": "But it tickled me, the one in the Washington Post said that if you read this book, you would understand why I perplexed people in Washington. I was actually brought up by real people, and occasionally I still acted like one. I did not know what that--I am trying to get over it, but it is hard even here. Anyway, here is something my mother said about her work, which would apply to all of you and those whom you represent. But it meant a lot to me. You do not do it halfway. You are the person responsible for putting another human being into a state of unconsciousness, somewhere between life and death. For 30 years, from the minute that I would walk into the operating room and start talking to the patient and begin putting him to sleep, until I got him safely back to the recovery room, nothing in the world could have crossed my mind. I do not care what problems were on the outside. I do not care what problems I might have been having at home. I never thought of my life beyond the moment. My mother used to take me to the hospital and let me meet the other nurses and the doctors and watch the emergency room and watch people go into the operating room. And the work you do has always sort of captured my imagination. My own wife had never been in a hospital before in her entire life until our daughter was born, never been in a hospital for any kind of sickness, and learned only a few moments before the happy event that she was going to have to have a C-section. And we had gone through Lamaze, and we had done all this stuff, and I was supposed to be in the operating room. And our hospital at that time had never before let a father into the delivery room if it was not a natural birth. So they did and actually changed the policy so that if fathers had been through the Lamaze course and then the mothers eventually had to have a C-section, they got to go. So I felt-that is my one contribution to medical advances. But I owe all that to my mother, who was a remarkably determined woman in the face of often excruciating adversity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1428, "text": "I think one of the reasons that the Nurses Association has been so forthright about this health care reform issue is that you see it from the grassroots up in human terms and you do not get so hung up as some people do on all the political rhetoric and the positioning and the characterizations that have, frankly, put a lot of Members of Congress at a severe disadvantage because they have not had the chance to spend the time and make the effort to deal with this issue that you have. It is 14.5 percent of our income, and for people who do not live in it every day, it can be a very difficult thing. But I just wanted to thank you because I believe that the personal experiences you have shared, so many of you, common to the ones that my own mother shared, really animated the Nurses Association to take the position that you have taken. I want to emphasize today that what I seek, contrary to the attacks, and what you have sought, is not a Government-run health system, it is a private insurance health system that covers everybody, where the health care professionals run it and not the insurance companies. That is what we seek. We seek private insurance that can never be taken away. It is wrong to treat seriously ill children in an emergency room who could have been treated more easily and more inexpensively if their parents had just had the coverage. With our reforms, every family will have that kind of quality insurance. We ought to reform the insurance system that today often only covers the healthiest people and even then will deny them coverage for anything they have been sick with before. When you go to a patient's bedside, you ask, Why does it hurt? If you think about all this preexisting condition business, there are 81 million Americans who live in families where there is been a child with diabetes or a mother that had cancer prematurely or a father that had an early heart attack or some other problem. I see these people everywhere. Now, we get action lickety-split up here all the time when a million people or 2 million people are adversely affected by something if they are well organized. But these 81 million people, they are professionals and blue-collar workers; they are old folks and young folks; they are all different kinds of people; and they are by definition disorganized. You think about it; if there were, and 10 million of them showed up here, we'd have health care reform so fast you could not blink.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1429, "text": "You must be their voice in an organized way. So we ought to cover everybody with private insurance, and we ought to have insurance reforms that deal with preexisting conditions and do not discriminate against people based on age. I know that. But I believe if we went back to health insurance the way it originally was when Blue Cross first started writing it, where everybody was put in a large group, risk was broadly spread, and people paid a fee against the day when they would be sick, it would be fairer for all Americans. And our economy would work better, our society would have a stronger sense of community, our families would function better. People would be free of a lot of the anxiety that comes to them. Hillary and I have received about a million letters. And whenever I go somewhere now, they arrange for some of the letter writers to come see me. And it is just gripping to see people just over and over and over and stunning to see how they really do come from all walks of life and how they have been broken by the things which have happened. The third thing I think we should do is to preserve the Medicare program. It is interesting, the people who criticize our program say this is Government-run health care which, of course, it is not . And if you tried to take away Medicare, which is a Government-funded health care, well, they would be up in a tree somewhere screaming about it. But we do not want to do anything to the Medicare program, except to make it better. I do believe we should add a prescription drug benefit and phase in long-term care that is community-based or home-based for two simple reasons. One is, there are an awful lot of elderly people who are not poor enough to be on Medicaid but are not well off, who have significant medical bills. We know the elderly use 4 times the prescription drugs that the nonelderly do. And we know from study after study after study that a proper medication regime can keep people out of the hospital and can save money and that we now have-any number of elderly people every month-I was in a grocery store in New York yesterday called Pathmark, which also operates, as many do now, a drugstore.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1430, "text": "And it was gripping; the CEO was saying, My workers tell me that every day they watch older people come in this store and go from the drugstore, down the food aisle, and try to make up their mind what food they are going to give up to get their medicine, or whether they are going to give up their medicine to buy their food -gripping. So I do believe we should do that. It has low administrative overhead. The fourth thing we want to do is to bring greater choice to our people. I guess the thing that has made me the maddest in the relentless campaign against this plan are all those bogus ads where they say, You are going to have to call some Government office to figure out where you go to the doctor. There are two realities of modern life that you have to drive home to every Member of Congress, without regard to party or philosophy. Number one, Americans are rapidly losing their choices today. Already, of people who are insured at work, fewer than half have more than one choice of a health plan. And they are rapidly losing their choices. Number two, medical professionals are increasingly losing their right to decide unilaterally, may have to have somebody get on the phone to an insurance company executive a long way away to ask for permission to do what anybody knows ought to be done under the circumstances. Now, most Americans, believe it or not, do not know either one of those things, even though they may be caught up in it, and I think it is very important. Our plan is designed, number one, to increase the choices that consumers have. We are moving to more managed care. There can be a lot of good things in it, but under our plan, every year, every person would have a choice between at least three plans, or among at least three plans but in all probability many more. And number two, under our plan, medical professionals would also be given more choices and would have to do less checking in with the insurance company in advance. Now, being treated by doctors and nurses, you know, is an American tradition. Every time I do one of these town meetings, like I did in Rhode Island last night, I talk to somebody that is just been forced to give up their doctor and just move away from the choices they made. We believe when all Americans can choose among several health plans, many Americans, many more Americans, will choose to stay with their own providers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1431, "text": "And many more of these plans will be organized in such a way that all providers can participate if they will do it for the agreed-upon fee. And if we do not do this, if we do not have some legal action to reorganize this, you are going to have less choice by consumers, less choice by providers. Time and again, we have also seen that the quality of care is directly related to the quality and the quantity of the nursing staff. One of the things that amazes me is how many nurses have been laid off in recent months and been told, well, this is because health care reform is coming. I will tell you what, one of Clinton's unbending laws of politics is, whenever somebody who is got a tough decision to make can shift the heat from themselves to you, they will do it every time. They will do it every time. What is really going on is, a lot of these health care providers are under the gun. all this stuff is going to happen if we do not do anything. All of us could go on vacation for a year, and this same thing would go on. You know that. And do not let your Members fall for it. What is going to happen is we will continue to see these trends occur unless we find a way to give health care providers reimbursement for all the people for whom they care, at an appropriate level in an appropriate way. More than a decade of research now shows that more and better trained nurses result in shorter hospital stays, better survival rates, fewer complications, whether you are dealing with low birthweight babies or older people. You do not have to work for the Congressional Budget Office to understand that healthier patients and shorter stays means lower health care costs. Sometimes I think if you do work for the Congressional Budget Office you will never get that, but--we are working together pretty well on the whole. This choice issue and maintaining an array of qualified people doing the things for which they are best qualified is terribly important. Finally, let me say-and this, I guess, is, except for this whole issue of whether this is a Government program, which it is not , is the most controversial part of it-our reform is based on providing guaranteed benefits at work. Now the reason for that is simple, for the people in this country that have health insurance, 9 out of 10 of them have it at work where there is some shared responsibility between the employer and the employee.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1432, "text": "For the people who do not have insurance, 8 out of 10 of them have someone in their family who is working. It seems to me that the fairest and simplest, and if you will, the most conservative way to achieve universal coverage, to have health care security for everybody, is to ask employers and employees who are not doing anything or barely doing anything to do more so that they can fulfill their own responsibilities and then use tax funds to cover the unemployed, uninsured people for whom you could say, well, there is a general responsibility, just like Medicare and Medicaid, and then organize the market so that smaller businesses and self-employed people get discounts if they need it and are able to buy good insurance on the same terms that those of us who are insured by Government or larger businesses can. Now it seems to me that is a fair and simple and obvious way to do this. I think that any other way will sooner or later involve either a radical change, that is, getting rid of the whole health insurance market and substituting taxes for it, or involve people who are already paying too much for their own health care, having to pay something for people who will not do anything for themselves because they say they should be exempt. You know, again, we lose sight of the fact that most small businesses are making an effort to cover their employees. We have brought hundreds and hundreds of small businesses to Washington to talk to the Congress, but they are not organized. small businesses who cover their employees and are mad their competitors do not and mad they cannot get better insurance rates- -and wish somebody would help them. So an association that may have a lot of folks in the insurance industry, along with other small businesses, says, Do not do this; the whole small business economy will break, says this, and there is no association on the other side . Had a car dealer from a town of 7,000 people in Arkansas up staying with me the other night, he and his wife, long-time friends of mine. He said to me the other night-it was funny-he said, You know, for 20 years I have been feeling sorry for myself because I have provided a good health plan for my employees, and none of my competitors did. So he said, I was so happy when you proposed this just because I thought I was going to get even.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1433, "text": "And then he said, But you know, then I remembered that in the last 20 years I put three of my competitors out of business. And I am making more money than I ever have. And the reason is I still got the same folks working for me I had 20 years ago because I gave them health benefits. And yesterday I went to New York and I visited this Pathmark store. They have 175 stores, 28,000 employees, the 10th biggest supermarket chain in the country. We are all told, Oh, if you do this, the retailing business will go to pieces. These people have put new stores in inner-city areas that other chains would not touch, fine new stores. They are making money, and they have always provided comprehensive health benefits to their employees. And they are now sacking their groceries in a bag that says they favor health care benefits to all Americans, guaranteed through the workplace. I say this to you because, as you know, there are a lot of nurses that do not have any health care coverage and a lot of nurses who are single parents who do not have health care coverage. Everybody now in Washington is for welfare reform, and I guess it means different things to different people. One was embodied in last year's economic plan, lower income taxes for working people who are hovering just above the poverty line with children. This year one in six American working families will be eligible for lower income taxes so they can succeed at work and can succeed as parents. And if they do not , require them to take it. And if they cannot , provide some public subsidy in the private sector or some publicly funded job so that work is preferable to welfare. Strategy number three has got to be cover the people with health insurance. All these people on welfare in this country who are dying to get off-and by the way, that is most of them-who are dying to get off, most of them have limited education. Suppose they go through a little training program and they get a job that pays a modest wage but is still more than the welfare benefits. But they go to work for an employer who does not provide for health care. You are a mother with two children. You give up being on welfare to take a job that pays more than the welfare check, but you lose health care coverage for your kids. What are you going to do if your kid has to go to the dentist? What are you going to do if your child is desperately ill?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1434, "text": "How are you going to feel every week, every 2 weeks or every month when you get your paycheck and you see what is taken out of it in taxes and you realize those taxes are going to pay for the health care benefits of people who decided to stay on welfare instead of going to work? You do not have to be as bright as a tree full of owls to figure out that this does not make a lot of sense. Now a lot of American nurses are in this situation today, getting up every day, slaving away, trying to take care of people who have children without insurance, caring for people who come into their office who are on public assistance who have children with insurance because of the Medicaid program. And you could say, well, all this inability to cover everybody, if this were fueling some enormous American economic expansion because we were saving so much money on health care, maybe you could deal with that. But the truth is we are spending over 40 percent more of our income on health care than any other country in the world. Oh yes, some of it because we are more violent, and that is something we pay for. Some of it because we have better medical research and technology, and that is worth paying for. But a whole lot of it, as you well know, is because of the way we have financed health care, which has employed hundreds of thousands of people in doctors' offices, in clinics, in hospitals, and in insurance companies to read the fine print on thousands and thousands of policies to see who and what is not covered. And it has rifled inefficiencies through this system that we are all paying for. We can fix this. We can fix it by having a law which fixes what is wrong, keeps what is right, provides health care security to everybody through a private system, increases the choices consumers have, and increases the decisions that doctors and nurses and other qualified providers make without oversight by others. We can do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericannursesassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the American Nurses Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-nurses-association-0", "publication_date": "10-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1435, "text": "Much has been said by former speakers of the honor I have done this State by coming here. no greater honor can come to any individual and citizen of this country than to be received in friendly fashion by a cross-section of his fellow citizens. You have honored me. I think, first, I should like to remember my manners and thank you--each of you--as representatives of my host State for the warm reception I have had, for the beautiful presents given me. As a matter of fact, for the prestige I shall have in Pennsylvania when I can show a cow that has no other like it around there. They will come to see that farm if for no other reason than that cow. Now I had a number of reasons for coming here. self-education. I do not think I know enough--ever--about the people of the United States, with whom I am privileged to meet and mingle when I go on a trip like this. Particularly, I have been denied too many opportunities to go to the northern three States of the New England group. I have long wanted to come here, and for two years I have carried it as a determination. And finally, I got the permission of Governor Adams to come--and here I am! Now one of the first things I want to learn is where Calvin Coolidge got a certain skill that I have not acquired. He held the same position I now hold. He had a distinguished record, and held it for a long time, and he spoke so rarely that he got the nickname Silent Cal. My own experience in this regard is exemplified by the fact that the day before yesterday I spoke in San Francisco, and here again I am today, still talking. I find that my tongue is clattering in my ears a great deal, and I would like to know what Vermont secret he had that allowed him to avoid this particular responsibility. There is another thing I want to learn; old as I am, there is a lesson in romance I have heard attached to Vermont--told me by that now distinguished citizen, Sherman Adams of New Hampshire. He said there was a Vermont couple that were going to get married, but Mary thought that John ought to save a thousand dollars before they really were married. And he worked all winter long, and when June again approached, Mary thought it was a nice time to think of marriage, and she said, How much have you saved?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthevermontstatedairyfestivalrutlandvermont", "title": "Remarks at the Vermont State Dairy Festival, Rutland, Vermont.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-vermont-state-dairy-festival-rutland-vermont", "publication_date": "22-06-1955", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1436, "text": "Well, John looked a little bit sheepish and did not want to confess, but after a while he said, Thirty-five dollars. Ladies and gentlemen, that is a confidence--the emotion--the idealism--that we normally associate with Vermont when we say the word Ethan Allen. By the way, I hear my cow came from Ethan Allen's farm. And am I glad --I think I shall call her Mrs. Ethan Allen. Actually, I came here just to see you--to see people. I want to know you better. There are certain things I do know about you. I know that Americans everywhere are the same, in their longing for peace, a peace that is characterized by justice, by consideration for others, by decency above all, by its insistence on respect for the individual human being as a child of his God. All of us want that. All of us want the institutions of America preserved. It makes no difference what party label you attach to an American, we have equal veneration for our Constitution, for the basic principles that have been so beautifully upheld in this State, so well described in that tribute to the people of this State by Calvin Coolidge, just read to you a little while ago. what are the methods by which we approach all of these things? We know we must not sacrifice principle for mere expediency. But do we know also that the responsibility is on us to attempt to understand others as we think they should understand us? Do we even make the mistake of assuming that the rest of the world knows us, knows our peaceful intentions, knows that we want nobody else's land, nobody else's rights, that we covet nothing? We merely want to live in peace with all the world, to trade with them, to commune with them, to learn from their cultures, as they may learn from ours. I assure you, my friends, they do not know it. Even nations we know enlightened still have much to learn about America. Indeed, every single citizen of every other State has something to learn about you. It is probably a pity that every citizen of each State cannot visit all the others, to see the differences, to learn what we have in common, and to come back with a richer, fuller understanding of America in all its beauty, in all its dignity, in all its strength, in support of moral principle.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthevermontstatedairyfestivalrutlandvermont", "title": "Remarks at the Vermont State Dairy Festival, Rutland, Vermont.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-vermont-state-dairy-festival-rutland-vermont", "publication_date": "22-06-1955", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1437, "text": "Let me just say I really am pleased and privileged to be with this group of people that do so much. You know, I really feel comfortable talking to this group because most people think I have been free associating for years. I heard that last year I accidentally caused panic among your executive directors. They thought I pledged no new faxes. Believe it or not, there are still some Americans who do not know what the association for associations is. That is why next week they are doing a bit on you for TV's Unsolved Mysteries. Because really, only your organization is big enough and broad enough to include the Leafy Greens Council and the Association of Tongue Depressors. But I guess it is only natural for the heads of organizations like yours to get together themselves. Some people think of our great country as a nation of rugged individualists alone against the odds. And that is part of the American tradition, but only a part. There is another tradition, a tradition as old as America itself, as old as Pilgrims and the Mayflower Compact, as old as the pioneers who settled the West. It is the tradition that Tocqueville described more than 150 years ago when he came to America, observed the scenes, and wrote that Americans of all ages, all conditions, and all dispositions constantly form associations. individuals translating common interests into a common cause. And you know, today we see the power of democracy, and is not it an exciting time to be alive, seeing this change in Eastern Europe and in Managua, Nicaragua? in the Revolution of 1989 that brought down the Berlin Wall and brought freedom to Eastern Europe; here in our own hemisphere, in the great victories for democracy in Panama and then again in Nicaragua -- and millions of people now enjoying the freedoms that America has known for two centuries. Here at home, we have got to see what these transforming changes in the world mean for us. And those changes carry a challenge, a challenge to us to find in our freedoms new ways to solve the problems that threaten our society and our continued leadership in the whole world community. drug abuse, hunger, homelessness, illiteracy, despair in our inner cities, the breakdown of the family. There is a role, a critical role for government in finding solutions, but we know government does not always have the answers. If we could eliminate these problems, solve them once and for all with more programs, more bureaucracy, these problems would have disappeared a long time ago.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives0", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-0", "publication_date": "06-03-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1438, "text": "The fact is, government is not the only organized entity out there with the powers to change things, the power to make a difference. Everyone in this room is well aware of the advantages of association. But I do not know whether you are really aware of the full extent of your own power, of the resources, the expertise, the potential energy your organizations can bring to bear on these problems -- your ability to help solve community problems. the Medical Association of Atlanta, working after hours to provide free medical care to the homeless; by the Oregon Remodelers Association out there in Portland, Oregon, in Project Pride, a program to do home repairs for the low-income elderly; by the Hotel Association of New York, with its ongoing commitment to donate surplus food to feed the hungry . These are just three, just three of countless community service projects that your associations are engaged in, a commitment of time and talent mirrored in similar community efforts by millions of Americans across the country. In fact, one study in 1988 found that Americans who volunteered in formal organizations gave almost 15 billion hours valued at an estimated $150 billion. Now that is tremendous, but it is just the tip of the iceberg, just a fraction of all the good works we are capable of. Because the fact is, coping with the problems we face is within our power. There is no problem in America that is not being solved somewhere. the programs I have just mentioned -- New York, Atlanta, Portland -- thousands more. Think about ways that your organization, every one of your members, can make this mission of serving others your very own. The story I want to tell you today -- a story that Martin Luther King, Jr., told in his speech he made the night before that terrible day in Memphis, 22 years ago -- it is a story about serving others and the courage that takes. It is a familiar story about the Good Samaritan and the stranger he helped. But there is another part of the story we do not always remember. Before the Good Samaritan stopped that day, two other men saw the injured stranger and passed him by. Why did not the others stop to help? They did not stop because they were too busy, had more important work waiting in Jerusalem of far more consequence than helping one unfortunate man; and so, on they went. And then one day, Martin Luther King put himself in their shoes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives0", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-0", "publication_date": "06-03-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1439, "text": "At the age of 30, on his very first trip to the Holy Land, he and his wife, Coretta, traveled that road from Jerusalem to Jericho. And Dr. King saw the story of the Good Samaritan in a new light. That road starts off more than 1,000 feet above the sea level and ends in Jericho 2,000 feet below sea level -- a twisting road, full of blind curves. He imagined the road 2,000 years ago, each curve a perfect ambush for robbers. And at the moment, Dr. King realized why the two men did not stop. It had nothing to do with the reasons he had imagined. If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me? And he went on about his way. If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him? And he asked himself that question, and he found the courage to stop, the courage to help, the courage to serve. So which question, then, do we ask ourselves about going down to the soup kitchen in that dangerous neighborhood; about stopping on a dark street to help a homeless man; about reaching out to those desperate kids out there, kids who have no home life, who are hooked on drugs, who live a nightmare we cannot begin to imagine? Every one takes an act of courage. But unlike the Good Samaritan, we do not have to act alone. how much we can get done when we work together, pool our resources, combine our talents. And do not think it will not take courage. It is going to take courage to go back to your member organizations, back to their CEO's and boards of directors, and suggest that they place community service at the center of their agenda. It is going to take courage to insist that community service has a place at the very heart of every organization. It will take courage to make each one believe that from now on in America, any definition of a successful life must include serving others. But that is just exactly what I am asking you to do. Today, I want to lay down some challenges, challenges to associations all over America to take up community service. Find out what is working in your industry, in your profession, in your community; let your members know which community service programs are most effective; and then, challenge them to make those programs the blueprint for their own efforts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives0", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-0", "publication_date": "06-03-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1464, "text": "Everybody, please, everybody have a seat, have a seat. It is good to be back in North Carolina. Although, I have to say, I came down here for slightly warmer weather. What is snow doing on the ground in North Carolina? Anyway, it is a great honor to be with you here at Forsyth Technical Community College. There are a few people I want to acknowledge who are just doing outstanding work. First of all, your incredibly impressive college president, Gary Green, is here. Your wonderful Governor, Bev Perdue, is in the house; your Senators, Richard Burr and the better looking one, Kay Hagan; two hard-working Congressmen, Mel Watt and Brad Miller, are here. We have got Secretary of State Elaine Marshall in the house. Well, it is been about a month now since the midterm elections. what the results mean for Democrats, what they mean for Republicans. And already, we are hearing what this means for the next election. And I have to tell you, I came to Winston-Salem because I believe that right now there are bigger issues at stake for our country than politics. And these issues call on us to respond not as partisans, but as Americans. At this moment, we are still emerging from a once-in-a-lifetime recession that has taken a terrible toll on millions of families, many here in North Carolina who have lost their jobs or their businesses, and their sense of security. Now, fortunately, we have seen some encouraging signs that a recovery is beginning to take hold. An economy that had been shrinking for nearly a year is now growing. After nearly 2 years of job loss, our economy has added over 1 million private sector jobs in 2010. Now, I was just talking to Bev, and she was mentioning that here in North Carolina, we have seen 50,000 new jobs here in North Carolina. And after teetering on the brink of liquidation not 2 years ago, our auto industry is posting healthy gains. So we are seeing progress across the country. But as we also saw in November's jobs report, the recovery is simply not happening fast enough. Plenty of Americans are still without work. Plenty of Americans are still hurting. And our challenge now is to do whatever it takes to accelerate job creation and economic growth. Now, in the short term, that means preventing the middle class tax increase that is currently scheduled for January 1. Right now Democrats and Republicans in Congress are working through some differences to try to get this done.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1465, "text": "And there are some serious debates that are still taking place. Republicans want to make permanent the tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. I have argued that we cannot afford it right now. But what I have also said is we have got to find consensus here, because a middle class tax hike would be very tough not only on working families, it would also be a drag on our economy at this moment. So I believe we should keep in place tax cuts for workers and small businesses that are set to expire. We have got to make sure that we are coming up with a solution, even if it is not a hundred percent of what I want or what the Republicans want. We should also extend unemployment insurance for workers who've lost their jobs through no fault of their own. And I should mention that is not only the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do, because if millions of Americans who are not getting unemployment benefits stop spending money, that slows down businesses. That slows down hiring. It slows down our recovery. Now, even if we take these and other steps to boost our recovery in the short term, we are also going to have to make some serious decisions about our economy in the long run. We have got to look ahead, not just to the next year but to the next 10 years, the next 20 years. We have got to ask ourselves, where will the new jobs come from? What will it take to get them? And what will it take to keep the American Dream alive for our children and our grandchildren? Obviously, this recession had a devastating effect here, like it did everywhere else. But the trends have been going on for quite some time. I was just visiting with President Green, with some of the students here in the biotech field, wonderful people, from every walk of life. You had folks who had just gotten out of high school, and you had folks who had--were in midlife and had been laid off from a manufacturing job and had come here to retrain. But a bunch of them mentioned, Well, I was laid off because the textile industry has moved away here in North Carolina. I was laid off because the furniture industry has moved away here in North Carolina. And that means we have got to have a long-term vision about where we want to be 10 years from now, 20 years from now, 30 years from now. Just like past generations did, we must be prepared to answer these questions in our time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1466, "text": "And over the next several weeks, I am going to be meeting with my economic team, with business leaders, and others to develop specific policies and budget recommendations for the coming year. Today I want to outline the broader vision that I believe should guide these policies, and it is a vision that will keep our economy strong and growing and competitive in the 21st century. And that vision begins with a recognition of how our economy has changed over time. When Forsyth Technical opened 50 years ago, it was known as Forsyth County Industrial Education Center, right? Machine shops and automotive mechanics were some of the first classes you could take. Of course, back then you did not even need a degree to earn a decent living. You could get a job at the local tobacco or textile plant and still be able to provide for yourself and your family. In the last few decades, revolutions in communications, revolutions in technology, have made businesses mobile and has made commerce global. So today, a company can set up shop, hire workers, and sell their products wherever there is an Internet connection. That is a transformation that is touched off a fierce competition among nations for the jobs and industries of the future. Some of you know I traveled through Asia several weeks ago. You have got a billion people in India who are suddenly plugged into the world economy. You have got over a billion people in China who are suddenly plugged into the global economy. And that means competition is going to be much more fierce, and the winners of this competition will be the countries that have the most educated workers, a serious commitment to research and technology, and access to quality infrastructure like roads and airports and high-speed rail and high-speed Internet. Those are the seeds of economic growth in the 21st century. Where they are planted, the most jobs and businesses will take root. Now, in the last century, America was that place where innovation happened and jobs and industry always took root. The business of America was business. Our economic leadership in the world went unmatched. Now it is up to us to make sure that we maintain that leadership in this century. And at this moment, the most important contest we face is not between Democrats and Republicans, it is between America and our economic competitors all around the world. That is the competition we have got to spend time thinking about. Now, I have no doubt we can win this competition.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1467, "text": "We are the home of the world's best universities, the best research facilities, the most brilliant scientists, the brightest minds, some of the hardest working, most entrepreneurial people on Earth, right here in America. It is in our DNA. People came from all over the world to live here in the United States. The folks who did not want to take risks, they stayed back home. In the race for the future, America is in danger of falling behind. And when--if you hear a politician say it is not, they are not paying attention. In a generation, we have fallen from first place to ninth place in the proportion of young people with college degrees. When it comes to high school graduation rates, we are ranked 18th out of 24 industrialized nations--18th. We are 27th in the proportion of science and engineering degrees we hand out. We lag behind other nations in the quality of our math and science education. When global firms were asked a few years back where they planned on building new research and development facilities, nearly 80 percent said either China or India, because those countries are focused on math and science, and they are focused on training and educating their workforce. I sat down with President Lee of South Korea, and I asked him, what is the biggest problem you have in education? He said, You know, these parents, they come to me and they are constantly pressuring me; they want their kids to learn so fast, so much--they are even making me import English-speaking teachers in, because they want first-graders to know English. I asked him about investment in research and development. He says, We are putting aside 5 percent of our gross domestic product in research and development, 3 percent of it in clean energy. You go to Shanghai, China, and they have built more high-speed rail in the last year than we have built in the last 30 years. The largest private solar research and development facility in the world has recently opened in China, by an American company. Today, China also has the fastest trains and the fastest supercomputer in the world. In 1957, just before this college opened, the Soviet Union beat us into space by launching a satellite known as Sputnik. And that was a wake-up call that caused the United States to boost our investment in innovation and education, particularly in math and science.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1468, "text": "And as a result, once we put our minds to it, once we got focused, once we got unified, not only did we surpass the Soviets, we developed new American technologies, industries, and jobs. If the recession has taught us anything, it is that we cannot go back to an economy that is driven by too much spending, too much borrowing, running up credit cards, taking out a lot of home equity loans, paper profits that are built on financial speculation. We have got to rebuild on a new and stronger foundation for economic growth. building, innovating, educating, making things. We do not want to be a nation that simply buys and consumes products from other countries. Made in America. So I came to Forsyth today because you have shown what this future can look like. Half a century later, you are still giving students the skills and training they need to get good jobs, but of course--but courses in machine shop and car mechanics have now broadened to degrees in mechanical engineering technology and nanotechnology and biotechnology. they come here, they stay here, they hire right here in Winston-Salem. As a national leader in bioscience and innovation, North Carolina is now the country's third largest employer in biotechnology. And when Caterpillar recently decided to build a plant in this community, they told President Green one of the main reasons was they were convinced that Forsyth Tech had the capability of providing them with the technical workforce that they need. That is something everybody in this room should be very proud of. And I know that business leaders from throughout the community have worked intensively with President Green and others to help make this happen. Now, none of this progress happened by itself. It happened thanks to the hard work of students here at Forsyth, the commitment of local leaders, foresight of local business leaders. Most importantly, it happened because there was a decision made to invest in the collective future of this community. It happened because there was a decision to invest in this college, and there were loans and scholarships that made it affordable to go here. To invest in the basic research and development that helped jump-start North Carolina's biotech industry, to invest in new buildings and laboratories and research facilities that make your work possible, these are the kinds of investments we need to keep making in communities across America, investments that will grow our economy and help us to stay competitive in the 21st century.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1469, "text": "Now, I want to emphasize I say this knowing full well we face a very difficult fiscal situation. I am looking at the books back in Washington, and folks were not doing a real good job with their math for the last decade. So now that the threat of a depression has passed and a recovery is beginning to take hold, reducing our long-term deficit has to be a priority. And in the long run, we will not be able to compete with countries like China if we keep borrowing from countries like China. We will not be able to do it. So we have already started making some tough decisions. And they are unpopular and people get mad, but we have got to make some decisions. I have proposed a 3-year freeze in all spending that does not have to do with national security. And I proposed a 2-year freeze in the pay for Federal workers. That is why we are currently studying recommendations of the bipartisan deficit reduction panel that I commissioned. We are going to have to be bold and courageous in eliminating spending and programs that we do not need and we cannot afford. But here is where there is going to be a debate in Washington over the next year and over the next couple of years and maybe over the next 5 years, because I will argue and insist that we cannot cut back on those investments that have the biggest impact on our economic growth. Because I was talking with President Green, and he said much of the equipment here would not be here if it had not been for the assistance of the Recovery Act, the assistance of the Department of Labor. All this stuff that we have done over the last couple of years that people were questioning, you can see it translated in the classrooms right here. The work that we are doing on student loans and Pell grants, you can see it in the students who are able to finance their retraining right here. So we cannot stop making those investments. The best antidote to a growing deficit, by the way, is a growing economy. To borrow an analogy, cutting the deficit by cutting investments in areas like education, areas like innovation, that is like trying to reduce the weight of an overloaded aircraft by removing the engine. There may be some things you need to get rid of, but you got to keep the engine.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1470, "text": "That is why even as we scour the budget for cuts and savings in the months ahead, I will continue to fight for those investments that will help America win the race for the jobs and industries of the future, and that means investments in education and innovation and infrastructure. I will be fighting for that. In an era where most new jobs will require some kind of higher education, we have to keep investing in the skills and education of our workers. By 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. That is a commitment that we are making. So to get there, we are making college more affordable for millions of students. We have made an unprecedented investment in community colleges just like this one. And just like Forsyth, we have launched a nationwide initiative to connect graduates that need a job with businesses that need their skills. We are reforming K-12 education not from the top down, but from the bottom up. Instead of indiscriminately pouring money into a system that is not working, we are challenging schools and States to compete with each other to see who can come up with reforms that raise standards and recruit and retain good teachers, raise student achievement, especially in math and science. We call it Race to the Top, where you get more funding if you show more results, because part of the argument here is, is that if we are going to have a government that is smart and helping people compete in this new global economy, then we have got to spend our money wisely. And that means we want to invest in things that are working, not in things that are not working just because that is how things have always been done. Now, once our students graduate with the skills they need for the jobs of the future, we have also got to make sure those jobs end up right here in America. We have got to make sure that the United States is the best place to do business and the best place to innovate. So it is time, for example, that we have a Tax Code that encourages job creation here in America. And to boost our recovery, I have already proposed that all American businesses should be allowed to write off all the investments they do in 2011. We want to jump-start, starting next year, plants and equipment investment right here in Winston-Salem and all across North Carolina and all across the United States of America. To encourage homegrown American innovation we should make it easier to patent a new idea or a new invention.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1471, "text": "And if you want to know one reason why more companies are choosing to do their research and development in places like China and India, it is because the United States now ranks 24th out of 38 countries in the generosity of the tax incentives we provide for research and development. So that is why I have proposed a bigger, permanent tax credit for companies for all the research and innovation they do right here in America--all of it. Now, what is also true is a lot of companies do not invest in basic research because it does not pay off right away. But that does not mean it is not essential to our economic future. Forty years ago, it probably did not seem useful or profitable for scientists and engineers to figure out how to increase the capacity of integrated circuits. Forty years later, I am still not sure what that means. What I do know is that discoveries in integrated circuits made back then led to the iPod and cell phones and GPS and CT scans, products that have led to new companies and countless new jobs in manufacturing and retail and other sectors. That is why I have set a goal of investing a full 3 percent--not 2 percent, not 2.5 percent--a full 3 percent of our gross domestic product into research and development. If this is truly going to be our Sputnik moment, we need a commitment to innovation that we have not seen since President Kennedy challenged us to go to the Moon. And we are directing a lot of that research into one of the most promising areas for economic growth and job creation, and that is clean energy technology. I do not want to see new solar panels or electric cars or advanced batteries manufactured in Europe or in Asia. I want to see them made right here in America, by American businesses and American workers. I also want to make it easier for our businesses and workers to sell their products all over the world. The more we export abroad, the more jobs we support at home. We have got to change the formula. We have got to flip the script, because what is been happening is, is that we have been doing all the buying; somebody else has been doing all the selling. We have got to start selling and have them do some buying. And that is why we have set a goal of doubling U.S. exports in 5 years. And that is why I am pleased that last week, we came closer to meeting that goal by finalizing a trade agreement with our ally, South Korea.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1472, "text": "This is a nation that offers one of the fastest growing markets for American goods. Now, here in North Carolina and all across the country, there are a lot of people that say, trade, we are not sure that that helps us. It seems like maybe it is hurt us in areas like furniture. South Korea is selling a whole bunch of stuff here, and we are not selling it there. The current deal is not a good one for us. Let us sign any trade agreement; let us cut any deal, without thinking ahead about how this is going to impact America. What this deal does is boost our annual exports to South Korea by $11 billion. That means it will support at least 70,000 American jobs--70,000 American jobs. our roads, our railways, our runways, our information superhighways. Over the last 2 years, our investment in infrastructure projects--yes, through the Recovery Act--have led to thousands of good private sector jobs and improved infrastructure here in North Carolina and all across the country. But we have got a long way to go. There is no reason that over 90 percent of the homes in South Korea have broadband Internet access and only 65 percent of American households do. There is no reason why China should have nearly 10,000 miles of high-speed rail by 2020 and America has 400. They have got 10,000; we have got 400. They have got trains that operate at speeds of over 200 mph, and I do not know how fast our trains are going. We are the nation that built the transcontinental railroad. We are the nation that took the first airplane into flight. We constructed a massive Interstate Highway System. We introduced the world to the Internet. And if we want to attract the best jobs and businesses to our shores, we have got to be that nation again. And throughout history, the investments I have talked about--in education and innovation and infrastructure--have historically commanded the support from both Democrats and Republicans. It was Abraham Lincoln who launched the transcontinental railroad and opened the National Academy of Sciences. He did it in the middle of a war, by the way. But he knew this was so important we had to make these investments for future generations. Dwight Eisenhower helped build our highways. Republican Members of Congress worked with FDR to pass the GI bill. More recently, infrastructure bills have found support on both sides of the congressional aisle.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1473, "text": "The permanent extension of research and development tax credits was proposed by both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. Our education reforms have been praised by both Democratic and Republican Governors. So the point is there should not be any inherent ideological differences that prevent Democrats and Republicans from making our economy more competitive with the rest of the world. If we are willing to put aside short-term politics, if our objective is not simply winning elections but winning the future, then we should be able to get our act together here, because we are all Americans and we are in this race together. So those of us who work in Washington have a choice to make in the coming weeks and months. We can focus on what is necessary for each party to win the news cycle or the next election. We can do what we have been doing. Or we can do what this moment demands and focus on what is necessary for America to win the future. For as difficult as the times may be, the good news is that we know what the future could look like for the United States. We can see it in the classrooms that are experimenting with groundbreaking reforms and giving children new math and science skills at an early age. We can see it in the wind farms and solar plants and advanced battery plants that are opening all across America. We can see it here at Forsyth, in your laboratories and your research facilities, and over at the biotechnology firms that are churning out jobs and businesses and lifesaving discoveries. You see it in the faces of the young people who we just visited to--visited with, Dr. Green and myself--some not-so-young faces, but people who, despite layoffs, despite hardships, felt confident in their future. Just the other month, I saw part of America's future during a science fair we held at the White House. And we talked to some of these amazing young people. It was probably as much fun as I have had in several months. But there was a team from Tennessee that had designed a self-powered water filtration plant so that homes in Appalachia could have access to clean water. And then there were these young people--these are all high school, some younger than high school--there were young people who had designed a way to make an entire town more energy efficient.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1474, "text": "And there were young people who had entered into rocket contests, and they were showing me all the rockets that they had been shooting up, and they had won an international contest, and explained to me the designs of these things--and robots that were running around in the State Dining Room and bumping into things. And then the last person I spoke to was a young woman from Dallas, Texas, and her name was Amy Chyao. She is a child of immigrants. Her parents came to the United States from China, but Amy was born here. And when she was a freshman in high school, she got interested in cancer research. She had studied biology and she got interested in cancer research. So she decided--get this--she decided to teach herself chemistry over the summer. And then she designed a device that uses light to kill hard-to-reach cancer cells while leaving the healthy ones untouched. She goes on to win the international science competition. All these kids from all around the world--she wins the competition. So now she is being approached by laboratories all across the country who want to work with her on developing this potential breakthrough cancer drug that she is designed. And I am talking to Amy and pretending like I understand what she is explaining. And as I am listening to her, I am looking at the portrait of Abraham Lincoln that hangs over her head in the State Dining Room. And I remembered all that we have been through and all that we have overcome. And I thought to myself, you know what, the idea of America is alive and well. We are going to be just fine as long as there are people like Amy and her parents who still want to come to this country and add to our story; as long as there are people like the men and women here at Forsyth Technical, who are keeping us at the top of our game; as long as we are willing to look past the disagreements of the moment and focus on the future that we share. If we can do that, I have no doubt that this will be remembered as another American century. We will meet that Sputnik moment, but we are going to all have to do it together. God bless you, and God bless America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksforsythtechnicalcommunitycollegewinstonsalemnorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Forsyth Technical Community College in Winston-Salem, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-forsyth-technical-community-college-winston-salem-north-carolina", "publication_date": "06-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1475, "text": "I am very sorry I cannot be with you personally today, because I have enjoyed that experience in the past. But I have asked my assistant and your good friend, Brooks Hays, to represent me at your conference. This conference is a matter of great interest to me and to the National Government, because we have been devoting a good deal of our time and effort to attempt to assist you in meeting the problems of our growing urban areas, an area and an environment where over 70 percent of our people live. Because of this great national challenge, we have in the past months doubled our urban renewal program to help you in your fights against slum and blight. We have developed a program to broaden the housing opportunities for people of low and moderate incomes in our great cities and towns across the country. And after a year of experience with a temporary program, we now have before the Congress a major proposal on urban mass transportation. I am confident that the Congress, which is proceeding rapidly in its consideration of this measure, will act on it favorably this year. We have greatly expanded the water pollution control program in order to join with you in providing adequate supplies of good water to meet urban and industrial needs. And we have recommended to the Congress a comprehensive program in the field of air pollution control. We have joined in attempting to assist you in the acquisition of much-needed open space land in urban areas, and I believe that last year's enactment of airport aid legislation will assure continuing progress towards meeting the objectives of the national airport plan. Through the retraining and area redevelopment programs, we are engaged in a pioneering effort to reduce chronic unemployment in many of our communities. And we have recently recommended to the Congress a public improvements program as an additional means of combating unemployment. I am sure as city officials you have been heartened by the United States Supreme Court decision requiring more equitable representation of our urban areas in State legislatures, because from that I believe progress can come. Our urban areas, and I think the country, suffered a set-back in our recent failure in establishing a Department of Urban Affairs and Housing, but I believe that this country will come more and more to realize--and the Congress will--the necessity for us organizing those departments of the federal Government which are concerned with urban affairs, in such a way as to provide maximum service to your people. This is a matter of great challenge to us in the years ahead.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstelephonethemayorsconferencemiamibeach", "title": "Remarks by Telephone to the Mayors' Conference at Miami Beach.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-telephone-the-mayors-conference-miami-beach", "publication_date": "14-05-1962", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1483, "text": "I am really proud that all of you came to the picnic that Rosalynn and I and Amy have put on with you, along with 3M Company. We are glad to be your cohosts and also the guests of a very fine example of the free enterprise system of our country. 3M was the first company in our Nation that was given the national award for conserving energy. And I think what they have done is typical of what has been done throughout the State of Wisconsin. When your former Governor, Pat Lucey, who is now a very distinguished and able Ambassador to Mexico, was in office, he initiated some conservation measures in Wisconsin which have been good as an example for the entire Nation. You as a people in Wisconsin use 20 percent less energy per person than the average throughout our country, in spite of the fact that you rank 12th in industrial production and in spite of the fact that on normal days you have cooler weather than we do in Georgia-but I think today you have equaled the Georgia climate and temperature. And neither has anyone in the United States done well enough in saving energy. Our country has a great challenge before us at this time. There is no conflict between the two things that we must do. One is to conserve energy, to stop waste, and secondly, to produce more energy in our own Nation. Our Nation's security is threatened because we are too dependent on foreign oil. So, everyone in the United States must do as we have done in the past when our country was in danger or when it was threatened-unite with one another, instead of being divided one from another, and realize that every single American is important, cut back on waste of energy in your driving habits, obey the speed limits, join in the vanpool system that 3M is doing in other parts of the country-will soon be doing here-make sure that you do not waste energy in your home, do everything you can to save precious energy. And secondly, we will have to use more solar power. We will have to use more coal from within our own country, and we will produce more oil and gas and synthetic fuels. If we do those things, there is no doubt in my mind that we can meet this present challenge. Our country, as you well know, is the greatest nation on Earth. And we have got something else as well.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspicnicsponsoredtheminnesotaminingandmanufacturingcompanyprairieduchien", "title": "Remarks at a Picnic Sponsored by the Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company in Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-picnic-sponsored-the-minnesota-mining-and-manufacturing-company-prairie-du-chien", "publication_date": "19-08-1979", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1484, "text": "First of all, I want to thank Ron and Beth for having all of us here and for being so generous with their time and their home. However, now that I-you know, I thought I knew them pretty well. I never knew they met at a Chuck Robb fundraiser. We ought to put that out. We can raise millions of dollars on this. All the lovelorn who can write a check or show up at your fundraisers-this is wonderful. So I want to thank them. And I want to thank all of you for coming and for supporting Chuck, and in just a minute, I am going to tell you why. Let me say to all of you, you went through the line and had your picture taken. I appreciate the many nice things you said and especially those of you who expressed your support for my wife, whom I hope will be helping to swell the Democratic majority in the Senate after November. I want to thank Lynda Robb for being our friend for probably 20 years now. Chuck and I were Governors together in the early eighties. Out at Camp David I have got this beautiful picture of a carriage from colonial Williamsburg, from the Southern Governors' Association meeting in 1984, that Chuck Robb gave me. And I want to tell you, quite briefly, why I am here tonight, besides the fact that, yes, I'd show up if Ron and Beth asked me to come, and yes, I'd show up if Chuck and Lynda asked me to come. But there is a great question before the American people in this election, very different from the one we faced in 1992, but in some ways, maybe even more important and perhaps even more difficult to answer properly. In 1992 the American people gave Al Gore and me a chance, but the country was mired in difficulty, and everyone knew that the way that things were being done in Washington was not working. You remember how it was then; you just took a position on an issue, and there was a position you had to take. If you were a Democrat, you had to take one position. If you were Republican, you had to take the other. And then you just stood off from one another and screamed as loud as you could and hoped you'd get your 10 seconds on the evening news, which might have been good politics but did not move America forward very much. So we set about turning the ship of state around.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatorcharlessrobb", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Charles S. Robb", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-charles-s-robb", "publication_date": "15-05-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1485, "text": "And without being self-serving, I think it is fair to say we did a pretty good job, and things are going in the right direction now. And I think it is one reason to vote for Chuck Robb and for Al Gore, because it was not because I was ENTITY; it was because we were all doing the right things. You know, some of my adversaries, now that they want to win the election before us, they spent 7 years telling everybody how bad I was; now they say I am the only guy that jumps higher than Michael Jordan-let us throw the other Democrats out. That has nothing to do with it. We did the right things, and it is very, very important. So now the question is not, how are we going to turn the ship of state around; how are we going to build our bridge to the 21st century? The question is, what are we going to do with these good times? We never had such good times before. We never had at one time so much economic progress, social progress with the absence of severe domestic distress or external threat. So what are we going to do? It is easy to get people together when they are under the gun. It is hard to get people together when things are fun. And what I would like to say to you is that I am old enough to know that nothing lasts forever and that these moments come along once in a generation if you are lucky, and you have got to make the most of them. I am also experienced enough in politics to know that our adversaries, both in the Virginia Senate race and the White House, they will be very adroit at speaking in reassuring terms and helping to blur the lines of the election. But the truth is, as Senator Robb just said, there are huge consequences to the choices the American people will make. And you have to come to terms with that, as well. If you want to change the economic policy of the country and go back to the way they did it, you can do it. If you like the way things are going, you have got to vote for Chuck Robb and for the Vice President. If you want someone to do something serious about gun violence, to keep building on the record of the last 7 1/2 years, to keep crime coming down, you can have it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatorcharlessrobb", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Charles S. Robb", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-charles-s-robb", "publication_date": "15-05-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1486, "text": "If you want someone who will not touch this issue with a 10-foot pole and will not do anything the NRA does not want them to do, you can have that, too. But you have got to make up your mind. And you cannot pretend that there are no consequences to this election. You know, one of the things I really respect about Chuck Robb is, he is a fiscal conservative; he voted with me on that budget, knowing it could beat him in the '94 election. He did not blink; he got up there and voted in '93 for the budget. And if he had not voted for it, it would have never passed. But also, after his distinguished career in the United States Marine Corps, he has supported me on every human rights initiative, including gay rights, I have ever advanced. And I respect that more than I can say. And he has supported sensible efforts to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children. Yesterday Hillary and I had-and I like it, because Al Gore and I need some Southern cover, you know. I do not know if you saw it, but there was a picture in the paper that said, gunnery sergeant for responsible gun control -it was a great sign, yesterday at this thing. You know, I just want to take a minute. This is a big choice you have got in the election. But do not let anybody you know pretend that they are voting-the Senate race or the President's race is not about what our policy is with regard to safety, public safety, or pretend that it is not about our policy with regard to human rights or pretend that it is not about our policy with regard to economics and whether you like having this surplus and you want to get America out of debt and keep investing in education or you'd rather go back and try it the way it was. I am telling you, those are three inescapable consequences of this election and your choice. Will we change economic policy? Will we continue to try to make America a safer country and have responsible measures to promote gun safety? Will we continue to advance the cause of human rights? And the fourth inescapable consequence is, will we continue to grow the economy and improve the environment at the same time or let the old way prevail, and say the heck with that?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatorcharlessrobb", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Charles S. Robb", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-charles-s-robb", "publication_date": "15-05-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1487, "text": "America's history books are filled with the names of places that are far removed from America's shores, where her strength and her will were tested, and where they triumphed. We know most of those places very well-the Argonne Anzio Okinawa and the Pusan Perimeter. Now they will add the Ia Drang Valley in the Central Highlands of South Vietnam. In one critical month there in the fall of 1965, American troops were locked in major combat with regular forces from North Vietnam. The enemy can never win Vietnam by armed conquest. the 1st Cavalry Division . Their performance in the Ia Drang Valley from October 23 to November at, 1965, has earned them a Presidential Unit Citation for heroism. Air cavalry with its mobility and its potential for surprise on the battlefield was a promising but untried concept, until the men of the 1st Cavalry, in their first test of arms, proved its validity. They proved more than a concept. To the Vietnamese people who had lived under Vietcong control for so long, their presence helped destroy the myth which the enemy had carefully built that the area was permanently tied to the enemy. The war in Vietnam, as all of you know, is a new kind of conflict. American arms are being tested there by a new kind of aggression. Of that, we and the rest of the world may be sure. In past years, our military gave us only the alternatives of permitting the enemy to have his victory undeterred, or of stopping him with a massiveness that could provoke a nuclear war. America needed a new response to meet the new form of aggression. Great names went into the construction of that response-John F. Kennedy, Robert McNamara, Maxwell Taylor. What the 1st Cavalry Division did in the Ia Drang Valley demonstrated that the new kind of warfare could be met and could be mastered. They dealt a hard blow to the Communist belief that freedom can be destroyed piece by piece. What happens in Vietnam is extremely important to this Nation's freedom and it is extremely important to the United States security. The cavalrymen who took their stand in the Central Highlands, and showed that America could meet its responsibilities in fact as well as in theory, knew that. The men in Vietnam today know it. And because they fought with such bravery and such skill, I salute them here this morning on behalf of all of their fellow citizens who live in this Nation of which all of us are so proud.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponpresentingthepresidentialunitcitationthe1stcavalrydivisionairmobile", "title": "Remarks Upon Presenting the Presidential Unit Citation to the 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) and Attached Units.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-presenting-the-presidential-unit-citation-the-1st-cavalry-division-airmobile", "publication_date": "15-09-1967", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1488, "text": "By virtue of the authority vested in me as ENTITY and as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States I have today awarded The 1st Cavalry Division and attached units distinguished themselves by outstanding performance of duty and extraordinary heroism in action against an armed enemy in the Republic of Vietnam during the period 23 October 1965 to 26 November 1965. Following the attack on a Special Forces camp at Plei Me, in Pleiku Province, on 19 October 1965 by regular units of the ENTITY of North Vietnam, the 1st Cavalry Division was committed to action. The division was initially assigned the mission of protecting the key communications center of Pleiku, in addition to providing fire support both for an ENTITY of the Republic of Vietnam armored column dispatched to the relief of the besieged camp, and for the camp itself. The 1st Cavalry Division , having recently been organized under a completely new concept in tactical mobility, and having arrived in the Republic of Vietnam only a month earlier, responded quickly with an infantry brigade and supporting forces. Using air assault techniques, the division deployed artillery batteries into firing positions deep within enemy-held territory and provided the vital fire support needed by the ARVN forces to accomplish the relief of the Special Forces camp. By 27 October, the tactical and strategic impact of the presence of a North Vietnamese regular army division in Pleiku Province necessitated a change in missions for the 1st Cavalry Division. The division was given an unlimited offensive role to seek out and destroy the enemy force. With bold thrusts, elements of the division pursued the North Vietnamese regiments across the dense and trackless jungles of the west-central highlands, seeking the enemy out in his previously secure sanctuaries and giving him no quarter. In unfavorable terrain and under logistical and tactical conditions that would have stopped a unit with less capability, motivation and esprit, the cavalrymen repeatedly and decisively defeated numerically superior enemy forces. The superb training, unflinching devotion to duty, and unsurpassed gallantry and intrepidity of the cavalrymen, individually and collectively, resulted in numerous victories and succeeded in driving the invading North Vietnamese division back from its positions at Plei Me to the foot of the Chu Pong Massif. There, in the valley of the Ia Drang, the enemy was reinforced by a fresh regiment and undertook preparations for more incursions into Pleiku Province.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponpresentingthepresidentialunitcitationthe1stcavalrydivisionairmobile", "title": "Remarks Upon Presenting the Presidential Unit Citation to the 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) and Attached Units.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-presenting-the-presidential-unit-citation-the-1st-cavalry-division-airmobile", "publication_date": "15-09-1967", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1504, "text": "I am profoundly moved by the trust you have placed in me. I deeply feel the responsibility which goes with your nomination for President of the United States at this grave hour of our nation's history. That I have not sought this responsibility, all of you know. I told the people of my State, two years ago, that it was my intention to devote my full term as governor exclusively to their service. In accordance with the principles of our republican form of government you have laid upon me the highest duty to which an American can be called. No one has a right to refuse such a call. With the help of God, I will try to be worthy of the trust. I accept the nomination. I am happy and proud to be associated with my good friend from the State of Ohio, John W. Bricker. For many months, John Bricker has gone from state to state telling the people of the issues, of the great need for better government, for the sound principles of government, and the leader-ship which will come to it with a Republican victory this year. Never before have I seen such good sportsmenship as that displayed by John Bricker here this morning and I am proud to be associated with him. I come to this great task a free man. I have made no pledges, promises or commitments, expressed or implied, to any man or woman. I shall make none, except to the American people. To men and women of the Republican Party everywhere I pledge my utmost efforts in the months ahead. In return, I ask for your support. Without it, I cannot discharge the heavy obligation you lay upon me. To Americans of every party I pledge that on Jan. 20 next year our government will again have a cabinet of the ablest men and women to be found in America. The members of that Cabinet will expect and will receive full delegation of the powers of their office. They will be capable of administering those powers. They will each be experienced in the task to be done and young enough to do it. This election will bring an end to one-man government in America. To Americans of every party I pledge a campaign dedicated to one and above all others-that this nation under God may continue in the years ahead a free nation of free men. At this moment on battlegrounds around the world Americans are dying for the freedom of our country. Their comrades are pressing on in the face of hardship and suffering. They are pressing on for total victory and for the liberties of all of us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressacceptingthepresidentialnominationtherepublicannationalconventionchicago1", "title": "Address Accepting the Presidential Nomination at the Republican National Convention in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-accepting-the-presidential-nomination-the-republican-national-convention-chicago-1", "publication_date": "28-06-1944", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Thomas Dewey"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1505, "text": "Everything we say or do today and in the future must be devoted to the single purpose of that victory. Then, when victory is won, we must devote ourselves with equal unity of purpose to re-winning at home the freedom they have won at such desperate cost abroad. The American people are united with you to the limit of our resources and manpower, devoted to the single task of victory and the establishment of a firm and lasting peace. By this political campaign, which you are unable to understand, our will to victory will be strengthened, and with every day you further delay surrender the consequences to you will be more severe. That we shall win this war none of us and few of our enemies can now have any doubt. But how we win this war is of major importance for the years ahead. We won the last war but it did not stay won. This time we must also win the purposes for which we are fighting. Germany must never again nourish the delusion that she could have won. We must carry to Japan a defeat so crushing and complete that every last man among them knows that he has been beaten. We must not merely defeat the armies and the navies of our enemies. We must defeat, once and for all, their will to make war. Never again. The military conduct of the war is outside this campaign. It is and must remain completely out of politics. General Marshall and Admiral King are doing a superb job. Let me make it crystal clear that a change of administration next January cannot and will not involve any change in the military conduct of the war. If there is not now any civilian interference with the military and naval commands, a change in administration will not alter this status. If there is civilian interference, the new administration will put a stop to it forthwith. But the war is being fought on the home front as well as abroad, while all of us are deeply proud of the military conduct of the war, can we honestly say that the home front could not bear improvement? The present administration in Washington has been in office for more than 11 years. Today, it is at war with Congress, and at war with itself. Squabbles between Cabinet members, feuds between rival bureaucrats and bitterness between the President and his own party members, in and out of Congress, have become the order of the day. In the vital matters of taxation, price control, rationing, labor relations, manpower, we have become familiar with the spectacle of wrangling, bungling and confusion.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressacceptingthepresidentialnominationtherepublicannationalconventionchicago1", "title": "Address Accepting the Presidential Nomination at the Republican National Convention in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-accepting-the-presidential-nomination-the-republican-national-convention-chicago-1", "publication_date": "28-06-1944", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Thomas Dewey"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1506, "text": "Does anyone suggest that the present national administration is giving either efficient or competent government? We have not heard that claim made, even by its most fanatical supporters. No, all they tell us is that in its young days it did some good things. That we freely grant. But now it has grown old in office. It seems that the great men who founded this nation really did know what they were talking about when they said that three terms were too many. When we have won the war, we shall still have to win the peace. We are agreed, all of us, that America will participate with other sovereign nations in a cooperative effort to prevent future wars. Let us face up boldly to the magnitude of that task. We shall not make secure the peace of the world by mere words. We cannot do it simply by drawing up a fine-sounding treaty. It can not be the work of any one man or of a little group of rulers who meet together in private conferences. The structure of peace must be built. It must be the work of many men. We must have as our representatives in this task the ablest men and women America can pro-duce, and the structure they join in building must rest upon the solid rock of a united American public opinion. I am not one of those who despair of achieving that end. I am utterly confident we can do it. For years, we have had men in Washington who were notoriously weak in certain branches of arithmetic but they specialized in division. They have been playing up minor differences of opinion among our people until the people of other countries might have thought that America was cleft in two. Recently the overwhelming majesty of that broad area of agreement has become obvious. The Republican Party can take pride in helping to define it and broaden it. There are only a few, a very few, who really believe that America should try to remain aloof from the world. There are only a relatively few who believe it would be practical for America or her allies to renounce all sovereignty and join a Super-state. I certainly would not deny these two extremes the right to their opinions; but I stand firmly with the overwhelming majority of my fellow citizens in that great wide area of agreement. That agreement was clearly expressed by the Republican Mackinac Declaration and was adopted in the foreign policy plank of this Convention. No organization for peace will last if it is slipped through by stealth or trickery or the momentary hypnotism of high-sounding phrases.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressacceptingthepresidentialnominationtherepublicannationalconventionchicago1", "title": "Address Accepting the Presidential Nomination at the Republican National Convention in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-accepting-the-presidential-nomination-the-republican-national-convention-chicago-1", "publication_date": "28-06-1944", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Thomas Dewey"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1507, "text": "We shall have to work and pray and be patient and make sacrifices to achieve a really lasting peace. That is not too much to ask in the name of those who have died for the future of our country. This is no task for men who specialize in dividing our people. It is no task to be entrusted to stubborn men, grown old and tired and quarrelsome in office. We learned that in 1919. The building of the peace is more than a matter of international co-operation. God has endowed America with such blessings as to fit her for a great role in the world. We can only play that role if we are strong and healthy and vigorous as nature has equipped us to be. It would be a tragedy if after this war Americans returned from our armed forces and failed to find the freedom and opportunity for which they fought. This must be a land where every man and woman has a fair chance to work and get ahead. Never again must free Americans face the spectre of long-continued, mass unemployment. We Republicans are agreed that full employment shall be a first objective of national policy. And by full employment I mean a real chance for every man and woman to earn a decent living. What hope does the present administration offer here? In 1940, the year before this country entered the war, there were still 10,000,000 unemployed. After seven years of unequalled power and unparalleled spending, the New Deal had failed utterly to solve that problem. It never solved that problem. It was left to be solved by war. Do we have to have a war to get jobs? What are we now offered? Only the dreary prospect of a continued war economy after the war, with interference piled on interference and petty tyrannies rivaling the very regimentation against which we are now at war. The present administration has never solved this fundamental problem of jobs and opportunity. It can never solve this problem. It has never even understood what makes a job. It has never been for full production. It has lived in chattering fear of abundance. It has specialized in curtailment and restriction. It has been consistently hostile to and abusive of American business and American industry, although it is in business and industry that most of us make our living. In all the record of the past 11 years is there anything that suggests the present administration can bring about high-level employment after this war? Is there any reason to believe that those who have so signally failed in the past can succeed in the future?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressacceptingthepresidentialnominationtherepublicannationalconventionchicago1", "title": "Address Accepting the Presidential Nomination at the Republican National Convention in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-accepting-the-presidential-nomination-the-republican-national-convention-chicago-1", "publication_date": "28-06-1944", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Thomas Dewey"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1508, "text": "The problem of jobs will not be easily solved; but it will never be solved at all unless we get a new, progressive administration in Washington-and that means a Republican administration. For one hundred and fifty years America was the hope of the world. Here on this great broad continent we had brought into being something for which men had longed throughout all history. Here, government derived its just powers from the consent of the governed. Here men believed passionately in freedom, independence-the God-given right of the individual to be his own master. Yet, with all of this freedom-I insist-because of this freedom-ours was a land of plenty. In a fashion unequalled anywhere else in the world, America grew and strengthened; our standard of living became the envy of the world. In all lands, men and women looked toward America as the pattern of what they, themselves, desired. And because we were what we were, good will flowed toward us from all corners of the earth. An American was welcomed everywhere and looked upon with admiration and regard. At times, we had our troubles; made our share of mistakes; but we faltered only to go forward with renewed vigor. It remained for the past eleven years, under the present national administration, for continuing unemployment to be accepted with resignation as the inevitable condition of a nation past its prime. It is the New Deal which tells us that America has lost its capacity to grow. We shall never build a better world by listening to those counsels of defeat. Is America old and worn out as the New Dealers tell us? Look to the reaches of the wide Pacific-to the corners of the world where American men are fighting. our country is just fighting its way through to new horizons. The future of America has no limit. True, we now pass through dark and troubled times, scarcely a home escapes the touch of dread anxiety and grief; yet in this hour the American spirit rises, faith returns-faith in our God, faith in our fellowman, faith in the land our fathers died to win, faith in the future, limitless and bright, of this, our country. In the name of that faith we shall carry our cause in the coming months to the American people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressacceptingthepresidentialnominationtherepublicannationalconventionchicago1", "title": "Address Accepting the Presidential Nomination at the Republican National Convention in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-accepting-the-presidential-nomination-the-republican-national-convention-chicago-1", "publication_date": "28-06-1944", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Thomas Dewey"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1522, "text": "Can I ask you, make it so quiet temporarily you can hear a pin drop? It is great to be in Rochester-Monroe County and the great State of New York. It is my privilege and honor to be here with some of your wonderful local people, some that represent the whole State. And let me express my deep appreciation and gratitude to your senior Senator, Jack Javits. And then we have got one of your hometown boys--he has grown quite a bit--the former judge and our State chairman, Dick Rosenbaum. Now, let me say something about some people that I want to be with me in Washington for the next 4 years. First, I want you to reelect for your benefit, for the country's benefit, for our benefit, Frank Horton. And then another one of your outstanding, super guys that has helped me so much, who can help you, help the State, help the country, Barber Conable. And then I want you to send down to Washington--or to keep him there, that is what I really mean-your good friend, your Senator, Jim Buckley. Now, for just a minute I would like to first express my deep appreciation and gratitude for the tremendous turnout in Michigan weather. Now, having said that, when I became your President 26 months ago, things were tough. We were on the brink of a recession. People had lost faith and confidence in the White House. We were still involved in Vietnam. And as I stood in the East Room of the White House and took the oath of office, it was not an easy time--America was in turmoil. You have not confirmed me by your ballots. I ask that you confirm me by your prayers. And the net result is America got our ship of state on a steady course, we put a firm hand on the tiller. And America has made an incredible comeback, and you did it, and I thank you. We have cut inflation by more than 50 percent, and we are going to do better. We have added 4 million jobs in the last 18 months, and we are going to do better. We have restored trust and honesty in the White House, and I pledge that is the way it will be for the next 4 years. But today, we can all be proud and thankful that not a single young American is fighting or dying on any foreign battlefield.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeparturefromrochesternewyork", "title": "Gerald R. Ford Remarks on Departure From Rochester, New York", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-departure-from-rochester-new-york", "publication_date": "31-10-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1533, "text": "I thank you. We love Wisconsin. But you know we are having massive crowds all over the place and I will tell you what, I look at a poll we are even in Wisconsin. With what I have done for you, USMCA, we got rid of those horrible You know what you were being charged? 287% tariff to do business with Canada. I heard about that. I did not like that. Your specialty milk people got me. Do you believe it? It was all about specialty milk. That was like the straw that broke the camel's back. I said, What do you mean? And we knocked the hell out of it and we got the brand new USMCA. Sleepy Joe cannot do that, it is not in his vocabulary. He has no idea what we just said. He is sitting in his basement right now watching us. He has no idea. I hate to do this to you. I was a great hair day, and then I heard you at 40 mile an hour winds. I said, All right, give me the cap. I do not do it often. But now I am looking at that beautiful sight. As beautiful as that is, OSHA, as beautiful as that is, I do not know that I'd want to be those people right in that little corner. But they have no fear, do you? You have confidence in ENTITY. Yeah, we get good equipment. It is great to be back in Wisconsin with thousands of loyal, hard-working Americans. We had a problem, big problem in Texas. We had a surge, they opened it up, it is all opened up. Arizona, they had a surge. I will tell you what, when you look at our numbers compared to what is going on in Europe and other places, but we are doing well. We are going to have one of the best economic years we have ever had next year. One of the best we have ever had. 17 days from now, we are going to win the state of Wisconsin, and we are going to win four more years in the running. By the way, early voting begins on Tuesday, so get out and vote. Now, we have had great success in your state and I have been very good to you, likewise, with the ships. You build good ships. You know that, right? A lot of other states wanted that contract. I probably lost some states because of it, but we gave you the big contract.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1534, "text": "Honestly, I went to the yards. It is incredible what you do. This is the most important election in the history of our country. Six months ago I was saying, Well, how do you compare with the last one? The fact is, this is the single most important election in the history of our country. Sleepy Joe Biden's made a corrupt bargain. You saw the bargain he made, in exchange for his party's nomination, which he should not have gotten because if Pocahontas got out one day early, I'd be running against Crazy Bernie, which would have been okay, too. I would have had a small but energized base. Now we have a little bit larger base to run against, but there is zero energy. They are reporting on it. We have got the most energy in the history of politics, and he is got the least. Biden handed control of his party over to hardcore militant left. The Democrat Party, you once knew no longer exists, it is now a party of socialists and Marxists and left wing extremists. They would kill your jobs, dismantle your police departments, and you have a lot of great law enforcement people here today. I think we have every single law enforcement group in the country's endorsed us. You know they endorsed us, first time they have ever endorsed a presidential candidate. Everybody's endorsed us. During the debate, I said, Joe, name one group, law enforcement, that is endorsed you. And then, Chris Wallace bailed him out. I said, Joe, say the words law and order. He would not do it. I said, Say the words loiter, then Chris Wallace bailed him again. But he cannot , because if he says law and order, that means he loses the radical left, which I think he is losing anyway. But they want to dissolve your borders, raise your taxes, destroy your suburbs. Oh, have I saved your suburbs. The women, they keep telling me about suburban women. I think suburban women liked it. I have only saved your house, and frankly, I have saved your way of life. I have saved the American dream. But they keep saying, ENTITY has a problem. Well, last time they said the same thing. They said I had a problem with women, period. Was that the greatest of all time? It is probably the greatest night in the history of television, right? We had so much fun.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1535, "text": "The tears that were flowing out of pure We have another one of them coming up next week, Kristen Welker. She deleted her entire account. I have known her for a long time. We did very well the other night with a person I knew was even more unfair, Savannah. In fact, nobody's seen Savannah for two days. What happened to Savannah? What happened to Savannah? They said, We'd like to give Savannah Guthrie I said, That is all right. What difference does it make? They ask you a question, you give them an answer. But she was sort of jumping out of her seat. She was like, I told you. I told you. I said, I do not care what you told me. What does that mean? We actually got eight plus marks on that. Then you watch Sleepy Joe get interviewed by George Stephanopoulos. I interviewed with him two weeks ago. He is giving these lobs in slow motion, lobs. But they want to fund extreme, late-term abortion. They want to pack the Supreme Court. It could end up with 16, 1920. They want to put far left judges on the court. They are going to pick people so far left, and you will end up with far left justices like we have never had ever before. They want to protect criminals and disarm law-abiding Americans. They want to take away your second amendment. If Biden wins the lawless demonstrators in our streets, and you see them all the time, they are democratic-run. They should actually change their name to the Democratic. I said, Why do not you try changing your name officially? But they are lawless demonstrators, and they are, they are all Democrat-run cities and states, almost every single one of them, and they do not want to really take care of it. They do not want to take care of law enforcement. You see what is going on in Seattle. First of all, the police who we love, they are all quitting, they are all leaving. They'd still be occupying Seattle, except they found out that we were going in the morning that they all raised their hands. The reason they raised their hands is we were going in that morning, we were going to take over. Can you believe it? We are going to take over the section, the large section of Seattle that these anarchists had.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1536, "text": "In theory, we have to be asked and the Federal Government has to be asked. But we went into Minneapolis, and you know what happened? Remember, they formed a line, they formed another line, they were not socially distance, which is very bad. In fact, they were very close. They had helmets that cost a fortune. They formed those lines, and then they said, Okay, let us go. This is after two weeks of destruction in Minneapolis. That is why we are going to win Minnesota for the first time since 1972, Republican Party. Now, it does not hurt that in Minnesota they have Ilhan Omar, who hates our country, who is broken the law, she is broken the law. Let us see what happens, but she is broken the law. But she hates our country. We are going to win because of what we did with Minneapolis, we saved Minneapolis, and we saved Seattle. Do you want to know the truth? We are sort of saving the whole country if you really think about it. That is why we have spirit, the likes of which I do not think any campaign has ever had. You know something? I just left Michigan. You know that. It is supposed to go like 70, 80% to the Democrats, and then we come in with the big red wave. So they will start big heavy when it gets the early voting, but especially on that November third day, we are going to be swamping it. So this is early, but still hundreds of thousands of votes. We are supposed to be down big, and then we catch it like a race horse. That was what was supposed to sort of happen, and then you see what happens in the end. But something strange has happened in Michigan. We brought back many car plants, many, many. They had not brought back a plant, I think it is 42 years, and we brought back many and expansion the car plant. In Michigan, a strange thing has happened. We are leading substantially in the early voting. What is that all about? What is that all about? You cannot see it. As far as the eye can see, you have people. This election day, the people of Wisconsin, and you know what? We win Wisconsin, we win the whole ballgame. What the hell do you think I am doing here on a freezing night with 45 degree winds. What do you think? Do you think I am doing this for my health? I am not doing this for my health.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1537, "text": "I am doing it for that, and I am doing it for that. This election day, the people of Wisconsin must stop these anti-American radicals by issuing Sleepy Joe Biden. He has no clue anyway. Look, let us not kid ourselves. Let us not kid ourselves. Think of it, think of it, because this puts pressure on you. I am running against perhaps in the history of presidential politics, the worst candidate. Obama would not even endorse him. And then even after he won, I did not think Obama Now I heard that today, they said, Sir? Well, we have a little problem. Obama is going to campaign for him. He campaigned harder than Hillary Clinton did for Hillary, and it just made us stronger. But it is true, by issuing Joe Biden, a tremendous defeat at the ballot box. 56% of the American people, Gallup poll, right, say that they are better off today than they were four years ago under the Obama/Biden Administration. Think of what we are saying. By the way, that is a record, 56% of the people, and that is during, and we are rounding the corner, we got the vaccines, all that, but even without it, we are rounding the corner. You will see it. We are rounding the corner. Frankly, except for a little politics, but we have unbelievable vaccines are coming out real soon, and the therapeutics are unbelievable, and the cures. I did not feel so good, I will be honest with you. I had not been sick in a long time. I do not have any time to get sick. If you are busy, you do not get sick because you have no time. You do not think about it. I was not feeling like Superman. All of a sudden, the doctor, we have great doctors. One thing with being president, you got more doctors than any human being. I am lying down in a bed, I got 12 doctors from Johns Hopkins Hospital, university, great people, all great. And they love their president. They love their country. But I have doctors, they wanted to touch every single part of my body. All I know is the next morning I felt stronger than I have ever I wanted to get out there and I wanted to make new trade deals for your jobs, and I wanted to deal a lot of things. We have done a great job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1538, "text": "But the most menacing aspect of the Biden/Harris agenda is their attack of law and order. I came in and I had your sheriff, and what a great guy, Beth, I had your sheriff's endorsement and a lot of other endorsements in Kenosha. You ever hear of a place called Kenosha? Say what you want. I will tell you what. I give your governor credit. Unlike Oregon, because we could solve Portland in about, I'd say, 22 minutes. They live in the basement with their parents. They go home with their parents, but wise guys, right? You know nobody likes to say it. We can solve that in two minutes, but they do not want to do it. At least you governor said, Let us go in and let us solve the problem. And we solved it. But we solved and we saved Kenosha. And I want to thank the sheriff and I want to thank the chief, I want to thank all of the law enforcement that was there. I want to thank the people that were helping rebuild their stores and their businesses. I never thought of Kenosha that it would be an important part of my life. But I will tell you what. Your law enforcement did a great job, we did a great job, and I want to thank everybody involved. Our law enforcement in this country, if you let them do fairly what they do better than anybody in the world, they would not have any problem. They would not have any problem. You look at what is going on in New York under Democrats. You look at what is going on in Chicago under Democrats, Portland, Oakland under Democrats, Baltimore under Democrats. We have a great young Congress woman, hopefully running in Baltimore. I hope she gets her shot, Republican. I hope she gets her shot. Today, I want to explain to you the threat that their far left plans pose to the safety of your family, your community, and your country. If you give the power to Democrats, the radical left will defund, disband, disarm, and dismantle police departments all across America. Ask if he supports slashing police funding. You saw this last week. Honestly, look, he did not even understand the question, but that is what he said. It is just like fracking, right? He said, There'll be no fracking for a year. Elizabeth Warren refuses to get out so Bernie can have the nomination.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1539, "text": "Joe lucks into it on a Super Tuesday, and now he is standing in Pennsylvania and they want to frack because they have a million fracking jobs and because we are energy independent and things. He goes from saying for a year and a half, There will be no fracking. I wanted to put on a screen, but it was so windy we would've needed 15 cranes to hold up the screen. But we have it. He says no fracking like 18 times. Goes to Pennsylvania, which we are going to win, too. Because in Pennsylvania, I know it, I went to school there, in Pennsylvania, they believe in law and order, and they believe in energy, and they believe in intelligence. They believe in intelligence. He now goes to Pennsylvania, he gets hit hard, and he all of a sudden says, I never said that. First of all, always follow with these politicians, because I have only been doing this for a short while. No, I have only been doing it for a short while, but one thing I have learned But I have known politics. I have been dealing on the other side of politics. And he said it for a long time, along with everybody else in his party, and there is no way he could not do what he did not agree to in the first place. He gets up and he says, In Pennsylvania, no, no, we will frack. And the whole place, and not one, see all the fake news media back there, nobody said to him, But for a year and a half, you said there'd be no fracking, and now you said there'll be fracking. Nobody asked him that question. Only in Wisconsin could this happen. I know you well. As long as I am president, we will never defund the police. We will strongly defend our police. I will always stand with the heroes of law enforcement. I think I am endorsed by every law enforcement group all over the country, beyond the country. I get world endorsements. I want common sense. The Biden plan calls for abolishing cash bail. You have a murderer. Look at what happened to New York. They abolished cash bail. They are going to release 400,000 criminals onto your streets and into your neighborhoods if crazy Joe becomes president. No, no, running against him, it puts such pressure because I am running against the worst in the history of presidential.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1540, "text": "If I lose, I will have lost to the worst candidate, the worst candidate in the history of presidential politics. If I lose, what do I do? I'd rather run against somebody who is extraordinarily talented. At least this way, I can go and lead my life. We are going to win at numbers. We are going to win in numbers. That is what the first Their plan also includes disarming law abiding citizens, namely taking away your second amendment. I am very proud of that because any guy, being a developer, you just learn how to do it. But we had an entire, very powerful party. They have two things. They have a very powerful Democrat party that always sticks together. They do not have any of these rebels that we have in the Republican party. I call them stupid people. I call them stupid, stupid people because they play right into the hands. But the Democrats really do not have that. They have two things. Like, Let us impeach him even though he did nothing wrong. Now, what we have is we have much better policies like how about we want a strong border? They do not want to have a border. They want to have open borders, right? We do not want sanctuary cities. We do not want to protect criminals. We want jobs, we want low taxes. We have a lot of good things, but I tell the Republicans all the time, a lot of peoples have a lot of influence over the party so you got to get tougher. You got to get only fairer, but you got to get meaner, but you got to get tougher because they play a tougher game. But we have these rebels. By the way, they usually end up outside of politics in a very short time. We make sure of that. For the entire summer, Biden was silent as radicals, anarchists, arsonists, and vandals rampaged through Democrat-run cities in Minneapolis, Chicago, New York, Seattle, Portland, and other places. Biden called them peaceful protesters. This is a peaceful I have no idea, it is Ali Velshi, I have a really good Ali Velcher, shaved head, right? I am thinking about doing that. That way I do not have to worry about that. No, he shaved it all off, he does not have to worry about How does it look, darling? I said, Who could top me?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1541, "text": "Well, she said, Well, JFK was good looking, but nothing like you. Now you go home and you see this crazy CNN. But you will see them say, ENTITY said he is better looking than JFK. You will see it. They are sick people, they got a lot of problems. Earlier this month, rioters laid waste to suburban residential neighborhoods just outside of Milwaukee. Biden will appease the rioters and the looters and the anarchists, and I am having them arrested. You know what we are doing. And you know when they knock down statues, you notice that is very much stopped. They go to jail for a period of 10 years. They were getting all set to take down the incredible statue of Andrew Jackson right by the White House, right? And I will tell you what. The police are afraid if they touch somebody or speak to somebody rudely, there'll be destroyed, their pension will be gone, their family will be gone. No, we got to protect our police, we have got to take care. And you are going to have problems and you are going to have mistakes. They will choke, they have a decision to make. They have a quarter of a second sometimes to make. And you will have some bad cops. And we got to do something about those bad cops. But 99.9, I mean, they are the most incredible people and they keep us safe. They keep us safe. They keep us safe. So we have to take care of them. Nobody talks about that. Nobody talks about that. You saw a month ago with the two sitting in a car. The anti-police rhetoric of Joe Biden and the Democrat party is really what causes a lot of this too. But it puts police officers in harm's way. It really puts them in harm's way. Biden referred to police as the enemy, he just referred, the enemy, quote, quote, the enemy. He does not believe that. I really do not believe I should not say that. But I do not believe he believes it. Joe's running mate, oh, how do you like her? Did Mike Pence do a great job? Did our great vice president do a great job? I mean, I could not believe he picked her. And I have said it a lot. She treated him worse than any would have. I could tell them it is not that easy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1542, "text": "We have done more than any administration in the first three and a half years in the history of our country. We have rebuilt our military, we have cut more regulation than any other administration by a factor of a lot. And we all did this. We have more federal judges by the end of the first term than any other administration. In fact, percentage wise, the only one that has more, there is only one president that has more percentage wise, not the number. Because we will have 300, maybe even more than that by the end of the first term. But there is only one president that has a higher percentage than I have. Give him a Make America Great Again hat. We made it great again and now we are going to make it great again because we had to close it up, save two million lives, and now we are opening it up and we are doing record numbers. Joe's running mate and America's most liberal Senator, Kamala Harris, recently urged their supporters to donate to a fund that bailed out the rioters that did so much harm and even physical damage to people, but damage in Minneapolis. And they wanted to bail them out of jail. And she was heading up a group to get them out of jail. He attempted killing a policeman. 13 members of Biden's staff donated to the same fund. By the way, they talk about fundraising, right? I am good at fundraising. I could be the greatest fundraiser in history. I am the president of the United States. But I will tell you what, think of this. If I wanted to pick up a phone and call Wall Street, say the FIG firms, say, Yeah, I got to raise X dollars. They will do it, every one. I could have more money. The problem is if you do that, what happens is when they call you in two months, three months, four months because they need something, you got to take their call and you got to do it. So Biden is raising a lot of money because they are promising all these things to all these people. Now, I have a much better platform because I am the president, right? I could raise money. We are doing great on the small donors. But I could raise more money than anybody in the history of politics. But I do not want to call these people and say, Do me a favor, the head of Goldman Sachs. I do not want to say, Do me a favor.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1543, "text": "Nobody could ever raise money like me. I just do not want to do it because it puts us all, meaning us, I did this for us, not for me. I did not do it for me. I lost a fortune. This job has cost me billions and billions of dollars, billions. They do not like to say that. And yet, if a man from Kuwait comes up and stays at one of my hotels for $259. 13, takes a room. Next day, ENTITY takes Arab as a guest in one of hotels. I mean, billions I lost. And that is okay because I am doing something that is the most important thing I have ever done. What the hell difference does it make? But I have lost billions. And I never talk about it. They never talk about it. So I get paid, I guess, $400,000, $450,000. And I give up my salary. I do not get it. You do not read that. You do not read it. It is not good for them to say that. And I do not talk about it. But tonight, I will talk about it. So I get the highest salary because you are the president. And I give it up, I do not take it. I would say it costs me two, three, maybe more billion dollars. I have good kids. They do not do jobs. Can you imagine if they wanted to go to the Middle East and do jobs all over the place? I'd have hotels being built in every city, in every country in the world. And I have great kids and they are ambitious kids. They'd like to do it. I say, You cannot do it. And by the way, there is no legal reason you cannot do it. You can not go to Saudi Arabia and all these different places that we protect and we do all these things and that buy a lot of our planes and a lot of our everything, you cannot allow them. You cannot allow them. But I would be the greatest fundraiser in the history of politics. But if you do not mind, we do not need the money. And we will not do it that way. But they are raising a lot of money. And every time I see them raising a lot of money, I say, because I know exactly what is going on, Deals are being made. Especially when you look at Joe Biden . I mean, look at what is going on with that family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1544, "text": "The Democrat party's war on cops is driving police officers to leave their jobs in record numbers. No one is hurt more by the left wing crusade against law enforcement than African-Americans. And you look at it and you know it. Last year, and by the way, large percentages of our police men and women are African-Americans. Last year, in just four Democrat-run cities, over 1000 African-Americans were murdered as a result of violent crime. This year, murders in Democrat cities have increased by more than 30%. And we'd help them. We'd help them. We want to help them. More than half of the victims are African-Americans. Joe Biden and the left ignore these American victims. We are never going to ignore them. We have done more for the Black community than any president with the exception of Abraham Lincoln. Obama could not do it. I do not even think he tried to do it, frankly. But he could have never done it. Bush could not do it, none of them could do it then. Criminal justice reform, I did it. Prison reform, we did it. We did things nobody We worked on that with a great senator from South Carolina, Tim Scott. You went to one. Oh, which one did you go to? I love them. Well, anyway, they have to be happy with me. But listen, so after three years, every three years, every year a group of 44 people, 44, 45, they'd come up, the head people at all of these colleges, and they'd come up and I'd see him. And the first year I saw them, I thought it was routine and they were up because they needed money for the colleges. Second year, I said, What are you doing back here? And then I see them the third year and I say, Wait a minute, let us get this straight. You mean you come up here every three years to beg for money? He said, We beg for money. And we feel like beggars. He told me exactly those words. Obama never did it. Obama never did it. And I said, So wait, here is what we are going to do. We are going to get you long-term funding. And here is what I did. I got them more money than they were asking for. And I said, The only bad news is I may never see you again. I may never see you again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1545, "text": "But we did that for the Black community. And we did a lot of other things. And I say that nobody's done more for the Black community. With all of that, the biggest thing of all is criminal justice reform. You know about Alice Johnson. And we have so many people like Alice. Do you want to vote for the candidate supported by anti-American rioters? Or do you want to vote for the candidate supported by so many of our great people and the heroes of law enforcement? Biden made a speech, I think it was today. I mean, he makes so few of them. I think he stays in his place in Delaware. And I like Delaware, but does he ever leave Delaware? But he made a speech. And they never say this. They never say it. We come here, take those cameras and show them please. No, I am telling you, today, I think the camera slipped. Because in his case, they should not show the audience. In our case, they should. And I am saying nobody reports that. And he never leaves his little area. And you know, I will tell you what, as president of the United States, I met with Gold Star families the other week, I meet with a lot of people. I have an obligation. I cannot lock myself into a basement in the White House. I cannot lock myself into a beautiful bedroom at the top of the White House where there is no risk, no nothing. I am the president of the United States. And I would often say, I meet people, and these are incredible, like the Gold Star families. They lost sons and daughters and husbands in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places. And I cannot say, I want to cancel the meeting. And I met about 48 families. And when they come up to you, and they are close, and they were tested and all. And when they come up to you and they want to say, My son was so brave, and they want to tell you the story, it is amazing. This is in almost all case. I say, So tell me what happened. And she was shot down, sir, in Iraq. And then they tell me what happened and how brave and how great. And I cannot say, Do me a favor. You just cannot do that. And I say, every time I meet with groups of people, it is not all like that. But I cannot cancel, like cancel culture.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1546, "text": "They want to cancel everything, right? I cannot cancel these people. I have to take care of our people. And every time I do it, I say, It is risky. And sure as hell, I caught it. I can now jump into the audience and give you all a big kiss. The women and the men, I will kiss. I will even kiss the men. I will kiss those big powerful men down there. I will not love it, but I will kiss them. But I have an obligation. Somebody said, Why did you do this? Why did you do that? I said, Because these meetings are so important to people and you are the president. And I cannot do that. And really, I got really well taken care of. And we are going to make what I had available to everybody free. And it is been incredible, what we have been able to do. If you support our police, if you stand with the heroes of law enforcement, then you must defeat the Democrats on November 3rd. You have to do it. You have to do it. And by the way, I hate to say it. I got a little briefing. I have been here before, but I got a little briefing on the area. But it is a Democrat area that really likes ENTITY a lot. And a lot of us are really great, really great workers. And the workers like me. You know who does not like me? The heads of the union, they never like me. You know who does like me? The people in the union, they like me. But I will tell you, this is largely a lot of Democrats. And many people in this audience are Democrats, but they are Democrats that are going to vote for ENTITY. And I appreciate it. And I take care of our workers and I take care of jobs. And China will not get away with what they got away with. They are not going to get away with it. We just finished an incredible trade deal. And all of that is good, but you know what? Does that make sense to you? It does not mean what it would have meant had they not put us through. Because they stopped it from going into China, but they did not stop it from going to the rest of the world, including our country, Europe, the rest of the world. So your Democrats, some of them By the way, just seriously, I am just curious, raise your hand if you are a", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1547, "text": "Seriously, I am going to do a poll that costs nothing, right? I like these polls that cost nothing. They do a poll, it costs $1 million. They interviewed like 12 people, right? We have interviewed 253 people. They over-sample Democrats by 28%. I said, Yeah, but you are interviewing mostly Democrats. You ever see that? I guess there must be a legal reason why they have to put it, but they over- sample by 18% ,20%, 21%. So I was down in all nine places that I had to win. Well, you are down at all nine places. By the end of the evening, I won all nine places. Other than that, they did a great job of polling. They even had me believing it for awhile. But what I did not believe, because we had a lot of spirit four years ago, and by the way, nothing like we have now. And it sounds like very little, but that is a lot. Normally, a crowd like this would be for the night before for a candidate, one time shot. We have this all over. You ought to see what we had in Pennsylvania, in Florida. We were in Florida, we had, I think, 41,000 people. We were in Atlanta. We just got back from Georgia. I mean, it is like this. But the spirit, we have much more spirit now than we ever had four years ago. And we had a record. Look, Hillary was a lot smarter than Sleepy Joe, let us not kid ourselves. They will not let the fact that we caught him in a total corrupt deal, they will not let the news get out. And in all fairness to Fox, I have my own problems with Fox, but at least Fox is letting it out. And I will tell you who is incredible. It is the fifth largest paper in America. And they are all in to finding out about all of this Joe Biden. So we are thrilled to be here with some incredible people and you are going to be joined by a man And I mean this too. And you know, I say, Oh, everybody's wonderful, and then half the time you cannot stand them, but you got to say it, but this guy is wonderful. He is one of the smartest people in the Senate. A lot of people do not know that. See, I know that because I do a lot of very complex things.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1548, "text": "And there are not a lot of people that understand, but he understands and nobody understands finance better. But now what he is doing on, he is the chairman of Homeland security, what he is doing on corruption is unbelievable. And I am very proud of your state for a lot of reasons, but one of the reasons is that you have a senator named Ron Johnson. Would you get him up please? I got to get him up. He deserves it. He deserves it. Secret service is worried about it. He is one of the greatest people. He is one of the greatest senators. And I guess, whenever the hell you are running, I will be here for you. I will tell you that. Well, thank you, Mr. President, as I was saying in the pre-program, what I admire about ENTITY is his tenacity. The unfair treatment in the press by the Democrats, by the deep state, it does not deter him. And he talked about the First Step Act. It was going nowhere until ENTITY stepped up to the plate and made sure he got it done and he did. Another piece of legislation that is very dear to my heart, was something again, it was dead, it was going nowhere, it is called Right to Try. And, Mr. President, I will never forget in that State of Union Address, you start talking about this bill that I'd been championed and you have not said the name yet. I am going, I think he is talking about Right to Try. And all of a sudden, he goes, We have to pass Right to Try. And I do not know if you saw me spring up like a jack in the box. He does not get credit for it, but he wakes up every day, like the rest of you, loving this country and doing everything can to make it a greater country. God bless you. God bless ENTITY. I will be fighting for you. No, he is really a great guy and I am glad you came up and I am glad to have you around. And really, we are very proud of you. We have some warriors with us and people that have been with us through the fake impeachment, the hoax. That was one of the great hoaxes. And do not forget, we have done, and Ron understands better than maybe anybody, we have done more in three and a half years, then any administration First three and a half years, than any administration in the history.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1549, "text": "He'd mentions Right to Try, that is where a person is terminally ill and they cannot get a medicine that looks real good, but it has not been approved because it has to go through this long process, which we have cut in half by the way But they cannot get, so now they sign a document and it was very complicated, but not for me, it was not complicated. I said, You take the liability away. But we had problems with the insurance companies because they did not want We had problems with everybody, including the country. So people would go all over the world, if they had some money, if they did not have money, they'd go home and they just die. And now if we have something that may work, but it is two years away, three years away, they sign just a quick waiver. And we have had Right to Try. And Ron, I do not know if you know, the success rate. It is been unbelievable, the number of people. We have kept people alive and healthy and well and fully recovered. And I could never understand it, because for years I said, Why would not they give somebody who is terminally ill the drug? I mean, I understand it all. But we got it done, they sign a waiver and we got it done. A side effect that nobody thought too much about. These companies that are trying to prove that their drug works, I will tell you, if it works there, it works everywhere. And they are able to be able to speed it up, where they speed them up because we have had some unbelievable stories. One in particular that I know, a young lady who spoke at the national convention, Republican National Convention, but the success rate has been incredible. So I want to thank you for that. You are right, you are one of the real authors of it. We want to also thank Glenn Grothman. He is been from the beginning by me and I want to thank you, Glenn, for what you have done. What a job he is doing, what a job. I will tell you, he has a big future. And everybody knows Darin LaHood. You are all great in Wisconsin. You are producing good in Wisconsin. What can I tell you? We got to win it. We got to win it. By the way, I wanted to say before Ron Johnson interrupted me So who is a Republican here, just raise your hand?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1550, "text": "Seriously, do not worry about your hand, we all love you. No, we appreciate it. We have a lot of them over there too. We have a lot of Democrats, but we really do appreciate it. Because ultimately, we are looking for the same thing. We are looking for unity. We are looking for one country. And the question was asked a week ago and they said, What about bringing the country together, because I want that? Before the China virus hit us, we were there. And we were getting calls because the success was bringing us together as a country. We had the greatest employment numbers. We had the greatest African-American Hispanic-American, Asian-American, women, people with a diploma, people without a diploma, people that graduated first in their class at MIT, everybody. We never had anything like it. And I am telling you, I bet it was true with you guys, we were getting calls from people that you would least suspect and the country was coming together. Then we got hit by the China virus and it was back to the drawing boards. And next year we are going to have the most successful year economically, I think, with what we have done. I also want to introduce the Republican candidate for Senate from the State of Illinois, Mark Curran. I like it. I will tell you what, Illinois could use a new governor. They got to open up that state. They got to open up that state. Kids have to get back to school. You know Barron had it, right? They said Barron, Barron Trump, my boy, my very tall young boy. He is very tall, but Barron Trump had it. No, young people, they have, we hate to admit it, they have a very strong immune system, incredibly strong. We have to get back to school. On November 4th, they will all say, All right. Now, everybody They are only doing this for politics. I really believe that, because they want the numbers to look as bad as possible. Hey, we won the case in Michigan. The courts have now forced her. They said it was unconstitutional what she was doing. The only person in the whole state that was allowed to have fun and go bowling and play tennis and do whatever he want, was the governor's husband, right? Her husband was free to do whatever he wanted. But other than that, it was like a prison she was operating.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1551, "text": "This election is a choice between a ENTITY super recovery and a Biden depression. And they are going to raise your taxes substantially, like quadruple. He is the only candidate All my life I have been involved in politics, never from the side. But a few years ago I said, Let us give it a shot, but I have always been around. This is the only time in my life. I always heard it was good to cut taxes. I said, How do you say we are giving a massive tax increase to everybody? And it is everybody, because you are getting thousands of dollars a year from my tax cuts. We gave the greatest, the biggest tax cut in history and he wants to end the ENTITY tax cut. Now he is saying, Well, I will not do that. It is same thing like fracking. He is just changed his mind. But he wants to end it, and do not forget child tax credit. That is a thousand dollars for every child. So he is going to end all that. So he was going to end it, We are going to end He did not realize that the middle income people are getting a tremendous tax cut. And if you add energy to it, because they will drive energy through the roof. They want to end fossil fuel. They are going to end fracking. 100% they are going to end fracking. I mean, this guy goes around, We are going to end fracking, for a year and a half. Then he lucks out, gets the nomination. Because Pocahontas refused to do what she should have done, if she believes really in his philosophy of being a socialist, right? And he gets it. And as soon as he gets it, he says, No, no we are going to frack. But if you add energy to it, right? You add energy, we are talking about six, seven, $8,000 a family. So if you vote for me, you will have the greatest If he gets in, he is going to raise your taxes like crazy. If he gets in And it is not him, again, it is his people that tell him what to do. If he gets in, you will have the greatest depression in the history of this country, your stocks will go to hell. Everybody owns stocks. You have 401ks. Who has a 401k here? That is a lot of people. Are you practically at your all time high, right?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1552, "text": "You will have a depression the likes of which we have never seen, with the possible exception of 1929, because I do not think it gets much worse than that. But you cannot do that, you cannot let this happen, because he will destroy everything we have done. Regulations, we cut more regulations than any administration in history. And regulation may be more important, in terms of jobs and everything, then even the biggest tax cut. It is the biggest tax cut in history. And I think the regulation cut, which is more than any president's done, no matter they were eight years or in one case more, it does not matter. He wants to put them all back. That means all these companies that moved to America, that moved to the United States, that came here because of lower taxes, because of all of the things that we have done. It used to take 18 to 21 years to get a highway built, to get a highway approved. We have got it down to two years. And let me tell you, it may not make it. We are trying to get it to one year, by the way and we are close to getting it. But it used to take, I mean, we have highways for 20 years, they have been trying to get approvals. And then after it gets approved, it is totally different and it costs hundreds of times more money. If you vote for me, prosperity will surge. And the next year will be the greatest year economically in the history of our country. Joe Biden would terminate our recovery with a draconian unscientific lockdown. I mean, not that you are already in it. And he will keep Wisconsin locked up, locked down and closed for business. Biden will shut down the country, delay the vaccine and prolong the pandemic. And companies will be afraid to invest in Wisconsin, if you have this happen, and our country. But you have a Democrat governor, I do not know him but he is a nice guy probably. But I will tell you, companies, big companies, very strong companies, companies like as an example, Foxconn, they do not want to invest with these people. They do not have any security. They do not have any They do not want to invest. I get in, companies like that will put more money in then they even promised. But they are very concerned, I mean, they have to have the right climate.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1553, "text": "So we are going to do things with Wisconsin, but we are going to do things with this country, like honestly has never even been done before and people will come together because of success. So we are delivering a safe vaccine very soon and a rapid recovery. Biden's plan will crush Wisconsin. My plan will crush the virus and will make Wisconsin greater than ever before. You have a spike, you have a surge. But if you remember it, two months ago, Florida had a big surge. Texas had a very big surge and now it is down. If you look at Arizona had a big, big surge, all great governors and it is down. It is down to all low numbers, really low numbers. And you are going to have the same thing, but you got to open up. Joe Biden is the living embodiment of the corrupt political class, that enriched itself while draining the economic life and soul from our country. I mean 47 years, and he just says, Well, I should have done this or that. I said, Joe, you were here for 47 years. You never I always hated when he says that I should have done something. He is been at a high position for 47 years. I said, Joe, you could have done something for the last 47 years. Joe Biden shipped away your jobs, shut down your factories, and you know it very well, you got to hit hard here, threw open your borders and ravaged our cities while sacrificing American blood and treasure in endless wars that were ridiculous in countries that you'd never even heard of. Got a lot of them, most of them are back. I hate to say it. To be honest with you, he makes crooked Hillary Clinton look like an amateur. And China has already bought and paid for Joe Biden. Let me tell you, if Joe Biden became president, China will own this country, China. China will own They are paying us billions and billions of dollars a year. I charged them billions. They never paid us 25 cents. I gave $28 billion to the farmers, many of them right here, 28. 12 and 16, two years. I said to Sonny Perdue, Secretary of Agriculture, great guy, How much have we been targeted for our farmers by China? We are going to target them. We took $28 billion. We had tens of billions left over that went to the treasury, our treasury by the way.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1554, "text": "But we had 28 billion that went to the farmers, and a lot of you farmers got it. I also cut the tariffs between Canada, what they were doing to you with 287% tariffs. So I am not just running against Biden. I am running against the left wing media, the big tech companies. But if you think about it, the Democrats and the media are one in the same. When you look at MSDNC and you look at fake news, CNN, then you look at the fake New York Times, the failing New York Times And the good news is, look Well, I do not even call it good news. But when someday I leave, whether it is in four years, eight years, 12 years, 16 years Now the story tomorrow will be with the fake news, He is a fascist he wants to take over No. But when, at some point, I leave, they are all out of business. They are going to go out of business. They know it too. That is why I expect someday they are going to all get together and say, Let us endorse him, because he is done a really good job. And they know that. This political class has nothing but disdain for you and for your values. They flood your communities with criminal aliens, drugs and crime, while living behind gated compounds in communities. They oppose school choice, so important is school choice, while sending their families to the best private schools. They attack the Second Amendment, while employing armed guards for themselves. They want to get rid of your Second Amendment. It is not going to happen with me, I promise. I do not think they will get Ron Johnson on their side. Ron, can I have your pledge please? We got Ron Johnson. Fellas, we have your votes. In 2016, Wisconsin voted to fire this corrupt and decrepit political establishment. And you elected an outsider as president to finally put America first. That is what you did. To defend our workers and our national security, I took the toughest ever action to confront China's rampant theft of American jobs. When China targeted us, we targeted them. And it was very simple and now we are providing all sorts of everything, what we are doing for you. We have $13 billion coming to help our farmers, in addition to all of the money that China paid our farmers, including Wisconsin's incredible dairy farmers. Anybody here do specialty milk.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1555, "text": "It is a very small part, but it was like the straw that broke the camel's back. Because I met with these guys and what they were doing, ripping you off on the big stuff, specialty milk. And anybody do specialty milk? It is so small, but when I heard it, it was like 287%. When the Wisconsin timber industry was threatened, I imposed tariffs on dumped foreign goods and subsidized products, saving your timber jobs. And we have a long way to go. We can save a lot more. We got plenty of timber. I always say, Why the hell are we taking in timber from other countries? We have it all over the place. And if they ever manage their forests in California and other places, you would not have these forest fires. And part of that is cutting wedges. You have to cut wedges and all that stuff. And so we have so much timber. And I do not know, I guess we are just nice people, doing it from other lands, right? But we are doing good with our timber, we saved our timber jobs. If Joe Biden gets in, the radical left will shut down Wisconsin timber production forever. They do not want to let you touch a tree. If you happen to touch a tree, they want to put you in jail for the rest of your life. I also issued brand new regulations to ensure American workers are first in line for jobs. We want American workers to be first in line. Biden will allow his donors to bring in a flood of cheap foreign workers and wipe out your middle class. Under my leadership, we achieved the most secure border in US history. That wall, we are doing 10 miles a week and we will be hitting over 400 miles within a period of a couple of weeks. And by the way, Mexico is paying for the wall, you do know. So finally, they said, Well, all right, he is built the wall. Let us not talk about the wall anymore. We are putting a charge at the border and Mexico is paying us for the wall. But Mexico has been great to us, because they have 27,000 soldiers all along our Southern border. And I want to thank the President of Mexico, who happens to be a great guy. And they do have a big ENTITY problem. This is a good time to have a wall because we have that wall and it is not penetrable.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1556, "text": "Remember, they used to talk about, We do not need a wall. They wanted drones. You know what the drones would be good at, with cameras on them? So that we could watch all the people pouring into our Right? They wanted drones. Remember crying Chuck Schumer You know Schumer? He cries anytime I have known him all his life, I have never seen him cry. But when he wants to get on camera, he cry so much. Crying Chuck, I call him. Because he feels so sad, he feels so sorry for people. Ah, do not worry about it, he does not . But crying Chuck, you understand what I mean. Ron looks like , because not a good guy. obsolete. And he said, No, no, we need technology, drones. I said, Drones are not going to help you, other than I mean, they are nice. We have all sorts of attachments to the wall. This wall is technologically very advanced, and drones are fine, but you have got to have a wall. And then I said to a group of people, and they thought it was sort of cool, You know, you do a computer today, you do a chip, you do anything today, it is obsolete in about 19 minutes, right? We have just developed a new computer. Three weeks later, somebody does a better one, right? That is why I like real estate. You buy a good piece of land, that is good. I like it better, simpler, right? Everything's obsolete in 15 minutes, except the two things that you know what that is, I have been telling you, right? In a thousand years, you will come back and the only two things that you will have that are very modern will be a wheel and a wall. Look at the wall they built over there. They took trucks and they put them together because they do not want any criminals coming in here, so that is a wall. Look at that, they built a wall. That wall took them about 12 minutes, but the two things are a wheel and a wall, they will Everything else is going to be obsolete in about 12 minutes. In the last three years, we have arrested over a half a million criminal aliens, including those charged with murder, assault, sex offenses. We have over 6,000 murderers that ICE has apprehended in our great border patrol and we owe them a debt of gratitude.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1557, "text": "Think of that, 6,000 murderers we took off the streets. In some cases they are so bad we did not even want to give them, we have to take I do not want to pay for them for the next long period of time. Frankly if it was up to me, I am a person that believes in the death penalty, but what are you going to do? So we will end up keeping them for 50 years. We will end up feeding them for 50 years. But look, look, let me just tell you. We have what The job that ICE does and border patrol, and this guy's a tough guy. You do not want the job. You do not want it. You do not want it. There is a couple of guys could probably, maybe you'd be good at it, I do not know. These guys, the ICE guys, you will see these killers from the MS13, they are total killers. But you get these killers They will be standing up in about two seconds. I appreciate it. The fact is, does anybody have a better time than at a rally, right? But we do not call it a rally, we call it a friendly protest because, legally, if I call it a friendly protest, you are allowed to be here. If you call it a rally, you are entitled to two people or something. So we said let us call it a protest. So everybody raise your hand, this is a protest, right? Under the Biden administration, these criminals would be set free. Under the ENTITY administration, these criminals are put in jail or they are sent home. We have to, we cannot do this. And by the way, the MS13 gang members are the worst anywhere in the world. They do not even want, right, they do not even I hope you did not come into contact with one. You know too much about them. I do not know, I am worried about you. Stand up, I am worried about you. What the hell do you know so much about MS13? Is he with you? You know what can I be honest with you? If he is with you, you have no problem. You got no problem. And these people go in and they go with they call them a nest, where they be standing and just run in and start swinging and fighting. And then they always come out on top. There are not a lot of people that would be good at that job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1558, "text": "We have to respect those people that protect us like this. And we have to have borders. A nation without borders is not a nation. We do not have a nation. So on behalf of the United States, I'd like to extend my sincere, really sincere condolences to a friend of mine, President Macron of France, where they had just yesterday, a vicious, vicious, Islamic terrorist attack beheading, and just a teacher near Paris, beheading. And they have apprehended nine people, who knows. But we have been very, very strong on radical Islamic terrorism. And we do have a ban. Remember I put the ban o.n and then we got sued and we lost, lost, and then we wanted the United States Supreme Court. We have also invested and France is having a hard time and Macron's a great guy, and I just want to say whatever we can do. We have also invested 2.5 trillion with a T, trillion dollars in the U.S. military, which was totally depleted when we took office. Including major contracts to build new warships that saved the historic shipyard right here in Marinette Marine in Wisconsin. We gave you billions of dollars. A lot of states wanted that contract, I gave it to you. And I came to Marinette about three months ago. And they do a great job. But a lot of people wanted that. A lot of states wanted it. I am going to lose those states, but that is all right. But we gave it, it is a lot of jobs. It is actually a very big contract that gets bigger, but they do fantastic work. I looked at what they were doing. And you would have lost that ship yard. You would have lost it, but we saved it. We have done plenty. We launched the first new branch of the U.S. Armed Forces in nearly 75 years, the Space Force. I withdrew from the last administration's disastrous, $150 billion for nothing. If and when we win, if we win, the first call I am going to get is from the head of Iran. And he is going to say, Let us make a deal. They are dying to make a deal. I said, Look, you want to really see the election because you are not going to be in a position. You got to see the election.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1559, "text": "And then I will tell you the other calls, but I better not, because I am going to just make the deal harder if I do. But plenty of other nations are going to be calling because they are going to want to make deals. I recognize the true capital of Israel and opened the American embassy in Jerusalem. I also recognize By the way, every president for many, many presidents, right, every single president said they were going to do that. And they all said they were going to do it. And they never did it because I will tell you what it was not easy. Once I got to office the pressure put on your president not to do it was incredible. And I told the story, I did not take phone calls. I got calls from kings and presidents and prime ministers. We do not want you to do it. It is going to be horrible if you do it, sir, it'll cause problems. Then finally I said, I will tell you what, who is calling? I was thinking about taking her call, but I. What are they calling about? They want to talk you out of moving the capital of Israel to Jerusalem. I am going to call them back on Thursday. I had the press conference on a Tuesday. So I said, Tell them, I will call them back on Thursday. I look forward to talking to them. I then announced that we were doing it. And we had Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. And then I called back the heads of all these countries. What could I do for you, President of the United States? Well, I wanted to talk to you about Israel, but it is already been announced. Oh gee, I wish I got to you a little bit soon. No, it is much, much easier than, like what do we need? So I got back to them. We opened and it was going to cost anywhere from a billion to $2 billion. And I said to my very talented, who was one of the greatest lawyers in New York, David Friedman, a great lawyer. I said, David, see if you can get a piece of land cheap or a piece that we already own. Because they want to spend $2 billion to build this thing. I said, We can do it cheaper. Calls me back two days later, Sir, we have a piece of land with a building on it. I think we can renovate it for $350,000.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1560, "text": "It will be nicer than the one they want to build. So we did it for 350. I said, David, I have never said this before, it sounds too cheap. You can imagine the cost overruns everything else. And this was a better location, a bigger piece of land, a better view, better everything, safer, better part. We have the best land, right? That is why I said it. If you want a good building by a post office, it is always there. And he said, We have a great piece of land. The building, we fixed it. And we use Jerusalem stone, which is a complicated thing. But I will not tell you about a very expensive, except if you happen to be in Jerusalem. And it is a beautiful embassy and it is opened and now we have the capital and I will tell you something. Every single president, you go back during their campaign. They used to campaign on it and nobody had the guts to do it, but we did it. We did it. Did I do it? And we opened the embassy three months later. Can you believe that? Instead of 10 years later, we would not have that thing open for 20 years. I also recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. 52 years, they worked on it. I got it done in about two hours. And instead of endless war in the Middle East, we are forging peace without blood all over the sand. The fact is I did more in 47 months than Joe Biden did in 47 years, and it is true. What he did was distraught. And now the Democrats are pushing the most far-left agenda ever put forward by a presidential nominee. The Biden plan would destroy your social security and destroy protections for people with pre-existing conditions. You do not know that. They want to spend all their money on this ridiculous Green New Deal for a hundred trillion dollars. A poor student has no idea about the environment. All of a sudden she is coming up with a Green New Deal. And we will not let them take your cattle. Biden vowed to terminate our travel bans on jihadist regions. And they have agreed to this. This is the manifesto, I call it, with Bernie Sanders. You stayed in your country will be overrun and overwhelmed and it will never happen on my watch. Biden wants to ban school choice, the most important thing, school choice. And he wants to end charter schools, which have been so successful.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1561, "text": "Because he is controlled by a group. But with that, some of the most important people on this planet are teachers. We love our teachers. We love our teachers. In a second term, I will provide school choice to every parent in America. And when you talk about the black community, the Hispanic community, that is one of the great civil rights developments in our country. One of the most important things we can do. A vote for Republicans is a vote for safe communities, great job, just incredible jobs, and a limitless future for all Americans. It is really about the American Dream. And I will say again, again and again, had we not been hit with this virus, you would have seen things that like you have never seen before, but we are going to have it back there very, very soon. We are setting records. We are going to have it back very soon. So in conclusion, over the next four years, we will make America into the manufacturing superpower of the world. And we will end our reliance on China once and for all. We will hire more police, increased penalties for assaults on law enforcement, and we will ban deadly sanctuary cities. We will uphold religious liberty, free speech, and the right to keep and bear arms. We will strike down terrorists who threaten our children and our citizens. And we will keep America out of these endless and ridiculous foreign wars. We will maintain America's unrivaled military might. We have the greatest military now in the world. When I took over three and a half years ago, you know it and the military, our planes were old. Our missiles, our rockets, our nuclear, was not in the condition that had to be in. You never want to use it. You never want to use it. We hope to God, we never have to use it. Now we have the greatest weapons ever produced by a single country, not even close. I call them the super-duper missiles. They go seven times faster than a normal missile. They took our plans to Russia and other places. But now we have done because we had the technology like nobody else. We make them in Ohio. We kept the plant open. I kept that plant open. I kept the plant open. I said, You cannot close this plant. The plan was to close it. It is the only place in the country. I visited, went to Ohio with Jim Jordan, a great guy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1562, "text": "I saw the people and I saw the technology and the complexity. I said, You will never be able to build You will never be able to reproduce it. Anyway, we kept it open. And now it is working 24 hours, around the clock. New jets, the fighters F-35s, everything new. And when I took over our military and you know it, the military people, it was totally depleted. We now have the greatest We are the envy of Russia and China and North Korea and every country in the world. There is nobody that has anything near our weaponry, and again, we hope to God, we never ever have to use it, but we will have peace through strength. We will end surprise medical billing. Require price transparency, which goes into effect on January 1st. I invoked a thing. You know that, what I did. You know, I invoked a favored nations clause. So we are going to pay whatever the lowest price in the world. I said, That is what we are going to pay. I am not very popular, however, with big pharma. They are spending a of money on ads against me. When you see those ads, please remember your drug prices are coming down for a reason. They have the biggest lobby in the world by far, but is the only way. I mean, every year what they were doing to people, no good. Or maybe we will make a deal with big pharma along the way, but they are spending a fortune of ads and that is okay. I mean, people get it. You are going to go down 60, 70, 80, maybe 90%, in some cases. We will strongly protect Medicare and social security. And we will always protect patients with pre-existing conditions. America will land the first woman on the moon. And the United States will be the first nation to land an astronaut on Mars. We will stop the radical indoctrination of our students and restore patriotic education to our schools. We will teach our children to love our country, honor our history, and always respect our great American flag. And we will live by the timeless words of our national motto, In God we trust. For years, you had a president who apologized for America. Now you have a president who is standing up for America and standing up for the great people of Wisconsin.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumprallytranscriptjanesvillewioctober17", "title": "Donald Trump Rally Transcript Janesville, WI October 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-rally-transcript-janesville-wi-october-17", "publication_date": "17-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1579, "text": "I want to, first of all, thank all of you for coming, the Members of Congress of both parties, members of our administration, but the larger community represented here in this room and at all of our sites. This has been a truly remarkable experience, I think, for all of us-stimulating, moving, humbling. I think it is because it is so real, and it has been too long since we have come together over something that is this real, that touches so many of us. This is a moment of great hope for people who are living with mental illness and, therefore, a moment of great promise for our Nation. We know a lot about it; we know a lot more than most of us know we know, as we found out today. And we wanted to have this conference to talk about how far we have come and also to look forward into the future. We all know we would not be here today without the commitment of Tipper Gore. I asked her to be my national adviser for mental illness because she knows more and cares more about this issue than anyone else I personally know. She has dedicated herself to making this a priority of national policy and private life. And I think we are all very, very much in her debt. I would also like to say one more word about Tipper and about the Vice President, about the way they have dealt with this issue as a family and the gifts they have given to America, going back to before the time when we all became a team in the election of 1992, when they began their annual family conferences. All people in public life talk about family values. No couple in public life has ever done remotely as much to try to figure out what it would mean to turn those family values into real, concrete improvements in the lives of ordinary families as Al and Tipper Gore have over a long period of time. I sort of feel like an anticlimax at this convention-not for the reasons the political reporters think--but because the real story here is in the people who have already talked, in their stories of courage and struggle, of endurance and hope. Americans with mental illness should have the same opportunity all Americans have to live to the fullest of their God-given ability. They are, perhaps, just the latest in our enduring challenge as a people to continue the work of our Founders, to widen the circle of opportunity, to deepen the meaning of freedom, to strengthen the bonds of our community.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthewhitehouseconferencementalhealth", "title": "Remarks at the White House Conference on Mental Health", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-white-house-conference-mental-health", "publication_date": "07-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1580, "text": "Clearly, people with mental illnesses have always had to struggle to be treated fairly and to get the treatment they need-and they still do. We have made a lot of progress by appealing to the better angels of our nature, by drawing on our deep belief in equality, but also by hearing these stories. So again, I want to thank Mike and John and Jennifer and Robin and Dr. Burton. I thank Dr. Hyman, Dr. Koplewicz. I thank Lynn Rivers. I think all of us can remember some moment in our lives where, because of something that happened in our families or something someone we knew wrote or said, we began to look at this issue in a different way. I, myself, feel particularly indebted to the courage of my friend the great author William Styron for writing the book he wrote about his own depression. We have to have hope, and then we have to have some sense about where we are going. It was no accident that all of you were clapping loudly when Dr. Hyman showed us pictures of the brain. I remember when Hillary and I first met and began going together 28 years ago, and she was working at the Yale Child Study Center and the hospital, and we began to talk about all of this. Like a lot of young students at the time, I had been very influenced by Thomas Kuhn's book, The Structure of Scientific Revolution. And I began to wonder whether we would ever develop a completely unified theory of mind and body, if we would ever learn that at root there are no artificial dividing lines between our afflictions. The human genome project, as you have heard explained today, offers us the best chance we have ever had to have our science match our aspirations in learning to deal with this and all other issues. So this has been for me not simply emotionally rewarding but intellectually reaffirming. And I hope it has been for all of you. We have been at this for quite a long while. A hundred and fifty years ago we had to learn to treat people with mental illness as basic human beings. Thirty years ago we had to learn that people with mental illness had to be treated as individuals, not just a faceless mob. I will never forget when journalists secretly filmed the nightmare world inside some of our Nation's mental hospitals. Americans were heartbroken and horrified by what they saw, and we began to develop a system of community care for people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthewhitehouseconferencementalhealth", "title": "Remarks at the White House Conference on Mental Health", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-white-house-conference-mental-health", "publication_date": "07-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1581, "text": "Today, we have to make sure that we actually provide the care all of our people need, so they can live full lives and fully participate in our common life. We have worked hard to break down some of the barriers for people living with mental illness. On Friday, as many of you know, I directed all Federal agencies to ensure that their hiring practices give people with mental disabilities the same employment opportunities as people with physical disabilities. On Saturday Tipper and I did the radio address together and announced that Tipper will unveil our new campaign to fight stigma and dispel myths about mental illness. But all of you who have had this in your lives, or in your families' lives, know that attitudes are fine, but treatment matters most. Unfortunately, too many people with mental illness are not getting that treatment because too many of our health plans and businesses do not provide equal coverage of parity for mental and physical illness or because of the inadequacy of Government funding and policy supports. I have heard heartbreaking stories from people who are trying hard to take care of their families, and one day mental illness strikes. And when they try to get help, they learn the health plans they have been counting on, the plans that would cover treatment for high blood pressure or heart disease, strictly limit mental health care and do not cover it at all. Because of ignorance about the nature of mental illness, the cost of treating it, and as Dr. Burton told us, the cost of not treating it. A recent study showed the majority of Americans do not believe mental illness can accurately be diagnosed or effectively treated. If we do not get much else out of this historic conference than changing the attitudes of the majority, it will have been well done, just on that score. Insurance plans claim providing parity for mental health will send costs and premiums skyrocketing. Businesses believe employees will over-use mental health services, making it impossible for employers to offer health insurance. Now, there may be arguments to be made at the margins on both sides of these issues, but I believe that providing parity is something we can do at reasonable cost, benefit millions of Americans, and over the long run, have a healthier country and lower health care costs. As we have heard again today, mental illness can be accurately diagnosed, successfully treated, just as physical illness. New drugs, better community health services are helping even people with the most severe mental illnesses lead healthier, more productive lives.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthewhitehouseconferencementalhealth", "title": "Remarks at the White House Conference on Mental Health", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-white-house-conference-mental-health", "publication_date": "07-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1582, "text": "Our ability to treat depression and bipolar disorder is greater even than our ability to treat some kinds of heart disease. But left untreated, mental illness can spiral out of control, and so can the cost of mental health care. A recent World Bank study showed that mental illness is a leading cause of disability and economic burden that goes along with it. Here in the United States, untreated mental illness costs tens of billions of dollars every year. The loss in human potential is staggering. So far, 24 States and a large number of businesses have begun to provide parity for their citizens and their employees. Reports show that parity is not notably increasing health care costs. For instance, Ohio provides full parity for all its State employees and has not seen costs rise. As we heard, Bank One's employee mental health treatment program has helped it reduce direct treatment costs for depression by 60 percent. As a nation founded on the ideal of equality, it is high time that our health plans treat all Americans equally. Government can and must lead the way to meet this challenge. In 1996 I called on Congress to make parity for mental health a priority. I was proud to sign into law the Mental Health Parity Act, which prohibited health plans for setting lower annual and lifetime limits for mental health care than for other medical services. Again I want to say, since we have so many Congressmen here, Tipper Gore was very instrumental in that. But I was also deeply moved by the broad and deep bipartisan support by Members of Congress in both Houses who had personal experiences that they shared with other Members which helped to change America. And I am pleased to announce, with Secretary Herman here, that the Labor Department will now launch a nationwide effort to educate Americans about their rights under the existing law, because a lot of people do not even know it passed. But when insurers can get around the law by limiting the number of doctor's visits for mental condition, when families face higher copayments for mental health care than for physical ailments, when people living with mental illness are forced to wait until their sickness incapacitates them to get the treatment they need, we know we have to do more. First, I am using my authority as President to ensure that our Nation's largest private insurer, the Federal Employee Health Benefit Plan, provides full parity for mental health.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthewhitehouseconferencementalhealth", "title": "Remarks at the White House Conference on Mental Health", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-white-house-conference-mental-health", "publication_date": "07-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1583, "text": "Today Janice Lachance, the Director of OPM, will inform nearly 300 health plans across America that to participate in our program, they must provide equal coverage for mental and physical illnesses. With this single step, 9 million Americans will have health insurance that provides the same copayments for mental health conditions as for any other health condition, the same access to specialists, the same coverage for medication, the same coverage for outpatient care. Thirty-six years ago President Kennedy said we had to return mental health to the mainstream of American medicine. Thirty-six years ago he said it, and we are still waiting. Today, we have to take more steps to return Americans to the mainstream of American life. I ask Congress now to do its part by holding hearings on mental health parity. The second thing we have to do is to reach out to the people who are most in need. Today I have asked HCFA, the Health Care Finance Administration, to do more to encourage States to better coordinate mental health services, from medication to programs targeted at people with the most serious mental disorders, for the millions of people with mental illness who rely on Medicaid. Third, we must do more to help people with mental illness reenter the work force. I asked Congress to pass the Work Incentives Improvement Act, which will allow people with disabilities to purchase health insurance at a reasonable cost when they go back to work. No American should ever have to choose between keeping health care and supporting their family. Fourth, with an ever-increasing number of people with mental disabilities in managed care plans, it is more important than ever for Congress to pass the Patients' Bill of Rights. Fifth, this year we requested the largest increase in history, some $70 million to help more communities provide more mental health services. And I asked Congress to fully fund this proposal. The absence of services and adequate funding and institutional support for sometimes even the most severe mental health problems is a source of profound worry to those of you who actually know what is going on out there. I know that I was incredibly moved by the cover story in the New York Times Sunday magazine a couple of weeks ago, and I know a lot of you were. And I read that story very carefully. I talked to Hillary about it; I talked to Al and Tipper about it; and I asked myself then-I am still asking myself-what more can we do to deal with some of the unbelievable tragedies that were plainly avoidable, clearly documented in that important article?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthewhitehouseconferencementalhealth", "title": "Remarks at the White House Conference on Mental Health", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-white-house-conference-mental-health", "publication_date": "07-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1584, "text": "This is a good beginning, and I hope that Congress will fund it. And finally, it is profoundly significant what we have heard about children. We have to do more to reach out to troubled young people. One out of ten children suffers from some form of mental illness, from mild depression to serious mental disease. But fewer than 20 percent receive proper treatment. One of the most sobering statistics that I have heard in all of this is that a majority of the young people who commit suicide-now the third leading cause of death in teenagers, especially gay teenagers-are profoundly depressed. Yet the majority of parents whose children took their own lives say they did not recognize their children's depression until it was too late. The tragedy at Columbine High School, as Hillary said, was for all of us a wakeup call. We simply cannot afford to wait until tragedy strikes to reach out to troubled young people. Today I am pleased to announce a new national school safety training program for teachers, schools, and communities to help us identify troubled children and provide them better school mental health services. This new program is the result of a remarkable partnership by the National Education Association, EchoStar, and members of the Learning First Alliance, joined by the Departments of Education, Justice, and Health and Human Services. This fall the Vice President and Tipper will kick off the first training session, which will be transmitted via satellite to more than 1,000 communities around our Nation. We are all very grateful to EchoStar, a satellite company based in Littleton, Colorado, and its partner, Future View, for helping make this possible by donating satellite dishes to 1,000 school districts, and 40 hours of free time. I want to ask businesses and broadcasters all around our country to follow EchoStar's lead and donate their time, expertise, and equipment to help ensure that every school district in America can participate in this important training program. the president of the NEA, Bob Chase; and Bill Vanderpoel, the vice president of EchoStar. I'd like to ask them to come up and talk a little bit about what they are going to do. Let us give them a big hand. Now, I'd like to ask Tipper to come up one more time so we can all tell her how grateful we are, and let me say this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthewhitehouseconferencementalhealth", "title": "Remarks at the White House Conference on Mental Health", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-white-house-conference-mental-health", "publication_date": "07-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1585, "text": "It is been my honor to welcome to Washington and to confer with President Azcona of Honduras. And we have had extremely useful discussions today. We both expressed our appreciation for the positive and solid relationship that our two countries enjoy. We reviewed recent developments in Central America, including the summit meeting this past weekend. President Azcona and I are in full agreement on the necessity of working for greater economic growth in Central America and the importance of democratic institutions to the cause of peace in the region. I reaffirmed the commitment of the United States to cooperate closely with Honduras, both in helping to build its economy and in bolstering its democracy. I expressed to President Azcona my personal thanks and that of the American people for his government's responsible stand on regional issues. Our two governments share a serious concern over the threat to peace, stability, and freedom posed by the Communist regime in Nicaragua. The Nicaraguan Communists, with extensive Soviet and Cuban support, persist in repressing their own population and in backing the subversion of their democratic neighbors. This endangers all of Latin America and ultimately the United States as well. In this regard, I underscored to the President our promise to stand by Honduras in defense of its national sovereignty and territorial integrity, as is in accordance with our reciprocal international rights and obligations. A joint communique will be issued today reiterating this mutual commitment. President Azcona and I agree that our countries and the other democracies in the region must act together to end the conflict that plagues Central America, but it is not just up to us. Honduras has been diligent and persistent in its pursuit of a comprehensive and verifiable solution within the framework of the Contadora negotiations, and, Mr. President, you have our support in these efforts. The United States continues to believe that a realistic and enforceable agreement, based on the full implementation of the Contadora Document of Objectives, is one way to bring peace to Central America. And finally, it was a great personal pleasure to meet President Azcona. I look forward to continuing our work in the same spirit of friendship and respect that was so evident in our meeting today. So, Mr. President, we thank you for coming. It has been a great pleasure to talk with President Reagan. I believe that these exchanges of views, held in a climate of great cordiality and frankness, are always beneficial, because they lead to greater understanding and a better relationship between our governments and peoples.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionswithpresidentjosesimeonazconahoyohonduras", "title": "Remarks Following Discussions With President Jose Simeon Azcona Hoyo of Honduras", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussions-with-president-jose-simeon-azcona-hoyo-honduras", "publication_date": "27-05-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1586, "text": "With President Reagan, we have reviewed the various aspects of the harmonious bilateral relations between our two countries. I am happy to say that in the economic field he was receptive to the points I made to him. So, I am certain that his great country will give broad support to the measures which my government is taking to reactivate the Honduran economy and reduce our present high unemployment levels, as a complement to Honduran short- and medium-term efforts, all without neglecting our security needs. I have told President Reagan about the efforts we are making in Honduras to develop our country. In this context, I reiterated the fact that our government assigns the highest priority to foreign investment, while at the same time recognizing that at present we also require the participation of government and the cooperation of friendly countries, among which the United States is one of the closest. Because of the fact that we believe in the necessity of offering the foreign investor a climate of tranquillity, encouraging his participation in the effort being made by Hondurans to develop our country, and of offering him guarantees which ensure the protection of his legitimate rights, I have authorized the Foreign Minister to sign during this visit the treaty on the settlement of investment disputes between states and nationals of other states. This treaty will provide the foreign investor in Honduras with access to international legal mechanisms of recognized impartiality and competence, which together with those offered by Honduran law will guarantee to him the full enjoyment of his rights. In the political field, we reaffirmed our identity as a regime governed by rule of law and based on the effective exercise of democracy and on respect for human rights. When we examined the situation in Central America, we noted with concern that conditions jeopardizing peace and security still exist. We agreed that major new efforts must be made to find a negotiated solution to the crisis, based on concrete actions for national reconciliation, on free and honest elections, on disarmament, and in general, on the creation of a climate in which freedom and security for all can guarantee the economic and social development of the peoples of Central America. To that end, it is necessary to conclude fully verifiable, juridical arrangements among the Central American States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionswithpresidentjosesimeonazconahoyohonduras", "title": "Remarks Following Discussions With President Jose Simeon Azcona Hoyo of Honduras", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussions-with-president-jose-simeon-azcona-hoyo-honduras", "publication_date": "27-05-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1593, "text": "General Irving, distinguished visitors, and the Corps of Cadets at West Point, I am having a wonderful time today. I was telling my Missouri cadet friends that the only ones who are suffering and having trouble are the ones who are my hosts. It is always a nuisance to have the President of the United States around. He has to have certain special treatment, which is for the Presidency and not for the individual. Always bear in mind that the Presidency of this great Republic of ours is the greatest office in the history of the world. It is the most important office in the world, and the man in it must do everything he can to cause all the people, at home and abroad, to respect that office for what it is. World leadership came and was forced upon us, because we did not want to assume that responsibility we refused to assume that responsibility in 1920; and the Second World War was the result. Beginning in 1938 when Hitler went into Poland it began to dawn on the people at the head of the Government of the United States, that we had a place in the world which had to be filled. We are trying our best to fill that place in the world. You young men who will be the future generals, the men who will form the military policy of the United States, have a responsibility which you will have to assume just as soon as you finish your education. Now, this is your great school I was telling my young friends from Missouri here, that this school has produced some of the greatest men in the history of our country. This school has made a contribution that is one of the greatest in the history of the country. I am proud to be your guest today on that account. And I am just as proud and I am interpolating here of the Naval Academy and its cadets. I want to see you become the leaders and the citizens in our military setup that you should. General Bradley this afternoon is going to give you a lecture on what it means to be a graduate of this school, and what your responsibilities are, and what our military policy really is. Now I did not intend to give you a lecture on citizenship and the Presidency of the United States, but I thought maybe you would be interested in knowing that the President himself an individual like everybody else must keep his eye on the ball, in an effort to attain the respect for the office that it deserves.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonthecadetdininghallwestpoint", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon in the Cadet Dining Hall at West Point.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-the-cadet-dining-hall-west-point", "publication_date": "20-05-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1609, "text": "It is a very great pleasure for me to see you out here this morning. It is a pleasure to me. You know how intriguing it is, and helpful it is, for the ENTITY to get away from the White House and get to see the people as they are. ENTITY, you know, is virtually in jail. He goes from his study to his office and from his office to his study, and he has to have guards there all the time. And they do a good job, too--I am not criticizing the guards--but when you get out and see people and find out what people are thinking about, you can do a better job as President of the United States. I understand that this is top of the world in Ohio. On this nonpartisan, bipartisan trip that we are taking here, I understand there are a whole lot of Democrats present, too. It is a pleasure to have been able to see the Governor. I know he is going to be the next Governor of Ohio. It is a very great pleasure indeed for me to have a chance to stop at Fort Wayne. I have always, all my life, been an admirer of Mad Anthony Wayne. You know, Mad Anthony had a dictionary without the word cannot in it. Whenever he was given a job to do, he did it. These northwest territories are very much beholden to him for being a part of the greatest republic in the world. In his day people were thinking just as they are now-. They were anxious for peace and security, and they themselves contributed to making that peace and security. They usually had their own squirrel rifle up over the door, the bag full of powder and shot, and a King James version of the Bible. It took all those things to make this great community what it is now. I can say to you categorically that there will be a permanent peace if the United States of America assumes the role that God Almighty intended the United States of America to assume in 1920. The first is to have the United Nations to work as the United Nations Charter intends it to work, and that is what we have been working for ever since that charter was agreed to. The next most important thing right now is the success of the European recovery program. If the 16 nations that agreed at Paris to the European recovery program are encouraged and we carry out the agreements which we made with them without stint, Europe will recover and we will have peace in Europe.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksohioandindiana", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Ohio and Indiana.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-ohio-and-indiana", "publication_date": "04-06-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1610, "text": "It is just as necessary that we have peace in Asia as it is to have it in Europe, and since we are the leaders in world government, we will see that we carry out those agreements to the letter. And, I sincerely hope that the Congress will carry out the agreement that was made by these 16 nations to the letter, and not quibble on it. The next most important thing we are faced with is the necessity that we have the strength to maintain that peace. In November 1945 I requested the Congress to give us a universal training program, so that we could be in a position, after our demobilization, to maintain the peace. In January 1946 and again in 1946, and in January 1947 and again in 1947, and last November and last January, I asked Congress for the same thing, for the same reason. We must be strong enough to maintain the peace if we expect to have peace in the world. If we did not have a police force in Fort Wayne, capable of enforcing the city ordinances, you would not have any peace. And I sincerely hope that this Congress will give us that temporary draft and universal training that is necessary to keep this country in the lead. That means peace in the world. If those three things which I called to your attention are carried through to the logical conclusion, there will be peace, and there will be permanent peace, and there will be prosperity in all the world, for there are enough resources on this old globe to give everybody his fair share, and that is all the United States Government is working for. It is a pleasure to me, I assure you, to have had the privilege of stopping here this afternoon and to have had the privilege of meeting this most intelligent audience, as Mr. Madden said. I appreciate that privilege. I wish I had the time to look at some of the great industries you have in this fast growing community. I am told that this is the youngest town in America over a hundred thousand inhabitants. You have done some great things here in this town. I made some investigations here during the war, and the. plants in this city made a magnificent contribution to that war effort. Everybody was worried and uneasy when the war ceased suddenly on V-J Day--in September--and everybody wondered whether he was going to have a job or not, and everybody wondered whether he was going to have enough to eat, and when he was going to be able to get what he needed to live.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksohioandindiana", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Ohio and Indiana.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-ohio-and-indiana", "publication_date": "04-06-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1611, "text": "Well, that worry about the job went out the window. The last part of last year we passed the 60-million mark in jobs in this country. But that 61,800,000 people at work in this country had another worry. They were very much worried about the cost of living. Now that cost of living has been skyrocketing ever since July 1946. In July 1946--that is on the 30th of June 1946--the Congress sent me an impossible price control bill, and I vetoed it. Thirty days later they sent me one almost as bad, and I had to take it or none. I had suggested to the Congress leaving the powers with the President for a gradual release of controls, as production caught up with consumption. They did not see fit to do that. And therefore the price of living--the cost of living has been gradually going up. It made a tremendous jump from August 1946 to January 1947, and it has been steadily rising ever since. I asked the Congress last November in the message to the special session to restore Federal controls to the President so he could in his discretion hold down the cost of living to the common, everyday man. This 80th Congress has not seen fit to take any action. They have decided that the National Association of Manufacturers and the National Chamber of Commerce of the United States know all about prices and price controls. Well now, we have price controls and rationing now, just as we have under Government controls, only those price controls are controls so that only the man who has the money is able to get the necessities of life. Your dollar now in the purchase of food is worth only about 60 cents of what your dollar was in 1946, when the Government was controlling prices in favor of the consumer. This is a producer's market under which we are living now. The Both Congress, I am afraid will adjourn without doing anything about it. And then we will be faced with a continued rise and rise in the cost of living. It can only go so far under this boom and bust program. I am hoping that when we get a new Congress--and we are going to get one this fall--maybe we will get one that will work in the interests of the common people and not the interests of the men who have all the money. Bear that in mind carefully when you decide that you want a new Congress.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksohioandindiana", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Ohio and Indiana.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-ohio-and-indiana", "publication_date": "04-06-1948", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1631, "text": "I WANT to welcome you all to the White House and to tell you that I am very appreciative to have a chance to say a word to you. This is a matter in which I have been greatly interested, and with the support of General Taylor, our Military Representative at the White House, the Department of Defense, the Department of State, the AID Agency, CIA, and the other groups in Government, we have been attempting to put a good deal more emphasis in recent months on this problem of counter-insurgency. It has so many ramifications, as you know from your analysis of it, and it requires a mastery of so many different areas of national, international life that it has required, I know, study by all of you at the foreign Service Institute, and will require continued analysis by all of you, I hope, after you graduate, so that we can improve our courses. The foreign Service Institute has done an excellent job in laying this out. We are anxious that all of the military colleges emphasize this phase of our struggle. We are anxious that beginning really at the three military academies, that they attempt to inculcate an interest in this phase of military life. We are anxious that all those who are promoted in the career services of the foreign Service itself, of the CIA, and the AID agency and the military departments, that all of them, particularly the senior officers, have had at least some contact with this subject at various schools so that we become really far more expert than we have ever been in the past. This most ancient form of warfare, going back as it has to its earliest beginnings, has become far more important than it has ever been in the past, and it is going to become more important in the future. As the great weapons become more deadly and as more and more nations possess them, there will be of course, as has been very clearly pointed out by those who make themselves our adversaries, more and more emphasis on this kind of war, insurgency, guerrilla, and the other kind of struggle, the so-called wars of liberation. So that as the thermonuclear weapons get higher and higher in their megatonnage, and as there becomes less and less occasion to use them, then of course there will be more and more emphasis on this kind of struggle.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmembersspecialseminartheforeignserviceinstitute", "title": "Remarks to Members of a Special Seminar of the foreign Service Institute.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-special-seminar-the-foreign-service-institute", "publication_date": "03-07-1962", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1632, "text": "This is not merely a military effort, but it also requires, as I have said, a broad knowledge of the whole development effort of a country, the whole technique of the National Government to identify themselves with the aspirations of people. The problem, of course, that we face is that in so much of the world the problems that the people face are so staggering, and there is no immediate answer to them. The United States does not have sufficient capital itself to make an immediate imprint. We can join the countries and encourage them and offer them hope and indicate that they are moving, but even in a country with the resources of Mexico, with the population increasing nearly 31/2 percent, with I out of every 20 children getting beyond the sixth grade, and a country with the highest standard of living in Latin America, we can see how serious are the problems that so much of the world faces. And therefore this technique of the guerrilla, where you need only one guerrilla, and it requires 15 or 20 troops to track him down, and where you have so much misery which can be exploited, offers a very effective weapon for the overthrow of legitimate governments. We sometimes take some encouragement in the fact that there are so many obvious evidences of a desire of people to be free and a desire of people to maintain their anti-Communist position. What we realize, and I am sure you realize, is the technique of the Communists which emphasizes organization, which requires comparatively few people, the people to be at the pressure point at the key moment. And when you realize the Castro experience, starting with such a small number of people, and what eventually came about, you cannot be satisfied to merely feel that 75 or 80 or 85 percent of the people are anti-Communist. They work on a much more selective basis, and it will require the best we have. So I was anxious to have you come to the White House because we want to emphasize the necessity for the experience which you are going through, that it be shared by all people in the National Government who have anything to do with our international relations. Every senior officer, as I say, in all the key departments must have a comparable experience to yours, have the knowledge that you have, have their attention focused on it. This is particularly true, as I say, in the key agencies, the military across the spectrum, to the State Department, and the agencies in between. They all must concentrate their energy on what is going to be one of the great factors in the struggle of the sixties.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmembersspecialseminartheforeignserviceinstitute", "title": "Remarks to Members of a Special Seminar of the foreign Service Institute.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-special-seminar-the-foreign-service-institute", "publication_date": "03-07-1962", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["John F. Kennedy"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1633, "text": "I want to thank the leaders of both parties for being here today to discuss what is a very serious issue facing the United States. And the fact that I have had a chance to speak to many of you and Congress as a whole is taking this issue with the soberness and seriousness that it deserves is greatly appreciated and, I think, vindicates the decision for us to present this issue to Congress. As I have said last week, as Secretary Kerry made clear in his presentation last week, we have high confidence that Syria used, in an indiscriminate fashion, chemical weapons that killed thousands of people, including over 400 children, and in direct violation of the international norm against using chemical weapons. That poses a serious national security threat to the United States and to the region, and as a consequence, Asad and Syria needs to be held accountable. I have made a decision that America should take action. But I also believe that we will be much more effective, we will be stronger, if we take action together as one Nation. And so this gives us an opportunity not only to present the evidence to all of the leading Members of Congress and their various foreign policy Committees as to why we have high confidence that chemical weapons were used and that Asad used them, but it also gives us an opportunity to discuss why it is so important that he be held to account. This norm against using chemical weapons that 98 percent of the world agrees to is there for a reason, because we recognize that there are certain weapons that, when used, can not only end up resulting in grotesque deaths, but also can end up being transmitted to nonstate actors, can pose a risk to allies and friends of ours like Israel, like Jordan, like Turkey, and unless we hold them into account, also sends a message that international norms around issues like nuclear proliferation do not mean much. And so I am going to be working with Congress. We have sent up a draft authorization. We are going to be asking for hearings and a prompt vote. And I am very appreciative that everybody here has already begun to schedule hearings and intends to take a vote as soon as can-as all of Congress comes back early next week. The military plan that has been developed by our Joint Chiefs-and that I believe is appropriate-is proportional. It does not involve boots on the ground.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspriormeetingwithcongressionalleadersthesituationsyria", "title": "Remarks Prior to a Meeting With Congressional Leaders on the Situation in Syria", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-prior-meeting-with-congressional-leaders-the-situation-syria", "publication_date": "03-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1634, "text": "Well, thank you very much and I am thrilled to be back with the hardworking, God-fearing, card-carrying patriots of the NRA. As a candidate in 2016, I promised you that I would save your Second Amendment from absolute oblation, that is where it was going, and as your president, that is exactly what I did. We saved our Second Amendment and we are going to save it for a long time to come. It is under siege, but we are going to save it for a long time to come. Forever, as far as I am concerned, forever, and thank you very much. I was proud to be the most pro-gun, pro-Second Amendment president you have ever had in the White House, I think that is been acknowledged, and with your support in 2024, I will be your loyal friend and fearless champion once again as the 47th president of the United States. We have to remember in 2016, we won, we won the first time, and we did better the second time, got a lot more votes. A lot of bad things happened, though, did not they, huh? A lot of bad things happened. I want to thank Wayne LaPierre and Charles Cotton for their leadership, as well as all of the people that work with them, the NRA members who make up this incredible organization. It is really a tremendous force for freedom, that is what it is, and I am very proud to be here. Also, with them came along Isaac. If anybody's into sports, even a little bit, four-time All-American's good. Jim was a great wrestler, a lot of people do not know that. His daughter-in-law, Brooke, she is about to have a baby. I said, What are you doing here? But he is a spectacular congressman, politician, and person, and so I just want to thank Jim and the whole family, and Polly, thank you very much for being here. Somebody that I believe is going to be and a friend of Jim, and it is going to be your next senator from the great state of Indiana, which I love so much, Jim Banks. We like it that way, do not we? He is someplace here, I saw him. For seven years, all of us here today have been engaged in an epic struggle against the corrupt forces and communist maniacs, and they are all over the place, that are absolutely trying to destroy our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1635, "text": "They want to take away your guns while throwing open the jailhouse doors and releasing bloodthirsty criminals into your communities. They want to abolish your borders and impoverish your families while spending your money on endless and very, very stupid foreign wars. They want to demonize patriots and persecute Christians while pushing the transgender cult on your children, children who turn 25 and they say, Who did this to me? Who did this to me? They want to weaponize and interfere with our elections through the use of the DOJ, the FBI, and local attorney generals and district attorneys. That is happening to me, but we are doing very well, thank you. I will tell you what, if I were not running, which is not going to happen, or if I was doing badly in the polls, and we are not going to let that happen either, we are killing them in the polls, are you seeing the numbers? They would not be doing anything. They'd be after somebody else. But we are going to show you some of the polls in a little while, you are going to be amazed. We really made a lot of progress over the last month. We put it into high gear, like we did for four years when this country had no problems, and then ENTITY came in and we got it back. When you think about it, it was amazing. We actually left it with a stock market that was higher than just pre-ENTITY coming in. It was an amazing job that we did. We built it twice, but there was nothing like it. What we did in those four years were really monumental, rebuilt our military, largest tax cuts in history, largest regulation cuts in history, the creation of Space Force, that was a big deal, that was a big deal, and so many other things. Even right to try, I hope nobody needs it, right to try, where you can use this advanced medical treatments that will not be approved for five or six years by the FDA, but we got them to move a lot faster, I will tell you, on everything, but will not be approved by the FDA for years, and we have saved thousands and thousands of lives with right to try. But we did a lot, we did a lot. 2024 is the year that we will defeat these nation-wrecking globalists, Marxists, RINOs, and tyrants once and for all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1636, "text": "In many ways, the RINOs are worse because you do not know where they are coming from. You say, Oh, that is a RINO, we do not like that one. At least with the Democrats, you know where they are coming from and that is not a good place, is it? If you put me back in the White House, their reign is over and America will be a free nation once again. I promise you this, with me at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, no one will lay a finger on your firearms, just as took place for four years when I was your president, I will uphold those glorious words, Shall not be infringed. Do you know those words? I think you know those words. You know those words? Every pledge I made to you as a candidate in 2016, I fulfilled as your president. I appointed nearly 300 federal judges to fill the bench with pro- Constitution warriors who interpret the law as written. We have great judges, a lot of great justices, almost 300, a record. I faced down vile attacks from the radical left to confirm three great Supreme Court justices, you know who they are, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, all outstanding people. They do not help me much, I have got to tell you that, they vote against me too much, but one of those little things in life, right? But they are outstanding people and great scholars, brilliant, and they have done a very good job. I always say, Except for me, they have done a very good job. Standing before you like, Show your tax returns, that was not supposed to happen, right? Show you tax returns, I thought that was not supposed to happen. By the way, I showed them, and you know what happened? They said, This guy made a lot of money. Standing before you at the NRA Leadership Forum in 2019, I revoked America's signature from the globalist United Nations Arms Trade Treaty, which was a disaster. I never surrendered to the globalist left. I always put our term America First, very simple, America First. I canceled Barack Hussein Obama's corrupt use of Social Security data to deny Americans their gun rights without due process of law. You know that very well in this auditorium, I fought Obama's unconstitutional effort to ban 3D-printed guns.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1637, "text": "I stood up for our hunters, fishers, and sportsmen like no other president has ever done before, opening up millions acres of federal land and rolling back Obama's assaults on hunting, fishing, trapping, and on ammunition itself. When the radical left Democrats tried to use ENTITY to shut down gun sales during the China virus pandemic, I proudly designated gun and ammunition retailers as critical infrastructure. Do you remember that? It saved all of them, a lot of them are in the room with us today. My administration also petitioned the Supreme Court to overturn New York City's unconstitutional, so many unconstitutional things are taking place in these Democrat-run cities, but it was an unconstitutional ban on transporting handguns outside of the home, and in a landmark case last June, the court affirmed that the right to self-defense does not end when you step outside the front door of your house. We did all of this and we did so much more working now and going to finish everything that we started. We finished a lot it already in the four years, but we have things to do and we have things to finish and we are going to get that done. We are going to take back that beautiful, gorgeous White House. In year one of my new term, I will stop Joe Biden's war on lawful gun owners. It is a war, what they are doing is crazy, so many things are crazy. Let us say no borders, high taxes, everything they do. I made a speech recently and I used this term, and I did not even know we were using it, but I used it, Every day is like April Fool's Day. We want no borders. No, no, no, you have got to have borders. want no walls. No, no, you got to have walls. Everything is like the opposite. We want high taxes. No, no, we want to keep our taxes low. We want no guns. No, no, we want people to be able to protect themselves and also enjoy it as entertainment and go out and hunt and do the things that you want to do. It is almost like April Fools. Everything that they do is like, We want to have a weak military. We rebuilt the entire US military. We had planes that were 48 years old. We built brand new, beautiful jets. We had planes where the grandfathers were flying the same plane as the grandson, but we rebuilt our entire military.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1638, "text": "I hate to say this, we gave $85 billion of it to the Taliban in Afghanistan, in probably the most embarrassing, single moment in the history of our country, which I believe led to Russia going in. They would've never done that with us, but I believe it led to that and led to a lot of bad things. That was the most embarrassing period of time, I think in our nation's history. Not only that, the soldiers killed, 13 killed, many just horribly, horribly wounded, hurt, no arms, no legs, faces were just so badly hurt and we left a lot of people there too. And then we gave up Bagram Airbase, a big airbase, one hour from where China makes its nuclear weapons. You should have never given that up, and I call it a surrender. We were in great shape. If you look back on that history, you are going to see something that was interesting. I dealt with Abdul. Abdul was the leader of the Taliban, and I took a lot of heat from all of those fake news people back there, and they said, Why do you call Abdul? Abdul is the leader of the Taliban. They are the ones that we are fighting and fighting hard.. And I related to Jesse James. They say, Why do you always rob banks, Jesse?. So when I dealt with Abdul, he is the one that was shooting our young soldiers and others with snipers and lots of other things, and I said, Abdul, you cannot do that. You cannot do that., over the phone. You do that, you are going to suffer like nobody's ever suffered. We will hit you harder than anybody's ever been hit.. He said, Your excellency, why, but why do you send me a picture of my home?. I said, Abdul, you are going to have to figure that one out for yourself.. We did not lose one soldier in 18 months. Now think of it, not one soldier was even shot at. They were at bay and we were going to get out with pride and with dignity. We were going to take all of our equipment out. I told the generals, I want every screw. I want every bolt. I want every tank. I want every plane. I want every helicopter. Sir, can we leave the hangers?, you know those big canvas, covered hangers?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1639, "text": "Sir, I think it would be a lot easier to leave the equipment behind.. I said, So you mean to tell me, General, that if we have a hundred million dollar airplane sitting there, you want to leave that and you think that is a good thing?. Leave the airplane, leave the helicopters, which they did leave all of this very expensive We could just fill it up with a little jet fuel and fly it to Pakistan or fly it home. I think it would be a good idea to leave it.. That is where these ideas came from. We left $85 billion worth of equipment in Afghanistan and I just read a report the other day that they are about the second-largest seller of arms in the whole world. We sell more than they do, a little bit, but they are the second largest. Can you imagine that they are Because they do not need 700,000 rifles? We left behind, talking about guns, NRA, 700,000 guns and rifles, some of them the finest in the world. Some of them, even are people right up here that are so wealthy, I know them. They wish they could afford guns like we left behind for the Taliban. Many of them armor plated, costing millions of dollars apiece. We left it all behind like a bunch of fools. We are led by stupid people, and let me tell you, we have never been in such danger in our life. I believe it is the most dangerous time in the history of our country, because of the power of weaponry and I am not talking about rifles now. You know what I am talking about. You cannot use the nuclear word. The power of these weapons is so And I would never talk about it. I did not talk about it, and now it is talked about every single day, including by Putin. He says that publicly now. He never said that when I was here, because you do not talk about it. You do not talk about it. Now, they are talking about it all the time and we have somebody that has no idea what it is. We have never been in such danger. Because of our leadership, we have never been in such danger as we are right now. I will take Biden's executive order directing the federal government to target the firearms industry, and I will rip it up and throw it out on day one.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1640, "text": "You will see your gasoline and your heating bills and your cooling bills and every other bill, you will see them plummet and you will see inflation start to go away. I will eliminate the Biden ATFs ridiculous pistol brace rule, which orders law-abiding citizens to register or surrender guns with stabilizing braces. Does everybody like that or should I forget about it? They wanted me to put that in. I guess some people are happy with it. To restore our Second Amendment, we will pass legislation protecting the absolute right to self-defense with federal penalties for prosecutorial abuse, like we saw just recently in Texas. You saw that? Where a man was trying to defend himself and they want to put him in jail for the rest of his life, and I will ask Congress to send a bill to my desk delivering national concealed carry reciprocity. You want protection. Just like your driver's license or your marriage license, your Second Amendment must apply across state lines. The Biden gun control agenda is part and parcel of the left wing crusade to organize government against law-abiding citizens, while letting criminals roam free. They are all over the place. I have never seen anything like it. You are afraid to walk through one of these democrat cities. You go out for a loaf of bread, you end up getting shot. As president, I will end the weaponization of our government, including the ATF, the FBI, and the DOJ. They have weaponized our country. I will dismantle and destroy the deep state. We made a big progress, and that includes the gun grabbing bureaucrats who are persecuting gun owners and manufacturers every single day. You people are getting persecuted by these left wing maniacs. No longer will government target the left's political enemies. Instead, we will once again target violent criminals. I want to go after the criminals. These are mentally deranged or bad people, and we have to go after them and stop worrying about somebody that will never hurt anybody with a gun, just wants the gun for protection or whatever. We will get them behind bars and we will keep them behind bars. They do not even Now in New York, we have a district attorney. You can kill somebody and you do not even have to put up bail. It is insane and that is true with many different cities. You talk about April Fools Day. Murderers, killers, violent animals are released onto the streets immediately.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1641, "text": "They do not even spend time in jail. The first duty of government is to protect its citizens. As an example, when you see these gangs of hundreds of young, usually young people, go and attack an apartment store, department store in San Francisco and Los Angeles and Chicago, and they are running by the hundreds and they are running out carrying refrigerators and carrying air conditioners and big stuff, big, little, everything, fur coats, non-fur coat, everything they are carrying. They empty out the stores and we Our police are incredible, but they are not allowed to do their job. They want to do their job so badly. They want to do their job, be so easy to do, but they are not allowed to do their job, because of these radical lunatics we have thinking they are doing the right thing. I do not even think they do think they are doing the right thing. The politically incorrect truth, that no one on the left wants to admit, is that violent crime is rarely committed by legal gun owners. It is committed by a brutal class of hardened repeat criminals. That is who is doing it. In San Francisco, and who would've thought San Francisco, one of the most beautiful cities in the world. In San Francisco, murder suspects have an average of 13.9 prior arrests and 9.2 felony arrests. In Portland shooting Suspects have an average of eight prior arrests and nine criminal charges. In Washington D.C., a place that I am very familiar with, four years. When I saw tents going up, I had them take them down immediately. You cannot do that on these incredible parks and these incredible monuments. They were putting tents up and I take them down immediately, because you can do that much easier than when you have hundreds and even thousands. You have to see what is happened to Washington D.C. since I have left. But in Washington D.C., an estimated 70% of all violent crime, and there is a lot of it involving guns, is concentrated among a group of just 500 chronic law-breakers. With most suspects arrested 11 times, at least, before being involved in a murder. They ultimately end up in a murder and then they end up getting like a year and sometimes less, and sometimes they are not even prosecuted. Let us get Trump. Let us get that son of a bitch. Let us get him. This career criminal class cares nothing about gun laws in Chicago.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1642, "text": "Just 3% of prison inmates, who used a gun, bought it at a store. So all of the gun owners in this room, a lot of them Who is a gun owner? Who is a gun owner, first of all? Is there anybody in the room who does not own a gun? Raise your hand if you have the courage. Okay, and how many people own gun stores and sell guns? The issue is too many thugs, hoodlums and savage criminals on our street. Instead of getting these dangerous killers into jail, we have radical DAs and attorney generals, prosecutors all across this country, subverting the law to attack conservative people and religious people, evangelicals, Christians. The very same raging, radical left, lunatic attorney general that is coming after me in New York State is also waging war on the NRA, shamefully trying to destroy this legendary organization that is been an American institution since 1871. You know when the NRA endorsed me in 2016, for the 2016 campaign, it was fairly early, and I do have two sons who are really good shots. They have been a member of the NRA for a long time, and I think maybe that helped, but they endorsed me. That was considered one of the greatest things to do. That it was like getting into the Wharton School of Finance or getting into Harvard or getting into a great college. And they endorsed me very early and it was a great honor. We did a great job. And they better endorse me again, or they are going to have some explaining to do. They will have some explaining to today. No, I do believe we are in pretty good shape, but when you see the polls in a little while, you can understand that we are in pretty good shape. I have never seen such spirit as there is right now. And part of that, sadly, is because they are doing such a horrible job of running our country, which is really destroying our country, and I think it makes us even more popular to be honest with you. They are doing such a horrible job. What they are doing is destroying our great country. I want to congratulate you for fighting it so bravely, all of the things that have been happening to you. The racist in reverse, ran for office on the promise, I will get Trump. You ever see the commercial? I will get Trump. I am going to get him. Did not know anything about me, she is running for office.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1643, "text": "But I am watching her campaign and a lot of people in the race and get a few people that vote, very few people actually it takes to get in. But she proclaimed, I look forward to going into the Office of Attorney General every single day suing him and then going home, being very happy. But she announced, What is fueling my soul right now is Trump, getting Trump. And she knows nothing about me. So it is not an investigation, you are going through the same thing, it is a persecution. Just like her attacks on the NRA and just like the witch hunts against us by the Manhattan DA, the Marxist DA in Atlanta, and the guy I have watching, this guy's central casting, the guy from Washington special prosecutor. They say special counsel, I call it a prosecutor, it is much better. They are looking at the boxes hoax. Biden has 1,850 boxes that are unaccounted for. He had many boxes in Chinatown, classified information, many boxes. They got them out of there, but they got caught. And they sent them up to Boston and they sit up in Boston and then it was revealed that he got millions of dollars from the Chinese. He got millions of dollars. But he has boxes in Chinatown, boxes all over the place. They do not care about that, they only care about Trump. But they are trying to arrest their political opposition, it is really very much like the old Soviet Union. They called Soviet style with elections and with the interference. They are interfering with the election, that is what they are doing. It is going to be hard for them to get away with the kind of corruption they did when they had ENTITY because ENTITY made a lot of things bad for a lot of people, but they cheated and going to be hard. So now I really believe they are going the prosecutorial way, that is the route. Where they use prosecutors to Do not forget if you are a With me, it is sort of interesting because my numbers have gone way up, you explain this to me. But other people, because you know me, the truth is the American public knows me well and they know that is my deal, but they do not know a lot of people running for office. So if you have a young good Republican running for office gets a subpoena and then they leak it out to the papers, it is impossible for this guy to win a race.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1644, "text": "So we have done something that I do not believe has ever done before, and we are going to stay there and we are going to go even higher if we can. I am not sure you can go higher, but we are going to go even higher if you can because we have to save our country. They are not coming after me, they are coming after you and I am just sort of in the way. I am in of these people. And as everybody knows, it is all because we are leading so big in the polls, not only against Republicans, but also against Joe Biden. And if you take a look this week's morning consult poll I led the field by 33 points with Trump 56 DeSanctis 23, Pence 5. I hope you gave Pence a good warm approval because he is a nice man, if you want to really know the truth. You have made news today. I do not know what you did, but you made news today with the introduction you gave. Nikki Haley, that is another, that is a beauty, she is at 4 and Abbott's at 1. I do not think Abbott's going to run, Governor of Texas. In a two-way poll of Florida last week it was Trump 47 and DeSanctis 32%. And there was another poll in Florida where Trump was at 80 and DeSanctis was at 50, and that is a Florida poll. In Texas it is Trump, 52% DeSanctis 20, Pence 5, Haley 4. The only way we can lose is if we go prevent defense. Do you know what that means? In football where they are holding the team to no score and then they go prevent the last two minutes and they lose the game. But you can take a look on the screen and you will see some of these things posted and they are really big polls. Massachusetts were leading by I think like 45, almost 50 points. In New Hampshire we are leading by a lot. In Iowa the farmers can never vote for me. I got China to pay the farmers $28 billion for the damage that they caused. And so you see some of these, I just thought you'd put them up. Remember in the old days, I used to always announce polls only if they were good, I would not announce them if they were not good. If I had a bad one, I would. But when they were good I used to drive the opposition crazy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1645, "text": "But we are leading Biden now by a lot, 7 points, 9 points and a 10 point, but seven points in the last Rasmussen poll. And I am the one that they do not want to run against, that is why they are coming after me like this. Instead, they put these monsters in there, they put these radical left crazy people in. They are the party of disinformation, remember that. What they say, you can usually go the opposite. They say, Oh yeah, we want to run against Trump. In the meantime, they got 5,000 prosecutors after my ass. We want to run against him so bad, we are going to run against him. That is the guy we want Trump. Please get him out as fast as you can. Nah, they are the party of disinformation or misinformation, nobody knows the difference but they are pretty close. It is no wonder that the far left crazies are engaging in election interference on a historic scale. Nobody outside of this country, nobody has ever seen anything like what is happening now with the prosecutors, these Marxist prosecutors, who release rapists and murderers while persecuting conservatives. On day one of my new administration I will direct the DOJ with a very strong leader, not like Barr, not like Bill Barr. You do not do anything. Remember they were going to impeach him and then all of a sudden he actually said, no, he did not see any wrongdoing in the election. My young son, very young, saw a lot of wrongdoing in the election every. Did anybody in this room can they say they did not see any wrong? That was the worst horror show, I think one of the greatest criminal acts ever, the election of 2020. But we will turn that around and it'll be even bigger. If you think about it, it'll be even bigger. We will be able to do things we could have never done because they have shown so bad. In other words, they want to show us. Well, they showed us. We have no energy. We have massive crime. Nobody respects us in the whole world. I mean, there is not a leader that respects our leader. We will show them through this horrible four years that we are going through. The problem is we cannot take any more of it because we are not going to have a country left.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1646, "text": "But we will show them that we can do things and we will be able to do things on crime and other elements of society we will be able to do things that you probably would not have been able to do if you just carried it forward. So I think it is actually much bigger, this could be much bigger than if we went the more traditional route. I will direct the DOJ to investigate every radical DA and attorney general and American for their illegal race in reverse based enforcement of the law. I will then appoint a team of warrior US attorneys, and I know know some great ones including from this area, who will be the polar opposite of the DeSoro's district attorneys. These guys, I mean, what they are thinking? They are either stupid or they hate our country, and I do not think they are stupid because anybody that can cheat so well in election, they are not stupid. That means they hate our country and I believe they hate our country. They will be the 100 most ferocious crime fighters in American history and I will task them with demolishing every gang, street crew and criminal network they can find piece by piece until public safety is fully restored, and that means in Democrat run cities. And at the top of the list is Washington DC itself, which is absolutely plagued by numbers and crime that nobody's ever seen before. We have never seen anything like what is happening in Washington DC. Can you imagine these foreign leaders coming over from countries and they are looking at this filth and squalor and crime in our capitol? And I think we have to take it over. We have to take over management of our capitol because the people that are running, including the mayor who did nothing about January 6th, he was the one, No, we do not need anybody. We do not need any help. Along with crazy Nancy Pelosi, they did nothing. They did absolutely nothing. They are in charge of it. But all of our Democrat run cities are being absolutely ruined and destroyed. I will order the ATF to stop bullying gun store owners and wanting to shut them down for paperwork errors and instead go after drug dealers, human traffickers and criminal cartels, which is what they should be going after. Under Biden other countries are emptying out their prisons insane asylums and mental institutions and sending them right here to the USA.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1647, "text": "I read a story not long ago where a man who takes care of a large segment of people in a mental institution in a South American country, a doctor, sounded like a great man actually, he said he no longer has anything to do. He used to work 24 hour days. He said, All of our patients have been released into the United States of America. And this is what we have. This is what we have allowed to happen. And we cannot allow this to happen because we will not have a country any longer. Under my leadership, we will quickly restore the most secure border in US history. We had the strongest border in history, and now we have, I think, the worst border in the history of the world because no country, even a Third World country, would allow what is happening right now to us to happen to them. The first reconciliation Bill I signed for a massive increase in border patrol. These Border Patrol and Brandon Judd and all of his people, they are incredible, the job they do. Tom Homan as a man that knows it, you see him on television, I call him central casting. But these two guys and all of the people that work with him, they are so good. They want to do their job. It is going to be a colossal increase in the number of ICE and Border Patrol, deportation offices following the Eisenhower model. I do not know if you know Dwight Eisenhower was very tough on the subject. We will use all necessary state, local, federal, and military resources to carry out the largest domestic deportation operation in American history. And I will ask every state and federal agency to identify every known or suspected gang member in America. And every one of them that is here legally we will pick them up and we will send them back to the country from which they came as we restore safety to our streets. have no choice. As we restore safety to our streets, we must also restore it to our schools. Hardening places of lording, we have to harden our assets to protect our children against threats of any kind. Last month, our hearts were shattered by news of the monstrous attack on a Christian elementary school in Nashville that claimed the lives of three adults and three precious children. Today we wrapped those beautiful families in our love and we lift them up in our prayers. We also salute the law enforcement heroes who ran into danger and took out that killer with speed and skill that made us all very, very proud.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1648, "text": "It is a scandal and a tragedy that year after year Democrats in Washington continue to hold common sense school safety measures hostage to their radical gun control agenda, which in virtually all cases would do nothing to prevent attacks by demented and disturbed individuals, of which we have many and many are coming into our country, but we are getting them out. Our country has been chock-full of guns for centuries and there was no talk of massacres of school children until around the year 2000. They started talking about it. Each and every one of these heinous attacks depend on the same cold-blooded calculation that the evil monster will have a window of time to act out their demonic fantasy unchallenged, they want to be unchallenged, they do not want challenge. The only way to stop these wicked acts is to ensure that any sicko who would shoot up a school knows that, within seconds, not minutes, they will face certain death. They have to know that, then they will not be doing it. For this reason, I will ask Congress to repeal totally ineffective legislation that makes it harder to protect our schools and easier for criminals to face absolutely no opposition when they go in. I will also create a new tax credit to reimburse any teacher for the full cost of a concealed carry firearm and training from highly qualified experts who is better. If even 5% of teachers, people that are skilled with arms, we want that. 5% were voluntarily armed and trained to stop active shooters, we would achieve effective deterrents and the problem would cease to exist and that would be a lot of people, but these are all people that are trained and talented with firearms. For about $12 billion, we could fund arm security guards at the entrance every school in America and also arm every willing teacher. We want to arm some of these teachers that have to go through rigorous or some people say vigorous, I like vigorous better, I do not like rigorous, they have to go through vigorous training, but they are already there and they will do better than anybody you could put in. And they love our children. They really love our children. If we can send $120 billion to Ukraine, then we can afford one-tenth of that amount to protect American children in American schools. We also need to drastically change our approach to mental health.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1649, "text": "Upon my inauguration, I will direct the FDA to convene, and it is going to happen quickly, to convene an independent outside panel to investigate whether transgender hormone treatments and ideology increase the risk of extreme depression, aggression, and even violence. I think most of us already know the answer, do not we? Furthermore, we have to look at whether common psychiatric drugs as well as genetically engineered cannabis and other narcotics are causing psychotic breaks, lot of problems. We are having problems that we have never seen before and people sort of think they understand why. We must also be much better at detecting warning signs of evil disturbed young men, like the one who murdered colleagues in Louisville, we cannot rest until we get to the bottom of all of the sickness that we are seeing in our country. I will fight to restore our safety and I will also fight to reclaim our freedom. We are going to have freedom in our country. We are going to be able to walk down the street and buy a loaf of bread and come back and not be shot. To defend our constitution and the rule of law, I will give you my word today that I will appoint rock solid constitutional conservatives to crush the communists from our federal bench. They are communists, many of them. We did a great job. We set a record, but there is more to go. Before election day 2024, I will once again release the full list of names from which I select my appointments to the United States Supreme Court so everyone can see who I am . Thinking about putting there, I did that last time and a lot of people said it made a big difference. It will be an all star roster of young fearless originalists in the mold of Justice Antonin Scalia, great man and the great lion of American Liberty. Justice Clarence Thomas, by the way, they are after him. Did you see it? They are after him now. They are after Clarence now, but he can take care of himself very well. At the same time, conservatives can no longer sit by and wait for the courts to save America. Our country is being plundered and ransacked by radical left barbarians who are trying to burn down every right and every liberty that we hold so dear. The next time we have power, Congress has to step up and stop this Marxist revolution and it strikes. We have a Marxist revolution going on and I think you are starting to see it. I think you are starting to see it, and we have to stop it fast.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1650, "text": "This is what we must do to save our country. With your vote and with a Republican house and a Republican Senate, and we have a really good chance at both, I will lead the great rebirth of American freedom. We will build a future where we are free of crime and free of violence and free from fear, is fear, where we are free from dependence on foreign countries. We are so dependent on so many foreign countries, in particular China, where we are free from the shackles of an unelected deep state from corrupt intelligence agencies, free from war, free from poverty, free to speak our minds, and last but certainly not least, free to keep and bear arms. And in closing, I have to state, the USA is a mess. Our economy is crashing, inflation is out of control. Russia has joined with China, unthinkable. Saudi Arabia, great people, have joined with Iran. China, Russia, Iran, North Korea have formed together as a menacing and destructive coalition. Our currency is crashing and will soon no longer be the world's standard, which will be our greatest defeat in 200 years and was unthinkable just a few years ago. Unthinkable that that could happen, but it is happening before your very eyes and we will not let it happen. With me, not even a chance, just like Russia would've never invaded Ukraine, and China would not be having even a thought of raiding Taiwan. You did not hear about these things when I was president. If you took the five worst presidents in the history of the United States and added them up, they would not have done near the destruction to our country as Joe Biden and the Biden administration have done. We are a nation in decline, and now these radical left lunatics want to interfere with our elections by using law enforcement and we cannot let that happen. But with all of this being said, and with a very dark cloud hanging over our country, I have no doubt that we will, together as a group, make America great again. I have no doubt. God bless you all. God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpaddressesnrameetinginindianapolistranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Addresses NRA Meeting in Indianapolis Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-addresses-nra-meeting-in-indianapolis-transcript", "publication_date": "17-04-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1662, "text": "I have an announcement with regard to the energy crisis that I will now make, and at the conclusion of my announcement, Mr. Simon will have a brief statement with regard to his acceptance of the position that I am appointing him to, and then will take questions on the new office that we are setting up and new actions that we are taking to meet the energy crisis. As you recall, in my report to the Nation on November 25, I said that I would be reporting from time to time on the energy crisis and on the steps that I would personally be taking to meet it. Last June, I asked Governor Love to join my staff in order to develop the necessary policies to meet what was then essentially a long-term problem which had important short-term consequences. Governor Love has provided me with a broad range of recommendations and policy considerations for achieving independence with regard to energy by the year 1980. The work which Governor Love and his staff have done in the last 6 months constitutes an invaluable and lasting contribution to this Nation's efforts to meet a challenge of formidable dimensions. While the process of policy formulation was going forward, the world--the United States and all the rest of the world as well--was confronted with a new and far more critical situation arising from the Middle East oil embargo. I have discussed in recent weeks those steps which we would take to meet this new situation. Such steps will involve the Federal Government directly in operational matters, in addition to its policy-making role in resolving the energy crisis. In order to administer the necessary voluntary and mandatory actions, some of which have been announced, some of which are still under consideration, we must now strengthen our ability to make and implement our energy program. The planning for this step has been in process for several weeks. I have been in consultation with my senior advisers on the development of an operational structure to carry out our energy policies. And we also have been in contact with major Congressional leaders who are interested in this particular problem and have responsibilities in the Congress for the problem. As a result of these consultations, I have decided to bring together in one agency the major energy resource management functions of the Federal Government to provide the centralized authority we must have for dealing with the energy crisis. I am personally assuming the Chairmanship of the Energy Emergency Action Group which will continue to oversee all major policy issues relating to energy. And Mr. William E. Simon, who is currently Deputy Secretary of the Treasury, will serve as Executive Director of this group.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingestablishmentthefederalenergyoffice", "title": "Remarks Announcing Establishment of the Federal Energy Office", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-establishment-the-federal-energy-office", "publication_date": "04-12-1973", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1663, "text": "I expect, Mr. Simon, that this will take almost all of your time. Concurrently, I am asking the Congress to create a Federal Energy Administration and, in the Executive Office of the President, a Federal Energy Office to carry out all energy-related functions. In anticipation of Congressional action on my request, I am today establishing by Executive order the Federal Energy Office, which will begin to perform these functions while we await the necessary statutory authority which we hope to get from the Congress. The Federal Energy Office will also be headed by Mr. Simon. I am gratified by the rapid action which the Congress is taking on many of the proposals for dealing with the energy crisis. The emergency legislation which we must have is being considered in an expeditious manner, as is my request for legislation establishing an Energy Research and Development Administration. And I am confident, too, that my proposal for a Federal Energy Administration will be dealt with in a similar manner by the Congress. As these steps are being taken, I want to emphasize once again that the work of the Government agencies involved in meeting the energy crisis cannot be fully successful without the total commitment of every American citizen to see our Nation through this situation. The American people recognize the challenge facing us, and they are already responding to it in a way that speaks well for the future. Every day reports flow into the White House of families who are driving more slowly, turning down their thermostats in their homes, and seeking other ways to conserve fuel. Each of these families has my personal gratitude and has also the gratitude of the entire Nation. As we see the spirit of sacrifice which has distinguished this response, we approach the days ahead with the strongest confidence that we will weather this present difficulty as we have others in our history and that the ultimate accomplishment of independence with regard to energy can and will be a fitting tribute to America's strength and perseverance in this time. And now, Mr. Simon, who will have such great responsibilities to carry out these policies in this new office, will have a statement and then will take your questions.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingestablishmentthefederalenergyoffice", "title": "Remarks Announcing Establishment of the Federal Energy Office", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-establishment-the-federal-energy-office", "publication_date": "04-12-1973", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1670, "text": "Barbara and I are just delighted to welcome everyone to the White House. And let me single out a few people. Jim Watkins, who brought our National Energy Strategy through the Congress; Manuel Lujan, who is helped expand our parks and refuges; Secretary Barbara Franklin, her team's been out there pushing on the economic benefits of environmental protection. Don Atwood was to be here, but I single him out because he and the military brought an environmental ethic, I think, to everything from basic training to the conduct of a successful military operation halfway around the world in Desert Storm. Then our Secretary of Transportation was to be here, Andy Card. He is now Secretary of Transition and as well as Secretary of Transportation. Let me just say to this distinguished nonpartisan group that I am just determined that this transition goes smoothly and go well. And I am absolutely convinced under Andy's leadership it is going well and will go well. Speaking of nonpartisanship, I salute the Governor of Florida, and I am just delighted that Lawton Chiles is with us, leader in the environmental movement; Senator Domenici was to be here I do not see him, but nevertheless; and Congressman Gilchrest; Congressman Porter Goss. And I want to reserve a very special thanks for Bill Reilly, our able EPA Administrator, in whom I have great confidence, a confidence that has been well rewarded, I might say, by an outstanding performance; and then for Mike Deland, the key figure here today. He is the Chairman of our Council on Environmental Quality, and I believe he is done an outstanding job. And so I am just delighted, Barbara and I are delighted to be standing at his side. Gil Grosvenor of the National Geographic Society, Frank Bennack of Hearst, John Johnstone of the Business Roundtable, and Kathryn Fuller of the World Wildlife Fund. And I want to thank the awards selection committee and especially my old friend Bob Stafford who is back in Washington. I am just delighted to see him, and Gaylord, Senator Gaylord Nelson, as well. And most of all I want to send a special welcome to the guests of honor, the 9 medal and the 13 citation recipients. Congratulations to all, and I look forward to seeing the presentations. I am not going to make a long-winded speech, because I take the Clean Air Act very seriously. I have had a chance, under a very different schedule, to do a lot of thinking over the past 3 weeks.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresentationceremonyforthepresidentsenvironmentandconservation", "title": "Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony for the President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-for-the-presidents-environment-and-conservation", "publication_date": "02-12-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1671, "text": "And let me just share some of your reflections. I hope you will excuse me if I take pride in talking about certain accomplishments. Over the next few years I reckon I will be spending a lot of time in what Teddy Roosevelt called the great cathedral of the outdoors, and I cannot wait. I will remember what we have tried to do to conserve it, to preserve it, and I am very proud of our team's efforts. Everyone is and should be, whatever age, interested in the environment. And my own conviction, or environmental policy, if you will, was born out of the concerns of a President, an outdoorsman, and maybe most of all, a grandfather. Our approach signaled a step beyond command-and-control regulation toward a more market-oriented, decentralized philosophy of environmental action. Those who said we posed a false choice between a strong economy and a safer environment just did not get it, just missed the point. We sought to achieve both while sacrificing neither. And we combined a pragmatism about human nature with an idealism about Mother Nature, an ambitious agenda that harnessed the energy of capitalism in the service of the environment. Now, excuse me, as I say, if I take pride in listing a few accomplishments that we pass on to a new generation. The Clean Air Act, with the help of Democrats and Republicans on the Hill, we broke 10 years of congressional gridlock by pushing through the world's most protective and cost-effective clean air legislation. And we have already proposed or finalized rules that promise to get at 85 percent of the pollution reductions that are targeted in this law. Reilly's clapping for himself, and I do not blame him. We won major funding shifting to environmental programs increasing the EPA's budget, I believe it was almost 50 percent; increasing funding for clean energy research and development by 66 percent. We enlisted the private sector in the voluntary pollution prevention efforts that are reshaping American industries, making us leaner, more efficient, and reducing toxic pollution by hundreds of millions of pounds a year. On the law enforcement front, we broke new ground and old records, filing more cases, collecting more penalties, and putting more polluters behind bars than every previous administration in history combined. We helped make America's great outdoors even greater, securing over a billion dollars to expand parks and wetlands and wildlife refuges, campgrounds and scenic rivers. We decided to end clear-cutting as a standard practice on Federal land.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresentationceremonyforthepresidentsenvironmentandconservation", "title": "Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony for the President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-for-the-presidents-environment-and-conservation", "publication_date": "02-12-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1672, "text": "And our America the Beautiful initiative has gotten off to a good start with several million new trees all across this great country. We ensured that America's seas would still be shining, ending ocean dumping and sewage sludge, proposing and signing a tough oil pollution bill, and imposing a 10-year moratorium on oil and gas leasing over vast areas of the really sensitive, the ecologically sensitive coasts. We have launched a new generation of clean energy technologies, not only by increasing funding for research and development but also by increasing incentives for their use. And we have pushed through comprehensive national energy legislation a salute to Jim again that will guide our country into the next century. In terms of Federal leadership, we have tripled funding for Federal facility cleanups, secured over 100 enforceable cleanup agreements for Federal facilities, and signed Executive orders spurring the Federal Government to take the lead in increasing energy efficiency, recycling, waste reduction, and converting the Federal fleet to alternative fuels. Finally, we have insisted that a new world order include a cleaner world environment, and we reached over 20 new international environmental agreements. Just by way of example, we reduced Poland's debt in order to help them fund a new environmental foundation. We also launched the center, the Environmental Center in Budapest, to help countries in Central and Eastern Europe. We made America the world leader in the phaseout of ozone depletion, the ozone-depleting CFC's, and we led the way to global bans on driftnet fishing. We built environmental cooperation into trade negotiations with Mexico. We have expanded the debt-for-nature swaps to protect the rain forests in Latin America and created networks for cooperation with Asia. And our comprehensive, action-oriented approach to global climate change was ratified by the Senate and adopted by the world community. At the same time that we renewed our national commitment to the environment, we redoubled our efforts to support and encourage people like you. Everyone in this room, everyone here today, has demonstrated the principles of a new environmentalism. This national environmental awards program was established to honor those who honored the environment. Some here have forged innovative partnerships, environmental alliances that are protecting our wetlands, preserving our resources, and preparing a new generation of environmental leadership. Others have taken the lead in combining sound business with a safer environment, a smart new merger between profitability and preservation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepresentationceremonyforthepresidentsenvironmentandconservation", "title": "Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony for the President's Environment and Conservation Challenge Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-for-the-presidents-environment-and-conservation", "publication_date": "02-12-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1680, "text": "First, let me say to all of you that when we came in here tonight, I think it is fair to say that Hillary and Al and Tipper and I were literally overwhelmed by this reception. I knew there was a lot of enthusiasm, but it did not all quite add up until I realized that we had caused your exams to be delayed. And I want you to know that we are having such a good time, we'd be delighted to come back about this time next term if you want. I want to thank Dr. Williams for his magnificent invocation. I thank Dr. Woodall for the remarks he made, for making us welcome here, and for the example that he and Mr. Spencer, the principal here, all the teachers here, and all the students and teachers from this school and the other schools here represented. I thank you for what you are doing and for the example you are setting for America. I'd like to thank all of our musicians and the choir for playing and singing for us. And I want to thank Melissa for speaking so well. Were not you proud of her? Did she do a great job, or what? I am glad I never had to run against her for anything. I also want to thank all these wonderful people from Pennsylvania who have come here, all the officials and citizens from this area and from Philadelphia and nearby areas. Let me say, there was a lot of talk tonight keying off Reverend Williams' invocation about vision. I'd like to say something else, if I might, out of respect to others. It is a good thing to have a vision, because otherwise you never know where you are going. So you have to have one. I ran for ENTITY, beginning in 1991, because I thought our country was drifting and because I believed that if you look at these young people here one elementary school in this area has kids from 50 countries speaking 13 languages and if you look at all these young people and their parents and everybody in this room, and you imagine what the world is going to be like, and you know it is going to get smaller and smaller, and we are going to have more and more relationships, and the borders will become more and more open, it is hard to imagine any country in the world that is remotely as well positioned as America to give people the chance to make the most of their own lives. But we had to have a vision. My vision for the 21st century was pretty simple.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1681, "text": "I wanted us to have a country for the children of the Gores and the Clintons and all the other kids in our country where every person who was a responsible citizen would have a genuine opportunity to live out their dreams. I wanted us to have a country where over all the differences between us we would relish those differences, our racial, our religious, our cultural differences; our serious differences we would debate seriously. But we would honor our common humanity and our shared values as Americans enough to say, what unites us is so much more important than what divides us; we will build one America in the 21st century. And I wanted us to continue to be the country, as we grew more diverse and, therefore, had deeper and deeper ties with more and more other people around the world. I wanted America to recognize that because of our wealth and position, we have not only the opportunity but a responsibility to continue to be the world's leading force for peace and freedom and prosperity for others. It is good for ourselves to do the right thing in trying to build the rest of the world and build closer ties. Now, it is a good thing to have a vision; you cannot get started without it. The Vice President talked about Tommy Lasorda and Mike Piazza. My favorite baseball player of all time, because he was such a wonderful speaker, was Yogi Berra. You know, Yogi Berra said, We do not know where we are going, but we are making good time. So you have to have a vision. But you have to have something else, too. You have to have people who are willing to act on it. I hope you could see with the four of us up here, we like being together. We see ourselves as a family, and we see our allies as a family. When I came to Washington, I wanted to do something about homelessness, but Tipper Gore helped me do it. I wanted to raise the consciousness of America about all kinds of things that we sort of kept hidden under the rug but were hurting people. Mental health was one of the most important. Tipper Gore helped me do it. I wanted to prove that we could have a smaller Government we now have the smallest Federal Government since 1962 but I wanted to do it in a way that would not just throw good Federal employees in the street and that would enable us to do more. The Vice President made it possible for us to do that; he led that effort.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1682, "text": "I wanted to prove that we could grow the economy and improve the environment by doing things like building new cars that would triple gas mileage. The Vice President has led our efforts there, and in dealing with all the promise of new technology in trying to hook up all our schools and libraries to the Internet, and in managing a big portion of our relations with Russia, South Africa, and other countries. I can say without qualification that no Vice President in history has had so much responsibility or done so much good. So the vision requires an action. And if it had not been for Hillary, for all the good intentions in the world, we would not have done nearly as much to advance the cause of health care or child care or education or to observe the millennium. We would not have been able to do it. When I see Joe Hoeffel standing up here talking and I know he is going to be a strong force on the committees that he is gotten; I see another new Congressman out there, my longtime friend Bob Brady from Philadelphia. I know that they will be implementers of a vision. Or Chaka Fattah, who got you all worked up, up there, when he stood up; do you know what he did? He passed a bill in the Congress last year that I was for, but I could not have passed it. I could not have done it. But he went around to Republicans and Democrats alike and said, You know, I come from Philadelphia. There are a lot of poor kids there that have never had a real chance. They come from poor families. They live in tough neighborhoods, but they have got good minds. Will you help me pass a bill that will provide the necessary financial support for college students to come in and mentor these kids in middle schools so they will go on to college? And we did it because of that. Now, I will give you one other example. Last time I came here as ENTITY was in 1993, to a conference on entitlement reform. Entitlement reform is a fancy way of saying with everybody living longer and the baby boomers about to retire, all the rest of you are not going to be able to afford to pay our medical and retirement bills unless we do something. That is what entitlement reform means. And I said, You know, I have got this economic plan, and it is not going to be very popular with a lot of people because it has a lot of tough decisions.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1683, "text": "We are asking people who are the wealthiest people in America to pay a little more in income taxes, sometimes a lot more if they were really well off. We are asking people who are used to getting Government programs to do without a few hundred of them until we get this budget in balance. But if we do it, we will lower interest rates, cutting home mortgages and the interest rates on car payments and credit cards, and we will get investment back in the country. We will have jobs coming back in the country. And the money you will save on the stock market going up and the interest rates going down will be far greater than the money those of us who are well off had to pay in a little more taxes. It was very controversial, and people said, Oh, it will bring an end to the economy. It will end the American economy as we know it. It will drive us into recession. Well, you heard what the Vice President said about the country with the longest peacetime expansion in history, the lowest peacetime unemployment since 1957, and all of that. What you should know is that this county, this county has had, since that economic program passed and the interest rates started going down, 1,800 new businesses and 44,000 new jobs, the highest growth in the State of Pennsylvania. The decisive vote that made all that possible was cast in Congress by Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky. We won by one vote in the House, and it was tied in the Senate. The decisive vote in the Senate was cast by Al Gore. Now, the point I am trying to make is we had a good vision, but somebody has got to carry the water; somebody has to make the decisions; somebody has to push the rocks up the hill; somebody has to take that step and jump off the diving board; someone has to move. People have to act on their vision. That is why I said last night and that is why that sign says, Let us get to work. We have a good vision, but we must act. And for all of you, I thank you. I wanted to come here to this school because this school district represents what I think America ought to do. I know not every school district has the resources. So if we want everybody to end social promotion but have summer school and afterschool programs, we have to provide the funds from Washington to help the school districts do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1684, "text": "If we want to turn around schools that are not working, we have to provide help from Washington. And we are doing that. But I want people to see this school district all over America, on the news tonight, in the articles tomorrow. I want people to know we came here to a place that has done important things, to give kids who need it extra help, to have high standards, to do things that will create a vision that people will want to act on. I think to have a motto like learn and live to serve is a stunning thing, and I hope you will live by it all your lives. Every high school graduate in this school district gets a license, a driver's license-sized copy of the diploma, and on the back it has the computer skills the graduate has mastered. That is a driver's license to the future. I would like to see that modeled in other places all across America, as well. So you have already heard what we have to say, but it is plain that America is working again. But every one of you knows if we had time to do it, I'd give everybody a piece of paper, and I'd ask you to write down you might do this when you go home tonight. I'd ask you to write down somewhere between three and six things no more than six that you believe are the long-term challenges that will face you young people in the 21st century and what is it that we could do now that would pave the way to a better future for you. I can tell you that I did my best in the State of the Union last night to say, Okay, we have got America working again, but what are the long-term challenges? And you have heard them talked about tonight, and I will not belabor them. But let me say, we have to build strong communities in the 21st century that gives everyone a chance at opportunity. That means we have to do more to have the kind of economic opportunity in places where unemployment is high and people make low wages that you have here. That means putting more money in there. It means teaching adults better skills. It means teaching those who are first-generation Americans to read better, if that is what it takes. It means continuing to drive the crime rate down.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1685, "text": "It means making all communities livable communities, to set aside the land that we need to set aside, to have the green space, to manage the traffic, to do the things that will make people free and happy if they live anywhere in America. These are the kinds of things we have to do. It means reconciling work and family. One of the best things that the Gores have done is, for the last 7 years, they have had a conference in Tennessee every year on the challenges modern families face. And most all of them relate somehow or other to the need to balance work and family, a challenge that faces Americans in all income groups. I will bet there is not a family here that has not at some point in the last couple of years faced some sort of challenge of balancing your responsibilities to your children to your responsibilities to your work. That is why we want a child care plan that includes help for stay-at-home parents when the children are very young, but real help for working people that cannot afford quality child care on their own. Because in America, when I look at all of you, I want you to be free and confident, when you start your families, that you can do what you want in your work life, but you know that your first responsibility is to raise your children, and you are going to be able to succeed at that responsibility. The Vice President told you that rather gripping story about the HMO's. The truth is we have to manage the health care system; it is like any other system. We have to keep the costs as low as possible. But the quality of our people's health counts most. That is why we say you ought to be able to see a specialist if you need one. You ought to be able to go to the nearest emergency room. You ought to be able to have your medical records private and all of the other things in our Patients' Bill of Rights, because we have got to balance the need to save money with the fundamental necessity of providing quality health care to all Americans. And I'd just like to say one other thing. We have said a lot about education tonight, but I would like to say something about the very first subject I talked about last night in the State of the Union, and that is the aging of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1686, "text": "And again I want to say, this is an issue that should be of primary importance not to today's retirees but to tomorrow's retirees, their children, and their grandchildren yet unborn. Because when the baby boomers retire and that includes the parents of just about all of the students here; people between the ages of 34 and 52 were the people born in the generation after World War II, the largest group of people in history in America, young people, until the present class of students which numbers over 53 million. Now, when we retire, we are going to double the number of seniors by the year 2030. And what we have got and the average life expectancy is already 76 years old plus; for the young people here, it is probably about 83 years. But we do not want to get into a position where our retirement is a financial burden to our children and undermines our children's ability to raise our grandchildren. So when I tell you that we ought to set aside roughly 75 percent of this surplus we have got for the next 15 years to save Social Security and to save Medicare, and in the process, since we will be saving the money, we will be paying down the national debt, giving us the lowest level of debt we have had as a nation since before World War I in 1917, keeping interest rates down, investment high, jobs creation going, and incomes rising I say that not just for those of us who will be older but for our kids and our grandkids. And I hope you will see it that way. This is a big test for us. We have not had this kind of situation in a long, long time. And very rarely do societies have the luxury of being financially strong enough, militarily secure enough, and having enough information about the future to make the kind of decisions that I asked the American people to make last night. Yes, we ought to give some tax cuts, but they ought to be the right kind. They ought to be for child care. They ought to be for helping us to deal with our environmental challenges. They ought to be for people saving for their own retirement, because Social Security will never be enough for that. They ought to be for raising children. But we can save this money now and lift a burden from the young people here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1687, "text": "Do you really want to run the risk of squandering this surplus that we have worked so hard for until we know for sure that our retirement will not compromise the integrity of their lives and their ability to raise their children as we have tried to raise them? Now, the young people here are going to have a fascinating time. The Internet is already growing by, you know, millions and millions of new pages every week. It is the fastest growing communication mechanism in human history. People are able to move around as never before, and even if you cannot leave town now, you have got people from all over the world right next door. We are learning things that we have never imagined before. We are on the verge of not only unlocking the mysteries of the human gene but actually finding medical treatments to cure or even prevent things from Alzheimer's to arthritis to all kinds of cancers. I went to the auto show in Detroit the other day, and one thing I am looking forward to I love this job, and I am not looking forward to 2 years from now being barred from being ENTITY by the Constitution's two-term limit. But one thing I am looking forward to, now that I have been to the Detroit auto show, is getting back in those cars, because the cars of the future are going to be environmentally sound and hilariously fun to drive and safer. But we have to do our best in this time to, first of all, make it safe, dealing with the challenges of nuclear and chemical and biological weapons, to give you the strongest communities possible, to build one America across our lines of diversity, and to think about the future. When I ran for ENTITY in 1992, before I ever made the decision to run, a young man who is now not quite so young, he is a graduate student, named Sean Landris was driving me around Los Angeles. I was an anonymous, virtually anonymous Governor of Arkansas. But Sean Landris knew something about me and the speeches I had made and the things I was interested in, and he said, Are you going to run for ENTITY? And he had a little tape deck in his car, and he put this tape deck in and this old Fleetwood Mac song, Do not Stop Thinking About Tomorrow, which was made before he was born. And I believe that those of us in positions of responsibility have no higher responsibility than to think about your tomorrows.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthemontgomerycountycommunitynorristownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to the Montgomery County Community in Norristown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-montgomery-county-community-norristown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "20-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1688, "text": "It is a pleasure to be here with my friend and partner, President Medvedev, and I want to thank him again for his leadership, especially his vision for an innovative Russia that is modernizing its economy, including deeper economic ties between our two countries. my Commerce Secretary, Gary Locke, and Minister Nabiullina. I always have a little trouble with that one. They say the same thing about Obama. We are joined by our United States Trade Representative, Ambassador Ron Kirk, and our great Ambassadors, John Beyrle and Sergey Kislyak. And I want to also thank the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the U.S.-Russia Business Council, the American Chamber of Commerce in Moscow, and all the organizations who helped bring our countries together not just today but every day. Now, many of you joined us at the business summit during my visit to Moscow 1 year ago, and it is good to see you again. I noted then that you are part of a long tradition of commerce and trade between our peoples. Long before Russia and the United States even exchanged Ambassadors, we exchanged goods. In fact, before coming to Washington, President Medvedev visited California and Silicon Valley to explore new partnerships in science and technology and in venture capital. And while there, he pledged Russia's support to preserve the historic Fort Ross in Sonoma County, an enduring reminder of the early Russian settlements and trade that brought Russian goods to our young nation. Some have even wondered whether our Declaration of Independence may have been signed with goose quills from Russia. More than 200 years later, it is a sign of the times that during his visit to Silicon Valley, President Medvedev opened his own Twitter account. I have one as well. And I said during our press conference today that we may be able to finally get rid of those old red phones. As we all know, despite the surge in trade in recent years, the economic relationship between the United States and Russia is still largely one of untapped potential. And I pointed out last year that our trade with Russia is only about the same as our trade with Thailand, a country with less than half the population of Russia. And that is why part of the reset of the U.S.-Russia relationship required us creating the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Partnership Commission--Presidential Commission to explore a whole range of new opportunities, including economic partnerships that create jobs and opportunities for both our peoples.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunitedstatesrussiabusinesssummit0", "title": "Remarks at the United States-Russia Business Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-united-states-russia-business-summit-0", "publication_date": "24-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1689, "text": "And under Secretary Locke and Minister Nabiullina's leadership, that is what we have done. Companies represented here today are moving forward with a series of major trade and investment deals that will create jobs for both Americans and Russians across many sectors, from aerospace to automotive engineering to the financial sector and high technology. I am especially pleased that Boeing and Russian Technologies are moving forward with a $4 billion deal on 50 Boeing 737s. This is a win for Russia, creating a long-term market for its raw materials and resulting in modern airplanes for Russia's travelers. It is obviously a win for the United States, because this partnership could add up to 44,000 new jobs in the American aerospace industry. This reflects my administration's National Export Initiative, and it is a perfect example of the shared prosperity and the high-tech jobs that we can create together. So today President Medvedev and I agreed to expand trade and commerce even further. We agreed to deepen our collaboration on energy efficiency and clean energy technologies. We reached an agreement that will allow the United States to begin exporting our poultry products to Russia once again. I want to again thank President Medvedev and his team for resolving this issue, which is an important signal about Russia's seriousness about achieving membership in the World Trade Organization. And that is why I told President Medvedev that our teams should accelerate their efforts to work together to complete this process in the very near future. I believe that Russia belongs in the WTO. That is good for Russia, it is good for America, and it is good for the world economy. I pledged to President Medvedev that the United States wants to be Russia's partner as he pursues his vision of modernization and innovation in Russia, including his initiative to create a Russian silicon valley outside of Moscow. American companies and universities were among the first to invest in this effort. And I am pleased that a number of you here today are going to be working with it as well. Now, there is still a lot more that we can do to encourage trade and investment. And obviously in Russia--and Medvedev and I discussed this--issues of transparency and accountability and rule of law remain absolutely critical. This is the foundation on which investments and economic growth depends. And I very much appreciate and applaud President Medvedev's efforts in this area. Today we took another step forward.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunitedstatesrussiabusinesssummit0", "title": "Remarks at the United States-Russia Business Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-united-states-russia-business-summit-0", "publication_date": "24-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1690, "text": "I always feel self-conscious when I say that, and I say that every time I am in here, but somehow, technically and that just kind of explains some of the problems of government that this Old Executive Office Building is part of the White House. I have not put my clothes in a single closet over here. Well, I am glad to welcome members of the clergy and lay leaders to Washington. I have always' assumed that men of the cloth can visit this town and really see how it works without returning home feeling the need to pray fervently, and let me tell you, we need all the help we can get. I also feel a certain kinship with those of you who are members of the clergy. Now, this is a comparison that is not always made, but politicians and clergy do have a lot in common. We both have to make speeches and keep our audiences interested, and I know I am running a risk in telling members of the clergy a story about their own profession, but maybe it will be new to some of you. It has to do with a young minister who was very disturbed because sometime, particularly on those hot Sunday or summer mornings Sunday mornings, he'd see his group nodding off while he was preaching his sermon. And he told about his distress to a more experienced and older clergyman who said that he'd had that same problem, but he'd found an answer to it. He said, When you see them and their eyes beginning to close, he said, you just insert a line in your sermon and say, 'Last night, I held another man's wife in my arms.' Last night, I held in my arms a woman who was not my wife. Well, the first minister had told him that after he got them awake, he was to then say, That woman was my dear mother. And this young fellow said the line and then said, I cannot remember who she was. Well, I hope I have better luck today. I have come to talk to you about our efforts to overhaul our nation's tax code, but I first want to stress our commitment to solving the school dropout problem and youth unemployment. The two subjects are not unrelated because a vital, growing economy, liberated from high tax rates and an unfair and restrictive tax code, is the best way to provide opportunity for all. For the special problem of our unemployed young people, a youth employment opportunity wage is also vital.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreligiousleaderswhitehousemeetingtaxreform", "title": "Remarks to Religious Leaders at a White House Meeting on Tax Reform", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-religious-leaders-white-house-meeting-tax-reform", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1691, "text": "Now, if you have not heard that term expressed, it is something we have asked of the Congress and asked that they do. The figures reveal that every time the minimum wage has increased, the number of jobs available for teenagers, young people, has gone down those afterschool jobs, those weekend, and those summer jobs. The jobs are simply priced out of existence. The school dropout problem is more complex, but I think that we can all agree that it is at least attributable in part to the increase in family breakdown. But one of the common causes of dropout from school also is a need or desire to be earning some money. In this modern age, families are subject to intense pressures from all sides. And sad to say, the Federal Government, instead of helping, has been adding to the burden of families. Throughout the great tax explosion of the sixties and seventies, everybody with a paycheck got hit and hit hard by taxes, but those trying to raise families really got clobbered. Not only did their taxes skyrocket, their personal exemption, the real value of the deduction that they were allowed to take for themselves and each one of their dependents, was steadily knocked down by inflation. If the personal exemption, which was $600 in 1948, had kept pace with inflation, that exemption today would be $2,700. Now, this is where the profamily initiatives of America's fair share tax plan come in. We are not going to go to the $2,700 or have not asked to do that but in our tax plan we have asked to almost double it, to raise it to $2,000 in order to make up for some of what the family has lost over those years. We are also increasing the standard deduction to $4,000 for joint returns. Our proposal will mean that families, as well as the elderly, the blind, and the disabled, living at or below the poverty line will be completely scratched from the Federal income tax rolls. The U.S. Government will no longer tax families into poverty. And under our proposal, a family of four would not have to pay one single cent of Federal income taxes on the first $12,000 of income. And because saving is so essential to families, but so very difficult with all those expenses, we are expanding the taxfree savings accounts of IRA's, the individual retirement accounts, so that they are fully available to nonwage-earning spouses.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreligiousleaderswhitehousemeetingtaxreform", "title": "Remarks to Religious Leaders at a White House Meeting on Tax Reform", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-religious-leaders-white-house-meeting-tax-reform", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1692, "text": "America's fair share tax plan has received commendations from some unexpected quarters. The Democratically controlled House Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families rated our plan more profamily than any other tax proposal around and light years ahead of the present system. He said that our profamily provisions will do more for the poor than Lyndon Johnson ever did during the years of the Great Society. Are we going to give up and stick with a tax system loved only by the special interests and their high-priced tax attorneys, or are we going to stop making excuses and give the poor the break from unfair taxation they so very urgently need? You know, the Lord has told us that his share is a tenth of what we earn, and He has told us that if we prosper 10 times as much, we will give 10 times as much. But when we start computing Caesar's share under our present tax policy, you can prosper 10 times as much and find you are paying 50 times as much tax. So, I think what is fair for the Lord ought to be more reasonably fair for Caesar, also. Opportunity also means economic growth, and the best way to achieve that is by cutting tax rates still further. One of the great economic lessons of the last few years is the beneficial effect of tax rate reductions. We have seen that as tax rates go down, all the negative economic indicators, like poverty and inflation, go down, too; and all the positive economic indicators, like productivity, disposable income, and employment, go up. Something else also goes up when marginal tax rates are cut believe it or not at the lower rates, government revenue increases; it does not go down with the cut in the rates. Tax rates in this country, long ago, passed the point where they became counterproductive, stunting economic growth and actually bringing in less revenue than tax rate cuts that spur growth and draw investment out of wasteful loopholes and back into the productive economy. Just a few years ago, before our present tax cut the one that we launched in 1981 before that, there was only $39 million in America available for what is called venture capital to be invested into new ventures and new business and so forth. Well, last year, after our tax cuts were in effect, there was $4 billion available for such investment. Our first tax cut you can see the across-the-board thing it was 25 percent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreligiousleaderswhitehousemeetingtaxreform", "title": "Remarks to Religious Leaders at a White House Meeting on Tax Reform", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-religious-leaders-white-house-meeting-tax-reform", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1693, "text": "And since 1984 that was the first year that all of the three installments of our tax cut were in place we found that the tax revenues have been increasing at a rapid pace. And in fiscal year 1985, which ended October 1st, Federal revenues continued to grow at the remarkable rate of 10 percent. Now, let me suggest that over the long haul, the Federal Government simply cannot raise revenue any faster than by cutting tax rates and, then, cutting them again. So, it does not make much sense to blame the deficit on tax cuts, and even less to ask for economy-busting tax hikes as a cure. The deficit is quite clearly caused by overspending. The government Gargantua has been eating up those extra revenues from our tax cut and pounding on the table demanding more. Well, we are going to put Gargantua on a diet, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings diet. It would pare $36 billion a year off its overeating, resulting in a balanced budget by 1990. All we are asking is that Congress take a little over one-half the extra $60-odd billion in revenue generated by our tax cuts and economic growth and use it to reduce the deficit. And the way some people in government spend the public's money also reminds me of a story. And again, it is about a clergyman who had gone to a small hamlet about a hundred miles from his own parish to preach at a revival meeting. And driving into the village, he noticed a man from his own community. The fellow was known, a little bit, for his drinking. And he was sitting on the front steps of the general store, and he had a bottle of beer in his hands. And the preacher stopped his car, and he asked the drinker why he was so far from home. And the man told him that beer was 5 cents a bottle cheaper where they were then. Well, the minister pointed out the cost of travel back and forth, the price for a hotel room. And the beer drinker retorted, I am not stupid, Reverend, I just sit here and drink till I show a profit. cuts in the deficit and cuts in the tax rates. Both are in the Congress now, and we need your support to keep their noses to the grindstone. As for America's fair share tax plan, we are shooting for Christmastime.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreligiousleaderswhitehousemeetingtaxreform", "title": "Remarks to Religious Leaders at a White House Meeting on Tax Reform", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-religious-leaders-white-house-meeting-tax-reform", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1700, "text": "I am happy to have this opportunity to talk to you once more before I leave the White House. Next Tuesday, General Eisenhower will be inaugurated as ENTITY . A short time after the new President takes his oath of office, I will be on the train going back home to Independence, Missouri. I will once again be a plain, private citizen of this great Republic. Inauguration Day will be a great demonstration of our democratic process. I am glad to be a part of it-glad to wish General Eisenhower all possible success, as he begins his term--glad the whole world will have a chance to see how simply and how peacefully our American system transfers the vast power of the Presidency from my hands to his. It is a good object lesson in democracy. I am very proud of it. During the last 2 months I have done my best to make this transfer an orderly one. I have talked with my successor on the affairs of the country, both foreign and domestic, and my Cabinet officers have talked with their successors. I want to say that General Eisenhower and his associates have cooperated fully in this effort. Such an orderly transfer from one party to another has never taken place before in our history. In speaking to you tonight, I have no new revelations to make--no political statements-no policy announcements. There are simply a few things in my heart that I want to say to you. I want to say goodby and thanks for your help. and I want to talk to you a little while about what has happened since I became your ENTITY. I am speaking to you from the room where I have worked since April 12, 1945. This is the ENTITY's office in the West Wing of the White House. This is the desk where I have signed most of the papers that embodied the decisions I have made as ENTITY. It has been the desk of many Presidents, and will be the desk of many more. Since I became ENTITY, I have been to Europe, Mexico, Canada, Brazil, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands--Wake Island and Hawaii. I have visited almost every State in the Union. I have traveled 135,000 miles by air, 77,000 by rail, and 17,000 by ship. But the mail always followed me, and wherever I happened to be, that is where the office of the ENTITY was. The greatest part of the ENTITY's job is to make decisions--big ones and small ones, dozens of them almost every day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsfarewelladdresstheamericanpeople", "title": "The President's Farewell Address to the American People", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-farewell-address-the-american-people", "publication_date": "15-01-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1701, "text": "The papers may circulate around the Government for a while but they finally reach this desk. He cannot pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That is what I have been doing here in this room, for almost 8 years. And over in the main part of the White House, there is a study on the second floor--a room much like this one--where I have worked at night and early in the morning on the papers I could not get to at the office. Of course, for more than 3 years Mrs. Truman and I were not living in the White House. We were across the street in the Blair House. That was when the White House almost fell down on us and had to be rebuilt. I had a study over at the Blair House, too, but living in the Blair House was not as convenient as living in the White House. The Secret Service would not let me walk across the street, so I had to get in a car every morning to cross the street to the White House office, again at noon to go to the Blair House for lunch, again to go back to the office after lunch, and finally take an automobile at night to return to the Blair House. But necessary, so my guards thought--and they are the bosses on such matters as that. Now, of course, we are back in the White House. It is in very good condition, and General Eisenhower will be able to take up his residence in the house and work right here. That will be much more convenient for him, and I am very glad the renovation job was all completed before his term began. Your new ENTITY is taking office in quite different circumstances than when I became ENTITY 8 years ago. On April 1945, I had been presiding over the Senate in my capacity as Vice President. When the Senate recessed about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, I walked over to the office of the Speaker of the House, Mr. Rayburn, to discuss pending legislation. As soon as I arrived, I was told that Mr. Early, one of President Roosevelt's secretaries, wanted me to call. I reached Mr. Early, and he told me to come to the White House as quickly as possible, to enter by way of the Pennsylvania Avenue entrance, and to come to Mrs. Roosevelt's study.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsfarewelladdresstheamericanpeople", "title": "The President's Farewell Address to the American People", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-farewell-address-the-american-people", "publication_date": "15-01-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1702, "text": "When I arrived, Mrs. Roosevelt told me the tragic news, and I felt the shock that all of you felt a little later--when the word came over the radio and appeared in the newspapers. I offered to do anything I could for Mrs. Roosevelt, and then I asked the Secretary of State to call the Cabinet together. 09 p.m. I was sworn in as ENTITY by Chief Justice Stone in the Cabinet Room. Things were happening fast in those days. The San Francisco conference to organize the United Nations had been called for April 25th. After attending President Roosevelt's funeral, I went to the Hall of the House of Representatives and told a joint session of the Congress that I would carry on President Roosevelt's policies. On May 7th, Germany surrendered. The announcement was made on May 8th, my 61st birthday. Churchill called me shortly after that and wanted a meeting with me and Prime Minister Stalin of Russia. Later on, a meeting was agreed upon, and Churchill, Stalin, and I met at Potsdam in Germany. Meanwhile, the first atomic explosion took place out in the New Mexico desert. The war against Japan was still going on. I made the decision that the atomic bomb had to be used to end it. I made that decision in the conviction it would save hundreds of thousands of lives--Japanese as well as American. Japan surrendered, and we were faced with the huge problems of bringing the troops home and reconverting the economy from war to peace. All these things happened within just a little over 4 months--from April to August 1945. I tell you this to illustrate the tremendous scope of the work your ENTITY has to do. And all these emergencies and all the developments to meet them have required the ENTITY to put in long hours--usually 17 hours a day, with no payment for overtime. I sign my name, on the average, 600 times a day, see and talk to hundreds of people every month, shake hands with thousands every year, and still carry on the business of the largest going concern in the whole world. There is no job like it on the face of the earth--in the power which is concentrated here at this desk, and in the responsibility and difficulty of the decisions. I want all of you to realize how big a job, how hard a job, it is--not for my sake, because I am stepping out of it--but for the sake of my successor. He needs the understanding and the help of every citizen.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsfarewelladdresstheamericanpeople", "title": "The President's Farewell Address to the American People", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-farewell-address-the-american-people", "publication_date": "15-01-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1703, "text": "It is not enough for you to come out once every 4 years and vote for a candidate, and then go back home and say, Well, I have done my part, now let the new President do the worrying. He cannot do the job alone. Regardless of your politics, whether you are Republican or Democrat, your fate is tied up with what is done here in this room. The ENTITY is ENTITY of the whole country. We must give him our support as citizens of the United States. He will have mine, and I want you to give him yours. I suppose that history will remember my term in office as the years when the cold war began to overshadow our lives. I have had hardly a day in office that has not been dominated by this all-embracing struggle-this conflict between those who love freedom and those who would lead the world back into slavery and darkness. But when history says that my term of office saw the beginning of the cold war, it will also say that in those 8 years we have set the course that can win it. We have succeeded in carving out a new set of policies to attain peace--positive policies, policies of world leadership, policies that express faith in other free people. We have averted world war III up to now, and we may already have succeeded in establishing conditions which can keep that war from happening as far ahead as man can see. These are great and historic achievements that we can all be proud of. After the First World War we withdrew from world affairs--we failed to act in concert with other peoples against aggression--we helped to kill the League of Nations--and we built up tariff barriers that strangled world trade. This time, we avoided those mistakes. We helped to found and sustain the United Nations. We have welded alliances that include the greater part of the free world. And we have gone ahead with other free countries to help build their economies and link us all together in a healthy world trade. Think back for a moment to the 1930's and you will see the difference. The Japanese moved into Manchuria, and free men did not act. The Fascists moved into Ethiopia, and we did not act. The Nazis marched into the Rhineland, into Austria, into Czechoslovakia, and free men were paralyzed for lack of strength and unity and will. Think about those years of weakness and indecision, and the World War II which was their evil result.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsfarewelladdresstheamericanpeople", "title": "The President's Farewell Address to the American People", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-farewell-address-the-american-people", "publication_date": "15-01-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1704, "text": "Then think about the speed and courage and decisiveness with which we have moved against the Communist threat since World War II. The first crisis came in 1945 and 1946, when the Soviet Union refused to honor its agreement to remove its troops from Iran. Members of my Cabinet came to me and asked if we were ready to take the risk that a firm stand involved. So we took our stand--we made it clear to the Soviet Union that we expected them to honor their agreement--and the Soviet troops were withdrawn from Iran. Then, in early 1947, the Soviet Union threatened Greece and Turkey. The British sent me a message saying they could no longer keep their forces in that area. Something had to be done at once, or the eastern Mediterranean would be taken over by the Communists. On March 12th, I went before the Congress and stated our determination to help the people of Greece and Turkey maintain their independence. Today, Greece is still free and independent; and Turkey is a bulwark of strength at a strategic corner of the world. Then came the Marshall plan which saved Europe, the heroic Berlin airlift, and our military aid programs. We inaugurated the North Atlantic Pact, the Rio Pact binding the Western Hemisphere together, and the defense pacts with countries of the Far Pacific. Most important of all, we acted in Korea. I was in Independence, Missouri, in June 1950, when Secretary Acheson telephoned me and gave me the news about the invasion of Korea. I told the Secretary to lay the matter at once before the United Nations, and I came on back to Washington. Flying back over the flatlands of the Middle West and over the Appalachians that summer afternoon, I had a lot of time to think. I turned the problem over in my mind in many ways, but my thoughts kept coming back to the 1930's--to Manchuria, to Ethiopia, the Rhineland, Austria, and finally to Munich. Here was history repeating itself. If we let the Republic of Korea go under, some other country would be next, and then another. And all the time, the courage and confidence of the free world would be ebbing away, just as it did in the 1930's. And the United Nations would go the way of the League of Nations. When I reached Washington, I met immediately with the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, and General Bradley, and the other civilian and military officials who had information and advice to help me decide on what to do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsfarewelladdresstheamericanpeople", "title": "The President's Farewell Address to the American People", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-farewell-address-the-american-people", "publication_date": "15-01-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1705, "text": "We talked about the problems long and hard. We considered those problems very carefully. It was not easy to make the decision to send American boys again into battle. I was a soldier in the First World War, and I know what a soldier goes through. I know well the anguish that mothers and fathers and families go through. So I knew what was ahead if we acted in Korea. But after all this was said, we realized that the issue was whether there would be fighting in a limited area now or on a much larger scale later on--whether there would be some casualties now or many more casualties later. So a decision was reached--the decision I believe was the most important in my time as ENTITY. In the days that followed, the most heartening fact was that the American people clearly agreed with the decision. And in Korea, our men are fighting as valiantly as Americans have ever fought-because they know they are fighting in the same cause of freedom in which Americans have stood ever since the beginning of the Republic. Where free men had failed the test before, this time we met the test. We met it firmly. We met it successfully. The Communists have seen their hopes of easy conquest go down the drain. The determination of free people to defend themselves has been made clear to the Kremlin. As I have thought about our worldwide struggle with the Communists these past 8 years--day in and day out--I have never once doubted that you, the people of our country, have the will to do what is necessary to win this terrible fight against communism. I know the people of this country have that will and determination, and I have always depended on it. Because I have been sure of that, I have been able to make necessary decisions even though they called for sacrifices by all of us. And I have not been wrong in my judgment of the American people. That same assurance of our people's determination will be General Eisenhower's greatest source of strength in carrying on this struggle. Now, once in a while, I get a letter from some impatient person asking, why do not we get it over with? Why do not we issue an ultimatum, make all-out war, drop the atomic bomb? We are not made that way. Peace is our goal, with justice and freedom. We cannot, of our own free will, violate the very principles that we are striving to defend. The whole purpose of what we are doing is to prevent world war III.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsfarewelladdresstheamericanpeople", "title": "The President's Farewell Address to the American People", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-farewell-address-the-american-people", "publication_date": "15-01-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1706, "text": "We are living in the 8th year of the atomic age. We are not the only nation that is learning to unleash the power of the atom. A third world war might dig the grave not only of our Communist opponents but also of our own society, our world as well as theirs. Then, some of you may ask, when and how will the cold war end? I think I can answer that simply. The Communist world has great resources, and it looks strong. Theirs is a godless system, a system of slavery; there is no freedom in it, no consent. The Iron Curtain, the secret police, the constant purges, all these are symptoms of a great basic weakness--the rulers' fear of their own people. In the long run the strength of our free society, and our ideals, will prevail over a system that has respect for neither God nor man. Last week, in my State of the Union Message to the Congress--and I hope you will all take the time to read it--I explained how I think we will finally win through. As the free world grows stronger, more united, more attractive to men on both sides of the Iron Curtain--and as the Soviet hopes for easy expansion are blocked--then there will have to come a time of change in the Soviet world. Nobody can say for sure when that is going to be, or exactly how it will come about, whether by revolution, or trouble in the satellite states, or by a change inside the Kremlin. Whether the Communist rulers shift their policies of their own free will--or whether the change comes about in some other way-I have not a doubt in the world that a change will occur. I have a deep and abiding faith in the destiny of free men. With patience and courage, we shall some day move on into a new era--a wonderful golden age--an age when we can use the peaceful tools that science has forged for us to do away with poverty and human misery everywhere on earth. Think what can be done, once our capital, our skills, our science--most of all atomic energy--can be released from the tasks of defense and turned wholly to peaceful purposes all around the world. The Tigris and Euphrates Valley can be made to bloom as it did in the times of Babylon and Nineveh. Israel can be made the country of milk and honey as it was in the time of Joshua.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsfarewelladdresstheamericanpeople", "title": "The President's Farewell Address to the American People", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-farewell-address-the-american-people", "publication_date": "15-01-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1707, "text": "There is a plateau in Ethiopia some 6,000 to 8,000 feet high, that has 65,000 square miles of land just exactly like the corn belt in northern Illinois. Enough food can be raised there to feed a hundred million people. There are places in South America--places in Colombia and Venezuela and Brazil-just like that plateau in Ethiopia--places where food could be raised for millions of people. If we can get peace and safety in the world under the United Nations, the developments will come so fast we will not recognize the world in which we now live. This is our dream of the future--our picture of the world we hope to have when the Communist threat is overcome. I have talked a lot tonight about the menace of communism--and our fight against it-because that is the overriding issue of our time. But there are some other things we have done that history will record. One of them is that we in America have learned how to attain real prosperity for our people. We have 62 1/2 million people at work. Businessmen, farmers, laborers, white-collar people, all have better incomes and more of the good things of life than ever before in the history of the world. No depositor has lost a cent in that period. And the income of our people has been fairly distributed, perhaps more so than at any other time in recent history. We have made progress in spreading the blessings of American life to all of our people. There has been a tremendous awakening of the American conscience on the great issues of civil rights--equal economic opportunities, equal rights of citizenship, and equal educational opportunities for all our people, whatever their race or religion or status of birth. So, as I empty the drawers of this desk, and as Mrs. Truman and I leave the White House, we have no regret. We feel we have done our best in the public service. I hope and believe we have contributed to the welfare of this Nation and to the peace of the world. When Franklin Roosevelt died, I felt there must be a million men better qualified than I, to take up the Presidential task. But the work was mine to do, and I had to do it. And I have tried to give it everything that was in me. Through all of it, through all the years that I have worked here in this room, I have been well aware I did not really work alone-that you were working with me.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsfarewelladdresstheamericanpeople", "title": "The President's Farewell Address to the American People", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-farewell-address-the-american-people", "publication_date": "15-01-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1741, "text": "You know, Paul, if you really have all morning been talking about all those things you said, then I have not got anything left to say. That is what I was going to talk about. No, I want to thank you. It is a privilege to be with so many hard-working and dedicated Republicans. And with regard to the interruptions last night, afterwards I said to George, I said, I thought there for awhile I was going to have to do the speech one word at a time. But it is a special honor to greet the women and men who've just become the new Republican National Committee. And incidentally, if we are the reason for all of this, we would not have been in a position to be responsible for all of this if it had not been for people like you putting us here, and we are most grateful. Each of you has dedicated years of effort to the cause that unites us. And today, you take up positions of the highest responsibility in one of the oldest, proudest political parties on Eartha party that is always stood for human freedom, a party that is given the world leaders like Theodore Roosevelt and Dwight David Eisenhower and Abraham Lincoln. Your positions give you an opportunity to serve our country in an historical manner. And on behalf of all Republicans, I give you a heartfelt congratulations. During your time in office you will face many challenges, but none will be greater than the challenge you face in the next 74 days. And I just know that with the people by our side, we willand by we I mean Republicanswe'll lead not only our party but our country. And we will fight this campaign with every ounce of strength we have, and the people will win. We will go to the peopleto all the peoplewe'll speak of our beliefs; we will stand on the record; we will deal in the facts. The opposition has already begun to try to pit one group of Americans against another. But the election of '84 will be a battle not of groups, but of ideas. And we will wage it with joy and vigor. We know that our constituency is everyone in this country. And our intent is to keep promoting policies that will help all of the people and help the people of this country to help themselves. that we are the party of new ideas; we are the party of the future; and we are the party whose philosophy is vigorous and dynamic.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmemberstherepublicannationalcommitteeandthereaganbushcampaignstaff", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Republican National Committee and the Reagan-Bush Campaign Staff in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-republican-national-committee-and-the-reagan-bush-campaign-staff", "publication_date": "24-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1742, "text": "The old stereotype of a kind of pudgy, stolid, unimaginative Republicanthere may be a few cartoonists around that still want to portray us as that, but they are lying in their teeth if they do. I know that all of you know that. And it is no time to sit on our laurels. 1984 is the year when we can get out there in the union halls and the VFW, the church meetings, and get out the word. As a matter of fact, we will be walking away from here in a few minutes, because Nancy and I are due in Chicago to speak to the VFW this afternoon at their national convention. But we want to get out the word on how, through cutting tax rates, we are making the GOP stand for Great Opportunity Party, and get out the word on how our policies have enhanced America's strength and this has made the peace that we enjoy more solid and durable; get out the word on how inflation has plummeted and unemployment has fallen and the value of the dollar is higher and the economy is expanding. And we did not do this to help some of the people; we did it to help all of the people. Things are going so well that the opposition has had to reverse the meaning of a few words and concepts. Indeed, at their meeting in San Francisco, one of their speakers called the economic expansion-and I quotean illusion. Well, it is pretty hard to cash an illusion. People are cashing bigger checks. But according to the opposition, prosperity is an illusion. And if you read the record of the last administration backward, it has a happy ending. Well, this expansion has already lasted 20 months without fueling inflation. It is given nearly 6 1/2 million more Americans, as I said last night, jobs. There is nothing dangerous about an expansion that is based on hard work and innovation, and the American people know it. Looking to the future, it is clear that the opposition has only one innovation to offerstrange for them, tooa huge tax increase. But let us get the word out on that one, too. To bring the budget under control, we need more Republicans elected who will support the line-item veto and the balanced budget amendment.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmemberstherepublicannationalcommitteeandthereaganbushcampaignstaff", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Republican National Committee and the Reagan-Bush Campaign Staff in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-republican-national-committee-and-the-reagan-bush-campaign-staff", "publication_date": "24-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1743, "text": "You have heard me say that before, but we are going to keep on saying it, because every poll indicates that the American people support those measures overwhelmingly, once again showing that the leadership of the other party totally is ignoring what their own people are telling them they want. And to spur new investment, to enable the people to keep a greater share of their earnings, we need that historic simplification of the tax code. And if we can broaden that base, if we can begin to get the unpaid tax that is now out there from those who are freeloading on their neighbors, we can reduce the rates for everyone. Our vision is and must be an America of greater incentives, more growth, and new opportunities. Holding this office has allowed me to see as never before how richly our nation has been blessed. Around the world, totalitarians tread ideals underfoot and oppress millions. But in America, it is still our privilege to stand for liberty. This election is for more than our party and more than the White House; it is for the future of our beloved country, the place Mr. Lincoln called the last, best hope of man. For the sake of our children and the millions on Earth who look to America for hope, I know that we will fight the good fight, we will keep the faith. There was one thingI know that many of the things I have said here were repeated many times in the convention, because they had to do with the actual record of 'what we have been doing in the management of the Government, but I think you might be pleased to knowyou'll remember back a couple of years ago when we were talking about a private sector initiative, encouraging that. And thousands of volunteers came forth with every kind of idea, and we had a commission, temporarily put together, that collected, and then in the White House we had computerized the literally thousands of programs throughout the country that citizens and community groups have themselves put in place to solve some problems that heretofore our opponents always would think was only for government to do. Well, we still maintain a headquarters in that private initiatives, and there is hardly a week goes by that we do not have something that we pick up the phone to them and say, Hey... And sometimes it is a problem only involving one individual that we have heard about, or that we have read in the press about, with a situation that government is not equipped to solve, and we call them. All taken care of.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmemberstherepublicannationalcommitteeandthereaganbushcampaignstaff", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Republican National Committee and the Reagan-Bush Campaign Staff in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-republican-national-committee-and-the-reagan-bush-campaign-staff", "publication_date": "24-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1744, "text": "I want to say a deep thank you from the bottom of my heart for your warm welcome to this wonderful State of sunshine here in Arizona. This is not a day for politics. This is a day for God, and since this is God's day I will leave very shortly and go with my old and longtime friend, Roy Elson, down to hear his preacher. He recommends him pretty highly, and I want to see if he is as good as the preacher I would have heard at Johnson City had I gone to church at home this morning. The reason I did not go to church at home this morning was because that beloved and venerable and wonderful man, than whom there is no other like him in all the world, Carl Hayden, the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, said to me, I think if you are going from your ranch in Texas to the sidewalks of San Francisco, you better not do it without stopping in Arizona. And when the Chairman of the powerful Appropriations Committee makes a slight suggestion to the President, I hope the President is smart enough, and I know he loves Carl Hayden enough, that his suggestion is my command. I want to thank Governor Fannin and Governor McFarland, my old boss that taught me so much and I love so much, and Edna, for coming out here to meet me. I want to tell you how grateful I am that Arizona furnishes one of our Cabinet members, Stewart Udall, and his lovely wife, and I am very proud of him. He is doing a wonderful job. We have done the best work on water and on power and on conservation that has been done any years since I have been in Washington. I want to thank Congressman Udall and Congressman Senner for coming here and welcoming me this morning. I am going to leave with Roy now in just a moment and I will not be seeing you any more, but I am coming back to these wonderful, happy, smiling faces, and this dry air and this fine sunshine because it is good and it invigorates you. It makes you count all your blessings and think about really how fortunate we are to be Americans. Now, all of you people out here have faith and have hope and have vision or you would not be in this Promised Land of Arizona.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponarrivalthephoenixairport", "title": "Remarks Upon Arrival at the Phoenix Airport", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-arrival-the-phoenix-airport", "publication_date": "11-10-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1745, "text": "If you were afraid, and if you were doubters, and if you did not have vision, you would be in some ghost town somewhere instead of a State like Arizona and a city like Phoenix that is a Go-Go State and a Go-Go City. Do you know that by the year 2000--and we are really closer to the year 2000 now than we are to the year 1918 when we had our last war, even when I was born, 1908, we are pretty close to the year 2000--in the year 2000 Arizona's growth will be twice what it is in the rest of the Nation, the Nation's average. I do not want that to be repeated out where it gets back and drifts back over into Texas because some of my opponents over there will be saying I said Arizona is twice as good as Texas, and I do not want to say that. But I do say that your resources, your people, your management, your faith, your vision, your 20th century methods, your modern ideas, your great electronic industry and other industries that are coming to Arizona--that you will be growing twice as fast as the rest of the Nation in the year 2000. You have one problem, and it is a mighty big problem. I told you this was not going to be a political day and it is not. You get the wrong impression. You have one big problem, and that problem is--water. I never go down a corridor of the Capitol that Roy Elson does not catch me by my coattail and say, Cannot you help us with the problem of water in Arizona? I never went into the Appropriations Committee but what Carl Hayden did not catch me by the lapels of my coat. I am not that intimate with your other Senator, and I did not come out here to advertise him. He has talked to me a good many times about your water problem, and he wants to help on it. And he has wired me, urging me to take certain action in connection with water for Arizona. So it is not a partisan thing between Democrats and Republicans and Independents. We all have to find an answer to this water problem because that is going to be the answer to the 20th century. I will tell you what I am going to do about it. We are going to continue under the program that Stewart Udall has working now, and we are making progress on it every day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponarrivalthephoenixairport", "title": "Remarks Upon Arrival at the Phoenix Airport", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-arrival-the-phoenix-airport", "publication_date": "11-10-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1758, "text": "I wonder if you would mind if I would communicate to you an odd thought that occurred to me, as I sat here. There was brought to me in emphatic form once, by an old soldier of mine, who reminded me that you could never tell what was around the corner in the world. When I first came back from Europe 2 years ago, and before my friends found that it was utterly futile and useless to try to make me appear better on the TV by the use of paints and stains, they had me in a little room one night, and the man was working very seriously on my face in an effort to do something about it. Finally, in this very preoccupied sort of job and atmosphere that was prevailing, he suddenly began to laugh. And he said to me, General, we have got ourselves in a funny fix. Do you know what I was in the war? He said, I was one of your paratroopers. What made me think of that this morning was the fact that when I first met Sam Sturgis, I was detailed as a young officer to coach a football team and I made him an end, and he worked pretty hard under me for some weeks and months. Today, I think that all of you would like for me to speak for you in commending him as a brilliant head of a great organization which not only here but throughout our land has built up these great works in flood control, in drainage, in water conservation, and power development-an organization of which not only the United States ENTITY but which America is proud. I am delighted to be here with you on this historic spot. Our Nation was only 16 years old when, from a point near here, two Americans of great courage--Lewis and Clark--pushed off and floated to the mouth of this great river. A little over a century ago, a man named McKay struggled over primitive paths in this area. A hundred and nine years ago., a frontiersman named McNary, with his family, reached this almost virgin land to establish his home. Both of these men had famous descendants--men who have contributed much to the extraordinary growth of the Northwest. From the McKay family came an able Governor and a dedicated Secretary of the Interior--Douglas McKay. From the McNarys came the great American whose name forevermore will distinguish this monumental work. Senator McNary believed deeply in the future of this country. He had the grit and determination to help build that future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationmcnarydamwallawallawashington", "title": "Address at the Dedication of McNary Dam, Walla Walla, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-mcnary-dam-walla-walla-washington", "publication_date": "23-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1759, "text": "In this endeavor he worked side by side with those men of vision of this region who, before the turn of the century, sought to open to navigation the upper reaches of the Columbia River. With that drive for an open river for water traffic came the natural development of hydro-electric power. Ten years ago, death denied Senator McNary the privilege of seeing his dream come true. But the will to build this dam lived after him. And may I pause to pay my personal tribute to Mrs. McNary, here with us today on the platform. That the will to build this dam survived-and that today this dam is built--are due to the spirit of distinguished citizens of this region. Especially are they due to an Oregonian who carried on Senator McNary's work and for the past 10 years has labored tirelessly to complete this project--my good friend, Senator Guy Cordon. I am mindful as well of the sustained effort of many Congressmen from this region, including particularly Congressman Hal Holmes, who have worked in behalf of this and other great projects here in the Northwest. Now, this massive dam, my friends, means much more than the steel and concrete, more than the genius and the effort that went into its building. It means more than the benefits and the progress--however great--that it will bring to this fortunate region. This structure symbolizes the purpose of using, for the benefit of all our people, the tremendous natural legacy with which the Almighty so abundantly endowed our land. Wisely and providently we must use and develop these resources, so that each succeeding generation of Americans may share in their benefits. It is for us to see that they shall not be wasted or neglected or denied to generations yet to come. Now, among these treasures of our land is water fast becoming our most valuable, most prized, most critical resource. A blessing when properly used--it can bring devastation and ruin when left uncontrolled. It is essential that every drop of water, from the moment that it falls upon our land, be turned to the service of our people. thus we will develop power, prevent floods, improve navigation, and supply our tremendous and growing domestic and industrial needs for water. So crucial to our future has water become, that I have assigned appropriate surveys and plans concerning it to a special committee of the Cabinet, and to the Hoover Commission as well.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationmcnarydamwallawallawashington", "title": "Address at the Dedication of McNary Dam, Walla Walla, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-mcnary-dam-walla-walla-washington", "publication_date": "23-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1760, "text": "These studies, when subjected to Congressional action, will undoubtedly result in the comprehensive water policy that this country has needed since its very beginning. The wise control of our water resources obviously requires the most skillful and comprehensive planning. This dam, for example, is designed to operate in coordination with similar structures, upstream and down. It is part of a plan to assure the full use of the water resources of this entire river system. McNary Dam is, therefore, representative of the coordination that must mark the development of all of our river systems. It is, moreover, an example of national responsibility properly assumed by the Federal Government. Just a mile and a half down river is another structure--the bridge at Umatilla. I am sure that you who live here are just as proud of that bridge as you are of this tremendous dam. You have every right to be. That bridge at Umatilla is an example of local responsibility properly assumed. A major difference between the two undertakings is in size. All of you know that when construction was started on McNary Dam, no local enterprise--public or private--could have financed it, so, realizing that the dam was necessary, the Federal Government gave its support. The bridge at Umatilla was a much smaller effort. Local enterprise-in this case the county government--was able to shoulder the $5 million loan that made that construction possible. And so, local enterprise did that job. These two structures illustrate an idea we have been applying in Washington for some 19 months. A century ago Abraham Lincoln put it better than anyone else has done. He said, The legitimate object of government is to do for a community of people whatever they need to have done, but cannot do at all, or cannot so well do for themselves--in their separate and individual capacities. Now, in keeping with Lincoln's standard, the Federal Government has certain vital responsibilities in such fields relating to the control and use of water as flood control, improvement of navigation, and reclamation and development of land. When in the course of assuming these responsibilities, dams are built, then hydro-electric power is often developed, of great value to the surrounding regions and to the Nation. I hope that we shall soon have another example of Federal responsibility in the generation of power. I refer to the Libby Dam, which-like this great McNary Dam--is a project requiring the resources of the Federal Government.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationmcnarydamwallawallawashington", "title": "Address at the Dedication of McNary Dam, Walla Walla, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-mcnary-dam-walla-walla-washington", "publication_date": "23-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1761, "text": "From its location on the Canadian border, on a tributary of this mighty Columbia River, it will powerfully aid the control of floods, and produce a new means of generating power, all the way to the sea. I have recently acted to remove obstacles to the construction of that dam. A distinguished northwesterner, Governor Jordan of Idaho, has been named Chairman of the International Joint Commission. His intimate knowledge of this area and sound judgment will surely go far to speed fulfillment of our aims, and those of our Canadian neighbors. This project will be brought into existence. I shall continue to recommend Federal construction of such beneficial projects. Such activities as these, my friends, are obviously, as Lincoln said, the legitimate object of government. In all that the people can individually do for themselves, government ought not to interfere. It is not properly a Federal responsibility to try to supply all the power needs of our people. The Federal Government should no more attempt to do so than it should assume responsibility for supplying all their drinking water, their food, their housing, and their transportation. Parenthetically, may I remark that a region which lets itself become completely dependent upon national funds provided by a Congress-which Congress represents not that region alone but the whole Nation-would frequently find that the funds fail to keep pace with local needs. But the important thing is that as Federal power expands in a region-and I mean Federal authority and responsibility--local enterprise comes increasingly intimidated and discouraged, even though the needs for energy continue to grow. Such a conversion of local regions into Federal satellites poses a threat deadly to our liberties. The Administration in Washington--and the present leadership in Congress--are unalterably opposed to such malignant growth of bureaucracy. In our devotion to conservation, let us not forget that there are spiritual as well as physical values to protect. Above all else, we must protect the freedom and the spirit of independence of our people in our States and counties, in our cities and towns. Determination to have this kind of freedom gave us this Nation. It brought your ancestors to this Western country. That determination is not only the surest protector of our liberties, it is the principal ingredient in our national prosperity. Yet, there are some who contend that the development and distribution of hydro-electric power is exclusively the responsibility of the Federal Government. They argue that to permit any State or local government or any private company under governmental regulation to develop such power capacity is to give to a special group an asset belonging to all the Nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationmcnarydamwallawallawashington", "title": "Address at the Dedication of McNary Dam, Walla Walla, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-mcnary-dam-walla-walla-washington", "publication_date": "23-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1762, "text": "Indeed, in some instances, these disciples of centralized responsibility and authority insist that since the Federal Government should provide all hydro-electric power, it should likewise eliminate competition by providing steam-electric power as well. Only thus, these zealots would have us believe, can we poor citizens be protected against exploitation against what they call the predatory exponents of capitalism--that is, free enterprise. Now, let us have a quick look at this matter. In the first place it is, of course, not difficult to be generous with someone else's money. So the individual who wants to build power dams only with Federal money is not directly or particularly concerned with the economic necessity of the project or with the suitability of its location. Secondly, these advocates of centralized government shut their eyes to the remarkable development of this Nation during past decades. They must wonder how such prosperity came about when communities and citizens were free to look after themselves--including their own protection against the so-called local interests. These believers in centralization fail to warn us that monopoly is always potentially dangerous to freedom--even when monopoly is exercised by the Government. Curiously enough, they proclaim their fear of a private power monopoly in a county, city or State, but they urge upon us all a gigantic, overwhelming, nationwide power monopoly. But, of course, they also see themselves as the all-wise directors of that monopoly-so all would be well. monopoly, nor do they want a system leading toward it. They know The American people do not want and do not need to have any such they can have all the power capacity of our streams developed, as needed, without forfeiting the advantages of local responsibility and participation. Throughout our country are many public enterprises--organized years ago by States, municipalities, and other public agencies--which have long been in successful operation. In hundreds of other instances, power has been and is being provided by private enterprise under the regulatory processes in the particular governmental agency involved. In each instance the people directly concerned by such operations have themselves decided whether they are best served by public or by private agencies. The issue is not, therefore, public power versus unregulated private power. The issue posed to us is Federal monopoly of power, as against public or regulated power, freely chosen in each instance by the citizens of each area, with the Federal Government coming in as a cooperating partner where this seems necessary or desirable.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationmcnarydamwallawallawashington", "title": "Address at the Dedication of McNary Dam, Walla Walla, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-mcnary-dam-walla-walla-washington", "publication_date": "23-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1763, "text": "Last year, for example, State and local governments were invited to cooperate in power generation without the threat of Federal power control. During this brief period numerous local public agencies and private investors have applied for licenses to build hydro-electric plants. These applications in this Northwest region amount to nearly six million kilowatts. This represents a prospective investment of not less than one and one-half billion dollars. Well over half of this would be invested by public power--not private power--interests. But the seekers after Federal control of energy are not silenced even by this array of facts. They say that construction of power projects by local enterprise will impede the comprehensive development of this or other river basins. Now again--let us take a look at the facts. What they say just is not true. All power projects must be licensed by the Federal Power Commission. Before the Commission grants a license, it must see evidence that the project makes maximum use of the developed resources. It makes no difference who builds the projects-Federal, State, municipal, or private agencies. when a project is licensed before a non-Federal authority, it is not removed from public control. Rates and services remain under regulation. And when the licensing period ends, the site can be assumed by the Federal Government. that, here in the Northwest, your own public agencies and your own private companies--operating under both Federal regulation and your own eagle eyes out here--can work in the public interest at least as well as some far-off Federal agency. Through the Governors' Power Policy Committee, Governors Langlie, Patterson, Jordan, and Aronson are doing great work in assuring this area of adequate supplies of water. More benefits will flow from efforts to further inter-State cooperation on problems that cross the borders of the Northwestern States. I am especially happy that the power produced by this great new dam will contribute to the finest type of cooperative effort--your own Northwest Power Pool. This arrangement is an admirable modal of voluntary pooling of public and private generating and transmission facilities. Because of it, you citizens of the Northwest have hundreds of thousands of kilowatts of additional prime power that would not exist through independent operation of your various utilities. And in addition--and very important--you have it under your own control--not under the permission of a far-off Washington office holder. This is a splendid partnership--the kind that the Administration will continue to encourage.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationmcnarydamwallawallawashington", "title": "Address at the Dedication of McNary Dam, Walla Walla, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-mcnary-dam-walla-walla-washington", "publication_date": "23-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1764, "text": "I might add that this partnership concept has been most ably advanced by your Republican delegation in the Congress, led by Senator Cordon. to assure each citizen of enough kilowatts, when he wants them, where he wants them, at the lowest competitive cost--with the least likelihood of bureaucratic domination from Washington, D.C. In this effort, we shall avoid extremes. We shall neither withdraw from the power field nor will we federalize all electric power generators in the United States. Instead, we shall continue to advance in a spirit of helpfulness to localities, and in a spirit of cooperation with local citizens. Where local enterprise can shoulder the burden, it will be encouraged and supported in doing so. And where local action cannot or should not fully meet the need, we shall have Federal action. In this way, our people, in their communities and homes throughout America, shall reserve to themselves as many of the basic decisions affecting their lives as possible. In this way, our people will remain free to carve out their destinies as their predecessors did. It was in this spirit that those who preceded you in the great Northwest, in only a century and a half, turned an unsettled wilderness into an inland empire--an empire vastly enriched by this gigantic structure which today we so proudly name the McNary Dam. Now, my friends, I know that the policy I have outlined for you will satisfy neither group that exists at the extreme ends of this argument. It is not intended to please them. This program, as all other programs in which your Government engages, is designed to benefit the United States of America--160 million people. It is guided and formulated on the advice, the commonsense counsel of the vast majority of Americans. Extremes do not interest me, or the Administration, in the slightest. Fellow citizens, we have talked today especially of power and water and this great new dam. But it is well that we remind ourselves that these are but part of a commonly-held objective which transcends all partisan and sectional considerations. The objective is that this Republic shall in every way grow ever stronger and more secure--that it may remain at peace in a world freed of the threat of atomic war. We want our America to have an ever growing, vigorous economy. We want every citizen to prosper and advance--with freedoms which daily shine brighter in each community of our land.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationmcnarydamwallawallawashington", "title": "Address at the Dedication of McNary Dam, Walla Walla, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-mcnary-dam-walla-walla-washington", "publication_date": "23-09-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1767, "text": "For several reasons, I shall want to take some of the time available to us today, actually to read to you a statement. Now, Mr. Hagerty tells me that a mimeograph of it is being made and is going to be over here before the conference is ended. If that is true, I suggest there is no need for your making notes during the time I am dealing with this paper. The paper deals with an approach to the security problem, and there are three reasons that I should like to take it up today. First, I have sent down today to the Congress a reorganizational plan for the Defense Department. It is not radical in most ways, certainly, but it does attempt to point up that organization so as to secure a greater effectiveness, economy, speed in action, and more rapid production of materiel that has been appropriated for. the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of Defense, and the Director of Mutual Security. They have all returned, or at least all have returned except Secretary Wilson; and we have been having conferences on this same global problem. And finally, I met this morning with some of the legislative leaders, and we had this problem up for a long and exhaustive discussion. So I want to give you really the approach that we are now making toward this problem. I would like to present to you in a general way, and with fairly broad strokes, what I consider the sensible framework within which the United States and its allies can present in hard military fact an ever more effective posture of defense. A true posture of defense is composed of three factors--spiritual, military, and economic. Today I shall talk only about the last two. We Americans have frequently called for unity of basic purpose among our allies. I feel quite strongly that the least we can do is to display a similar continuity and unity in American purpose. This policy of ours, therefore, will not be tied to any magic, critical year which then has to be stretched out because of economic or production problems, but will be based on the sounder theory that a very real danger not only exists this year, but may continue to exist for years to come; that our strength, which is already very real, must now be made stronger, not by inefficient and expensive starts and stops, but by steady continuous improvements. I have always firmly believed that there is a great logic in the conduct of military affairs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference450", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-450", "publication_date": "30-04-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1768, "text": "If these two logical disciplines can be wedded, it is then possible to create a situation of maximum military strength within economic capacities. If, on the other hand, these two are allowed to proceed in disregard one for the other, you then create a situation either of doubtful military strength, or of such precarious economic strength that your military position is in constant jeopardy. It has been the purpose of this administration ever since it took office, finding itself confronted with a crazy quilt of promises, commitments, and contracts, to bring American military logic and American economic logic into joint strong harness. No more glaring illustration of the lack of balance between the military logic and the economic logic could possibly be found than the situation that existed when we took office. On the one hand, we found our allies deploring our unfulfilled defense promises. On the other hand, we found there was a total carryover of $81 billion in appropriated funds, largely committed, for which cash must be provided from revenues in future fiscal years, over and above the normal annual cost of government. It is just as if the late administration had gone to the store and ordered 81 billion dollars worth of goods, which we have got to pay for as they are delivered, in addition to paying the regular household running expenses. The fiscal situation represented by these two extremes absolutely has to be brought into some kind of realistic focus, and the only way to do it is to have a completely new, fresh look without any misleading labels. As you know, over the past years I have been involved in the European end of defense, and therefore I think I know all about paper divisions and cardboard wings. For the last 3 months, I have been heavily involved in the American end of defense, and day after day have had to struggle with the basic equation that links the military safety of this country and of the free world with the ability of the world to pay its bills and earn a living. This morning I told the legislative leaders that already we can see our way clear to ask the Congress to appropriate at least 8 billion less in new money for the fiscal year 1954 than had been asked for by the previous administration. This is a preliminary figure based on 3 months' hard work. The great bulk of it, of course, relates to security programs. More definite figures will become available as appropriation requests are presented to the Congress during the next few weeks. You will note that I have been talking about the new appropriations for fiscal 1954.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference450", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-450", "publication_date": "30-04-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1769, "text": "Actual cash savings for 1954 will be determined only as Congress acts on the appropriation requests. These savings will not reduce the effective military strength we will deliver to ourselves and our allies during fiscal 1954. They are already on the books and in contracts. Deliveries actually will be speeded up through the reduction of lead time, and concentration on producing those items which make the most military sense for the immediate future. Practically everyone concerned with the problem can with some justification be a special pleader. But I am sure that what the overwhelming majority of Americans want to believe is that their Government is working with diligence and intelligence to bring about as rapidly as possible a condition of true military strength. I also believe that the overwhelming majority of the people of the free world appreciate the fact that a healthy American economy and a functioning economy in their own home country are inseparable from true defense. Furthermore, I have a deep conviction that all these people possess a fundamental common sense Which permits them to grasp the difference between a quiet, steady, long-term improvement in their defense position and the tempests stirred up by public arguments over the artificial arithmetic which is so easy to produce in the defense field. The program we are presenting is a long-term program, calling for a steady and adequate flow of men and materials to present a position of genuine strength to any would-be aggressor. The basic elements of our strategic problem have not materially changed in recent years, and certainly not in recent days. The areas and peoples vital to our Nation's welfare are the same as they have been for a long time. What we are doing is to adopt a new policy for the solution of the problem. This change in policy is radical and cannot be effected overnight. There exists what is, in effect, a straitjacket, comprising prior authorizations, appropriations, and contracts. The essence of the change is this. We reject the idea that we must build up to a maximum attainable strength for some specific date theoretically fixed for a specified time in the future. Defense is not a matter of maximum strength for a single date. It is a matter of adequate protection to be projected as far into the future as the actions and apparent purposes of others may compel us. It is a policy that can, if necessary, be lived with over a period of years. Finally, I would like to remind you of what I have said many times before, and will probably say many times again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference450", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-450", "publication_date": "30-04-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1770, "text": "Most of all, we must champion the American worker and the American small business. We will, if we fight fearlessly and faithfully in Congress for what President Trump started, the America First Agenda. Now, everywhere I go in Northwest Georgia, I am humbled and honored by the overwhelming support I receive from many of you here in this room. You would not know that, though, if you only read the New York Times and the Washington Post, which unfortunately is what a lot of people in DC read. So they might be a little surprised at our numbers tonight, but we are not. Now I want to tell you this, I am blessed and I am constantly overwhelmed by the thousands of letters, cards, voicemails, and emails we receive, not only from right here at home, but from every state in America. It is just my home state, and I love Georgia so much. My enemies on both the left and the right will never admit it out loud, but I have become one of the most effective members in Congress for the Republican Party, simply by one thing, you guys, demanding that our party fight for our values of our voters, not the interest of corporate donors or Washington insiders. Now, my critics like to produce headlines full of fake outrage, because I keep daring to say things the globalist elites do not want you to hear. They write lies about me and team up with Democrats to have me sidelined and censored because they know I am the voice of the people, and that scares them the most. I am honored to represent the values of Northwest Georgia. I honor you by leading with my Christian faith, and by focusing on traditional family values, I believe in putting American workers and American small businesses first. I received a record number of votes from Northwest Georgians on November 3rd in 2020. And I took that sign from you all seriously. I got to work, and even before being sworn in, by leading the congressional objection to Joe Biden's fraudulent electoral votes on the House floor, that was important. Now, since then, I have kept my campaign promises to all of you. I fight every day in every way I can to stop the Democrats communist agenda. One way I have done that is by calling for roll call votes, putting Congress on record. By demanding transparency and forcing Congress to vote on record, I have defeated radical bills like squad member, Cori Bush's bill to allow felons to vote in jail; that should never happen.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmarjorietaylorgreenedeliversspeechongopprimarywin52422transcript", "title": "Marjorie Taylor Greene delivers speech on GOP primary win 5/24/22 Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/marjorie-taylor-greene-delivers-speech-on-gop-primary-win-5-24-22-transcript", "publication_date": "25-05-2022", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Marjorie Taylor Greene"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1771, "text": "But we stopped it. That is more than any top ranking Republican accomplished on any House committee. Not only that, I have filed America First legislation, I have offered legislation to preserve and protect our second amendment, I have offered bills to impeach Joe Biden four times, bills to fire Dr. Anthony Fauci, bills to expel insurrectionist Maxine Waters, bills to eliminate the ATF, bills to ban vaccine mandates, and bills to secure our Southern border and finish President Trump's wall. I even released my own congressional oversight report on my visit to the Washington DC jail, which currently houses January 6th pretrial defendants, still to this day. My report revealed the horrific conditions they face. I called for an end to the abuse of pretrial defendants and for the termination of the person overseeing their care, Deputy Warden Kathleen Landerkin. I have hit a few roadblocks on the way, perhaps because the Washington elites realize that I would always put you the voters first. Just after I was sworn in Democrats recognized me as the biggest threat to their communist agenda in Congress and made me their number one target. We can remember all those news stories. Well, they kicked me off committees, not just Democrats, but unfortunately 11 Republicans, because they knew I was not going to go along with their America last establishment agenda. They kicked me off because they realize, you know what, I am just like you; I am a proud American and I am tired of the business as usual in the swamp. Now to tell you the truth, in the current 117th Congress committees are useless for Republicans. Republicans are in the minority and Nancy Pelosi rules Congress with an iron fist. GOP bills and amendments are rejected and hardly see the light of day. When Republicans take back the majority in 2022, it is going to be a different story. I will be back on committees, you can count on that. Our party will have the power to make those committees useful and hold Democrats in the deep state who have put our country through hell accountable. I ran for Congress in 2020 because I was sick and tired of Republicans doing absolutely nothing even when they are put in charge, holding hands with Democrats, got us here. Over 30 trillion in debt now; it is a shame. I am running for reelection because my work to put people over politicians is just beginning.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmarjorietaylorgreenedeliversspeechongopprimarywin52422transcript", "title": "Marjorie Taylor Greene delivers speech on GOP primary win 5/24/22 Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/marjorie-taylor-greene-delivers-speech-on-gop-primary-win-5-24-22-transcript", "publication_date": "25-05-2022", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Marjorie Taylor Greene"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1772, "text": "Failed leaders like Mitch McConnell and neocons like Dan Crenshaw, who by the way, I think is in Ukraine and probably visiting Davos with Klaus Schwab, are eager to work with Democrats to pass Joe Biden's America last agenda. They reject the priorities of grassroots conservatives, but so long as I am in Congress, you will always have a voice. You will always have a champion working for each and every single one of you. I have been in Washington DC on your behalf for almost a year-and-a-half, seems like maybe 10 or 20 years. So I have had the chance to learn a few things. And tonight I'd like to let you in on a little secret, the people you see on TV, in press conferences, or walking the halls of Congress, you know, the diabolical evil masterminds who always seen two steps ahead, the ones who have caused us all so much misery, they are actually idiots. Surprise, but you already knew that. The only reason they get away with the things they get away with is because Republicans have not stood up to them. When the elites wield the power of the state against patriots, they can be terrifying. I am shocked at the cruel and illegal treatment of many nonviolent January 6th protestors, while over 95% of Antifa and Black Lives Matter domestic terrorists had their charges dropped. That is a two-tier justice system, and that should not exist in our country. But our enemies in Washington are not as smart as they think they are, and they are not unbeatable. They are good at one thing, though, they watch who and what gets popular, and they decide whether to take it out and strangle it, or take it over and claim the credit. Whether it is Democrats following AOC off a cliff into communism, or Republicans rushing to embrace the populous wing of our own party, the elites scramble to copy what we say, and then pretend it was their idea all along. They do these things because they simply do not care about you. In fact, they look down on us and they hate us. They know that if enough of us said, Stop, their influence would disappear. And that is what they fear the most. Sending me back to Washington will send a message to the blood sucking establishment, it is we who will set the political agenda for the next decade and not them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmarjorietaylorgreenedeliversspeechongopprimarywin52422transcript", "title": "Marjorie Taylor Greene delivers speech on GOP primary win 5/24/22 Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/marjorie-taylor-greene-delivers-speech-on-gop-primary-win-5-24-22-transcript", "publication_date": "25-05-2022", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Marjorie Taylor Greene"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1773, "text": "You see, it is the elites that do not have any true affinity for the country they govern. They prefer Davos to Dalton, Georgia. So we are going to start speaking the truth more loudly and fearlessly than ever before; we are going to work together, and we are going to take our country back. Now, the globalist are going to see that we are the majority in this country, and we have both the right and the power to determine our own destiny. That is what being an American's all about, right? We are the majority who want an end to trans-terrorism, socialist monetary policy, endless wars and nation building across the world, and the slow drain of our sovereignty into unaccountable foreign institutions run by sinister unelected fanatics. We are the majority who after Roe v. Wade is overturned, will protect the lives of the innocent children in the womb from the moment of conception. We are the majority who, when we put our minds to it, can wreck the Democrats plans for their terrifying Ministry of Truth, and send Nina Jenkowinz scuttling back to the karaoke bar where she belongs. We are the majority who even now still wants to see Hillary Clinton in jail. When conservatives work together to fight for Christian ideals, we can win. We have proven it. We can join hands to defy Democrat horrors, whether it is evil social engineering in our daughter's locker rooms, communism in the halls of Congress, or the DOJ harassing and intimidating parents at our school boards, the Republican Party has no choice but to fall in line, and they will, and they want to. I can already see changes happening in Washington; think tanks and political consultants and academics are starting to admit that the neocon project was a mistake, and that globalism has gone too far, and gone on too long. They are rebranding themselves populist and nationalist, and America First. I do not have faith in the character or integrity of a lot of these slimy people, but I do believe in their sense of self preservation; believe me, they know how to survive. So when we take back the House, I believe the Republican Party will come to its senses and once again begin to reflect the priorities of ordinary working American families who have for so long been ridiculed, ignored and taken for granted, we will never forget being called a basket full of deplorables, right?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmarjorietaylorgreenedeliversspeechongopprimarywin52422transcript", "title": "Marjorie Taylor Greene delivers speech on GOP primary win 5/24/22 Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/marjorie-taylor-greene-delivers-speech-on-gop-primary-win-5-24-22-transcript", "publication_date": "25-05-2022", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Marjorie Taylor Greene"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1774, "text": "Because I believe that we are on the verge of a great American revival, a revival so enormous and so profound that no one will be able to stand in its way. I believe that this revival of faith, family, and freedom, a revival of Christian morals and constitutional values is ours to welcome in if we want it. I am convinced that the establishment in Washington knows this too. They know that America's patience for tyranny, communism, child abuse, the murder of the unborn, corporations and teachers grooming our kids, and politically weaponized law enforcement agencies is that an end. The era of mandates, and lockdowns, and jabs, and censorship, and lies is ending because the American people will no longer tolerate their government declaring war on its own citizens and our own values. Every politician says that an upcoming election is the most important one ever, most of the time that is not true, they are just trying to get people out to vote. Hail and thunder are coming for the elites who despise us and who want us to eat the bugs, drink the poop water, and live in the pods, and own nothing, yet somehow be happy. I am sorry, do any of you want that future? Y'all do not want his fake Petri dish meat? In 2016, this nation came together to show the Hollywood elites and university professors and line news reporters that we hold the power of self-governance. We reminded them that they are not in charge, we are. We elected Donald J. Trump, and we will make an American revival possible just when it is seemed as though our nation might be lost to faceless bureaucrats, European commissions, the World Health Organization, and the World Economic Forum. Tonight I am calling on you to help me continue the America First movement, and commit to rebuilding a happier, healthier, more law-abiding, more caring, and more morally accountable America in which we respect God and his plans for us, and in which we protect the future of our children and our grandchildren. We are at the start of something here in 2022. Some people are describing it as a return of some 2016 energy here in Georgia's 14th district. You have power to affect change nationally in a way, many other Americans do not , you are sending me back to Washington to put our country and our people first to make America great. Again, you and me working together can succeed in a place that fails you every single day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmarjorietaylorgreenedeliversspeechongopprimarywin52422transcript", "title": "Marjorie Taylor Greene delivers speech on GOP primary win 5/24/22 Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/marjorie-taylor-greene-delivers-speech-on-gop-primary-win-5-24-22-transcript", "publication_date": "25-05-2022", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Marjorie Taylor Greene"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1775, "text": "And we know that this is possible because we are already on that journey. I will continue to speak the truth and fight back against the uni-party in Washington, DC. Together, we will hold their feet to the fire, together we can inspire the rest of America to be just like Northwest Georgia, and elect people who will fight for you in Washington, DC. Now, in the 118th Congress with Republicans in power, we will launch real investigations with teeth to hold accountable and to jail bad actors in the deep state who work every day to strip away your freedoms. We will finish President Trump's border wall and secure our Southern border. And we will reign in big tech companies and stop those woke corporations from shutting down and silencing conservatives and destroying our freedom of speech. We will stop the evil influence of the Chinese Communist Party in our economy and our institutions. We will achieve American energy independence again. And we will investigate and fire Dr. Anthony Fauci; nobody voted for him in the first place. We will kick Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell off committees so they can no longer pervert our constitution. And yes, if we work hard and if we want it badly enough, we will impeach Joe Biden. As many of you know, I have a great relationship with President Trump. I am going to work with him to deliver the America First policies that America needs and America desperately wants. We miss him, do not we? I think the whole world misses President Trump right now. I pray that you will show the same faith in me this coming November that you have tonight, Georgia, and I thank you for that, the same faith that you did two years ago. Meanwhile, I look forward to a Republican majority in 2022. I also look confidently ahead at the presidential election in 2024. We can, and we will win that race too. And we have to, if we truly want to save America and stop communism, we are going to lead the way. May God bless every single one of you, every single one of you; and may God bless the great State of Georgia, and let us save America and stop communism.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmarjorietaylorgreenedeliversspeechongopprimarywin52422transcript", "title": "Marjorie Taylor Greene delivers speech on GOP primary win 5/24/22 Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/marjorie-taylor-greene-delivers-speech-on-gop-primary-win-5-24-22-transcript", "publication_date": "25-05-2022", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Marjorie Taylor Greene"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1783, "text": "This week we celebrated the creation of 4 million new jobs in America since I became President on a platform to renew the American dream by restoring our economy, empowering individual Americans to compete and win in it, making Government work for ordinary citizens, and rebuilding our communities. Since we started our national economic strategy, our private sector is creating jobs nearly 8 times faster than it was 4 years ago. It has not been easy to make these changes. We had to make some tough decisions to put our economic house in order. We had to break the bad habits that led to mismanagement of our economy and the explosion of our deficit for more than a decade. And we had to break through all of the partisan barriers and political rhetoric that too often keeps us from doing the right thing for the American people here in Washington, DC. Today I want to talk with you about two other historic decisions that call on us to break through partisan barriers and political rhetoric again. For very soon, Congress will vote on both health care reform and the crime bill, two issues crucial to our mission of renewing the American dream. I want to talk to you about two young Americans whose stories are the best arguments I have heard for why we have to fix what is wrong with our health care system and make our country safer again for all Americans. One of those young people is Amanda Stewart from Keyes, Oklahoma. This week, I gave awards to four young people who have done heroic deeds or performed remarkable public service. Amanda was one of them. She was injured in a car wreck in 1990 and paralyzed from the chest down. This wonderful young lady could have given up on life. Instead of becoming bitter or defeated, she is devoted herself to educating other young people not to drink and drive, not to ride with people who do, and to always use seat belts. She is helping others to avoid what happened to her. I met Amanda's family. Her father is a hardworking farmer in western Oklahoma. She has a lovely mother and a wonderful younger sister. She has not had any significant medical costs since just after her accident 4 years ago. The Stewarts have been paying $3,400 a year for a limited health insurance policy with a high deductible. But recently they were told that this month their insurance premiums were going to be raised to $9,600 a year. He is in a different party from me, and he made it clear to me that he does not want the National Government to give him anything.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress585", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-585", "publication_date": "06-08-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1784, "text": "But he is got a family to raise, and he has no idea how he is going to keep paying for their health insurance. He said to me that if he could not take care of his family, as hard as he was working, something was wrong in this country. People like Amanda and her family are the reason we have to guarantee private, not Government, health insurance for every American, insurance that is always there. It is time to do what is right by those people. We are going in the wrong direction now. There are 5 million Americans just like Amanda's family who had insurance 5 years ago who do not have it today. Almost every one of them are working people and their children. It is also time we do what is right for young people like James Darby, the 9-year-old boy from New Orleans who wrote me last April. He asked me to do something about the crime rate. He asked me to stop the killing, because he was afraid that someone might kill him. And just 9 days later, walking home from a Mother's Day picnic, little James Darby was shot in the head and killed. Well, 9 days ago, after 6 years of delay, a bipartisan committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives reconciled their differences on the smartest, toughest crime bill in the history of this country and sent the bill back to be voted on for final passage in both Houses of Congress. It took a lot of work. It is a bipartisan effort and has been every step of the way. three strikes and you are out and tougher punishments for other tough criminals; 100,000 new police officers on our streets that is a 20 percent increase all across America; a ban on deadly assault weapons; a law that makes it illegal for minors to own and possess handguns; new prisons to keep hardened criminals in; and billions for new, effective prevention programs to give our young people something to say yes to, not just something to say no to. Nine days ago when the bill was sent to both Houses for final passage, I thought it would pass quickly and be sent to my desk for signing. You see, before the House of Representatives can vote on a bill, it must agree on the rules for debate about the bill. There are 435 Members of the House, and they have to have some rules to limit debate. In shorthand, this is called the rule.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress585", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-585", "publication_date": "06-08-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1813, "text": "Second only to Georgia in the primary, does anybody here know which State gave me the biggest margin of victory when I ran for President? And I have come to thank you for that. Not too long ago, the Congress and I restored full citizenship to President Jefferson Davis. And since Camp David, the Congress and the people of the country have done the same to me, and I want to thank you for that, too. For any Democrat coming to Tennessee, and particularly coming to Nashville, is a homecoming, because Andrew Jackson, one of the greatest Presidents who ever lived, the father of our party, has made Tennessee a homecoming place for all Democrats. He was a man of great courage. He was a man who loved his home State. He was a man who founded the principles of our party, that said that those who hold public office have to put our faith, our confidence, our responsibility to the average, common, good American citizens who put us in office. That is the commitment of the Democratic Party today, and we are going to keep it that way. There has been a time in the last few years when Tennessee strayed temporarily from the Democratic Party and from the principles of Andrew Jackson. And in the last few years, we have seen a major shift back toward Democrats by Tennessee, and that is going to keep on the next 2 weeks. Georgia, my own State, has always been close to Tennessee. We share a lot with you. When it snows in the north Georgia mountains and the northwestern part of our State, our State legislators have to come through Tennessee to get home to Atlanta to act as legislators. We have always kept those borders open, except one time when General Sherman crossed them on the way from Tennessee through Atlanta. But with that one exception, we bind ourselves to you. We will keep those lines open. And I am proud to say that as Tennesseans, I consider you my brother, and I am glad to be here as that, too. James K. Polk, President of the United States; Cordell Hull, one of the greatest Secretaries of State our country has ever seen; Estes Kefauver, who ought to have been President of the United States. Kefauver was a man who went throughout the country, standing on street corners, standing in factory shift lines early in the morning, shaking hands with the American citizens and saying, What can I do for you if I am the nominee of the Democratic Party? I believe he entered 13 primaries.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnashvilletennesseeremarksstatedemocraticpartyrally", "title": "Nashville, Tennessee Remarks at a State Democratic Party Rally.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/nashville-tennessee-remarks-state-democratic-party-rally", "publication_date": "26-10-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1814, "text": "He won 11 of them. He was not elected President, but he set a standard of campaigning that I followed very closely when in 1976 I entered 30 primaries and won a fairly good number of those which gave me an avenue to the White House. I want to recognize, too, a great United States Senator who served at the same time, Senator Albert Gore, who is been an inspiration to a lot of southerners. As you well know, when the South was going through those difficult days of changing from a segregated society to one where we gave all American citizens equal rights, regardless of color, Albert Gore, Estes Kefauver set a standard for the rest of us to follow. Their courage has made the southland a better place to live for blacks and whites. And I want to thank them for what they meant to me and to my own people. I will always remember the Democratic convention when Frank Clement made an inspiring address, and his son, Bob,2 has brought the same kind of approach to Democratic politics in this State. And he supported the Democratic nominees as a loyal Democrat should, in this same status with the same tradition as his father, Frank. I cannot come to Tennessee, especially Nashville, without mentioning Dick Fulton, a man who was in the Congress, who could have stayed there as long as he wanted to, who was doing a great job, but felt that he could do a better job and be closer to you if he came home as mayor of Nashville. And I hate to miss him in Washington, but I am glad you have got him. And I am very thankful that he is doing such a great job here as your mayor, and I want to make sure that everybody knows about that. Some people said he came to Nashville to be closer to country music. But that is not true any more, because you cannot get any closer to country music that originates in Nashville than you do in the White House when I turn my record player on or my radio on-that is the kind of music I really love. And we have had a lot of great music performers from your city come to entertain us and many others in the White House since I have been President. The night before last, my wife and I were on the telephone talking to June Carter and also to her husband, as you know, about the unfortunate loss of Maybelle Carter.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnashvilletennesseeremarksstatedemocraticpartyrally", "title": "Nashville, Tennessee Remarks at a State Democratic Party Rally.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/nashville-tennessee-remarks-state-democratic-party-rally", "publication_date": "26-10-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1815, "text": "She set not only a standard in country music that is inspired Johnny Cash and many others as well as her own family, but she also set a standard of common, ordinary people who love one another, expressing their views, their hopes, their dreams, their fears to the world through music. And I want to thank you for her. As June knows, I always claim kinship with her, particularly after I started running for office. And that family means a lot to me and to the rest of the country. I just want to mention two other people. Al Bissell, a great mayor of Oakridge, has provided us with a standard of leadership at the municipal level, and I predict that his son, Keith, will do an equally good job as public service commissioner next year. Jay Solomon, a Tennessean, came to Washington at my request. He did not much want to come, but he is a great businessman from Chattanooga, and he took over as Administrator of the General Services Administration, the GSA. And he is done as much to let us know about waste and corruption in Government as anyone. He is fighting the battles for you to make the Federal Government be better, cleaner, more decent, more honest. He is the kind of fellow who issues the contracts now after he opens the bids. And I want to thank Tennessee for giving me Jay Solomon. I have really come here today to get you to work hard for the nominees for Governor, United States Senate, State offices, and the U.S. Congress, whom you have already chosen in an open, tough, difficult, closely contested Democratic primary. You have chosen a man to come to Washington with me 2 years ago, who is done an outstanding job already. And I want to express my deep thanks to you for sending Jim Sasser to Washington, who has already carved out for himself a position of leadership. One of the most important responsibilities of any Senator is to pass the appropriations bills, deciding where money goes for every possible service the National Government provides. Jim Sasser just happens to be on the Appropriations Committee. Another important job, of course, is preparing the budget to cut down on deficits and to make sure the Congress toes the line when they spend your money. It just happens that Jim Sasser is on the Senate Budget Committee. Another important job is to give government reorganization a chance to let us have a better government. We have passed now a very fine civil service reform law to put our good civil servants to work a little harder for you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnashvilletennesseeremarksstatedemocraticpartyrally", "title": "Nashville, Tennessee Remarks at a State Democratic Party Rally.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/nashville-tennessee-remarks-state-democratic-party-rally", "publication_date": "26-10-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1816, "text": "It just happens that Jim Sasser is chairman of the Civil Service Reform Committee, and I want to thank Tennessee for giving me this strong ally and friend and supporter in Washington. I have only got one complaint to make about Jim Sasser. When it comes down to deciding what I want him to do, compared to what Tennessee wants him to do, he always does what you want him to do. Now I want to comment on one man who is had maybe a more difficult youth than I had. When I was 14 years old, because of the TVA and because of the REA, we got electricity and running water in the house I lived in. Jake Butcher did not get it until he was 16 years old. He is a man who comes from humble beginnings. He is a man who exemplifies in my mind the true spirit of Tennessee. He has cast his lot with the people of this State. When I was Governor of Georgia, I spent about 25 percent of my time trying to bring industry into my State. I spent that time trying to revive the possibility of jobs for Georgians, to make sure we were a dynamic, growing State, to make sure the State government was run economically and efficiently as a business ought to be. And you have a true treasure coming up next year in Jake Butcher as your Governor. And I hope every one of you will help him. I have particularly admired his. He has not run a negative campaign. He is pointed out to you how Tennessee could be a better State with good leadership. And he has got a particularly soft spot in his heart for senior citizens. If he is elected Governor-and I am sure he will be-he is promised all those over 65 years old that you will not have to pay sales tax on food. That shows one of the things that he will do. And now I want to mention a woman who, next January, is going to make Jim Sasser senior Senator from Tennessee-Jane Eskind. In the Tennessee primary-and there is no other like it in the whole United States-you had nine candidates for the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senator. Nobody thought Jane Eskind had a chance. Jane Eskind thought she had a chance. She put her political future in your hands. And she came through on top. The reason is that she is tough, competent, she knows government. She will come with a clear eye and a clean-sweeping broom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnashvilletennesseeremarksstatedemocraticpartyrally", "title": "Nashville, Tennessee Remarks at a State Democratic Party Rally.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/nashville-tennessee-remarks-state-democratic-party-rally", "publication_date": "26-10-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1817, "text": "She is cast her lot with the little people, the common, ordinary, good working people of Tennessee. And she will bring to Washington the true spirit of Andrew Jackson. And I hope all of you will help her when November 7 comes. I will have to express my thanks as a peanut farmer to Ed Jones, the dean of the Tennessee congressional delegation and one of the leading members of the Congress in passing agricultural legislation for our country. Albert Gore, Jr., fits in well with Tennessee. He is on the committee responsible for science and technology. And Tennessee, with a dynamic economy and a clear vision of the future, is certainly benefiting from his incumbency, and I am sure he will go back into office. And you have got here in Nashville a man to fill some big shoes, your next Congressman, Bill Boner. We have got the most wonderful Democratic slate you have ever had, and I hope you will help me get all of them elected in 2 weeks, November 7, Tuesday after next. Will you do that for us? Now I'd like to say just a word about our Nation. You got that title and that reputation because you have always been willing and eager to defend our Nation when it was in trouble. And as your Governor pointed out, since I have been in office, we have not called on a single Tennessean nor a single American to lose a life or to shed blood in conflict in another country. And I want to keep that record as long as I am in the White House. Our Nation has taken the leadership in trying to preserve peace for our own people, in trying to bring peace to others. We are negotiating now to conclude a SALT treaty, to make sure that we lessen the threat of nuclear weapons for people in our own country and throughout the world. We are trying to negotiate, with some success already, peace in the Middle East, between Israel and Egypt. This is a difficult undertaking, and we need your help, your prayers, and your support. We are trying to strengthen our ties with our own allies, to let NATO be stronger. We have got a strong defense, ever improving. We are the strongest nation on Earth militarily, and as long as I am in the White House, we are going to stay number one in defense. Tennesseans believe in hard work. When I was elected President, we had 10 million Americans, 10 million Americans who could not get a full-time job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnashvilletennesseeremarksstatedemocraticpartyrally", "title": "Nashville, Tennessee Remarks at a State Democratic Party Rally.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/nashville-tennessee-remarks-state-democratic-party-rally", "publication_date": "26-10-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1818, "text": "We had 7 million Americans or more who could not get a job at all. But we put America back to work. We have had, since I have been in office, an increase of 6 million net new jobs for America, and we are going to keep on giving our people a chance to work for themselves and for our country. We are trying to provide better education, better housing, better highways, a good agricultural program. With your Congressmen's help, we passed a farm bill about a year ago that is already improved farm income 25 percent. We have got the highest level of agricultural exports in the history of our country last year. We are trying also to make sure that we have a good energy program, and for the first time in the history of our Nation, we now have a good, sound energy policy that is going to be better in the future with your help. 3 yesterday, I signed a bill to deregulate the airline industry. We are trying to get Government's nose out of the business of the people of this country, and we have made good progress already. We have had a decrease in airline fares, a tremendous increase in the number of people who can now afford to fly in airplanes, and the profits of the airline industry have gone up. And by 1985, we will have eliminated a major Federal regulatory agency, the CAB, the Civil Aeronautics Board, because we have proven that the American free enterprise system can work if competition is put in and the consumers are protected. That is the kind of government we are trying to give you. The Democratic Party has always been a party with a heart. We believe in people and giving our people a better chance to live. But we are also a party that knows how to manage government. When I was running for President in 1976 and you helped me so much, we had a Federal budget deficit of $66 billion. In 1 year, we cut it down to the fifties. We have now cut it down to the forties. By the end of next year, we will have cut it in half, and we are going to keep on working until we have a balanced budget for the Federal Government and responsible to you. At the same time, we have cut taxes. Better services, lower taxes, lower budget deficits, better management, zero-base budgeting-these are the kind of things that we believe are important. We are cutting out corruption.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsnashvilletennesseeremarksstatedemocraticpartyrally", "title": "Nashville, Tennessee Remarks at a State Democratic Party Rally.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/nashville-tennessee-remarks-state-democratic-party-rally", "publication_date": "26-10-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1819, "text": "It is a great pleasure to have so many present and future scientific pioneers in the Rose Garden with us today. Along with Members of Congress and the administration, we have no fewer than four Nobel laureates in the audience as well as many of the top science students from the Department of Energy's Science Honors Program. I am tempted to paraphrase an earlier President who once said there is never before been so much talent assembled in one place in the White House since-well, since I hosted the Washington Redskins on the South Lawn last month. But the reason we are here, of course, is to talk about the superconducting supercollider, as you have probably guessed already. I have to confess that when I first heard about this place where things go round and round at great speeds and then crash into each other I thought they were talking about a Presidential campaign. At first I was a little nervous addressing so many distinguished scientists on a subject of such complexity, but then I realized these are people who spend their days talking about things called quarks, which some claim exist in two places at the same time. The fact is, I envy the students here today because they exist in a world that seems to put no limits on the imagination. Outer space used to be called the final frontier, but today we have begun to tap another frontier-inner space-whose infinitesimal constellations hold out infinite possibilities. It may be a cliche, but it is nevertheless true that the pace of progress is constantly accelerating. I think one of the reasons I have always had so little patience with those who talk about the limits to growth is that in my lifetime I have seen those limits shattered again and again by questing minds. When I was very young, horsepower was still the kind you fed with hay. And before the turn of the century, we plan to have men living and working in stations in space and a new hypersonic plane that can fly from here to Tokyo in less than 3 hours. I know that some people may question the practical applications of the superconducting supercollider. The strange world of subatomic particles they may think will never be more than an arcane interest to a few highly specialized scientists. But the truth is, the practical applications of this knowledge are already changing the way we live. One of my favorite examples is from the computer industry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssciencehonorsstudentsthesupercolliderprogram", "title": "Remarks to Science Honors Students on the Supercollider Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-science-honors-students-the-supercollider-program", "publication_date": "30-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1820, "text": "If automotive technology had progressed as fast and as far as superconductor technology has in the last 20 years, he says, a Rolls Royce today would cost less than $3, get 3 million miles to the gallon, and six of them would fit on the head of a pin. Well, the technological revolution he is describing is transforming our world, and it was only made possible by the knowledge scientists have brought back from their explorations of inner space. Every time someone turns on his desk computer, makes a phone call, or plays a video game, he is plugging into that mysterious world of quantum physics. The superconducting supercollider is the doorway to that new world of quantum change, of quantum progress for science and for our economy. In the face of ever-increasing global competition, the United States must maintain the leading edge in science and technology, and building the world's largest particle accelerator is a visible symbol of our nation's determination to stay out front. Benjamin Franklin once said that an investment in knowledge pays the best interest. I want to commend you all on your cause, your vision, and the message of progress and competitiveness you carry with you today. And it is my hope that Congress will show equal vision by approving funding to initiate construction of the supercollider. I think all they'd need to do is meet with some of these students here today to see that it is our responsibility to the next generation to keep America a place where we can dream big dreams and then make them real. I have to interject something here before I conclude. In my lifetime-and only the recent part of my lifetime-after about 25 years in movies and so forth, I was representing the General Electric Theatre on television. And I visited one of their plants in Schenectady early on, and they proudly took me in and showed me what turns out to be the first computer. They called it an electric brain. It would have-well, it would have fit in the Rose Garden here, but it was about as long as from the edge of the platform to the bushes over there and almost as thick. And that is what-I just thought of that when I mentioned here someone sitting down to his desk computer-that, in just those years, from there up to here, is what has happened. So, maybe that fellow about the Rolls Royce was right-six of them on the head of a pin.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssciencehonorsstudentsthesupercolliderprogram", "title": "Remarks to Science Honors Students on the Supercollider Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-science-honors-students-the-supercollider-program", "publication_date": "30-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1821, "text": "I love you back! A couple of acknowledgments that I want to make. First of all, Mike is a pretty humble guy, but this is the Iowa Firefighter of the Year. We are proud of him and every single firefighter that puts their lives at risk for us. We are grateful to them. You have got your own attorney general, Tom Miller, in the house; Congressman Bruce Braley is here; and Mayor Buck Clark is here. And all of you are here. Now, listen, if you have got a seat, feel free to sit down, because I have got some things to say. I have got some things to say. First of all, it is good to be back. Some of you may remember that one of my first stops after I announced for ENTITY was right here in Waterloo back, way back when, in 2007. I had no gray hair. I mean, maybe I had a little bit, but you could not see it. Now you can see it. But the reason that is important, it is worth reminding people, is because it was on your front porches, it was in your backyards, where our movement for change began. We spent a lot of time on bus tours like the one I am taking right now, although the bus was not as nice as it is now. And we went to school gyms and family farms and small businesses across the State. Yesterday I went to the State Fair, and I had a pork chop and a beer. Today I just had a beer. I did not get the pork chop. But-you say, you will fry me a pork chop, huh? Somebody just said-it is true, at the State Fair, instead of saying 4 more years, they were saying, four more beers. So I bought him four more beers. Told him he had to register to vote, though, to get one of the beers. It is-the reason I am back, other than I just love being in Iowa, the reason I am back is because that journey we started in 2008, we are not finished yet. So just like we did in 2007, we started over in Council Bluffs, and we are driving all the way to the Quads. And we want to make sure that everybody understands the choice that you face in November. And this choice could not be bigger, because it is not just a choice between two candidates; it is not just a choice between two parties.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallywaterlooiowa", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Waterloo, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-waterloo-iowa", "publication_date": "14-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1822, "text": "More than any recent election, more than 2008, this is a choice between two fundamentally different visions of where we need to go as a country. And the direction that you choose when you walk into that voting booth in November, that is going to have an impact not just on your lives, it will have an impact on your children and your grandchildren for decades to come. Now, remember why we came together in 2008. It was because we saw that the basic bargain that built this country, that created the most prosperous economy the world has ever known, that basic bargain was not being met. And let me tell you what that bargain is. It says that if you act responsibly and you put in enough effort, you can find a job that pays the bills. You can have a home that you call your own. You will not go broke just because somebody in your family gets sick. You can retire with dignity and respect. And most importantly, you can give your kids a great education so they can dream even bigger and do even better than you did. But the problem was for a decade we had seen that bargain was not being met. So we had seen a decade in which jobs were being shipped overseas and wages and incomes for working people were going down, even though folks at the very top were doing very well, and the costs of everything from health care to college were going up. We ran two wars on a credit card. We went from surplus to deficit. So when I walked into office we already had a $1 trillion deficit. And it all culminated in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. That is the track record of the other party the last time they were in charge. And we knew that restoring the bargain that made this country great would not be easy. It was going to take more than one year or one term or even more than one ENTITY, but we knew we had to get started. And obviously, it became that much harder when the middle class was hammered by this crisis because a lot of folks lost jobs, lost homes, lost savings, and that American Dream seemed even further out of reach. But I told you there would not be any quick fixes, there would not be any easy solutions, but what I also promised you, and I absolutely believe this, is we have got everything we need to meet our challenges. Waterloo, we have still got the best workers in the world and the best entrepreneurs in the world. We have got the best scientists and the best researchers in the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallywaterlooiowa", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Waterloo, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-waterloo-iowa", "publication_date": "14-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1823, "text": "We have got the best farmers in the world. We have got the best colleges and universities in the world. We are still a young nation, full of promise, and we have got the greatest diversity of talent and ingenuity from every corner of the globe. So no matter what the naysayers say, no matter how dark they try to paint things when they are running against me in an election, there is not another country on Earth that would not trade places with the United States of America. Because people around the world still believe that America is the place where, if you work hard, no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, you can still make it. That is what my Presidency is about. That is why I am running for a second term as ENTITY of the United States. Now, Waterloo, what stands-there is one thing standing in our way, though-is some strange politics in Washington. You have got a party that says compromise is a dirty word. Folks who want to go back to the same top-down economics that got us into this mess in the first place. You may have heard, my opponent chose as his running mate Congressman Ryan this weekend and-- No, no, no, listen, I know Congressman Ryan. He is the ideological leader of the Republicans in Congress. And he is an articulate spokesperson for Governor Romney's vision. See, my opponent, Governor Romney, and his friends in Congress, they believe-this is their whole platform, this is their basic plan, as much detail as you get, this is what you get. Their plan to grow the economy is to eliminate regulations, including on big banks and insurance companies, some of the regulations we put in place to make sure, for example, that we do not have another taxpayer-funded bailout. So he wants to get rid of regulations, and then what he wants to do is give more tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans. And the idea, then, is that jobs and prosperity will trickle down on everybody. That is the centerpiece of his plan. You can go on his website. His economic plan is a new $5 trillion tax cut, a lot of it going to the wealthiest Americans. Now, keep in mind, these are the same folks who say the deficit is our biggest problem, but they want to pass a new $5 trillion tax cut-$5 trillion, that is with a t.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallywaterlooiowa", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Waterloo, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-waterloo-iowa", "publication_date": "14-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1824, "text": "So just to give you some perspective, our annual defense budget, everything we spend on national security, is just a little over $500 billion. So this would be, every year for 10 years, a tax cut as big as our defense spending. He says he is going to pay for it. Well, how are you going to pay for it? It turns out that he expects you to pay for it. He expects middle class families to pick up the tab. Governor Romney's plan, according to independent analysts, would actually raise taxes on middle class families with children by an average of $2,000. Now, keep in mind, this is not $2,000 to reduce the deficit or create jobs or build new schools or help kids go to college or send a man to the moon. This is $2,000 each that you'd have to pay to give another $250,000 tax cut to folks who are making $3 million a year or more. Now, I am not making this stuff up. You can look; look on their website. We have tried this before. We tried this trickle-down fairy dust before. It is not a plan to create jobs. It is not a plan to lower the deficit. It is not a plan to move our economy forward. It is not a plan to revive the middle class. We do not need more tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. We need to give tax relief to working families who are trying to raise their kids, keep them healthy, send them to college, keep a roof over their heads. That is the choice in this election. That is one of the reasons I am running for a second term as ENTITY. So, Waterloo, I have got a different idea. Four years ago, I came into office. I promised to cut taxes for middle class families. That is exactly what I have done, by a total of about $3,600 for the typical family. So if you talk to somebody who is still not convinced and undecided in the election, you tell them your taxes are lower-your Federal taxes are lower now than when I came into office. Now, what I want to do is I want to keep everybody's taxes right there where they are for the first $250,000 of everybody's income.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallywaterlooiowa", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Waterloo, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-waterloo-iowa", "publication_date": "14-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1825, "text": "So if your family makes under $250,000-like 98 percent of families do and 97 percent of small businesses do-then you will not see your income taxes go up by a single dime next year. But if you are fortunate enough to be in the other 2 percent, like I am, you will still get a tax break on your first $250,000. But for the amount that you make over that, we are asking you to contribute a little bit more so we can pay down our deficit without gutting education, without getting rid of transportation projects, without gutting all the things that help make America grow. Now, Government-I will make sure Government still does its part to reduce our debt and our deficits. We have cut out already a trillion dollars' worth of spending we do not need. And we can do more. But we cannot bring down our deficit and our debt just by asking us to get rid of the things that help open up opportunity to Americans. So instead, we are asking folks like me to go back to the rates we paid under Bill Clinton, which, by the way, was a time when we created 23 million new jobs, went from deficit to surplus, and we created a whole lot of millionaires to boot. See, Waterloo, this comes down to your basic philosophy. But also, when you look at the evidence of our economic history, when teachers and nurses and firefighters and receptionists and construction workers-when you have got a little more money in your pocket, what do you do? You spend it because times are tight, right? So if you have got a little extra money, now maybe you finally trade in that 10-year-old car you have been driving. Maybe you buy a computer for your kid who is about to go to college. So suddenly, businesses have more customers, which means they are making more profits, which means they are hiring more workers, who then spend more money, and suddenly, the economy gets better for everybody, including folks at the top. I do not believe in top-down economics. I believe in middle-class-out economics. I believe in bottom-up economics. I believe in making sure everybody has got a fair shot. That is why I am running for a second term as president of the United States of America. That is not the only difference between me and Mr. Romney.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallywaterlooiowa", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Waterloo, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-waterloo-iowa", "publication_date": "14-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1826, "text": "When the auto industry was on the brink of collapse-you remember that?-more than a million jobs at stake, Governor Romney said, let us let Detroit go bankrupt. I said, let us bet on American workers. And management and workers got together in a great, iconic American industry. I want to see high-tech advanced manufacturing come back all across America in other industries. I do not want those jobs in China or Germany. I want them here in Iowa. Governor Romney says, well, no, look, I understand the economy because I have been in the private sector. Well, a lot of that experience was investing in companies, including those that were called pioneers in the business of outsourcing. He wants to keep giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. I want to end those tax breaks once and for all and start rewarding companies that are investing right here in the United States of America, hiring American workers, making American products. That is the choice in this election. Right now we are seeing homegrown energy, new sources of energy, creating jobs right here in Iowa. So what does Governor Romney want to do? He wants to end the tax credit for wind energy producers. He said these new sources of energy are imaginary. Congressman Ryan, his running mate, calls them a fad. During a speech a few months ago, Governor Romney even explained his energy policy. This is what he said. He said, You cannot drive a car with a windmill on it. That is what he said about wind power, you cannot drive a car with a windmill on it. I mean, maybe he is tried it; he is put other things on the roof. But if he really wants to learn something about wind energy, he should come to Iowa. Then he'd know that 7,000 Iowa jobs depend on the wind industry, more than any other State in America. He'd know that the parts for making these high-tech wind turbines, they are now made in Iowa. They are made in America. I have been to the places in Newton, Iowa, where some of this stuff is being made. I understand he may not have figured out how to drive a car with a windmill on it, but if he came to Iowa, he'd know that 20 percent of Iowa's electricity now comes from wind energy. America has doubled the amount of electricity we get from wind over the last 4 years, enough power for nearly 13 million homes-clean, renewable energy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallywaterlooiowa", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Waterloo, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-waterloo-iowa", "publication_date": "14-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1827, "text": "That is something you leave behind for the next generation. We should support it; I support it. And instead of giving $4 billion in taxpayer subsidies to oil companies that are making plenty of money every time you go to the pump, we should be investing in homegrown energy that is never been more promising. That is the choice in this election. That is why I am running for a second term. In 2008, I promised to end the war in Iraq; I ended it. Governor Romney said the way I ended it was tragic. I said I'd go after Al Qaida and bin Laden; I went after them. We are now beginning a transition out of Afghanistan. And so all of this is possible only because of the extraordinary service of our men and women in uniform. And that is why I have made sure to make historic investments in the VA. Because somebody who has fought for us should not have to fight for a job when they come home. But if we are serious about them coming home to a strong economy, then we have got to do some building here at home, some nation-building. Take half of the money that we have been spending over a decade of war, and let us start doing some rebuilding here in America. Let us put Americans back to work rebuilding roads and bridges and ports and airports, laying broadband lines in rural communities. Let us create a veterans jobs corps so returning heroes can get jobs as firefighters and cops in communities that need them. There is a lot of work to be done right here in America, and I am running to rebuild America. That is a choice in this election. And I am running to make sure America once again has the best education system in the world and the best training system for workers in the world. I want to help our schools hire and reward the best teachers, especially in math and science. I want to give 2 million more Americans the chance to go to community colleges to train for the jobs that businesses are hiring for right now. I want to get colleges and universities to bring down the cost of tuition so that every young person can get the kind of education that they need to succeed in the 21st century. I want to help homeowners refinance their homes, save 3,000 bucks at these historically low rates. That is a difference in this election. I believe that you should have some health care security. That is why I passed Obamacare. And I like Obamacare. I like the phrase Obamacare, because you know what?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallywaterlooiowa", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Waterloo, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-waterloo-iowa", "publication_date": "14-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1828, "text": "I care about the-I care about all those folks with preexisting conditions who now are going to be able to get coverage. I care about folks who already have insurance, making sure insurance companies do not jerk them around right when they need that insurance the most. I care about the 6 1/2 million young people who are now able to stay on their parent's plan and do not have to go without insurance. I care about the seniors who now have more discounts on their prescriptions drugs, and we are closing the doughnut hole. So, Waterloo, we do not need another 2 years of arguing about health care. We are implementing this law. All these things-health care security, American manufacturing, rebuilding America, putting construction workers back to work, making sure our kids are getting a great education and can afford college-all these things that make up a middle class life, they all tie together. It goes back to that central idea of America, that here in this country everybody gets a fair shot, everybody does their fair share, everybody plays by the same set of rules. It is the same promise our parents and grandparents passed on to us, and now, our job is to pass it on to our kids. Now, over the next 3 months, the other side will spend more money than we have ever seen. Now, you notice their ads generally do not tell you what it is that they are going to do because they know their plans will not sell. You have not forgotten; you did not get amnesia. You did not forget the last time they tried what they are selling. So basically, the argument that they are going to make over and over again is just the same one, which is, the economy is still not where it needs to be and it is Obama's fault. We have still got too many folks out of work and too many homes under water. And we have not brought back all the jobs that need to be brought back. What they are offering, it is not a plan to create jobs. It is not a plan to reduce the deficit. They do not have a plan to grow the economy. They do not have a plan to revive the middle class. The plan I have put forward can do that. But I need your help. I need your help. I need your help. You can get a voter registration form online. But here is what I know.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallywaterlooiowa", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Waterloo, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-waterloo-iowa", "publication_date": "14-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1836, "text": "I thank the Speaker for the invitation to come here to celebrate the shared history and heritage that unite Ireland and America. And I promise that my remarks today will be briefer than the last time I spoke on Capitol Hill. Some of you may be aware that I do not attend a lot of formal lunches like this. But I had a change of heart when I saw that the Speaker's menu included Tex-Mex food. I just could not pass up the chance to try a green burrito. On Saint Patrick's Day, we all get to be Irish for a day. There has been a lot of speculation about whether I am part Irish. Today I will speak plainly about an extremely important topic, peace in Northern Ireland. The United States will remain unwavering in our support of peace. We will remain unwavering in our support for all parties who show courage and leadership on behalf of peace. And we will remain unalterably opposed to anyone who would destroy peace by preaching or practicing violence. Much of the progress toward peace in the past several years has been aided by the engagement of the United States. As I told Prime Minister Blair-and as I will tell Prime Minister Ahern tomorrow-the United States stands ready to continue that engagement. Peace in Northern Ireland is in America's strong national interest. The peace that holds today has many authors, from President Clinton to leaders from Britain, Ireland, and Northern Ireland to American political leaders, such as Senator Mitchell. The Good Friday agreement remains the best hope for lasting peace for the people of Northern Ireland. The goal of the United States is to see that agreement fully implemented. First, this is what the people of Ireland and Northern Ireland voted for back on May 22, 1998. And they did so by a very large margin. Second, the Good Friday agreement embodies principles of fundamental fairness without which peace will never breathe. First, as stated in the agreement itself, it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts...to exercise their right to self-determination on the basis of consent. The second principle is that of territorial integrity, that borders should never be changed through violence. The progress the parties have made in putting these principles into practice has made a difference-a big difference. And no one knows this better than the people of Northern Ireland themselves. Violence is down from previous levels. More people are moving into Northern Ireland than are moving out.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspreparedfordeliveryfriendsirelandluncheon", "title": "Remarks Prepared for Delivery to a Friends of Ireland Luncheon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-prepared-for-delivery-friends-ireland-luncheon", "publication_date": "15-03-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1837, "text": "We are very glad to see you, and we want to pay you a very special warm welcome to the White House. I was glad to hear that 20 of the brightest young students from three countries were visiting the White House today. Your visit comes at a very critical time. Therefore, I am especially glad that you have a chance to have an experience here at this time. I want to take advantage of every opportunity I can to meet with young people, and to let them observe what this country stands for, and what it believes in, and what it is doing, and also hear from you on your views of the world that we are living in. To follow knowledge like a sinking star, Beyond the utmost bound of human thought. That really is what you are about to do. You are beginning a great voyage, a voyage to explore a new and an extremely exciting field of knowledge, man in inner and outer space. I do not think there is anything I need to tell you about how important this journey is. I think that you know today that almost nothing is more important in all this world than trained intelligence. There is one thing that matters more though, and there is one thing that is more important than all of man's knowledge and all of man's skill. At a time when nations are quarreling, when divisions of race and class and religion trouble 'people everywhere, when there is a general restlessness among the youth of all lands, when there is an insecure feeling among many, many peoples, when mighty armies can cross borders and people are not sure of what tomorrow holds for them-then your journey is an important one because the trip that you are beginning, in my judgment, offers great promise to increase and to enrich and to promote better understanding between men and between nations. For that I am very grateful--to you and to Dr. Messel and to the Science Foundation and Sydney University and to the wonderful people of Australia. That is a great and that is a friendly land and I treasure my associations with that country and with those people. I hope all of you have a good trip. I wish I could go with you. I know your experiences will be of great profit to you and, I believe, your country. It would be wonderful to be your age again on a mission like yours.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthelyndonbjohnsonaustraliansciencescholars0", "title": "Remarks to the Lyndon B. Johnson Australian Science Scholars.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-lyndon-b-johnson-australian-science-scholars-0", "publication_date": "21-08-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1838, "text": "Let me ask you a question. Half are saying yes; half are saying no. Let me say to all of you, I will give you a brief version of what I said there. First, I want to thank Chicago and the State of Illinois for being so good to me. I thank Mayor Daley for his leadership and partnership and for making it possible to prove that our crime policies and our welfare policies and our economic policies would all work, because they worked here in Chicago. I thank Bobby Rush for helping me in '92. I thank Bobby and Dick Durbin and the entire crowd in your congressional delegation who have been so good to me. But Senator Durbin, I especially thank you for all the things you have done. I thank Bill Daley for being a superb Secretary of Commerce and a brilliant campaign manager. What I told them upstairs was, Bill Daley ran the first Presidential campaign in history that was so clearly winning, a court had to stop the vote in order to change the outcome. Now, I want to say two other things. Upstairs, I said that this hotel was very important in my life. I spoke to the Democratic chairs here in December of '91. I had my party here on Saint Patrick's Day in 1992 when we won the primary. Some of you were there. And I still have a picture in my little office off the Oval Office of Hillary and me standing here in this lobby with the confetti coming down on Saint Patrick's Day. I have had it there every single day for 8 years to remind me that Chicago and Illinois made me ENTITY. I thank you for voting for us overwhelmingly in '92, in '96. I thank you for a fabulous convention in 1996, which was a joy. And I thank you for sticking with us in the year 2000, which you did. I thank you for that. I thought it was really important to me to come here before I leave office to say thank you. And I also want to bring you greetings from the new Senator from the State of New York. Hillary said to tell you hello. And I told Senator Durbin that you should just sort of consider that Illinois also has two Democratic Senators again. I am honored to have been ENTITY at a time when a lot of changes were going on in America and in the world. And you had a lot to do with that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksoverflowcrowdchicago", "title": "Remarks to an Overflow Crowd in Chicago", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-overflow-crowd-chicago", "publication_date": "09-01-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1863, "text": "Hillary and I are honored to be here today to join in praising, remembering, and cherishing the life of a man who was our friend and whose love for his family, his Nation, and his Navy were as deep as the oceans he sailed. Listening to Phil Lader talk about how Bud and Mouza first met brought back so many old memories to me and to those of us who had the privilege to listen to Bud Zumwalt tell that story. I became convinced that it was the reverse of the fish story, that every time he is told it, she said yes in a shorter and shorter amount of time. The last time I was in this magnificent chapel was to say goodbye to another great admiral of the 20th century, Arleigh Burke. When our historians look back on the century we have just left, they may well record that Arleigh Burke was the spirit of the United States Navy; they will certainly recall that Bud Zumwalt was its conscience. As much as any other leader in our entire history, Americans could always count on Bud Zumwalt to do the right thing. The midshipmen here learn a lot about honor, commitment, and courage. All his life, he exemplified those virtues. His bravery in World War II, in Korea, what he did in Vietnam, his physical courage and leadership led him to become the youngest Chief of Naval Operations in our history. But beyond his physical courage, Bud Zumwalt stood out for his moral courage and for saying what he thought was right, regardless of the consequences. He sailed through rough waters more than once. We heard Dick Schifter so eloquently chronicle his work in the 1970's to bring back the Navy's strength. When he issued his famous Z-grams, he knew that he was taking on more than 200 years of Navy tradition. But because he took the heat, thousands of naval leaders like former Secretary John Lehman have said they actually made the decision to stay in the Navy because Bud Zumwalt made the Navy exciting again. When we struggled through the racial tensions of the sixties and seventies, he worked in the face of wilting criticism and a highly resistant institutional culture to make the Navy do the right thing and make the Navy one of the most colorblind institutions in our entire Nation. I know it was a special point of pride for him that the very first African-American admiral earned his star on Bud Zumwalt's watch.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfuneralservicesforelmorzumwaltjrannapolismaryland", "title": "Remarks at Funeral Services for Elmo R. Zumwalt, Jr., in Annapolis, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-funeral-services-for-elmo-r-zumwalt-jr-annapolis-maryland", "publication_date": "10-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1864, "text": "At a time when morale and enthusiasm were at an all-time low, he had the vision to see a great future for the Navy. And even though he lived just to see 2 days of this new century, the changes he brought about three decades ago will continue to shape the character and culture of our Navy for a long time in the 21st century. Many people have commented on this today, but I want to give you a personal example. Of all the things he inspired, perhaps the greatest impact he had was on the ordinary men and women who served under him. We all know he originally intended to go to West Point, and then a whaling captain set his sails straight. The men and women of the Navy always knew that Bud Zumwalt had their backs, and that loyalty went both ways. This week we have seen an astonishing outpouring of love and affection from those who served with Admiral Zumwalt. Many of them are here today. This morning, when I was putting on my necktie and getting ready to go out for the day, my naval steward, who has been a Navy enlisted man for more than 30 years, said, ENTITY, today you are going to Admiral Zumwalt's service, are not you? He looked at me and smiled, and he said, He is the best we ever had. He was for us. He also never forgot to live by the consequences of his commitments. I know there was a family from South Vietnam that was sent after the end of the war to America as refugees, as so many were, and they were sent to my home State of Arkansas. To stay, they were told they had to know someone from our country. When Bud was contacted, to their surprise, the family was actually put on a plane, not to the admiral's home in Maryland but to his son's home in North Carolina, because the admiral already had other refugee families living in his house and he did not have any more room. When Bud Zumwalt made a commitment, he stuck with it. And when it did not work out exactly as planned, he honored the consequences and lived by them. Perhaps the most famous consequence of his leadership during the Vietnam era was the painful loss of his son, Elmo, from the use of Agent Orange, which clearly he ordered because he believed it would save the lives of our people in uniform. So he lived with the consequences of life's greatest loss.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfuneralservicesforelmorzumwaltjrannapolismaryland", "title": "Remarks at Funeral Services for Elmo R. Zumwalt, Jr., in Annapolis, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-funeral-services-for-elmo-r-zumwalt-jr-annapolis-maryland", "publication_date": "10-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1866, "text": "It is great to be back in the State of New Jersey. Oh, I know it might surprise some to see a Republican Presidential candidate in New Jersey in late October. The reason why I am here, with your help, we will carry the State of New Jersey in November. We are now 15 days away from a critical election. Many important domestic issues are at stake. I have a positive, hopeful agenda for job creation, broader health coverage, and better public education. Yet all the progress we hope to make depends on the security of our Nation. America is in the middle of a global war on terror, a struggle unlike any we have ever known before. We face an enemy that is determined to kill the innocent and make our country into a battlefield. For the sake of our future and our freedom, we will fight this war with every asset of our national power, and we will prevail. Laura sends her best. So I asked her to marry me; she said, Fine, just so long as I never have to give a political speech. I said, Okay, you got a deal. Fortunately, she did not hold me to that deal. The American people-a lot of Americans have seen her give a speech, and when they do, they see a compassionate, strong, warm woman. I am proud to have been standing on the stage with Bernie Kerik. He knows something about security. He is lived security all his life, and I want to thank him for his dedication and his service to the people of this country. I want to thank Congressman Jim Saxton for being here today. I want to thank Congressman Scott Garrett for joining us today. I want to thank Congressman Chris Smith and Marie for joining us. The chairman of the Republican Party was born and raised in this county. He is doing a fabulous job. I want to thank all the State senators and statehouse members who are here. I want to thank the grassroots activists. I want to thank you for what you are going to do during the next 15 days. We are going to win the State of New Jersey and win a great victory in November. During the decade of the 1990s, our times often seemed peaceful on the surface. Yet, beneath that surface were currents of danger. Terrorists were training and planning in distant camps. In 1993, terrorists made their first attack on the World Trade Center. In 1998, terrorists bombed American Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1867, "text": "And then came the attack on the U.S.S. Cole in 2000, which cost the lives of 17 American sailors. In this period, America's response to terrorism was generally piecemeal and symbolic. The terrorists concluded this was a sign of weakness, and their plans became more ambitious, * and their attacks became more deadly. Most Americans still felt that terrorism was something distant and something that would not strike on a large scale in America. That is the time that my opponent wants to go back to a time when danger was real and growing, but we did not know it, a time when some thought terrorism was only a nuisance. But that very attitude is what blinded America to the war being waged against us. And by not seeing the war, our Government had no comprehensive strategy to fight it. September the 11th, 2001, changed all that. We realized that the apparent security of the 1990s was an illusion. The people of New Jersey were among the first to understand how the world changed. On September the 11th, from places like Hoboken and Jersey City, you could look across the Hudson River and see the Twin Towers burning. We will never forget that day, and we will never forget our duty to defend America. Out of the horror of that day, we also saw good emerge. America has seen a new generation of heroes, police, firefighters, members of the military. Americans have felt a new sense of community in neighborhoods and across our country. We have been reminded that all of us are a part of a great American story that is larger than our individual lives, and we have been reminded of our solemn responsibility to defend freedom. September the 11th also changed the way we should look at national security, but not everyone realizes it. The choice we face in this election, the first Presidential election since September the 11th, is how our Nation will defeat this threat. Will we stay on the offensive against those who want to attack us or will we take action only after we are attacked? Will we make decisions in the light of September the 11th or continue to live in the mirage of safety that was actually a time of gathering threats? And in this time of choosing, I want all Americans to know you can count on me to fight our enemies and defend our freedom. America needs clear moral purpose and leaders who will not waver, especially in the tough times. Unlike my opponent, I understand the struggle America faces, and I have a strategy to win.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1868, "text": "Our first duty in the war on terror is to protect the homeland. This morning at the White House, I signed a strong law that will make our Nation more secure. With the 2005 Homeland Security Appropriations Act, we are providing essential funding for Coast Guard patrols and port security, for the Federal air marshal program, and for technology that will defend aircraft against missiles. We are adding new resources to patrol our borders and to verify the identity of foreign visitors to America. We need to know who is coming in and out of our country. The new law includes vital money for first-responders and for better security of chemical facilities and nuclear plants and water treatment plants and bridges and subways and tunnels. All these measures show the unwavering commitment of our Government. We will do everything in our power to protect the American people. The law I signed today is part of a broad effort to defend America against new dangers. After September the 11th, we created the Department of Homeland Security to make sure our Government agencies are working together. We are transforming the FBI into an agency whose primary focus is stopping terrorism. Through Project Bio-Shield, we are developing new vaccines and treatments against biological attacks. We have trained more than a half million first-responders across America. To protect America, we passed the PATRIOT Act, giving law enforcement many of the same tools to fight terrorists that they already had to fight drug cartels and organized crime. Since September the 11th, law enforcement professionals have stopped terrorist activities in Columbus, Ohio; San Diego, California; Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington; Buffalo, New York; and other places, including New Jersey, where we apprehended an arms dealer who was allegedly trying to sell shoulder-fired missiles to terrorists. My opponent voted for the PATRIOT Act, but now he wants to weaken it. There are plenty of safeguards in this law, making sure that civil liberties are protected and searches are authorized by court order. By seeking to dilute the PATRIOT Act, my opponent is taking the eye off the ball. The danger to America is not the PATRIOT Act or the good people who use it; the danger to America is the terrorists. And we will not let up in this fight. To protect America, our country needs the best possible intelligence. Chairman Tom Kean and other members of the September the 11th Commission made thoughtful and valuable recommendations on intelligence reform. We are already implementing the vast majority of those recommendations that can be enacted without a vote of Congress.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1869, "text": "We are expanding and strengthening the capabilities of the CIA. We have established the Terrorist Threat Integration Center so we can bring together all the available intelligence on terrorist threats to one place. But other changes require new laws. Congress needs to create the position of the National Intelligence Director and take other measures to make our intelligence community more effective. These reforms are necessary to stay ahead of the threats. I urge Congress to act quickly so I can sign them into law. My opponent has taken a different approach, and it shows in his record. Just one year after the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993, Senator Kerry proposed a $6 billion cut in the Nation's intelligence budget. But the majority of his colleagues ignored his irresponsible proposal. In 1995, he tried to cut intelligence funding again, and this time he could not get a single Member of the United States Senate to support his bill. And that is an important difference between us. Senator Kerry has a record of trying to weaken American intelligence. I am working every day to strengthen American intelligence. In a free and open society, it is impossible to protect against every threat. So second, we must pursue a comprehensive strategy against terror. The best way to prevent attacks is to stay on the offense against the enemy overseas. We are waging a global campaign from the mountains of central Asia to the deserts of the Middle East and from the Horn of Africa to the Philippines. Since September the 11th, 2001, more than three-quarters of Al Qaida's key members and associates have been brought to justice. The rest of them know we are coming after them. If you support or harbor terrorists, you are equally guilty of terrorist murder. We destroyed the terror camps that trained thousands of killers in Afghanistan. We removed the Taliban from power. We have persuaded Governments in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to recognize the enemy and join the fight. We ended the regime of Saddam Hussein, which sponsored terror. Iraq's new Government under Prime Minister Allawi is hunting down terrorists in Iraq. We sent a message to Libya, which has now given up weapons of mass destruction programs and handed nuclear materials and equipment over to the United States. We have acted, through diplomacy and force, to shrink the area where the terrorists can operate freely, and that strategy has the terrorists on the run. My opponent has a fundamental misunderstanding on the war on terror. A reporter recently asked Senator Kerry how September the 11th changed him. He replied, It did not change me much at all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1870, "text": "His unchanged worldview is obvious from the policies he still advocates. He has declared, we should not respond to threats until they are, quote, imminent. He has complained that my administration, quote, relies unwisely on the threat of military preemption against terrorist organizations. Let me repeat that. He says that preemptive action is unwise, not only against regimes but even against terrorist organizations. This kind of September the 10th attitude is no way to protect our country. The war on terror is a real war with deadly enemies, not simply a police operation. In an era of weapons of mass destruction, waiting for threats to arrive at our doorsteps is to invite disaster. Tyrants and terrorists will not give us polite notice before they attack our country. As long as I am the Commander in Chief, I will confront dangers abroad so we do not have to face them here at home. The case of one terrorist shows what is at stake. The terrorist leader we face in Iraq today, the one responsible for beheading American hostages, the one responsible for many of the car bombings and attacks against Iraqis, is a man named Zarqawi. Before September the 11th, Zarqawi ran a camp in Afghanistan that trained terrorists in the use of explosives and poisons- until coalition forces destroyed that camp. He fled to Saddam Hussein's Iraq, where he received medical care and set up operations with some two dozen terrorist associates. He operated in Baghdad and worked with associates in northern Iraq who ran camps to train terrorists and conducted chemical and biological experiments-until coalition forces arrived and ended those operations. With nowhere to operate openly, Zarqawi has gone underground and is making a stand in Iraq. Here, the difference between my opponent and me is very clear. Senator Kerry believes that fighting Zarqawi and other terrorists in Iraq is a diversion from the war on terror. I believe that fighting and defeating these killers in Iraq is a central commitment in the war on terror. If Zarqawi and his associates were not busy fighting American forces in Iraq, does Senator Kerry think they would be leading productive and peaceful lives? Clearly, these killers would be plotting and acting to murder innocent civilians in free nations, including our own. By facing these terrorists far away, our military is making the United States of America more secure. Third, to win the war on terror, America must work with allies and lead the world with clarity. And that is exactly what we are doing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1871, "text": "The flags of 64 nations fly at U.S. Central Command Headquarters in Tampa, Florida, representing coalition countries that are working openly with us in the war on terror. Dozens more are helping quietly in important ways. Today, all 26 NATO nations have personnel either in Iraq, Afghanistan, or both. America's allies are standing with us in the war on terror, and we are grateful. My opponent promises that he would do better with our allies, yet he is decided that the way to build alliances is to insult our friends. As a candidate for President, Senator Kerry has managed to offend or alienate almost every one of America's fighting allies in the war on terror. He has called the countries serving alongside us in Iraq, quote, a trumped-up coalition of the bribed, the coerced, the bought, and the extorted. He has dismissed the sacrifice of 14 nations that have lost forces in Iraq, calling those nations window dressing. Great Britain, Australia, and the United States. He left out Poland, one of the first countries to see combat on the first days of hostilities in Iraq. He never shows respect for some of the 30 nations that are serving courageously in Iraq today. Senator Kerry even has disregarded the contributions of Iraqis who are fighting for their freedom. When he speaks of coalition casualties in Iraq, he does not count the hundreds of Iraqis who have given their lives fighting the terrorists and the insurgents. When Iraq's Prime Minister came to Washington to address Congress last month, Senator Kerry did not show up. Instead, he called a press conference and questioned the Prime Minister's credibility. The Prime Minister of Iraq is a brave man who survived the assassins of Saddam. The Prime Minister of Iraq deserves the respect of the world, not the scorn of a politician. As part of his foreign policy, Senator Kerry has talked about applying a global test. Before we act to defend ourselves, he thinks we need permission from foreign capitals. Yet, even the gulf war coalition in 1991 did not pass Senator Kerry's global test. Even with the United Nations approval, he voted against removing Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. If that vast, U.N.-supported operation did not pass his test, nothing ever could. Senator Kerry's global test is nothing more than an excuse to constrain the actions of our own country in a dangerous world. I believe in strong alliances. I believe in respecting other countries and working with them and seeking their advice.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1872, "text": "But I will never submit our national security decisions to a veto of a foreign government. Fourth, we will win the war on terror and make America safer by advancing the cause of freedom and democracy. Free societies are hopeful societies which do not nurture bitterness or the ideologies of terror and murder. Free governments in the broader Middle East will fight the terrorists instead of harboring them. And this is why a free Iraq and a free Afghanistan are vital to peace in that region and vital to the security interests of our country. After decades of tyranny in the broader Middle East, progress toward freedom will not come easily. Across a troubled region, we are seeing a movement toward elections, greater rights for women, and open discussion of peaceful reform. The election in Afghanistan less than 2 weeks ago was a landmark event in the history of liberty. That election was a tremendous defeat for the terrorists. My opponent has complained that we are trying to, quote, impose democracy on people in that region. Is that what he sees in Afghanistan, unwilling people having democracy forced upon them? We removed the Taliban by force, but democracy is rising in that country because the Afghan people, like everywhere, want to live in freedom. No one forced them to register by the millions or stand in long lines at polling places. On the day of that historic election, an Afghan widow brought all four of her daughters to vote alongside her. She said this, she said, When you see women here lined up to vote, this is something profound. But that woman's dream finally arrived, as it will one day across the greater Middle East. The dream of freedom is moving forward in Iraq. The terrorists know it, and they hate it, and they fight it. And we can expect more violence as Iraq moves toward free elections. Yet, every day in Iraq, our coalition is defeating the enemy's strategic objectives. The enemy seeks to disrupt the march toward democracy. But an Iraqi independent electoral commission is up and running, political parties are planning campaigns, voter registration will begin next month, and free and fair Iraqi elections will be held on schedule this coming January. The enemy seeks to establish sanctuaries in Iraq from which to commit acts of terror. But Iraqi and coalition forces are on the offensive in Fallujah and North Babil and have restored Government control in Samarra, Tall 'Afar, and Najaf. The enemy wants to make Iraqis afraid to join security forces.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1873, "text": "But every week, more and more Iraqis answer the call to arms. More than 100,000 soldiers, police, and border guards are already trained, equipped, and bravely serving their country. And well over 200,000 will be in place by the end of 2005. The enemy seeks to break the will of the Iraqi people. But as Prime Minister Allawi told the Congress, Iraqis are hopeful, optimistic, and determined to prevail in their struggle for liberty. After the enemy has failed in so many goals, what can these killers do now? They can fill up our TV screens with horrible images of suicide bombings and beheadings. These scenes are chaotic and horrific, but they are not a complete picture of what is happening in Iraq. A recent poll found that more than 75 percent of Iraqis want to vote, and they have confidence in the electoral progress. And more than 75 percent are hopeful about the future of their country. The violent acts of a few will not divert Iraqis and our coalition from the mission we have accepted. My opponent has a different outlook. While America does the hard work of fighting terror and spreading freedom, he has chosen the easy path of protest and defeatism. He refuses to acknowledge progress or praise the growing democratic spirit in Iraq. He has not made democracy a priority of his foreign policy. Is he content to watch and wait as anger and resentment grow for more decades in the Middle East, feeding more terrorism until radicals without conscience gain the weapons to kill without limit? Giving up the fight might seem easier in the short run, but we learned on September the 11th that if violence and fanaticism are not opposed at their source, they will find us where we live. America is safer today because Afghanistan and Iraq are fighting terrorists instead of harboring them. And I believe future generations of Americans will be spared violence and fear as democracy and hope and governments that oppose terror multiply across the Middle East. Victory in the war on terror requires victory in Iraq. If a terror regime were allowed to reemerge in Iraq, the terrorists would find a home, a source of funding, and vital support. They would correctly conclude that free nations do not have the will to defend themselves. When Iraq becomes a free society at the heart of the Middle East, an ally in the war on terror, and a model for hopeful reform in a region that needs hopeful reform, the terrorists will suffer a crushing defeat and every free nation will be more secure.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1874, "text": "Unfortunately, Senator Kerry does not share our commitment to victory in Iraq. For 3 years, depending on the headlines, the poll numbers, and political calculation, he has taken almost every conceivable position on Iraq. First, he said Saddam Hussein was a threat, and he voted for the war. Then he voted against funds for bullets and body armor for the troops he had voted to send into battle. Months later, he said that knowing everything we know now, he would have still voted for the war. Having gone back and forth so many times, the Senator from Massachusetts has now flip-flopped his way to a dangerous position. My opponent finally has settled on a strategy, a strategy of retreat. He has talked about artificial timetables to pull our troops out of Iraq. He has sent the signal that America's overriding goal in Iraq would be to leave, even if the job is not done. And that approach would lead to a major defeat in the war on terror. So long as I am the Commander in Chief, America will never retreat in the face of the terrorists. We will keep our word to the Iraqi people. We will make sure Iraqi forces can defend their country, and then American troops will return home with the honor they have earned. My opponent wants to weaken the PATRIOT Act and has a history of trying to undermine our intelligence services. I will take every necessary measure to protect the homeland. The Senator wants to wage the war on terror on the defensive. I will take the fight to the enemy. The Senator insults our friends in the world and wants to please a few critics. I am working with our friends for the sake of freedom and security. The Senator is skeptical and pessimistic about democracy in Iraq and critical of our efforts in the broader Middle East. I know that the advance of freedom is the path to security and peace. In all these areas, my opponent's views would make America less secure and the world more dangerous. And none of these positions should come as a surprise. Over a 20-year career in the United States Senate, Senator Kerry has been consistently wrong on the major national security issues facing our country. The Senator who voted against the $87 billion for our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq is the same Senator who has voted against vital weapons systems during his entire career. He tried to cancel the Patriot missile, which shot down Scud missiles in Operation Desert Storm. He opposed the B-1 bomber, which was critical to victory in the Afghan campaign.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1875, "text": "He opposed the B-2 stealth bomber, which delivered devastating air strikes on Taliban positions. He opposed the modernized F-14D, which we used against terrorists in Tora Bora. He opposed the Apache helicopter, which destroyed enemy tanks and anti-aircraft missile launchers in Iraq. The Senator who is skeptical of democracy in Iraq also spoke with sympathy for a communist dictator in Nicaragua in the 1980s and criticized the democracy movement as terrorism. His misguided policies would have impeded the spread of freedom in Central America. The Senator who claims the world is more dangerous since America started fighting the war on terror is the same Senator who said that Ronald Reagan's policies of peace through strength actually made America less safe the same Senator who said the Reagan Presidency was 8 years of moral darkness. In this campaign, Senator Kerry can run from his record, but he cannot hide. The Senator's long record shows a clear pattern on national security. He has consistently opposed a stronger military. He has consistently looked for excuses to constrain American power. He has consistently shown poor judgment on the great issues of war and peace. When one Senator among a hundred holds a policy of weakness, it does not make a lot of difference. But the Presidency is an office of great responsibility and consequence. I have a record in office as well, and all Americans have seen that record. September the 14th, * 2001, I stood in the ruins of the Twin Towers. Bernie might remember the workers in hardhats that were yelling at me and yelling at us, Whatever it takes. A man grabbed me by the arm, just coming out of the rubble, and he said, Do not let me down. I have a responsibility that goes on. I acted again and again to protect the American people. I will never relent in defending our country, whatever it takes. In a new term as your President, we will finish the work we have started. We will stand up for terror-we will stand up for freedom. And on November the 2d, my fellow Americans, I ask that you stand with me.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmarltonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks in Marlton, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-marlton-new-jersey", "publication_date": "18-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1876, "text": "I have had a wonderful time in Philadelphia today, and I am deeply indebted to you for being here tonight, for supporting our party, our candidates, and what we stand for. I, too, want to thank Congressman Chaka Fattah for the High Hopes program. He and the mayor met me today at the airport with a number of young children from Philadelphia who are in your school system, in your middle school system. And then later, we sat down and drank a soft drink together, and I visited with them. And Chaka asked how many of them wanted to go to college, and they all wanted to go. the High Hopes scholarship program. And we thank him. America is in your debt, Congressman. And I believe we have one of our candidates for Congress here, too, tonight, Roy Afflerbach. Let us give him a hand. I want to thank Steve Grossman for doing a superb job as the chairman of the Democratic Party. And we will not tell his mayor that he bragged on Rendell shamelessly tonight. I also want to thank Len Barrack of Philadelphia for being our finance chair. He is doing a wonderful, wonderful, wonderful job. And finally, let me say that the mayor was uncommonly generous tonight, but his administration is basically the embodiment of my philosophy of government. When we came before the American people, Al Gore and I, in 1992, we said we had a different idea, that we wanted everyone in America who was a responsible citizen to have opportunity. We wanted to come together as one community across all of our differences of race, religion, politics, income. We wanted to prove that you could be in favor of economic growth and still improve the environment. We wanted to end all these sort of false choices that had been imposed on us by the hot rhetoric of Washington for too many years. And we had a different theory of government, that we thought that the main role of government was to create the conditions and to give people the tools to make the most of their own lives. And all the initiatives that the mayor mentioned, that he so generously gave me credit for, most all of them were available to a lot of other places, too. But Philadelphia made the most of its opportunities because, in no small measure, of the gifts, the dedication, and the downright aggression of its mayor. And I cannot tell you how much I admire him for that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "02-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1877, "text": "You know, I am sure all of you have had an experience like this in your life in some context or another-by the time somebody calls you 15 times and asks you for something, you say yes just to stop them, you know. When Ed Rendell gets all over you like a wet blanket about something--you know you might as well just cry uncle and go on to something else. I say that because the achievements of this city have been truly phenomenal. You know, the people of Philadelphia have been quite wonderful to me and Hillary and to Al and Tipper, voting for us in record numbers and by record margins in both elections and I am very, very grateful. Let me just take a few minutes to be a little serious with you tonight. I was so moved today by all the things that were said to me on the street-did not even mind the protesters. But you like it even more when they are not in the majority-- and that seemed to be the case today. But I want you to know that, on behalf of the First Lady and on my part, I am very grateful for those personal expressions. But I do not believe that adversity is the enemy of the Democratic Party in this election. Indeed, adversity can be our friend, because it is not only good for personal reformation; it is good for people to sort of dig down deep inside and ask yourself what is really important and what is really fair. What do you really care about? What will you act for? What will you move for? The real enemy the Democrats have in this election is complacency, because we are doing pretty well as a country. We have got the lowest unemployment rate in 28 years and the lowest percentage of people on welfare in 29 years and the first balanced budget and surplus in 29 years, and it is the biggest in history. We have got the best wage growth in way over 20 years. We have got, as Steve Grossman said, the biggest drop in Hispanic poverty in 30 years and the lowest unemployment rates and poverty rates among African-Americans since statistics have been kept, the highest homeownership in history. I am grateful for that. But the real question is, what will we do with this moment? Our friends in the other party know that in spite of your presence and generosity here tonight, they always have tons more money than we do. I will tell you a little more about that in a minute.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "02-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1878, "text": "But they also know that oftentimes at these midterm elections, the people who always vote in presidential elections, a lot of them do not vote in midterm elections. Well, they are young parents on modest incomes; they have to worry about how to juggle child care and work, and voting on a work day is another hassle. A lot of them live in cities and do not own cars and have transportation problems. And how are they going to get to work and to the polling place? I tell you, my friends, our enemy is complacency. Adversity is forcing us to focus on what is important and what we believe in and what we are prepared to fight for. And while I think it is a wonderful thing that all these good things are happening in our country, you know there are still some people in Philadelphia who have not felt the benefits of the things that have been done, and you know there is more to do. I want you to know that a long way away from here, in the high plains of America, people that work hard to feed you on the farm do not know there is been a recovery because they have to export a lot of their products, and they have been flooded out or burned out or had diseases. They have had all kinds of problems. And now the Asian markets, where they sell their food, are closed to them because the folks do not have any money over there. We could lose 10,000 family farmers in America this year, at a time of greatest prosperity for the country as a whole in a generation. So we have challenges at home. You have to see that as an obligation to look at the real challenges facing the country and take them on. That is what we have tried to do. So we, the Democrats, have gone before the American people and we said, Look, we have a program for this election, and we think it is worth your voting for. We know that the other side has tried to offer you-for most of you- a modest tax cut. Right here, before the election, they want to spend the surplus. And we have given you a harder message. We have said, Look, we have waited for this for 29 years. We worked for it for 6 years. Should not we let the red ink turn to black, and let us let it dry for a day or two before we squander it?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "02-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1879, "text": "At a time when there is so much financial turmoil throughout the world, should not we set a good example to stabilize the global economy? And even more important, knowing as we all do-every person in this room knows that while Social Security is absolutely stable for the people who are now on it and the people who are about to go on it, when all the baby boomers get in, it is not sustainable under the present circumstances because there will only be two people working for every one person drawing Social Security. Everybody in this room between the ages of 52 and 34 is a baby boomer. Either we will have to put a whopping tax increase on our kids to maintain the system as it is, undermining their ability to raise our grandchildren, which none of us want to do; or we will have to take a whopping cut in Social Security benefits, which today keeps one-half of the senior citizens in America out of poverty. So I say, tempting though it is before an election to shovel up a little tax cut, let us show a little restraint and a little knowledge of the last 29 years and say, No, no, we are going to save Social Security first before we spend it. And believe me, the elections will send a message to the Congress about which path you wish to take. I talked about it all day today, and I never thought I'd come to Philadelphia or go anyplace in America in a political election and say, The big issue is, are we going to fund the IMF? Sounds like those people that make bowling equipment. The International Monetary Fund is a fund to which we and others contribute that helps countries that are poorer and developing, who have good policies, to try to grow their economy; or when they get in trouble, it tries to help them work out of trouble without just being absolutely destroyed. For 8 months I have been trying to get America to make its fair share of contribution. Because we cannot lead the world-and you know the troubles that Asia has; you know the troubles in Russia; you see the impact, how it echoes in Latin America, our fastest growing market for American products. You see people say, when the stock market changes here, that that has something to do with this financial trouble overseas. We have an obligation not only to others throughout the world but to our own economy. Thirty percent of this growth we have enjoyed has come from selling things to people overseas who had enough money to buy them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "02-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1880, "text": "And when they get in trouble, eventually we will suffer from that. And already, I have told you, our farmers are. And so I say to you, if you want to keep the American economic recovery going, if you like the way it is gone the last 6 years, and you'd like to have a few more years of it, then America has to lead the world away from the brink of the worst financial crisis in decades. And that means we have to pay our fair share to the fund that will do it. For 8 months I have had before the Congress an education program. We have succeeded in getting bipartisan agreement in the balanced budget for tax credits for all students to go to college, for the deductibility of interest on student loans, for more Pell grants. Our Democrats put that before the Republicans, and we were able to get bipartisan agreement-and now for Congressman Fattah's High Hopes program. But you all know that we do not yet have a world-class elementary and secondary education system that will guarantee to every child, without regard to race or neighborhood or income, a chance to be able to take advantage of those college opportunities. And so I came before the Congress and I said, Okay, we have listened to the educators. I, personally, and Hillary and I have been going into the schools for 20 years now listing and watching and learning, and here is our program. Number one, in the balanced budget-paid for-put up enough money for school districts across America to hire 100,000 teachers to take average class size down to 18 in the early grades. It will make a difference. Number two, provide-provide a tax incentive that will help to build or repair 5,000 school buildings. I went to Jupiter, Florida, and saw a dozen housetrailers outside a school because the population is growing so fast. The mayor took me to a school building in Philadelphia that was over 65 years old. It was one of the most beautiful buildings I have ever seen, but it was not in good shape because there is not enough money to repair all those buildings. And all over America in the cities, I see people say, Oh, our children are the most important things in the world to us. What does it say to them if they walk up the steps every day to a school where the windows are broken or a whole floor is closed down?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "02-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1881, "text": "Very often, people cannot even look out the window in some of these places, because they cannot afford to heat and cool them, so they just board them up. The third thing it does is to give funds to cities for after-school and summer school programs to help kids who are in trouble. I do not believe kids should be promoted endlessly if they do not learn what they are supposed to learn. But I do not think the children should be branded failures because the system fails them. So give them those after-school programs and the summer school programs and the mentors they need to learn what they need to learn. That is a part of our program as well. The fourth thing it does is provide funds to hook every classroom in the country up to the Internet by the year 2000. If you walk out of this room tonight and-God forbid-you get hit by a car, and you are covered by an HMO plan, a managed care plan, you ought to be able to go to the nearest emergency room, not one clear across town because that is the one that happens to be covered by your plan. It says if your doctors tells you that he or she cannot help you and you need to see a specialist, you ought to be able to see one. It says if your employer changes HMO providers while you are going through a certain medical treatment, you ought to be able to finish with it. Now, let me just tell you what that means. How would you feel if you were 7 months pregnant and somebody came to you and said, I am sorry, your employer changed providers; you have got to give up your obstetrician, and here is Dr. Jones ? How would you feel if someone in your family was undergoing chemotherapy-I have been through this, a lot of you have, and you know it is a pretty traumatic thing for families. I remember when my mother went through it, we sat around and tried to make jokes about whether she'd lose her hair and what kind of wig she'd buy. How would you feel if you were two-thirds of the way through a chemotherapy protocol and somebody said, I am sorry, you have got to change your doctor ? The Congress-the House passed a bill that did not guarantee any of those things and what little it did guarantee left out 100 million Americans. Then it went to the Senate, and our crowd had a right to bring our bill up in the Senate, and they could not keep it away.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "02-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1882, "text": "So you know what the leader of the Senate did? He shut the Senate down for 4 hours-I mean, turned out the lights; everybody got under the desks. Because they did not want to be recorded as voting against this, but they did not want to make angry the insurance companies who oppose it. This is the symbol of the difference between the two parties today, make no mistake about it. Now, what have they done with their year in the majority? Except for this higher education bill, I cannot think of much. They killed the minimum wage. They killed campaign finance reform. They killed tobacco legislation reform that would have protected our children from the dangers of tobacco. They killed the Patients' Bill of Rights. They have continued their assault on the environment. They have gone backwards on paying for the International Monetary Fund; they have taken no action on it. And they have taken no action on the education bill, and they went backwards on saving Social Security first when the House passed their tax plan. It is over in the Senate now. And what I want you to do-I thank you for coming here tonight. I thank you for these contributions. We need the money, and we will spend it well. But you have to go out and tell people, there is this cynical idea that you will not vote and that good times makes you less likely to vote. And I know it is more trouble for a lot of people you know to vote. But if you believe that America ought to be about not what goes on in Washington, DC, but what goes on in the neighborhoods of Philadelphia, in Boston, and in rural North Dakota and in rural Nebraska-if that is what you believe-if you believe in saving Social Security first, if you believe in the Patients' Bill of Rights, if you believe in education as our top investment priority, if you believe in keeping our economic recovery going, then you should support our party-not just tonight but on election day. And I want every one of you to go out every day between now and then and stir it up among your friends, and make sure that we surprise the cynics on election day. Thank you, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "02-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1883, "text": "It is fitting that in the capital of the Nation a statue should stand through the ages, to remind future generations of the services to that Nation of a patriot who served his country well. It is fitting that the Government, through its representatives, should take part in the dedication of this monument. It is fitting that I should appear here in my official capacity; but it is also fitting that I should be here in my personal capacity, as one who has always been proud of the personal friendship which he held for many years with Samuel Gompers. I knew him first when as a very young man I came to New York City and received his fine support in the establishment of pure milk stations for the feeding of undernourished babies. From then on, we had many mutual tasks. It is, I think, a commentary on the progress toward social justice which we have accomplished in a short space of time, when I tell you that in the year 1911 only twenty-two years ago Samuel Gompers, Robert F. Wagner, Alfred E. Smith and I were labeled as radicals when we fought for and finally succeeded in passing a bill through the New York State Legislature, limiting the work of women in industry to fifty-four hours a week. These early struggles for social betterment struggles which in large part were initiated by him have met with growing success with every passing year. I like to think that Samuel Gompers is today, and at this moment, aware of the fact that through the quick and practical action of the National Recovery Act, child labor in the United States has at last come to n end. During the years of the Wilson Administration, the friendship between us grew and strengthened. I need not speak of his great service to organized labor in their relations with private employers; but I can speak rightfully of the splendid cooperation which at all times he gave to the sympathetic adjustment of problems relating to workers for the Government itself. He understood well the fact that those who serve the Government serve the people as a whole. It was in the fulfillment of this principle that he approached the whole subject of the relationship of labor to the Government at the outbreak of the World War. As a member of the advisory committee of the Council of National Defense, he was a part of the great organization which met the crisis Of war. But more than that, it was his patriotic leadership for the unanimous mobilization of the workers in every part of the Union which supplemented the mobilization of the men who went to the front.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationthesamuelgompersmemorialmonumentwashingtondc", "title": "Address at the Dedication of the Samuel Gompers Memorial Monument, Washington, D.C.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-the-samuel-gompers-memorial-monument-washington-dc", "publication_date": "07-10-1933", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1884, "text": "If I may be permitted to do so I want to express my admiration of his patriotic courage, his large vision and his statesmanlike sense of what has to be done. I like to lay my mind alongside of a mind that knows how to pull in harness. The horses that kick over the traces will have to be put in a corral. In those few words President Wilson summed up the splendid national services of Samuel Gompers, and at the same time preached a sermon that applied to capital and labor alike. That sermon is just as good today as it was in 1917. We are engaged in another war, and I believe from the bottom of my heart that organized labor is doing its share to win this war. The whole of the country has a common enemy; industry, agriculture, capital, labor are all engaged in fighting it. Just as in 1917 we are seeking to pull in harness; just as in 1917, horses that kick over the traces will have to be put in a corral. Gompers understood and went along with that thought during the years of the War, and we have many evidences of his acceptance of the fact that the horses pulling in harness were the horses of the employees and of the employers as well. In those years a few, happily a very few, horses had to be lassoed both kinds of horses; and today the conditions are very similar. In the field of organized labor there are problems just as there were in the spring of 1917 questions of jurisdiction which have to be settled quickly and effectively in order to prevent the slowing-up of the general program. There are the perfectly natural problems of selfish individuals who seek personal gain by running counter to the calm judgment of sound leadership. There are hot-heads who think that results can be obtained by noise or violence; there are insidious voices seeking to instill methods or principles which are wholly foreign to the American form of democratic government. On the part of employers there are some who shudder at anything new. There are some who think in terms of dollars and cents instead of in terms of human lives; there are some who themselves would prefer government by a privileged class instead of by majority rule. But it is clear that the sum of the recalcitrants on both sides cuts a very small figure in the total of employers and employees alike, who are going along wholeheartedly in the war against depression.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthededicationthesamuelgompersmemorialmonumentwashingtondc", "title": "Address at the Dedication of the Samuel Gompers Memorial Monument, Washington, D.C.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-dedication-the-samuel-gompers-memorial-monument-washington-dc", "publication_date": "07-10-1933", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1885, "text": "And to my fellow Americans, our newest citizens, I am so excited. You are men and women from more than 25 countries, from Brazil to Uganda, from Iraq to the Philippines. You may come from teeming cities or rural villages. But here, surrounded by the very documents whose values bind us together as one people, you have raised your hand and sworn a sacred oath. I am proud to be among the first to greet you as my fellow Americans. What a remarkable journey all of you have made. And as of today, your story is forever woven into the larger story of this Nation. In the brief time that we have together, I want to share that story with you. Because even as you have put in the work required to become a citizen, you still have a demanding and rewarding task ahead of you, and that is the hard work of active citizenship. You have rights and you have responsibilities. And now you have to help us write the next great chapter in America's story. Just about every nation in the world, to some extent, admits immigrants. We do not simply welcome new immigrants, we do not simply welcome new arrivals, we are born of immigrants. And for more than two centuries, it is remained at the core of our national character. After all, unless your family is Native American, one of the First Americans, our families-all of our families-come from someplace else. The first refugees were the Pilgrims themselves, fleeing religious persecution, crossing the stormy Atlantic to reach a new world where they might live and pray freely. Eight signers of the Declaration of Independence were immigrants. And in those first decades after independence, English, German, and Scottish immigrants came over, huddled on creaky ships, seeking what Thomas Paine called asylum for the persecuted lovers of civil and religious liberty. Down through the decades, Irish Catholics fleeing hunger, Italians fleeing poverty filled up our cities, rolled up their sleeves, built America. Chinese laborers jammed in steerage under the decks of steamships, making their way to California to build the Central Pacific Railroad that would transform the West and our Nation. Wave after wave of men, women, and children-from the Middle East and the Mediterranean, from Asia and Africa-poured into Ellis Island or Angel Island, their trunks bursting with their most cherished possessions-maybe a photograph of the family they left behind; a family Bible or a Torah or a Koran; a bag in one hand, maybe a child in the other-standing for hours in long lines.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnaturalizationceremonythenationalarchivesandrecordsadministration", "title": "Remarks at a Naturalization Ceremony at the National Archives and Records Administration", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-naturalization-ceremony-the-national-archives-and-records-administration", "publication_date": "15-12-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1886, "text": "New York and cities across America were transformed into a sort of global fashion show. You had Dutch lace caps and the North African fezzes, stodgy tweed suits, colorful Caribbean dresses. And perhaps, like some of you, these new arrivals might have had some moments of doubt, wondering if they had made a mistake in leaving everything and everyone they ever knew behind. So life in America was not always easy. It was not always easy for new immigrants. Certainly, it was not easy for those of African heritage who had not come here voluntarily and yet in their own way were immigrants themselves. But, like you, they no doubt found inspiration in all those who had come before them. And they were able to muster faith that, here in America, they might build a better life and give their children something more. survivors of the Holocaust; Soviet refuseniks; refugees from Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia; Iraqis and Afghans fleeing war; Mexicans, Cubans, Iranians leaving behind deadly revolutions; Central American teenagers running from gang violence; the Lost Boys of Sudan escaping civil war. They are people like Fulbert Florent Akoula from the Republic of Congo, who was granted asylum when his family was threatened by political violence. Immigrants and refugees revitalize and renew America. Immigrants like you are more likely to start your own business. Many of the Fortune 500 companies in this country were founded by immigrants or their children. Many of the tech startups in Silicon Valley have at least one immigrant founder. Immigrants are the teachers who inspire our children, and they are the doctors who keep us healthy. They are the engineers who design our skylines and the artists and the entertainers who touch our hearts. Immigrants are soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, coastguardsmen who protect us, often risking their lives for an America that is not even their own yet. As an Iraqi, Muhanned Ibrahim Al Naib was the target of death threats for working with American forces. He stood by his American comrades and came to the U.S. as a refugee. And today we stand by him. And we are proud to welcome Muhanned as a citizen of the country that he already helped to defend. We celebrate this history, this heritage, as an immigrant nation. And we should be strong enough to acknowledge, as painful as it may be, that we have not always lived up to our own ideals. We have not always lived up to these documents.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnaturalizationceremonythenationalarchivesandrecordsadministration", "title": "Remarks at a Naturalization Ceremony at the National Archives and Records Administration", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-naturalization-ceremony-the-national-archives-and-records-administration", "publication_date": "15-12-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1887, "text": "From the start, Africans were brought here in chains against their will and then toiled under the whip. They also built America. A century ago, New York City shops displayed those signs, No Irish Need Apply. Catholics were targeted, their loyalty questioned, so much so that as recently as the 1950s and sixties, when JFK had to run, he had to convince people that his allegiance was not primarily to the Pope. Chinese immigrants faced persecution and vicious stereotypes and were, for a time, even banned from entering America. During World War II, German and Italian residents were detained, and in one of the darkest chapters in our history, Japanese immigrants and even Japanese American citizens were forced from their homes and imprisoned in camps. We succumbed to fear. We betrayed not only our fellow Americans, but our deepest values. We betrayed these documents. And the biggest irony of course was, is that those who betrayed these values were themselves the children of immigrants. One generation passes, two generation passes, and suddenly, we do not remember where we came from. On days like today, we need to resolve never to repeat mistakes like that again. We must resolve to always speak out against hatred and bigotry in all of its forms, whether taunts against the child of an immigrant farmworker or threats against a Muslim shopkeeper. Standing up for each other is what the values enshrined in the documents in this room compels us to do, especially when it is hard, especially when it is not convenient. All of us are called to live up to our expectations for ourselves, not just when it is convenient, but when it is inconvenient, when it is tough, when we are afraid. The tension throughout our history between welcoming or rejecting the stranger, it is about more than just immigration. It is about the meaning of America, what kind of country do we want to be. E pluribus unum-that out of many, we are one. Scripture tells us, For we are strangers before you, and sojourners, as were all our fathers. We are strangers before you. In the Mexican immigrant today, we see the Catholic immigrant of a century ago. In the Syrian seeking refuge today, we should see the Jewish refugee of World War II. our parents, our grandparents, our aunts, our uncles, our cousins who packed up what they could and scraped together what they had. And their paperwork was not always in order.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnaturalizationceremonythenationalarchivesandrecordsadministration", "title": "Remarks at a Naturalization Ceremony at the National Archives and Records Administration", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-naturalization-ceremony-the-national-archives-and-records-administration", "publication_date": "15-12-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1888, "text": "And they set out for a place that was more than just a piece of land, but an idea. a place where we can be a part of something bigger. A place where we can contribute our talents and fulfill our ambitions and secure new opportunity for ourselves and for others. A place where we can retain pride in our heritage, but where we recognize that we have a common creed, a loyalty to these documents, a loyalty to our democracy; where we can criticize our government, but understand that we love it; where we agree to live together even when we do not agree with each other; where we work through the democratic process, and not through violence or sectarianism, to resolve disputes; where we live side by side as neighbors; and where our children know themselves to be a part of this Nation, no longer strangers, but the bedrock of this Nation, the essence of this Nation. And that is why today is not the final step in your journey. More than 60 years ago, at a ceremony like this one, Senator John F. Kennedy said, No form of government requires more of its citizens than does the American democracy. of being informed; of understanding that the Government is not some distant thing, but is you; of speaking out when something is not right; of helping fellow citizens when they need a hand; of coming together to shape our country's course. And that work gives purpose to every generation. It belongs to me. It belongs to the judge. It belongs to you. to follow our laws, yes, but also to engage with your communities and to speak up for what you believe in and to vote; to not only exercise the rights that are now yours, but to stand up for the rights of others. Birtukan Gudeya is here from Ethiopia. The joy of being an American is the joy of freedom and opportunity. We have been handed a work in progress, one that can evolve for the good of all Americans. I could not have said it better. That is what makes America great, not just the words on these founding documents, as precious and valuable as they are, but the progress that they have inspired. If you ever wonder whether America is big enough to hold multitudes, strong enough to withstand the forces of change, brave enough to live up to our ideals even in times of trial, then look to the generations of ordinary citizens who have proven again and again that we are worthy of that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnaturalizationceremonythenationalarchivesandrecordsadministration", "title": "Remarks at a Naturalization Ceremony at the National Archives and Records Administration", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-naturalization-ceremony-the-national-archives-and-records-administration", "publication_date": "15-12-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1895, "text": "Today it is my pleasure to welcome Alan Greenspan back to official service to his country. Chairman of President Ford's Council of Economic Advisors; member of three Presidential commissions, including the Greenspan commission; frequent witness before congressional committees; guest lecturer at New York University; member of the board of overseers of the Hoover Institution-and the list goes on and on. Now, in becoming Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Alan is making perhaps the most dramatic personal sacrifice of his career, taking his name down from the door of Townsend-Greenspan, the firm he guided as president and chairman for nearly 30 years. Alan, I suppose it would have been only natural for you to have had some second thoughts as you packed up your boxes last week. But knowing you, I do not think you did. No, knowing you, I have a feeling that your thoughts had already turned to the great role in American life that you take up today. Since its creation in 1913, the Federal Reserve System, with its Board of Governors, has become one of the central institutions of our government. Charged with maintaining the soundness of the banking system, the Fed helps to make possible the many millions of financial transactions that take place in America every day, from the purchase of stocks and bonds on Wall Street to the purchase of groceries on Main Street. But perhaps the Fed is best known for its conduct of monetary policy-managing the rate of growth in the supply of money. inflation, interest rates, the overall rate of economic expansion itself. Under the chairmanship of Paul Volcker, the Fed has used its monetary policy to overcome the rampant inflation that had grown up during the late 1970's. What we are aiming for, Chairman Volcker once said, is a situation in which people can proceed about their business without worrying about what prices are going to do. And once this situation had been achieved, Chairman Volcker argued, confidence in the economy would return and economic growth would once again begin to take place. With budgetary and monetary discipline, Chairman Volcker added, the process could be sustained for years. Well, as we all know, economic growth has taken place, and it has been sustained. The economic expansion is now just 2 months short of becoming the longest peacetime economic expansion in American history. For some 5 years now, inflation has stayed well below the rates of the late 1970's, with interest rates coming down sharply as well.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheswearingceremonyforalangreenspanchairmantheboardgovernorsthefederal", "title": "Remarks at the Swearing-In Ceremony for Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-swearing-ceremony-for-alan-greenspan-chairman-the-board-governors-the-federal", "publication_date": "11-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1896, "text": "We have seen a burst of new business formations, a virtual riot of new technologies, and the creation of over 13 1/2 million new jobs. And I know that Governor Martha Seger, who has done some briefings for us here at the White House, reported after consultations with foreign bankers and businessmen during her recent European trip that today confidence in the American economy is firmly established abroad, and this represents a source of stability for the entire world economy. I want to express my gratitude to Paul Volcker for the part he played in these accomplishments. And I want to restate my confidence in Alan Greenspan to carry these accomplishments still further, all the while maintaining the Fed's traditional independence. Here in our own country, Chairman Greenspan will bring all his skill to bear upon the task of promoting our continued economic growth while keeping inflation low. Today, keeping down inflation and sustaining economic growth is not an either-or proposition. Today, low inflation and economic growth can and must go hand in hand. Abroad, Chairman Greenspan will have to work closely with the heads of foreign central banks. With the entire globe becoming a single and highly competitive marketplace, Chairman Greenspan will play an important role in seeking solutions to the problems of developing countries and the massive debt some of them have accumulated. He will work to ensure an open and fair trading system among all nations. And he will be deeply involved in the restructuring and modernization of the American banking system to keep our own capital markets competitive with others around the world. These past 6 1/2 years-6 1/2 years of sound policies in the public sector and technological breakthroughs in the private-have produced such a dramatic change in America, perhaps most remarkably among our young people. The future looks more open and promising to young Americans than it did before, for the simple reason that it is more open and promising. There is been a convergence of policy and technology that has changed the spirit of America. Well, Alan, I guess that is the fundamental reason why I am so happy that when I asked you to become Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, you said yes. You are an economist's economist, one of the most widely respected men in your field. But you know that economics is more than numbers, that there are crucial intangibles, as well intangibles like hope, a willingness to work, and, yes, faith in the future of this great and good land.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheswearingceremonyforalangreenspanchairmantheboardgovernorsthefederal", "title": "Remarks at the Swearing-In Ceremony for Alan Greenspan as Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-swearing-ceremony-for-alan-greenspan-chairman-the-board-governors-the-federal", "publication_date": "11-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1916, "text": "First, may I greet the distinguished Members of Congress here in the front rows, thank them for coming, thank them for their interest in the passage of this important legislation we are here to celebrate today, but also in their interest in following up on it. May I greet, also, the Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, and our Secretary of HHS Lou Sullivan and the Vice President, of course. He and I welcome you to the Rose Garden. And may I salute the other guests that are with us. American corporations, you see, are a vital part of this team, and your support of the ADA is critical to its success. One year ago, I stood over there -- many of you present -- on the South Lawn. And I will never -- literally, never -- forget that sight or certainly the emotional feeling I felt on that day. Thousands of people from across the country had come to celebrate the signing of the Americans with Disabilities Act, one of the most comprehensive civil rights bills in the history of this country. And while people felt a justifiable sense of triumph last year, you also could see a feeling of eager impatience. After all, the signing of the ADA did not mark the end of a long struggle; it marked, really, a beginning. Some of you here today joined me on the South Lawn, as I mentioned, a year ago, and we have made tremendous advances since that ceremony. We have introduced changes that will transform people's worlds. The ADA has also helped us -- all of us -- to understand a little bit more about ourselves. to recognize and defend the rights of every American. This bill does more than make the American dream of equality a reality for 43 million Americans with disabilities. It offers, in a sense, fresh testimony to our Nation's greatness. It demonstrates how we can advance the cause of civil rights. It shows what can happen when we work together, drawing upon the fundamental decency of the American people. The quest for civil rights is not a zero-sum game. It should not mean advancing some at the expense of others. The quest for civil rights is a quest for individual rights and equal opportunity and it is a crusade to throw open the doors of opportunity and tear down the walls of bigotry. The ADA works because it calls upon the best in the American people, and then Americans respond. the spirit of inclusiveness, the devotion to individual rights and equal opportunity. That devotion runs deep in our Nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscommemoratingthefirstanniversarythesigningtheamericanswithdisabilities", "title": "Remarks Commemorating the First Anniversary of the Signing of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-commemorating-the-first-anniversary-the-signing-the-americans-with-disabilities", "publication_date": "26-07-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1917, "text": "Our Constitution and our courts pledge equal protection under the law. But equally important, our people believe in legal equality -- and many try to broaden opportunity in little ways, by reaching out to capable people and giving them a chance -- giving them a fair chance. America must be a country where the sons and daughters of poverty have the same grasp on the American dream as the children of privilege. And it must be a land where a child can overcome any obstacle and fulfill his or her own potential. We see this promise fulfilled by a man I presented to this Nation 4 weeks ago. tolerance, industry, and decency. And I am speaking, of course, of my nominee to the Court, Clarence Thomas. While Judge Thomas was at the EEOC, he compiled an excellent record on disability issues, with which I hope all of you are familiar. the principle that we must throw open the doors of opportunity to everyone. And this spirit should guide us as we pursue all civil rights legislation, for our greatest strength lies in our ability to work together and honor the shared values we treasure. And in so doing, we have understood more fully just how much people with disabilities have to offer. We have demonstrated that social progress includes economic growth and that both play essential roles in the American dream. Businesses support the ADA because it gives everyone a chance to be productive in the workplace. It broadens our economic mainstream. It enables society to benefit from the wisdom, energy, and industry of people who want just one thing, a fair chance. And while we have made a strong start, we have much to do. As long as the doors of opportunity are closed to even one American we must keep working at it. The passage of the ADA, the world's first declaration of equality for people with disabilities, made this country the international leader on this human rights issue. And now the world is watching to see how we use this act, how we remove the physical barriers we have created and the social barriers that we have accepted. Our success or failure in keeping the promise of the ADA will affect the lives of hundreds of millions of people with disabilities, not just here in the United States but throughout the world. In America -- the most generous, optimistic Nation on the face of the Earth -- we will not rest until every man and woman and child with a dream has a fair chance to realize it. Most of this work will be done by individual Americans acting day by day to increase tolerance and understanding.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscommemoratingthefirstanniversarythesigningtheamericanswithdisabilities", "title": "Remarks Commemorating the First Anniversary of the Signing of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-commemorating-the-first-anniversary-the-signing-the-americans-with-disabilities", "publication_date": "26-07-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1918, "text": "It is clearly my duty to lay before you, very fully and without reservation, the facts concerning our present relations with the Republic of Mexico. The deplorable posture of affairs in Mexico I need not describe, but I deem it my duty to speak very frankly of what this Government has done and should seek to do in fulfillment of its obligation to Mexico herself, as a friend and neighbor, and to American citizens whose lives and vital interests are daily affected by the distressing conditions which now obtain beyond our southern border. Those conditions touch us very nearly. Not merely because they lie at our very doors. That of course makes us more vividly and more constantly conscious of them, and every instinct of neighborly interest and sympathy is aroused and quickened by them; but that is only one element in the determination of our duty. We are glad to call ourselves the friends of Mexico, and we shall, I hope, have many an occasion, in happier times as well as in these days of trouble and confusion, to show that our friendship is genuine and disinterested, capable of sacrifice and every generous manifestation. The peace, prosperity, and contentment of Mexico mean more, much more, to us than merely an enlarged field for our commerce and enterprise. They mean an enlargement of the field of self-government and the realization of the hopes and rights of a nation with whose best aspirations, so long suppressed and disappointed, we deeply sympathize. We shall yet prove to the Mexican people that we know how to serve them without first thinking how we shall serve ourselves. But we are not the only friends of Mexico. The whole world desires her peace and progress; and the whole world is interested as never before. Central America is about to be touched by the great routes of the world's trade and intercourse running free from ocean to ocean at the Isthmus. The future has much in store for Mexico, as for all the States of Central America; but the best gifts can come to her only if she be ready and free to receive them and to enjoy them honorably. America in particularAmerica north and south and upon both continentswaits upon the development of Mexico; and that development can be sound and lasting only if it be the product of a genuine freedom, a just and ordered government founded upon law. Only so can it be peaceful or fruitful of the benefits of peace.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressjointsessioncongressmexicanaffairs", "title": "Address to a Joint Session of Congress on Mexican Affairs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-joint-session-congress-mexican-affairs", "publication_date": "27-08-1913", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1919, "text": "Mexico has a great and enviable future before her, if only she choose and attain the paths of honest constitutional government. The present circumstances of the Republic, I deeply regret to say, do not seem to promise even the foundations of such a peace. We have waited many months, months full of peril and anxiety, for the conditions there to improve, and they have not improved. The territory in some sort controlled by the provisional authorities at Mexico City has grown smaller, not larger. The prospect of the pacification of the country, even by arms, has seemed to grow more and more remote; and its pacification by the authorities at the capital is evidently impossible by any other means than force. Difficulties more and more entangle those who claim to constitute the legitimate government of the Republic. They have not made good their claim in fact. Their successes in the field have proved only temporary. War and disorder, devastation and confusion, seem to threaten to become the settled fortune of the distracted country. As friends we could wait no longer for a solution which every week seemed further away. It was our duty at least to volunteer our good officesto offer to assist, if we might, in effecting some arrangement which would bring relief and peace and set up a universally acknowledged political authority there. Press very earnestly upon the attention of those who are now exercising authority or wielding influence in Mexico the following considerations and advice: The Government of the United States does not feel at liberty any longer to stand inactively by while it becomes daily more and more evident that no real progress is being made towards the establishment of a government at the City of Mexico which the country will obey and respect. The Government of the United States does not stand in the same case with the other great Governments of the world in respect of what is happening or what is likely to happen in Mexico. We offer our good offices, not only because of our genuine desire to play the part of a friend, but also because we are expected by the powers of the world to act as Mexico's nearest friend. We wish to act in these circumstances in the spirit of the most earnest and disinterested friendship.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressjointsessioncongressmexicanaffairs", "title": "Address to a Joint Session of Congress on Mexican Affairs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-joint-session-congress-mexican-affairs", "publication_date": "27-08-1913", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1920, "text": "It is our purpose in whatever we do or propose in this perplexing and distressing situation not only to pay the most scrupulous regard to the sovereignty and independence of Mexicothat we take as a matter of course to which we are bound by every obligation of right and honorbut also to give every possible evidence that we act in the interest of Mexico alone, and not in the interest of any person or body of persons who may have personal or property claims in Mexico which they may feel that they have the right to press. We are seeking to counsel Mexico for her own good and in the interest of her own peace, and not for any other purpose whatever. The Government of the United States would deem itself discredited if it had any selfish or ulterior purpose in transactions where the peace, happiness, and prosperity of a whole people are involved. It is acting as its friendship for Mexico, not as any selfish interest, dictates. The present situation in Mexico is incompatible with the fulfillment of international obligations on the part of Mexico, with the civilized development of Mexico herself, and with the maintenance of tolerable political and economic conditions in Central America. It is upon no common occasion, therefore, that the United States offers her counsel and assistance. All America cries out for a settlement. A satisfactory settlement seems to us to be conditioned only An immediate cessation of fighting throughout Mexico, a definite armistice solemnly entered into and scrupulously observed; Security given for an early and free election in which all will agree to take part; The consent of Gen. Huerta to bind himself not to be a candidate for election as President of the Republic at this election; and The agreement of all parties to abide by the results of the election and coperate in the most loyal way in organizing and supporting the new administration. The Government of the United States will be glad to play any part in this settlement or in its carrying out which it can play honorably and consistently with international right. It pledges itself to recognize and in every way possible and proper to assist the administration chosen and set up in Mexico in the way and on the conditions suggested. Taking all the existing conditions into consideration, the Government of the United States can conceive of no reasons sufficient to justify those who are now attempting to shape the policy or exercise the authority of Mexico in declining the offices of friendship thus offered. Can Mexico give the civilized world a satisfactory reason for rejecting our good offices?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressjointsessioncongressmexicanaffairs", "title": "Address to a Joint Session of Congress on Mexican Affairs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-joint-session-congress-mexican-affairs", "publication_date": "27-08-1913", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1921, "text": "If Mexico can suggest any better way in which to show our friendship, serve the people of Mexico, and meet our international obligations, we are more than willing to consider the suggestion. Lind executed his delicate and difficult mission with singular tact, firmness, and good judgment, and made clear to the authorities at the City of Mexico not only the purpose of his visit but also the spirit in which it had been undertaken. But the proposals he submitted were rejected, in a note the full text of which I take the liberty of laying before you. I am led to believe that they were rejected partly because the authorities at Mexico City had been grossly misinformed and misled upon two points. They did not realize the spirit of the American people in this matter, their earnest friendliness and yet sober determination that some just solution be found for the Mexican difficulties; and they did not believe that the present administration spoke, through Mr. Lind, for the people of the United States. The effect of this unfortunate misunderstanding on their part is to leave them singularly isolated and without friends who can effectually aid them. So long as the misunderstanding continues we can only await the time of their awakening to a realization of the actual facts. We cannot thrust our good offices upon them. The situation must be given a little more time to work itself out in the new circumstances; and I believe that only a little while will be necessary. The rejection of our friendship makes them new and will inevitably bring its own alterations in the whole aspect of affairs. The actual situation of the authorities at Mexico City will presently be revealed. Clearly, everything that we do must be rooted in patience and done with calm and disinterested deliberation. Impatience on our part would be childish, and would be fraught with every risk of wrong and folly. We can afford to exercise the self-restraint of a really great nation which realizes its own strength and scorns to misuse it. It was our duty to offer our active assistance. It is now our duty to show what true neutrality will do to enable the people of Mexico to set their affairs in order again and wait for a further opportunity to offer our friendly counsels. The door is not closed against the resumption, either upon the initiative of Mexico or upon our own, of the effort to bring order out of the confusion by friendly coperative action, should fortunate occasion offer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressjointsessioncongressmexicanaffairs", "title": "Address to a Joint Session of Congress on Mexican Affairs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-joint-session-congress-mexican-affairs", "publication_date": "27-08-1913", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1922, "text": "While we wait the contest of the rival forces will undoubtedly for a little while be sharper than ever, just because it will be plain that an end must be made of the existing situation, and that very promptly; and with the increased activity of the contending factions will come, it is to be feared, increased danger to the non-combatants in Mexico as well as to those actually in the field of battle. The position of outsiders is always particularly trying and full of hazard where there is civil strife and a whole country is upset. We should earnestly urge all Americans to leave Mexico at once, and should assist them to get away in every way possiblenot because we would mean to slacken in the least our efforts to safeguard their lives and their interests, but because it is imperative that they should take no unnecessary risks when it is physically possible for them to leave the country. We should let every one who assumes to exercise authority in any part of Mexico know in the most unequivocal way that we shall vigilantly watch the fortunes of those Americans who cannot get away, and shall hold those responsible for their sufferings and losses to a definite reckoning. That can be and will be made plain beyond the possibility of a misunderstanding. For the rest, I deem it my duty to exercise the authority conferred upon me by the law of March 14, 1912, to see to it that neither side to the struggle now going on in Mexico receive any assistance from this side the border. I shall follow the best practice of nations in the matter of neutrality by forbidding the exportation of arms or munitions of war of any kind from the United States to any part of the Republic of Mexicoa policy suggested by several interesting precedents and certainly dictated by many manifest considerations of practical expediency. We cannot in the circumstances be the partisans of either party to the contest that now distracts Mexico, or constitute ourselves the virtual umpire between them. I am happy to say that several of the great Governments of the world have given this Government their generous moral support in urging upon the provisional authorities at the City of Mexico the acceptance of our proffered good offices in the spirit in which they were made. We have not acted in this matter under the ordinary principles of international obligation. All the world expects us in such circumstances to act as Mexico's nearest friend and intimate adviser. This is our immemorial relation towards her.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressjointsessioncongressmexicanaffairs", "title": "Address to a Joint Session of Congress on Mexican Affairs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-joint-session-congress-mexican-affairs", "publication_date": "27-08-1913", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1923, "text": "My fellow Americans, four years ago we launched a great national effort to rebuild our country, to renew its spirit, and to restore the allegiance of this government to its citizens. In short, we embarked on a mission to make America great again for all Americans. As I conclude my term as the 45th President of the United States, I stand before you truly proud of what we have achieved together. We did what we came here to do, and so much more. This week we inaugurate a new administration and pray for its success in keeping America safe and prosperous. We extend our best wishes, and we also want them to have luck, a very important word. I'd like to begin by thanking just a few of the amazing people who made our remarkable journey possible. First, let me express my overwhelming gratitude for the love and support of our spectacular First Lady Melania. Let me also share my deepest appreciation to my daughter, Ivanka, my son-in-law Jared, and to Baron, Don, Eric, Tiffany, and Lara. You fill my world with light and with joy. I also want to thank Vice President Mike Pence, his wonderful wife, Karen, and the entire Pence family. Thank you as well to my chief of staff, Mark Meadows, the dedicated members of the White House staff, and the cabinet, and all of the incredible people across our administration who poured out their heart and soul to fight for America. I also want to take a moment to thank a truly exceptional group of people, the United States Secret Service. My family and I will forever be in your debt. Most of all, I want to thank the American people. We must never forget that while Americans will always have our disagreements, we are a nation of incredible, decent, faithful, and peace-loving citizens who all want our country to thrive and flourish and be very, very successful and good. All Americans were horrified by the assault on our capital. Political violence is an attack on everything we cherish as Americans. Now more than ever, we must unify around our shared values and rise above the partisan rancor and forge our common destiny. Four years ago, I came to Washington as the only true outsider ever to win the presidency. I had not spent my career as a politician, but as a builder looking at open skylines and imagining infinite possibilities. I ran for president because I knew there were towering new summits for America just waiting to be scaled.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptspresidentdonaldtrumpfarewelladdressspeechtranscript", "title": "President Donald Trump Farewell Address Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/president-donald-trump-farewell-address-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "19-01-2021", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1924, "text": "I knew the potential for our nation was boundless as long as we put America first. So I left behind my former life and stepped into a very difficult arena, but an arena, nevertheless, with all sorts of potential if properly done. America had given me so much and I wanted to give something back. Together with millions of hardworking Patriots across this land, we built the greatest political movement in the history of our country. We also built the greatest economy in the history of the world. It was about America first because we all wanted to make America great again. We restored the principle that a nation exists to serve its citizens. Our agenda was not about right or left. It was not about Republican or Democrat, but about the good of a nation, and that means the whole nation. With the support and prayers of the American people, we achieved more than anyone thought possible. We passed the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history. We slashed more job-killing regulations than any administration had ever done before. We fix our broken trade deals, withdrew from the horrible Trans-Pacific Partnership and the impossible Paris Climate Accord, renegotiated the one-sided South Korea deal. And we replaced NAFTA with the groundbreaking USMCA, that is Mexico and Canada, a deal that is worked out very, very well. Also and very importantly, we imposed historic and monumental tariffs on China, made a great new deal with China. But before the ink was even dry, we and the whole world got hit with the China virus. Billions and billions of dollars were pouring into the US but the virus forced us to go in a different direction. The whole world suffered, but America outperformed other countries economically because of our incredible economy and the economy that we built. Without the foundations and footings, it would not have worked out this way. We would not have some of the best numbers we have ever had. We also unlocked our energy resources and became the world's number one producer of oil and natural gas by far. Powered by these policies, we built the greatest economy in the history of the world. We reignited America's job creation and achieved record-low unemployment for African-Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, women, almost everyone. The American dream was restored and millions were lifted from poverty in just a few short years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptspresidentdonaldtrumpfarewelladdressspeechtranscript", "title": "President Donald Trump Farewell Address Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/president-donald-trump-farewell-address-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "19-01-2021", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1925, "text": "The stock market set one record after another, with 148 stock market highs during the short period of time, and boosted the retirements and pensions of hardworking citizens all across our nation. 401s are at a level they have never been at before. We have never seen numbers like we have seen, and that is before the pandemic and after the pandemic. We rebuilt the American manufacturing base, opened up thousands of new factories, and brought back the beautiful phrase Made in the USA. To make life better for working families, we doubled the child tax credit and signed the largest-ever expansion of funding for childcare and development. We joined with the private sector to secure commitments to train more than 16 million American workers for the jobs of tomorrow. When our nation was hit with the terrible pandemic, we produced not one, but two vaccines with record-breaking speed and more will quickly follow. They said it could not be done, but we did it. They called it a medical miracle. And that is what they are calling it right now, a medical miracle. Another administration would have taken three, four, five, maybe even up to 10 years to develop a vaccine. We did it in nine months. We grieve for every life lost and we pledge in their memory to wipe out this horrible pandemic once and for all. When the virus took its brutal toll on the world's economy, we launched the fastest economic recovery our country has ever seen. We passed nearly $4 trillion in economic relief, saved or supported over 50 million jobs, and slashed the unemployment rate in half. These are numbers that our country has never seen before. We created choice and transparency in healthcare, stood up to big pharma in so many ways, but especially in our effort to get favored nations clauses added, which will give us the lowest prescription drug prices anywhere in the world. We passed VA Choice, VA Accountability, Right to Try, and landmark criminal justice reform. We confirmed three new justices of the United States Supreme Court. We appointed nearly 300 federal judges to interpret our Constitution as written. For years, the American people pleaded with Washington to finally secure the nation's borders. I am pleased to say, we answered that plea and achieved the most secure border in US history. We have given our brave border agents and heroic ICE officers the tools they need to do their jobs better than they have ever done before and to enforce our laws and keep America safe.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptspresidentdonaldtrumpfarewelladdressspeechtranscript", "title": "President Donald Trump Farewell Address Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/president-donald-trump-farewell-address-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "19-01-2021", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1926, "text": "We proudly leave the next administration with the strongest and most robust border security measures ever put into place. This includes historic agreements with Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador, along with more than 450 miles of powerful new wall. We restored American strength at home and American leadership abroad. The world respects us again. We reclaimed our sovereignty by standing up for America at the United Nations and withdrawing from the one-sided global deals that never served our interests. And NATO countries are now paying hundreds of billions of dollars more than when I arrived just a few years ago. We were paying the cost for the world. Now the world is helping us. And perhaps most importantly of all, with nearly $3 trillion, we fully rebuilt the American military, all made in the USA. We launched the first new branch of the United States Armed Forces in 75 years, the Space Force. And last spring, I stood at Kennedy Space Center in Florida and watched as American astronauts returned to space on American rockets for the first time in many, many years. We revitalize our alliances and rallied the nations of the world to stand up to China like never before. We obliterated the ISIS caliphate and ended the wretched life of its founder and leader al-Baghdadi. We stood up to the oppressive Iranian regime and killed the world's top terrorist, Iranian butcher, Qassem Soleimani. We recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and recognized Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. As a result of our bold diplomacy and principled realism, we achieved a series of historic peace deals in the Middle East. The Abraham Accords opened the doors to a future of peace and harmony, not violence and bloodshed. It is the dawn of a new Middle East, and we are bringing our soldiers home. I am especially proud to be the first president in decades who has started no new wars. Above all, we have reasserted the sacred idea that in America the government answers to the people. Our guiding light, our North star, our unwavering conviction has been that we are here to serve the noble everyday citizens of America. Our allegiance is not to the special interests corporations or global entities, it is to our children, our citizens, and to our nation itself. As president my top priority, my constant concern has always been the best interests of American workers and American families. I did not seek the easiest course. I did not seek the path that would get the least criticism.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptspresidentdonaldtrumpfarewelladdressspeechtranscript", "title": "President Donald Trump Farewell Address Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/president-donald-trump-farewell-address-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "19-01-2021", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1927, "text": "I took on the tough battles, the hardest fights, the most difficult choices because that is what you elected me to do. Together, we put the American people back in charge of our country. We restored self-government. We restored the idea that in America no one is forgotten because everyone matters and everyone has a voice. We fought for the principle that every citizen is entitled to equal dignity, equal treatment, and equal rights because we are all made equal by God. Everyone is entitled to be treated with respect, to have their voice heard, and to have the government listen. You are loyal to your country and my administration was always loyal to you. We worked to build a country in which every citizen could find a great job and support their wonderful families. We fought for the communities where every American could be safe and schools where every child could learn. We promoted a culture where our laws would be upheld, our heroes honored, our history preserved, and law-abiding citizens are never taken for granted. Americans should take tremendous satisfaction in all that we have achieved together. Now, as I leave the white house, I have been reflecting on the dangers that threaten the priceless inheritance we all share. As the world's most powerful nation, America faces constant threats and challenges from abroad. But the greatest danger we face is a loss of confidence in ourselves, a loss of confidence in our national greatness. A nation is only as strong as its spirit. We are only as dynamic as our pride. We are only as vibrant as the faith that beats in the hearts of our people. No nation can long thrive that loses faith in its own values, history, and heroes for these are the very sources of our unity and our vitality. What has always allowed America to prevail and triumph over the great challenges of the past has been an unyielding and unashamed conviction in the nobility of our country and its unique purpose in history. We must never lose this conviction. We must never forsake our belief in America. The key to national greatness lies in sustaining and instilling our shared national identity. That means focusing on what we have in common, the heritage that we all share. At the center of this heritage is also a robust belief in free expression, free speech, and open debate. Only if we forget who we are and how we got here could we ever allow political censorship and blacklisting to take place in America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptspresidentdonaldtrumpfarewelladdressspeechtranscript", "title": "President Donald Trump Farewell Address Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/president-donald-trump-farewell-address-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "19-01-2021", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1928, "text": "In America, we do not insist on absolute conformity or enforce rigid orthodoxies and punitive speech codes. We just do not do that. America is not a timid nation of tame souls who need to be sheltered and protected from those with whom we disagree. For nearly 250 years in the face of every challenge, Americans have always summoned our unmatched courage, confidence, and fierce independence. These are the miraculous traits that once led millions of everyday citizens to set out across a wild continent and carve out a new life in the great West. It was the same profound love of our God-given freedom that willed our soldiers into battle and our astronauts into space. As I think back on the past four years, one image rises in my mind above all others. Whenever I traveled all along the motorcade route, there were thousands and thousands of people. They came out with their families so that they could stand as we passed and proudly wave our great American flag. It never failed to deeply move me. I knew that they did not just come out to show their support of me. They came out to show me their support and love for our country. This is a republic of proud citizens who are united by our common conviction, that America is the greatest nation in all of history. We are and must always be a land of hope, of light, and of glory to all the world. This is the precious inheritance that we must safeguard at every single turn. For the past four years, I have worked to do just that. From a great hall of Muslim leaders in Riyadh to a great square of Polish people in Warsaw, from the floor of the Korean Assembly to the podium at the United Nations General Assembly, and from the forbidden city in Beijing to the shadow of Mount Rushmore, I fought for you. I fought for your family. I fought for our country. Above all, I fought for America and all it stands for, and that is safe, strong, proud, and free. Now, as I prepare to hand power over to a new administration at noon on Wednesday, I want you to know that the movement we started is only just beginning. The belief that a nation must serve its citizens will not dwindle, but instead, only grows stronger by the day. As long as the American people hold in their hearts, deep and devoted love of country, then there is nothing that this nation can not achieve.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptspresidentdonaldtrumpfarewelladdressspeechtranscript", "title": "President Donald Trump Farewell Address Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/president-donald-trump-farewell-address-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "19-01-2021", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1929, "text": "Have you been enjoying yourselves too much? There are too many distinguished Irish and Irish Americans here tonight to mention, so I will just offer a hundred thousand welcomes to the White House. Taoiseach Kenny and his lovely wife Fionnuala. I also want to take a moment to recognize those who do the hard work of waging peace. Theresa Villiers, the U.K.'s Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, is here. As is America's Consul General in Belfast, Greg Burton-yay, Greg-and Richard Haass, two men who helped bring the Stormont House Agreement to fruition, and we are very grateful to them. Two people who were going to be here-First Minister Peter Robinson and Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness-are home hammering out the details to implement the agreement. So we wish them good luck and Godspeed so the people of Northern Ireland can finally enjoy the full fruits of a lasting peace. But let me just mention one. When Brendan Boyle ran for Congress last year, his campaign was followed closely by folks back in Ireland, not so much because of him, although he is an impressive young man, but because of his dad. Frank Boyle grew up in Donegal. He moved to America as a young man, married an Irish lass, had two sons. He supported his family by working as a janitor for the Philadelphia public transit authority. Today, one son, Kevin, serves in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives. Brendan serves in the U.S. Congress. They have made people across two nations very proud. So when Irish and Americans get together, there is more than a diplomatic exchange. My eighth cousin, Henry, who has become a regular at this party, I mean--where is Henry the Eighth -he is , he is -there he is, he is back there. So is his good buddy, Ollie Hayes, who owns my favorite pub in Moneygall. And while many of you are far from home today, I am sure you have found plenty of green in the red, white, and blue because we have got 30 or 40 million family members here in the United States and millions more who wish they were. Now, Shaw said that an Irishman's heart is nothing but his imagination. And if there is any place that can set the imagination on fire, it is Ireland. I remember my own visit to Dublin and Moneygall and Belfast.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksstpatricksdayreception1", "title": "Remarks at a St. Patrick's Day Reception", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-st-patricks-day-reception-1", "publication_date": "17-03-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1930, "text": "A people noted for bouts of great joy and the belt of a late-night song. the cities our ancestors helped build, the canals they dug, the tracks they laid, the shipyards and factories they labored in, enduring all manner of intolerance and insult to carve out a place for themselves and their children in this new world. They put their full hearts into their work, even as their hearts were far from home. In 1897, at an Irish Fair held in New York, dirt was shipped over from each of Ireland's counties and laid out on a map. At least one immigrant knelt in prayer, grateful to be back in Fermanagh again, even if only for an instant. Meanwhile, thousands of young Irish women moved to America to find work as domestic servants. Not a day goes by, one said, that I do not look at the Moon and say it is the same in Ireland. For the story of the Irish in America is a story of overcoming hardship through strength and sacrifice and faith and family. faith in the unseen, a belief in something better around the bend. And that is why the Irish did more than help build America-I am very impressed, by the way, whoever just shushed. . I was going to wait until the Taoiseach spoke to shush everybody, but Joe handled his business. I like that, Joe. the notion that no matter who you are, where you come from, what your last name is, in this country, you can make it. And today we revel in that idea. those who struggled in obscurity, those who rose to the highest levels of politics and business and the arts. friendship and family and hard work and humility, fairness and dignity, and the persistent belief that tomorrow will be better than today. Yeats is one of my favorite poets, and the Taoiseach honored me by giving me a slim volume of his favorite works. I have believed the best of every man. And find that to believe it is enough to make a bad man show him at his best-or even a good man swing his lantern higher. Prime Minister Kenny. Have fun, do not break anything, and you can take the paper napkins, but not the cloth ones. They do not belong to be, and I want my security deposit back.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksstpatricksdayreception1", "title": "Remarks at a St. Patrick's Day Reception", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-st-patricks-day-reception-1", "publication_date": "17-03-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1931, "text": "For the last few days I have been traveling on a jet airplane. I have found that you have to adjust your schedule, even on an airplane, for the simple reason you get everywhere so rapidly that after you have allowed time for a breakfast or a lunch with a little nap, you have found that the work you were supposed to do has gone by the board and you have landed. The Ambassador does a tittle bit better than that, he takes you back to Italy from here in a matter of seconds. But on this trip I have been talking a lot about America's deep desire for peace, and I know that the peoples of all nations feel exactly as the people of America do. I have traveled in many countries of the world and I have never yet found a people that were belligerent, I know of no men that just long for the battlefield and I know of no women who want to see their men, their sons and their husbands, their sweethearts or their fathers, on the battlefield. So, as far as the longing and aspirations of peoples are involved, we know we are one. But governments have a habit of getting into the way of the sentiments and the feelings of people. It is the governments that conduct propaganda, that put out what they call information--and I am not so sure it always is--people that create problems and then at least say they are attempting to solve them. Now our problem is how do we get across from people to people, so that we can each try to fulfill our own destinies according to the methods of our own choosing? Now I think this is one of the problems and the jobs that people like yourselves help to perform. Political leaders--sometimes they like to call themselves statesmen--are apt to have to deal in generalizations. But you, each of you, with the understanding you display toward another, whether he be of another race or another religion, or different from you in his ideals, but no matter how much this individual may differ, if you are working together and you can understand him and you become friends, you are doing some of the practical work that statesmen and political politicians are talking about. The courtesies that you show to a visitor, no matter how meanly he is dressed or what kind of work he does, when you can show the natural, inborn courtesy and hospitality that is expected of one of God's creatures, because he is talking to another one, that is helping.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthestafftheusembassyandtheamericancommunitynewdelhi", "title": "Remarks to the Staff of the U.S. Embassy and the American Community in New Delhi.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-staff-the-us-embassy-and-the-american-community-new-delhi", "publication_date": "11-12-1959", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1932, "text": "This of course is a very simple, homely example. In all of the hours of our daily lives, you people have an unusual opportunity to do this. Of course, the example you show here, as you work among yourselves, in itself is helpful. But as you go further afield, in your clubs, in your restaurants, and your places of recreation and places of work--the more that the American Embassy, whether its employees are Americans or Indians, the more that the American Embassy gets a name for being understanding and sympathetic, this is the stuff of which finally peace will be made. It is not going to be made by two or three people sitting in something that is called a summit, and after exchanging a lot of views that rarely agree, and probably are not pertinent to the subject particularly, anyway; you are not going to get peace that way. This is going to be people that do people talking to people. So I say to you that I believe you are not only having the opportunity to do something that for yourselves would be satisfying, in the sense that for your families, for your country, and for your world community, you are really doing something valuable, but it is the kind of thing that the whole world must be doing, if we are going to have the peace that we seek, a peace with justice and of durability. And when I take a look at the Cub Scouts and children of that age, and I stop to think what will be the year, what will be the year on the calendar, when they are my age--say they are 9 now and add 60 years to that, that is two thousand and nineteen--what is that world going to be then? What are we teaching these little fellows and girls--young Americans and young Indians--how to do these things better than we have done them? Because if we do not do it, by that time, two thousand and nineteen, then indeed this poor old world, I think, will be in a sick state. But the point is, if we do our work well, they will do theirs better-and we will have the kind of earth that is moving ahead, with a greater measure of happiness for all people, a greater satisfaction in the work we ourselves have done. So as I say, when I see this kind of crowd, I think of your opportunity to do practical work, where I go around just talking too much sometimes. You are doing work that is valuable.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthestafftheusembassyandtheamericancommunitynewdelhi", "title": "Remarks to the Staff of the U.S. Embassy and the American Community in New Delhi.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-staff-the-us-embassy-and-the-american-community-new-delhi", "publication_date": "11-12-1959", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1940, "text": "At the outset, let me thank the Secretary of Defense for his more than generous comments, and let me simply reiterate the theme that he set forth. We are strong, we will continue to be strong, we will keep our commitments, and we will remain a great country. Only the United States of America can make a machine like this. We have witnessed the magic moment when an intricate mass of steel and cable and sophisticated marvels of engineering suddenly become a living thing with a unique personality. No matter how many commissionings you take part in, breaking the pennant and setting the first watch involves a special reward for all of us who love the sea and the United States Navy. I thank you very much, Captain Compton, and all of the ship's company for the privilege of being here. I congratulate all who helped build her and all who man her, as well as their loved ones who-as many of you know better than I will do a lot of waiting for the sake of our country and of freedom everywhere. Their allegiance and their service to the country is also in the very best tradition of this great Nation. We all regret that Mrs. Chester W. Nimitz, St., cannot share this proud hour with all of us, but I am happy that Mrs. Lay and other members of the admiral's family are here. It is also gratifying to have Admiral Rickover here, for without these two farsighted submariners, Fleet Admiral Nimitz and Admiral Rickover, we would have no nuclear Navy. Few of us remember that it was Admiral Nimitz, as he was completing his career as Chief of Naval Operations in 1947, who recommended to the then Secretary of the Navy that the Bureau of Ships and the new Atomic Energy Commission get together to design and to build a nuclear propulsion plant for a submarine. Admiral Rickover took it from there. I see this great ship as a double symbol of today's challenging times. She is first of all a symbol of the United States, of our immense resources in materials and skilled manpower, of our inexhaustible energy, of the inventive and productive genius of our free, competitive economic system, and of our massive but controlled military strength. Wherever the United States Ship Nimitz shows her flag, she will be seen as we see her now, a solid symbol of United States strength, United States resolve made in America and manned by Americans.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheussnimitzcommissioningceremonynorfolkvirginia", "title": "Remarks at the U.S.S. Nimitz Commissioning Ceremony in Norfolk, Virginia.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-uss-nimitz-commissioning-ceremony-norfolk-virginia", "publication_date": "03-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1941, "text": "She is a movable part and parcel of our country, a self-contained city at sea plying the international waters of the world in defense of our national interests. Whether her mission is one of defense, diplomacy, or humanity, the Nimitz will command awe and admiration from some, caution and circumspection from others, and respect from all. There is no need for me to dwell on the importance of aircraft carriers in today's and tomorrow's defense planning though as an old carrier man myself, I might like that role. During recent days, I think it is worthy to note, we have seen the most convincing demonstration of their readiness and their flexibility in the successful execution of national policy. Without the five aircraft carriers which served as the nucleus of our forces operating off South Vietnam, without the skill and the heroic performance of Marine Corps and naval aviation and support personnel, without the Air Force helicopter crews who operated from the carrier decks, we could not have rescued all of the remaining American citizens and thousands of endangered Vietnamese from Saigon within 20 hours. And I congratulate, on behalf of all of you, the work that was done on that occasion. The Nimitz joins the fleet at an auspicious moment when our determination to strengthen our tics with allies across both great oceans and to work for peace and stability around the world requires clear demonstration. Along with our other forces worldwide, the Nimitz will make critically important contributions in our continuing quest for a peaceful planet, a planet whose surface is more than 70 percent ocean. As I see the United States Ship Nimitz as a symbol of the vast power, the protective or productive skill and economic strength of America, so will others around the world. To all, this great ship is visible evidence of our commitment to friends and allies and our capability to maintain those commitments. But for Americans, especially, she is also a symbol of the man whose name she bears. The grandson of a seafaring German immigrant, who grew up in the great State of Texas and never lost his pride in his native State, Chester W. Nimitz started from the smoke of Pearl Harbor and carried the fight to the enemy. His superb leadership and the valor of more than 2 million American fighting men culminated on the deck of the U.S.S. Missouri 4 years later, as he signed the Japanese surrender as commander in chief of the largest naval armada ever assembled.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheussnimitzcommissioningceremonynorfolkvirginia", "title": "Remarks at the U.S.S. Nimitz Commissioning Ceremony in Norfolk, Virginia.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-uss-nimitz-commissioning-ceremony-norfolk-virginia", "publication_date": "03-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1942, "text": "Looking back on a period of my own life, one of the things of which I am the proudest is that I can say, I served under Admiral Nimitz in the Pacific. As a lowly lieutenant on the U.S.S. Monterey, a carrier you could probably stow on the hangar deck of the Nimitz, I saw very little of fleet admirals during World War II. But every watch officer could recognize the crisp CINCPAC dispatches that Admiral Nimitz obviously had written in his own hand. One biographer who did not know him or who, I should say, did know him Professor E. B. Potter of the Naval Academy, summed up Admiral Nimitz' qualities in simple words that well serve as a model for anyone who aspires to leadership in any line of endeavor. He surrounded himself with the ablest men he could find and sought their advice, but he made his own decisions. He was a keen strategist who never forgot that he was dealing with human beings, on both sides of the conflict. He was aggressive in war without hate, audacious while never failing to weigh the risks. Admiral Nimitz, of all the great American commanders of World War II, was one of the most self-effacing and, certainly, one of the most effective. He possessed great stamina, an abundance of common sense, and such immense inner strength that he felt no need to strut or to shout. Born near what today we would call the poverty level, he worked hard, he studied hard, and was a long, long time getting ahead. He spent his whole life training to serve his country in commanding men at sea, and when he was needed, he was prepared. He learned by his mistakes and was tolerant of others, but he was always in command. Those who had the good fortune to know Admiral Nimitz will say his fundamental honesty, intellectual honesty and integrity, enabled him to keep a steady course toward his ultimate objective without yielding to the tremendous pressures of his vast responsibilities. He did the job he was prepared to do, did it superbly, hung up his sword and filled his final years with quiet service to his country and to the cause of peace. Repeatedly urged to write his wartime memoirs, Admiral Nimitz just as repeatedly refused. To do so, he explained, would compel him either to hurt the reputations of some fine shipmates or tell some whopping lies.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheussnimitzcommissioningceremonynorfolkvirginia", "title": "Remarks at the U.S.S. Nimitz Commissioning Ceremony in Norfolk, Virginia.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-uss-nimitz-commissioning-ceremony-norfolk-virginia", "publication_date": "03-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1946, "text": "Senator and Mrs. Kennedy, the Kennedy family, Senator Mitchell and Members of the Senate, Congressmen, Congressman-to-be Patrick Kennedy, and Marvin Rosen, and all those who made this night possible , I thank you so much for your help for our friend. Chevy Chase, thank you for making us laugh. I will tell you a story about Chevy Chase. I never told this story in public before. I had never met Chevy Chase in my entire life, except on a movie screen. And in 1988 or '89, I went up to Long Island in the summertime. Hillary and I were up there visiting our friend Liz Robins, who is here tonight. And they asked me if I would be an umpire in this game. And once I realized there were some members of the press there and I'd be able to give them grades instead of the other way around, I eagerly accepted. Now, at that time a lot of you will not remember this; I hope, at least, you will not remember it, and I hope you will forget after I tell you tonight. I had given a speech for Governor Dukakis at the Democratic Convention, which I intend to complete here this evening. Anyway I cannot believe I said that. The announcer for the ball game was Jim Brady, the guy that does that Brady's Bits in Parade magazine every Sunday, you know? He is a delightful man, but when he saw me out there on the mound about ready to call balls and strikes, he saidhe introduced mehe said, This is Governor ENTITY from Arkansas. He is up here visiting, and if he takes as long to make the calls today as he did to speak in Atlanta, we will never get out of here. I really appreciated that. Anyway, so the game starts, and the next time the sides change, I look up in the stands, and this tall guy stands up and walks down, comes out to the pitcher's mound, shakes my hand, and says, I am Chevy Chase. And he said, I may be the only person in America besides your mother who feels this way, but I liked that speech. That is verbatim what he said. You just applauded for the next ambassador to Great Britain. Ladies and gentlemen, you know we all do a lot of these events, and a lot of you are the backbone of our party.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatoredwardmkennedymcleanvirginia", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in McLean, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-edward-m-kennedy-mclean-virginia", "publication_date": "29-09-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1947, "text": "And sometimes we do them with great energy; sometimes we do them with interest; sometimes we do them because we know it is the right thing to do and we do them. I am here tonight because there is no place else in America I would rather be tonight than here in this cause for this good man. You know, before I got here I really did not understand how things so often came across in the country so different than they are up here. I was another alienated American, even though I was the Governor of my State. And I was terribly worried that this country was going in the wrong direction, that the people that were running our country were just telling the voters what they thought they wanted to hear and avoiding all the tough problemswe had had profound social problems building up for 30 years, we'd had serious economic problems building up for 20 yearsthat we had finally come to the end of the cold war, a time when we had an opportunity to take a fresh look at both the opportunities and the difficulties of this country at this time, and that we had a window here in which we could either secure the American dream for our children and our grandchildren and the strength of this country as we move into the 21st century, or we could walk away from the responsibilities of our generation. When I talked to Hillary about running for President, Iin a very personal way, I did not really want to do it. First of all, most of my friends thought it was a fool's errand because the incumbent President was at over 70 percent approval. Secondly, things were going pretty well for us at home, with our family, our friends, and our work. But I did it because I thought that we all have an obligation to try to make a difference and that we had to change the direction of the country. Tonight we come here to honor someone who has always fought to keep us going forward in the right direction, who has always fought for hope over fear, for reconciliation over division, to bring out the best in us instead of to bring out the worst in us. Well, when I came here I knew it would not be easy, but I was determined to see that we work together to move this country forward, to address our problems, to get things done for ordinary Americans. But you know, we have made a good start.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatoredwardmkennedymcleanvirginia", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in McLean, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-edward-m-kennedy-mclean-virginia", "publication_date": "29-09-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1948, "text": "And now, as always happens in these midterm elections, with the issue hanging fire, the American people will have to decide whether we will continue this rigorous transition into tomorrow. Every time we reach a point in history where we are going through big changes and the future is not clear, we fight a battle within ourselves. In that sense, our Nation is very much like a person. If you think about your own life, whenever you did anything really different and took on a new challenge, it was always with a mixture of hope and fear, when you went to school the first day or first went off to college or had your first job or first sought elective office or married or had your first child. A delicate balance always has to be maintained between hope and fear. And every day we all get up and we see things that are happening that we do not like or we are unsure what will happen to us. And it is almost as if we have a scale inside us, with blind justice holding it, and hope is on one side and fear is on the other. And each day it may take a little different balance. The job we have between now and election day is to make sure that when people wake up on election day, they vote their hopes instead of their fears, they vote for tomorrow instead of yesterday, they vote to keep going forward, and they vote for Senator Ted Kennedy for reelection in Massachusetts. We still have a lot to do, but we have made a good start. And we have done some very important things by putting our economic house in order, giving the American people their first serious attack on crime in a long time, and beginning to make this Government work for ordinary citizens. If you look at the last 20 months, this CongressI might add, without one single, solitary vote from a member of the other partythe Democrats, who were so often attacked as being for big Government and spending, voted for a budget that cut $255 billion in Federal spending, that reduced the deficit by more than any plan ever adopted in the history of the country, that gave us 3 years of deficit reduction in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was President. I might add, they did it by raising tax rates on only the top 1.2 percent of Americans, including most of you in this room tonight. And we thank you for staying with us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatoredwardmkennedymcleanvirginia", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in McLean, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-edward-m-kennedy-mclean-virginia", "publication_date": "29-09-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1949, "text": "This administrationand it is a great rebuke to those who think people only vote their own short-term self-interests; all of you are. And I honor you for your presence here tonight and for caring about your country and the long-term health and discipline and economic direction of what we are trying to do. Our administration expanded trade by more than any in the comparable time period in the last 30 years. Exports are up, sales are up, and jobs are up in export-related areas. 4.3 million new jobs, 93 percent of them in the private sector, unlike the ratio in previous years when it is been mostly Government jobs created to try to help people deal with the problems of economic fallout. We have had 8 months of manufacturing job growth in a row for the first time in a decade. And just last week, at the annual vote of International Economists, for the first time in 9 years, it was the United States of America that was voted as having the most productive economy in the world. We have got a long way to go, but we have made a good beginning. And Senator Kennedy for years has been interested in this whole crime issue from his service on the Judiciary Committee. But Joe Biden will tell you they talked about crime around here for 6 years, but we finally passed the crime bill that is tough with punishment, tough in terms of putting 100,000 police on the street, but also smart in providing prevention and giving people a chance to turn away from lives of crime and giving our young people a chance to have something to say yes to. Also, for the first time in my memory we put together back-to-back victories with the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban, in spite of the ferocious opposition of the NRA. We have got a long way to go, but it is a pretty good beginning. If you look at what was done to make Government work for ordinary people, in the economic plan, we reformed the college loan program the Secretary of Education is here tonight making 20 million Americans, including over 840,000 in the State of Massachusetts, eligible for low-interest loans at longer repayment terms, a stunning benefit for middle class kids, not just poor kids, so that no one need ever walk away from the challenge of paying for a college education againyou can clap for that; Ted Kennedy was for it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatoredwardmkennedymcleanvirginia", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in McLean, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-edward-m-kennedy-mclean-virginia", "publication_date": "29-09-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1950, "text": "We have 200,000 more children in Head Start; hundreds of thousands of people in Massachusetts alone affected by the family leave law which says that if you have got a sick parent or you are about to have a child, you can take a little time off work without losing your job. We are going to have 2 million more children immunized by 1996, so that all the kids under 2 will be immunized and parents can go to work not worrying about whether their children are going to be safe from preventable childhood diseases. Fifteen million working people and their children are going to get income tax cuts because they work hard and they raise their kids but they are hovering just above the poverty line, and we do not want them to fall into the poverty line and quit working and go on welfare. This is a pro-work, pro-family administration making this Government work for ordinary citizens again. Finally, let me say to our friends in the other party, I sat out there in the heartland of America as the Governor for years and years and years, and I heard them talk about how terrible the Federal Government was and how big and bloated it was. But we, the Democrats, voted to reduce the size of the Federal Government by 272,000, to make it the smallest it is been since President Kennedy was in office. We have already done over 70,000 of those reductions. And every last red cent of reduction in the Federal Government is going to local government and to local communities to help them fight crime. That is the record of the Democrats in the last 2 years. Now, if you compare that to what our opponents have done and what they have said, it is a pretty big difference. In the name of partisanship, they tried to stop the crime bill. They voted entirely against the economic program, a program that gave college loan breaks to millions of kids, a program that made 90 percent of the small businesses in this country eligible for tax cuts and gave tax reductions to 15 million working families. They have done everything they could to keep us from addressing the health care reform issue in a serious way.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatoredwardmkennedymcleanvirginia", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in McLean, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-edward-m-kennedy-mclean-virginia", "publication_date": "29-09-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1951, "text": "Congressman Grandy from Iowa saying that they had all been ordered not to cooperate and compromise on health care; a Republican Senator quoted in one of our big newspapers the other day saying, We killed health care, now if we can just not get our fingerprints on it ; their political adviser, Mr. Kristol, telling them the one thing they must not do is to cooperate to bring down health care costs, make health insurance secure for those who have it, and cover those who do not because that would be a political benefit for the other party. Now we know what they wish to do if they get the majority. They put out their Contract With America, and you know what they did? It looks like a contract; it looks like they took out a contract against the deficit, a contract against Medicare, a contract against paying for the crime bill, a contract against all the gains we have made for ordinary Americans in the last 2 years. They want to go back to the way they did it before, explode the deficit, tell people what they want to hear, and stick it to ordinary Americans. We can do better than that. We have to reelect the people and elect the people who want to keep going forward. If you just look at the things that Senator Kennedy has been involved in just since I have been Presidentthe Head Start program, 200,000 more children; reforming the education loans; working on changing the whole unemployment system to a reemployment system, something we have not finished yet; the Goals 2000 bill, which for the first time in the history of America commits us as a nation to world-class standards of educational excellence and commits the Federal Government not to have a bureaucracy but to give help to local grassroots efforts at reform; the national service program, which this year has 20,000 young Americans and 2 years from now will have 100,000 young Americans earning their way to a higher education by serving their communities at the grassroots level, not in a bureaucracy but in people power that can truly change the course of our country's futurehe led the way in all of those endeavors. And he deserves a lot of credit for it. But elections are about the future. If we do a good job, it is just what we were hired to do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatoredwardmkennedymcleanvirginia", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in McLean, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-edward-m-kennedy-mclean-virginia", "publication_date": "29-09-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1952, "text": "Because if you ever want this country to be able to bring the deficit down without breaking the backs of our senior citizens; if you ever want to see a time when working people will be secure in their insurance, instead of the situation which exists todaythis is the only advanced country in the world where working families are losing ground in insurance coverage. There are 5 million Americans in working families today who had health insurance 5 years ago who do not have it today, even though we spend 40 percent more of our income than any other country on health care. If you want to preserve the integrity of our great medical institutions of higher learning, if you want to see health insurance for all Americans and stability in our economy long-term and in our Federal budget long-term, we have got to address the health care issue. So what if we could not do it in a year. It took 7 years to pass the Brady bill, 7 years to pass family leave, 7 years to pass motor voter, 6 years to pass the crime bill. I signed a banking reform bill today that they have been working on longer than anybody can remember. We can do this. We will do this. The people of Massachusetts, I do not believe, want to send a signal to Washington, DC, that they have abandoned health care. I think they want to tell us to keep at it until we get it right. And the only way to do that is to say, Senator Kennedy, stay on the job; keep doing it until we get it right. My friends, you will see this election everywhere in America played out. He is running against someone who signed the contract, a contract against health care reform, for cutting Medicare, for exploding the deficit, for putting the Federal budget in a place where they will not even be able to fund the crime billthe same old promises, tell them what they want to hear, bad-mouth Government, bad-mouth the people who are the instruments of change, and hope you do not get caught. I think the American people are smarter than that. You know, Ted Kennedy said tonight that he was not the youngest man in the Senate race. He was once the youngest man in the Senate for quite a long time. Well, I was once the youngest Governor in America by 9 years. Time has a way of curing those problemsand of changing your perspective. But I would like to say something about Senator Kennedy and about the United States. He is made enemies in his life because he has fought for things.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatoredwardmkennedymcleanvirginia", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in McLean, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-edward-m-kennedy-mclean-virginia", "publication_date": "29-09-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1953, "text": "But the things he has fought for are things that would help people who are very different from him. Ninety-five percent of the people that would have been given the things that he was given in life never would have spent their life trying to get all that for everybody else in the country. Most of us, given the opportunities he had, would have enjoyed them in a very different way. They would not have put themselves on the line day in and day out, year in and year out. This country is also very old as a democracy, but it is forever young. Why do you think the Israelis and the Arabs want to come here and have us work with them to end the decades of horrible fighting in the Middle East? Why do you think that after literally hundreds of years of fighting, the Catholics and the Protestants in Northern Ireland, and the British and the Irish wish the Americans to be involved in the peace process? Why did Mr. Mandela and Mr. de Klerk want the United States to spend a few million dollars of our tax money to help them develop an election that would really work? Even in the 11th hour of our crisis in Haiti a little over a week ago, when the delegation was down there meeting with the military leaders and they realized finally that we meant business, one of them said, Well, if the President is determined to do this and the United Nations is determined to act, at least we want the United States here; we trust them, we know they can be trusted. We know what they represent. And I was sitting here looking at Ted Kennedy give that speech tonight, and I saw it literally moving his entire being. And I said to myself, let the people who disagree with him disagree. Let the people who say he is wrong on the issues say that. But let no one doubt that he may be the youngest person running for the Senate in any State this year, because he believes in things that are forever young. Thank you, and God bless you all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforsenatoredwardmkennedymcleanvirginia", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Senator Edward M. Kennedy in McLean, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-senator-edward-m-kennedy-mclean-virginia", "publication_date": "29-09-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1954, "text": "Speaker, Madam Vice President, our First Lady and Second Gentleman good to see you guys up there members of Congress And, by the way, Chief Justice, I may need a court order. She gets to go to the game tomorr- next week. We got to work something out here. You know, I start tonight by congratulating the 118th Congress and the new Speaker of the House, Kevin McCarthy. Speaker, I do not want to ruin your reputation, but I look forward to working with you. And I want to congratulate the new Leader of the House Democrats, the first African American Minority Leader in history, Hakeem Jeffries. He won despite the fact I campaigned for him. And congratulations to Chuck Schumer, another you know, another term as Senate Minority Leader. You know, I think you only this time you have a slightly bigger majority, Mr. Leader. Nancy Pelosi. Folks, the story of America is a story of progress and resilience, of always moving forward, of never, ever giving up. It is a story unique among all nations. We are the only country that has emerged from every crisis we have ever entered stronger than we got into it. Look, folks, that is what we are doing again. I stand here tonight, after we have created, with the help of many people in this room, 12 million new jobs more jobs created in two years than any President has created in four years because of you all, because of the American people. Two years ago and two years ago, ENTITY had shut down our businesses were closed, our schools were robbed of so much. And today, ENTITY no longer controls our lives. And two years ago, our democracy faced its greatest threat since the Civil War. As we gather here tonight, we are writing the next chapter in the great American story a story of progress and resilience. possibilities. We do not think anything is beyond our capacity. But over the past two years, we proved the cynics and naysayers wrong. You came together to pass one in a gen- one-in-a-generation once-in-a-generation infrastructure law building bridges connecting our nation and our people. We came together to pass one the most significant law ever helping victims exposed to toxic burn pits. And, in fact it is important.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1955, "text": "And, in fact, I signed over 300 bipartisan pieces of legislation since becoming President, from reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act to the Electoral Count Reform Act, the Respect for Marriage Act that protects the right to marry the person you love. And to my Republican friends, if we could work together in the last Congress, there is no reason we cannot work together and find consensus on important things in this Congress as well. Fighting for the sake of fighting, power for the sake of power, conflict for the sake of conflict gets us nowhere. to restore the soul of this nation; to rebuild the backbone of America, America's middle class; and to unite the country. We have been sent here to finish the job, in my view. For decades, the middle class has been hollowed out in more than and not in one administration, but for a long time. Once-thriving cities and towns that many of you represent became shadows of what they used to be. pride, our sense of self-worth. I ran for President to fundamentally change things. To make sure the economy works for everyone so we can all feel that pride in what we do. Because when the middle class does well, the poor have a ladder up and the wealthy still do very well. I know a lot of you always kid me for always quoting my dad. But my dad used to say, Joey, a job is about a lot more than a paycheck. He really would say this. It is about a lot more than a paycheck. It is about your dignity. It is about respect. It is about being able to look your kid in the eye and say, 'Honey, it is going to be okay' and mean it. Well, folks, so let us look at the results. We are not finished yet, by any stretch of the imagination. But unemployment rate is at 3.4 percent -- a 50-year low. We have already created, with your help, 800,000 good-paying manufacturing jobs the fastest growth in 40 years. And where is it written where is it written that America cannot lead the world in manufacturing? For too many decades, we imported projects and exported jobs. Now, thanks to what you have all done, we are exporting American products and creating American jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1956, "text": "Folks, inflation inflation has been a global problem because the pandemic dirup- disrupted our supply chains, and Putin's unfair and brutal war in Ukraine disrupted ener- energy supplied as well as food supplies, blocking all that grain in Ukraine. But we are better positioned than any country on Earth right now. But we have more to do. But here at home, inflation is coming down. Here at home, gas prices are down $1.50 from their peak. Inflation has fallen every month for the last six months, while take-home pay has gone up. Additionally, over the last two years, a record 10 million Americans applied to start new businesses. And, by the way, every time every time someone starts a small business, it is an act of hope. And, Madam Vice President, I want to thank you for leading that effort to ensure that small businesses have access to capital and the historic laws we enacted that are going to just come into being. Standing here last year, I shared with you a story of American genius and possibilities. Semiconductors small computer chips the size of a fingerprint that power everything from cellphones to automobiles and so much more. These chips were invented in America. They were invented in America. And we used to make 40 percent of the world's chips. In the last several decades, we lost our edge. We are down to only producing 10 percent. We all saw what happened during the pandemic when chip factories shut down overseas. Today's automobiles need 3,000 chips each of those automobiles but American automobiles could not make enough cars because there were not enough chips. So did everything from refrigerators to cellphones. That is why that is why we came together to pass the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act. Folks, I know I have been criticized for saying this, but I am not changing my view. We are going to make sure the supply chain for America begins in America the supply chain begins in America. And we have already created we have already created 800,000 new manufacturing jobs without this law, before the law kicks in. With this new law, we are going to create hundreds of thousands of new jobs across the country. And I mean all across the country, throughout not just the coast, but through the middle of the country as well. That is going to come from companies that have announced more than $300 billion in investments in American manufacturing over the next few years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1957, "text": "Outside of Columbus, Ohio, Intel is building semiconductor factories on a thousand acres literally a field of dreams. It is going to create 10,000 jobs, that one investment; 7,000 construction jobs; 3,000 jobs in those factories once they are finished. They call them factors. Jobs paying an average of $130,000 a year, and many do not require a college degree. Jobs because we worked together, these jobs where people do not have to leave home to search for opportunity. So much more that is going to be needed to support those three thou- those 3,000 permanent jobs and the factories that are going to be built. Talk to mayors and governors, Democrats and Republicans, and they will tell you what this means for their communities. We are seeing these fields of dreams transform the Heartland. But to maintain the strongest economy in the world, we need the best infrastructure in the world. And, folks, as you all know, we used to be number one in the world in infrastructure. We have sunk to 13th in the world. The United States of America 13th in the world in infrastructure, modern infrastructure. But now we are coming back because we came together and passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law the largest investment in infrastructure since President Eisenhower's Interstate Highway System. Folks, already we have funded over 20,000 projects, including major airports from Boston to Atlanta to Portland projects that are going to put thousands of people to work rebuilding our highways, our bridges, our railroads, our tunnels, ports, airports, clean water, high-speed Internet all across America urban, rural, Tribal. I want to thank my Republican friends who voted for the law. And my Republican friends who voted against it as well but I am still I still get asked to fund the projects in those districts as well, but do not worry. I promised I'd be a President for all Americans. We will fund these projects. And I will see you at the groundbreaking. Look, this law this law will further unite all of America. And, folks, we have been talking about fixing it for decades, but we are really finally going to get it done. I went there last month with Democrats and Republicans in from both states to deliver a commitment of $1.6 billion for this project. And while I was there, I met a young woman named Saria, who is here tonight. Is she up in the box?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1958, "text": "Well, Saria for 30 years for 30 years I learned she told me she'd been a proud member of the Iron workers Local 44, known as known as the Cowboys in the Sky the folks who built who built Cincinnati's skyline. Saria said she cannot wait to be 10 stories above the Ohio River building that new bridge. God bless her. And that is what we are also building we are building back pride. Look, we are also replacing poisonous lead pipes that go into 10 million homes in America, 400,000 schools and childcare centers so every child in America every child in American can drink the water, instead of having permanent damage to their brain. Look, we are making sure we are making sure that every community every community in America has access to affordable, high-speed Internet. No parent should have to drive by a McDonald's parking lot to help their do their homework online with their kids, which many thousands were doing across the country. And when we do these projects and, again, I get criticized about this, but I make no excuses for it we are going to buy American. We are going to buy American. Folks and it is totally it is totally consistent with international trade rules. Buy American has been the law since 1933. But for too long, past administrations Democrat and Republican have fought to get around it. Tonight, I am also announcing new standards to require all construction materials used in federal infra- infrastructure projects to be made in America. I mean it. And on my watch, American roads, bridges, and American highways are going to be made with American products as well. Folks, my economic plan is about investing in places and people that have been forgotten. So many of you listening tonight, I know you feel it. So many of you felt like you have just simply been forgotten. Amid the economic upheaval of the past four decades, too many people have been left behind and treated like they are invisible. Maybe that is you, watching from home. You remember the jobs that went away. You remember them, do not you? The folks at home remember them. Well, that is why I get that. That is why we are building an economy where no one is left behind. Jobs are coming back, pride is coming back because of choices we made in the last several years. You know, this is, in my view, a blue-collar blueprint to rebuild America and make a real difference in your lives at home.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1959, "text": "For example, too many of you lay in bed at night, like my dad did, staring at the ceiling, wondering what in God's name happens if yo- if your spouse gets cancer or your child gets deadly ill or if something happens to you. What are you going are you going to have the money to pay for those medical bills? Are you going to have to sell the house or try to get a second mortgage on it? I get it. I get it. With the Inflation Reduction Act that I signed into law, we are taking on powerful interests to bring healthcare costs down so you can sleep better at night with more security. You know, we pay more for prescription drugs than any nation in the world. We pay more for prescription drugs than any major nation on Earth. For example, 1 in 10 Americans has diabetes. Many of you in this chamber do and in the audience. But every day, millions need insulin to control their diabetes so they can literally stay alive. Insulin has been around for over 100 years. The guy who invented it did not even patent it because he wanted it to be available for everyone. It costs the drug companies roughly $10 a vial to make that insulin. Package it and all, you may get up to $13. But Big Pharma has been unfairly charging people hundreds of dollars $4- to $500 a month making rec- record profits. So so many things that we did are only now coming to fruition. We said we were doing this and we said we'd pass the law to do it, but people did not know because the law did not take effect until January 1 of this year. We capped the cost of insulin at $35 a month for seniors on Medicare. I am sure you are getting the same calls I am getting. Look, there are millions of other Americans who do not are not on Medicare, including 200,000 young people with Type 1 diabetes who need these insulin need this insulin to stay alive. Let us finish the job this time. Let us cap the cost of insulin for everybody at $35. Folks and Big Pharma is still going to do very well, I promise you all. I promise you they are going to do very well. This law also this law also caps and it will not even go into effect until 2025. It costs out-of-pocket drug costs for seniors on Medicare at a maximum of $2,000 a year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1960, "text": "You do not have to pay more than $2,000 a year, no matter how much your drug costs are. You all know it. Many of you, like many of my family, have cancer. You know the drugs can range from $10-, $11-, $14-, $15,000 for the cancer drugs. And if drug prices rise faster than inflation, drug companies are going to have to pay Medicare back the difference. And we are finally we are finally giving Medicare the power to negotiate drug prices. Bringing down bringing down prescription drug costs does not just save seniors money, it cuts the federal deficit by billions of dollars by hundreds of billions of dollars because these prescription drugs are drugs purchased by Medicare to make keep their commitment to the seniors. Instead of paying 4- or 500 bucks a month, you are paying 15. That is a lot of savings for the federal government. And, by the way, why would not we want that? Now, some members here are threatening and I know it is not an official party position, so I am not going to exaggerate but threatening to repeal the Inflation Reduction Act. As my coach that is okay. As my football coach used to say, Lots of luck in your senior year. Make no mistake, if you try anything to raise the cost of prescription drugs, I will veto it. And, look, I am pleased to say that more Americans health have health insurance now than ever in history. A record 16 million people are enrolled in the Affordable Care Act. And thanks thanks to the law I signed last year, saving millions are saving $800 a year on their premiums. And, by the way, that law was written and the benefit expires in 2025. Let us finish the job and make those savings permanent. Look, the Inflation Reduction Act is also the most significant investment ever in climate change ever. I visited the devastating aftermath of record floods, droughts, storms, and wildfires from Arizona to New Mexico to all the way up to the Canadian border. More timber has been burned that I have observed from helicopters than the entire state of Missouri. And we do not have global warming? In addition to emergency recovery from Puerto Rico to Florida to Idaho, we are rebuilding for the long term. New electric grids that are able to weather major storms and not prevent those fire forest fires. We are going to build 500,000 electric vehicle charging stations, installed across the country by tens of thousands of IBEW workers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1961, "text": "And we are helping families save more than $1,000 a year with tax credits to purchase of electric vehicles and efficient and efficient appliances energy-efficient appliances. Let us face reality. The climate crisis does not care if you are in a red or a blue state. We have an obligation not to ourselves, but to our children and grandchildren to confront it. I am proud of how the how America, at last, is stepping up to the challenge. We are still going to need oil and gas for a while, but guess what no, we do but there is so much more to do. We got to finish the job. And we pay for these investments in our future by finally making the wealthiest and biggest corporations begin to pay their fair share. The tax system is not fair. Look, the idea that in 2020, 55 of the largest corporations in America, the Fortune 500, made $40 billion in profits and paid zero in federal taxes? But now, because of the law I signed, billion-dollar companies have to pay a minimum of 15 percent. God love them. Under my plans, as long as I am President, nobody earning less than $400,000 will pay an additional penny in taxes. But let us finish the job. We have to reward work, not just wealth. You know, there is a thousand billionaires in America it is up from about 600 at the beginning of my term but no billionaire should be paying a lower tax rate than a school teacher or a firefighter. No, I mean it. I mean, look, I know you all are not enthusiastic about that, but think about it. Have you noticed Big Oil just reported its profits. Last year, they made $200 billion in the midst of a global energy crisis. They invested too little of that profit to increase domestic production. And when I talked to a couple of them, they say, We were afraid you were going to shut down all the oil wells and all the oil refineries anyway, so why should we invest in them? I said, We are going to need oil for at least another decade, and that is going to exceed and beyond that. We are going to need it. If they had, in fact, invested in the production to keep gas prices down instead they used the record profits to buy back their own stock, rewarding their CEOs and shareholders. Corporations ought to do the right thing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1962, "text": "That is why I propose we quadruple the tax on corporate stock buybacks and encourage long- long-term investments. They will still make considerable profit. Let us finish the job and close the loopholes that allow the very wealthy to avoid paying their taxes. Instead of cutting the number of audits for wealthy taxpayers, I just signed a law to reduce the deficit by $114 billion by cracking down on wealthy tax cheats. In the last two years, my administration has cut the deficit by more than $1.7 trillion -- the largest deficit reduction in American history. Under the previous administration, the American deficit went up four years in a row. Because of those record deficits, no President added more to the national debt in any four years than my predecessor. Nearly 25 percent of the entire national debt that took over 200 years to accumulate was added by just one administration alone the last one. How did Congress respond to that debt? They did the right thing. They lifted the debt ceiling three times without preconditions or crisis. They paid the American bill to prevent an economic disaster of the country. So, tonight I am asking the Congress to follow suit. Let us commit here tonight that the full faith and credit of the United States of America will never, ever be questioned. So my many of some of my Republican friends want to take the economy hostage I get it unless I agree to their economic plans. All of you at home should know what those plans are. Instead of making the wealthy pay their fair share, some Republicans some Republicans want Medicare and Social Security to sunset. I am not saying it is a majority Anybody who doubts it, contact my office. I will give you a copy. I will give you a copy of the proposal. Well, I am glad to see no, I tell you, I enjoy conversion. You know, it means if Congress does not keep the programs the way they are, they'd go away. Other Republicans say I am not saying it is a majority of you. but it is being proposed by individuals. I am not politely not naming them, but it is being proposed by some of you. Look, folks, the idea is that we are not going to be we are not going to be moved into being threatened to default on the debt if we do not respond. Folks so, folks, as we all apparently agree, Social Security and Medicare is off the off the books now, right? We got unanimity!", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1963, "text": "Social Security and Medicare are a lifeline for millions of seniors. Americans have to pay into them from the very first paycheck they have started. So, tonight, let us all agree and we apparently are let us stand up for seniors. Stand up and show them we will not cut Social Security. We will not cut Medicare. Those benefits belong to the American people. They earned it. And if anyone tries to cut Social Security which apparently no one is going to do and if anyone tries to cut Medicare, I will stop them. I will veto it. Next month, when I offer my fiscal plan, I ask my Republican friends to lay down their plan as well. I really mean it. Let us sit down together and discuss our mutual plans together. Let us do that. I can tell you, the plan I am going to show you is going to cut the deficit by another $2 trillion. And it will not cut a single bit of Medicare or Social Security. how do we make keep it solvent. Well, I will not raise taxes on anyone making under 400 grand. by making sure that the wealthy and big corporations pay their fair share. They are not just taking advantage of the tax code, they are taking advantage of you, the American consumer. I have your back. We are already preventing Americans who are receiving surprise medical bills, stopping 1 billion dollar surprise bills per month so far. We are protecting seniors' life savings by cracking down on nursing homes that commit fraud, endanger patient safety, or prescribe drugs that are not needed. Millions of Americans can now save thousands of dollars because they can finally get a hearing aid over the counter without a prescription. Look, capitalism without competition is not capitalism. Last year, I cracked down, with the help of many of you, on foreign shipping companies that were making you pay higher prices for every good coming into the country. I signed a bipartisan bill that cut shipping costs by 90 percent, helping American farmers, businessmen, and consumers. Let us finish the job. My administration is also taking on junk fees, those hidden surcharges too many companies use to make you pay more. For example, we are making airlines show you the full ticket price upfront, refund your money if your flight is cancelled or delayed. We have reduced exorbitant bank overdrafts by saving consumers more than $1 billion a year. We are cutting credit card late fees by 75 percent, from $30 to $8.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1964, "text": "Look, junk fees may not matter to the very wealthy, but they matter to most other folks in homes like the one I grew up in, like many of you did. They add up to hundreds of dollars a month. They make it harder for you to pay your bills or afford that family trip. I know how unfair it feels when a company overcharges you and gets away with it. We have written a bill to stop it all. We are going to ban surprise resort fees that hotels charge on your bill. Those fees can cost you up to $90 a night at hotels that are not even resorts. We the idea that cable, Internet, and cellphone companies can charge you $200 or more if you decide to switch to another provider. We can stop service fees on tickets to concerts and sporting events and make companies disclose all the fees upfront. And we will prohibit airlines from charging $50 roundtrip for a family just to be able to sit together. Airlines cannot treat your child like a piece of baggage. Americans are tired of being we are tired of being played for suckers. So pass pass the Junk Fee Prevention Act so companies stop ripping us off. We are going to be we are beginning to restore the dignity of work. Thirty million workers have to sign non-compete agreements for the jobs they take. So a cashier at a burger place cannot walk across town and take the same job at another burger place and make a few bucks more. Well, they just changed it because we exposed it. That was part of the deal, guys. We are banning those agreements so companies have to compete for workers and pay them what they are worth. And I must tell you, this is bound to get a response from my friends on my left, with the right. I am so sick and tired of companies breaking the law by preventing workers from organizing. Because businesses have a right workers have a right to form a union. And let us guarantee all workers have a living wage. Let us make sure working parents can afford to raise a family with sick days, paid family and medical leave, affordable childcare. That is going to enable millions of more people to go and stay at work. And let us restore the full Child Tax Credit which gave tens of millions of parents some breathing room and cut child poverty in half to the lowest level in history. And, by the way, when we do all of these things, we increase productivity, we increase economic growth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1965, "text": "So let us finish the job and get more families access to affordable, quality housing. Let us get seniors who want to stay in their homes the care they need to do so. Let us give more breathing room to millions of family caregivers looking after their loved ones. Pass my plan so we get seniors and people with disabilities the home care services they need and support the workers who are doing God's work. These plans are fully paid for, and we can afford to do them. Restoring the dignity of work means making education an affordable ticket to the middle class. You know, when we made public education 12 years of it universal in the last century, we made the best-educated, best-paid we became the best-education, best-paid nation in the world. But the rest of the world has caught up. Jill, my wife, who teaches full-time, has an expression. Any nation that out-educates is going to out-compete us. Any nation that out-educates is going to out-compete us. Folks, we all know 12 years of education is not enough to win the economic competition of the 21st century. If we want to have the best-educated workforce, let us finish the job by providing access to preschool for three and four years old. Studies show that children who go to preschool are nearly 50 percent more likely to finish high school and go on to earn a two- or four-year degree, no matter their background they came from. Let us give public school teachers a raise. We are making progress by reducing student debt, increasing Pell Grants for working and middle-class families. Let us finish the job and connect students to career opportunities starting in high school, provide access to two years of community college the best career training in America, in addition to being a pathway to a four-year degree. Let us offer every American a path to a good career, whether they go to college or not. And, folks folks, in the midst of the ENTITY crisis, when schools were closed and we were shutting down everything, let us recognize how far we came in the fight against the pandemic itself. While the virus is not gone, thanks to the resilience of the American people and the ingenuity of medicine, we have broken the ENTITY grip on us. ENTITY deaths are down by 90 percent. We have saved millions of lives and opened up our country we opened our country back up. And soon, we will end the public health emergency.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1966, "text": "But we will remember the toll and pain that is never going to go away. More than a million Americans lost their lives to ENTITY. Empty chairs at the dining room table constantly reminding you that she used to sit there. Remembering them, we remain vigilant. We still need to monitor dozens of variants and support new vaccines and treatments. So Congress needs to fund these efforts and keep America safe. And as we emerge from this crisis stronger, we are also got to double down prosecuting criminals who stole relief money meant to keep workers and small businesses afloat. Before I came to office, you remember, during that campaign, the big issue was about inspector generals who would protect taxpayers' dollars, who were sidelined. Many people said, We do not need them. Last year, I told you the watchdogs are back. Since then since then, we have recovered billions of taxpayers' dollars. Now let us triple the anti-fraud strike force going after these criminals, double the statute of limitations on these crimes, and crack down on identity fraud by criminal syndicates stealing billions of dollars billions of dollars from the American people. And the data shows that for every dollar we put into fighting fraud, the taxpayer will get back at least 10 times as much. Look, ENTITY left its scars, like the spike in violent crime in 2020 the first year of the pandemic. We have an obligation to make sure all people are safe. Public safety depends on public trust, as all of us know. Joining us tonight are the parents of Tyre Nicholswelcome who had to bury Tyre last week. As many of you personally know, there is no words to describe the heartache or grief of losing a child. But imagine imagine if you lost that child at the hands of the law. Imagine having to worry whether your son or daughter came home from walking down the street or playing in the park or just driving a car. Most of us in here have never had to have the talk the talk that brown and Black parents have had to have with their children. Beau, Hunter, Ashley my children I never had to have the talk with them. I never had to tell them, If a police officer pulls you over, turn your interior lights on right away. Imagine having to worry like that every single time your kid got in a car. Here is what Tyre's mother shared with me when I spoke to her, when I asked her how she finds the courage to carry on and speak out.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1967, "text": "With the faith of God, she said her son was, quote, a beautiful soul and something good will come of this. Imagine how much courage and character that takes. It is up to us, to all of us. neighborhoods free of violence, law enfircement law enforcement who earns the community's trust. Just as every cop, when they pin on that badge in the morning, has a right to be able to go home at night, so does everybody else out there. Our children have a right to come home safely. Equal protection under the law is a covenant we have with each other in America. We know police officers put their lives on the line every single night and day. And we know we ask them, in many cases, to do too much to be counselors, social workers, psychologists responding to drug overdoses, mental health crises, and so much more. In one sense, we ask much too much of them. And they risk and they risk their lives every time they put that shield on. But what happened to Tyre in Memphis happens too often. Give law enforcement the real training they need. Help them to succeed in keeping them safe. We also need more first responders and professionals to address the growing mental health, substance abuse challenges. All this can help prevent violence in the first place. And when police officers or police departments violate the public trust, they must be held accountable. With the support with the support of families of victims, civil rights groups, and law enforcement, I signed an executive order for all federal officers, banning chokeholds, restricting no-knock warrants, and other key elements of the George Floyd Act. Something good must come from this. All of us in the cha- in this chamber, we need to rise to this moment. Let us do what we know in our hearts that we need to do. Let us come together to finish the job on police reform. That was the plea of parents who lost their children in Uvalde I met with every one of them Do something about gun violence. Thank God thank God we did, passing the most sweeping gun safety law in three decades. enhanced background checks for 18- to 21 years old, red-flag laws keeping guns out of the hands of people who are a danger to themselves and others. Joining us tonight is Brandon Tsay, a 26-year-old hero.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1968, "text": "Brandon put his college dreams on hold to be at his mom's side his mom's side when she was dying from cancer. And Brandon Brandon now works at the dance studio started by his grandparents. And two weeks ago, during the Lunar New Year celebrations, he heard the studio door close, and he saw a man standing there pointing a semi-automatic pistol at him. He thought he was going to die, but he thought about the people inside. In that instant, he found the courage to act and wrestled the semi-automatic pistol away from the gunman who had already killed 11 people in another dance studio. He saved lives. It is time we do the same. I led the fight to do that in 1994. And in 10 years that ban was law, mass shootings went down. After we let it expire in a Republican administration, mass shootings tripled. Let us finish the job and ban these assault weapons. And let us also come together on immigration. We know we now have a record number of personnel working to secure the border, arresting 8,000 human smugglers, seizing over 23,000 pounds of fentanyl in just the last several months. We have launched a new border plan last month. Unlawful migration from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela has come down 97 percent as a consequence of that. If we do not pass my comprehensive immigration reform, at least pass my plan to provide the equipment and officers to secure the border and a pathway to citizenship for DREAMers, those on temporary status, farmworkers, essential workers. Here in the People's House, it is our duty to protect all the people's rights and freedoms. Congress must restore the right and Congress must restore the right that was taken away in Roe v. Wade and protect Roe v. Wade. The Vice President and I are doing everything to protect access to reproductive healthcare and safeguard patient safety. But already, more than a dozen states are enforcing extreme abortion bans. If Congress passes a national ban, I will veto it. But let us also pass let us also pass the bipartisan Equality Act to ensure LBG- LGBTQ Americans, especially transgender young people, can live with safety and dignity. Our strength our strength is not just the example of our power, but the power of our example. I spoke from this chamber one year ago, just days after Vladimir Putin unleashed his brutal attack against Ukraine, a murderous assault, evoking images of death and destruction Europe suffered in World War Two.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1969, "text": "Putin's invasion has been a test for the ages a test for America, a test for the world. Would we stand for the most basic of principles? Would we stand for sovereignty? Would we stand for the right of people to live free of tyranny? Would we stand for the defense of democracy? For such defense matters to us because it keeps peace and prevents open season on would-be aggressors that threatens our prosperity. One year later, we know the answer. And together, we did what America always does at our best. We united NATO. We built a global coalition. We stood against Putin's aggression. We stood with the Ukrainian people. Tonight, we are once again joined by Ukrainians' Ambassador to the United States. She represents not her just her nation but the courage of her people. Ambassador is our Ambassador is here, united in our we are united in our support of your country. Will you stand so we can all take a look at you? Because we are going to stand with you as long as it takes. Our nation is working for more freedom, more dignity, and more more peace, not just in Europe, but everywhere. Before I came to office, the story was about how the People's Republic of China was increasing its power and America was failing in the world. We made clear and I made clear in my personal conversations, which have been many, with President Xi that we seek competition, not conflict. But I will make no apologies that we are investing and to make America stronger. Investing in American innovation and industries that will define the future that China intends to be dominating. Investing in our alliances and working with our allies to protect advanced technologies so they will not be used against us. Today, we are in the strongest position in decades to compete with China or anyone else in the world. And I am committed I am committed to work with China where we can advance American interests and benefit the world. As we made clear last week, if China threatens our sovereignty, we will act to protect our country. Winning the competition should unite all of us. We face serious challenges across the world. But in the past two years, democracies have become stronger, not weaker. Name me a world leader who'd change places with Xi Jinping. America is rallying the world to meet those challenges from climate to global health to food insecurity to terrorism to territorial aggression. Allies are stepping up, spending more, and doing more.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1970, "text": "Look, the bridges we are forming between partners in the Pacific and those in the Atlantic. And those who bet against America are learning how wrong they are. It is never, ever been a good bet to bet against America. When I came to office, most assured that bipartisanship assumed was impossible. But I never believed it. That is why a year ago, I offered a Unity Agenda to the nation as I stood here. We made real progress together. We passed the law making it easier for doctors to prescribe effective treatments for opioid addiction. We passed the gun safety law, making historic investments in mental health. We launched the ARPA-H drive for breakthroughs in the fight against cancer, Alzheimer's, and diabetes, and so much more. We passed the Heath Robinson PACT Act, named after the late Iraq War veteran whose story about exposure to toxic burn pits I shared here last year. And I understand something about those burn pits. And we can do it together. Joining us tonight is a father named Doug from Newton, New Hampshire. He wrote Jill, my wife, a letter and me as well about his courageous daughter, Courtney. He shared a story all too familiar to millions of Americans and many of you in the audience. Courtney discovered pills in high school. It spiraled into addiction and eventually death from a fentanyl overdose. Describing the last eight years without her, Doug said, There is no worse pain. Yet, their family has turned pain into purpose, working to end the stigma and change laws. He told us he wants to start a journey towards American recovery. Doug, we are with you. Fentanyl is killing more than 70,000 Americans a year. Big Big you got it. So let us launch a major surge to stop fentanyl production and the sale and trafficking. Second, let us do more on mental health, especially for our children. When millions of young people are struggling with bullying, violence, trauma, we owe them greater access to mental health care at their schools. We must finally hold social media companies accountable for experimenting they are doing running children for profit. And it is time to pass bipartisan legislation to stop Big Tech from collecting personal data on kids and teenagers online, ban targeted advertising to children, and impose stricter limits on the personal data that companies collect on all of us. to equip those we send into harm's way and care for them and their families when they come home.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1971, "text": "Job training, job placement for veterans and their spouses as they come to return to civilian life. Helping veterans to afford their rent, because no one should be homeless in America, especially someone who served the country. Denis McDonough is here, of the VA. We had our first real discussion when I asked him to take the job. We were losing up to 25 veterans a day on suicide. Now we are losing 17 a day to the silent scourge of suicide. Seventeen veterans a day are committing suicide, more than all the people being killed in the wars. Folks, VA VA is doing everything it can, including expanding mental health screening, proven programs that recruits veterans to help other veterans understand what they are going through, get them the help they need. We got to do more. And fourth, last year, Jill and I reignited the Cancer Moonshot that I was able to start with, and President Obama asked me to lead our administration on this issue. Our goal is to cut the cancer death rates at least by 50 percent in the next 25 years, turn more cancers from death sentences to treatable diseases, provide more support for patients and their families. It is personal to so many of us so many of us in this audience. Joining us are Maurice and Kandice, an Irishman and a daughter of immigrants from Panama. They met and fell in love in New York City and got married in the same chapel as Jill and I got married in New York City. He wrote us a letter about his little daughter, Ava. And I saw her just before I came over. She was just a year old when she was diagnosed with a rare kidney disease cancer. After 26 blood transfusions, 11 rounds of radiation, 8 rounds of cheno chemo, 1 kidney removed, given a 5 percent survival rate. He wrote how, in the darkest moments, he thought, If she goes, I cannot stay. Many of you have been through that as well. Jill and I understand that, like so many of you. And he read Jill's book describing our family's cancer journey and how we tried to steal moments of joy where we could with Beau. For them, that glimmer of joy was the half-smile of their baby girl. It meant everything to them. They never gave up hope, and little Ava never gave up hope. They just found out Ava is beating the odds and is on her way to being cured of cancer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1972, "text": "And she is watching from the White House tonight, if she is not asleep already. For the lives we can save for the lives we can save and the lives we have lost, let this be a truly American moment that rallies the country and the world together and prove that we can still do big things. Twenty years ago, under the leadership of President Bush and countless advocates and champions, he undertook a bipartisan effort through PEPFAR to transform the global fight against ENTITY/ENTITY. I believe we can do the same thing with cancer. Let us end cancer as we know it and cure some cancers once and for all. our democracy itself. It is the most fundamental thing of all. With democracy, everything is possible. Without it, nothing is. Over the last few years, our democracy has been threatened and attacked, put at risk put to the test in this very room on January the 6th. And then, just a few months ago, an unhinged Big Lie assailant unleashed a political violence at the home of the then-Speaker of the House of Representatives, using the very same language the insurrectionists used as they stalked these halls and chanted on January 6th. my friend, Paul Pelosi. We have to protect the right to vote, not suppress the that fundamental right. We have to uphold the rule of the law and restore trust in our institutions of democracy. And we must give hate and extremism in any form no safe harbor. Every generation of Americans have faced a moment where they have been called to protect our democracy, defend it, stand up for it. My fellow Americans, we meet tonight at an inflection point, one of those moments that only a few generations ever face, where the direction we now take is going to decide the course of this nation for decades to come. We are not bystanders of history. We are not powerless before the forces that confront us. It is within our power of We the People. We are facing the test of our time. optimistic, hopeful, forward-looking. A nation that embraces light over dark, hope over fear, unity over division, stability over chaos. We have to see each other not as enemies, but as fellow Americans. The only nation in the world built on an idea the only one. Other nations are defined by geography, ethnicity, but we are the only nation based on an idea that all of us, every one of us, is created equal in the image of God.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsstateunionaddressreadtranscriptstoryid96970217", "title": "Michael Bennet` State of the Union address: Read the transcript", "source": "https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/state-union-address-read-transcript/story?id=96970217", "publication_date": "08-02-2023", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1985, "text": "I think you notice from the distinguished men and women on the steps with me the importance of the subject that we will be discussing this morning. We have had a briefing for interested persons from around the Nation on this new proposal which I am sure will be implemented without delay. Every American is concerned about crime and every American is a potential victim of crime. But that is only part of our concern. Crime destroys the essential fabric of our society in ways that go far beyond individual suffering and loss. In that sense, we are all victims. If our communities are to be vibrant and safe, our people cannot live in fear. We cannot let criminals control our lives. The primary responsibility for controlling crime rests with local and State officials, but the Federal Government can and does provide essential and effective support. Within the last year, we have made some progress in reducing crime. Crime rates in almost every category have gone down, but the rates are still too high and crime is still of grave concern to me and other Americans. There is clearly more that the Federal Government can and should do to solve this problem. Working in partnership with State and local governments, community organizations, and concerned citizens, we can make a safer America. Since its creation a decade ago, the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, LEAA, has been the Federal Government's major tool to help local communities, local officials carry out this responsibility. But it has never yet realized its full potential, As part of our reorganization efforts, the Justice Department and the Office of Management and Budget have been working for the last 12 months, intensively reviewing LEAA. We have involved community leaders, public officials, and law enforcement specialists from throughout the Nation. We have also had valuable counsel and assistance from congressional leaders, such as Senator Kennedy and Congressman Rodino. The proposals that I am sending to Congress today will make the Federal Government a more effective and competent partner in the fight against crime. First, we will greatly simplify the grant process, eliminating 75 percent of the paperwork. For instance, cities now requiring 40 different applications per year will in the future only have to submit one application per year. Second, we will strengthen the partnership already enhanced by our urban policy between the Federal Government on the one hand and State and local communities on the other. For the first time hundreds of cities and counties will have the flexibility to decide how their LEAA funds can best be used to attack crime in their own communities and will receive fixed allocations of LEAA funds for that purpose.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfederallawenforcementassistanceprogramsremarksannouncingreorganizationlegislation", "title": "Federal Law Enforcement Assistance Programs Remarks Announcing Reorganization Legislation and a Department of Housing and Urban Development Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/federal-law-enforcement-assistance-programs-remarks-announcing-reorganization-legislation", "publication_date": "10-07-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1986, "text": "In addition, we will target resources to those areas of the country with especially severe crime problems. Third, we will consolidate and strengthen research and statistics programs within the Department of Justice. A National Institute of Justice will be created to replace several different research units now located in the Department of Justice. It will be charged with conducting independent studies to determine how we can best solve our criminal and civil justice problems. A Bureau of Justice Statistics will be created to provide for the first time a central focus for the gathering and analysis of statistics concerning crime and concerning our justice system. The Federal effort to help State and local governments solve their crime programs cannot be limited, however, to just improving LEAA. A sensitivity to the crime problem must be part of other Federal programs which affect the daily lives of our citizens. Several of the Federal agencies which have been involved in our urban policy will be pooling $32 million over the next year to develop, for instance, an improved anticrime program for public housing projects. Funds will be provided by the CETA program for training and education to hire local residents for such important, preventive jobs as manning elevators and patrolling unguarded areas where the crime rate has been very high. Recreation facilities will be built by Interior Department funds for the men, women, children who reside in these projects. And LEAA funds will be provided for counseling and for other services for juveniles living in public housing projects who might be influenced or tempted to resort to a life of crime. The programs I have announced today will have a beneficial effect on our crime problem. But if we are to be successful, we also need the support of each of the distinguished leaders who are here today from State and local governments, from community and neighborhood groups. We have the knowledge, the ability, the determination, the commitment, and the influence, and using these more effective programs, our common effort can continue to reduce the excessive crime rate in our Nation. I'd like now to call on the Attorney General for further remarks, and then we will hear from distinguished Members of the Congress, and then from the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. This is the third ceremony we have had in the Rose Garden that bears very heavily on our effort to do something about improving our criminal justice system. The first was a meeting just like this where we joined with the Senate and Home Judiciary Committees to sponsor the recodification of the criminal laws. That is now pending in the House, already passed the Senate", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfederallawenforcementassistanceprogramsremarksannouncingreorganizationlegislation", "title": "Federal Law Enforcement Assistance Programs Remarks Announcing Reorganization Legislation and a Department of Housing and Urban Development Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/federal-law-enforcement-assistance-programs-remarks-announcing-reorganization-legislation", "publication_date": "10-07-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1987, "text": "The second was to do something about bringing the court system into our foreign intelligence efforts-we call that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. That has passed the Senate and is now pending in the House. We have been somewhat delayed on revamping and revising the LEAA because it is complex. And we started out, because of some of the things they'd done in the past, with the idea that maybe it should be abolished. We finally decided the thing to do was to refurbish it in a way to take out wasted overhead on local, State, and Federal levels, and on the Federal level we reduced the payroll by 15 percent since we have been here, number one. Number two, take the fat out, not spend any more money on boondoggles, but to be sure that the money goes to the process of deterring and eliminating crime. So, we are ending up with a three-pronged agency-research and development that will guarantee that our research is worthwhile and that it will produce something that can be developed; a Bureau of Justice Statistics, something badly needed. We oftentimes do not know what to do about the total system from police, courts, and corrections and prosecutions, without having some idea of what the statistical picture is in the country. We are bringing that together. And, of course, the grant part of the program will be a great deal better, became 70 percent of the money, as the President said, will go out almost as revenue-sharing, and the other 30 percent will be reserved for discretionary programs. I am quite pleased over the prospects, and I am more pleased than that by the fact that Senator Kennedy and Chairman Rodino and some of their colleagues will be sponsoring this legislation. We hope to have it in place by October of 1979, when the present authorization for the LEAA expires. At that time, we will be ready to move into the new system and, hopefully, both committees will agree with the President and me that we ought to go ahead and as much as possible put the new management concept in place now, because this is a managerial problem. And when I say that, I say serious managerial problem. And we need to go ahead and move to better management. I think that Mr. Gregg at the LEAA, who has been the Acting Administrator and is now, has done a wonderful job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfederallawenforcementassistanceprogramsremarksannouncingreorganizationlegislation", "title": "Federal Law Enforcement Assistance Programs Remarks Announcing Reorganization Legislation and a Department of Housing and Urban Development Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/federal-law-enforcement-assistance-programs-remarks-announcing-reorganization-legislation", "publication_date": "10-07-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1990, "text": "I am so grateful that many from the diplomatic corps are here. This is a historic year for America. It is a year of great consequence. It is a year in which we have an opportunity to work with others to shape the future of our globe. We have a chance to achieve peace. We have a chance to achieve a more compassionate world for every citizen. America believes deeply that everybody has worth, everybody matters, everybody was created by the Almighty, and we are going to act on that belief, and we will act on that passion. You know, the world looks at us and say, They are strong. We are strong militarily, but we have got a greater strength than that. We have got a strength in the universality of human rights and the human condition. It is in our country's history. It is ingrained in our soul. And today we are going to describe how we are going to act, not just talk, but act, on the basis of our firm beliefs. I want to thank Tommy; he is the new chairman of the board of the Global Fund. He is also the Secretary of Health and Human Services, doing a great job for our administration. I want to thank so very much the Ambassadors from Guyana and Uganda for standing up here with us today. I appreciate the other ambassadors from the continent of Africa and the Caribbean for being here. With us as well is Bill Frist, a United States Senator, majority leader, passionate advocate of good health care for every citizen on the globe, a man with whom this administration will work, along with Russ Feingold, from Wisconsin, to make sure that the proposal becomes real. There is no doubt in my mind that when you have got the majority leader and a distinguished Senator like Senator Feingold teaming up together, that this will get done. It is just a matter of time. I am honored that Mark Malloch is here Mark Malloch Brown is here, who is the U.N. administrator of the U.N. Development Program. I want to thank the U.S. Surgeon General Carmona is here with us. Zerhouni of the NIH is with us. Tony Fauci is here with us. Les Crawford is the deputy commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheemergencyplanforaidsrelief", "title": "Remarks on the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-emergency-plan-for-aids-relief", "publication_date": "31-01-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1991, "text": "And of course, a man who is on my staff who is going to make an enormous difference here and abroad as a direct adviser to the President, and that is Dr. Joe O'Neill, who is the director of National ENTITY Policy. He cares deeply, and his care has had he is got a lot of influence, let me put it to you this way, because of his convictions. As I mentioned, we are a strong nation, but we are also a blessed nation, and it is important for our citizens to recognize it. Richness is one thing; recognizing that we are blessed gives a different perspective, I think. I think it enhances the fact that we have a responsibility. If you are blessed, there is a responsibility to recognize your blessings in a compassionate way. We have got to understand in this country that if you value life and say every life is equal, that includes a suffering child on the continent of Africa. If you are worried about freedom, that is just not freedom for your neighbor in America; that is freedom for people around the globe. As I said in my State of the Union, freedom is not America's gift to the world; freedom is God's gift to humanity. Freedom means freedom from a lot of things. And today, on the continent of Africa, freedom means freedom from the fear of a deadly pandemic. That is what we think in America, and we are going to act on that belief. Our founding belief in human dignity should be how we conduct ourselves around the world and will be how we conduct ourselves around the world. I want you all to remember, and our fellow citizens to remember, that this is nothing new for our country. Human dignity has been a part of our history for a long time. We fed the hungry after World War I. This country carried out the Marshall plan and the Berlin airlift. Today we provide 60 percent over 60 percent of all the international food aid. We are acting on our compassion. It is nothing new for our country. But there is a pandemic which we must address now, before it is too late. And that is why I took this message to our fellow citizens, that now is the time for this country to step up our efforts to save lives. After all, on the continent of Africa, 30 million people have the ENTITY virus 30 million people. Three million children under the age of 15 have the ENTITY virus. More than 4 million people require immediate drug treatment.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheemergencyplanforaidsrelief", "title": "Remarks on the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-emergency-plan-for-aids-relief", "publication_date": "31-01-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1992, "text": "Yet, just about one percent of people receive drug treatment. I mean, there is a significant world problem that the United States of America can do something about. Tommy mentioned the images, the horrible images, that take place in Africa. It is important for our fellow citizens, as they listen to the dialog on this initiative, to understand that there are mass burials and unmarked graves on the continent of Africa. The pandemic is creating such havoc that there are mass burials, that there are wards of children that are dying because of ENTITY, not a ward, not some wards, but wards after wards full of dying children because of ENTITY, that there are millions of orphans, lonely children, because their mom or dad has died children left, in some cases, to fend for themselves. Because the ENTITY diagnosis is considered a death sentence, many folks do not seek treatment, and that is a reality. It is as if the ENTITY pandemic just continues to feed upon itself over and over and over again, because of hopelessness. This country needs to provide some hope, because this disease can be prevented and it can be treated. Anti-retroviral drugs are now dramatically more affordable in many nations, and these drugs are used to extend the lives of those with ENTITY. In other words, these drugs are really affordable. And when the treatment has come to Africa, it is also important for our citizens to understand the effect of that treatment. When one patient is rescued by medicine, as if back from the dead, many others with ENTITY seek testing and treatment, because it is the first sign of hope they have ever seen. We have the opportunity to bring that hope to millions. It is an opportunity for this Nation to affect millions and millions of lives. And so that is why I have laid out the Emergency Plan for ENTITY Relief. I called it in my State of the Union a work of mercy, and that is what I believe it is. With approval of Congress, we will devote $15 billion to the fight ENTITY abroad over the next 5 years, beginning with 2 billion in the year 2004. I have been asked whether or not we are committed to the Global ENTITY Fund. Well, first of all, I would not put Tommy as the head of it if we were not . And so we are still committed to the Global ENTITY Fund to fight disease. This program in no way diminishes our commitment to the fund. We will continue bilateral ENTITY programs in more than 50 countries.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheemergencyplanforaidsrelief", "title": "Remarks on the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-emergency-plan-for-aids-relief", "publication_date": "31-01-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1993, "text": "We have already got bilateral relations with 50 countries with whom we are working on ENTITY, and we will continue that program. But this plan that I have laid out in front of the Congress, and will work with Members of the Senate and the House on, will dramatically focus our efforts. You notice I did not say, focus our efforts, I said, dramatically focus our efforts. And that is important for the American people to understand, because we want to bring a comprehensive system. It is more than money that we bring; we bring expertise and compassion and love and the desire to develop a comprehensive system, work with people in Africa to do so, for diagnosis and treatment and prevention. We are determined to turn the tide against ENTITY. And we are going to start in 14 African and Caribbean countries, where the disease is most heavily concentrated. We whip it in those 15 or 14 we will show what is possible in other countries. We are going to be involved with the fund. We will continue to have bilateral aid. We want to have intense focus where the need is most severe and show the world what is possible not just show our fellow citizens or show the folks on the continent of Africa, but the world needs to see what we can do together. The model has been applied with great success in Uganda. Anybody who knows the issue of ENTITY on the African Continent appreciates the efforts of Uganda. Even though we are on 14 countries initially with this major focus, we understand there is suffering elsewhere. We want to encourage others to join us as well. The funding will initially go toward expanding existing hospitals and, of course, drawing on the knowledge and the expertise of local physicians. That makes sense. You have got a doc in place, we want to encourage that doc to be able to continue his or her healing. We will build satellite facilities that can serve more people. Of course, we will provide antiretroviral drugs and as well work with folks on the ground for education and care. It is important for our citizens to know that the infrastructure is it is hard for many Americans to imagine the lack of infrastructure that we are working with on the continent of Africa. So we use motorcycles, trucks, bicycles. We use nurses and local healers to go to the farthest villages and farms to test for the disease and to deliver medications that will save lives. Facilities across Africa and the Caribbean will have now the medicine. And our fellow citizens must understand that the reason they do is because of your generosity, the taxpayers of the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheemergencyplanforaidsrelief", "title": "Remarks on the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-emergency-plan-for-aids-relief", "publication_date": "31-01-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1994, "text": "I hope when our citizens absorb that knowledge the massive attempt to save lives that they feel proud of their country and proud of the compassion of America. We are going to work with other governments, of course, private groups there is all kinds of faith-based programs involved on the continent of Africa, and we welcome that, of course. And we encourage that. And we thank you for that. I thought you were Father Edward Phillips for a minute. He is in Kenya, works in Kenya. He is obviously followed his faith. He leads an organization that provides testing and treatment in Nairobi. He is helped thousands of people every year. He ought to be giving this speech, not me, because he knows what it must feel like to play a significant role in saving lives. And that is what we are here to talk about today, how best to save lives. that in this decade, we will prevent 7 million new infections; that we will treat at least 2 million people with life-extending drugs. We will provide humane care, of course, for those who suffer and, as importantly, for the orphans. To me, that is just the beginning. Most important thing is we are providing hope, which is immeasurable. How can you possibly measure the benefits of hope? There is no we cannot quantify that. But it certainly can be qualified by saying a hopeful society is a heck of a lot better society than what they found on the continent today. This project is urgent, and as we move forward on this program we will continue to call upon other nations to join. The United States does not mind leading, and we believe others have a responsibility as well, that we are not the only blessed nation. And we hope they join us. And as well we have got a lot of work to do here in America. It is important for our fellow citizens never to think that one initiative or a major initiative in Africa does not mean we are going to forget the 900,000 people living in America today who carry the ENTITY virus. Of course we will never do that. It is important for our citizens to understand that there is 40,000 new infections every year in this country. The ENTITY diagnosis still obviously brings tremendous grief and worries in parts of our society. And so the budget I have submitted and worked with Congress on will be a request for $16 billion for domestic ENTITY prevention and care and treatment; it is a 7 percent increase over '03. It is a $93 million increase for ENTITY research.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheemergencyplanforaidsrelief", "title": "Remarks on the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-emergency-plan-for-aids-relief", "publication_date": "31-01-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2019, "text": "I do not know about you, but I am excited about the year 2008. I intend to finish strong with my head held high. And I intend to work to see to it that we keep the White House and elect John Boehner Speaker of the House of Representatives. Now, I thank you all for coming tonight. I send I bring greetings from First Lady Laura Bush. She is yes, thank you. She is wedding planning right now, so I appreciate the invitation to be here. You know, I was just thinking about how next year's dinner is going to be a little different from this one. First, you are going to be welcoming a new keynote speaker, President John McCain. And President McCain will start this dinner by saying, Thanks for the introduction, Mr. Speaker. And I will be watching it all on TV in Crawford. I do want to thank my friend John Boehner. He has been a great leader for the Republicans in the House of Representatives. I am proud to call him friend, and I thank you for your service. Roy Blunt, Adam Putnam, Darrell Issa. Issa, you did a heck of a job tonight. I want to recognize my friend Tom Cole. Tom Cole has the vision and determination to effect change, and that is, elect Republicans to be the Speaker and leaders of the House of Representatives. I want to thank Eric Cantor, David Dreier, Kay Granger, John Carter. I appreciate Sam * Hall, my fellow Texan, and Sam Johnson, my fellow Texan, and Ralph Regula for presenting the awards on all the veterans who are serving in Congress tonight. That'll happen after I leave, but nevertheless, I do want to extend my congratulations. I thank Trace Adkins for singing here tonight. I told him, no, I did not think I'd sing; I thought I'd just do a little tap-dance. And I also appreciate my friend, one of the great voices of all time, Sam Moore. I also want to welcome all the candidates who are running for office. You know, it is not an easy decision to make to run for the United States Congress, but it is a noble decision. And it is a tough decision for your families. And so I want to thank you for agreeing to run; I want to thank your families for agreeing to support you. My advice is, work hard, talk about what is in your heart, let the people know your values, and win.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalrepublicancongressionalcommitteedinner1", "title": "Remarks at the National Republican Congressional Committee Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-republican-congressional-committee-dinner-1", "publication_date": "12-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2020, "text": "I think 2008 is going to be a fabulous year for the Republican Party. And the reason why I believe that is because when the American people look at our ideals versus the ideals of the Democrats, when they look at what we believe versus what they believe, they are with us. We represent the values of the American people. Our ideas are the ones embraced by the folks. They may not be the ones that the pundits listen to, but they are the ones who are out working every single day to make America a great and hopeful place. We believe in strong national defense, and we will do what it takes to keep our Nation safe from a terrorist attack. We believe in limited government. We believe in the collective wisdom of the American people to make the decisions on behalf of the American Government. We would rather trust you than the people in government to make the decisions for what is best for you. I am optimistic about this year because I know John McCain. I have known him for many years. I have seen his character and his leadership up close. I have campaigned with him, and I have campaigned against him. He is a tough competitor. I have seen in every decision he makes that he is guided by the national interests of the United States, not by self-interest. I know John McCain to be a man who will make decisions based upon sound principles, not based upon the latest focus group or political poll. John McCain is running on a clear, consistent, and conservative agenda. He is a man of honor. He has the wisdom and the experience necessary to be the Commander in Chief of our United States military forces. He loves this country. He is ready to lead this country. And on Inauguration Day, I will proud to be say to John McCain, Congratulations, Mr. President. And I can assure you he does not want a lonely victory. He needs allies in the Congress to help enact his agenda. And he is going to work hard alongside these candidates and the incumbents to make sure we win. And I am confident I hope you go forth from this meeting with confidence because I am confident. I firmly believe that we can retake the House. I know we will hold the White House. And I know it is necessary for the United States of America that we do both. Let me talk about some of the issues and why I think we will win. We trust people. We Republicans believe you can make the best decisions for your life.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalrepublicancongressionalcommitteedinner1", "title": "Remarks at the National Republican Congressional Committee Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-republican-congressional-committee-dinner-1", "publication_date": "12-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2021, "text": "On health care, we trust patients to make decisions, not bureaucrats in Washington, DC. When it comes to education, we trust parents to make the right decisions for their children, and we believe in strong accountability in our public schools. We refuse to accept mediocrity. We refuse to accept the status quo when not every single child in America is learning to read and write and add and subtract. The American people need us because we will appoint judges who will strictly interpret the Constitution and not use the bench from which to write law, judges like John Roberts and Sam Alito. But I think the biggest issue in this campaign is going to be your taxes. I think the biggest issue in this campaign is which side of the political divide is going to let you keep your money and which side is going to raise your taxes. Now, we have got a record on which side will not raise your taxes. We have been through some tough economic times together. We have been through a recession and a terrorist attack and war and corporate scandal and natural disasters. We added jobs for 52 consecutive months. It is the longest uninterrupted job growth in the Nation's history. We trusted the American people, and we cut taxes on every American who pays taxes. We have hit a rough patch, but we took the lead. We anticipated the problems. And thanks to the leadership of John Boehner and Roy Blunt, they helped shepherd through over $160 billion of tax relief that will be reaching the mailboxes of the American people in the second week of May. Tax relief has worked in the past, and tax relief will work this time, when we get through this rough patch. Milk expires, taxes increase. And we know the difference. And so will the American people when they realize that 116 million households will see their taxes rise by an average of $1,800 if the Democrats get their way in the House of Representatives. We need a Republican President and a Republican Congress to prevent the Democrats from raising your taxes. It is the most solemn responsibility that those of us who have been honored to serve you have. We must do everything in our power to make sure the enemy does not strike us again. And I fully understood that after September the 11th, that the temptation would be to dismiss any threat; the temptation would be that, Oh, perhaps since we have not been attacked, the threat does not exist.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalrepublicancongressionalcommitteedinner1", "title": "Remarks at the National Republican Congressional Committee Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-republican-congressional-committee-dinner-1", "publication_date": "12-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2022, "text": "Well, the threat does exist, and it requires steadfast, strong, clear-eyed leadership here in Washington, DC. One of the things that we must do is to make sure that the hundreds of people that are out working for you every night to protect you have the tools they need. If the enemy, if the extremists who want to do America harm, if the radicals who want to kill again, like they did before on our homeland, are making phone calls into the United States of America, we need to know who they are calling, what they are saying, and what they are planning. The Congress came together last year and passed the Protect America Act to give our professionals the tools they need. But the threat to the United States of America has not expired. Unfortunately, Democratic leaders in the House are continuing to block bipartisan legislation that would give our intelligence officials the tools they need to quickly and effectively monitor terrorist communications. And they are doing so despite the fact that legislation, good legislation, to give our professionals the tools passed the United States Senate by an overwhelming majority of 68 to 29. Instead of holding a vote on this bill that would pass the House of Representatives, House leaders have introduced a highly partisan and deeply flawed bill of their own. Their bill would put in place a cumbersome court approval process that would make it harder to collect intelligence on foreign terrorists and could reopen dangerous intelligence gaps that we experienced last year. Their bill fails to provide liability protection to companies believed to have assisted in protecting our Nation after the 9/11 attacks. Instead, the House bill would make matters worse by extending litigation for years to come. In fact, House leaders simply adopted the position that class-action trial lawyers are taking in billions of dollars of lawsuits they have filed. We are under threat, ladies and gentlemen, and yet the House leaders blocked meaningful, substantial legislation that will help protect America for the sake of class-action trial lawyers. Companies that may have helped us save lives should be thanked for their patriotic service and should not be subjected to billion-dollar lawsuits. This bill would require the disclosure of state secrets during the litigation process. This could lead to the public release of highly classified information that our enemies could use against us. The Democrat version of protecting America is a bad bill; it is irresponsible. It casts aside the bipartisan consensus that was reached in the United States Senate in favor of a partisan approach that has no chance of becoming law.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalrepublicancongressionalcommitteedinner1", "title": "Remarks at the National Republican Congressional Committee Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-republican-congressional-committee-dinner-1", "publication_date": "12-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2023, "text": "House leaders know this, yet they are pursuing this anyway. This is bad public policy and another reason to elect Republicans to the House of Representatives. But the enemy only has to be right one time, and therefore, the best way to protect the American people from further harm is to defeat the enemy overseas so we do not have to face them here at home. And that is precisely the strategy that we are following. We are on the offense. Wherever we can find a terrorist who would harm the American people, we will bring him to justice. And this war against the extremists is now being played out on two major theaters. I laid out a doctrine that said, if you harbor a terrorist, you are equally as guilty as the terrorists. The Taliban and did not believe us, and so the United States of America, after giving the enemy due warning, unleashed the fury of a great military. And in so doing, we cleaned out the terrorist training camps from which they launched attacks on the United States and freed 25 million people from the clutches of a barbaric regime. This young democracy is struggling for its very existence against coldblooded killers, and it is in the interests of the United States that we stand strongly with these proud Afghan citizens, that we back them in their efforts, and that we make sure Al Qaida or any other extremist can no longer find a safe haven in the country of Afghanistan. And then, of course, the other theater is Iraq. Removing Saddam Hussein was the right decision early in my Presidency; it is the right decision now; and it will be the right decision ever. And the fight's been tough in Iraq. And for those of you here who are here who have served in that theater, I cannot thank you enough for your sacrifices and your service to the United States of America. After all, they wrote one of the most modern constitutions in the history of the Middle East. Iraqis braved the violence to vote. And yet nearly a year ago, the terrorists and extremists were succeeding in their efforts to plunge the country into chaos. So I had a tough decision to make. I reviewed our strategy. I fully understood that failure in Iraq would make America more vulnerable to attack, that failure in Iraq would create unbelievable chaos in a part of the world that has that produced suicide bombers in the first place.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalrepublicancongressionalcommitteedinner1", "title": "Remarks at the National Republican Congressional Committee Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-republican-congressional-committee-dinner-1", "publication_date": "12-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2024, "text": "And so rather than retreating, I made the considered judgment to send reinforcements into the country, in a dramatic move that is now called the surge. Fourteen months after I ordered the surge of forces, sectarian killings are down, and Al Qaida is on the defense. U.S. and Iraqi forces have captured or killed thousands of extremists in Iraq, including hundreds of key Al Qaida operatives. Progress in Iraq is fragile, and there is no question, it is going to take strong determination to prevail. Yet even the enemy recognizes they are on the wrong side of events. When things were going poorly in Iraq early last year, Democrats called for withdrawal. Today, the situation has turned around, and Democrats are calling for withdrawal. retreat. You might even say that when it comes to withdrawing from Iraq, the Democrats' policy is, stay the course. If we followed their advice a year ago, Iraq would be far different and a much more dangerous place than it is today, and the American people would be at greater risk. And if we followed their advice now, we would put at risk all the gains our troops have made over the past year. The United States Congress does need to act when it comes to Iraq, and they need to stand with our brave men and women in uniform and give them all the resources they need to do their job. And it when it comes to standing with the United States military, there is no greater supporters than the Republicans in the House of Representatives. The struggle we are engaged in is difficult for the American some Americans to really understand the scope and the nature of the battle. We are involved in an ideological struggle between folks who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives, folks who have got a vision about what they would like to impose on the rest of the world, and particularly in the Middle East, and those of us who believe strongly in the power of liberty. I believe in the trans-formative power of liberty. I believe that if the United States of America does not lose its faith in the power of freedom to transform hopeless societies, that we will see the peace that we all want. I believe in the universality of freedom. I believe there is an Almighty, and I believe a gift of that Almighty to every man, woman, and child is freedom. I love to share the story, and I am sure some of you have heard this before but the story about my friendship with Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalrepublicancongressionalcommitteedinner1", "title": "Remarks at the National Republican Congressional Committee Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-republican-congressional-committee-dinner-1", "publication_date": "12-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2025, "text": "Only a few moments ago, I had the first opportunity of my life to look at the Old Man of the Mountain. The natural question asked me was, What did you think of it, ENTITY? Remarkable. what does the Old Man of the Mountain think of us? He has been there through time. In his lonely vigil up at the top of that mountain--let us not try to go back to what he may have been thinking through those ages before our civilization first discovered him--150 years ago he saw great ox carts going through these roads where now we travel in an instant. He saw the fastest means of transportation--the horse. Finally he saw stage coaches. He saw only here and there a habitation, a sparsely settled wilderness. He has seen mankind go from the sailing ship and from the horse and buggy to the jet airplane and the ability to cross the ocean in a few hours. He has seen the great sciences of radio and television come to us. He has seen every American have, with his morning breakfast, the day's news of the world. He has seen the great electronics industry--electric lights, telephones and telegraphy, and all the things by which we live today. All of these changes have come about. But can you believe, as he stands up there, almost in infinite majesty, that he thinks it is of great concern that we travel at a rate that multiplies the speed of our forefathers? I believe he thinks of something deeper than that. When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and assume among the powers of the earth that separate and equal status to which both the laws of nature and nature's God intended them, a decent respect for the opinions of mankind impel them to declare the reasons which have led to their separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights. Among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These immortal words must mean a great deal to the Old Man of the Mountain. He must contemplate them from time to time. I think we--with him--understand life. We know the instinct of self-preservation, and we know what living means to us, in our separate capacities, in our separate areas.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremoniescommemoratingthediscoverytheoldmanthemountainfranconianotch", "title": "Remarks at Ceremonies Commemorating the Discovery of the Old Man of the Mountain, Franconia Notch, New Hampshire.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremonies-commemorating-the-discovery-the-old-man-the-mountain-franconia-notch", "publication_date": "24-06-1955", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2026, "text": "the individual right to do as we please as long as we do not infringe upon similar rights of others. But the pursuit of happiness--he must have noted that those writers did not create this government to give us happiness. Far better they knew than to try to define happiness for any one of us--the pursuit of happiness in liberty each according to his own desires, to the deepest aspirations of his own soul. Now, what have we done about it? Where do we find happiness? Possibly that is what he is wondering today. We know certain things. We know we would like to be at peace. We do not want to send our boys off into the Armed Services to serve in foreign lands. We do not want to dwell in fear. We do not want to contemplate the horrible things that could happen to us in a new war. At home we want to live comfortably. We want to have neighbors around us that we like. But as we pursue happiness, are we thinking only of these material things? Then how do we attain it? If we attain money to do certain things, then we want more money. If we attain a high office, we want a higher one. If there is no higher one we would like to invent it. We always want something more. Maybe the more is to try to discover what others around us find as their idea of the pursuit of happiness, what is it that mankind wants, instead of each of us separately? Can we integrate the desires, the aspirations, the hopes of our community, and then do our part to achieve that? In so doing, I wonder whether the Old Man would not approve of us more than he may at present? Because he well knows, if he has watched us, that each individual is made up of two sets of qualities. courage, readiness to sacrifice, love for our families, respect for others. And he knows also those other qualities, of selfishness and greed and ambition, and things that set men one against the other, and nations one against the other. He recognizes the right of a group, whether it be community, or whether it be nation, to protect itself, to make certain of its own security. a peaceful world in which each of us may continue to develop. Whether we do it through church, or through our schools, through any kind of community enterprise, through the family, through our own reading, we do not seek knowledge for itself.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremoniescommemoratingthediscoverytheoldmanthemountainfranconianotch", "title": "Remarks at Ceremonies Commemorating the Discovery of the Old Man of the Mountain, Franconia Notch, New Hampshire.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremonies-commemorating-the-discovery-the-old-man-the-mountain-franconia-notch", "publication_date": "24-06-1955", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2070, "text": "I look forward to going to the Panama Canal. I am most impressed by the management of the canal. Those who are responsible for the Panama Canal have done an excellent job, and this is beneficial to the world, and I congratulate you for that. And I am really looking forward to seeing it. I am also looking forward to paying our respects to, by laying a wreath. I am also looking forward to seeing some of the Panamanian baseball stars. People around here know how to play baseball, and I am looking forward to seeing some of your stars, Mr. President. We have had a very good discussion, and it is important we have discussions, because we are friends. And one of the matters we discussed was, how do we work together to improve the lives of our respective citizens? And one way is through trade. We are in the midst of negotiating a free trade agreement with Panama. And I told the President this free trade agreement is important for America, as he told me it is important for Panama. And we are close to coming to an agreement, and we will continue to work on that agreement for the good of our respective peoples. I also told him that I was pleased with the leadership of Panama and Argentina. Twenty-nine nations said, loud and clear, It is important for us to continue to advance a trade agenda that is positive for the people of this hemisphere. And I appreciated your Government's stance on that, Mr. President. You are acting in the interest of your people. And speaking about the interest of the people, I do want to say something about the tornadoes that recently hit America. I had the-I called the Governor of Indiana this morning and expressed my deepest condolences for the families who lost lives. I asked him if there was more Federal response needed. He felt like the response that we had given was appropriate at the time. And many Americans are now asking God's blessings on those who suffered through this natural disaster. President, I am fully aware that 25,000 of our citizens live in your beautiful country. I congratulate you for your fiscal reforms. I congratulate you for the strong growth of your economy. I appreciate your transparency. I appreciate your strong commitment to fighting corruption. It sends a clear signal not only to the people of this important country but also to people throughout the region. And it is noble, and it is important that you continue, which I know you will, your very strong leadership.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentmartintorrijosespinopanamapanamacity", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Martin Torrijos Espino of Panama in Panama City, Panama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-martin-torrijos-espino-panama-panama-city", "publication_date": "07-11-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2073, "text": "Proclaiming Columbus Day is much more to me than just another ceremonial function. Because this event gives me a chance, along with all of my fellow countrymen, to reflect on the beginnings of this Nation-and on the men who began it. It reminds us that every citizen in this land is the descendant of men who were once foreigners--who were once strangers from afar. This is what our great President Franklin Roosevelt was thinking about one day in April when he addressed the Daughters of the American Revolution by saluting them as My fellow immigrants. the first in that long procession of strangers who, over the centuries, have come to enrich our lives, our statesmanship, and our culture here in America. Today we think of Columbus Day as a time for honoring not only that great explorer, but also all of those Italians whose gifts have been freely given to make this Nation great. Enrico Fermi, Frank Capra, A. P. Giannini, Fiorello La Guardia, Max Ascoli, Joe DiMaggio, Johnny Pastore. I would like to call the name of each of you, because you mean that much to me and you have made great contributions. Steve Martini, who cuts my hair here at the White House and has cut the hair of Presidents for several years, is one of my most influential counselors, believe it or not. He is also one of my most recognized comforters in moments of distress and depression. I just cannot resist adding Jack Valenti and Joe Califano, because in the period that I have been here, no two men have given their country greater or more rewarding service. In the past year, I am very proud that by all of us working together we have made it much easier for people of such ability to come here to the United States. You may remember it was on October 3, last year, standing beside the Statue of Liberty, that I signed a new immigration bill that we had been trying to pass for years and we had finally, successfully gotten it through both Houses. That measure ended, I think, once and for all, the discrimination-the discrimination which, for nearly 40 years, handicapped those who wanted to call our land their home. Under the old system, even Christopher Columbus would have found it difficult to come to this country--simply because Christopher Columbus was born in Italy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesigningthecolumbusdayproclamation", "title": "Remarks at the Signing of the Columbus Day Proclamation.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-signing-the-columbus-day-proclamation", "publication_date": "22-09-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2074, "text": "Under the old system, a person born in England was 12 times more welcome to America than a person born in Italy, and far more acceptable, Mike, than a Greek or a Portuguese or a Pole. Under that old system, countries like Italy had very small immigration quotas. They had long lists of persons who were waiting to emigrate to the United States. At the same time preferred nations were failing to even fill the very large quotas that were assigned to them. But the Immigration Act of 1965 has not opened the floodgates to immigration as its opponents claimed that it would. In fiscal year 1966 the State Department granted 309,000 visas--only 9,000 more than the year before. The increase is almost invisible when you consider that the internal growth of the United States was over 3 million, while we had an increase of 9,000 coming in. The Immigration Act of 1965 does assign quotas on a basis of equality. What skills can you perform? Italy was granted 9,987 immigration visas in fiscal year 1965. In 1966, under the new law, Italy received 24,967. Portugal was granted 1,798 visas in 1965; 9,017 in 1966. The list goes on through all the countries with citizens desiring to relocate here in America. So in its short life, this Immigration Act of 1965 has brought happiness to many homes, has reunited many families that have been kept apart very cruelly for a good many years. It has brought us capable people that wish to put their skills at the service of the United States. It has earned us the friendship of nations which had resented this unfair treatment under the unjust quota system. It has demonstrated the desire of the people in the United States to end discrimination and to end it in every corner of our national life. For years, America has been a beacon of change and progress to men who wanted to escape old lands, old ways, and old injustices. That is what brought our fathers here; it still brings people here. But to men across the world, we have been the land whose revolution did not end; we have been the land whose eyes are always forward. So today, all around the world, we hear the cry for change. And the cry for change is rising. It is rising in our own country. We welcome it--for we hear, in that sound, the echo of 1776. this echo of 1776, as I meet here with you in the Cabinet Room today to sign this proclamation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesigningthecolumbusdayproclamation", "title": "Remarks at the Signing of the Columbus Day Proclamation.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-signing-the-columbus-day-proclamation", "publication_date": "22-09-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2075, "text": "For too long, the people of Darfur have suffered at the hands of a government that is complicit in the bombing, murder, and rape of innocent civilians. genocide. The world has a responsibility to help put an end to it. Last month, I announced that the United States was prepared to take new steps if the Government of Sudan did not allow the full deployment of a U.N. peacekeeping force; if the Government did not begin living up to its many commitments, that the United States would act. I made clear that the time for promises was over, and that President Bashir had to do something to end the suffering. I held off implementing these steps because the United Nations believed that President Bashir could meet his obligations to stop the killing and would meet his obligations to stop the killing. Unfortunately, he has not met those obligations. President Bashir's actions over the past few weeks follow a long pattern of promising cooperation while finding new methods for obstruction. One day after I spoke, the military bombed a meeting of rebel commanders designed to discuss a possible peace deal with the Government. In the following weeks, he used his army and Government-sponsored militias to attack rebels and civilians in south Darfur. He is taken no steps to disarm these militias in the year since the Darfur Peace Agreement was signed. Senior officials continue to oppose the deployment of the U.N. peacekeeping force. The result is that the dire security situation on the ground in Darfur has not changed. And so today, at my instruction, the United States has taken the steps I announced in April. First, the Department of Treasury is tightening U.S. economic sanctions on Sudan. With this new effort, the United States will more aggressively enforce existing sanctions against Sudan's Government. As part of this effort, the Treasury Department will add 30 companies owned or controlled by the Government of Sudan to its list of Specially Designated Nationals. We are also adding an additional company to the list, a company that has been transporting weapons to the Sudanese Government and militia forces in Darfur. All these companies are now barred from the U.S. financial system. It is a crime for American companies and individuals to knowingly do business with them. Second, we are targeting sanctions against individuals responsible for violence. These sanctions will isolate these persons by cutting them off from the U.S. financial system, barring them from doing business with any American citizen or company, and calling the world's attention to their crimes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesituationdarfursudan", "title": "Remarks on the Situation in Darfur, Sudan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-situation-darfur-sudan", "publication_date": "29-05-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2076, "text": "Third, I am directing the Secretary of State to consult with the United Kingdom and other allies on a new United Nations Security Council resolution. This resolution will apply new sanctions against the Government of Sudan, against individuals found to be violating human rights or obstructing the peace process. It will impose an expanded embargo on arms sales to the Government of Sudan. It will prohibit the Sudanese Government from conducting any offensive military flights over Darfur. It will strengthen our ability to monitor and report any violations. At the same time, we will continue to push for U.N. support, including funding for the African Union peacekeepers, who remain the only force in Darfur that is protecting the people. We will continue to work for the deployment of a larger, hybrid force of AU and U.N. peacekeeping troops. We will continue to support the diplomacy of U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. We will continue to insist on the full implementation of the Darfur Peace Agreement. We will continue to promote a broadly supported and inclusive political settlement that is the only long-term solution to the crisis in Darfur. Since this conflict began, we have provided more than $1.7 billion in humanitarian and peacekeeping assistance for Darfur. We are the world's largest single donor to the people of Darfur. We are working for the day when the families of this troubled region are allowed to return safely to their homes and rebuild their lives in peace. The people of Darfur are crying out for help, and they deserve it. I urge the United Nations Security Council, the African Union, and all members of the international community to reject any efforts to obstruct implementation of the agreements that would bring peace to Darfur and Sudan. I call on President Bashir to stop his obstruction and to allow the peacekeepers in and to end the campaign of violence that continues to target innocent men, women, and children. The United States will not avert our eyes from a crisis that challenges the conscience of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesituationdarfursudan", "title": "Remarks on the Situation in Darfur, Sudan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-situation-darfur-sudan", "publication_date": "29-05-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2089, "text": "Tomorrow the House of Representatives faces a critical vote on the balanced budget amendment, and right now is the time for some straight talk about our national deficit. With our Federal debt averaging $65,000 for the typical American family of four, I understand why the American people are fed up and why you are looking for change. I share your frustration, and I am determined to see things changed. I am convinced that a balanced budget amendment is the only way to force the Federal Government, both the Congress and the executive branch, to live within its means. In fact, the very first address to Congress I made as President included a call for a balanced budget. I confidently presented a balanced budget constitutional amendment to the Congress. I asked our Nation's elected leaders to put America's best interests first and to join me in reaching a goal whose benefits will be measured in jobs and opportunity for ourselves and for our children. Government spending must be restrained and the budget balanced. Government is too big, and it spends too much. We are treating our national debt like the old fellow who borrowed money to pay off his loans. Inevitably, someone at some time must foot the bill. It is simply wrong to walk away from this mountain of debt and leave it to our kids. Forty-four of our States have some kind of a constitutional requirement for a balanced budget. It is time for the Federal Government to follow their lead. We must balance the Federal budget without shifting the funding burden along to the States. We must pay our own way. Our future is at stake. Now is the time to pass a constitutional amendment mandating a balanced budget. Let me caution Americans not to be taken in by bold blustering. We cannot wheel and deal the deficit away. There is no easy answer that we can jot out on a blank sheet of paper to wipe out a deficit of that magnitude. We should not be willing to risk our grandchildren's future on sound bites that merely sound real. A constitutional amendment mandating a balanced budget is what is needed. Pass this balanced budget amendment. There is no single action that we can take that will be any more important than doing this for our Nation's future. Thank you, and may God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthenationthebalancedbudgetamendment", "title": "Address to the Nation on the Balanced Budget Amendment", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-nation-the-balanced-budget-amendment", "publication_date": "10-06-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2094, "text": "I COME before you at the opening of the Regular Session of the 73d Congress, not to make requests for special or detailed items of legislation; I come, rather, to counsel with you, who, like myself, have been selected to carry out a mandate of the whole people, in order that without partisanship you and I may cooperate to continue the restoration of our national wellbeing and, equally important, to build on the ruins of the past a new structure designed better to meet the present problems of modern civilization. Such a structure includes not only the relations of industry and agriculture and finance to each other but also the effect which all of these three have on our individual citizens and on the whole people as a Nation. Now that we are definitely in the process of recovery, lines have been rightly drawn between those to whom this recovery means a return to old methods and the number of these people is small and those for whom recovery means a reform of many old methods, a permanent readjustment of many of our ways of thinking and therefore of many of our social and economic arrangements Civilization cannot go back; civilization must not stand still. We have undertaken new methods. It is our task to perfect, to improve, to alter when necessary, but in all cases to go forward. To consolidate what we are doing, to make our economic and social structure capable of dealing with modern life is the joint task of the legislative, the judicial, and the executive branches of the national Government. Without regard to party, the overwhelming majority of our people seek a greater opportunity for humanity to prosper and find happiness. They recognize that human welfare has not increased and does not increase through mere materialism and luxury, but that it does progress through integrity, unselfishness, responsibility and justice. In the past few months, as a result of our action, we have demanded of many citizens that they surrender certain licenses to do as they please, in their business relationships; but we have asked this in exchange for the protection which the State can give against exploitation by their fellow men or by combinations of their fellow men. I congratulate this Congress upon the courage, the earnestness and the efficiency with which you met the crisis at the Special Session. It was your fine understanding of the national problem that furnished the example which the country has so splendidly followed. I venture to say that the task confronting the First Congress of 1789 was no greater than your own.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsannualmessagecongress4", "title": "Annual Message to Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/annual-message-congress-4", "publication_date": "03-01-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2095, "text": "I shall not attempt to set forth either the many phases of the crisis which we experienced last March, or the many measures which you and I undertook during the Special Session that we might initiate recovery and reform. It is sufficient that I should speak in broad terms of the results of our common counsel. The credit of the Government has been fortified by drastic reduction in the cost of its permanent agencies through the Economy Act. With the twofold purpose of strengthening the whole financial structure and of arriving eventually at a medium of exchange which over the years will have less variable purchasing and debt paying power for our people than that of the past, I have used the authority granted me to purchase all American-produced gold and silver and to buy additional gold in the world markets. Careful investigation and constant study prove that in the matter of foreign exchange rates certain of our sister Nations find themselves so handicapped by internal and other conditions that they feel unable at this time to enter into stabilization discussion based on permanent and world-wide objectives. The overwhelming majority of the banks, both national and State, which reopened last spring, are in sound condition and have been brought within the protection of Federal insurance. In the case of those banks which were not permitted to reopen, nearly six hundred million dollars of frozen deposits are being restored to the depositors through the assistance of the national Government. We have made great strides toward the objectives of the National Industrial Recovery Act, for not only have several millions of our unemployed been restored to work, but industry is organizing itself with a greater understanding that reasonable profits can be earned while at the same time protection can be assured to guarantee to labor adequate pay and proper conditions of work. Uniform standards of hours and wages apply today to 95 percent of industrial employment within the field of the National Industrial Recovery Act. We seek the definite end of preventing combinations in furtherance of monopoly and in restraint of trade, while at the same time we seek to prevent ruinous rivalries within industrial groups which in many cases resemble the gang wars of the underworld and in which the real victim in every case is the public itself. Under the authority of this Congress, we have brought the component parts of each industry together around a common table, just as we have brought problems affecting labor to a common meeting ground. Though the machinery, hurriedly devised, may need readjustment from time to time, nevertheless I think you will agree with me that we have created a permanent feature of our modernized industrial structure and that it will continue under the supervision but not the arbitrary dictation of Government itself.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsannualmessagecongress4", "title": "Annual Message to Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/annual-message-congress-4", "publication_date": "03-01-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2096, "text": "You recognized last spring that the most serious part of the debt burden affected those who stood in danger of losing their farms and their homes. I am glad to tell you that refinancing in both of these cases is proceeding with good success and in all probability within the financial limits set by the Congress. But agriculture had suffered from more than its debts. Actual experience with the operation of the Agricultural Adjustment Act leads to my belief that thus far the experiment of seeking a balance between production and consumption is succeeding and has made progress entirely in line with reasonable expectations toward the restoration of farm prices to parity. I continue in my conviction that industrial progress and prosperity can only be attained by bringing the purchasing power of that portion of our population which in one form or another is dependent upon agriculture up to a level which will restore a proper balance between every section of the country and between every form of work. In this field, through carefully planned flood control, power development and land-use policies in the Tennessee Valley and in other, great watersheds, we are seeking the elimination of waste, the removal of poor lands from agriculture and the encouragement of small local industries, thus furthering this principle of a better balanced national life. We recognize the great ultimate cost of the application of this rounded policy to every part off the Union. Today we are creating heavy obligations to start the work because of the great unemployment needs of the moment. I look forward, however, to the time in the not distant future, when annual appropriations, wholly covered by current revenue, will enable the work to proceed under a national plan. Such a national plan will, in a generation or two, return many times the money spent on it; more important, it will eliminate the use of inefficient tools, conserve and increase natural resources, prevent waste, and enable millions of our people to take better advantage of the opportunities which God has given our country. I cannot, unfortunately, present to you a picture of complete optimism regarding world affairs. The delegation representing the United States has worked in close cooperation with the other American Republics assembled at Montevideo to make that conference an outstanding success. We have, I hope, made it clear to our neighbors that we seek with them future avoidance of territorial expansion and of interference by one Nation in the internal affairs of another. Furthermore, all of us are seeking the restoration of commerce in ways which will preclude the building up of large favorable trade balances by any one Nation at the expense of trade debits on the part of other Nations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsannualmessagecongress4", "title": "Annual Message to Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/annual-message-congress-4", "publication_date": "03-01-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2097, "text": "In other parts of the world, however, fear of immediate or future aggression and with it the spending of vast sums on armament and the continued building up of defensive trade barriers prevent any great progress in peace or trade agreements. I have made it clear that the United States cannot take part in political arrangements in Europe but that we stand ready to cooperate at any time in practicable measures on a world basis looking to immediate reduction of armaments and the lowering of the barriers against commerce. I expect to report to you later in regard to debts owed the Government and people of this country by the Governments and peoples of other countries. Several Nations, acknowledging the debt, have paid in small part; other Nations have failed to pay. One Nation Finland has paid the installments due this country in full. Returning to home problems, we have been shocked by many notorious examples of injuries done our citizens by persons or groups who have been living off their neighbors by the use of methods either unethical or criminal. In the first category a field which does not involve violations of the letter of our laws practices have been brought to light which have shocked those who believed that we were in the past generation raising the ethical standards of business. They call for stringent preventive or regulatory measures. I am speaking of those individuals who have evaded the spirit and purpose of our tax laws, of those high officials of banks or corporations who have grown rich at the expense of their stockholders or the public, of those reckless speculators with their own or other people's money whose operations have injured the values of the farmers' crops and the savings of the poor. In the other category, crimes of organized banditry, coldblooded shooting, lynching and kidnapping have threatened our security. These violations of ethics and these violations of law call on the strong arm of Government for their immediate suppression; they call also on the country for an aroused public opinion. The adoption of the Twenty-first Amendment should give material aid to the elimination of those new forms of crime which came from the illegal traffic in liquor. I shall continue to regard it as my duty to use whatever means may be necessary to supplement State, local and private agencies for the relief of suffering caused by unemployment. With respect to this question, I have recognized the dangers inherent in the direct giving of relief and have sought the means to provide not mere relief, but the opportunity for useful and remunerative work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsannualmessagecongress4", "title": "Annual Message to Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/annual-message-congress-4", "publication_date": "03-01-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2098, "text": "We shall, in the process of recovery, seek to move as rapidly as possible from direct relief to publicly supported work and from that to the rapid restoration of private employment. It is to the eternal credit of the American people that this tremendous readjustment of our national life is being accomplished peacefully, without serious dislocation, with only a minimum of injustice and with a great, willing spirit of cooperation throughout the country. Self-help and self-control are the essence of the American tradition not of necessity the form of that tradition, but its spirit. The program itself comes from the American people. It is an integrated program, national in scope. Viewed in the large, it is designed to save from destruction and to keep for the future the genuinely important values created by modern society. The vicious and wasteful parts of that society we could not save if we wished; they have chosen the way of self-destruction. We would save useful mechanical invention, machine production, industrial efficiency, modern means of communication, broad education. We would save and encourage the slowly growing impulse among consumers to enter the industrial market place equipped with sufficient organization to insist upon fair prices and honest sales. But the unnecessary expansion of industrial plants, the waste of natural resources, the exploitation of the consumers of natural monopolies, the accumulation of stagnant surpluses, child labor, and the ruthless exploitation of all labor, the encouragement of speculation with other people's money, these were consumed in the fires that they themselves kindled; we must make sure that as we reconstruct our life there be no soil in which such weeds can grow again. We have plowed the furrow and planted the good seed; the hard beginning is over. If we would reap the full harvest, we must cultivate the soil where this good seed is sprouting and the plant is reaching up to mature growth. I know that each of you will appreciate that. I am speaking no mere politeness when I assure you how much I value the fine relationship that we have shared during these months of hard and incessant work. Out of these friendly contacts we are, fortunately, building a strong and permanent tie between the legislative and executive branches of the Government. The letter of the Constitution wisely declared a separation, but the impulse of common purpose declares a union. In this spirit we join once more in serving the American people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsannualmessagecongress4", "title": "Annual Message to Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/annual-message-congress-4", "publication_date": "03-01-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2099, "text": "I appreciate your enthusiasm. Chris Dodd has that effect on everyone. I really would like to say a special word of thanks to my neighbor Mel Carnahan. He helped me when I ran for President. He helped me even when he was in the midst of a tough primary when it could have done him no good at all to be for anybody running for President. But he survived me, and he got elected and then I got elected. We worked together fighting floods, reforming welfare, doing a lot of things, and I am honored to be his friend and his partner. I want to say a special word of appreciation, too, to the DGA vice chair, Governor Caperton, and Rachel. I have been their friend for a long time, and I am looking forward to working with them. I also want to say a personal word of appreciation to your outgoing chair, Evan Bayh, and to Susan. They did unbelievable work with the help of a lot of you in a very, very difficult year, and I will never forget all the efforts Evan Bayh made. And when the road turns, do not forget that Evan Bayh was there for us when it was tough, and he did his part. I thank Katy Whelan and Mark Weiner for the wonderful work that they have done for the DGA. I am sure glad to see all of you. You know, over New Year's I was talking to a lot of interesting people, and a lady came up to me who was a college president, and she said, You know, I really identify with you. There is a lot of people under you, but nobody's listening. Well, I have had that feeling for the last couple of years from time to time, but I think that also is beginning to change. Lord knows, I gave it a good test last Tuesday night in the State of the Union and it turned out the American people were listening. I want to express my appreciation also to Chris Dodd and to Don Fowler, to Debbie DeLee for leading our Democratic Party. I thank Chris and Don especially for being willing to come on at this time and to help us remember who we are and why we are Democrats and what it is we are supposed to do now, and I thank them. They have done a wonderful job. I loved it. I mean, we also had public housing and security, and people called us by something other than our first names.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticgovernorsassociationdinner4", "title": "Remarks at the Democratic Governors Association Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-governors-association-dinner-4", "publication_date": "30-01-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2100, "text": "But nobody ever sprayed the front of the Governor's mansion with an assault weapon or tried to land a plane in my back yard. But most days, I am profoundly happy to have the chance to wage these battles, and every day I am honored for the opportunity and the obligation to do it. You know, it is kind of fashionable now for our colleagues in the other party to quote Franklin Roosevelt. They like his words, you know; it is optimism and hope and everything. And when they do it, they have a little spin on it. They say, Now, Roosevelt was the right person for his time, and the Democrats were right for their time. If you really read between the lines, they basically say, Okay, okay, everything that was worth doing in the 20th century, the Democrats did. I agree with that. But their line is something like, Well, the reason that is so is that in the 20th century we had an industrial age dominated by large, powerful organizations, and we needed a Democratic Party that was the party of National Government to protect the common people and the little children and the elderly and others from abuse by large private organizations. But in the 21st century, the world will be very different. It will be more rapidly changing, more entrepreneurial, less bureaucratic, the age of the PC, not the mainframe. You have heard all that stuff. And therefore, we do not need the Democrats any more. But we like Roosevelt's words. Well, I say to them, I know the world is changing, and I know we need to reduce the size and reach of much of the Federal Government's activities. As a matter of fact, we started that. We are glad to have their help in going forward with it. But the issue facing America is the issue that has faced America from the beginning and, certainly, the issue that has faced America repeatedly in the 20th century, as we stand at the dawn of a new era. Can we really guarantee the American dream for all Americans willing to work for it? And can we find ways with all of our incredible differences to come together as a people to do what we have to do? If you go back through the 219 years of American history since the issuance of the Declaration of Independence, you find those challenges over and over and over again. Will we do what it takes to expand the American dream and keep it alive for all of our people?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticgovernorsassociationdinner4", "title": "Remarks at the Democratic Governors Association Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-governors-association-dinner-4", "publication_date": "30-01-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2101, "text": "Can we find a way, with all of our differences, to come together, because we know that is the only way we are ever profoundly strong? I say to you that there is still something for the Democratic Party to do. Consider what is good about what they want to do and what is good about what we want to do and what is sort of open to question, and you will see where we should go. Because there is no question that if we really want to guarantee the American dream in this new economy for all of our people, what we have to do is to empower people to make the most of their own lives, to find a way to continue to enhance opportunity even as we shrink the bureaucracy, and to strengthen our sense of citizenship and community as a fundamental condition of America's security, opportunity, and responsibility. Yes, yes, yes, we must change the Government. Yes, we have to shrink it. There is 100,000 fewer people working for the Federal Government than there were on the day I became President, and there'll be another 170,000 more leaving if no new laws are passed by this Congress. Which party wanted family and medical leave? Which party wanted to immunize all the children in this country against serious disease? Which party said, We cannot afford to keep wasting money on the college loan program. Let us cut the cost of it, make it available to more Americans, and make it cheaper for students ? The Democratic Party did that. Yes, we should reduce the tax burden on people that are paying all they can afford. You know, that is the only secret I kept from the press the last 2 years. We cut taxes on 15 million working families, kept it a total secret from the American people. I am still trying to figure out how we did it, but it is not too late to let them know. Our middle class bill of rights could more properly be called the bill of rights and responsibilities because you cannot get the tax break unless you are trying to raise your kids or educate them or educate yourselves or take care of your families. In other words, we reward, by reducing the tax burden, people who are carrying on the work of citizenship and making the country stronger for everybody. We lower people's taxes and raise their income in the short run in a way that will also raise their income in the long run. That is why we ought to have a tax deduction for education costs after high school.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticgovernorsassociationdinner4", "title": "Remarks at the Democratic Governors Association Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-governors-association-dinner-4", "publication_date": "30-01-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2102, "text": "That is why we ought to have an IRA that can be drawn on for education or health care or care of an elderly parent. That is why we ought to lower the cost of raising young children. That is why we ought to collapse all these terrible plethora of programs, and instead of letting people sign up for a Government program, give them a chit worth cash that they can take to the local community college when they are unemployed or they need job training. Yes, we have some good ideas. Let us cut the taxes, but let us do it in a way that raises the economic power of America in the long run and helps middle class families to build their lives. And while we are at it, let us not forget that the last time the country got in a total fever over tax cutting, we overdid it, and we wound up with a terrible burden. You can either share the responsibility and say both have to be responsible and move forward, or you can point the finger of blame and hope that everybody can escape responsibility. Well, we tried it the second way, folks, and it did not work out very well. Interest payments on the Federal debt will require the amount equal to 36 percent of your personal income tax. And 27 percent of it, 27 cents, more than a quarter of every dollar you pay to the Federal Government in personal income taxes, will be required to pay interest on the debt run up between 1981 and the day I became President. So yes, it is okay to cut taxes if we do it in the right way, but let us pay for these tax cuts with spending cuts. Let us do not put more debt on our children and more burdens in that budget. to empower people, pass the middle class bill of rights and raise the minimum wage and reform the welfare system so people can go to work. And we have an agenda to reduce Government more. The Vice President's coming back with another round of reinventing Government. Look at the way the emergency management programs work now. I just talked to the homebuilders today in Houston, and I reminded them that Henry Cisneros, since he is been head of the Housing and Urban Development Department, has reduced the size of that Department by 10 percent, eliminated all the regional offices, and cut the time for loan processing from 4 to 6 weeks down to 3 to 5 days. That is a Democratic way of reinventing Government that serves better with less.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticgovernorsassociationdinner4", "title": "Remarks at the Democratic Governors Association Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-governors-association-dinner-4", "publication_date": "30-01-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2103, "text": "Well, maybe it will not , but it is worked pretty well for 2 years. We have almost 6 million jobs more than we had 2 years ago. We have reduced the debt on our families by over $600 billion, about $10,000 a family. We have seen in the last week that 1994 was our best year economically in terms of growth and in terms of personal income increases in 10 years. And we also had the lowest combined rates of inflation and unemployment what President Reagan used to call the misery index the lowest in 1994 it is been in 25 years. But we have a long way to go, because we all know that our rising tide is not lifting all boats. We know that a lot of people are not doing better economically. What is best for the American people? Do what we can to give them a Government that offers more opportunity with less bureaucracy. And finally, let us not forget that for those who are willing to be responsible, this country is best when it works together, when there is a sense of partnership, a sense of citizenship, a sense of community. We have worked with innovative Governors in this room and their predecessors in health care, in welfare reform. We have worked with Governors like Governor Chiles, Governor Kitzhaber, Governor Dean on health care reform, and we are not through with that issue. We plead guilty to wanting to get the 40 million Americans, most of them in working families, who cannot have health insurance we think we ought to have it for them, and we think there must be a way to do it that all Americans can agree on. We plead guilty to believing that when people change jobs, they ought not to lose their family's health insurance. We believe that. That is what we believe. And we can do these things in ways that build our community. Should we require responsibility? Should we just give people a check forever and a day, no matter how they behave or what they do? But the focus ought to be on liberating people, moving them from welfare to work, moving them from having children to being the best possible parent. It should not be on punishing people because they are poor or because they made a mistake. If that were the criteria, a bunch of us were once poor, and all of us have made mistakes, and none of us want to be punished for either one. So, let us approach this welfare debate with a sense of excitement and determination but also a little bit of humility.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticgovernorsassociationdinner4", "title": "Remarks at the Democratic Governors Association Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-governors-association-dinner-4", "publication_date": "30-01-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2104, "text": "If anyone knew the answer to this problem, it would have been fixed by now. our worry that Government does not give us our money's worth; our fear that our profoundest problems are really cultural, not political or economic, that something is amiss in our society and we have got to get our values right again; our deep understanding that we do not really have anybody to waste and when people are not being as productive as they ought to be, it hurts the rest of us and our economic future as well. All of this is there in this debate. Now, Saturday we had a very good meeting with Republicans and Democrats from the Congress, from the Governors, from the local governments around the country. And on Friday, I got ready for that meeting by spending an hour with four women who had worked their way off welfare. And I am telling you, what I heard Friday is what I have heard now for 15 years. The people who know how broke the system is, best, are those who've been on it, who've been trapped by it, who regret it, who've resented it, who struggled and worked and slaved to get out of it. It is that that we should tap into. We are the party of change. We brought the deficit down. We reduced the size of the Government. We put welfare reform and health care reform and aggressive, expansive trade on the world's agenda and on America's agenda. It was our administration that first had a Commerce Secretary like Ron Brown that went around selling American products all over the world, not the Republicans. So I say, let us extend the hand of partnership to those in the other party. Let us say, We hear you. You want to reduce the size of Government? You want to reduce regulation? You want to give more authority to the States? You want to privatize those things which can be privatized? We want to create opportunity, not just bash Government. We want children to have a future no matter where they come from, what their roots are, what their disabilities are by virtue of their birth. We believe that America works best when everybody's got a chance at the brass ring. Thank you, and God bless you all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticgovernorsassociationdinner4", "title": "Remarks at the Democratic Governors Association Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-governors-association-dinner-4", "publication_date": "30-01-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2107, "text": "One of the wonderful experiences that is enjoyed by the men who've lived in this house and served here is to meet outstanding people from around the world, and particularly from his own Nation. It is not possible to recognize in any tangible way the literally tens of thousands, even more, Americans who serve unselfishly and who serve with distinction and who garner, because of their service, the legitimate debt and thanks of their fellow citizens. A number of years ago President Harry Truman initiated the Presidential Medal of Freedom to single out a few distinguished Americans to represent that superb service. When a few are chosen, it is done without derogation of those not chosen. It is done as an exemplification of honor in a democracy among citizens who are all equal. I have been quite reticent, compared to some of my predecessors, about the number who have been selected. The first ceremony that I had in 1977 I honored Martin Luther King, Jr., and Jonas Salk; later, Arthur Goldberg, Margaret Meade, Ansel Adams, Rachel Carson, Lucia Chase, Hubert Humphrey, Archbishop Lakovos, Lyndon Johnson, Clarence Mitchell, Jr., Roger Tory Peterson, Admiral Hyman Rickover, Beverly Sills, Robert Penn Warren, John Wayne, Eudora Welty, and Tennessee Williams. As you listen to those names, one of the first questions that comes to mind is why were not they honored long ago? And I feel that way about some of those who will be honored today. Four of our honorees cannot be here, and I will explain to you why as their names are called. I would like now for the military aide to come forward to present the certificates to me, and I will read the citation and perhaps say a few extra words. Those who have representatives, come forward in their place, and I will award the medals at that time. These are done not in order of seniority or age, but according to alphabetical listing of the last names. From the government of science to the science of government, Harold Brown has served his country first and his principles always. As an advisor to Presidents, and a president of a community of scholars, he has helped bridge the gap between the world of theory and the world of reality. Adept at translating from the language of science to the language of statecraft, he excels in translating purpose into action. I have worked and served with Harold Brown for 4 years. He is a man of strength and a man of peace.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2108, "text": "He is brought levelheaded judgment to one of the major departments of our country in times of testing, in times of potential war. But because of his sound judgment and the trust that others have in him, he has preserved our Nation as it should be, strong and peaceful. It is with a great deal of honor that I present the Medal of Freedom to Harold Brown. Zbigniew Brzezinski served his country and the world. An author and architect of world affairs, his strategic vision of America's purpose fused principle with strength. His leadership has been instrumental in building peace and ending the estrangement of the Chinese and American people. But above all, he helped set our nation irrevocably on a course that honors America's abiding commitment to human rights. I doubt that anyone in my own administration has been more controversial than Dr. Brzezinski. And the reason for it is manifold, but I'd like to make two reasons. One is that he is evocative; he is a person who explores constantly better ways to do things. His Eastern European origins have given him an almost unmatched understanding of the interrelationships among the cultural entities of the Soviet Union and the satellite countries. He came here early in his life seeking freedom. I do not know of a single time in the last 4 years when he has ever made a public statement of any kind, privately or publicly which was not compatible with my own policies. The other reason that he has been somewhat controversial is that he has never tried to take credit for a success, nor has he ever tried to blame me as President, or anyone else, for a failure. To me, this is a wonderful evidence of courage, because it is so easy for someone who works within the inner circles of the White House in particular and other places of leadership when something goes wrong, very quietly, very subtly to say, I recommended one thing; ENTITY or the Secretary of State or the Secretary of Defense did something else. Zbigniew Brzezinski has never done that. I am deeply indebted to him, and I think that the Nation shares that debt with me. It is with a great deal of pride and gratitude that I present the Medal of Freedom to Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski. I look around the room and people who know the alphabet and who work very closely with me are smiling with anticipation about the next award.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2109, "text": "I might say that Warren Christopher is in Algiers working as he has for the last 14 months for the freedom of the American hostages. He is listening to my voice through an open telephone line, and I'd like to read this citation. Warren Christopher has the tact of a true diplomat, the tactical skills of a great soldier, the analytical ability of a fine lawyer, and the selfless dedication of a citizen-statesman. His perseverance and loyalty, judgment and skill have won for his country new respect around the world and new regard for the State Department here at home. Last week I was in Plains, and I was invited out to a small French restaurant between Plains and Americus by the press; it is one of the few French restaurants between Plains and Americus. And when I sat at the table eating supper, we had an informal off-the-record discussion, and the members of the press asked me, Of all the public servants with whom you have served as President, who would you rank number one? I said, Warren Christopher. I think that those others who are being honored here today and all those that have worked with me would agree that he is indeed outstanding. I am indebted to him, and so is the Nation, far beyond what the general public knows. And it is with a great deal of pleasure and pride and honor that I present this Medal of Freedom to his lovely wife for Warren Christopher, a distinguished American. For thousands of nights, the eyes and can of millions of Americans have been tuned in to the eyes and ears of Walter Cronkite. He has reported and commented on the events of the last two decades with a skill and insight which stands out in the news world, in a way which has made the news of the world stand out for all of us. There is probably not a single American who does not know Walter Cronkite, and of those tens of millions who know him, I do not believe there are any who distrust him. When our Nation has had great achievements, his voice has explained the significance of it, whether we have achieved peace when it was doubtful or when a man has landed on the Moon. And when our Nation has been in trouble or made mistakes and there was a danger that our public might react adversely or even panic on occasion, the calm and reassuring demeanor and voice and the inner character of Walter Cronkite has been reassuring to us all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2110, "text": "He is a man superb on his own, but who has exemplified in the finest way the profession which he represents. And on behalf of all Americans, I extend my congratulations and my appreciation to a distinguished American, a public servant, Waiter Cronkite. Acclaimed as a screen actor and director here at home, Kirk Douglas has often played a different role abroad. Acting as an ambassador of good will beyond our shores, he has travelled around the world for our State Department and the United States Information Agency. The son of Russian immigrants, he travels, too, for the opportunity to share with other peoples his love of film, and country. I have know Kirk Douglas personally and appreciate his friendship. But more than that, I have known how dedicated he is to using his talent as an actor and a director and the esteem with which he is held by his own people in spreading the good news about this country and explaining our purposes, our ideals, our commitments, and our achievements, our hopes, and our dreams to people around the world. He is done this in a sacrificial way, almost invariably without fanfare and without claiming any personal credit or acclaim for himself. And so, it is with a great deal of pleasure that I give him this recognition and admire his modesty and thank him for what he has meant and what he still means and will mean to the country which he loves. Margaret Craig McNamara saw a need in our society, and filled it. By creating the Reading is fundamental program, which has provided youngsters all over this country with millions of books, she has opened new doors in the minds of our young people and has given fresh meaning to the lives of the parents, teachers and volunteers who have joined her program. The other night, I think in this room, I spoke to a group of people who represented local and State government in an official capacity, and I reminded them that the things that occupy our mind and to which we are dedicated are the simple things of life-things like a mother, a baby, retarded children, love for the elderly, the quality of a classroom, gentleness, love, peace, the purity of air, quietness-those kinds of things are what we try to preserve and enhance. Margaret Craig McNamara has taken this kind of commitment very long ago, when she saw two young men, I believe; talked to them quietly, found that they had never owned a book, were not interested in reading.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2111, "text": "And she had just a simple idea of getting books and not lending them to people but letting them own their own. Since then tens of millions of books have been collected through her leadership and given to young people. It has transformed their lives. And she has marshaled tens of thousands of people to help in this program. She is done it quietly, because she loves others. She is dedicated a major part of her life to this effort, a simple thing of through reading, stretching the minds and the hearts of young people who would not otherwise know how great God's world is and would not know much about their fellow human beings. She is the kind of person who is an inspiration to all Americans who love others. And it is with a great deal of pride that I present this Medal of Freedom to Margaret Craig McNamara. Menninger, as you may have anticipated, is busy enhancing the mental treatment qualities of this Nation. He is on the west coast, and honored by this award, of course, he still asked that he be excused so he could continue his work uninterrupted. A not so valuable nephew, Dr. Roy Menninger- -has volunteered to come forward to accept the award for his uncle. And I would like to read the award now. Karl Menninger has taught us much about ourselves and our behavior. An acute observer and social critic, he has put into action what he has put onto paper. As an author and doctor, his works range from popular, written accounts of psychiatry to studies done in his own hospital, from creating homes for parentless children to reforming the penal system.   All of those in this room who have been interested in improving the quality of mental health of this Nation have heard the name Karl Menninger since many years ago. He has been a pioneer, but as the closing phrase of this citation reminds us, he has never looked backward. His entire family has made the Menninger Clinic what it stands for, a powerful factor for a better life for Americans, not just in its own neighborhood but throughout the world. And with his research and with his writing, with his lecturing, with his training of other doctors, psychiatrists, psychologists, and others, he has literally transformed the mental health care attitudes of our great Nation. To Dr. Roy Menninger, I want to express my deep thanks for accepting this award on behalf of his uncle and express my thanks also to the entire Menninger family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2112, "text": "It is with a great deal of pleasure that I present this award to Dr. Roy Menninger for Dr. Karl Menninger. As Senator and Secretary of State, candidate and citizen, Edmund S. Muskie has captured for himself a place in the public eye and the public's heart. Devoted to his nation and our ideals, he has performed heroically in a time of great challenge, with great fortitude in an era of change. If Ed were going to rewrite this citation, he would certainly insert the word Governor. I remember when we had the swearing-in ceremony in this room not too long ago, Ed pointed out that his love for the Governorship equaled my own, and I think those who have served in that position would agree that this is a wonderful opportunity for service before one comes to Washington to serve our whole Nation. Ed Muskie has been a man whom I have admired ever since I have been aware of his public service and been interested myself in going into the political arena. He has performed all of his official functions admirably with a quiet sense of inner strength and demonstrated courage. He has never yielded to temptation to lower his own standards or the standards which make all public servants proud. He is a man who has transcended in all his service any particular delineation of a political party, but has stayed a loyal Democrat at the same time. He is a man admired by all and the admiration is richly deserved. I am particularly grateful to Ed Muskie, because he was willing to leave a sure seat in the Senate to come and serve in a very difficult position as Secretary of State in this time of transition or change. But he did it with conviction that this was the best place for him to give his tremendous talents for the further service of his fellow Americans. He is a personal friend, as many of these honorees are, and personally and as President of our country, I am delighted and proud to award the Medal of Freedom to Ed Muskie. Once government's highest ranking woman, Esther Peterson still ranks highest among consumer advocates. She has advised Presidents and the public, and has worked for labor and business alike, always keeping the rights of all Americans to know and to be treated fairly as her highest priority. Even her staunchest foes respect her integrity and are warmed by her grace and sincere concern. You may be surprised that in the citation the word foes is mentioned in relation to this lovely American, but she has made some foes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2113, "text": "And I would guess, knowing her, that she is prouder of the foes she has made- -if possible, 'than even some of the friends she has. She has never been afraid to address difficult issues even at the expense on occasion of personal harmony with those about whom she cares. She serves others with her entire dedicated life. She is come to the inner circles of the White House in a major position during these last few years to work with me to make sure that the average American is not cheated, that they are told the truth, that they are treated fairly, and that when they go into the marketplace they can have some inner sense of trust in the free enterprise system which she has served so well. She is a delightful person, a person with charm, a person who makes deep friendships and deep commitments. And her deepest commitment has been to those who do not know her and who will probably never see her or maybe not even hear her voice. She serves those who are most deprived and has done that with her whole life. I love her personally, and I congratulate her on receiving this award, the Medal of Freedom of our country. Gerard C. Smith has represented our country in many capacities-as the first U.S. Chairman of the Trilateral Commission, as chief U.S. delegate to the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks in 1969. In helping formulate our national security policy, in promoting a better understanding of foreign relations, he has helped us all to perceive that in this nuclear age security and peace are indivisible. In my farewell address the other night, I emphasized one subject perhaps greater than any other, and that is the control of nuclear weapons throughout the world. One way to control nuclear weapons is to have an agreement, a binding agreement, between ourselves and the Soviet Union, the other superpower, to control and to limit and hopefully to reduce, ultimately to eliminate nuclear weapons altogether. The other way is to make sure that the world understands the threat of nuclear weaponry and the threat of a nuclear war and that we can impose a policy of nonproliferation, to prevent the spread of nuclear weaponry to other nations around the world. Gerry Smith has been involved from the very beginning of our Nation's policy of nonproliferation. He is been a teacher of leaders in this country and around the world. He is put forward our own Nation's programs and policies with distinction and commitment and tenacity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2114, "text": "He is a great negotiator, a very successful one, and he is responsible now for the SALT treaty which is binding upon and has been for many years binding upon our Nation and the Soviet Union. Our country is indebted to Gerry Smith. And as President, I am personally indebted to him as well. I want to say at this time that I congratulate him; I am honored to present the Medal of Freedom to a fine American who has served us well, Gerard C. Smith. For Americans politics is the art of the possible. Through intelligence, ability, and the many friendships earned during his service as the leader of his party and his Nation, Robert S. Strauss has refined that art into a science. With diligence, persistence, and wit, he successfully concluded the multilateral trade negotiations at a time when many believed that they were doomed for failure. For strengthening the system of trade which links the nations of our increasingly interdependent world he has earned our gratitude and respect. The first time I went to an international forum to meet with the leaders of other great Western nations-Japan, Canada, Italy, Great Britain, Germany, France-I asked them about the longstanding effort to conclude a multilateral trade agreement that would enhance the quality of life, the productivity, the exchange of goods, the enhancement of peace among all the nations of the Western world. Chancellor Schmidt, President Giscard d'Estaing, at that time Prime Minister Callaghan, all told me this was a fruitless wish, that the Multilateral Trade Negotiations were dead. I decided to ask Bob Strauss to give it a try. Not only did he succeed in bringing the multiple nations together in one of the most complex negotiating efforts that I have ever seen, but he came back and convinced the Members of Congress-Democrats, Republicans, House and Senate that the very complicated agreements that he had negotiated and which, I would guess, many of them never read, were in the best interest of our country, in the best interest of their constituents, and would do them credit on the next election day. And the Multilateral Trade Negotiation Act passed the Congress overwhelmingly. As a matter of fact, it passed so easily, that there were no violent altercations or major debates, and the event almost escaped the notice of the press, even CBS Evening News. But it was a notable achievement, and it was one that utilized the tremendous talents of this good man.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2115, "text": "Later, Bob Strauss helped to negotiate peace between Israel and Egypt, pursuing the Camp David accords and the treaty that had been signed. And I think everyone who knows him would say that his understanding of the people of this country, his ability to get along with people of diverse views, and his ability to bring people together in an agreement that enhances the quality of life of all Americans is indeed outstanding. He is a man, as the citation says, of wit and competence and integrity. And I am very proud to present the Medal of Freedom to Robert Strauss. At a time when it was unpopular to do so, he carried out the mandate of Supreme Court decisions and Congressional legislation to end racial discrimination in the Deep South. With steadfast courage and a deep love and understanding of the region, he has helped to make the Constitutional principle of equal protection a reality of American life. Those of us who have lived in the South during the time when racial discrimination was ended by the courts are perhaps the only ones here who can adequately appreciate the courage of a Federal judge like Elbert Tuttle. His decisions not only required the knowledge of the law and courage. They required a character and an earned degree of esteem from his fellow Georgians and his fellow southerners that would add additional weight to his decisions. When the people in my region would read that Judge Elbert Tuttle had ruled this way, we had a natural sense that even though some may not agree, it must be right. I am indebted to him personally. Both I and one of the honorees would probably never be here in the White House on this day had it not been for Elbert Tuttle and men like him. He is a man of brilliant mind. He can handle complex legal decisions easily, but he is a man of simple commitments and ideals. When he was interviewed at the time of his retirement from the Federal bench on national television, the interviewer said, Judge Tuttle, I understand that you have never drunk alcoholic beverages, and Judge Tuttle said, That is right. And the interviewer said, Would you mind telling our television audience why? And Judge Tuttle said, Because my mother told me not to. I have thought about that a lot. And a lot of people in this Nation did what was right because Judge Tuttle said, That is what we ought to do. I am honored to present to him the Medal of Freedom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2116, "text": "Earl Warren led a unanimous court that in turn led the Nation in reversing a century of judicial and social history. Equal Justice For All. As governor, presidential candidate and Chief Justice, he has truly been a citizen for all seasons. As I stood here this afternoon, I tried to think of any man who has served in the White House as President who has benefited our Nation as much or more than Earl Warren-and I cannot think of anybody. There comes a time in the evolution of society when a certain quality of understanding and integrity and leadership is a prerequisite to further progress. When hopeless, perhaps, but courageous people are being frustrated, when the times call for change, but ordinary human beings cannot bring themselves to make the change because they might be criticized by their peers or those whom they would like to please, and when the trend of history must be modified or even reversed, I thank God that Earl Warren was the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in a time like that. And with his decision, he helped to realize the aspirations and ideals expressed in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of our Nation. His predecessors had not adequately done it. He departed from some longstanding decisions that they had made. I say that without criticizing them. But it took a special man to make those difficult decisions that Judge Tuttle and others followed in the administration of justice and the enhancement of equality of opportunity under the law for all the people of our Nation. Miss Nina has come here representing her late husband, and I am honored especially to present the Medal of Freedom to the beloved wife of one of the finest Americans who ever served in any capacity in the Government of our Nation, former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court Earl Warren. I would like to say before I present the last medal here that Roger Baldwin, a great civil rights leader, is in the hospital in New Jersey. At 3 o'clock this afternoon, the same time as we began our ceremony here, he was presented with a Medal of Freedom by William Vanden Heuvel, Deputy Ambassador to the United Nations, on my behalf. Founder of the American Civil Liberties Union and the International League for Human Rights, Roger Nash Baldwin is a leader in the field of civil rights and a legend in the field of civil liberties. He is a national resource, and an international one as well, an inspiration to those of us who have fought for human rights, a saint to those for whom he has gained them. Andrew Young brought to diplomatic service a lifetime of dedication to human rights.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2117, "text": "He helped restore trust in the United States among Third World nations, especially in Africa, demonstrating to them that American foreign policy was based on our firm belief in justice, freedom, majority rule, and opportunity for all people. I first heard about Andrew Young when I read news reports that he was in jail along with Martin Luther King, Jr., and when I saw his photographs in the newspaper seeking, with danger to his own life, to prove that our Constitution and the rulings of Earl Warren and Judge Tuttle ought to be put into effect by human beings. He is a man of quiet demeanor, having served as a United States Congressman from my State. When I was elected President, one of my major goals was to enhance human rights and to strengthen the ties of friendship and understanding and mutual respect between our Nation and the small, sometimes weak, new nations of the world, those whose people might be black or brown or yellow and who in the past had sometimes distrusted our country because there was a lack of understanding on our own leaders' part of them. I asked Andy Young to leave the Congress and to serve as our U.N. Ambassador. He did it reluctantly. But when he went to the United Nations he served our Nation superbly. Sometimes I have to admit I was surprised by some of the statements that Andy made, and I do not agree with all of them and did not then. But if you listen closely to what he says, in the context of his statement, you see the wisdom and the continued purpose of his life expressed not just locally or domestically, but internationally. Throughout the Asian countries, the South American countries, the African countries, and many others, Andy Young is the brightest star in the American firmament. He is the man who represents integrity and understanding, humility, purpose, and who exemplifies the quiet teachings of his Saviour, whom he represents as a preacher of the gospel. He is carried on well along with Coretta and others the heritage of Martin Luther King, Jr., and I am deeply grateful for what Andy has meant to me personally, to me as President, and to our Nation. His beneficial service will help our Nation in many years ahead, and he is done it always with humility and with a quiet sense of calm, because he was sure that what he did was right for others. I have never known a person more unselfish than Andrew Young. And the respect that he enjoys around the world is well-deserved.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspresidentialmedalfreedomremarksthepresentationceremony0", "title": "Presidential Medal of Freedom Remarks at the Presentation Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/presidential-medal-freedom-remarks-the-presentation-ceremony-0", "publication_date": "16-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2132, "text": "The reason this is such a successful event is because people know that Bob Ehrlich will make a great Governor for Maryland. I believe it, and that is why I am here. I believe that is the reason why Democrats and Republicans support this good man-because he is honest, he is hard-working, and he is got a positive vision for everybody who lives in the State of Maryland. I am here because this man is somebody who wants to unite this State, not divide it. I appreciate Kendel, and I know Bob does as well. And I want you to know, I appreciate Laura, too. She is-you know, when I married her, she was a public school librarian. She was living in Texas, and so was I. The truth of the matter is she did not like politics then. And she was not too fond of politicians either. And here she is, married to me. But people, as they have gotten to know Laura, now know the reason why I asked her to marry me. A lot of her buddies are wondering why she said yes. But she does send her best and sends all her support to the Ehrlichs and wishes them all the best and joins me in urging the people of Maryland to give this good man a chance to be the Governor of this important State. I have known the next Lieutenant Governor for a while. He is a good, solid citizen of the State of Maryland. He will work well with Bob. It is an honor to be on the podium with the next Lieutenant Governor of the State of Maryland, Michael Steele. And I had the honor of meeting his good wife, Andrea, and I appreciate Andrea standing by her man during this tough campaign here. They are not easy on a family. But I appreciate- I appreciate her joining Michael in this race. I am honored to be back with former Congressman, soon-to-be Congresswoman Helen Bentley. I figure that when she wins, she will be telling me what to do. And those of you know, who know Helen, know that I'd better listen. It is great to see Helen. I love her spirit. I am also proud to be here with Ellen Sauerbrey, who is the national committeewoman. I want to thank Chairman Louis Pope of the Republican Party. I want to thank all the grassroots activists who are here. I want to thank you for-- I did not ask for any speeches; I just said-.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2133, "text": "Okay, let me tell you what you are going to have to do then. I want to thank you for what you are going to do, which is to turn out the vote. Listen, a lot of you never get thanked enough. I am thanking you. I am thanking you for dialing the phones and putting up the signs and for mailing the letters. I am thanking you for going to your community centers and your coffee shops. I am thanking you for supporting this ticket ahead of time, because they need your help, and they want your work. You have got to talk it up between now and election day. And you have got to find those Ehrlich voters and make sure they go to the polls, and this man will be your next Governor. You need somebody who can manage your government, somebody who knows how to balance the books without raising the taxes on the taxpayers-that is what you need. You need somebody who can make a tough decision who does not need a poll or a focus group to tell him how to think, somebody who stands on principle, somebody who will do in office what he says he will do. And when he says he will not raise your taxes, he will not raise your taxes. I appreciate the fact that Governor Ehrlich will set education as the number one priority for this State. The way I used to put it when I was a Governor, I said, Education is to a State what national defense is to the Federal Government. Education has got to be the number one priority of your Governor, and it will be Bob's number one priority. We share the same philosophy. That is what we believe. See, that is important to have in your Governor's office, somebody who is willing to challenge the soft bigotry of low expectations. You see, if you lower standards, if you lower the bar, you are going go get lousy results. And that is not fair for the children. Governor Ehrlich will raise the standards. He will trust the local people to manage their way to excellence. But he and I agree on this, and that is, we have got to know. See, as a society, we have got to measure to determine whether or not our children are learning to read and write and add and subtract. It is essential that you have a Governor who is strong on accountability.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2134, "text": "But in order to make sure no child gets left behind in the State of Maryland, you must have a Governor who uses the accountability system to praise those teachers and principals who succeed on behalf of the children but also someone who is willing to challenge the schools which will not teach and will not change. Bob Ehrlich will be a Governor who will make sure that no child is left behind in the State of Maryland. The job of a Governor is to create an environment in which people can find work and the economy grows. That is why he is insistent upon infrastructure, to be wise about the use of taxpayers' money, to expand the asset base which will encourage private sector growth. I love his vision about the Port of Baltimore and the Baltimore/Washington International Airport. He understands job creation. See, that is what he knows. And it is important to have somebody in the Governor's office who understands how jobs are created. The role of Government is not to create wealth. The role of Government is to create an environment in which the entrepreneur can realize his or her dreams, in which small businesses can grow to be big businesses. That is the kind of Governor you need. He is compassionate, and his record speaks to his compassion. He worked for tax credits for parents who adopt children. He worked hard to make sure there is equal health insurance benefits for the mentally ill. He works to have increased access to individuals in the workplace who may be disabled. See, that is the kind of Governor you want. You want somebody who is tough when it comes to the budget, making sure that it is balanced but compassionate when it comes to helping people who need help. There is no question in my mind that this man, when elected, will make Maryland a safer and stronger and better place for every citizen who lives in this State. And my job as the President is to make sure America is a safer and stronger and better country. A strong country is one in which people can find work. Anytime somebody is looking for work and they cannot find work in America, I think we have a problem. And we have got to do everything we can at the Federal level to make sure our economy grows. I worry about people who have lost value in their 401s. I worry about people looking for work who cannot find work. I worry about uncertainty. We are beginning to make progress because the foundations for growth are strong. The productivity of the American worker is the highest and best in the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2135, "text": "We have got a lot of strong things going for us. For a while there was a kind of an overhang in our economy because we had some of our citizens who thought they could fudge the books, who forgot what it means to be a responsible citizen, who got caught up in money, not in responsibility. I had the honor of signing, and Bob voted for, the most significant corporate reform since Franklin Roosevelt was the President. Our message to corporate America, to those citizens who think they can cheat, is, Those days are over with. And that is why I worked with Congressman Ehrlich and others to pass a significant tax cut, because I took a page out of this economic textbook. The page said if you let a person keep more of their own money-and notice I said more of their own money; it is not the Government's money, it is your money-if you keep more of your own money, if you have more money in your pocket, you are going to demand a good or a service. And when you demand a good or a service, in this marketplace economy, somebody's going to produce the good or a service. And when somebody produces the good or a service, somebody is more likely to find work. If you are interested in creating more jobs, you let people keep more of their own money. The tax cuts came at the exact right time in American economic history. We slashed the marriage penalty. We believe that the Tax Code ought to encourage families and encourage marriage, not discourage families and marriage. And we did something else to help the entrepreneur and the farmer and the rancher, and that is we put the death tax on the way to extinction. The rules in the Senate are such that that tax relief plan that we all worked so hard to enact goes away after 10 years. For the sake of job creation, for the sake of economic expansion, for the sake of those who want to find work- the Congress needs to make the tax cuts permanent. I worry about hardhats trying to find work. I worry about that. And so-I met, I guess it was yesterday-time flies up there--but I met yesterday with Members of the House and Senate, both parties, to urge them to pass a terrorism insurance bill. There is over $15 billion worth of projects, construction projects, which are not going forward because people cannot get terrorism insurance.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2136, "text": "a bill, by the way, which does not reward trial lawyers and does reward working people in America. I want to assure you, we will not rest until people can find work. And I look forward to working with ways to create the environment for economic expansion. I want to work to make America more confident about our future. One way to make sure that Americans are more confident about the future and availability of capital is to make sure Congress does not overspend. And we have a problem in Washington, right around the corner from here. Every idea sounds like a brilliant idea. The problem is, they have all got billions of dollars attached to them as price tags. They could not pass a budget. You can imagine what that means. For the sake of economic vitality, for the sake of making sure people can find work, the Congress must fund our priorities and not overspend the people's money. We must be fiscally sound in Washington, DC, if we want our economy to grow. A stronger America is one in which people can find work. And while I am optimistic about our future, while I understand the spirit of the-the entrepreneurial spirit is strong, we have got work to do. We have got work to do on the economy. And we have also got work to do to make sure America is a safer place. Economic vitality and growth are a really important part of my job and what is on my mind, but nothing more on my mind than protecting the American people. That is my most important job now, is to make sure that the enemy does not hit us again. They are out there because of what we love and what they hate. They are out there because we love freedom. We love the fact that our fellow citizens can worship an almighty God any way he or she sees fit. We love that, and we are never going to relinquish that freedom. We love our diversity. We love the fact that people can realize their dreams in America, regardless of where their mom or dad was born. That is what we love. We love the fact that this great country-in this great country you can speak your mind freely. We love a free press. We love everything about our freedoms. And yet we face an enemy which hates freedom. They hate us because of what we love. We also value life in America. Everybody has worth in this country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2137, "text": "And the enemy is nothing but a bunch of cold-blooded killers who are willing to take innocent life in the name of a hijacked religion. And that is who we fight. This is the first war of the 21st century, but it is a different kind of war. And therefore, I have spent a lot of time explaining to the American people how best we can keep the peace and what we must do to win this new war. It starts with making sure we do everything here at home to organize the agencies involved with the defense of the homeland. Before September the 11th, none of them really had as their number one priority the protection of the homeland. In order to make sure that we change culture and set priority, I have asked Congress to join me in the creation of a Department of Homeland Security. Listen, I readily concede my slogan was not , Vote for George. My slogan--what I want to have happen is, I want the Government to work. I want to be able to better do the job you expect me to do. And there-fore-and therefore, I call upon the Senate to join the House in creating a Department of Homeland Security which enables this President and future Presidents to be able to move people to the right place at the right time in order to protect America. I need the ability to manage the process. I do not need rules and regulations. I do not need micromanagement by the legislative branch. The House passed a good bill, and now the Senate must do so. They must get after it before they go home. I need a good bill, and I will not accept anything less. See, this is a chance to leave-for the Congress to leave a legacy for future people, future Presidents, future administrations, to deal with this real threat we face. But I want you to know, and you need to know, there are a lot of good folks working hard here in America to protect you; there really are. And we are doing a better job. We have got great police and fire, lots of FBI agents and CIA agents working hard. Anytime we get any hint about something might happen, a scintilla of evidence, we are moving on it; we are. We are making progress, all within the confines of the United States Constitution. But the best way to protect the homeland, short term and long term, is to chase the killers down, one at a time, and bring them to justice.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2138, "text": "This is the kind of war- we do not face people who have got tanks and destroyers and bombers. That is a different kind of war. Those are wars of the past. This is a war in which we are fighting resourceful, determined people who hide in caves or the dark recesses of certain cities, and then send youngsters to their suicidal deaths. That is the kind of people we fight. And therefore, we are on an international manhunt. And we are making progress. That is just what you have got to know. Sometimes it is hard to tell; it is hard to measure progress. If you are not destroying equipment, it is hard to tell. But we have captured over a couple of thousand of them. I say we -the doctrine that says, Either you are with us, or you are with the enemy, still stands. That doctrine is still a part of American foreign policy. We are sharing intelligence. We are disrupting their finances, and we are hauling them in. The other day we got the fellow-I forgot the guy's name-bin al-Shibh, or whatever his name was. And he popped his head up, and now he is no longer a problem. We are making progress. We are making progress. We are working with our friends. We have got a vast coalition of people who understand the stakes and understand the nature of the war. I said we hauled in a couple of thousand; a like number were not as lucky. Slowly but surely, we are dismantling this particular terrorist network. I want to thank those of you who have got loved ones in the United States military. I am proud of our military. They are making a huge difference. One, anytime our troops go into harm's way, they deserve the best pay, the best training, and the best possible equipment; and secondly, the defense spending should send a clear message to friend and foe alike that the United States of America is in this deal for the long haul, that when it comes to the defense of our freedom, when it comes to defending this country, there is no timeline until we get it right, that we are-that we will stay the course, we will stay-we owe that to our children. We owe it to our children and our children's children to defend freedom and to protect the homeland.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2139, "text": "We have new responsibilities in many ways-the same responsibilities, I guess, but new challenges to uphold those responsibilities, because we learned a tough lesson, and that is, oceans no longer protect us. It is a different war, with a different battlefield. And therefore, we must deal with threats as we see them, threats which may in the past have not been so frightening, but now in the new era we have got to deal with them, it seems like to me. In order to do our duty as Americans and leaders, we have got to defend our country and our friends and allies against the real threats that we face. This is a man who has gassed his own people, used weapons of mass destruction on his own citizens. Imagine what his intentions will be about a country that loves freedom like we do. This is a man who has attacked-and by the way, he used weapons of mass destruction in his own neighborhood, too, against countries on his border. This is a man who has attacked two countries in 22 years. This is a man who kills political dissenters in cold blood. This is a man who, 11 years ago, told the world that he would get rid of weapons of mass destruction, and yet, for 11 long years, he has defied resolution after resolution after resolution after resolution out of the United Nations. This is a man who would like nothing more than to team up with a terrorist network, a man who could use a terrorist network perhaps to use the weapons of mass destruction he is developed-and lies about-to harm countries that he cannot stand-America, Israel, countries in his own-immediately around him. And therefore, I thought it was time for us to deal with him, for the sake of freedom. So I went to the United Nations. We want you to succeed as a international body. We can do a better job if we work together through the United Nations, and here is your chance to succeed. You have a choice, and the choice is whether you will be an effective peacekeeping organization or whether you will be like the League of Nations-your choice. I also said to Mr. Saddam Hussein, You said you would disarm-your choice to disarm. He should do what he said he would do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2140, "text": "But for the sake of freedom and for the sake of peace, for the sake of a world that does not fear the world's worst leaders with the first world's weapons- with the world's worst weapons, this country will be deliberate, we will work with others, but we will lead a coalition to disarm Saddam Hussein. And today I was joined on the steps of the Rose Garden with Members of the House and Members of the Senate, Republicans and Democrats alike, who have joined with us to pass-the desire to pass a strong statement to the world about the resolve and determination of the United States. We are going to have a very constructive debate in Congress, and there should be. I told them today, I thought the debate that was going on is going to be one of the most historic debates ever in the Hall of Congress. That sentiment was echoed by not only the Speaker but Richard Gephardt, who was there, not only Trent Lott but Joe Lieberman was there, not only John McCain but Democrat Evan Bayh was there. We love our peace; we want the world to be a better and more peaceful place. If the United States remains strong and tough and focused, we can achieve peace. We can achieve peace here at home. If we speak clearly and renounce terrorism and fight terrorism, we can achieve peace in the Middle East; we can achieve peace in South Asia. No, the enemy hit us. The enemy hit us. But they did not realize who they hit. Oh, they probably thought we'd file a lawsuit or two. But they hit a country which loves freedom, a country based upon solid values, a country which, when we need to be strong, is strong. I believe, sincerely believe, that out of the evil done to America can come incredible good, starting with peace. We can make sure to work- work hard to make sure our seniors get quality health care. For the sake of our seniors, let us modernize Medicare with prescription drugs. But we must remember, here in America, in spite of our plenty, there are pockets of despair-there just are. They wonder whether or not the American Dream means anything to them. And as a society, we must do everything we can to eradicate those pockets of despair. Now, listen-Government can hand out money. We are pretty good at it at times.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2141, "text": "But what Government cannot do is put hope in people's hearts or love in people's hearts or a sense of purpose in people's lives. Government cannot do that. That is done when our fellow Americans have heard the universal call to love a neighbor just like you'd like to be loved yourself. If you want to fight evil, do some good. If you want to fight evil, if you want to join in the war against terror, if you want to show the world what we are made out of-help somebody in need. See, our society will change-one heart, one conscience, one soul at a time-when a neighbor loves a neighbor in need. I look forward to working with Governor Ehrlich to unleash the true compassion of each society. I am a strong proponent of the Faith-Based Initiative. I want to unleash the power of love. I want people who go to church and synagogue and mosque, if they want to help a person in need, to be empowered by the Government to do so. Our Governments must not fear faith. We must welcome faith in our society. No, the enemy hit us, but they-in doing so, they have awakened a great spirit, an American spirit. And I want you all to help move that spirit forward. I know many of you already do this-but mentor a child, or help somebody in need. Continue doing the charitable works you do to help the communities in which you live. It will be a better place for all of us. One of the reasons I first ran for office is because I wanted to challenge the culture of our country, which has said, If it feels good, just go ahead and do it, and If you have got a problem, blame somebody else. My dream was to usher in a period of personal responsibility, to be a part of a cultural shift in which each of understands we are responsible for the decisions we make in life. If you are a mom or a dad, your most important responsibility is to love your child with all your heart. You are responsible for helping a neighbor in need. You are responsible for the quality of education in the community in which you live. If you are running corporate America, you are responsible to your employees and shareholders to tell the truth. The responsibility era is happening in America, probably most vividly displayed on Flight 93, when average citizens were flying across the country. They learned their plane was going to be used as a weapon- imagine.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforgubernatorialcandidaterobertlehrlichjrbaltimoremaryland0", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Gubernatorial Candidate Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr., in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-gubernatorial-candidate-robert-l-ehrlich-jr-baltimore-maryland-0", "publication_date": "02-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2142, "text": "I am glad to be back in Mississippi. I thank the warm welcome for a former Texas Governor who is proud to be on stage with the future Mississippi Governor. I am here to remind the good people of this State-Republican, Democrat, or independent-if they are interested in good government, if they want somebody to call upon the best of Mississippi, if they are interested in every person being able to achieve their dreams in this State, they need to elect Haley Barbour as the Governor of Mississippi. Mississippi can do better. It says when he is your Governor, he will have an optimistic outlook for all the people of this State. He believes in high standards and raising that bar. He believes in the vast human potential of Mississippi. There is no doubt in my mind that when you elect Haley Barbour as Governor of Mississippi, Mississippi will do better. And I know him. I know him well. He recounted some of our history. We have been friends for a long time. So when I say, for example, he believes in personal responsibility, I know he believes that way. And when he says he is going to focus on education to make sure no child is left behind in Mississippi, I know he believes that. Whether it was in my conversations with him in Washington, DC, or in Austin, Texas, he always talked about Yazoo City. It is safe to say he never forgot his roots. No, there is no doubt in my mind this good man can do the job. If the people of this State give him a chance, they are going to realize that he is going to call upon the best of Mississippi. He and I share something else in common. We both married above ourselves. I am proud to be on stage with Marsha, had a chance to say hello to Sterling and Reeves. My only advice to those boys was, listen to your mother. I am still listening to mine. Laura sends her love. She sends her love not only to Haley and Marsha; she sends her very best to many of our friends out here today. She is a fabulous wife, by the way, and a great First Lady for America. Speaking about a guy who married well, Senator Lott is with us. Tricia and Trent are really good friends of Laura and mine. We both love our country, and we both love Scottish terriers. Mississippi is really, really lucky to have him as a United States Senator. You have got some pretty good Congressmen, too.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforgubernatorialcandidatehaleybarbourjacksonmississippi", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate Haley Barbour in Jackson, Mississippi", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-gubernatorial-candidate-haley-barbour-jackson-mississippi", "publication_date": "12-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2143, "text": "I am proud to call Roger Wicker and Chip Pickering friends. These guys are doing a great job on behalf of this State. It is great to see Chip and his beautiful wife today. I do want you to do me a favor, if you do not mind, a little personal privilege from the ENTITY. I hope you give your dad my best, Judge Charles Pickering. I nominated him to a higher court because I believe in his character. I trust his judicial philosophy. He is a man who will interpret the law, not legislate from the bench. Some Senators are playing politics with American justice. They did this man and this country a disservice. It is time for some on the Senate floor to stop playing politics with people like Charles Pickering's good name. There is a lot of people here hoping Haley runs good at the top of the ticket, starting with the Lieutenant Governor, Amy Tuck. I am proud to have welcomed her to the Oval Office the other day. It is-along with Travis Little-they were up there to, oh, get a picture or two taken. But it was good to talk to Amy again. I had the honor of welcoming her to the Republican Party. I appreciate the courage of your decision, Amy, and I appreciate your willingness to lead. Of course, I did meet Senator Little. I also want to thank State auditor Phil Bryant for being here. I want to thank the-thank you, Phil. I appreciate Mike Retzer, my long-time friend, for working hard for the Bush-Cheney campaign. I also know you have got some candidates here running, and I always like to mention candidates who have decided to take on the task of a statewide race, because it is not an easy job. It is not easy to ask your family to run-have to ask your family to join you in running. But we have got Julio Del Castillo here, who is the candidate for secretary of state. We have got Scott Newton, the candidate for attorney general. We have got Max Phillips, the candidate for agriculture commissioner. And we have got Tate Reeves, the candidate for treasurer. Thank you all for running, I hope you help them. It is good to see your former Governor, Kirk Fordice, here today. I want to thank Jim Herring, the chairman of the Mississippi Republican Party, for his hard work. And I want to thank all the folks involved with grassroots politics here in Mississippi.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforgubernatorialcandidatehaleybarbourjacksonmississippi", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate Haley Barbour in Jackson, Mississippi", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-gubernatorial-candidate-haley-barbour-jackson-mississippi", "publication_date": "12-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2144, "text": "I want to thank Cindy Phillips, who is the national committeewoman, as well. Finally, there is a special fellow here that my family has known for a long time. He is a really great American, great fellow from Mississippi. Laura and I occasionally slide across the street there in Washington, DC, to go to church at the little St. John's Church in Lafayette Square. One of our favorite things when we get to church is to shake hands and to say hello to one of the special Americans, and that is my friend Sonny Montgomery. It looks like they still remember you here, Sonny. I first want to thank you for your generosity but remind you that there is more to do in the campaign for an important race like Governor. You have got to turn out the vote. You have got to go to your coffee shops and tell the people that may not be quite as interested in politics as you are that there is a lot at stake for Mississippi. When they are just about to sip that coffee, you tell them that Haley Barbour has got a clear vision for the future of this State. He is not going to win it on his looks alone. He is going to win it because he cares about people. See, when he hears somebody is looking for a job, it bothers him. If somebody is looking for a job and cannot find work, it means you have got a problem here in Mississippi. That is the way I feel about the Nation. The role of Government is not to create wealth; the role of Government is to create an environment in which entrepreneurship can flourish, in which small businesses can grow to be big businesses. And that is why, for example, in Washington, I worked with the Congress to pass tax relief. When the economy goes slow, if you let people have more of their own money, they are likely to demand a good or a service. Haley understands that. He understands whose money we spend in Government. We are not spending the Government's money; we are spending the people's money. And you better have you a Governor who understands that when he gets you elected to represent this great State. This economy is beginning to pick up a little steam, but there are still some citizens who hurt. So long as they are hurting, we have got to keep creating an environment for economic growth. It will be important to have a Governor in Mississippi who understands that fiscal discipline is necessary at the State capital.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforgubernatorialcandidatehaleybarbourjacksonmississippi", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate Haley Barbour in Jackson, Mississippi", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-gubernatorial-candidate-haley-barbour-jackson-mississippi", "publication_date": "12-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2145, "text": "If you are interested in job creation, Government has got to be fiscally disciplined. If you are interested in job creation, you have got to put policy in place that encourages small-business growth. After all, most small businesses-most new jobs are created by small businesses in America. Haley has got a plan. He is got good ideas. He comes with the right philosophy, and he is got a plan to create jobs here in Mississippi. For the people in Mississippi who are interested in job creation, the right man for the job is Haley Barbour. By the way, one way to make sure this is a good State in which to create jobs is to have a Governor who is willing to take off the-take on the plaintiffs' attorneys and fight for real, meaningful litigation reform. You do not want it said that the fastest growth industry in your State is the plaintiffs' bar. That is not good for attracting industry and creating jobs. You do not want the greatest wealth accumulation in any State to be in the hands of plaintiffs' attorneys. You need to get you a Governor who understands that, who is tough enough to stand up to the special interests that oftentimes dominate State politics, is willing to look those in the eye who are trying to ruin the condition for job creation, who are running your doctors out of your State, look them in the eye and say, I demand that we have reasonable tort reform in the State of Mississippi. Last time I came to your beautiful State, I was here because I was worried about docs getting run out of Mississippi. I will never forget meeting with the guy from the Delta. It was a fellow; he came down from the North. He heard a call. He is what you might call a faith-based doctor, practicing real medicine, but he was motivated by faith to help people who hurt, a fantastic person. The guy never grew up in Mississippi but heard there was a need for health care in this State, so he came here. He wanted to give of his time and talents so somebody might live a better life. And he told me the stories about what it is like to live in a State where the system is not fair anymore, where the lawyers have pushed too far. And he left your State of Mississippi because the premiums went up too high. You lost a good heart in your State because the system is awry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforgubernatorialcandidatehaleybarbourjacksonmississippi", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate Haley Barbour in Jackson, Mississippi", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-gubernatorial-candidate-haley-barbour-jackson-mississippi", "publication_date": "12-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2146, "text": "You need you a Governor who understands that health care must be accessible and affordable, a Governor that when he says he is going to get you medical liability reform, will get you real medical liability reform, not only for the sake of the docs but, more importantly, for the sake of the people who need good health care. In order for this State to reach its full potential, you need to have a Governor who understands the number one priority of any State is the education of the children of that State. Haley understands that. We passed good law in Washington, DC. It is an interesting change of attitude for the Nation's Capital. It used to be we just passed out money in Washington. And we are pretty good at that, by the way. But now we have said, if you are going to receive money for education purposes and elementary and secondary act money and Title I money within that title, is now we expect to see whether or not the children are learning to read and write and add and subtract. See, the State of Mississippi needs a Governor, just like our country needed a ENTITY, that was willing to challenge the soft bigotry of low expectations. When you lower the bar, you get bad results. If you believe certain children cannot learn, you will have a system that just shuffles the kids through. If you believe it is impossible to teach a certain type of child, guess what is going to happen? That type of child will never learn. I believe it is in the reach with every State and every school to teach the basics. And therefore, in return for Federal money, I expect the basics to be taught. And I want to thank Senator Lott and the Congressman here who stood with me on that important initiative. Now, in return for Federal money, States must show people whether or not our children are learning to read and write and add and subtract. We want concrete proof. And if it is not happening, we will use the measurement systems not as a way to punish the good teachers, but to correct the situation. Haley Barbour agrees with that philosophy. He believes about raising the bar. He believes, support the teachers. But most of all, he knows that we must correct problems early, before they are too late, to make sure that not one single child gets left behind in the State of Mississippi.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforgubernatorialcandidatehaleybarbourjacksonmississippi", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate Haley Barbour in Jackson, Mississippi", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-gubernatorial-candidate-haley-barbour-jackson-mississippi", "publication_date": "12-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2147, "text": "I appreciate the fact that Haley understands that there are people who hurt in Mississippi; there are people who are lonely and addicted, people who are homeless, and people who are hungry. He also understands what I know, that the Government can hand out money, but it cannot put hope in people's hearts or a sense of purpose in people's lives. That is done when a loving soul puts their arm around somebody who hurts and says, I love you. What can I do to help you? The true strength of this country is the hearts and souls of the American people. And the job of people in positions of responsibility is to rally that spirit. That is why the Faith-Based Initiative that I proposed in Washington is so vital. It is an initiative that Haley fully understands. Listen, there are great programs that come out of Government, and sometimes they work, and sometimes they do not . But we ought to use all avenues, all our strengths, to achieve the common goal that everybody feels the great hope of America. When we find somebody who is lonely and addicted on drugs, we ought not to fear a faith-based program's involvement with that person. You see, sometimes it takes a change of heart to change a habit. And when we find effective programs based upon faith, Government at the Federal level and State level should not fear faith, we should welcome faith into the important delivery of human services to people who hurt. I had a chance to talk to Haley on Air Force One coming down. He came over to Fort Stewart, and I thought it might be okay if I shared some thoughts on the war on terror. I was in Fort Stewart; it is the home of the 3d Infantry Division. They are the troops who took it up the west side, from the south of Iraq to free Baghdad. What an honor it is to stand up in front of fantastically brave troops and to thank them on behalf of a grateful nation. It is important for me to continue to do this because this Nation still remains at war. It is a different kind of war. You saw how different it was on September the 11th, 2001. Instead of armies marching across plains or Air Forces bombing Pearl Harbor, we were attacked by coldblooded killers who took our own assets and flew them into the buildings without regard to the nature of the victim. These people did not care if they were young kids, women, men-no such thing in their mind as innocent or guilt. They are interested in one thing, death.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforgubernatorialcandidatehaleybarbourjacksonmississippi", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate Haley Barbour in Jackson, Mississippi", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-gubernatorial-candidate-haley-barbour-jackson-mississippi", "publication_date": "12-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2148, "text": "On that day, this country decided that no matter how long it took, we would find those who would inflict harm upon America and bring them to justice. I will never forget the lessons of September the 11th, 2001, so long as I am your ENTITY. I have a solemn duty to protect America, and we are making progress. We are slowly but surely bringing the Al Qaida killers to justice. I remind people that over two-thirds of the known operatives and leaders are either dead or captured. And I can assure you, we are after the rest of them. No matter how long it takes, no matter what the cost, we will bring those who harmed America and want to harm America to justice. We owe it to future generations of Americans. We owe it to the peace and security of the world to use our strength to find the killers. Therapy will not work with these kind of people. Treaties make no sense. Get them before they get us, to stay on the offensive. Right after September the 11th, I laid out a new American doctrine that said, If you harbor a terrorist, if you feed a terrorist, if you house a terrorist, you are just as guilty as the terrorists. And the Taliban found out what the United States of America meant. Young girls now go to school for the first time, because the Taliban is no more. Girls go to school, thanks to the might of the United States of America. We believe and know that freedom is not America's gift to the world; it is the Almighty's gift to every individual in the world. And we have brought freedom to the people of Iraq in a military operation that was one of the swiftest and most humane military operations in history. We rid the world of Saddam Hussein, and we freed millions of people in Iraq. Terrorist groups will no longer find support in Iraq, and terrorist groups will not ever be able to get weapons of mass destruction in Iraq because Saddam Hussein is no more. But I understand this, that in order to make sure America is secure in the long run and the world is more peaceful, we must spread freedom. Free people do not attack their neighbors. Free people do not develop weapons of mass destruction. The truth of the matter is, the greatest security for America in the long term is the spread of liberty. And that is why it is so important in the heart of the Middle East that we establish a free society in Iraq.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksluncheonforgubernatorialcandidatehaleybarbourjacksonmississippi", "title": "Remarks at a Luncheon for Gubernatorial Candidate Haley Barbour in Jackson, Mississippi", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-luncheon-for-gubernatorial-candidate-haley-barbour-jackson-mississippi", "publication_date": "12-09-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2149, "text": "I want to take this opportunity to update the American people about the situation in Libya. Over the last several weeks, the world has watched events unfold in Libya with hope and alarm. Last month, protesters took to the streets across the country to demand their universal rights and a government that is accountable to them and responsive to their aspirations. But they were met with an iron fist. Within days, whole parts of the country declared their independence from a brutal regime and members of the Government serving in Libya and abroad chose to align themselves with the forces of change. Muammar Qadhafi clearly lost the confidence of his own people and the legitimacy to lead. Instead of respecting the rights of his own people, Qadhafi chose the path of brutal suppression. Innocent civilians were beaten, imprisoned, and in some cases killed. A campaign of intimidation and repression began. In the face of this injustice, the United States and the international community moved swiftly. Sanctions were put in place by the United States and our allies and partners. The U.N. Security Council imposed further sanctions, an arms embargo, and the specter of international accountability for Qadhafi and those around him. Humanitarian assistance was positioned on Libya's borders, and those displaced by the violence received our help. Ample warning was given that Qadhafi needed to stop his campaign of repression or be held accountable. The Arab League and the European Union joined us in calling for an end to violence. Once again, Qadhafi chose to ignore the will of his people and the international community. Instead, he launched a military campaign against his own people. And there should be no doubt about his intentions because he himself has made them clear. For decades, he is demonstrated a willingness to use brute force through his sponsorship of terrorism against the American people as well as others and through the killings that he has carried out within his own borders. And just yesterday, speaking of the city of Benghazi, a city of roughly 700,000 people, he threatened, and I quote, We will have no mercy and no pity. Now, here is why this matters to us. Left unchecked, we have every reason to believe that Qadhafi would commit atrocities against his people. The entire region could be destabilized, endangering many of our allies and partners. The calls of the Libyan people for help would go unanswered. The democratic values that we stand for would be overrun.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesituationlibya", "title": "Remarks on the Situation in Libya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-situation-libya", "publication_date": "18-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2150, "text": "Moreover, the words of the international community would be rendered hollow. And that is why the United States has worked with our allies and partners to shape a strong international response at the United Nations. protecting innocent civilians within Libya and holding the Qadhafi regime accountable. Yesterday, in response to a call for action by the Libyan people and the Arab League, the U.N. Security Council passed a strong resolution that demands an end to the violence against citizens. It authorizes the use of force with an explicit commitment to pursue all necessary measures to stop the killing, to include the enforcement of a no-fly zone over Libya. It also strengthens our sanctions and the enforcement of an arms embargo against the Qadhafi regime. Now, once more, Muammar Qadhafi has a choice. The resolution that passed lays out very clear conditions that must be met. That means all attacks against civilians must stop. Qadhafi must stop his troops from advancing on Benghazi, pull them back from Ajdabiya, Misurata, and Zawiyah, and establish water, electricity, and gas supplies to all areas. Humanitarian assistance must be allowed to reach the people of Libya. These terms are not subject to negotiation. If Qadhafi does not comply with the resolution, the international community will impose consequences and the resolution will be enforced through military action. In this effort, the United States is prepared to act as part of an international coalition. It means shaping the conditions for the international community to act together. That is why I have directed Secretary Gates and our military to coordinate their planning, and tomorrow Secretary Clinton will travel to Paris for a meeting with our European allies and Arab partners about the enforcement of Resolution 1973. We will provide the unique capabilities that we can bring to bear to stop the violence against civilians, including enabling our European allies and Arab partners to effectively enforce a no-fly zone. I have no doubt that the men and women of our military are capable of carrying out this mission. Once more, they have the thanks of a grateful nation and the admiration of the world. I also want to be clear about what we will not be doing. The United States is not going to deploy ground troops into Libya. And we are not going to use force to go beyond a well-defined goal, specifically, the protection of civilians in Libya. In the coming weeks, we will continue to help the Libyan people with humanitarian and economic assistance so that they can fulfill their aspirations peacefully.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesituationlibya", "title": "Remarks on the Situation in Libya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-situation-libya", "publication_date": "18-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2151, "text": "You will have to forgive me; you can hear that I have a cold, and so I cannot talk very loud. If you like my speech very much, I cannot talk, because I cannot get over all the cheers. But let me say to all of you, first of all, I want to thank the Keiser family and the leadership of this college for welcoming us here. I want to thank the president of the student body, Dean Samuels, who met me and gave me a gift from the students. I believe in the audience we have, in addition to Representative Hastings, another candidate for Congress on our ticket in an adjacent district, State Representative Elaine Bloom. I want you guys to help her. Let me say to all of you, I have had a wonderful day in Florida. I do not think I ever had a bad day in Florida. This is the first time I have ever been in Florida in my life that I have been sick, and I had a good day in spite of it, because, this morning, I went up to Orlando to the Democratic State Convention. Now, I attended the Democratic State Convention in Florida in 1981 and in 1983 and in 1987, when I was just a Governor and a friend of your Governor's, and they were good enough to invite me. And I always had a big time, and Hillary had two brothers living down here then, and I was always looking for a reason to come and always learning about what was going on in Florida, and thinking, this is the beginning of what will happen in America. So, anyway, 8 years ago this week, 8 years ago, in December of 1991 Hillary and I came down to the Florida Democratic Convention, which was holding the first election of the primary season, a straw poll. I was running fifth in the country in the primaries at the time, but I got over 50 percent in the Florida Democratic straw poll. And it is been all uphill ever since, thanks to all of you, and I am very grateful. Now, I am glad to be here tonight with Alcee Hastings, and I will tell you why and ask you to help Elaine Bloom. Because I know the President sometimes gets the blame when things go wrong, but the President also gets the credit when things go right. And you heard Alcee talking about all those good things.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforrepresentativealceelhastingsfortlauderdaleflorida", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Representative Alcee L. Hastings in Fort Lauderdale, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-representative-alcee-l-hastings-fort-lauderdale-florida", "publication_date": "11-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2152, "text": "I want to run over them again in a minute for you, but the good things that have happened here to the American people would not have happened had I not had the support of the Democrats in Congress, particularly those that were really strongwilled and outspoken, that had influenced the others, and Alcee Hastings is such a leader in the United States Congress. And I want you to know that his influence extends beyond the Florida delegation, beyond the Congressional Black Caucus, because he is an intelligent man; because he cares about the rest of the world; because he believes that you can care about the education of our children and saving Medicare and Social Security for our seniors and protecting the Florida environment, and still care about decency and humanity all around the world and the end of not only racism at home but racial and ethnic and religious hatred all around the world. He is one of the most exceptional people in the House of Representatives, and I want you to help him. Now, I am going to give a short speech so I do not lose my voice, but you are more likely to remember it. I have got 14 months left, and then you are going to have an election to chart America's course in a new millennium. Here is what I want to say to you about it. We just passed the first budget of the 21st century. We got 100,000 teachers for smaller classes in the early grades. We got 50,000 more police to keep the crime rate coming down. We got 60,000 more housing vouchers to help poor people move from welfare to work. We have doubled the number of after-school programs to help kids stay in school and learning and out of trouble. We gave States for the first time help to help turn around or shut down schools that are failing our children, because all our schools can do better. We moved forward on the environment. We paid our dues to the U.N. We gave debt relief to the very poorest countries in the world. the Patients' Bill of Rights, the minimum wage increase, the hate crimes legislation. We had a great year in foreign policy. We saw the completion of the Irish peace process this year, and I am very happy about that. And just last week, I announced that, earlier this week, a couple of days ago, that next week Israel and Syria will resume their peace negotiations in Washington, DC, in a couple of days. So we are going to keep working to the last hour of the last day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforrepresentativealceelhastingsfortlauderdaleflorida", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Representative Alcee L. Hastings in Fort Lauderdale, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-representative-alcee-l-hastings-fort-lauderdale-florida", "publication_date": "11-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2153, "text": "But I want you to step back a minute, because what happens in these congressional elections, whether Bill Nelson gets elected United States Senator from Florida, whether Elaine Bloom gets elected United States Representative from Florida, whether we hold the White House, and I believe we will, but it all depends on, I wish I could be more whoop-dee-doo. It all depends on what the voters think the election is about. Now, I want you to remember this. We put in our economic program in 1993, and the Vice President broke the tie in the Congress, and the Republicans said it would be a disaster. Now, we have 20 million jobs, the longest peacetime expansion in history, the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years, the lowest welfare rolls in 32 years, the lowest poverty rates in 20 years, the lowest African-American and Hispanic unemployment rates ever recorded, the lowest female unemployment rate in 40 years. The second thing I want to say is, we have the lowest crime rate in 25 years; 90 percent of our kids immunized against serious childhood diseases for the first time in history; over 2 million more kids covered under the Children's Health Insurance Program. We have cleaned up 3 times as many toxic waste dumps as the predecessor administrations, both of them. And we now have the lowest output of waste that is terribly damaging to the environment that we have had in 20 years. Twenty years ago we had 50 million fewer people. We have had 150,000 young people serve this country in AmeriCorps, 7 million young people take advantage of the HOPE scholarship to go on to community college and to other college education. We have had 10 million people get the benefit of the minimum wage, and over 20 million get the benefit of the family and medical leave law. But what I want to say, I will stay the course. I want you to stay the course. And then what I want you to do, wait, wait, what I want you to do is go out here and find your fellow Floridians who may not be Democrats, who may not be voters, and not only do I want you to stay the course; I want you to teach the course. You know, we had an idea that we ought to have a country with opportunity for all, responsibility from all, and a community of all Americans. And almost everything that we fought for we were opposed by the leaders of the other party. And I have been willing to work with them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforrepresentativealceelhastingsfortlauderdaleflorida", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Representative Alcee L. Hastings in Fort Lauderdale, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-representative-alcee-l-hastings-fort-lauderdale-florida", "publication_date": "11-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2154, "text": "And when we have worked with them, I have always given them credit for what they have done. But I think we have proved that we are a stronger country when we go forward together across racial lines. So what are they trying to give you in Florida? Connerly wants to come here and try to abolish affirmative action when we have proved that going forward with affirmative action in the right way strengthens the economy and the society and makes us all better off. So I want you to think about that. So the first thing I want you to tell folks is it is not like we do not have evidence here. I will never forget how the NRA went after Congressmen in States like Florida after we passed the Brady bill and I signed it, because my predecessor vetoed it. And they told the awfulest stories about how people are going to lose their guns. Well, 470,000 felons, fugitives, and stalkers did lose their handguns, but not a single Florida hunter missed a day of hunting season because of it. They did not tell the truth about that. This is a safer country because of it. What is the election about? What is the election about? So what is the election about? It is about what we are going to do with that. What do we propose to do with our prosperity? The Republicans gave us their answer in the last session of Congress when they passed a tax cut so large it would have prohibited us from saving Social Security and Medicare and prohibited us from ever paying down the national debt. But when I vetoed it, the American people supported me, and Alcee supported me, and the Democrats in Congress supported me because they said, No, no, no, that is not what we are going to do with our prosperity. What do we want America to look like in 10, 20, and 30 years? How are we going to build the America of our dreams for our children? And let me just tell you what I think they are. Number one, you have got to deal with the aging of America. You have got to save Social Security and Medicare for the baby boom generation, add a prescription drug benefit, let people over 55 buy into Medicare if they do not have health insurance. We have got to do this. We have got to do this. I am telling you, every baby boomer I know is plagued by the thought that our retirement will burden our children and their ability to raise our grandchildren.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforrepresentativealceelhastingsfortlauderdaleflorida", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Representative Alcee L. Hastings in Fort Lauderdale, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-representative-alcee-l-hastings-fort-lauderdale-florida", "publication_date": "11-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2155, "text": "Now, we have got the money now, folks, to take the Social Security Trust Fund out beyond the life of the baby boom generation, and we ought to do it. Look at the young people that are here, 18 to 23 or 24, the young people in that age group. Do you really think when they get old enough to have their children and they start raising families that they should be burdened in what they can do for their children because they are having to take care of us, their parents, when there is no earthly excuse for it? All we have to do is take the savings that we get from paying down the debt with the Social Security surplus and put those interest savings into the Trust Fund, and it will take it out beyond the life of the baby boom generation, no controversy, no heat, no nothing. We ought to do it, and we ought to do it next year. The second thing we ought to do is to deal with the children of America. Ironically, we are growing at both ends, in our elderly and in our children. We have got the largest number of school children in our schools in our history. They are the most racially, ethnically, and religiously diverse school children in our history, and every one of them deserves a world-class education, and we ought to give it to them. The third thing we ought to do is take a different approach to crime. Now, you all clapped when I said we had the lowest crime rate in 25 years; we have got the lowest murder rate in 31 years. They thought the crime rate went in one direction only, up. I propose that in the year 2000 we have a decent goal. We say we are going to keep working till America is the safest big country in the world. I believe there are lots of other things I could say, and I am trying to save the Everglades, you know, and I just want to say this one thing about the environment. The young people here, if they are going to have the kind of America they deserve, are going to have to accept the fact that you can improve the environment and grow the economy at the same time. We have set aside more land than any administration except those of Franklin and Theodore Roosevelt. We have cleaned up all these dumps. Let me tell you something. We better start thinking that we should be improving the environment as we grow the economy, not destroying the environment as we grow the economy. I will just give you one other.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforrepresentativealceelhastingsfortlauderdaleflorida", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Representative Alcee L. Hastings in Fort Lauderdale, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-representative-alcee-l-hastings-fort-lauderdale-florida", "publication_date": "11-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2156, "text": "You ought to go home tonight and ask yourself what you think the big challenges are. But I will tell you, if somebody said to me tonight, Well, ENTITY, you do not have 14 more months; you have got to leave tomorrow. But I am the genie, and I will give you one wish. You can do anything for America you want, but only one. What I would choose is for us to be one America, across all the lines that divide us, for two reasons. he had an Asian and somebody who worked for the Federal Government; James Byrd gets dragged to death in Texas; Matthew Shepard gets put on a rack. Yesterday, all over America, there were gripping pictures of these two young soldiers, one 21, one 18. The 21-year-old, a gay soldier who the 18-year-old beat to death with a baseball bat. And I thought to myself, looking at these two young boys, keep in mind, I look at them in a certain way not only because they are young enough to be my own sons, but because I have a lot of your sons under my command. Those young men, when they put on that uniform, both of them, when they put on that uniform, they basically took an oath that says, If Bill Clinton tells me to, I will go halfway around the world to fight and die. That is what it means. That is what it means. They make the same pledge. They have got their whole lives before them. One of them is dead, and the other one's life is ruined. And frankly, I ached for both of them. And the young boy that murdered the other one because he was gay, he was not born feeling that way; somebody taught him to do that. So that is the last thing I want to tell you. get rid of the debt; give people the same incentives to invest in poor areas we give them to invest in poor areas in Latin America and Asia and Africa; give people empowerment, and they will do the job. That is also the way we can have the biggest influence in resolving the crisis in the Middle East, in Kosovo, in Bosnia, the tribal warfare in Africa, you name it. This old world is still burdened down with people that cannot get along without hating somebody who is different from them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreceptionforrepresentativealceelhastingsfortlauderdaleflorida", "title": "Remarks at a Reception for Representative Alcee L. Hastings in Fort Lauderdale, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reception-for-representative-alcee-l-hastings-fort-lauderdale-florida", "publication_date": "11-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2157, "text": "Well, first of all, let me say thank you for the welcome. I thank the members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus who are here and other Members of Congress and the people from our administration who are here. I want to thank Jimmy Smits and Felix Sanchez. And I want to congratulate your honorees, Sara Martinez Tucker and the Hispanic Scholarship Fund, for 25 years of service. I want to say a special word of appreciation to all the Latinos who have been part of our administration, including Maria Echaveste, Mickey Ibarra, Brian Barretto, Aida Alvarez, Bill Richardson, and all the others. Let me say, I am sorry I am not in proper attire tonight. But Jimmy Smits called me this afternoon, and I only had two other things I was supposed to do, and so he said I had to show. And I want you to know I am here in spite of the fact that Jimmy Smits called me. And I will tell you why. So, right before I was here, I went over to the Kennedy Center. And there is a magnificent event at the Kennedy Center that Kerry Kennedy Cuomo is having about her book on human rights activists, and artists from all over our country and human rights heroes from all over the world are over there tonight. And so, I went from there to a book party for my friend Paul Begala. And I am on my way over here, and everybody wanted to know where I was going. And this NBC television reporter said, Jimmy Smits, that is the best looking man I ever saw in my life. So, I said, Well, what can I tell you? I have been to war for 8 years now, and I do not look very good anymore. He will never forgive me for embarrassing him like that. I want to say something seriously. Felix, I appreciate what you have done so much with this foundation. And I want to say, I made fun of Jimmy Smits tonight, but I want you to know that becoming a friend of his has been one of the real joys of being ENTITY. He has been so kind to my wife and to me, to our family. He is been to the White House many times, and he is always been there for a good cause. And I hope you will forgive me for pulling your leg tonight, Jimmy, but I will never forget you for being our friend. I want to thank the National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts for giving young people a chance.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalhispanicfoundationforthearts", "title": "Remarks to the National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-hispanic-foundation-for-the-arts", "publication_date": "19-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2158, "text": "From the silver screen to the Broadway stage, kids with talent and dreams need a chance. That is what we have tried to do for 8 years now for all America's children. And the Vice ENTITY and I owe those of you who have done so much to help us do that a profound debt of gratitude, and I thank you. Tonight I came mostly just to do that, just to say thank you, for all you do for the arts, for all you do for the Hispanic community, and for all you have done to help America move forward in the last 8 years. We now have the lowest Hispanic unemployment rate we have ever recorded, the lowest Hispanic poverty rate in a generation, a million new homeowners in the last 6 years. The earned-income tax credit has been doubled, and it is lifted over a million Hispanics out of poverty. The minimum wage helped 1.6 million Hispanic workers, and it is time to raise it again and help more. The Hispanic Education Action Plan to encourage Hispanic youth to stay in school and go to college, along with our scholarship initiatives and other things, have contributed to the fact that the college-going rate among Hispanic young people is up over 50 percent in the last 7 years. And-listen to this-a report which was issued last week said there has been a 500 percent increase in the number of Hispanic students taking advanced placement courses in high school to prepare for college. Under the Vice ENTITY's leadership, we have reduced the naturalization backlog at INS. And under Aida Alvarez's leadership, loans to Hispanic entrepreneurs by the SBA have increased by 250 percent. We have all been enriched by your work. And I know that because of your work, we will have more great singers, more great writers, more great actors and actresses. I know we have got a long way to go, too, because still Latino characters are only about 3 percent of those that appear on prime-time television. I just left Rita Moreno, and I told her that I enjoyed watching her as a nun on her television series. And we were laughing about it. And I think that you will see, if you keep working, though, more and more of our movies and our television shows and our Broadway shows reflecting the rich diversity of America. I have said on many occasions, and I will just say one more time tonight, that if I could have only one wish for America, believe it or not, it would not be for a continued unbroken economic prosperity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalhispanicfoundationforthearts", "title": "Remarks to the National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-hispanic-foundation-for-the-arts", "publication_date": "19-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2159, "text": "It would be that somehow we would find the wisdom to live together as brothers and sisters, to truly be one America across all the lines that divide us. And to-just sort of a little picture of how fast America has changed; you may see the advertisements today for-they are on television now-for Denzel Washington's new movie about the integration of T.C. Williams High School over in Alexandria, Virginia, and its football team, which occurred-what-almost 40 years ago, not such a long time ago once you have reached my age, anyway. Now, a little over three decades later, that high school is in a school district which has students from over 180 different racial and ethnic groups, parents speaking over 100 different native languages. It is the most diverse school district in America. And I think it is sort of fitting that this movie, coming out in the new millennium, talks about something that to most of these kids is ancient history, that we hope they will never forget. Can we figure out a way to give them all a world-class education, with all their diversity? Can we figure out a way to make sure that every single child, every family, every faith in America is profoundly proud of its roots, understands them, and yet believes deep in the core of being that our common humanity is even more important than our unique characteristics? Not so long ago, a number of you in this room came to the White House for a showing of Mi Familia, the movie. Remember, you saw it; you were there. And so I was thinking about that tonight and feeling sort of nostalgic. And I think the central question that all of us have to ask ourselves, both within and beyond our borders now, is who is in our family anyway? There is an astonishing new book out, been out a few months, by a man named Robert Wright, called Non Zero, kind of a weird title unless you are familiar with game theory. But in game theory, a zero-sum game is one where, in order for one person to win, somebody has to lose. A non-zero-sum game is a game in which you can win, and the person you are playing with can win, as well.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalhispanicfoundationforthearts", "title": "Remarks to the National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-hispanic-foundation-for-the-arts", "publication_date": "19-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2160, "text": "Today I am pleased to announce that after months of tough and thoughtful negotiations, I think we have an historic, I know we have historic economic framework. It is a framework that will create millions of jobs, grow the economy, invest in our nation and our people. 17 Nobel Prize winners and economics have said it will lower the inflationary pressures on the economy. And over the next 10 years, it will not add to the deficit at all. It will actually reduce the deficit, according to the economists. I want to thank my colleagues in the Congress for their leadership. We spent hours, and hours, and hours over months and months working on this. No one got everything they wanted, including me. And that is what I ran on. I have long said compromise and consensus are the only way to get big things done in a democracy. Important things done for the country. I know how deeply people feel about the things that they fight for. But this framework includes historic investments in our nation and in our people. Any single element of this framework would fundamentally be viewed as a fundamental change in America. I will have more to say after I return from the critical meetings in Europe this week, but for now let me lay out a few points. First we face, and I apologize for saying this again, we face an inflection point as a nation. For most of the 20th century we led the world by a significant margin because we invested in our people. We did not just build an interstate highway system, we built a highway to the sky. We invested to win the Space Race, and we won. We were also among the first to provide access to free education for all Americans, beginning back in the late 18 hundreds. That decision alone to invest in our children and their families was a major part of why we were able to lead the world for much of the 20th century. But somewhere along the way we stopped investing in ourselves, investing in people. America is still the largest economy in the world. We still own the most productive workers and the most innovative minds in the world. But we risk losing our edge as a nation. Our infrastructure used to be rated the best in the world. Today, according to the World Economic Forum, we ranked 13th in the world. We used to lead the world in educational achievement. Now the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ranks America 35th out of the 37 major countries when it comes to investing in early childhood education and care.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenoutlinessocialclimatespendingbillspeechtranscript", "title": "Joe Biden Outlines Social & Climate Spending Bill Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-outlines-social-climate-spending-bill-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "28-10-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2161, "text": "We cannot be competitive in the 21st century global economy if we continue this slide. That is what I have said all along. We need to build America from the bottom up and the middle out, not from the top down with the trickle-down economics that is always failed us. I cannot think of a single time when the middle class has done well that the wealthy have not done very well. I can think of many times, including now, when the wealthy, the super wealthy do very well, and the middle class do not do well. That is why I proposed the investments congress is now considering in two critical pieces of legislation. Positions I ran on as president, positions I announced when I laid out in a joint session of Congress what my economic agenda was. These are not about left versus right, or moderate versus progressive, or anything else that pits Americans against one another. This is about competitiveness versus complacency. It is about expanding opportunity, not opportunity denied. It is about leading the world or letting the world pass us by. Today, with my democratic colleagues, we have a framework for my Build Back Better Initiative. And here is how it will fundamentally change the lives of millions of people for the better. Millions of you are in the so-called Sandwich Generation, who feel financially squeezed by raising a child and caring for an aging parent. About 820,000 seniors in America, and people with disabilities, have applied for Medicaid, and they are on a waiting list right now to get home care. They need some help. They do not have be kicked out of their homes, but they need a little help getting around. Having their meals made occasionally for them. They do not want to put them in nursing homes. Not because of the cost, but because it is a matter of dignity. They want to stay in their homes. You are just looking for an answer so your parents can keep living independently with dignity. For millions of families in America this, this issue, is the most important issue they are facing. So here is what we are going to do. We are going to expand services for seniors so families can get help from well-trained, well-paid professionals to help them take care of their parents at home. To cook meals for them, to get their groceries for them, to help them get around, to help them live in their own home with the dignity they deserve to be afforded.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenoutlinessocialclimatespendingbillspeechtranscript", "title": "Joe Biden Outlines Social & Climate Spending Bill Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-outlines-social-climate-spending-bill-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "28-10-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2162, "text": "Quite frankly, what we found is that this is more popular, or as popular as anything else we are proposing. Because the American people understand the need. It is a matter of dignity and pride for our parents. 30 years ago, we ranked number seven among the advanced economies in the world as a share of women working. Today there are nearly two million women in America not working today simply because they cannot afford childcare. Typical family spends about $11,000 a year on childcare, some states it is $14,500 a year per-child. We are going to make sure nearly all families earning less than $300,000 a year will pay no more than 7% of their income for childcare. And for a family making a hundred thousand dollars a year, that will save them more than $5,000 in childcare. This is a fundamental game-changer for families and for our economy. As more parents, especially women, can get back to work and work in the workforce. I am looking at a lot of significant press people in front of me. A lot of them are working, working mothers. They know what it costs. I remember when I got to the Senate, I lost my wife and daughter in an accident. I started commuting 250 miles a day because I had my mom and my dad and my brother and my sister to help me take care of my kids because I could not afford childcare. And I was getting a serious salary, $42,000 a year. We have also extended the historic middle class tax cut. That is what I call it, middle class tax cut for parents. That is the expanded child tax credit we passed through the American Rescue Plan. What that means is, for folks at home, they are getting $300 a month for every child under the age of six, $250 for every child under the age of 18. We are extending that for another year. The money is already a life-changer for so many working families. This will help cut child poverty in half this year, according to experts. But that is not all it does, it changes the whole dynamic for working parents. In the past if you paid taxes and had a good income you could deduct, under the tax code, $2,000 per-child from the taxes you owed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenoutlinessocialclimatespendingbillspeechtranscript", "title": "Joe Biden Outlines Social & Climate Spending Bill Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-outlines-social-climate-spending-bill-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "28-10-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2163, "text": "But how many families do you know are cashier or waiters, healthcare workers, who never out the benefit of the full tax credit because they did not have that much to deduct? So it either came off your tax bill or you did not get full credit. Why should, if somebody making $500,000 a year, or 150,000 or $200,000 a year, get to write it off their taxes? And the people who need the help even more, they do not have that much tax to pay. They do not get the benefit, and they have the same cost of raising their children. 80% of those left out were working parents who just did not make enough money. That is why in the American Rescue Plan we did not just expand the amount of the middle class tax cut, we also made it refundable. This framework will make it permanently refundable, making sure the families who need it get a full credit for it, in addition to those who are already getting full credit. They are going to make sure that every three and four-year-old child in America go to high-quality preschool. That is part of the legislation I just brought up to the Congress. Studies show that when we put three and four-year-olds in school, school, not daycare, school, we increase by up to 47% the chance that that child, no matter what their background, we will be able to earn a college degree. As my wife, Jill, who is in the back here always says, any country that out-educates us is going to out-compete us. We can finally take us from 12 years to 14 years of universal education in America. We also make investments in higher education, by increasing Pell Grants to help students from lower-income families attend community college and four-year schools. And we invest in historically black universities, colleges, universities, HBCUs, minority-serving institutions and tribal colleges, to make sure every young student has a shot at a good-paying job in the future. This framework extends tax credits to lower premiums for folks who are in the Affordable Care Act for another three years. For 4 million folks in the 12 states that have not expanded Medicaid, all the rest have, this framework will enable you to get affordable coverage. And Medicare will now cover the cost of hearing aids and hearing checkups. This framework also makes the most significant investment to deal with the climate crisis ever, ever happened.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenoutlinessocialclimatespendingbillspeechtranscript", "title": "Joe Biden Outlines Social & Climate Spending Bill Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-outlines-social-climate-spending-bill-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "28-10-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2164, "text": "Beyond any other advanced nation in the world, over a billion metric tons of emission reductions, at least 10 times bigger on climate than any bill that has ever passed before, and enough to position us for a 50 to 52% emission reductions by the year 2030. And we will do it in ways that grow the domestic industries, create good-paying union jobs, address long-standing environmental injustices as well. Tax credit to help people do things like weatherize their homes so they lose less energy. Install solar panels and develop clean energy products, and help businesses produce more clean energy. And when paired with the bipartisan infrastructure bill, we will truly transform this nation. But passenger rail and freight rail and public transit, it is going to take hundreds of thousands of vehicles off the road, saving millions of barrels of oil. Everybody knows, all the studies show, if you can get from point A to point B on electric rail, you will not drive your car. You will take the rail service. We also learned that in most major cities in America, minority populations, the jobs they used to have in town, they are now out of town. Roughly 60% of the folks, they do not have vehicles. So they need to have a means to get out of town to their jobs, to be on time. This will do that, like it did for Detroit. 95% of the 840,000 school buses in America run on diesel. Every day more than 25 million children and thousands of bus drivers breathe polluted air on the way to and from school from the diesel exhaust. We are going to replace thousands of these with electric school buses that have big batteries underneath, and that are good for the climate. I went down to one of the manufacturing facilities, saw them, got in one, drive them. They do not expend any, they do not expend any pollution into the air. We will build out the first ever national network of 500,000 electric vehicle charging stations all across the country. So when you buy an electric vehicle, and you get credit for buying it, you buy electric vehicle, you go all the way across America on a single tank of gas, figuratively speaking. It is not gas, you plug it in. We are going to get off the sidelines on manufacturing solar panels and wind farms and electric vehicles, with targeted manufacturing credits. You manufacture, you get a credit for doing it. These will help grow the supply chains in communities too often left behind.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenoutlinessocialclimatespendingbillspeechtranscript", "title": "Joe Biden Outlines Social & Climate Spending Bill Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-outlines-social-climate-spending-bill-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "28-10-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2165, "text": "And we are going to reward countries for paying good wages, for companies I should say, for good wages and for sourcing their materials from here in the United States. That means tens of millions of panels and turbines, doubling the number of electric vehicles we have on the road within just three years. We will be able to sell and export these products and technologies to the rest of the world, and creating thousands more jobs because we are, once again, going to be the innovators. We will also make historic investments in environmental cleanup and remediation. That means putting people to work in good-paying jobs at prevailing wage. Capping hundreds of thousands, hundreds of thousands of abandoned wells and gas wells, oil and gas wells, that need to be capped because they are leaking things that hurt the air. Putting a stop to the methane leaks and in the pipelines, protecting the health of our communities, it is a big deal. And we will build up our resilience for the next super storm, drought, wildfires, and hurricanes that represent a blinking code red for America and the world. Last year alone, these types of extreme weather events you have all been covering, and you have all witnessed, and some of you have been caught in the middle of, have caused $99 billion in damage to the United States within the last year. And we are not spending any money to deal with this? I met in Pittsburgh, I met an IBW electrical worker who climbs up in those power lines in the middle of the storm to try to put transformers in to keep the lights on when storms hit. He calls himself a hundred percent union guy. As he said, I quote, I do not want my kids growing up in a world where the threat of climate change hangs over their heads. Folks, we all have that obligation. The bipartisan infrastructure bill was also the most significant investment since we built the interstate highway system and won the space race decades ago. This is about rebuilding the arteries of our economy. Across the country now there are 45,000 bridges, and 173 thousand miles of roads, that are in poor condition. Some of the bridges you do not even take a chance of going across, they have shut down. They cannot be built back to the same standard because the weather's not going to get a lot better. We just got to keep it from getting a heck of a lot worse.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenoutlinessocialclimatespendingbillspeechtranscript", "title": "Joe Biden Outlines Social & Climate Spending Bill Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-outlines-social-climate-spending-bill-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "28-10-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2166, "text": "No one should have to hold their breath as they cross a rundown bridge or a dangerous intersection in their hometown. We are going to put hard-working Americans on the job to bring our infrastructure up to speed. Jobs you can raise the family on. And my dad would say, you could have a little breathing room. Jobs replacing lead water pipes so families can drink clean water, improving the health of our children and putting plumbers and pipe-fitters to work. Jobs laying thousands of miles of transmission lines to build a modern energy grid. Jobs making a high-speed internet affordable and available everywhere, in rural and urban America. Particularly including the 35% of rural America that goes without it right now. This pandemic has made clear the need for affordable and available high-speed internet. The idea of a parent having to put their kids in the car for virtual learning, drive and sit in the McDonald's parking lot so the child can access the internet when school is taught virtually, is not only unnecessary, it is just wrong. They do not add a single penny to the deficit. They do not raise taxes on anyone making less than $400,000 a year. In fact, they reduced the deficit, here is how; I do not want to punish anyone's success, I am a capitalist. I want everyone to be able to, if they want to be a millionaire or billionaire, to be able to seek their goal. But all I am asking is, pay your fair share. And right now, many are paying virtually nothing. Last year the 55 most profitable corporations in America, 55 of them, paid zero, zero, in federal income tax on about $40 billion in profit. If they report big profits to their shareholders, they should be paying taxes. That is why the Build Back Better framework will have a 15% minimum on the largest corporations, a minimum tax of 15%. The top 1% of the wealthiest Americans evade, it is estimated by the experts, $160 billion a year in federal taxes. We are going to change that. I want to emphasize what I said from the beginning. Under my plans, if you earn less than $400,000, you will not pay a single penny more in federal taxes. In fact, these bills continue cutting taxes for middle class. Let me close with this. For much too long, working people of this nation in the middle class of this country have been dealt out of the American deal. It is time to deal them back in.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenoutlinessocialclimatespendingbillspeechtranscript", "title": "Joe Biden Outlines Social & Climate Spending Bill Speech Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-outlines-social-climate-spending-bill-speech-transcript", "publication_date": "28-10-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2167, "text": "Thank you both for the work you have done on this. I thank the Commission members for their willingness to serve, those who are here and a few who could not be here with us today. And I thank all of you here in this audience for your interest in this profoundly important matter. The Advisory Commission that I announced today will help to chart our way through a time of profound change in health care. to find ways to ensure quality and to ensure that the rights of consumers in health care are protected. Since I took office, we have been committed to improving our health care system, to making it more affordable, more accessible, while preserving its high quality. You have heard Secretary Shalala mention some of the things we have done together. We have worked with States to expand Medicaid to more than 2 million Americans who previously had no insurance. We reached across party lines to enact the Kassebaum-Kennedy law that provides that working families will not lose their insurance when they change jobs, increased the health care tax deduction for 3 million self-employed Americans. And now in our budget plan, we have funds sufficiently targeted to extend coverage to as many as half of our 10 million American children who still do not have medical coverage. We have worked to constrain costs. Just yesterday, I announced a new effort to combat the multibillion dollar problem of fraud and abuse in Medicare and Medicaid. Our balanced budget proposal also strengthens Medicare through savings and overdue structural reforms. Of course, we are not alone in this. The private sector has found ways to rein in costs, sometimes dramatically. And in many cases, changes in the health care delivery system have, frankly, also improved its quality. For example, the growing recognition of the value of preventive care, such as mammography screening, is saving and extending lives and the quality of life. Step by step we have been working to expand access to health care, and today we take the next step. In this time of transition, many Americans worry that lower costs mean lower quality and less attention to their rights. On balance, however, managed health care plans, HMO's, PPO's, and others, give patients good care and greater choice at lower cost. Still, we must make sure that these changes do not keep health professionals from offering the best and the most medically appropriate services to their patients. Managed care managed well can be the best deal for our families.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheadvisorycommissionconsumerprotectionandqualitythehealthcareindustry", "title": "Remarks on the Advisory Commission on Consumer Protection and Quality in the Health Care Industry", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-advisory-commission-consumer-protection-and-quality-the-health-care-industry", "publication_date": "26-03-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2168, "text": "Whether they have traditional health care or managed care, none of our people should ever have inferior care. I am proud that the Medicare and Medicaid programs have taken the lead in responding to the quality concerns of both patients and health care providers, as Secretary Shalala has just described. But we are learning the defining, measuring, and enforcing quality is far from a simple task. They require thoughtful study. That is why I decided late last year to establish the Advisory Commission on Consumer Protection and Quality in the Health Care Industry. Today I am happy to introduce the members of that Commission to the American people. They represent consumers, business, labor, health care providers, insurers, managed care plans, State and local governments, health care quality experts. Their specialties are wide-ranging, including care for children, the elderly, women, people with disabilities, mental illness, or ENTITY. This Commission includes some of the best health care policy minds in our Nation and a lot of people with hands-on experience. Today, to assure that they get busy right away, I am charging the Commission to develop a consumer bill of rights so that health care patients get the information and care they need when they need it. Let us assure that patients and their families-first, that the health care professionals who are treating them are free to provide the best medical advice available; second, that their providers are not subject to inappropriate financial incentives to limit care; third, that our sickest and most vulnerable patients, frequently the elderly and people with disabilities, are receiving the best medical care for their unique needs; fourth, that consumers have access to simple and fair procedures for resolving health care coverage disputes with plans; fifth, and perhaps most important, that consumers have basic information about their rights and responsibilities, about the plans-the benefits the plans offer, about how to access the health care they need, and about the quality of their providers and their health care plans. I am delighted that the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Secretary of Labor will take on the task of being the Commission's Cochairs. I look forward to reviewing their first report at the end of the year and their final report next March. The need for this Commission is real. It will give us a roadmap to help us make our way through the time of rapid change we now see in our health care system. And again, let me say, I want to thank them for their commitment to serve.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheadvisorycommissionconsumerprotectionandqualitythehealthcareindustry", "title": "Remarks on the Advisory Commission on Consumer Protection and Quality in the Health Care Industry", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-advisory-commission-consumer-protection-and-quality-the-health-care-industry", "publication_date": "26-03-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2169, "text": "Good morning, everyone, it is a pleasure for us to be here with you In a few minutes we will have to leave Madrid after too short a visit and continue our journey to Portugal, and then later on this evening we will be back in Washington. It is impossible for a President to come to Madrid without remembering our first emissary to the great nation of Spain. While our country was still fighting for its own independence in 1777, the father of the Foreign Service came here to represent our great country. He was a diplomat of great ability, an author, a scientist, a thinker who was one of the great Americans of all times. I refer, of course, to Benjamin Franklin, who came here to marshal support for our Nation in a time of war, so that we might later enjoy blessings of peace. He exemplified in his own life what you exemplify in yours the ability and the dedication and the courage required in times of peace, through sound diplomacy accurately representing what our Nation is, to prevent or to reduce the prospects of war. We have a lot of wonderful people in our Foreign Service around the world. We have great Ambassadors who serve us. There is none that I know of in any post in the world more accomplished and more competent and more effective than Terence Todman, and I am very deeply grateful to him and to Doris for what they do. I first knew him, during the few months when I began to be President, as an Assistant Secretary in charge of the entire region of Latin America. As you well know, this is a very important post, to be responsible for a whole region of the world. But because of the significance which we attached to Spain and the rapid evolution that Spain has demonstrated to the entire world in shifting toward a completely democratic government, we believed that this fine man should be stationed here. He agreed with the significance of this task, and his transfer to Spain was done with his full agreement and approval. accurately and fruitfully to represent the greatest nation on Earth, the United States of America, in a great nation, an ally and a friend, the nation of Spain. We have a lot of interests here, a lot of common commitments, a lot of common goals and ideals and principles.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksembassyemployeesandmemberstheamericancommunitymadridspain", "title": "Remarks to Embassy Employees and Members of the American Community in Madrid, Spain", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-embassy-employees-and-members-the-american-community-madrid-spain", "publication_date": "26-06-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2170, "text": "I have had a very fruitful period of discussions, both with King Juan Carlos and his beautiful wife and also, of course, with the Prime Minister, the President, and with the members of the Cabinet and the opposition parties, to try to assess personally, as best I could here in Spain, what we might do even to improve already excellent relationships. I understand that very well. In a way, I am part of the diplomatic corps of our country. Secretary Muskie accompanied me on the first part of our trip to Rome and to Venice, and then he went to Ankara in Turkey to meet with the Foreign Ministers of the European nations, and then went to Kuala Lumpur to meet with the Foreign Ministers and leaders of the ASEAN nations in Southeast Asia. This constant effort to project the good side of our country and to learn how best to deal with our friends and to minimize the impact of potential adversaries is an Important part of your life and mine. Your life is not only a difficult and dedicated one but also, at times, dangerous. In the last 6 years, for instance, four American Ambassadors have been killed in the line of duty. And I can never look into the faces of anyone who serves in the Foreign Service without thinking about the 53 American hostages, who are innocent, who are held as a horrible act of international terrorism, condoned and supported by the official Government of Iran. This problem is constantly on my mind, and I never meet with a foreign leader or in a group of foreign leaders without very early raising this problem with them, urging them to do everything they possibly can, through diplomatic or private channels, to hasten the day when these 53 brave Americans will be free and will be back home where they belong. Do not ever forget how deeply grateful the American people are to you for the fine service that you render here. I know that in addition to the difficulties and the challenge and sometimes the danger in some countries, there is also a great sense of gratitude that you can not only serve a great country but live in a foreign country which is also great and pleasant and exciting and a friend. I want to add my personal thanks also to the citizens of Spain who work with you here in all the multitudinous duties of the American Embassy. On behalf of 220 million Americans who do not have the opportunity to come and stay in Spain, let me say that all of us are deeply grateful to you and wish for you God's greatest blessings.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksembassyemployeesandmemberstheamericancommunitymadridspain", "title": "Remarks to Embassy Employees and Members of the American Community in Madrid, Spain", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-embassy-employees-and-members-the-american-community-madrid-spain", "publication_date": "26-06-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2195, "text": "Well, I just completed a meeting with the Cabinet that is directly in charge of dealing with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. From the beginning, we activated 15 agencies for what is now the largest national response ever to an environmental disaster. And what we wanted to do was make sure that every agency was coordinating and that there was clarity about how we are going to proceed in the coming months. Now, we have gotten reports that have been confirmed by our independent scientists that the top-hat mechanism that was put in place is beginning to capture some of the oil. We are still trying to get a better determination as to how much it is capturing, and we are pushing BP very hard to make sure that all the facilities are available so that as the oil is being captured, it is also being separated properly, that there are receptacles for that oil to go, that we have thought through contingencies in case there is an emergency or a hurricane so that these mechanisms are not disrupted, and that there is a lot of redundancy built in. Even if we are successful in containing some or much of this oil, we are not going to get this problem completely solved until we actually have the relief well completed, and that is going to take a couple of more months. We also know that there is already a lot of oil that is been released and that there is going to be more oil released no matter how successful this containment effort is. And that is why it is so important for us to continue to put every asset that we have--boom, skimmers, vessels, hiring local folks and local fishermen with their facilities, equipping them with skimmers--getting every asset that we have out there to make sure that we are minimizing the amount of oil that is actually coming to shore. Now, there are a number of other issues that were raised during this meeting that I just want to touch on. Number one, when I was down in the Gulf on Friday, meeting with fishermen and small-business owners, what is clear is that the economic impact of this disaster is going to be substantial and it is going to be ongoing. And as I said on Friday--and I want to repeat--I do not want to see BP nickel-and-diming these businesses that are having a very tough time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingcabinetmeeting10", "title": "Remarks Following a Cabinet Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-cabinet-meeting-10", "publication_date": "07-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2196, "text": "Now, we have got the SBA in there helping to provide bridge loans, and we have got the Department of Commerce helping businesses to prepare and document the damages that they are experiencing. But what we also need is BP being quick and responsive to the needs of these local communities. We have individuals who have been assigned specifically to ride herd on BP, to make sure that that is happening. We want the people who are in charge of BP's claims process to be meeting with us on a regular basis. But we are going to insist that that money flows quickly, in a timely basis, so that you do not have a shrimp processor or a fisherman who is going out of business before BP finally makes up its mind as to whether or not it is going to pay out. And that is going to be one of our top priorities, because we know that no matter how successful we are over the next few weeks in some of the containment efforts, the damages are still going to be there. The second thing we talked about quite a bit is the issue of the health of workers who are out there dealing with this spill. So far, we have seen that onshore, we are not seeing huge elevations in toxins in the air or in the water. But that may not be the case out where people are actually doing the work. And we have got to make sure that we are providing all the protections that are necessary. We have put processes in place to make sure that workers out there are getting the equipment and the training they need to protect themselves and their health. But this is something that we are going to have to continue to monitor, because there are a lot of workers out there, and increasingly, we are starting to get individuals who may not be experienced in oil cleanup, because we are trying to get an all-hands-on-deck process. Obviously, we are also monitoring very carefully the impact to people who are not working out there, and that is where the Environmental Protection Agency is doing constant monitoring of the air and the water quality. And we are also doing testing on the seafood to make sure that toxins are not being introduced into the overall population. A couple of other points I just want to make.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingcabinetmeeting10", "title": "Remarks Following a Cabinet Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-cabinet-meeting-10", "publication_date": "07-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2197, "text": "Lubchenco of NOAA reported on convening a scientific conference to make sure that on issues like the plume that is been reported in the news and other questions about how large is this, what kind of damage do we anticipate, et cetera, that we have full transparency, that the information is out there, that it is subject to scientific review so that nobody has any surprises. And what we are going to continue to strive for is complete transparency in real time so that as we get information, the public as a whole gets information, academics, scientists, researchers get this information in what is going to be a fluid and evolving process. Let me just make one final point, and I think this was something that was emphasized by everybody here, and it is something that I want to say to the American people. It may take some time, and it is going to take a whole lot of effort. There is going to be damage done to the Gulf Coast, and there is going to be economic damages that we have got to make sure BP is responsible for and compensates people for. But the one thing I am absolutely confident about is that, as we have before, we will get through this crisis. And it--one of the things that I wanted to make sure we understand is that not only are we going to control the damages to the Gulf Coast, but we want to actually use this as an opportunity to reexamine and work with States and local communities to restore the coast in ways that actually enhance the livelihoods and the quality of life for people in that area. It is going to take some time. These are resilient people down on the Gulf Coast. I had a chance to talk to them, and they have gone through all kinds of stuff over the last 50, 100 years, and they bounce back. They are going to need help from the entire country. They are going to need constant, vigilant attention from this administration. That is what they are going to get. But we are going to be--we are confident that not only are we going to be able to get past this immediate crisis, but we are going to be focusing our attention on making sure that the coast fully recovers and that eventually it comes back even stronger than it was before this crisis.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingcabinetmeeting10", "title": "Remarks Following a Cabinet Meeting", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-cabinet-meeting-10", "publication_date": "07-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2209, "text": "I am very proud that I could be here with you today. I can assure you that the people of the United States share my pride in what American Samoa has done to prove that destiny is really what we make it. This island--with a population of only 22,000--has become the symbol of what many large nations may achieve for their people. It has become a showplace for progress, and a proving ground of methods to improve the lives of our fellow human beings. And, along the way, American Samoa has taken the term self-help out of the bureaucrats' dictionary and made it a living language for their people. You have doubled the per-acre yield of your crops. You have sharply reduced the diseases that once plagued your island. And this month you will begin construction of the American Samoan Tropical Medical Center which will provide the finest hospital care in this part of the world. You have almost eliminated childhood malnutrition. You have recognized that education is the tidal force of our century, driving all else ahead of it. I am told that the pilot program of education which you have started may point the way to learning breakthroughs throughout the Pacific islands and Southeast Asia. Samoan children are learning twice as fast as they once did, and retaining what they learn. Surely from among them, one day, will come scientists and writers to give their talents to Samoa, to America, and to the world. One requirement for good and universal education is an inexpensive and readily available means of teaching children. Unhappily, the world has only a fraction of the teachers that it needs. Samoa has met this problem through educational television-which was pioneered here by your outstanding Governor, Rex Lee, and the very able Director of the United States Information Agency, Mr. Leonard Marks. Before Mr. Marks came out here recently to help inaugurate this educational television system, he came to me at the White House and talked to me about its great benefits at some length. Upon his return, he insisted that he come over, and he spent an entire evening reviewing what your hopes and achievements would be. Everyone now wants to study the job that you have done-UNESCO, the World Bank, New Guinea, New Zealand, India, and other countries around the world. This technique--which you are helping now to improve--has the power to spread the light of knowledge like wildfire, to spread it all across the wide areas of our earth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponarrivaltafunainternationalairportpagopagoamericansamoa", "title": "Remarks Upon Arrival at Tafuna International Airport, Pago Pago, American Samoa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-arrival-tafuna-international-airport-pago-pago-american-samoa", "publication_date": "18-10-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2210, "text": "So I want to commend you on the stride that you have taken. We are most grateful for the voluntary action of the Samoan Legislature in voting to pay Federal income taxes. You are the only American territory voluntarily to take on this responsibility. Your taxes are growing with your economy. You paid about $200,000 in 1963-and yet you paid over a million dollars in 1965. At this rate, you may eliminate the deficit in the United States budget this year. An American editor, who used to have nothing to say about what we were doing in Samoa, recently wrote, Somewhere on earth there may be a more spectacular example of revolutionary change in an area and its people, but in years of roving the world's far corners, I have not seen it. All praise to you for that No, not quite all praise. Some of it must go to a man that you know better than you do any other American--your own very able Governor, Rex Lee. This year it was my pleasure to give him the President's Award for Distinguished Federal Civilian Service--an award that is granted to only five individuals each year. I have no appropriate awards to confer upon the people of Samoa for their progress. But there must be great satisfaction and honor enough in contemplating what you have done in 3 years, where you are today, and where the works of progress will lead your children in generations to come. I hope that America may soon accomplish in her other Pacific island responsibilities the same achievements of Samoa. For no other corner of the world can be left untidy and ignored today. Where once the sailing clippers called rarely in a year, now the jet airliners touch down several times a week. The time is fast coming when there will be no such thing as a far corner of the earth. So I think this is the way that God intended it. I cannot believe He wanted man to be isolated, ever, from his neighbor. He did not seek that distance or race or religion or creed ever separate us from one another. At the table of need, we all find our place, and the greatest need of all today, I think, is for human fellowship and a sense of what each of us can do for the rest of us. This is my first visit to American Samoa. I have not been among you but just a moment.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponarrivaltafunainternationalairportpagopagoamericansamoa", "title": "Remarks Upon Arrival at Tafuna International Airport, Pago Pago, American Samoa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-arrival-tafuna-international-airport-pago-pago-american-samoa", "publication_date": "18-10-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2266, "text": "President, in America we call this is bringing the press in out of the cold. You guys have to admit that. Anyway, I am glad to see you again after a successful summit we had, the Summit of the Americas, in June, and to be able to return a small amount of hospitality your family showed my wife Jill when she visited Quito over the spring. She enjoyed it so much I was not sure she was coming home. Today we are going to keep building on the progress we have made. Together, we have made historic strides on migration. And this afternoon we will discuss how we can deepen our security and our economic partnership even further than it is right now. That includes our new joint investment programs that address security needs for Ecuador's prison system, your justice sector, and your maritime security. And, Mr. President, since we both understand that working families are the backbone of both our economies, I look forward to discussing how we can keep delivering for those families under the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity. And, finally, I want to thank you for your moral leadership, your condemnation of Putin's brutal war against the Ukrainian people that continues in ways we have not seen for a generation. You and I are united not only in our values, but in our vision of the future, one that is both free and democratic. And in the new year, as Ecuador begins its term on the U.N. Security Council, I look forward to continuing to work together to make this vision a reality. And I want to thank you very much for making the effort to be here. The floor is yours. For me it is also a pleasure to here-to be here with you after our very nice visit together in Los Angeles and also after that very pleasant visit with you and your wife Jill in Quito. So, with-for us, this is a great opportunity to come here and to reaffirm the democratic freedom and human rights values that we share with the glorious people of the U.S. Without a doubt, yes, we have been allies for decades now. And I am here to reaffirm that spirit that we share among us as allies, too, in our fight for democracy, for peace, and for justice, not only in the region, but also to support your vision throughout the world. So we were the first country in Latin America to condemn the awful war from Russia into Ukraine. We believe in multilateralism, and we also believe in the rule of law.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspriormeetingwithpresidentguillermoalbertosantiagolassomendozaecuador", "title": "Remarks Prior to a Meeting With President Guillermo Alberto Santiago Lasso Mendoza of Ecuador", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-prior-meeting-with-president-guillermo-alberto-santiago-lasso-mendoza-ecuador", "publication_date": "19-12-2022", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2270, "text": "At midnight last night, for the second time in a month, the Republican Congress shut down the Federal Government in an effort to force through their unacceptable cuts in health care, education, and the environment. For weeks, my administration and the Republicans in Congress have been in serious negotiations over how to reach common ground on balancing the budget. A week ago, I forwarded to them a plan that would protect our principles and balance the budget in 7 years. I had hoped that this time would be different, that we were past the Republican threats to shut down the Government just to get their way. But yesterday, they broke off our talks. Unbelievably, they actually said that as a condition for our talks to continue, we had to agree right now to make deep and unconscionable cuts in Medicare and Medicaid. poor children, pregnant women, the disabled, seniors in nursing homes. They would let Medicare wither on the vine into a second-class system. Now, these things simply are not necessary to balance the budget. As I have said from the beginning, I very much want to work with Congress to get a balanced budget. After all, working with the previous Congress in my first 2 years as President, we cut the deficit I found when I became President in half. We reduced the size of the Federal Government by 200,000. We ought to finish the job. We should not leave a legacy of debt to our children, but neither should we leave the next generation a legacy of neglect. We have cut the deficit in half while continuing to invest in education, technology, research, the environment, Medicare, and Medicaid and cutting taxes on the most hard-pressed of our working people. That is what we ought to do in this budget plan. Now as far as shutting the Government down goes, this is not a result of our lack of agreement on a balanced budget plan; the two things have no connection. The Congress has failed to pass a budget for next year and the bills that would fund the agencies of Government on purpose. They have deliberately done this to force me to accept their long-term agenda of big cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and the environment and a tax increase on working people. That is what is in their balanced budget plan. But it is not necessary to balance the budget. So for them to cause a shutdown, denying Americans the services their tax dollars support, as a tactic in the budget debate is wrong.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress338", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-338", "publication_date": "16-12-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2271, "text": "I will not give in to the threat. Let me tell you why. I know you have been told that the winners and losers of this budget battle are all in Washington and it is all politics. America's children would bear the most pain from the sharp cuts proposed by the Republican Congress. health care they now have, schooling they can count on, school lunches, a safe place to live, or air and water we can be sure is safe to breathe and to drink. Just consider what would happen to Medicaid. For three decades, Medicaid has been a legal guarantee for millions who need medical care. It has been the primary source of health care for nearly one in five American children. And more than half of the children on Medicaid live in families with working parents. But the Republican plan repeals Medicaid's guarantees, and that spells disaster for families in the middle class who are caught unprepared. Medicaid helps millions of children who are disabled or who suffer from chronic illnesses or who have the ENTITY virus. But the Republican plan could pull this lifeline from millions of children. In education, the Republican plan eliminates Head Start for 180,000 preschoolers. It cuts our efforts to keep drugs and violence out of our schools. It undermines our efforts to help schools meet national standards of excellence for the first time. It kills the AmeriCorps national service program. It denies scholarships to more than 350,000 deserving college students and takes away the best student loan program available to young people-it lowers the cost and eases the terms of repayment. The Republican plan would raise taxes for over 7 million of our hardest pressed working families. Their budget cuts would leave children exposed to hazardous waste. And we know that pollution affects children more than it does adults. We want to clean up these sites, but the Republican cuts would limit what we can do. The Republican budget cuts are aimed squarely at our children. They will face larger classes and fewer Head Start programs. Ten million will live near toxic waste sites that will not be cleaned. Millions will be denied adequate medical care. And more than one million will be forced into poverty. That is no way to treat our children. Let them threaten to shut the Government down. It is not necessary to do this to balance the budget, and so I am not going to let them hurt our children and compromise their future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress338", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-338", "publication_date": "16-12-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2272, "text": "I appreciate you giving us a chance to share with you our strategy on how we are going to win the war against terror. It starts with assembling a good team, and I put together a fabulous administration. I picked a great Vice President in Dick Cheney. Some of you may know him. But I know him a man who gives solid advice, and he is got great judgment. And the Nation's lucky that he left the left his previous occupation to serve our country. I am also pleased to be joined by three members of my Cabinet who are all involved with shepherding through an economic stimulus plan through the United States Congress. Secretary Paul O'Neill is doing a fabulous job. I have got great confidence in Paul and his ability to sell to the American people and to the United States Congress that which we are trying to do to make sure our economy grows. And I want to thank you, Paul, for your service, as well. Bob Zoellick is traveling the world promoting free trade. I will talk a little bit about trade later on. But I want to thank his tireless efforts. One thing that we are all hopeful for is that we start a new round of WTO talks at Doha, Qatar. I just have come from China, as you know, and he preceded me there, and they were still talking about the Zoellick touch. And I want to thank Spence Abraham, as well, who is helping us shepherd a realistic energy plan through the United States Congress. We are at the beginning of what I view as a very long struggle against evil. We are not fighting a nation; we are not fighting a religion; we are fighting evil. And we have no choice but to prevail. We are fighting people that hate our values. They cannot stand what America stands for. And they really do not like the fact that we exist. And I want to assure you all that we will fight this fight on every front. We will use every resource we have. And there is no doubt in my time in my mind that in our time, we will prevail. And we are fighting this war on a variety of fronts. We have put together a vast coalition of nations to slowly but surely encircle those who would terrorize and to send the message that their actions will not stand. I really appreciate the hard work of Secretary of State Powell. He is working endlessly to not only keep a coalition together but to broaden it. We are fighting them on a financial front.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbusinesstradeandagriculturalleaders", "title": "Remarks to Business, Trade, and Agricultural Leaders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-business-trade-and-agricultural-leaders", "publication_date": "26-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2273, "text": "We are choking off their money. We are seizing their assets. We will be relentless as we pursue their sources of financing. And I want to thank the Secretary of Treasury for leading that effort. We are sharing intelligence because in order to fight a war, the new war of the 21st century, we have got to know more about the enemy, where they try to hide, where they may try to strike next. And so we have got great cooperation with intelligence services from around the world, as well as great cooperation internally between the CIA and the FBI. The culture in our agencies have changed. We are now interested in preventing attack. We are now interested in finding those who may attack America and arrest them before they do. We have had over nearly 1,000 people have been detained in America and questioned about their motives and their intentions. The FBI is on full alert, and they take information garnered from around the world and share that information in a way that will make Americans proud. And we have also put our military into action. I have got great confidence in the American military. It says, if you harbor a terrorist, you are a terrorist. If you harbor anybody who has harmed America, you are just as guilty as those who have harmed our country. And therefore the Taliban Government, which we gave ample time to respond to reasonable demands, are now paying the price for harboring the Al Qaida organization, as they should. We are slowly but surely dismantling Taliban defenses, Taliban military installations, the Taliban command and control structure, all aimed at bringing the Al Qaida criminals to justice. It is the first battle in the war of terrorism. And with that patience and with that determination, we will eventually smoke them out of their holes and get them and bring them to justice. And that is exactly what the world demands, and that is what the United States will deliver. After all, history has basically said there would never be two fronts, one abroad and one in America. But we now have a second front on this war against terror here at home. We have been struck, obviously, on September the 11th, and we are being struck again. Anytime anybody puts anthrax in a letter, it is an act of terror. The press often ask me, Well, is this the is the evil one hiding from us in Afghanistan, the ones who have done this to America?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbusinesstradeandagriculturalleaders", "title": "Remarks to Business, Trade, and Agricultural Leaders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-business-trade-and-agricultural-leaders", "publication_date": "26-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2274, "text": "But we do know the evil one who hides thinks in ways that we cannot possibly think in America so destructive, such a low regard for human life. And anybody who puts anthrax, trying to kill American citizens, shares the same set of values. Whoever has done it shares that same value of evil that we saw on September the 11th. And we will find them and bring them to justice, as well. But we have got a strategy to fight the war on the homefront. As I mentioned, we are disrupting, as much as we possibly can, any possible attack on America. Every day I meet with the FBI Director and the Attorney General and Tom Ridge, who heads the Office of Homeland Security, to get a report on the activities that were taking place. We take every threat seriously. We respond to every piece of information we receive. As I mentioned, we have arrested or detained over 1,000 people here in America, to determine to find out what they know. And if they know something that is helpful, we will act on it. And we have got a great response mechanism in place. Today I mourned the lives of two who two postal officers who lost their life in the line of duty. But I can tell the American people that because of the hard work of many in our public health offices, I believe we have saved a lot of lives, too, by responding as quickly as we have. Today, right here in this room, I had the honor of signing a piece of antiterrorist legislation widely supported by Members of both parties in both Houses. It is needed legislation to help us do the job the American people expect, which is to protect the homeland. It is a two-front war, and it is a war we are going to win on both fronts. But make no mistake; the best way to make sure we protect our homeland is to succeed by bringing the terrorists abroad who try to strike us to justice. Now, there is another front on the war, as well, and that is our economy. And there is no question the terrorists want to cast a shadow of fear on the businesses of America. They understand how important our businesses are to our way of life. After all, the entrepreneurial spirit is strong in America. It is part of our culture. It is part of a hopeful society. And the more that can be disrupted, that spirit of commerce and enterprise, the more successful they think they will be.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbusinesstradeandagriculturalleaders", "title": "Remarks to Business, Trade, and Agricultural Leaders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-business-trade-and-agricultural-leaders", "publication_date": "26-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2275, "text": "In all our wars, the productive power of the economy has been one of our Nation's great advantages. Obviously, we took a huge hit at the financial center of our country, in New York City. Our transportation system has been severely disrupted, which has, in turn, affected hotels and people who work in hotels. This administration is deeply concerned about those who have lost jobs. And we know there are a lot of Americans who hurt, and we hurt for them. And we are going to work with Congress to take the appropriate actions. I also know that some in this room have made a tough economic decision by delaying any layoffs or have chosen not to lay off workers, and I applaud you for that. And I thank you for making that decision, on behalf of the workers in America. I believe it is the right thing to do during this national emergency. We must understand that our job is to help restore confidence in the future of the country in a way that is wise and sound. But the vitality of our economy depends upon the willingness of Americans to spend and for Americans to start new businesses to purchase new equipment and to invest in the future of this country. And I understand that. And we are taking practical steps, and let me share some of those with you. We are supporting American aviation with money and loans, to make sure the planes fly. We are also beefing up security at our airports, to make sure people feel safe in flying. And we are working with Congress to get a long-term law passed that will say to the American consumer and the American flyer, this Government is doing everything in our power to secure the airways on your behalf. As I mentioned, we are we have spent money in a supplemental to rebuild New York City and the Pentagon. We have got SBA, the Small Business Administration, helping small businesses in the areas impacted by the attacks from the evil ones. We are paying for improved security at our post offices. We are just beginning to secure the post offices, in a way. You see, the post office obviously was set up as a way to efficiently deliver mail, not understanding that someone would dare use the mail as a weapon against America, and we are adjusting quickly to the new realities that we face. All this costs money, and we are spending it here in Washington. And when the money we have committed is spent, we believe it will have a positive effect on the economy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbusinesstradeandagriculturalleaders", "title": "Remarks to Business, Trade, and Agricultural Leaders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-business-trade-and-agricultural-leaders", "publication_date": "26-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2276, "text": "There is a lot of good ideas in Washington, and a lot of them cost a lot of money. And we must be careful to assess our needs and make sure we are cautious about how we spend taxpayers' money. We believe the best way to stimulate and restore confidence to the economy is not through additional spending but through tax relief. If we can get a bill out of both the House and the Senate, it will happen in quick fashion. Unlike spending programs, we will not have to wait for plans to be drafted and contracts to be let. The tax relief for new investment in the House stimulus package will go into effect as soon as the bill is signed, if we can get it out of the Senate. New lower tax rates for consumers and entrepreneurs will show up in paychecks on the first day of the next year of the new year, if we can get that passed out of the Senate. The tax rebates for low- and moderate-income folks would begin to arrive soon, if we can get it out of the Senate. Tax relief will put money rapidly into the hands of consumers. Tax relief will improve incentives to save and invest and will give a powerful boost to our national economy. When we have tried in the past to spend our way out of an economic slowdown, we have found that the money has often been spent unwisely. Tax relief, on the other hand, lets individuals decide for themselves what they need most. Tax relief lets economic resources flow to places where they can do the most good for the country. The House's tax relief plan accelerates some income tax reductions already planned for individuals and entrepreneurs and small businesses. This will give people opportunity to make decisions for themselves. And we have learned from experience that free decisions are usually the best decisions for our economy as a whole. And third, and most important, tax relief will expand productive investment. The House plan allows businesses to speed up the expensing of new equipment. And it reforms the corporate Tax Code, so that companies do not face higher effective rates as their profits decline. Together, these two changes will persuade many companies that time has come to reinvest in America. And when we invest in America, we create jobs for American workers. We need an energy plan for America. Under the leadership of the Vice President, we drafted a comprehensive, commonsense plan for the future of this country. It passed the House of Representatives. It needs a vote in the United States Senate.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbusinesstradeandagriculturalleaders", "title": "Remarks to Business, Trade, and Agricultural Leaders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-business-trade-and-agricultural-leaders", "publication_date": "26-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2277, "text": "But that should not lead our Nation to complacency. It is in our Nation's national interest that we develop more energy supplies at home. It is in our national interest that we look at safe nuclear power. It is in our national interest that we conserve more. It is in our national interest that we modernize the energy infrastructure of America. It is in our national interest to get a bill to my desk, and I urge the Senate to do so. And we can restore economic confidence by expanding trade. More open trade is essential to the growth of our Nation's economy. A part of our economic recovery program is to give me the ability to negotiate trade agreements. I need trade promotion authority to expand opportunity for businesses large and small, for entrepreneurs in America. I need trade promotion authority to expand the job base of this great Nation. I am the first ENTITY who has not had trade promotion authority. I need it now. It is in our Nation's best interest that we have it. And it is in the best interests of our world that we trade in freedom. We have a chance to draw all the people into the world in the world into an open market economy, and that will offer better living standards and more political freedom and will enhance human dignity all across our globe. Nobody is disqualified from an open world that trades freely. No one will be disqualified by religion, no one by nationality. No one will be disqualified by geography. Our enemies fear this world precisely because they know how attractive modernization is to the oppressed people around the globe. Our enemies fear open societies in which men and women can think for themselves, can decide their own destinies, can decently support their own families, can educate their sons and their daughters in a modern world. Our enemies fear a society which is pluralistic and open to worship an almighty God. Our enemies are right to fear open societies, because those societies leave no room for bigotry and tyranny. The promise of our time has no room for the vision of the Taliban or Al Qaida. This is a time of promise for America. I am incredibly optimistic about this Nation's future, because I understand America and I understand the people of America. Franklin Roosevelt warned us 70 years ago that fear feeds on itself and contributes to the very problems that first gave it rise. America has prevailed over fear in a Great Depression and in a global war, and we will do so again. The character of our country has not changed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbusinesstradeandagriculturalleaders", "title": "Remarks to Business, Trade, and Agricultural Leaders", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-business-trade-and-agricultural-leaders", "publication_date": "26-10-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2283, "text": "I have been under a promise to come to Boston and speak to its Chamber of Commerce for more than a year. It is a great pleasure to redeem that promise. To be the guest at a magnificent feast like this, to be thus received in Boston, one of the greatest centers of the wealth, of the culture and art, of the educational influences, and of the moral forces of our country, and to be welcomed by so distinguished a company, the Governor of the State, a Justice of the Federal Supreme Court, Foreign Ministers, members of the State Judiciary, United States Senators and Representatives, powerful and broad-minded prelates and ministers of religion, together with the men who are the bone and sinew of the commerce of this great section - make this occasion most memorable in my life, and properly call for an expression on my part of deep gratitude and high appreciation. I congratulate Boston on a union in one organization of all of her business men, for it insures a concentration of influence that must make for good. The opportunities for usefulness are great in civic improvement and progress and in State and National affairs. While you doubtless include in your ranks persons of all political views, many questions must arise upon which you can all unite, and thus exert a most effective influence. As Boston is the commercial center of New England, your association really speaks for New England, a part of the country whose importance can be measured by the emphasis with which sectional writers and speakers sometimes attack it. It is no mere exaggeration of speech or flattery, therefore, for me to point out that this Chamber of Commerce, by the ideals which it may maintain in the matter of business integrity and scrupulous business methods and in maintenance of law in the conduct of corporations, has great power and corresponding responsibility. I am very grateful for the hospitable reception which I have had on the North shore of Massachusetts. A vacation which I had planned of more than two months has been whittled down to a little more than one month; but every minute of it I have enjoyed. The beauties of that region are nothing but an expansion and enlargement of the wonderful park system and suburbs of Boston. I have attempted to keep within the speed limit and before a broad-minded judge I could establish this by satisfactory evidence. But it has not prevented me from motoring into every village and town and countryside of Essex County.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebanquetthebostonchambercommercebostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at the Banquet of the Boston Chamber of Commerce in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-banquet-the-boston-chamber-commerce-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "14-09-1909", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William Howard Taft"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2284, "text": "I am delighted at the prospect of returning here again next summer, when I hope and pray that no tariff or other bill will shorten my days of leisure. I am on the eve of beginning a journey 13,000 miles in length, which will enable me to see tens and hundreds of thousands of my fellow citizens, and enable them, I hope, to see me. Occasionally I hear a query, why should I start off on such a trip and what particular good does it do to anybody? Well, it certainly is not going to be a pleasure trip, although I shall enjoy it. It will involve much hard work and a great deal of mental effort to think of things to say, and to say them simply and clearly so that they can be understood. It will strain the digestion not only of myself and those who accompany me, but also of the many who extend hospitality along the way; and it will very considerably reduce the appropriation of $25,000 made by Congress for the traveling expenses of ENTITY. On the other hand, it will certainly give me a very much more accurate impression as to the views of the people in the sections which I visit. It will bring closely to me the needs of particular sections, so far as national legislation and executive action are concerned, and I believe it will make me a wiser man and a better public officer. Moreover, it will give the people an opportunity to see the man whom they have chosen, for the time being, to act as their chief executive, and who, because of this office, in a sense temporarily typifies nationality. I ought to be able to explain to the people some of the difficulties of government and some of the problems of solution from the standpoint of the executive and the legislator, as distinguished from that of the honest but irresponsible critic. The personal touch between the people and the man to whom they temporarily delegate power of course conduces to a better understanding between them. Moreover, I ought not to omit to mention as a useful result of my journeying that I am to visit a great many expositions and fairs, and that the curiosity to see the President will certainly increase the box receipts and tend to rescue many commendable enterprises from financial disaster. This is an innocent, but it has come to be a very useful, function of the presidential office. The thing that I most object to and look forward to with most fear is the necessity for speaking every day on some subject or other to a listening multitude.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebanquetthebostonchambercommercebostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at the Banquet of the Boston Chamber of Commerce in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-banquet-the-boston-chamber-commerce-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "14-09-1909", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William Howard Taft"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2285, "text": "It becomes a brain-racking performance before one gets through with a trip of two months. At first everything the President says is reported in the newspapers. If after a time he repeats himself, as he must do, and the correspondents and reporters exercise the discretion which they ought, and cut the report, a suffering public will thank them. One of the reasons why I hesitated to fix the time for meeting the Boston Chamber of Commerce on the eve of my departure for the West was because I would have to make a speech here and I needed all the material that I could think of for speeches in the West. When I explained this to the committee who were good enough to wait upon me to tender your hospitable invitation I was relieved greatly to hear from Mr. Frederick P. Fish, who was one of the committee, the statement that I need give myself no concern in that regard, because commonplace remarks would be entirely appropriate from me here. Now, whether Mr. Fish meant by this to characterize the intellectual capacity of the speaker, or the intellectual demands of the audience, I am at a loss to say. But if what I say to-night is commonplace, you may know that I am only filling the order which Mr. Fish gave me, and complying with the invitation as I have understood it. This is the second week of September. We are all ending our vacations and going home. This is the time of the year, rather than the first of the calendar year, when good resolutions ought to be made - and kept, as far as possible. This is the time when, looking forward to the coming again of Congress in December, one must consider the needs of the country so far as they may be relieved by congressional legislation, and attempt to state what that legislation should be. Your chairman has made some reference to a number of subjects to which the attention of Congress may well be directed. While it is probable that the Vreeland Bill passed by the last Congress would aid us in case of another financial crash, it is certain that our banking and monetary system is a patched-up affair which satisfies nobody, and least of all those who are clear-headed and have a knowledge of what a financial system should be. The matter has been referred by Congress to a monetary commission, which has been studying with much interest and enthusiasm the financial and banking systems of the great Governments of Europe and has embodied and will soon publish in interesting and attractive form the best accounts of the financial systems of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebanquetthebostonchambercommercebostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at the Banquet of the Boston Chamber of Commerce in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-banquet-the-boston-chamber-commerce-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "14-09-1909", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William Howard Taft"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2286, "text": "It is quite apparent from the statements of Mr. Vreeland, who is now the head of the committee on banking and currency in the House of Representatives, and from the conversations of Mr. Aldrich, who is the chairman of the monetary commission and of the finance committee of the Senate, that the trend of the minds of the monetary commission is toward some sort of arrangement for a central bank of issue which shall control the reserve and exercise a power to meet and control the casual stringency which from time to time will come in the circulating medium of the country and the world. Aldrich states that there are two indispensable requirements in any plan to be adopted involving a central bank of issue. The one is that the control of the monetary system shall be kept free from Wall Street influences, and the other, that it shall not be manipulated for political purposes. These are two principles to which we can all subscribe. It is quite possible that the report of the commission of a definite conclusion may be delayed beyond the next session of Congress. Meanwhile, the members of the commission intend to substitute a campaign of education in order to arouse public opinion to the necessity of a change in our monetary and banking systems, and to the advantages that will arise from placing some form of control over the money market and the reserve in the hands of an intelligent body of financiers responsible to the Government. I am told that Mr. Aldrich will swing around the circle in the present fall, and will lecture in many of the cities of the Middle West on the defects and needs of our monetary system. I can not too strongly approve of this proposal. Aldrich, who is the leader of the Senate, and certainly one of the ablest statesmen in financial matters in either house, has been regarded with deep suspicion by many people, especially in the West. If, with his clear-cut ideas and simple but effective style of speaking, he makes apparent to the Western people what I believe to be his earnest desire to aid the people and to crown his political career by the preparation and passage of a bill which shall give us a sound and safe monetary and banking system, it would be a long step toward removing the political obstacles to a proper solution of the question. I do not need to argue with this audience that a change in our monetary and banking systems is necessary.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebanquetthebostonchambercommercebostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at the Banquet of the Boston Chamber of Commerce in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-banquet-the-boston-chamber-commerce-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "14-09-1909", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William Howard Taft"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2287, "text": "You are too good business men not to know it, and I sincerely hope that the whole force of your association will be exerted to insist upon the adoption of a satisfactory system before the end of this Administration. It is a subject that the general public has very little conception of, and when they suffer from the radical defects of the system they are utterly unable to tell how and why. We all need education on the subject. We must all unite to mend our roof before the storm and rain shall show us again its leaky and utterly inadequate character. I am not going to discuss the merits and demerits of the new tariff bill with you. I shall have often to refer to that before my journey is ended and I must save something for other audiences. Suffice it to say that the passage of the bill has removed a disturbing element in business. Nor shall I dwell at length on the necessity for amendments to the interstate-commerce law, to the anti-trust law, and the organization of the Departments in Washington with a view to promoting greater efficiency and expedition in the settlement of controversies arising under them. During Mr. Roosevelt's Administration we were all struck with the necessity for reform in business methods, for more scrupulous attention to the conduct of business in accordance with the law, and with the necessity for simplifying the law in such a way as to make it clear to corporate managers what they can do and what they can not do. We are, I believe, unless all signs fail, on the eve of another great business expansion, and an era of prosperity. Indeed it is already here in many branches of business. The hum of prosperity and the ecstasy of great profits are likely to dull our interest in these reforms and to lead us back again to the old abuses, unless we insist upon legislation which shall clinch and enforce those standards by positive law. Nothing revolutionary, nothing disturbing to legitimate business is needed; but we must set the marks clear in the statute by which the lines can be drawn and the proper legitimate paths be laid down upon which all business shall proceed, and must have it understood by means of prompt prosecution and punishment that the law is for all and is to be enforced even against the most powerful.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebanquetthebostonchambercommercebostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at the Banquet of the Boston Chamber of Commerce in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-banquet-the-boston-chamber-commerce-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "14-09-1909", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William Howard Taft"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2288, "text": "Then, too, the needs in respect to the conservation of our national resources; the amendment to the public land system; the execution of the pure-food law; and all the rest of the important matters that should demand attention, make the legislative and executive labor of the next three years heavy enough, if our purposes are carried out, to exhaust the energy of the most enthusiastic and hopeful. Still the world is making progress - our country is making progress. Occasionally one hears a note like that of Governor Johnson, denouncing the East and calling upon the West to organize in a sectional way against the East, because the East is deriving more benefit from the governmental policy than the West, and at the expense of the West. It is difficult for one to treat such an appeal seriously. Throughout the country there is free trade of the freest character; and due to this the prosperity of the West, especially of the agricultural West, is even more pronounced than that of the East. Moreover, the East is too close to the Pacific Coast, too close to the Middle West, too close to the Rocky Mountains, because all the people of these western stretches have eastern ancestry and eastern associations and eastern connections, and because they have eastern capital with which their sections have been largely built up, and because they are too much assisted by eastern markets in enhancing the prices which their products bring, to make such an attempt at sectionalism successful. It is true that at times public questions will be given a local color by what is thought to be a local benefit, as distinguished from the general and the national benefit. But such attitude is generally temporary, and it takes but a few years of business experience, it takes but a panic or two, to present the most convincing evidence that in this country we are all in the same business boat, and that the prosperity of one section adds to the prosperity another, and the business disaster in one section is only the forerunner of business depression and disaster in another. I was born and brought up in the Middle West. I have had a New England ancestry and New England associations. Fortune threw me out into the Pacific so that I know something of the feelings of the West coast. Jurisdiction as a judge gave me a somewhat intimate knowledge of Southern feelings and Southern aspirations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebanquetthebostonchambercommercebostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at the Banquet of the Boston Chamber of Commerce in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-banquet-the-boston-chamber-commerce-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "14-09-1909", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William Howard Taft"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2305, "text": "McClure, my mother is up in heaven smiling at that introduction. And she is probably the only person who heard it who believes every word of it. But I liked it, and I thank you. I thank you so much, all of you, for welcoming me. To your chair-elect, Joann Boyd-Scotland, who sat with me for a few moments; your CEO, my long-time friend Dr. Henry Ponder; Dr. Earl Richardson, who welcomed me to Morgan State not too many years ago, and then Vice President Gore yesterday; to Dr. Iris Ish and all the members of my Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and Universities; to my president, the Arkansas Baptist College president, Dr. William Keaton, my longtime friend. I want to also have a special word of acknowledgement to your vice president, Dr. Wilma Roscoe. Her daughter, Jena, works in the White House; that is really why I am here tonight, to preserve peace in the family. the Director of our Office of Public Liaison, Mary Beth Cahill; and Ben Johnson, who has done a wonderful job for us. I also would like to thank Catherine LeBlanc, who is Executive Director of our Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities. And I congratulate all the alumni award winners here tonight. everybody counts; everybody ought to have a chance; everybody's got a role to play; we all do better when we help each other. The work I have done to build one America for a new century was a joy every day. Even on the darkest days, the fact that I had this job to do for you and for our children and our children's children made this a joy. And I think of all you have done to make the last 7 years possible. Think about what a different country America would be today had it not been for the institutions all of you represent. Think about what a different administration I would have had. We have Alexis Herman, the Secretary of Labor, graduate of Xavier. Togo West, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs; Bob Nash the hardest job in the White House he handles my appointments. I get the credit when they get it; he takes the blame when they do not . And Judith Winston, who ran our One America initiative when I put my White House committee together on race. All graduated from Howard.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationforequalopportunityhighereducationdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-equal-opportunity-higher-education-dinner", "publication_date": "16-02-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2306, "text": "But if you think about this economy we have, which is not only the longest expansion in history but has given us the lowest African-American unemployment rate ever recorded and the lowest poverty rate in 20 years and the lowest female unemployment rate in 40 years that would not have happened if it had not been for the educational opportunities provided by the people in this room and their forebears, and you should be very, very proud of that. I was very glad to be invited to come by here and to be able to redo our schedule so I could come, because I wanted to make one simple point to you. Everybody knows how important your institutions were to 20th century America. I want everybody to know how important your institutions will be to 21st century America. A third of all the undergraduate and advanced degrees awarded to African-Americans are awarded by your institutions. I want America to know that and to know what a vital role you play in building your communities, nurturing new businesses, and revitalizing neighborhoods, as Howard is doing here in our hometown of Washington. I want America to know about your enormous contributions to research. I want every American to know that last November Tennessee State astronomers made the world's first direct detection of a planet orbiting another star. We have done what we could to play our role. The Vice President and I have worked hard to be good partners to you. I told Earl, Al Gore was so happy that he got to go to Morgan State yesterday, because when I got to go to Morgan State to give a commencement address, to talk about, of all things, science and technology not him, I got to talk about that he was so jealous. And I just told him, I said, It will not be long before nobody pulls rank on you anymore, but I am going there. And we want you to be able to define a mission for the 21st century that will help to create opportunity for every responsible American. We now have 30 agencies in our Government all singing out of the same hymnal, working for you, to help you reach your goals and your aspirations. The budget I just submitted to Congress includes almost a 40 percent increase in HBCU funding, including the new dual degree program Secretary Riley talked about yesterday. I want to ask you now to think beyond that. In the State of the Union, I said that I thought America should be proud of what we had done together these last 7 years, but not satisfied.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationforequalopportunityhighereducationdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-equal-opportunity-higher-education-dinner", "publication_date": "16-02-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2307, "text": "We should remember that we got to where we are as a country with the right vision and the right values and an awful lot of effort an awful lot of effort. All of you know, because of the work you do, that the one constant of the time in which we live is change; that there is an inherent dynamism in this moment which rewards people who are educated, who work hard, who can think and create, and punishes the sluggards mercilessly. And I do not want to see our country become a sluggard in 2000 just because we are feeling good about ourselves. I do not want to see Washington become a sluggard in 2000 just because there is an election on the horizon that will occupy the headlines, because what is rewarded is action. And so I ask you to help me convince our country and our Congress that this may be an election year, but it is still got to be an action year. We have an action agenda. You know, I think we can really say with the HOPE scholarships, with the direct student loan program, with a million work-study positions, with the increases in the Pell grants we have opened the doors of at least 2 years of college now to every American who will work for it. But it is time to open the doors of college for 4 years to every American who will work for it. That is why we want to raise the Pell grant again. That is why I want to make college tuition tax deductible up to $10,000, and I want to do it in a progressive way so that whether the family is in the 15 percent income tax bracket or the 28 percent income tax bracket, they get a 28 percent tax deduction for college tuition. This can make a huge difference to help children stay in school. One of the things that bothers me most is that since 1993 we have a 10 percent increase in the percentage of our high school graduates going on to college. A couple years ago, for the first time in history, the percentage of African-Americans graduating from high school on time was almost identical to the white majority. The percentage going on to college has significantly increased. And it will give you a profile of the American people and their incomes and their prospects. People with an education do well; people without an education work harder for less. We have got to get these kids into college; we have got to keep them in college. And you have to help us, financially, academically, in every way.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationforequalopportunityhighereducationdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-equal-opportunity-higher-education-dinner", "publication_date": "16-02-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2308, "text": "I have proposed some new college completion grants to try to help schools experiment with new strategies to keep young people in school within the TRIO program. I know that this is a big concern of yours. This is a big issue to America. I want you to help me convince the country and the Congress that we ought to bring economic opportunity to every area that has not seen it. We ought to increase the number of empowerment zones under the program the Vice President has headed so ably. We ought in every poor neighborhood in America, an inner city, a rural area, an Indian reservation we ought to give people the same tax incentives to invest there that we give them to invest overseas, in Latin America or Africa or Asia. I am for helping Americans to invest overseas, but we ought to give them the same incentives to invest in poor areas here, where people are dying to go to work or start businesses or have a better future. I want you to help me convince the country and convince the Congress that there are still a lot people out there in poverty; that they ought to have access to jobs and education; and that even though we have 2 million-plus fewer children in poverty, there are still too many. And as rich as we are now, as low as our unemployment rate is now, there is no excuse for any child in America living in poverty. And we ought to say as a goal, we are going to make sure that we increase the earned-income tax credit for working families; we are going to make sure that we increase child care support; we are going to do whatever it takes to make sure that every parent can succeed at home and work, and no child is raised in poverty. I want you to help me convince the Congress and the country that that is the right thing to do. The one thing you can play a big role in is making sure we close the digital divide it is okay to clap for that, that is good. I was so pleased to learn of your new agreement with Gateway to empower your students, your faculty, your alumni with a million affordable new computers; to put in place the E-commerce tools for improving distance learning, on-line admissions, registration, and financial aid. It is a good company, doing what I think we ought to do. I visited Gateway's offices in Belfast, Northern Ireland. I met with all their young employees who worked there.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationforequalopportunityhighereducationdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-equal-opportunity-higher-education-dinner", "publication_date": "16-02-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2309, "text": "They had young people from seven, eight, nine different countries working in one office there, talking all over the world where they were selling these computers. And Ted Waitt and the people at Gateway have decided that if they are trying to bring that kind of opportunity to the rest of the world, they ought to be closing the digital divide here at home. I applaud them, and I applaud you for working with them. We have to do more with that. There is so much we can do to help young people skip a generation of educational and economic development, in terms of time, if we close the digital divide. I ask you to help me persuade the Congress to give the biggest increase in civil rights enforcement in history we still have actual problems with bigotry and discrimination out there to enforce the equal pay laws; and to pass hate crimes legislation; to do things that will give us the tools to create one America. Let me just say this briefly in closing. I know you all agree with my agenda. I know you do, and I am grateful for the support you have given us in everything we have worked on through the years together. Things are going pretty well at home, are not they? Yes, you know some people in trouble, but more people are doing better. The great test of our people in this age is what we do with our good feeling. How many times anybody that is over 30 in this audience will identify with this how many times in your life have you made a mistake not because things were going badly but because things were going well? The whole history of the civil rights movement is about people who were saints under fire. People'd burn crosses in their yards, throw rocks or bullets through the front window. We are commemorating Selma this year. We honor these people. But how many times have you made a mistake and failed, and your courage and your vision has failed you, not because you were under duress but because things were going so well you thought there were no consequences to taking your eye off the prize? And I want you to have a good time here tonight, but I want you to hear me about this. I thank you for acknowledging what I have tried to do with you for America. If nobody ever did another thing for me in my life, and I spent the rest of my life doing for other people, I would never catch up, not ever.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationforequalopportunityhighereducationdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-equal-opportunity-higher-education-dinner", "publication_date": "16-02-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2310, "text": "So what I want to say to you is, take a little time tonight while you are having fun at dinner and clapping for the award recipients and feeling pretty good about where you are and where your institutions are, but think about what you are going to do with this good fortune and what your country is. You know, you talked about me being a little boy in Hope. I am talking to you now more as a citizen than as a President. I am not running for anything, you know. And most days, I am okay about it. And I think about the young people and how I have always said, do not stop thinking about tomorrow; keep your eyes on the future; always have a vision. But I also know that to understand today and tomorrow, you have to have some sense of what yesterday was like. This month when we celebrated the longest economic expansion in history, I did a little looking into, and thinking about, what was the longest economic expansion until this one. Now, I remember what that was like. I remember in the beginning how full of hope we were when President Kennedy was elected. I remember when President Kennedy was assassinated, how heartbroken we were, but how we rallied as a country behind President Johnson. All these people that look back at the sixties and say American cynicism started when President Kennedy was assassinated are just wrong. This country was heartbroken, but we stood up together, and we joined hands. And Lyndon Johnson provided great leadership, and he pulled us together. So in 1964, I am graduating from high school into an America that was the nearest like this America. We had low unemployment, low inflation, high growth. And everybody thought as difficult as the civil rights problems were, they were going to be resolved in a peaceable manner, with this wizard in the White House and the votes in Congress, to lawfully give African-Americans what they were constitutionally entitled to. And all the while we would win the cold war against communism, and we would create the greatest society America had ever known. That is what I believed the night I graduated from high school. Two years later, we had riots in the streets, a half a million people in Vietnam; the country was beginning to be deeply divided. Two years after that, I graduated from college in this city, 2 days after Robert Kennedy was assassinated, 2 months and 4 days after Martin Luther King was killed, 5 weeks after Lyndon Johnson said he could not see his way clear to run for President again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationforequalopportunityhighereducationdinner", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-equal-opportunity-higher-education-dinner", "publication_date": "16-02-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2347, "text": "This afternoon I have a very serious message to deliver to our country Present high inflation threatens the economic security of our Nation. Since my economic and budget reports were made to the Congress and to the people in January, rapid changes in world events and economic prospects have made it necessary to intensify our anti-inflation fight. In the last 8 weeks inflation rates and interest rates have surged to unprecedented heights. During the last 2 reporting months, for instance, the increases in the wholesale price index in Italy, Great Britain, and Japan have all increased more than 25 percent. And even in Germany, West Germany, where the prime consideration, equal to national defense, is inflation, the wholesale price index has increased more than 13 percent. The inflation that we face today is deep-rooted. Its many causes have been built up over more than a decade. The most important of these causes are the soaring prices for energy throughout the world, declining productivity growth in our Nation, and our failure in government and as individuals, as an entire American society, to live within our means. Inflation is a symptom of economic distress. The truth is that we have inflation because our economy is not productive enough to do all the things that we demand of it. We want it to give us higher incomes, bigger profits, and bigger government programs in the areas where we have a special interest. The Federal Government must stop spending money we do not have and borrowing to make up the difference. Our whole society, the entire American family, must try harder than ever to live within its means. As individuals and as a nation, we must begin to spend money according to what we can afford in the long run and not according to what we can borrow in the short run. We cannot abolish inflation overnight by just passing a law against it. Only a long-term effort, with a partnership of business and labor and individual citizens and government at all levels, can succeed in bringing this serious problem under control. This dangerous situation calls for urgent. measures. We must remove any doubt about our Nation's will to take the painful steps that will be required to control inflation. We cannot accept high rates of inflation as a permanent fact of American life. first, discipline by reductions in the Federal Government; second, discipline by restraints on credit; third, discipline in wage and price actions; fourth, discipline by greater conservation of energy; and fifth, structural changes over a long period of time to encourage productivity, savings, and research and development.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsantiinflationprogramremarksannouncingtheadministrationsprogram", "title": "Anti-Inflation Program Remarks Announcing the Administration's Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/anti-inflation-program-remarks-announcing-the-administrations-program", "publication_date": "14-03-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2348, "text": "Let me discuss these one by one. I will soon set forth a revised budget for fiscal year 1981, beginning next October 1. And the Congress and I are determined to keep this budget in balance. Since the last balanced budget 12 years ago-and there has been only one balanced budget since 1961-we have added almost one-half trillion dollars to our Nation's debt. In 1981 we will thus achieve an objective that has escaped us, eluded our country in good times and in bad times, and that is a balanced budget. By the end of this month, I will send to Congress a major revision in both my 1980 and 1981 budgets. It will propose significant reductions of budget authority from the current proposals in order to cut spending this fiscal year and next fiscal year. I will cut spending in the 1981 budget by more than $18 billion. To reach that goal, I will defer or reduce or cancel most of the new or the expanded programs which were originally proposed in the 1981 budget. I will cut expenditures for personnel, operating, and maintenance throughout the Government. I will freeze Federal civilian employment immediately and maintain rigid ceilings, so that by the end of October of this year, we will have 20,000 fewer Federal employees on the payroll. I will reduce ongoing spending programs throughout the Federal Government. I urgently request from the Congress the savings and the revenue measures in the budget that I proposed back in January. I want to stress in particular the legislation needed to hold down hospital costs, to reform Federal pay, and to speed up collections in revenue. When budget cuts demand sacrifices from many Americans, it is intolerable for some to evade prompt payment of the taxes which they owe. I will send to the Congress legislation to make sure that taxes that are owed on interests and on dividends are actually paid and paid in a timely manner. I will maintain my commitment, through all of this procedure, to a strong defense and to the level of real growth in defense spending which I committed on the honor of our Nation to our NATO Allies. But the Defense Department will not be immune from budget austerity. In particular, I will require that Department to make savings that do not affect adversely our military preparedness. I consider the proposed defense budget adequate to meet our Nation's needs. We must maintain budget restraint and fiscal responsibility in every single agency of the Federal Government. Based on our estimates of economic and budgetary developments, the action that I have just described will produce a balanced budget in 1981.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsantiinflationprogramremarksannouncingtheadministrationsprogram", "title": "Anti-Inflation Program Remarks Announcing the Administration's Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/anti-inflation-program-remarks-announcing-the-administrations-program", "publication_date": "14-03-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2349, "text": "Of course, in our system the Congress controls the power of the purse. The recent intense efforts, one of the most inspiring demonstrations of congressional leadership that I have ever seen, and my close cooperation and consultation with these congressional leaders, have all convinced me that the Congress will indeed enact and maintain a balanced budget that I have just described to you. But to ensure that outcome I will use every power at my command, as ENTITY, as I did last week on a popular bill. I will veto any legislation that exceeds the spending limits which I consider to be inconsistent with a balanced budget. I will use lily full powers under the 1974 Budget Reform Act to hold down Federal spending, including some expenditures which have already been authorized by the Congress and for which money has been appropriated. If, during the course of the year, I judge these actions and powers which I have just described as being insufficient, I will ask the Congress for a temporary grant of extraordinary powers to ensure that spending by the Federal Government of our country is contained. Cutting back Federal spending to match revenue is not a cure-all, but it is an essential first step. The sources of inflation are far too complex to be treated by a single remedy. But nothing will work in an overall anti-inflation program until the Federal Government has demonstrated to the American people that it can discipline its own spending and its own borrowing-not just as a 1-year exercise but as a longterm policy. Together, we will do just that. We will dispel the notions that Federal budget deficits must always be with us. I want to be absolutely honest about these budget cuts. We have been cutting out waste and fraud and trimming the bureaucratic fat. But this time, there will also have to be cuts in good and worthwhile programs-programs which I support very strongly. In this critical situation we must all look beyond some of our most worthwhile immediate aims to the overriding permanent needs of our Nation. Our second area of action is restraining the growth of credit. When we try to beat inflation with borrowed money, we just make the problem worse. Inflation is fed by credit-financed spending. Consumers have gone in debt too heavily. The savings rate in our Nation is now much lower than it has been for more than 25 years. Less than 3 percent of the earnings of Americans now go into savings. As inflationary expectations have been worsened, business and other borrowers are also tempted to use credit to finance speculative ventures .as well as productive activities.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsantiinflationprogramremarksannouncingtheadministrationsprogram", "title": "Anti-Inflation Program Remarks Announcing the Administration's Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/anti-inflation-program-remarks-announcing-the-administrations-program", "publication_date": "14-03-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2350, "text": "The traditional tools used by the Federal Reserve to control money and credit expansion are a basic part of the fight against inflation. But in present circumstances, these tools need to be reinforced so that effective constraint can be achieved in ways that spread the burden reasonably and fairly. I am therefore using my power under the Credit Control Act of 1969 to authorize the Federal Reserve to impose new restraints on the growth of credit on a limited and on a carefully targeted basis. Under this authority the Federal Reserve will first establish controls for credit cards and other unsecured loans but not for secured loans on homes, automobiles, and other durable goods, and second, to restrain credit extensions by commercial banks that are not members of the Federal Reserve System and also by certain other money market lenders. The Chairman of the Federal Reserve will announce a voluntary program effective immediately to restrain excessive growth in loans by larger banks and by other lenders. At the same time, the program will encourage the flow of available credit supplies for investment and for other productive uses. Special attention will be given to the particular needs of small businesses, farmers, and homeowners, and I support these initiatives by the Federal Reserve. These carefully targeted actions will not damage the productive capacity of our Nation. To help curtail the excessive uses of credit and by dampening inflation they should, along with the budget measures that I have described, speed prospects for reducing the strains which presently exist in our financial markets. In addition, I am taking steps to reduce the extension of credit by the Federal Government. Federal loans and loan guarantees will be cut by nearly $4 billion in fiscal year 1981. As a longer run measure, I urge Congress to institute the credit budget which I proposed in January. It will help us control more effectively the loans and the loan guarantees provided by the Federal Government. Our third area of action is the voluntary wage and price standards. I do not have authority to impose mandatory controls. I will oppose such authority being approved at all by the Congress. We will not impose mandatory wage and price controls. Government wage and price controls have never worked in peacetime. They create unfair economic distortions, and they hurt productivity. These results always force price controls first to be eased and then to be dismantled while inflation roars ahead. Controls create inequities, and the greatest inequity is their effect on the average American family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsantiinflationprogramremarksannouncingtheadministrationsprogram", "title": "Anti-Inflation Program Remarks Announcing the Administration's Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/anti-inflation-program-remarks-announcing-the-administrations-program", "publication_date": "14-03-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2351, "text": "As even the most ardent advocates of mandatory wage and price controls will admit, the cost of vital necessities such as food and fuel would be passed on to those who are living on frozen wages and on fixed incomes. We simply cannot outlaw inflation with a massive Federal bureaucracy or wish it away with a magic formula. On the other hand, voluntary wage and price restraints offer the flexibility we need to deal with our complex economy. The Council on Wage and Price Stability has just issued revised pay standards and confirmed an extension of the price standards. The new pay standards were developed from the recommendation of a tripartite advisory committee, with members from business, labor, and the public. The committee unanimously recommended standards for pay increases in the range of 7 1/2 to 9 1/2 percent and stated that under normal circumstances increases should average 8 1/2 percent. I am determined to meet this goal. In the face of last year's 13-percent increase in the Consumer Price Index, and the even higher rate of recent months, this unanimous recommendation of the Pay Advisory Committee, designed to produce an average wage and salary increase of 8 1/2 percent, reflects a commendable spirit of restraint and cooperation. With business, labor, and public support, we can meet this goal of restraint. I am sharply expanding the price and wage monitoring activities of the Council on Wage and Price Stability. Its current staff of 80 people will be more than tripled. The Council will then establish teams of experts to track wage and price developments in each major industry. The Council will meet with leaders from specific industries to secure their cooperation in this fight against inflation. Where necessary, we will ask large firms for prenotification of significant price increases. We will investigate wage and price increases that seem out of line with the standards. I mean to apply these standards with vigor and toughness to both business and labor. Our fourth area of action is energy. The plain truth is that we will never be completely strong at home or secure abroad until we have at last solved our Nation's excessive dependence on imported oil. This year, we expect to spend $90 billion of America's hard-earned income to foreign countries to buy their oil. The price of imported oil has more than doubled-more than doubled in the last 12 months. Last year's increase alone in 1979 was greater than all other increases combined since the oil embargo of 1973. In fact, last year alone the price of oil increased more than it has since oil was first discovered.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsantiinflationprogramremarksannouncingtheadministrationsprogram", "title": "Anti-Inflation Program Remarks Announcing the Administration's Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/anti-inflation-program-remarks-announcing-the-administrations-program", "publication_date": "14-03-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2352, "text": "We must forge ahead toward the goal that I set last July-cutting in half the amount of oil that we will import in 1990. To do this, we will require increased conservation and increased production of domestic oil, natural gas, and coal, and the rapid development of alternative energy supplies. For 3 years, as every Member of the Congress well knows, I have fought for a national energy policy to achieve each of these goals, and we have worked closely together. Today, at long last, we are close to enacting such a policy into law, and we must not falter now. I am asking the Congress to finish without delay the three essential elements of the energy policy. These bills are the cornerstone for energy security, for our national security, and for our fight against inflation. I have recently submitted to the Congress a proposal to conserve energy in electric powerplants and to convert them from oil to coal. But we can never solve our energy dependence unless we meet the problem of America's extravagant gasoline use. Gasoline is the most important and the most wasted petroleum product in the United States. It accounts for some 40 percent of all the petroleum we use in our country. In almost every other industrial country, the average amount of gasoline used by each citizen is much less and the price for gasoline is much higher-more than twice as high in most other industrialized countries than it is today in the United States. Americans have done well in the past year in gasoline conservation. But if we are going to reduce further our dependence on foreign oil, we must do more. Therefore, I am exercising my Presidential authority to impose a gasoline conservation fee on imported oil. This will amount to about 10 cents a gallon and will be imposed only on gasoline. The fee will not add to the cost of any other petroleum product, and it will not add at all to the profit of oil companies. It should reduce imports by 100,000 barrels per day in 1 year, and within about 3 years, it will reduce the imports of oil from foreign countries by more than 250,000 barrels every day. I will submit to Congress a request for a specific gasoline tax, in the same amount exactly, which will replace the conservation fee. The funds from this gasoline conservation charge will be held in reserve or used to reduce the national debt. I do not intend to use these revenues to balance the budget or as a substitute for necessary spending cuts. That would not contribute substantially to the control of inflation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsantiinflationprogramremarksannouncingtheadministrationsprogram", "title": "Anti-Inflation Program Remarks Announcing the Administration's Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/anti-inflation-program-remarks-announcing-the-administrations-program", "publication_date": "14-03-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2353, "text": "But these revenues, which will begin occurring immediately, will give the budget, which will be balanced, a margin of safety, ensuring that it will remain in balance if conditions or estimates change in a way that we do not anticipate. We can now set new State targets for gasoline consumption which will, within a year, reduce consumption by 400,000 barrels per day. This action also underscores a commitment to greater conservation that our friends abroad, both the producing countries and the consuming countries, can both join and support. Finally, the Secretary of Energy is pursuing an intensified national energy conservation plan. Our aim is to involve every level of government, business and labor-in fact, every single citizen in our country-in conserving American energy. Our fifth area of action involves longterm structural changes to encourage productivity, savings, and research and development. We must face the fact that over the last 10 years the pace of productivity growth in the United States has slowed sharply. This trend is an important longterm factor in inflation. I am asking my Presidential commission on an agenda for the 1980's as part of their work to develop specific recommendations for revitalizing our Nation's economy. Our priority now is to balance the budget, but once these spending limitations have actually been achieved, we can then provide tax relief to encourage investment. Through fiscal discipline today, we can free up resources tomorrow, through tax deductions, for the productivity increase which our Nation needs. This discipline which I have described to you will not be easy. But [he most important thing we cannot afford is the national delusion which we have been harboring about inflation. We cannot afford the fairy-tale that inflation can somehow be passed along to the next person or somehow be passed along to the next generation. The actions I have outlined involve costs. They involve pain. But the cost of acting is far less than the cost of not acting. The temporary pain of inconvenience and discipline is far less for all of us together than the still worst permanent pain of constantly rising inflation. For all of us, but especially for the most disadvantaged among us, inflation is indeed the most cruel tax of all. When we take these necessary steps against inflation, it will not result in a quick victory. Over the next several months inflation is likely to continue at a high level. But I am confident that the steps that I have outlined today will make the inflation rate be declining later on this year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsantiinflationprogramremarksannouncingtheadministrationsprogram", "title": "Anti-Inflation Program Remarks Announcing the Administration's Program.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/anti-inflation-program-remarks-announcing-the-administrations-program", "publication_date": "14-03-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2359, "text": "And there are just a couple of people I want to acknowledge. First of all, obviously, Harvey and Georgina have just been great friends and have done so much for us, not just in this election, but in the previous one. your Governor, Dan Malloy, is here, who is doing outstanding work here in Connecticut. I want to thank Anne Hathaway for taking the time to host us. And I did get a chance to see Batman. And she was the best thing in it. Aaron Sorkin, who writes the way every Democrat in Washington wished they spoke. Joanne and Paul were not only I think what was best about American film, but also just embodied the American spirit in so many ways. And their love story and the way they took so many people under their wing and helped so many people I think made them something more important than just folks in film. Now, you know, in these kind of intimate settings, I usually do not make a long speech because what I want to do is have a conversation. And so let me just say a few things at the top. I will give you a sense of the kind of season we are in. Jim Messina, my campaign manager, tells this story. He was at an event like this, and there was a young couple; they had a 4-year-old boy, cute as can be. And so the parents, very proudly, prompt the son, Who is that? And they say, Well, and what does Barack Obama do? And he thinks for a second, and he says, Barack Obama approves this message. Now, that speaks to the state of affairs in politics today. Unless you have-you do not have a TV set or your cable is busted, you are seeing an awful lot of stuff about politics. And the reason I think there is so much intensity is because we have got a choice that is as stark and as critical as any that we have seen in my lifetime, in some ways, more important than 2008. the idea that if you work hard, that hard work is rewarded, that you can make it here if you try, regardless of what you look like, where you come from, what your last name is. And for a decade, we had seen job growth slow, and we had seen jobs moving overseas, and we had seen people working harder and harder, but coming up with less because the costs were going up a lot faster than their wages and their incomes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserwestportconnecticut", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Westport, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-westport-connecticut", "publication_date": "06-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2360, "text": "And this all culminated in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. We have spent 3 1/2 years, a little over 3 1/2 years now, trying to make sure that this country gets back on its feet. 4.5 million new jobs, half a million new manufacturing jobs, an auto industry that is reinvigorated. But we did not work this hard in 2008 just to get back to where we were in 2007. Our notion was that we needed to rebuild a country where the foundations for people who were willing to act responsibly were there for them either to feel security in the middle class or to climb into the middle class and maybe do even better. And that means making sure that we have an education system that works, which is why we have initiated more aggressive education reform across the country than any President in a very long time and the reason that we put so much emphasis on making college more affordable for young people. It meant health care, because in a country this wealthy, we should not go bankrupt when we get sick. And the Affordable Care Act means that 30 million people will have health insurance, but it also means that people who already have health insurance have a little more security. We did an event just before we came here, and there was a woman who clearly is doing fine and is well insured, but she personally thanked me for the health care bill because she said, my husband just got cancer and we were not sure whether we were going to hit that $1 million limit on our insurance policy. Well, that limit is no longer allowed under the Affordable Care Act, which means they may not lose their house because of an illness. It means making investments in science and research that are what made us an economic superpower. It means having a Tax Code that is fair so that we bring down our deficit not on the backs of folks who are struggling, but we ask those of us who are-who've been incredibly blessed by this country to do a little bit more, understanding that when folks in the middle and the bottom are doing well, everybody does well and the economy grows. It means a foreign policy that recognizes the force of our example and our ideals and our capacity to engage with countries diplomatically is a complement to our incredible military power. And it is not a sign of weakness to say that we are going to reach out around the world and engage people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserwestportconnecticut", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Westport, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-westport-connecticut", "publication_date": "06-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2361, "text": "So we have had a lot of work to do over the last 3 1/2 years, and we are not done. We are just-we have gotten on track, but these gains are reversible. And you have got the other party and the other candidate who do not just want to reverse the gains that we have made over the last 3 1/2 years, but in many ways, want to reverse gains we have made over the last 40 or 50 or 60 years. When you look at their budget, and they say that they want to initiate a $5 trillion tax cut on top of the Bush tax cut, what that functionally means is that either you blow up the deficit by another $5 trillion-which they say is irresponsible-or you are going to have to eliminate funding for education, for infrastructure, for basic science and research. Medicare is going to be a voucher system, which means that seniors may end up paying thousands of dollars more for care that they were counting on. When Mitt Romney says he wants to eliminate funding for Planned Parenthood, I think he means it. When he says that Arizona is a model for how we should deal with immigration, I think that fundamentally misunderstands that we are a nation of laws, but also a nation of immigrants. So on a whole host of issues, you have got very stark differences. And when you walk into that ballot box-or do not walk into the ballot box. That is the second time I have said this today. When you walk into the voting booth-it is illegal, I am sure, to walk into a ballot box. When you cast your ballot, you will have the opportunity to determine the course of this country's direction not just tomorrow or next year or 5 years from now, but probably for decades to come. And the great privilege of being President is you interact with people from every walk of life, from every corner of the country. And what you discover is the faith that I brought into this office in the American people-their core decency and their values and their resilience and their fundamental fairness-they have never disappointed me. And I am confident that they will not this time either-despite the fact that we have got all these negative ads raining down on our heads and super PACs running around with folks writing $10 million checks-because when the American people focus and are paying attention, their instincts are sound and they know what makes this country great.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksobamavictoryfund2012fundraiserwestportconnecticut", "title": "Remarks at an Obama Victory Fund 2012 Fundraiser in Westport, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-obama-victory-fund-2012-fundraiser-westport-connecticut", "publication_date": "06-08-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2362, "text": "You know, I only wish we knew how Barbra really feels about all of this. It is so hard when people hold back like that. And thank you, Bob and Carole, for opening your beautiful home and leaving it open day after day after day while I carried on at the Wye River. We were sitting there singing those songs with you, and I said, You know, every time Carole King opens her mouth, you can make 30 years of my life vanish. I am glad to be here with Senator Boxer and Stu and Doug and Nicole and Tony and my nephew, Zach. I talked to her just before I came out. This is the third talk I have made, and I have started with the same story, but it is true, so I am going to say it again. So I want to tell another true story. Every time I give a talk, my staff prepares a little card like this. At the top it says, Barbra Streisand, Carole King, Bob Daly, Carole Bayer Sager. I am glad to be here to support Senator Barbara Boxer for the Senate. And it says why I am for her here. And then before I do it, I make out little notes like this in my handwriting. And at my age, in dilapidated condition, I cannot read it anyway, so I have no idea what I said. So before I got off the plane I swear, before I got off the plane, my staff said, When you were at this Middle East peace thing, every night you got home at 2 or 3 in the morning, and then the last night you did not come home at all. I was up for 39 hours before I went to bed last night. I did not even do that in college. So they said, Read this card because the press is listening in, and Lord only knows what you will say. So I talked to Hillary; she said, Read the card; read the card. But I am not going to read the card. Anyway, I want to say just a couple of things about Barbara Boxer and then a couple of things about where we are right now and what is at stake. First of all, apart from our relationship by marriage and our deep friendship, I care a lot about her. And you should know that I see people in Washington in ways that their constituents often do not . I see Senators when they are mad at me, sometimes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2363, "text": "I see Senators when they call and want me to do things, and sometimes I cannot do it. I see the tough votes and easy shots and just the whole thing. This woman has a good mind, a good heart, a fierce spirit, and she would make you proud every day if you could see her as I do. And I will also tell you that of all the members of the California delegation this is no disrespect to the others she has called me more than any other member of the California delegation on issues relating specifically to California. Sometimes it gets to the point where I hear she is calling me again, I just say, Whatever she wants, just tell her, yes; I am tired of dealing with her. Just tell her, yes; I am tired of dealing with her. So I think she has earned the right to be reelected. But she made a couple of points I'd like to reinforce. In August of '93, when I'd been through a rocky 8 months, a lot of controversy, and I knew our ability to really get this economy going again rested on the capacity of the Congress to vote for an economic plan I gave them to slash the deficit but keep investing in education and children and the environment and research; and that it would require a lot of controversial choices, but that if we did not do it and it was not enough of a cut in the deficit, we'd never get the interest rates down; we'd never get the economy going again. Now, at the time we did that, the stock market was at about 3200; interest rates were much higher; the unemployment rate was a whole lot higher; and the budget passed by a single vote in the Senate and in the House one vote. So it is literally true that if in the last 6 years California had been represented by her opponent, we would not have had the economic recovery to the extent we have, and I might not be here giving this talk tonight. She voted to ban assault weapons. She voted for the Brady bill. She voted which has kept a quarter of a million people with criminal histories and mental health problems from buying handguns. Lord knows how many lives we saved. Roughly 15 million Americans have taken advantage of the family and medical leave law, which says you can take some time off when a baby is born or a parent is sick without losing your job. I mean, she is done things that have made a difference to the life of the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2364, "text": "This last budget you heard them talking about it all those funds for after-school programs would not be in that budget if it were not for Barbara Boxer. Let me just give you an example of what this means, just one. During all the years I served as Governor I think most of you know Hillary is from Chicago, and we used to spend a lot of time in Illinois. And the Chicago school system had a reputation for being the worst big-city school system in the country. They had a teacher strike in Chicago every year whether they wanted one or not, even whether the teachers wanted one. They just sort of automatic and they changed the whole way of governing the school system. The teachers basically are a part of the governance of the school system now. And the schools all have parent councils and lots of other changes have been made. Chicago big-city school system ended social promotion. If you do not pass a test, you cannot go on to the next grade. But they did not declare children failures because the system failed them. Instead, they guaranteed summer school to all the kids that do not do well. The summer school is now the sixth biggest school system in the United States the summer school. And there are now in Chicago alone 40,000 children that eat 3 meals a day in the school system. That is what this after-school program means. And she did it, and she deserves the credit for it. First of all, in spite of the fact that the country is doing well economically, and that a lot of our social problems are abating, and we have, fortunately, been able to advance the cause of peace around the world and to become, I think, much more capable of dealing with the world as it is going to be, from Africa to China, to Bosnia and Kosovo, to Northern Ireland and the Middle East, we have got a lot of challenges at home and abroad. And this next Congress will have a lot to do with what 21st century America looks like for a long time. I want to mention two or three things. Barbara mentioned the Patients' Bill of Rights. A hundred sixty million Americans are in managed care, and I support it. I always say this. You know, I was never against managed care in the beginning. A lot of people do not remember this, but in 1993, when I became ENTITY, the inflation rate in health care costs was 3 times the inflation rate in the economy as a whole.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2365, "text": "You have to manage any system that is taking that much money up. It will consume the economy. On the other hand, no management technique or device can ever be allowed to consume the fundamental purpose of the endeavor, whatever it is. If you make movies or CD's, you want to do them as efficiently as possible; you do not want to do them in a way that you have a low quality CD or a lousy movie. If you run a grocery store, you want to run it as efficiently as possible; but you do not want to run it with bad milk or rotten fruit. You can save money a lot of ways; any endeavor that you are doing, you can save money. But if you undermine the purpose of the endeavor, you have thwarted the very reason you are trying to be more efficient. You have got people who are out there dying, because their doctors say they need to have certain procedures or certain specialists, and it has to be approved by a managed care company, and the first person that gets it is a modestly paid accountant, a claims reviewer. And put yourself in the position of the claims reviewer we are talking about 160 million Americans now suppose instead of being an Academy Award winning actor, you are a claims reviewer for an HMO. What do you know? You know you are making a modest salary; you'd like a bonus at Christmastime; you'd like to have your job next year; you'd like to get a promotion someday. And all day long you are reviewing claims, and they are always the same thing, you know. The doctor says, Well, so-and-so ought to see a specialist, or so-and-so ought to have this procedure that may be experimental, and all this. What do you know about your job? You will never get in trouble for saying no. I want you to understand this from a human point of view. You will not get in trouble if you say no. Because if you make a mistake, they can always appeal the decision. And the doctor can ultimately, you say, make the right decision. Some of the biggest damage being done to the quality of health care in America today is being done on the way up the appeals ladder, when ultimately a doctor will say, Okay, yeah, this person should have the bone marrow transplant or whatever, you name it, or should see the plastic surgeon instead of just a general surgeon.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2366, "text": "But by then it is too late to do the thing that was recommended in the first place. Now, if we had to pay a modest amount more, all of us, just a modest believe me, it is a modest amount; we are talking small bucks here more, to have the benefits of a managed system, but a system where the purpose was protected so that if your doctor says you ought to be able to see a specialist or you ought to have a certain procedure or if you get in an accident, you ought to be able to go to the nearest emergency room, not one all the way across town because it is the one that is covered; or if you are pregnant or getting chemotherapy and your employer changes health care providers, you ought to be able to keep your doctor until you finish a treatment, and you ought to be able to keep your medical records private throughout I think the American people would like that kind of system. And we did not do that this time because I did not have enough people in the Congress who agreed with me and Barbara Boxer. On the education, we fought and we fought and we finally got the funds for the 100,000 teachers. And if we keep funding this, we will get 100,000 teachers in the next few years, and that will enable us, because we are targeting them at the youngest children, to take average class size down to 18. This is the first year the last 2 years the first time we have had more kids in school than the baby boom generation. But unlike the baby boomers, there is no arc where it ends after 18 years. It looks like it is going to keep on going, because so many of our young children are immigrants, and we continue to bring immigrants in, and they are younger people and have children. Now, I was in a little town in Florida the other day 2 months ago a little town that had a grade school with 12 trailers out back for classrooms. I have been in big cities all across this country with beautiful old school buildings where whole floors were shut down because they were in such disrepair. So what we did not pass this time was a tax cut paid for in our budget that would have helped school districts to build or repair 5,000 schools. If you are going to hire the teachers, they have to have some place to teach. If you want a smaller classroom, there has to be more classrooms.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2367, "text": "If you are going to say, Okay, end social promotion, give the kids after-school, give the kids summer school, have smaller classes, bring excellence in education back then you send a huge signal to children a huge signal by the buildings that they attend school in. We have people there are teachers in this country today conducting classes in broom closets. So we have got to win that. The next Congress this year we saved off this ill-advised election-year tax cut with the first surplus we have had in 29 years so we could reform Social Security. Now, when all us baby boomers get in the retirement system, there will only be two people drawing for every one person two people working for every one person drawing Social Security. To most of us, it will not make any difference. I have got a better pension than most Americans will have. Most Americans do not have a big pension. But today, half the seniors in this country are living above the poverty line only because of Social Security. Now, we have got to change the system. The system we have now will not support itself when there are only two people working for every one person drawing. Now, if we start now, we take this surplus and some portion of the surpluses we expect in the years ahead and make modest reforms, we can extend the life of Social Security so that the baby boomers can retire in dignity without bankrupting their kids. If we squander the money now or just avoid the tough decisions now, we will have some really tough decisions to make in a few years. We can either lower the standard of living of retirees, which will kill our consciences, or we can maintain the standard of living with a broken system by raising taxes on our kids in a way that undermines their ability to raise our grandkids. And one reason you ought to vote for her is because she will vote, A, to change it, but she will do it in a way that is humane and decent. And she will not throw all this money away that you have worked so hard to get us out of debt in with. One other issue I will just mention one other. There are lots of them, but one other I have had two people at these events tonight come up and mention it to me. We have a lot at stake in America in the success of the global economy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2368, "text": "No country has benefited more, and no State has done better in the last 6 years than California, because of our ability to trade with Asia, our ability to trade with Latin America. Now, you all know there are a lot of troubles out there. Some of it is just pure growing pains, and nobody has good times all the time. Some of it is just the cycle of things. But a lot of it is the direct result of the fact that in addition to global trade and global investment, the global flow of money has grown so rapidly and in such sweeping volumes. Now over one trillion dollars a day crosses national borders over a trillion dollars a day a lot of it in highly leveraged instruments where people only put up a small percentage of what it is they are investing. A vast amount of funds cross national borders every day just betting for and against national currencies. If you want to have high volumes of investment, if you want to have high volumes of trade, if you want to have high volumes of travel, if you want all that, you have got to have some way of moving money around. But the system that has we have modified over the last 50 years is not adequate to keep the global economy growing and going without running the risk of the kind of boom/bust cycles that used to afflict countries before the Great Depression. After the Great Depression, the United States, Europe, Japan, every country figured out how to avoid it ever happening again. We have not had another Great Depression, have we? We had some stiff recessions. We had some bad times. What we have to do is to devise a system for the global financial movement that will get the benefit of this money moving around without the risk of total collapse that you see affecting some of the countries in Asia and elsewhere. I think it is inconceivable we will be able to do all that without having somebody help in Congress. I tried to get the Congress this year to raise the minimum wage. Because the minimum wage is 5 bucks and 15 cents an hour, and you cannot raise a family on it. And when you have got low unemployment and low inflation and the rest of us are doing pretty well, that is the time when you ought to raise it. I tried to pass legislation to protect children from the dangers of tobacco. Because it is the biggest public health problem in the country for kids. I tried to pass campaign finance reform so you would not have to go to so many of these dinners every year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2369, "text": "And, you know, there are a lot of things to be done. Now, the last thing I want to say is this what Barbra said. I want you to focus on this, just because and I want to thank Barbra Streisand because she said she is going on the Internet to try to get people to vote. It is generally accepted now that our agenda this year is the winning agenda; that the American people support what we are trying to do; they believe in this; that they believe that we ought to be a force for peace and freedom around the world. They support us stopping another Bosnia from happening in Kosovo. They support us being involved in the peace process in Ireland and in the Middle East. They support these domestic agenda items that saving Social Security and more classrooms and the Patients' Bill of Rights. The difficulty is that almost without exception when you have an election for Congress and you do not have an election for President, you get a big drop in the turnout. And a lot of our folks do not go lower income working women that have a big enough hassle every day to figure out how to get the kids to child care, to school, and get to work; or inner-city residents who have to ride a bus to work every day, and the polling place is not on the bus route coming home. And just a lot of things happen. And a lot of people just do not think it is that big a deal. I am telling you, this is a big deal. And so what I would like to ask you to do is to think about what you could do between now and a week from Tuesday. Is there who do you come in contact with? Everybody you come in contact with at work or socializing or in any other way, that you could tell this is a big deal, and they need to show up. This election, in its potential significance, is like a Presidential election because these issues will shape the way we live for a long time to come. And we do not live in a dictatorship. So the President does not call all the shots. A lot of this has to be done by Congress and the President working together. Now, I just cannot tell you how important it is. But let me ask you to think about this when I close. The most heartbreaking thing that is happened in the last several days in America, I think, that is really seared the heart of the country, was the death of that young man out in Wyoming.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2370, "text": "And I called to talk to his parents and his brother hard to think of what to say. And it moved us all because you see the picture of this fine looking young guy, this intelligent, vital young man with his whole life before him. And it appears that he was taken out by people who thought he did not belong. So it offended our common sense of humanity. You all stood up and clapped for me, and I appreciated that, over this Middle East peace thing. But, you know, I felt lucky to be doing that. I loved it, even the ugly parts, the tough parts, and the long nights. That is what I hired on to do. That is why I ran for ENTITY. That is the kind of thing I wanted to do. I felt so fortunate to have been given the chance to do that. And I might add, it is easier for the honest broker than it is for the parties. You see I think Mr. Netanyahu has gotten some unfair criticism in this country for being too tough in the negotiating. If you have been watching the news today of what he is facing in Israel, you see that he has to bear the consequences of the commitments he made. Now, he made a good deal for his country. It will increase their security. But he is got a hill to climb to sell it to the people that are part of his coalition. I think Mr. Arafat made a good deal for the Palestinians. It will help them with land. It will help them with the economy. But I will guarantee you, there are people who do not want peace who will try to take him out over it. But why did you like that so much? I mean, think about it. Why did you do that? Because you know these folks have been fighting each other a long time. And you think about the wreckage all of that estrangement has wrought. And here are these people who reached across this divide and decided they'd hold hands and jump off this high dive together. It gives you energy. It gives you hope. It sort of chips away all those layers of cynicism that we carry around encrusted on us all the time. Because it is just the opposite of the murder of young Mr. Shepard. It reaffirms our common humanity. That is why we like it. Now, what is that got to do with this election and Barbara Boxer? I will tell you what.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerforsenatorbarbaraboxerlosangeles0", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner for Senator Barbara Boxer in Los Angeles", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-for-senator-barbara-boxer-los-angeles-0", "publication_date": "24-10-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2371, "text": "I have found it a real privilege to be here to-night and to listen to the addresses which you have heard. Though you may not all of you believe it, I would a great deal rather hear somebody else speak than speak myself; but I should feel that I was omitting a duty if I did not address you to-night and say some of the things that have been in my thought as I realized the approach of this evening and the duty that would fall upon me. The astonishing thing about the movement which you represent is, not that it has grown so slowly, but that it has grown so rapidly. No doubt for those who have been a long time in the struggle, like your honored president, it seems a long and arduous path that has been trodden, but when you think of the cumulating force of this movement in recent decades, you must agree with me that it is one of the most astonishing tides in modern history. Two generations ago, no doubt Madam President will agree with me in saying, it was a handful of women who were fighting this cause. Now it is a great multitude of women who are fighting it. And there are some interesting historical connections which I would like to attempt to point out to you. One of the most striking facts about the history of the United States is that at the outset it was a lawyers' history. Almost all of the questions to which America addressed itself, say a hundred years ago, were legal questions, were questions of method, not questions of what you were going to do with your Government, but questions of how you were going to constitute your Government,-how you were going to balance the powers of the States and the Federal Government, how you were going to balance the claims of property against the processes of liberty, how you were going to make your governments up so as to balance the parts against each other so that the legislature would check the executive, and the executive the legislature, and the courts both of them put together. The whole conception of government when the United States became a Nation was a mechanical conception of government, and the mechanical conception of government which underlay it was the Newtonian theory of the universe. If you pick up the Federalist, some parts of it read like a treatise on astronomy instead of a treatise on government. They speak of the centrifugal and the centripetal forces, and locate the President somewhere in a rotating system. The whole thing is a calculation of power and an adjustment of parts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthesuffrageconventionatlanticcitynewjersey", "title": "Address at the Suffrage Convention, Atlantic City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-suffrage-convention-atlantic-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "08-09-1916", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2372, "text": "There was a time when nobody but a lawyer could know enough to run the Government of the United States, and a distinguished English publicist once remarked, speaking of the complexity of the American Government, that it was no proof of the excellence of the American Constitution that it had been successfully operated, because the Americans could run any constitution. A great question arose in this country which, though complicated with legal elements, was at bottom a human question, and nothing but a question of humanity. And is it not significant that it was then, and then for the first time, that women became prominent in politics in America? Not many women; those prominent in that day were so few that you can name them over in a brief catalogue, but, nevertheless, they then began to play a part in writing, not only, but in public speech, which was a very novel part for women to play in America. After the Civil War had settled some of what seemed to be the most difficult legal questions of our system, the life of the Nation began not only to unfold, but to accumulate. Life in the United States was a comparatively simple matter at the time of the Civil War. There was none of that underground struggle which is now so manifest to those who look only a little way beneath the surface. Stories such as Dr. Davis has told to-night were uncommon in those simpler days. The pressure of low wages, the agony of obscure and unremunerated toil, did not exist in America in anything like the same proportions that they exist now. And as our life has unfolded and accumulated, as the contacts of it have become hot, as the populations have assembled in the cities, and the cool spaces of the country have been supplanted by the feverish urban areas, the whole nature of our political questions has been altered. They have more and more become social questions, questions with regard to the relations of human beings to one another,-not merely their legal relations, but their moral and spiritual relations to one another. This has been most characteristic of American life in the last few decades, and as these questions have assumed greater and greater prominence, the movement which this association represents has gathered cumulative force. So that, if anybody asks himself, What does this gathering force mean, if he knows anything about the history of the country, he knows that it means something that has not only come to stay, but has come with conquering power.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthesuffrageconventionatlanticcitynewjersey", "title": "Address at the Suffrage Convention, Atlantic City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-suffrage-convention-atlantic-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "08-09-1916", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2373, "text": "I get a little impatient sometimes about the discussion of the channels and methods by which it is to prevail. It is going to prevail, and that is a very superficial and ignorant view of it which attributes it to mere social unrest. It is because the women have seen visions of duty, and that is something which we not only cannot resist, but, if we be true Americans, we do not wish to resist. America took its origin in visions of the human spirit, in aspirations for the deepest sort of liberty of the mind and of the heart, and as visions of that sort come up to the sight of those who are spiritually minded in America, America comes more and more into her birthright and into the perfection of her development. So that what we have to realize in dealing with forces of this sort is that we are dealing with the substance of life itself. I have felt as I sat here to-night the wholesome contagion of the occasion. Almost every other time that I ever visited Atlantic City, I came to fight somebody. I hardly know how to conduct myself when I have not come to fight against anybody, but with somebody. I have come to suggest, among other things, that when the forces of nature are steadily working and the tide is rising to meet the moon, you need not be afraid that it will not come to its flood. We feel the tide; we rejoice in the strength of it; and we shall not quarrel in the long run as to the method of it. Because, when you are working with masses of men and organized bodies of opinion, you have got to carry the organized body along. The whole art and practice of government consists not in moving individuals, but in moving masses. I have not come to ask you to be patient, because you have been, but I have come to congratulate you that there was a force behind you that will beyond any peradventure be triumphant, and for which you can afford a little while to wait.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthesuffrageconventionatlanticcitynewjersey", "title": "Address at the Suffrage Convention, Atlantic City, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-suffrage-convention-atlantic-city-new-jersey", "publication_date": "08-09-1916", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2378, "text": "Earlier this week, I visited Arizona and Texas to observe firsthand our efforts to protect our Southwest border. And I met with customs and border protection agents who are working tirelessly to enforce our laws and keep our borders secure. Illegal immigration and border security are issues that concern Americans. We are a nation built on the rule of law, and those who enter the country illegally break the law. In communities near our border, illegal immigration strains the resources of schools, hospitals, and law enforcement. And it involves smugglers and gangs that bring crime to our neighborhoods. We are going to protect our borders. Since I took office, we have increased funding for border security by 60 percent, and our border agents have caught and sent home more than 4.5 million illegal immigrants, including more than 350,000 with criminal records. Yet we must do more to build on this progress. This week I outlined my comprehensive strategy to reform our immigration system. The strategy begins with a three-part plan to protect our borders. First, we will promptly return every illegal entrant we catch at our border with no exceptions. For illegal immigrants from Mexico, we are working to expand an innovative program called interior repatriation, in which those caught at the border are returned to their hometowns far from the border, making it more difficult for them to attempt another crossing. For non-Mexican illegal immigrants, we are changing the unwise policy of catch-and-release to a policy of catch-and-return, and we are speeding up the removal process. Second, we must fix weak and unnecessary provisions in our immigration laws, including senseless rules that require us to release illegal immigrants if their home countries do not take them back in a set period of time. Third, we must stop people from crossing the border illegally in the first place. So we are hiring thousands more Border Patrol agents. We are deploying new technology to expand their reach and effectiveness, and we are constructing physical barriers to entry. Comprehensive immigration reform also requires us to improve enforcement of our laws in the interior of our country, because border security and interior enforcement go hand in hand. In October, I signed legislation that more than doubled the resources for interior enforcement, so we will increase the number of immigration enforcement agents and criminal investigators, enhance worksite enforcement, and continue to go after smugglers, gang members, and human traffickers. Our immigration laws apply across all of America, and we will enforce those laws throughout our land.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress435", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-435", "publication_date": "03-12-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2385, "text": "With the New Year just a few weeks away, Washington is starting to get ready for the 100th Congress, which will be sworn in this January. The most important challenge facing that Congress will be joining with us in keeping a growing America on the road to a brighter future, the road that you and I and all Americans started on just 6 years ago. through the ingenuity, energy, and determination of the American people. Together we set out to cut your taxes and cut the growth of government spending so that you could get on with the important work of building a better future for yourself, your family, and all America. We first cut tax rates with our 1981 tax cut. Since the lower tax rates in that bill took effect, America has created over 12 million new jobs. We have had 48 straight months of economic growth and one of the longest periods of uninterrupted growth in the last 50 years. And after a decade-long decline, the American family's real income has been rising again and rising faster. But that is just the beginning; because earlier this year, with your help, Congress pushed aside the special interests and the tax-and-spend crowd, rolled up its sleeves, and shaped the tools that will help you and all Americans build on that record. That is when Congress passed the new tax reform bill, which will cut the top tax rate from 50 percent to 28 percent and for 8 out of 10 Americans will mean a top rate of no more than 15 percent. For the 4 years since our first tax cut found its footing, the American economy has been climbing to the mountaintop. With tax reform, America is going to shoot for the stars. That is why I was disappointed this week to hear some talk from the new Congress that we should stop the climb, turn around, and start back in the direction we have come from. Even before they take their oath of office, some in the new Congress are talking about breaking faith with the American people and taking back part of tax reform before it has taken effect. Yes, they say that to reduce the deficit they want to keep some people's tax rates high. First, they take one step towards raising taxes and then another and then another, and pretty soon every family in America is paying more to the Government again and we are back to the days of high taxes and no economic growth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationeconomicgrowthandbudgetreform", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on Economic Growth and Budget Reform", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-economic-growth-and-budget-reform", "publication_date": "13-12-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2386, "text": "I hope that instead of trying to return to the tax-and-spend policies of the past, the new Congress will work with us in getting the growth of Federal spending under control. We have begun to make progress here, too. The figures are coming in now for the spending the Government is actually doing this year, and the news is good. When this year is ended, the deficit will be down by $50 billion. Yes, this year, for the first time in two decades, the Federal Government will spend less, after taking out inflation, than it did last year. That is an historic step on the road to a balanced budget, and it could not have happened without the Gramm-Rudman legislation. Now it is time to take a second step. On January 5th we will send next year's budget up to Capitol Hill. It will be lean enough to meet the Gramm-Rudman deficit targets, but it will also meet the Government's commitments. We will be spending more than ever before in such areas as support for America's elderly, law and drug enforcement to protect America's young people, and health care for America's finest-for our veterans. And yet in the coming budget, after taking out inflation, the Federal Government will spend less in the coming year than it will this year. That will be 2 years of real falling spending. We in the administration have worked hard to meet the new, earlier deadline for sending this budget to Congress. I hope Congress will work just as hard to meet its required deadlines and not let them slip by, as has happened too many times in the past. And I hope the new Congress will take a constructive approach to this firm but fair budget. We are bound to disagree here and there, but let us work together for the good of the country to iron out our differences. The leadership of the outgoing 99th Congress gave America lower tax rates and began the process of putting the lid on spending. to build on that record and help lead America into the future. I hope they will accept that challenge. Until next week, thanks for listening, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationeconomicgrowthandbudgetreform", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on Economic Growth and Budget Reform", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-economic-growth-and-budget-reform", "publication_date": "13-12-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2389, "text": "We have been friends a long time and, frankly, I had forgotten that I had done some of those things. I congratulate the members of the caucus on 20 years of leadership. I thank Women's Policy Inc. for hosting this event, and I am delighted to be here, not only with the Secretary of State but also with Audrey Haynes, the Director of the White House Office for Women's Initiatives and Outreach, and several other outstanding senior officials of the White House. I, too, want to pay tribute to Margaret Heckler and Elizabeth Holtzman for their vision in creating this office, for the leadership that thank you for the past leadership of Olympia Snowe and Pat Schroeder, Connie Morella and Nita Lowey. And of course, to Nancy Johnson and Eleanor Holmes Norton, who show no lack of energy in pressing your cause with the President. That is about 52 too few. And I was thinking it, too, based on your record. I think the thing that has been overlooked in this whole endeavor of trying to give more sensitivity to issues of special concern to women and trying to give women more opportunities to serve is that we live in an age where every public figure says, as if it were just a cliche, that the most important resource in any human endeavor in the private sector or the public sector is our people. And yet we cavalierly go on, in example after example after example, not giving all our people the chance to live up to the fullest of their God-given capacities and make the greatest service they can to the rest of us to promote the general welfare. I have done what I could to correct that, partly based on the example of my wife, my mother, and my grandmother, and partly because I have known so many of you personally, and partly because it is manifest that we have to find a way to reach across all the lines in our society and lift up everyone to the position of his or her highest and best use and potential. In that connection, I would like to thank the newly confirmed Ambassador to the Vatican, Lindy Boggs, for her willingness to serve. I have been proud to work with you on a lot of issues. Most of them have been mentioned tonightthe family and medical leave law, which has changed more lives than almost any bill that we have passed around here in a long time. Everywhere I go around the country now, people still come up to me and tell me personal stories of how that law changed their lives.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalcaucusforwomensissues", "title": "Remarks to the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-caucus-for-womens-issues", "publication_date": "21-10-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2390, "text": "The Kassebaum-Kennedy bill, the minimum wage, the child care, the adoption tax credit, increased child support enforcement, the family violence initiativesall these things have made a difference. The hand of this caucus was felt heavily in the recent balanced budget, with the single biggest aid to education increase since '65, the biggest increase in aid to children's health since Medicaid in '65, and the children's tax credit. So, the country is in your debt. And I do believe that the bipartisan nature of this caucus has made a profound difference. I know that we are joined tonight by the Democratic leader, Dick Gephardt, and I believe Speaker Gingrich wanted to be here and had to be in Georgia tonight. I know Mr. Gephardt would agree with me that all of us have been impressed by how you are able to stay together, work together, and, in Eleanor's terms, get down to business no matter how crazy things get in this occasionally loony town. And for that, too, we are all in your debt, for you set an example that everyone else should follow. I'd like to talk just a moment about health issues. Hillary mentioned them and has worked on them so hard, and others have mentioned them. The budget not only provided for $24 billion to extend health coverage to 5 million children who do not have it, thus giving greater peace of mind to the parents who are raising them, both as parents and also when they are away at work, it did a lot more for the health of women. It expanded Medicare to cover bone mass measurement for women at risk of osteoporosis. Funding for osteoporosis research has now reached more than $100 million at NIH. It expanded Medicare to cover annual mammograms for all women over the age of 49 and eliminated the copayments to make these examinations more affordable. These were important things, and we have more to do. We have to continue our focus on women's health. Since I took office, funding for breast cancer research, prevention, and treatment has almost doubled, and we have discovered two breast cancer genes, holding great promise for the development of new prevention strategies, something that is profoundly important to all of us who have ever dealt with this in our families. We are unlocking the mysteries of the genetic code and continuing to discover new ways to diagnose and treat genetic disorders.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalcaucusforwomensissues", "title": "Remarks to the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-caucus-for-womens-issues", "publication_date": "21-10-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2391, "text": "But we know that these breakthroughs also bring with them the need for new protections. Studies show the leading reason women do not take advantage of new genetic breast cancer tests is because they fear they will be discriminated in health plans if the tests come out the wrong way. So I want to work with you to get Congress to pass bipartisan legislation that will ban all health plans, group and individual, from denying coverage or raising premiums on the basis of genetic tests. After all, if we can get everybody to take the tests, if they know what they are up against, in the end we will prevent more severe illness, we will reduce cost to the health care system. And we should not punish individuals for doing something that we know is not only in their own interest but is in the interest of society. Also, legislation should prohibit all health plans from disclosing genetic information that could be misused by other insurers. It ought to protect researchers' ability to make the best use of this important tool. So, again, let me applaud those, especially Representative Slaughter and Senator Snowe, for their leadership. Genetic discrimination legislation deserves action now. Let me also say that many of you in this room have contributed to our efforts to support legislation to protect women who have had mastectomies. They should not be forced out of the hospital before they are ready because of pressure from a health plan. It is unacceptable that Congress has not yet held a hearing on the DeLauro-Dingell-Roukema 48-hour mastectomy patient protection bill, and we need to keep pushing for that. And finally, we need to keep breaking down the doors and breaking through the glass ceilings and acting to bring women the full measure of economic and legal equity to which they are entitled. This caucus and our administration, under the leadership of Aida Alvarez, continues to work to counter the effects of discrimination and long-developed networks which hinder the success of women- and minority-owned businesses. I am proud of the fact that the SBA in the last 5 years has tripled the number of loans to women businesses, and I thank you for your support of the disadvantaged business enterprise program, which has successfully increased the percentage of women- and minority-owned construction firms. I am pleased to say that this has now passed both Houses, and I hope you will keep up the fight so that it actually reaches my desk.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalcaucusforwomensissues", "title": "Remarks to the Congressional Caucus for Women's Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-caucus-for-womens-issues", "publication_date": "21-10-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2402, "text": "Later today, I will send a report to the Congress which endorses the recommendations of the bipartisan Commission on Strategic Forces, urges prompt congressional action and support. The actions they propose will preserve stable deterrence and thus protect the peace, and they will add solid incentives and credibility to our efforts to negotiate arms reductions that can pave the way to a more secure and peaceful future. On the 23d of March, I spoke to the American people about our program for strengthening this nation's security and that of our allies and announced a long-term research effort to reduce, someday, the threat posed by nuclear ballistic missiles. A week later in Los Angeles, I expanded our efforts to limit and reduce this danger through reliable, verifiable, and stabilizing arms control agreements. preventing conflict, reducing the risk of war, and safeguarding the peace. Every American President has accepted this crucial objective as his most basic responsibility. Concrete, positive action is required to free the world from the specter of nuclear conflict. And that is why we will continue to work relentlessly to achieve nuclear stability at the lowest possible levels. Our words, policies, and actions all make clear to the world our country's deeply held conviction that nuclear war on any scale would be a tragedy of unparalleled scope. Time and again, America has exercised unilateral restraint, good will, and a sincere commitment to effective arms control. Unfortunately, these actions alone have not yet made us truly safer, and they have not reduced the danger of nuclear war. Over the past year, for example, the Soviets have deployed over 1,200 intercontinental ballistic missile warheads, more than the entire Peacekeeper program. The history of American involvement in arms control shows us what works and what does not work. The fact is that in the past our one-sided restraint and good will failed to promote similar restraint and good will from the Soviet Union. They also failed to produce meaningful arms control. But history also teaches us that when the United States has shown the resolve to remain strong, stabilizing arms control can be achieved. In the late sixties, we made a major effort to negotiate an antiballistic missile treaty with the Soviet Union. After the Soviet leadership demonstrated a clear lack of interest, the Congress agreed to fund an antiballistic missile building program. Once the Soviets knew we were going ahead, they came to the negotiating table, and we negotiated a treaty. It was formally adopted and remains in force today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksendorsingtherecommendationsthereportthepresidentscommissionstrategic", "title": "Remarks Endorsing the Recommendations in the Report of the President's Commission on Strategic Forces", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-endorsing-the-recommendations-the-report-the-presidents-commission-strategic", "publication_date": "19-04-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2403, "text": "Obviously, the best way to nuclear stability and a lasting peace is through negotiations. And this is the course that we have set. And if we demonstrate our resolve, it can lead to success. It was against this background that I established a bipartisan Commission on Strategic Forces last January and directed it to review the strategic program for United States forces with particular emphasis on intercontinental ballistic missile systems and their basing. A distinguished bipartisan panel of Americans who served on the Commission, and those who served as senior counselors, have performed a great service to their country, and we all owe them a debt of gratitude. I want to express my appreciation to you all for a tough job extraordinarily well done. In the finest spirit of bipartisanship, the Commission unanimously arrived at clear, important recommendations on some of the most difficult issues of our time. During the past 3 months, the Commission held dozens of formal meetings and numerous small conferences. They talked to over 200 technical experts and consulted closely with the Congress. to achieve a greater degree of national consensus concerning our approach to strategic force modernization and arms control. As the Constitution's report concludes, If we can begin to see ourselves in dealing with these issues, not as political partisans or as crusaders for one specific solution to a part of this complex set of problems, but rather as citizens of a great nation with the humbling obligation to persevere in the long-run task of preserving both peace and liberty for the world, a common perspective may finally be found. Well, these words guided the work of the Commission. It is my fervent hope that they will guide all of us as we work toward the solution of what has been a difficult and lengthy issue. The Commission has completed its work and last week submitted its report to me. It was immediately released, as you know, to the public. After reviewing the report, I met with the National Security Council. They endorse the Commission's recommendations, as do all the members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. First, the Commission urges us to continue the strategic modernization program which I announced in October of 1981. It reaffirms that the need remains for improvements in the command, control, and communications of our strategic forces, and continuation of our bomber, submarine, and cruise missile program. Second, the Commission urges modernization of our ICBM forces. We should immediately proceed to develop and produce the Peacekeeper missile and deploy 100 in existing Minuteman silos near Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksendorsingtherecommendationsthereportthepresidentscommissionstrategic", "title": "Remarks Endorsing the Recommendations in the Report of the President's Commission on Strategic Forces", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-endorsing-the-recommendations-the-report-the-presidents-commission-strategic", "publication_date": "19-04-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2404, "text": "At the same time, the Commission recommends that we begin engineering the design for a small, singlewarhead missile. If strategic and technical considerations warrant, this missile could be ready for deployment in the early 1990's. Incidentally, this modernization program will save about $1.5 billion in 1984 and even more than that in each of the next 2 years. Third, the Commission recommends major research efforts in strategic defense and a thorough research program of hardening, making our land-based missile systems more secure. This modernization effort is the final component of our comprehensive, strategic program. It will mean a safer, more secure America. And it will provide clear evidence to the Soviet Union that it is in their best interest to negotiate with us in good faith and with seriousness of purpose. That adds up to an important incentive for both arms control and deterrence, for peace and security now and far into the future. Finally, the Commission underscores the need for ambitious arms control negotiations, negotiations that would lead to agreements that are balanced, promote stability in time of crisis, and result in meaningful, verifiable reductions. These are precisely the objectives of our arms control proposals now on the table in Geneva. These are-well, I want to reemphasize that we are in Geneva seeking equitable, reliable agreements that would bring real reductions. So, the task before us is to demonstrate our resolve, our national will, and our good faith. That is absolutely essential both for maintaining an effective deterrent and for achieving successful arms reductions. Make no mistake, unless we modernize our landbased missile systems, the Soviet Union will have no real reason to negotiate meaningful reductions. If we fail to act, we cannot reasonably expect an acceptable outcome in our arms control negotiations, and we will also weaken the deterrent posture that has preserved the peace for more than a generation. Therefore, I urge the Congress to join me now in supporting this bipartisan program to pursue arms control agreements that promote stability, to meet the needs of our ICBM force today, and to move to a more stable ICBM structure in the future. To follow up on the Commission's recommendations, I have asked Brent Scowcroft in his capacity as Chairman to keep me closely advised as this issue moves toward resolution, particularly as it relates to arms control. For more than a decade, each of four administrations made proposals for arms control and modernization. Unfortunately, each became embroiled in political controversy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksendorsingtherecommendationsthereportthepresidentscommissionstrategic", "title": "Remarks Endorsing the Recommendations in the Report of the President's Commission on Strategic Forces", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-endorsing-the-recommendations-the-report-the-presidents-commission-strategic", "publication_date": "19-04-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2405, "text": "I want to thank the Democratic and Republican leaders who have come here today to support the Central American-Dominican Republic Free Trade Agreement known as CAFTA. As you can see, there are former Cabinet members of both Republican and Democrat Presidents, former staff members of Republican and Democrat Presidents, people who have said it is time to set aside political differences and focus on this very important trade agreement for the good of our country. And I want to thank you all for coming. I appreciate our visit. I appreciate the chance to hear your point of view about what we need to do together to get this bill passed. I want to thank the members of my Cabinet who are here. I particularly want to say thanks to Ambassador Rob Portman, who is the U.S. Trade Representative. He is the point person in the Bush administration to get this bill passed. He is working smart, and with your help and the help of those on the stage, I am confident that Congress will do the right thing. The reason we are here is because we share an interest in promoting opportunity and prosperity here at home. All of us understand that strengthening our economic ties with our democratic neighbors is a vital issue of national importance. All of us urge Congress to pass the agreement because America has an interest in strengthening democracy and advancing prosperity in our hemisphere. One of the surest ways to strengthen democracy and advance prosperity is by establish a trading system based on clear rules. My predecessors from both parties, former Presidents from both political parties, pursued this goal at all levels-at the global level, at the bilateral level, and at the regional level. Today, CAFTA presents us with an historic opportunity to advance a free and fair trading system that will bring benefits to all sides. I want to thank the members of the diplomatic corps from Central America who have joined us today. These Ambassadors understand what I just said. I said, this trade agreement benefits both sides. It is a good deal for the CAFTA countries, and it is a good deal for America as well. It is a good deal for America because CAFTA will help level the playing field for our goods and services. Under existing rules, nearly 80 percent of imports from Central America and the Dominican Republic already enter the United States duty free. But U.S. exports into the region face heavy tariffs. 80 percent of goods produced in Central America come into our country, come into the United States duty-free. Yet the same is not -it is not the same for American products.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedominicanrepubliccentralamericaunitedstatesfreetradeagreement0", "title": "Remarks on the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dominican-republic-central-america-united-states-free-trade-agreement-0", "publication_date": "23-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2406, "text": "By passing CAFTA, the United States would open up a market of 44 million consumers for our farmers and small-business people and entrepreneurs. By lowering barriers in key segments like textiles, CAFTA will put our region in a better position to compete with low-cost producers in Asia. For the young democracies of Central America and the Dominican Republic, CAFTA would continue the current trade benefits. That means good jobs and higher labor standards for their workers. And because of reduced tariffs on U.S. goods, consumers in these countries would have access to better goods at lower prices. And that brings us a step closer to our goal of an Americas where the opportunities in San Jose, Costa Rica, are as real as they are in San Jose, California. People have got to understand that by promoting policy that will help generate wealth in Central America, we are promoting policy that will mean someone is less- more likely to stay at home to find a job. If you are concerned about immigration to this country, then you must understand that CAFTA and the benefits of CAFTA will help create new opportunity in Central American countries, which will mean someone will be able to find good work at home, somebody will be able to provide for their family at home, as opposed to having to make the long trip to the United States. For the Western Hemisphere, CAFTA would bring the stability and security that can only come from freedom. That is what we are interested in. We are interested in spreading freedom. Today, a part of the world that was once characterized by oppression and military dictatorship sees its future in democratic elections and free and fair trade, and we cannot take these gains for granted. These small nations are making big and brave commitments, and America must continue to support them. And CAFTA is a good way to support them. CAFTA is good for our workers. It is good for our farmers. It is good for our small-business people, but it is equally as good for the folks in Central America. By transforming our hemisphere into a powerful trading area, CAFTA will help promote democracy, security, and prosperity. The United States was built on freedom, and the more of it we have in our own backyard, the freer and safer and more prosperous America will be. The leaders from both parties here today share this vision. These folks, who toiled in the vineyards of good international politics and worked in the White House know exactly what I am talking about.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedominicanrepubliccentralamericaunitedstatesfreetradeagreement0", "title": "Remarks on the Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dominican-republic-central-america-united-states-free-trade-agreement-0", "publication_date": "23-06-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2447, "text": "And Peter, thank you very much for that wonderfully warm introduction and for making me feel so welcome. I loved walking out through that crowd because it gave me a chance to see so many people who have been so supportive over the years, and I am very, very grateful to you. Believe me, I will never forget how I got there. It was good, strong, loyal friends out in the precincts and at dinners like this over the years, and I am very grateful to all of you. May I thank Reverend Gambet for his invocation; it was a unique invocation, and I kind of went along with the last part and could learn from the first part, but -- -- and Malcolm Evans for the national anthem. I missed the Pledge of Allegiance crowd. I hear they were absolutely fantastic, and some of them are back there, but thank you very much for a unique joint Pledge of Allegiance. And I want to thank Peter and David here for making this dinner happen. Of course, Senator Specter, I am just very pleased to have been with him today in what for, I think, both of us was a very moving tour through some of the less privileged, some of the impacted parts of this great city. Larry Coughlin is with us, who is our ENTITY-Quayle cochairman; Congressmen Weldon and Ridge and Ritter, all good people. We have got a great Republican delegation from Pennsylvania, I might add, in the United States Congress. I was delighted to see Barbara Hafer earlier on. And, of course, Governor Mike Castle, an old friend who is done a great job in a neighboring State with us tonight. And I'd be remiss if I did not single out Elsie Hillman, heading the campaign effort here in the Keystone State, and thank Dexter and then, of course, our team of Bobby Holt, Wally Ganzi. And then again, I will single out Dexter, who gets the star seat. He gets to sit next to Elsie, and that means he sold more tickets than anybody else. And, of course, Charlie, Charlie Kopp, he is a fundraising czar. And he is very successful -- so successful that he did not have to go to our dog Millie for a single dime. You may have seen our income tax returns, and you can tell who earns the money in the family. Millie is not a fat cat, but nevertheless has done a great job as our dog.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushquaylefundraisingdinnerphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Quayle Fundraising Dinner in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-quayle-fundraising-dinner-philadelphia", "publication_date": "11-05-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2448, "text": "And I want to share with you just some observations. This is a year where you are hearing a lot of talk about change. And I would be the first to concede that we must make significant change in this country. I hear a lot of talk about it coming out of the political arena, but we have been trying to effect constructive change. I came back from a very moving visit to Los Angeles; we got back Friday evening. And let me just give you a short report of what I saw and what I heard. Each one of us saw the images of hate and horror. That was all around you, images that we will not soon forget. But what I saw during my time in Los Angeles, even in the hardest hit parts of south central L.A., should give us some cause for hope. Everywhere, the people I talked with told about acts of individual heroism, about the extraordinary courage of just plain ordinary people. And some braved the gang of looters to form these bucket brigades to put out fires when the firetrucks could not get through. And then some stood up in the face of angry mobs and reached across the barrier of color to save lives of their fellow men and women. And many of these are not the stories that you will see on the nightly news. But believe me, they are the stories that tell us the power of simple human decency. What it tells me is that the time has come to set the old, worn-out ideas aside. And the time has come, in the words of Abraham Lincoln, to think anew and to act anew. And we start with the principles at the heart of this great Republican Party, principles that tell us something very obvious, and that is that we ought to keep the power close to the people, that we have got to strengthen families. I will never forget when Tom Bradley, the Mayor of Los Angeles, and others came to see me, large-city mayors, small-city mayors, Republicans, Democrats, liberals and conservatives joined, their National League of Cities. And they came and they said the one thing that united them in terms that they all agreed on was that the fundamental problem that the decline of the American family is causing in the cities. The prime cause of much of the unrest, the problems of crime, whatever, comes from the dissolution of the American family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushquaylefundraisingdinnerphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Quayle Fundraising Dinner in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-quayle-fundraising-dinner-philadelphia", "publication_date": "11-05-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2449, "text": "And we think we have got to find ways to strengthen that, instill character and values in our young people; that we must encourage entrepreneurship, ownership, increase investment, and create jobs. Now, these aims have got to form the heart of our agenda for economic opportunity, an agenda that can literally restore hope, cannot solve the problem overnight but restore hope to our inner cities. And they define what we must do. First, and let us be very clear on this one, we have got to preserve order. We have got to keep the peace because families cannot thrive, children cannot live, and jobs cannot flourish in a climate of fear. And I support the police. I saw the commissioner here today, had a great -- I see Governor Martinez, the head of our drug effort, here with him. He and I were together with the Senator and others. And I told the commissioner and told the people out here, We support your efforts. They put themselves in harm's way to save all of us. And we must start by standing strongly for order and keeping the peace. Now, those thoughts were foremost in my mind from the first hours of the violence in Los Angeles. A civilized society simply cannot tackle any of the really tough problems in the midst of chaos. Violence and brutality destroy order. They destroy the rule of law. And it must be condemned, violence, whenever you find it; we must condemn it as a society. When I was out in Los Angeles, I called a woman that had been a member of our little church in Houston, Texas, St. Martin's Parish. I'd got a message to call her. I called her, and she told me a tragic story of her brother and her son. They had gotten a call from a neighbor, a minority, a member of a minority group, and they'd climbed on their motorcycle and driven down to see this person. On the way, their motorcycle was surrounded by a gang. Somebody put a gun up to this kid's head, pulled the trigger, and it did not go off. He was beaten, and they put a gun up to his head, and he was killed right on the spot. This did not have anything to do with Rodney King. This did not have anything to do with anything other than wanton violence. We simply cannot be asked to condone that in our society.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushquaylefundraisingdinnerphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Quayle Fundraising Dinner in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-quayle-fundraising-dinner-philadelphia", "publication_date": "11-05-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2450, "text": "In Los Angeles, I announced an addition to a program that is already at work here in Philadelphia, an exciting program that we saw today, an initiative that I call Weed and Seed. The idea is to weed out the gang leaders and drug dealers and career criminals and then seed the community with expanded employment, educational, and social services. So we are going to push for that. I am going to push and try to see that we can do more for the American people with this innovative new program. Secondly, we must spark an economic revival in urban America. The best answer to poverty is a job with dignity in the private sector, and that means establishing what we call enterprise zones in our inner cities. It means reforming our welfare system, putting an end to the pervasive disincentives that encourage welfare and discourage work. Thirdly, we have got to revolutionize American education. I might add, parenthetically, that I wish Barbara was here to see what you are doing with this show of support for literacy. Notebaert, wherever he may be, I would like to make this contribution. I am not trying to sell this. This is Millie's Book, and we want to donate this here as a contribution from the breadwinner in the Bush family. So please, we want the record to show we brought a book in. Now, we have a good education program. It burns me up when I hear some of the old thinkers, the pass-the-mandated-Federal-program thinkers, criticize. We have a program called America 2000. It is an innovative strategy, and it has things in it like choice. You can choose your colleges; why not choose your schools and thus make them more competitive? Competition, community action, all of these things are a part of it. Children in our inner cities deserve the same opportunities that kids in the suburbs have, and that is what a lot of that program is about. That means we have got to break the power of the establishment, the education establishment. And whether it is public or private or religious, parents, not the government, should be free to choose their children's schools. I am going to fight for that concept. Then another ingredient of our urban policy, and one I have been trying to get through for a long time, is homeownership. And I have never understood how anyone could be content with the present system, to take pride in the warehousing of the poor.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushquaylefundraisingdinnerphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Quayle Fundraising Dinner in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-quayle-fundraising-dinner-philadelphia", "publication_date": "11-05-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2451, "text": "The aim behind our HOPE initiative is to give poor families a stake, give them a stake in their communities, to give them something of value they can pass along to their kids, by turning public housing tenants into homeowners. And we are going to fight for that principle. At every turn during my time in L.A., I heard people talking about the principles that guide these initiatives. These were people that were out there on the front line trying to help the kids. Personal responsibility, that was one; opportunity; ownership; independence; and then, of course, with great pride, dignity. And you know the sound of those words. It really adds up to the American dream. And we all know what the critics will say, and you have heard it. They will say, Well, you have proposed all this before, ENTITY. But now it is time to act on these proposals because this time they know we are right. We are right, and we want to get it passed through the Congress. Tomorrow I will be meeting with the leaders to try to get it done. It is no longer good enough to try the old ones. Let us try these new ideas and see if they cannot help some of the kids that we saw today here in Philadelphia. My first order of business is, then, to build a bipartisan effort in support of immediate action on this agenda. We will not settle for business-as-usual, measuring what we achieve by the size of the bureaucracy we build or the number of mandated programs we can send down to these communities who are crying out for flexibility. This time, we have got to put our principles to work and take the case for change directly to the American people. What is going on in urban America is just one part, though, of a larger issue because the need for reform does not end simply with our inner cities. It starts with the revolution in American education that I mentioned. America 2000, we call it. It starts with that. When you get down to what we have got to do really to be competitive in the future, to offer kids an opportunity, it is education. And it includes our aggressive action, also, to break down barriers to free trade. In each case, we have taken aim at the status quo, and we have set our sights on change. That is why I am fighting hard for a GATT agreement.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushquaylefundraisingdinnerphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Quayle Fundraising Dinner in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-quayle-fundraising-dinner-philadelphia", "publication_date": "11-05-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2452, "text": "That is why we have proposed and are working with Mexico's able President, Carlos Salinas, to try to get a North American free trade agreement. It will mean more jobs for the United States, more jobs for Mexico, and a Mexico much better able to do what it must do with its environment and do what it must do in controlling its own borders. America needs legal reform to put an end to these outrageous court awards that sap our economy and strain our civility. We have gotten to a point where doctors will not deliver babies, where fathers are afraid to coach Little League, all because of the fear of some frivolous lawsuit. That will not change until people spend less time suing each other and more time helping each other. And we have got to change the laws in Washington. We must and we will reform the legal system. Now, we need health care reform and to open up access to affordable health care for all Americans. I was talking to Charlie about this a little earlier here. It used to be that going to the hospital did not conjure up visions of financial suicide. Today, the cost of even minor surgery has gone right out through the roof. More than 30 million Americans have no health care coverage at all. We can change that. And we can do it better than some of these nationalized programs that we are hearing about from the opposition. We have a comprehensive health care reform plan that will help us keep the quality health care. Make no mistake about it, people are still pouring into the United States for specialized care because they know we have the best quality health care in the entire world. So we want to keep the quality health care that makes us first in the world and at the same time open up access to all Americans. Contrary to what the big Government folks say, we can do it without putting the Government in charge of everybody's health care. If you want to stand in line, you can go to the department of motor vehicles. You do not need to go for a nationalized health care program. Let us face it, national health care, in my view, literally would be a costly national disaster, and I am not going to let that happen. We are going to fight for our plan of reform that gives access to insurance to the poor and the middle-income people alike. That is what we need, and that is what I believe we will be able to get when we take this case to the American people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushquaylefundraisingdinnerphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Quayle Fundraising Dinner in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-quayle-fundraising-dinner-philadelphia", "publication_date": "11-05-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2453, "text": "So far, I have spoken a little bit about what Government can do. So let me conclude by speaking about what society absolutely must do. Because there is something society must cultivate that Government cannot provide, something we cannot legislate, something that we cannot make happen by Government order. I am talking about the moral sense that guides us all. In the simplest of terms -- you want to get it to fundamentals -- I am talking about knowing right from wrong and then doing what is right. You go back to Los Angeles for a minute. Time and again the people I met with there put their finger on one root cause for the turmoil we see, and that, of course, back to the point, the dissolution of the family. What is the determining fact right now for whether a child has hope, stays in school, stays away from drugs? It is not the number of SBA loans or HUD grants. It is whether a child lives in a loving home with a mother and a father. Barbara Bush was absolutely right when she said, What happens in the White House does not matter half as much as what happens in your house. We have tried, both of us, augmented by tons of grandchildren, et cetera, to put the emphasis on American family, put that emphasis first. Everybody here devoting some time to helping someone else in the community. The people who help the poor, the elderly, kids in trouble, and never ask a nickel in return. Government alone simply cannot create the scale and the energy needed to transform the lives of people in need. Let the cynics scoff about it, but we know these volunteers are the lifeblood of the American spirit. Community action. It was a wonderful thing we saw right here in some of the most impoverished areas of Philadelphia. Government has a role, but it never can supplant the propensity of one American to help another. So we have got to find ways to help in that concept and help encourage it. I believe there is a great future in store because I believe that all of these principles will be coming into focus now. I believe we are right about family. I think we are right about freedom and free enterprise, and I think we are right about faith. Most of all, I think we are right about America's future. You know, we have been through a very tough time. I have a feeling this thing is beginning to move a little bit, and it is long overdue.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushquaylefundraisingdinnerphiladelphia", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Quayle Fundraising Dinner in Philadelphia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-quayle-fundraising-dinner-philadelphia", "publication_date": "11-05-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2454, "text": "GOOD MORNING, I am glad that you could come over and visit with us. And I am happy to welcome you to the Capital and to the White House. I want to commend the American Legion for giving you young Americans a chance to learn at firsthand about your Government. I want to speak to you today because you are young and because you have lives to live. Many of you may be looking forward to careers in business. I would like you to consider an investment. I would ask you, after you have completed your education, to give careful consideration to the investment of a few years of your lives in the business of government, in the work of public service, in the cause of America. Our country needs men and women who are young--and young enough to dream of remaking America--as some of us did here in this Capital when I came here more than 30 years ago. We need young people who are confident in themselves and in their ability to meet the challenges that face us today. We need young people who care--and who are willing to work for something that is more than just a paycheck--for profits measured in human happiness and satisfaction gained from helping people to achieve human health and human dignity. So, I ask that you consider applying yourselves, your industry, your brains, your talent, and your imagination to the problems of the land in which you live. What is man born for but to be a reformer; a remaker of what man has made; a restorer of truth and good. America has always been a nation of reformers. And we have always been a people who knew and who accepted the responsibilities that that role demands. It is to be a remaker--not a wrecker--of what man has made. It is to be a restorer--not a destroyer--of truth and good. It is, beyond all else, to respect the laws of society--to rebuild society by changing laws, yes, by improving laws, yes, by using the laws--lest we accidentally or willfully weaken the foundations of law and bring all that we have achieved crashing down upon our heads. We have been through great trials in the history of this Nation. We have faced problems and challenges before. And in one of our gravest hours, one of our greatest Presidents left us the first commandment for a civilized society.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedelegatesboysnation", "title": "Remarks to the Delegates to Boys Nation.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-delegates-boys-nation", "publication_date": "26-07-1967", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2455, "text": "Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well wisher to his posterity... never to violate in the least particular, the laws of the country . . . let every man remember that to violate the law, is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own, and his children's liberty. Let reverence for the laws, be breathed by every American . . . let it be taught in schools, in seminaries, and in colleges;--let it be written in Primmers, spelling books, and in Almanacs;--let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice. And, in short, let it become the political religion of the nation; and let the old and the young, the rich and the poor, the grave and the gay, of all sexes and tongues, and colors and conditions, sacrifice unceasingly upon its altars. So, your role can be not only to respect the law, but to make it a living thing, make it more just, make it more effective. We have our job cut out for us. It is ahead of us. We have cities to rebuild. We have economy to maintain. We have children to teach. We have old people to care for. We have young people to find jobs for. We have human rights to protect and to enlarge. We have land to conserve and air and water to clean, and a whole world to guard, and liberty and freedom to preserve. Who will do these things? Who can we look to to get this job done in the years ahead? You--and young men like you-your brothers, even those who today may feel that they do not have a very big stake in our society. Even though sometimes you may feel you have no role to play in making it more just, the challenge is there waiting for you. I am depending upon you. You may choose to work in the great world of Washington. You may elect to be leaders in your own communities back home. But the arena of action is not so important. The need for leadership--for commitment and responsibility--is upon us. That need is the same in every State in this land. It will always be your challenge, your opportunity, your responsibility, if you will only face up to and use it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedelegatesboysnation", "title": "Remarks to the Delegates to Boys Nation.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-delegates-boys-nation", "publication_date": "26-07-1967", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2458, "text": "One of the biggest challenges of this recession has been its impact on State and local communities. With so many Americans unemployed or struggling to get by, States have been forced to balance their budgets with fewer tax dollars, which means that they have got to cut critical services and lay off teachers and police officers and firefighters. Now, it is one thing for States to get their fiscal houses in order and tighten their belts like families across America. Because families have been doing it, there is no reason that States cannot do it too. But we cannot stand by and do nothing while pink slips are given to the men and women who educate our children or keep our communities safe. That does not make sense. And that is why a significant part of the economic plan that we passed last year provided relief for struggling States, relief that has already prevented hundreds of thousands of layoffs. And that is why today we are trying to pass a law that will save hundreds of thousands of additional jobs in the coming year. It will help States avoid laying off police officers, firefighters, nurses, and first-responders. And it will save the jobs of teachers like the ones who are standing with me today. If we do nothing, these educators will not be returning to the classroom this fall. And that will not just deprive them of a paycheck, it will deprive the children and parents who are counting on them to provide a decent education. It means that students in Illinois and West Virginia who count on Rachel and Shannon are going to be not getting the education that they deserve. It will deprive countless cities and towns of the law enforcement officials and first-responders who risk their lives to keep us out of harm's way. It will cost us jobs at a time when we need to be creating jobs. In other words, it will take us backwards at a time when we need to keep this country moving forward. Now, this proposal is fully paid for, in part by closing tax loopholes that encourage corporations to ships American jobs overseas. So it will not add to our deficit. And the money will only go toward saving the jobs of teachers and other essential professionals. I heard the Republican leader in the House say the other day that this is a special interest bill. And I suppose if America's children and the safety of our communities are your special interests, then it is a special interest bill. But I think those interests are widely shared throughout this country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslegislationcreatingtheeducationjobsfund", "title": "Remarks on Legislation Creating the Education Jobs Fund", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-legislation-creating-the-education-jobs-fund", "publication_date": "10-08-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2459, "text": "It is with a great deal of pleasure that I, on behalf of the people of our country, welcome to the United States a distinguished visitor, Prime Minister Nouira from Tunisia, who comes here representing a great country which has close and longstanding ties of friendship and common purpose with the people of our Nation. Ever since Tunisia won its independence under the inspired leadership of President Bourguiba, the relations between the two nations have grown ever closer. We share common purposes, common ideals, common hopes, and a common future. This has been especially true during the last 8 years, since Mr. Nouira because Prime Minister of Tunisia. I think among all those nations who have had a close economic aid relationship with the United States, Tunisia has excelled in the rapid technological and economic development among their people. They have made full and increasing use of the great natural resources and human resources of their country. And along with this economic development has come a very rapid evolution into a leadership role among the developing nations of the world, the Arab community, and within the United Nations especially. So, the political and economic leadership which has exemplified Tunisia's role accurately expresses the strength and the purpose, the innovation and commitment of the people of that great country. Tunisia is recognized as having a government and leaders that are at the same time practical and effective and idealistic and never deviating from proper principles of government. This leadership under Prime Minister Nouira and President Bourguiba has also been exemplified by great courage. As a member of the Arab nation community, as far back as 1965, President Bourguiba called for a recognition of Israel, its right to exist, its right to be recognized as a nation. We have received good advice, good counsel, good support from Tunisia during our own times of effort to bring peace to the Middle East and to the northern portion of the continent of Africa. I am looking forward to my opportunity today to discuss with the Prime Minister these same concerns that we share and the same prospects for further progress in the future. We also are exploring ways for increased economic cooperation, military counsel and communication, the sharing, for both peace and security, agricultural development in Tunisia and cultural exchange. At the same time we have Peace Corps volunteers in Tunisia teaching English and performing' other roles, there are volunteers from Tunisia now working in Louisiana, teaching French. This is typical of the human, economic, and political interrelationships that exist between our countries.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsvisitprimeministerhedinouiratunisiaremarksthewelcomingceremony", "title": "Visit of Prime Minister Hedi Nouira of Tunisia Remarks at the Welcoming Ceremony.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/visit-prime-minister-hedi-nouira-tunisia-remarks-the-welcoming-ceremony", "publication_date": "29-11-1978", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2486, "text": "I want to thank you for your welcome. Laura and I are especially honored to visit this great institution in your bicentennial year. In every corner of America, the words West Point command immediate respect. This place where the Hudson River bends is more than a fine institution of learning. The United States Military Academy is the guardian of values that have shaped the soldiers who have shaped the history of the world. A few of you have followed in the path of the perfect West Point graduate Robert E. Lee, who never received a single demerit in 4 years. Some of you followed in the path of the imperfect graduate Ulysses S. Grant, who had his fair share of demerits and said the happiest day of his life was the day I left West Point. During my college years, I guess you could say I was-- during my college years, I guess you could say I was a Grant man. You walk in the tradition of Eisenhower and MacArthur, Patton and Bradley-the commanders who saved a civilization. And you walk in the tradition of second lieutenants who did the same by fighting and dying on distant battlefields. Graduates of this Academy have brought creativity and courage to every field of endeavor. West Point produced the chief engineer of the Panama Canal, the mind behind the Manhattan Project, the first American to walk in space. This fine institution gave us the man they say invented baseball and other young men over the years who perfected the game of football. You know this, but many in America do not I want an officer for a secret and dangerous mission. I want a West Point football player. being a plebe. But even a plebe at West Point is made to feel he or she has some standing in the world. Sir, the Superintendent's dog--the Commandant's cat, and all the admirals in the whole damn Navy. I probably will not be sharing that with the Secretary of the Navy. West Point is guided by tradition, and in honor of the Golden Children of the Corps, I will observe one of the traditions you cherish most. As the Commander in Chief, I hereby grant amnesty to all cadets who are on restriction for minor conduct offenses. Those of you in the end zone might have cheered a little early--because, you see, I am going to let General Lennox define exactly what minor means. Every West Point class is commissioned to the Armed Forces.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresstheunitedstatesmilitaryacademywestpointnewyork1", "title": "Commencement Address at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-the-united-states-military-academy-west-point-new-york-1", "publication_date": "01-06-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2487, "text": "Some West Point classes are also commissioned by history to take part in a great new calling for their country. Speaking here to the class of 1942, 6 months after Pearl Harbor, General Marshall said, We are determined that before the Sun sets on this terrible struggle, our flag will be recognized throughout the world as a symbol of freedom on the one hand and of overwhelming power on the other. Officers graduating that year helped fulfill that mission, defeating Japan and Germany and then reconstructing those nations as allies. West Point graduates of the 1940s saw the rise of a deadly new challenge-the challenge of imperial communism-and opposed it from Korea to Berlin to Vietnam, and in the cold war from beginning to end. And as the Sun set on their struggle, many of those West Point officers lived to see a world transformed. History has also issued its call to your generation. In your last year, America was attacked by a ruthless and resourceful enemy. You graduate from this Academy in a time of war, taking your place in an American military that is powerful and is honorable. Our war on terror is only begun, but in Afghanistan it was begun well. I am proud of the men and women who have fought on my orders. America is profoundly grateful for all who serve the cause of freedom and for all who have given their lives in its defense. This Nation respects and trusts our military, and we are confident in your victories to come. This war will take many turns we cannot predict. Wherever we carry it, the American flag will stand not only for our power but for freedom. Our Nation's cause has always been larger than our Nation's defense. We fight, as we always fight, for a just peace, a peace that favors human liberty. We will defend the peace against threats from terrorists and tyrants. We will preserve the peace by building good relations among the great powers. And we will extend the peace by encouraging free and open societies on every continent. From this day forward, it is your challenge as well, and we will meet this challenge together. You will wear the uniform of a great and unique country. America has no empire to extend or utopia to establish. We wish for others only what we wish for ourselves, safety from violence, the rewards of liberty, and the hope for a better life. In defending the peace, we face a threat with no precedent. Enemies in the past needed great armies and great industrial capabilities to endanger the American people and our Nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresstheunitedstatesmilitaryacademywestpointnewyork1", "title": "Commencement Address at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-the-united-states-military-academy-west-point-new-york-1", "publication_date": "01-06-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2488, "text": "The attacks of September the 11th required a few hundred thousand dollars in the hands of a few dozen evil and deluded men. All of the chaos and suffering they caused came at much less than the cost of a single tank. This Government and the American people are on watch. We are ready, because we know the terrorists have more money and more men and more plans. The gravest danger to freedom lies at the perilous crossroads of radicalism and technology. When the spread of chemical and biological and nuclear weapons, along with ballistic missile technology-when that occurs, even weak states and small groups could attain a catastrophic power to strike great nations. Our enemies have declared this very intention and have been caught seeking these terrible weapons. They want the capability to blackmail us or to harm us or to harm our friends, and we will oppose them with all our power. For much of the last century, America's defense relied on the cold war doctrines of deterrence and containment. In some cases, those strategies still apply, but new threats also require new thinking. Deterrence-the promise of massive retaliation against nations-means nothing against shadowy terrorist networks with no nation or citizens to defend. Containment is not possible when unbalanced dictators with weapons of mass destruction can deliver those weapons on missiles or secretly provide them to terrorist allies. We cannot defend America and our friends by hoping for the best. We cannot put our faith in the word of tyrants who solemnly sign nonproliferation treaties and then systemically break them. Homeland defense and missile defense are part of stronger security; they are essential priorities for America. Yet, the war on terror will not be won on the defensive. We must take the battle to the enemy, disrupt his plans, and confront the worst threats before they emerge. In the world we have entered, the only path to safety is the path of action, and this Nation will act. Our security will require the best intelligence to reveal threats hidden in caves and growing in laboratories. Our security will require modernizing domestic agencies such as the FBI, so they are prepared to act and act quickly against danger. Our security will require transforming the military you will lead, a military that must be ready to strike at a moment's notice in any dark corner of the world. And our security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresstheunitedstatesmilitaryacademywestpointnewyork1", "title": "Commencement Address at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-the-united-states-military-academy-west-point-new-york-1", "publication_date": "01-06-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2489, "text": "We must uncover terror cells in 60 or more countries, using every tool of finance, intelligence, and law enforcement. Along with our friends and allies, we must oppose proliferation and confront regimes that sponsor terror, as each case requires. Some nations need military training to fight terror, and we will provide it. Other nations oppose terror but tolerate the hatred that leads to terror, and that must change. We will send diplomats where they are needed, and we will send you, our soldiers, where you are needed. All nations that decide for aggression and terror will pay a price. We will not leave the safety of America and the peace of the planet at the mercy of a few mad terrorists and tyrants. We will lift this dark threat from our country and from the world. Because the war on terror will require resolve and patience, it will also require firm moral purpose. In this way our struggle is similar to the cold war. Now, as then, our enemies are totalitarians, holding a creed of power with no place for human dignity. Now, as then, they seek to impose a joyless conformity, to control every life and all of life. America confronted imperial communism in many different ways, diplomatic, economic, and military. Yet, moral clarity was essential to our victory in the cold war. When leaders like John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan refused to gloss over the brutality of tyrants, they gave hope to prisoners and dissidents and exiles and rallied free nations to a great cause. Some worry that it is somehow undiplomatic or impolite to speak the language of right and wrong. Different circumstances require different methods but not different moralities. Moral truth is the same in every culture, in every time, and in every place. Brutality against women is always and everywhere wrong. We are in a conflict between good and evil, and America will call evil by its name. By confronting evil and lawless regimes, we do not create a problem; we reveal a problem. And we will lead the world in opposing it. As we defend the peace, we also have an historic opportunity to preserve the peace. We have our best chance since the rise of the nation-state in the 17th century to build a world where the great powers compete in peace instead of prepare for war. The history of the last century, in particular, was dominated by a series of destructive national rivalries that left battlefields and graveyards across the Earth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresstheunitedstatesmilitaryacademywestpointnewyork1", "title": "Commencement Address at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-the-united-states-military-academy-west-point-new-york-1", "publication_date": "01-06-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2490, "text": "Germany fought France, the Axis fought the Allies, and then the East fought the West, in proxy wars and tense standoffs, against a backdrop of nuclear Armageddon. Competition between great nations is inevitable, but armed conflict in our world is not. More and more, civilized nations find ourselves on the same side, united by common dangers of terrorist violence and chaos. America has and intends to keep military strengths beyond challenge, thereby making the destabilizing arms races of other eras pointless and limiting rivalries to trade and other pursuits of peace. Today, the great powers are also increasingly united by common values, instead of divided by conflicting ideologies. The United States, Japan, and our Pacific friends, and now all of Europe, share a deep commitment to human freedom, embodied in strong alliances such as NATO. And the tide of liberty is rising in many other nations. Generations of West Point officers planned and practiced for battles with Soviet Russia. I have just returned from a new Russia, now a country reaching toward democracy and our partner in the war against terror. Even in China, leaders are discovering that economic freedom is the only lasting source of national wealth. In time, they will find that social and political freedom is the only true source of national greatness. When the great powers share common values, we are better able to confront serious regional conflicts together, better able to cooperate in preventing the spread of violence or economic chaos. In the past, great power rivals took sides in difficult regional problems, making divisions deeper and more complicated. Today, from the Middle East to South Asia, we are gathering broad international coalitions to increase the pressure for peace. We must build strong and great power relations when times are good to help manage crisis when times are bad. America needs partners to preserve the peace, and we will work with every nation that shares this noble goal. And finally, America stands for more than the absence of war. We have a great opportunity to extend a just peace by replacing poverty, repression, and resentment around the world with hope of a better day. Through most of history, poverty was persistent, inescapable, and almost universal. In the last few decades, we have seen nations from Chile to South Korea build modern economies and freer societies, lifting millions of people out of despair and want.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresstheunitedstatesmilitaryacademywestpointnewyork1", "title": "Commencement Address at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-the-united-states-military-academy-west-point-new-york-1", "publication_date": "01-06-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2491, "text": "The 20th century ended with a single surviving model of human progress, based on nonnegotiable demands of human dignity, the rule of law, limits on the power of the state, respect for women, and private property and free speech and equal justice and religious tolerance. America cannot impose this vision, yet we can support and reward governments that make the right choices for their own people. In our development aid, in our diplomatic efforts, in our international broadcasting, and in our educational assistance, the United States will promote moderation and tolerance and human rights. And we will defend the peace that makes all progress possible. When it comes to the common rights and needs of men and women, there is no clash of civilizations. The requirements of freedom apply fully to Africa and Latin America and the entire Islamic world. The peoples of the Islamic nations want and deserve the same freedoms and opportunities as people in every nation. And their governments should listen to their hopes. A truly strong nation will permit legal avenues of dissent for all groups that pursue their aspirations without violence. An advancing nation will pursue economic reform, to unleash the great entrepreneurial energy of its people. A thriving nation will respect the rights of women, because no society can prosper while denying opportunity to half its citizens. In poverty, they struggle; in tyranny, they suffer; and as we saw in Afghanistan, in liberation, they celebrate. America has a greater objective than controlling threats and containing resentment. We will work for a just and peaceful world beyond the war on terror. The bicentennial class of West Point now enters this drama. With all in the United States ENTITY, you will stand between your fellow citizens and grave danger. You will help establish a peace that allows millions around the world to live in liberty and to grow in prosperity. You will face times of calm and times of crisis, and every test will find you prepared, because you are the men and women of West Point. You leave here marked by the character of this Academy, carrying with you the highest ideals of our Nation. Toward the end of his life, Dwight Eisenhower recalled the first day he stood on the plain at West Point. The feeling came over me, he said, that the expression 'the United States of America' would now and henceforth mean something different than it had ever before. Today, your last day at West Point, you begin a life of service in a career unlike any other. You have answered a calling to hardship and purpose, to risk and honor.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresstheunitedstatesmilitaryacademywestpointnewyork1", "title": "Commencement Address at the United States Military Academy in West Point, New York", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-the-united-states-military-academy-west-point-new-york-1", "publication_date": "01-06-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2492, "text": "Over a month ago, Speaker Newt Gingrich and I met with a group of senior citizens in Claremont, New Hampshire. That sunlit event had a special spirit. We showed that the great debate now occurring in our country can and should be conducted with civility and a sense of common ground. Many Americans of both parties have told me since then that this is exactly the way they want their leaders to work together. And that is what I am committed to doing. Perhaps the most visible example of that spirit of New Hampshire came when the Speaker and I shook hands on the question of political reform, something that has divided the two parties and the Congress and the country for too long. The first question we answered was from a retired steelworker named Frank McConnell. He said that politics had become polluted by special interests and that too often the voice of the people was shut out. He said that bickering between the parties had blocked reform for too long, and he proposed that we create a blueribbon, bipartisan commission to write reforms to curb the power of special interests. There, in front of the entire country, the Speaker and I agreed to create this commission. A bipartisan commission could cut the knot that is strangling change. This panel would follow the approach that has worked on other critical issues. It would be comprised of distinguished citizens and would recommend broad changes in the rules which cover lobbyists and in how we finance political campaigns. Most important of all, the Congress would have to vote within a strict deadline, up or down, on the the package as a whole, no loopholes, no amendments. I am happy to report that in addition to myself and Speaker Gingrich, this very idea has been strongly endorsed for some time by Senate majority leader Bob Dole, who just last February said again that this was the way we ought to approach this question. It is clearer than ever that we need political reform. The American people believe their political system is too influenced by narrow interests, that our Government serves the powerful but not hard-working families. Even before the '94 elections, the special interests prevented passage of both campaign finance reform and lobby reform legislation that I had strongly asked the Congress to pass. When a minority in the Senate killed lobbying reform in 1994, lobbyists were standing right outside the Senate chamber cheering. Since the New Congress came in, I am sad to say, it is gotten worse, for even more power has been given to the lobbyists.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress310", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-310", "publication_date": "22-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2493, "text": "Now this new majority lets lobbyists for polluters write legislation rolling back environmental and public health protections. They have brought them in to explain the legislation. They even gave them a room off the House floor to write the amendments and the statements the Members would have to give explaining the bills that the lobbyists had written for them. Since things have gotten in this state, it was a real moment of hope when the Speaker and I shook hands on reform in New Hampshire. Just 5 days later, I sent Speaker Gingrich a letter laying out in detail my ideas for how to move forward. The Speaker announced that he would send me his proposal, but he never has. I think the people of this country want us to move forward with political reform. Speaker Gingrich and I shook hands on it. We have an obligation to get this done and not walk away. We have to be as good as our word. Today, to move this process forward, I am announcing that two distinguished Americans have agreed to work with me to get the commission idea underway. They are the kind of people I will appoint as its members. John Gardner's name is synonymous with integrity. He is a Republican Cabinet Secretary to a Democratic President, the founder of the citizens' lobby Common Cause, a wise and effective man. She understands through her knowledge of history and today's political situation how politics affects the lives of ordinary people. I have asked John Gardner and Doris Kearns Goodwin to meet with Speaker Gingrich as soon as possible and the other congressional leaders, to get them going on this idea so that we can make this commission a reality and keep our commitment to the Frank McConnells and all the other Americans who want us to improve the way our political system works. John Gardner and Doris Kearns Goodwin will help us to get this movement going. And now I call on Speaker Gingrich and the other congressional leaders to come forward and do their part. The Speaker and I made a deal, and it is time to keep it. We already have signs of bipartisan agreement. On Monday, the Senate begins to debate on legislation to require lobbyists to disclose who they are, what they are paid, and what bills they are trying to influence. And the Senate will vote on legislation to ban lobbyists from providing lawmakers meals or gifts or travel. If a judge took a paid vacation from a lawyer in his courtroom, he'd be disbarred.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress310", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-310", "publication_date": "22-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2494, "text": "May I salute Secretary Ed Derwinski, Reverend Morgan, and most of all, fellow veterans. From this sacred ground near the waters of Pearl Harbor, we remember the moment when the Pacific Ocean erupted in a storm of fire and blood. We remember a morning when America, where some thought isolation meant security, awoke wounded, and reeling, plunged into a desperate fight for world freedom. I remember the crackle of the radio and the voice of our President. We are going to win the war, FDR told us, and we are going to win the peace that follows. We won the war and secured the peace because American men and women responded bravely and instinctively to their Nation's call. They fought for their family and friends, defending the land they loved. When torpedoes crippled the U.S.S. California's ammunition hoists, Warrant Officer Thomas Reeves stood in a smoke-filled passageway and organized a human supply chain to move the ammunition. He worked with all his might till the smoke overcame him. He died that day aboard California, and he rests today in this cemetery. During the attack, Chief Boatswain Eddie Hill of the U.S.S. Nevada swam from the dock back out to his ship, ignoring the bombs falling all around him. He, too, died in the attack and rests here. The Bible says, Love is strong as death. that is the truth whispered by these rows of markers. I remember Ernie Pyle, and I will bet everybody behind me and in front of me remembers Ernie Pyle, too. The greatest of war correspondents, he fell to the enemy machinegun fire on Ie Shima. He lies here in this cemetery among the GI's he loved and honored so well. His plain-spoken news dispatches from the front reminded us that behind the battle statistics were true-life stories of how boys became men and men became heroes. He told us what was happening in the war, how our men were fighting. And by telling the stories of our servicemen to their hometowns and neighborhoods, he helped us understand why we were fighting, how our men at arms defended with all their hearts America's deepest ideals. Americans did not wage war against nations or races. We fought for freedom and human dignity against the nightmare of totalitarianism. The world must never forget that the dictatorships we fought, the Hitler and Tojo regimes, committed war crimes and atrocities.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepearlharborsurvivorsassociationhonoluluhawaii", "title": "Remarks to the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association in Honolulu, Hawaii", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-pearl-harbor-survivors-association-honolulu-hawaii", "publication_date": "07-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2495, "text": "Our servicemen struggled and sacrificed not only in defense of our free way of life, but also in the hope that the blessings of liberty some day might extend to all peoples. This ground embraces many American veterans whose love of country was put to the test unfairly by our own authorities. These and other natural-born American citizens faced wartime internment, and they committed no crime. They were sent to internment camps simply because their ancestors were Japanese. Other Asian-Americans suffered discrimination, and even violence, because they were mistaken for Japanese. And they, too, were innocent victims, who committed no offense. Here lie valiant servicemen of the 442d Regimental Combat Team and of the Military Intelligence Service, Americans of Japanese ancestry who fought to defeat the Axis in Europe and in the Pacific. Among these, the late Senator Spark Matsunaga, a combat hero and survivor who went on to help lead postwar Hawaii to American statehood. I remember sharing danger and friendship in these skies and on this ocean. Some of my closest friends, like many people here, your closest friends, never came home. Perhaps because of this experience, I can better understand what you survivors of Pearl Harbor are sensing and feeling here today. As all the veterans here know, when a friend or comrade in arms falls in battle, war grabs a part of your soul. My roommate aboard the carrier San Jacinto, CVL - 30, was a guy named Jim Wykes. And as we were about to go into combat for the first time, a strike over Wake Island, Jim Wykes and his crew were sent out on a search mission from which they never returned. Many more from our little torpedo squadron were to give their lives. And the names of many of these, and more than 18,000 other World War II servicemen lost in action in the Pacific, are engraved in the walls of this magnificent memorial. During every passage of my life, I have often thought of those who never returned. Some left children behind, and today those children, like my own kids, are raising children of their own. And thank God, each surviving generation has honored the memory of our heroes of the Second World War. Each new generation has risen to meet the challenge of winning the peace. After vanquishing the dictators of Japan and Germany and Italy, America's war generation helped those countries rebuild and grow strong in the exercise of democracy and free enterprise. They affirmed again that our quarrel had not been with races or nations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepearlharborsurvivorsassociationhonoluluhawaii", "title": "Remarks to the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association in Honolulu, Hawaii", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-pearl-harbor-survivors-association-honolulu-hawaii", "publication_date": "07-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2496, "text": "The American victors welcomed the new leaders of Japan and Germany and Italy into alliances that won the cold war and helped prevent the third world war. America and our wartime allies joined hands with the liberated peoples of our former foes to create and nurture international organizations aimed at protecting human rights, collective security, and economic growth. The cause of harmony among nations is not a call for pacifism. We avoided a third world war because we were prepared to defend the free world against aggressors. The Pearl Harbor generation saw its younger brothers go to Korea, its sons to Vietnam to resist communism. Pearl Harbor's grandchildren answered the call to the Persian Gulf to reverse Saddam's aggression against Kuwait. How fitting it is that this great cemetery holds so many who died for the cause of Korean and Vietnamese freedom. How honored we are to stand on this ground, consecrated with the remains of Marine Lance Corporal Frank Allen of Hawaii, who gave his life just 10 months ago in the battle to free Kuwait. Every soldier and sailor and airman buried here offered his life so that others might be free. Not one of them died in vain. Our men and women who served in Korea and Vietnam, whose sacrifices too often have been forgotten or even reviled, are nearing their day of greatest vindication. For I have confidence that the tragedy of totalitarianism has entered its final scene everywhere on this Earth. This morning's sun will course the Pacific skies and illuminate the lands of Asia. And just as certainly, the movement of human freedom will supplant dictatorships that now hold sway in Pyongyang and Rangoon and Hanoi, and yes, in China, too. For a billion yearning men and women, the future means freedom and democracy. This fair December dawn breaks on a world ready for renewal. A high tide of hope swells for those that are committed to peace and freedom. The nations pushed by tyrants into war against us half a century ago join us today as free and constructive partners in the effort for peace. The Soviet Communists' designs for world domination have collapsed before the free world's resolve. We have reached this morning because generation after generation of Americans kept faith with our founders and our heroes. From the snows of Valley Forge, to the fiery seas of Midway and Pearl Harbor, to the sands of Iraq and Kuwait, Americans lived and died true to their ideals. They have prepared the way for a world of unprecedented freedom and cooperation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepearlharborsurvivorsassociationhonoluluhawaii", "title": "Remarks to the Pearl Harbor Survivors Association in Honolulu, Hawaii", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-pearl-harbor-survivors-association-honolulu-hawaii", "publication_date": "07-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2497, "text": "Well, now I am a little embarrassed to come up here after all those wonderful things were said about me, because I happen to think that we have a very wonderful Ambassador and his wife here representing the United States in this nation. And I also happen to have had the chance to observe and know what a wonderful staff there is in this Embassy, also. But the reason it makes it a little difficult is because I know how much we upset the routine when we drop in. Nancy and I want to thank Ambassador Price, his lovely lady, and all the members of the Embassy staff for your extraordinary efforts to assure the success of this visit, as you have done so before. This, as you have been told, is my third visit to London and probably my last as ENTITY, and I know how much time and hard work must be devoted to a presidential visit. I also know that a visit like this is an exceptional one, one that takes you away from your day-today business. And let me express my deep appreciation for the work you do to represent United States interests in the United Kingdom. I know you spend long hours working to secure our foreign policy objectives, to strengthen our economy, to enhance our national security, and to protect United States citizens overseas. And I know the many times when you have been called upon for some individual citizen to overcome something that is upsetting them at the time when they are far away from home and here in this land. Your work here in London has proven invaluable in ensuring that the special relationship we enjoy with Great Britain continues to bear fruit. Nancy and I wish to thank you, all the men and women of the Embassy, not just the American employees, but also the Foreign Service nationals without whose hard work and support this visit and the execution of our foreign policy would not be possible. And, Charlie, I just-there are no words to express the appreciation that we have. You have a great staff, and now it is coming time for me to say so long. I have to tell you, though, I want to tell you one little incident that occurred recently in my meeting with the General Secretary over there. And knowing, of course, that officially their nation is atheist, and we know that ours is based on the Judeo-Christian religion, and I could not resist one day-I told him that I was looking forward to having prepared the greatest gourmet dinner that anyone could ever think of, the most wonderful and delicious foods, and having him to that dinner.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunitedstatesembassypersonnellondon", "title": "Ronald Reagan Remarks to United States Embassy Personnel in London", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-united-states-embassy-personnel-london", "publication_date": "03-06-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2505, "text": "It is wonderful to have you here and to see you joining in this important step forward for America. runaway government spending, double-digit inflation, record high interest rates they'd just hit 21 1/2 percent the worst tax burden in peacetime history, and high unemployment With support from the American people we put in place a program that was designed to cure this raging economic disease which had been ignored for too many years. Little more than a year's passed since our program went on the books, but already we have made solid progress against four of the five problems that we inherited. We have cut the growth of spending somewhere around in half, and we have reduced high inflation, high interest rates, and taxation. But let me just say something here about interest rates, which I will expand on in my speech to the Nation tonight. The very sharp and heartening decline that we have seen in interest rates brings us one step closer to the dream every American shares, which is lasting recovery. But let us understand that what brought, for example, Government-backed home mortgages down to 12 1/2 percent, the lowest level in 25 months, was not a quick fix, but our progress against inflation. The decline in inflation led directly to the fall in interest rates during the last several months. The Federal Reserve Bank announced last week that it was lowering its discount level to 9 1/2 percent. That is the first time this key interest rate has been a single digit since 1979 and the fifth reduction in the rate in 4 months. The Fed's lower rate shows its confidence that inflation and market interest rates are continuing to fall. The Federal Reserve has been pursuing a steady policy of trying to reduce inflation, and we have been supporting the Fed in that policy. And the Fed will continue to aim its policy at bringing inflation down further in the future. And that will continue to mean lower and lower interest rates as well. As I said, we are solving four of the five worst problems that we inherited. But unemployment, always the lagging indicator, remains too high, and clearly, our most urgent priority today is to create lasting, private sector jobs. I am not going to rest until every American who wants a job can find a job. Unemployment is a tragedy for all Americans in every region, every city, and every line of work. We need the strength of every back and the power of every mind to lift our nation from the economic swamp to higher ground.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthejobtrainingpartnershipact", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Job Training Partnership Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-job-training-partnership-act", "publication_date": "13-10-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2506, "text": "We must not waste the energy of one citizen who wants to work. All of us are moved by the plight of millions of our people who cannot find jobs or provide for their families. Perhaps the cruelest trap of all has caught the legions of our youth. As they stand on the threshold of the American dream, far too many find the door of opportunity slammed in their face. Two out of every five people out of work-two out of every five are between the ages of 16 and 24. We continue to push for enterprise zones in our inner cities, a program to attract new businesses and jobs to areas of highest unemployment. It is tragic that this enterprise zone proposal has been bottled up in committee by the leadership of the House. I remember what it was like to be 21 years old and looking for a job in 1932. And I know how it feels when your future has been mortgaged by the generation before you. Today's young people must never be held hostage to the mistakes of the past. The only way to avoid making these mistakes again is to learn from them. It is estimated, for example, that at least 20 million American workers now rely on skills that will not be needed within 20 years. The government has trained thousands more in skills that already are not needed in their communities. Still others have been steered into make-work government for our young people. And that is why I am proud today to sign into law the Job Training Partnership Act, a program that looks to the future instead of the past. This is not another make-work, dead-end, bureaucratic boondoggle. This program will train more than one million Americans every year in skills they can market where they live. It will make a difference on Main Street. It will provide help, bring hope, and encourage self-reliance and personal initiative. State and local government officials, business and labor leaders, and other members of the private sector will plan area programs in private industry councils. Local people will decide at the grass roots level what opportunities are available in their communities, and then match real jobs with needed skills. And here is something else that makes this program different from many past failures. At least 70 percent of the program funds will go to actual job training. We are eliminating the bureaucratic and administrative waste that has marked so many so-called job bills in the past. It is based on a tried and tested concept.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthejobtrainingpartnershipact", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Job Training Partnership Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-job-training-partnership-act", "publication_date": "13-10-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2507, "text": "Before my remarks, I have a brief announcement. Anyone that has not gotten his cuff links or tickets to the Kennedy Center, please see Max Friedersdorf. Well, ladies and gentlemen, members of the Cabinet and staff and all of you who are here, I do not think the East Room has ever seen exactly this kind of meeting here before. And I think last week we saw an extraordinary example of cooperation between the legislative and executive branches of government, and I want all of you Members of the House to know how deeply grateful I am for what you did last week. During these past 112 days we have worked well together, and I think we have made a little history. Thanks to you, we have made it clear that spending can be controlled and that our system works. The voice of the people can be heard here in the Capital, and in so doing, we have restored their confidence of our people in their government and in the institutions of this Government. I know that what we did was only the first step, but I have confidence that in the weeks and months ahead we will continue to put country ahead of partisanship. Yes, we have a big job ahead of us putting tax cuts into effect that are really the other half of returning America's prosperity. I believe the reduction in the tax rates, as I know I have said to many of you, is essential to restoring the spirit of enterprise. You know, some years ago there was an economist at Harvard, now deceased, Sumner Schlichter. And he said once that if a visitor from Mars came to Earth, he would conclude that our tax policy had been created to make private enterprise unworkable. And, you know, maybe what he was talking about, sometimes in a business or a sports team or an army, will outperform its competitor even though the material assets of the two seem to be roughly equal. Now, some academicians have commented-well, they have referred to this as the x factor in human affairs, a confidence or a spirit that makes men and women dream and dare and take greater risks. Well, for too long a time our tax structure has stifled that x factor and that spirit of confidence and daring in our economic doings here in our land. Those who have the means to invest have sought tax shelters instead. And workers have been discouraged from saving or even trying to increase their earnings by increasing their productivity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheprogramforeconomicrecoverywhitehousereceptionformembersthehouse", "title": "Remarks on the Program for Economic Recovery at a White House Reception for Members of the House of Representatives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-program-for-economic-recovery-white-house-reception-for-members-the-house", "publication_date": "11-05-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2527, "text": "The Secretary General and I have now completed almost 2 hours of hard work with this brilliant and dedicated staff of the Strategic Air Command. I think that both of us have gained fresh understanding of the intimate relation between the strategic strength of the United States and the defense of the North Atlantic Alliance. We have had presented in some detail the military facts and figures which support the great and simple political reality that is set forth in our treaty, namely that the defense of one is the defense of all. We have learned again what we already knew, that the strength and the skill of this Command are absolutely vital to the peace of the Atlantic world. We recognize that the mission of this Command is peace. And we had related to us this afternoon the capacity, the numbers, the procedures, the overall plans, and the great amount of thinking that has gone into accomplishing that mission, namely preserving the peace. This day has thus brought new encouragement to me, and I hope also to my friend, the distinguished Secretary General. So we are grateful to all of you and to the State of Nebraska for all that we have seen. We also thank you for your distance from Washington. On the plane ride out and back, Mr. Brosio and I are finding a chance for some quiet conversations together concerning the future needs and the future hopes of our great alliance. The success of NATO is evident in every member country, in peace and prosperity, and in confidence in the future. Yet our very success creates new problems for tomorrow. The work of freedom is really never done, and as we go back to these discussions let me thank all of you again for this very profitable afternoon in Omaha. I have been here several times during the 13 years that General Power has been connected with the Strategic Air Command, and I have had numerous briefings from him and from his staff. I feel as I believe most Americans do, deeply in his debt, and the debt of the dedicated men who serve with him, for their love of country and for their proficiency to accomplish the mission assigned them. I want to thank the members of the families of the men assigned to this Command. They are called upon to make many sacrifices, and just as their men's mission is peace, I guess they sacrifice with a smile, because wherever I go and I see the Strategic Air Force, I am stimulated and inspired. Since General LeMay is here with us today, all of you really represent a great monument to his thinking and to his planning.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponcompletinginspectionsacheadquartersoffuttairforcebaseomaha", "title": "Remarks Upon Completing an Inspection of SAC Headquarters, Offutt Air Force Base, Omaha", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-completing-inspection-sac-headquarters-offutt-air-force-base-omaha", "publication_date": "29-09-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2528, "text": "Now that we realize the proof of the pudding is in the eating and you have preserved the peace now for almost 20 years, I think you can return to your homes this evening with a proper and justified well done from your Chief. Incidentally, just to show you that I really mean it, I added a good deal to my budget this year by insisting on a pay raise for all of you. Perhaps my colleague, Mr. Brosio, would have something that he would like to say to you now. The President spoke following an inspection with Manlio Brosio, Secretary General of NATO, of SAC Headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base, Omaha, Nebr. His opening words referred to Gen. Thomas S. Power, Commander in Chief, Strategic Air Command, and Gen. Curtis E. LeMay, Chief of Staff, Department of the Air Force. Thank you. I want only to say that I am very happy to be back in Omaha again. I have been here a few years ago, that is in 1957, when General LeMay was still Commander here. I have seen new, interesting things; I have learned a lot. But I am above all very deeply honored to have had the opportunity of coming tonight on the invitation and in the company of the President of the United States. I have seen really the contribution to the defense not only of the United States, but also of Europe by this central base and Command of the Western World which is absolutely indispensable and decisive. That convinces me and convinces all Europeans, I think, of the absolute necessity of continuing the close links which tie us in our essential Atlantic Alliance. I also share entirely what the President of the United States has told you just now, that all this huge preparation which needs an enormous amount of intelligence, of skill, of patience and of courage, is intended only to defend peace, is intended primarily to prevent war. And in these 15 years of life of the Atlantic Alliance, thanks to this preparation, thanks to our unity and solidarity, peace has been preserved. I am sure we will be able to preserve it with the same methods and with the same spirit for the future in the interest of the freedom and the welfare of the people of the United States and Europe.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponcompletinginspectionsacheadquartersoffuttairforcebaseomaha", "title": "Remarks Upon Completing an Inspection of SAC Headquarters, Offutt Air Force Base, Omaha", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-completing-inspection-sac-headquarters-offutt-air-force-base-omaha", "publication_date": "29-09-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2539, "text": "It is wonderful to be here at Kenmore. And I want to first of all thank our principal, Mr. Dr. John Word Doctor; Superintendent of Arlington Public Schools Patrick Murphy. There they are over there, all doing great work. We have got your own Congressman, Jim Moran, here in the house. And we have got somebody who I believe is going to go down as the finest Secretary of Education we have ever had, Arne Duncan. Now, before I begin, let me just say that like all Americans, I continue to be heartbroken by the images of devastation in Japan. And I know all of you, young and old, have been watching the full magnitude of this tragedy unfold. I want to reiterate America's support for the people of Japan, who are some of our closest friends and allies. And I have said directly to the Prime Minister of Japan, Prime Minister Kan, that the United States will continue to offer any assistance we can as Japan recovers from multiple disasters and we will stand with the people of Japan in the difficult days ahead. Now, I just had a chance to talk with some of your teachers as well as some students, who told me about your all-school project that is weaving the life and music of Duke Ellington into your classes. And by getting students engaged in learning, you are teaching the kinds of skills about how to think and how to work together that young people are going to need in college and beyond. That is what all of our schools need to be doing. And in an economy that is more competitive and connected than ever before, a good job and a good career is going to demand a good education. Over the next 10 years, nearly half of all new jobs are going to require more than a high school diploma. So if you want a bright future, you are going to need a college degree or advanced training. And as Arne mentioned, unfortunately, too many students are not getting a world-class education today. As many as a quarter of American students are not finishing high school. The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations. And America has fallen to ninth in the proportion of young people with a college degree. And turning these statistics around is not just the right thing to do for our kids, it is the right thing to do for our economy, because the best jobs program out there is a good education. The best economic policy is one that produces more college graduates.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskenmoremiddleschoolarlington", "title": "Remarks at Kenmore Middle School in Arlington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kenmore-middle-school-arlington", "publication_date": "14-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2540, "text": "And that is why for the sake of our children and our economy and America's future, we are going to have to do a better job educating every single one of our sons and daughters, all of them. Now, that responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but it begins in our homes. It begins with parents who are instilling in their kids not only a love of learning, but also the self-confidence and especially the self-discipline and work ethics that are at the heart of success in school and success in life. Young people, I am talking to you. I have got a couple of them at home. And the truth is, the world's going to be more competitive, and nobody's going to just give success to you. You are going to have to earn it, and that means you have got to apply yourself. So that you are going to learn at home, first and foremost. All of us have a responsibility not just as parents, but as citizens for giving our kids the best possible education. Now, for a long time we were not sure about how to give our kids that kind of education. Some people thought, if you just put more money into education, that would solve the problem. And then on the other side thought, money does not matter, what we need is reform. In fact, there were those who argued that we should just dismantle the public education system altogether. Rather than working together, both sides remained locked in this stalemate year after year, decade after decade, and nothing much changed. And then something began to happen in States and local school districts. Instead of getting caught up in these old, stale debates, people began to agreeing to agree that, you know what, we need both more money and more reform. We need more resources for the schools, but we have got to reorganize how our schools are doing business in order to assure success for our young people. People began coming together parents, students, teachers, administrators, reformers, local officials and we started witnessing amazing success stories all across America. There is a school in Denver, Bruce Randolph School, that went from being one of the worst schools in Colorado to graduating 97 percent of its seniors last May. In Cincinnati, Taft High School went from handing out only one diploma for every five students to graduating 95 percent of its seniors and preparing them for careers in technology. So our goal as an administration, my goal as President, has been to build on these successes across America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskenmoremiddleschoolarlington", "title": "Remarks at Kenmore Middle School in Arlington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kenmore-middle-school-arlington", "publication_date": "14-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2541, "text": "trying to figure out how do we incentivize success by starting something a competition called Race to the Top. Prove you are serious about reform, and we will show you the money. And because it is a competition for less than 1 percent of what our country spends on education each year, Race to the Top has led over 40 States to raise their standards for teaching, learning, and student achievement. And these standards were not developed in Washington, but they were developed by Republican and Democratic Governors all across this country. So we have made enormous progress. As Arne has said, this is probably the most significant education reform initiative that we have seen in a generation. But we need to make sure we are reaching every child in America, not just those in States or districts that take part in Race to the Top. And that is why not only do we need to continue this competition, we have got to open it up. And that is why we need to take the same bottom-up approach when it comes to reforming America's most important education law, otherwise known as No Child Left Behind. We have to reform No Child Left Behind. Now, over these last few weeks, during what we have called Education Month around the White House, I have been traveling across the country talking with folks about education. In fact, we have actually been doing that for the last couple of years. And what I have heard, what Arne's heard, what the rest of my team has heard loud and clear from teachers and students and parents and communities is that No Child Left Behind got some things right and got some things wrong. making a promise to educate every child with an excellent teacher. Shining a light on the achievement gap between students of different races and backgrounds and those with and without disabilities, that is the right thing to do. But what has not worked is denying teachers, schools, and States what they need to meet these goals. That is why we need to fix No Child Left Behind. We need to make sure we are graduating students who are ready for college and ready for careers. We need to put outstanding teachers in every classroom and give those teachers the pay and the support that they deserve. I got some applause for that one. We need to not only hold failing schools accountable, we need to help turn those schools around. In the 21st century, it is not enough to leave no child behind, we need to help every child get ahead. We need to get every child on a path to academic excellence.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskenmoremiddleschoolarlington", "title": "Remarks at Kenmore Middle School in Arlington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kenmore-middle-school-arlington", "publication_date": "14-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2542, "text": "I am proud of the commitment by Democrats and Republicans in Congress to fix No Child Left Behind, to make this reform a reality, because they recognize education is an area where we cannot afford to drag our feet. As Arne says, our kids only get one shot at an education, and we have got to get it right. So that is why I am calling on Congress to send me an education reform bill I can sign into law before the next school year begins before next year's school year. I want every child in this country to head back to school in the fall knowing that their education is America's priority. Let us seize this education moment. Let us fix No Child Left Behind. Now, last week, we got a reminder of why it is so critical that we reform this law. According to new estimates, under the system No Child Left Behind put in place, more than 80 percent of our schools may be labeled as failing 80 percent of our schools. And let us face it, skepticism is somewhat justified. We know that four out of five schools in this country are not failing. So what we are doing to measure success and failure is out of line. In fact, the list of supposedly failing schools is includes schools that are making extraordinary progress, including Kenmore. So yes, we have still got more work to do here at this school to close the achievement gap. I think Dr. Word would agree with that. We have got to make sure that every student is on track. But I mean, we can see here at Kenmore what Kenmore's thriving. You got more work to do, but you are doing fine. So what this means, though, is, is that we need a better way of figuring out which schools are deeply in trouble, which schools are not , and how we get not only the schools that are in really bad shape on track, how do we help provide the tools to schools that want to get even better to get better. That way of measuring success and failure, that is the first problem with No Child Left Behind that we need to fix. Instead of labeling schools a failure one day and then throwing up our hands and walking away from them, we need to refocus on the schools that need the most help. Black, White, Latino, Asian, students with disabilities, English language learners. We need to make sure some of our best teachers are teaching in some of our worst schools.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskenmoremiddleschoolarlington", "title": "Remarks at Kenmore Middle School in Arlington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kenmore-middle-school-arlington", "publication_date": "14-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2543, "text": "We need to reward schools that are doing the difficult work of turning themselves around. We are going to have to take a series of steps across a broad range of measures to not only target our most troubled schools, but also raise expectations for all our schools. But we have got to do more than that. In recent years, 15 States have actually lowered their standards to make it easier for their kids to meet the targets set by No Child Left Behind. That was that is a pretty perverse incentive when States say to themselves, you know what, let us lower our standards so that we have an easy time easier time passing those standards so that we do not get punished under No Child Left Behind . That makes no sense. They are graduating ready for college and ready for a career. To know whether our kids are on track to meet that goal, we need better assessments. Now, I want to speak to teachers in particular here. I am not talking about more tests. I am not talking about teaching to the test. We do not need to know whether a student can fill out a bubble. We do need to know whether they are making progress. We do need to know whether they are not only mastering reading, math, and science, but also developing the kinds of skills, like critical thinking and creativity and collaboration, that I just saw on display with the students that I met here. Those are skills they are going to need for the rest of their lives, not just to be good workers, but to be good citizens. But the point is, is that we need to refine how we are assessing progress so that we can have accountability without rigidity, accountability that still encourages creativity inside the classroom and empowers teachers and students and administrators. Of course, we also know that better standards, better assessments, and better curriculum will not make a difference without outstanding teachers. Every day in this country, teachers are doing a heroic job for their kids every day. They are taking on the problems that follow students into class, come in early to rewrite lessons, spending hours after school tutoring students. Now, in South Korea, teachers are known as nation builders, and I think it is time we treated our teachers with the same level of respect right here in the United States of America. But if we are serious about treating teachers that way, if we are serious about educating all our kids with an excellent teacher, then we are going to have to fix No Child Left Behind.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskenmoremiddleschoolarlington", "title": "Remarks at Kenmore Middle School in Arlington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kenmore-middle-school-arlington", "publication_date": "14-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2544, "text": "What No Child Left Behind says is that teachers need to be certified before they step into the classroom. Now, certification can be an important measure of the quality of the teacher, and obviously, we want teachers to be well-qualified. But when the quality of a teacher can make or break a child's education, we have got to make sure our certified teachers are also outstanding teachers, teachers who can reach every last child. And so what we need to do is a better job preparing and supporting our teachers, measuring their success in the classroom, holding them accountable. We are going to have to stop making excuses for the occasional bad teacher. We are going to have to start paying good ones like the professionals that they are. If we truly believe that teaching is one of the most valued professions in society and I cannot think of a more important profession then we have got to start valuing our great teachers. I do not know any teacher who got into it for the pay. The teachers who are here, you got into it for the kids, for the satisfaction of feeling like your passing on knowledge that these young people will use and carry on for the rest of their lives. So we need to reward you by letting you make more of a difference for your kids. give our best teachers more time to learn from each other, more time to mentor each other, more responsibilities in their schools. And to replace the baby boomers who are retiring in the coming years, we are going to have to recruit a whole new generation of teachers, including a hundred thousand new math and science teachers over the next decade. So these are the steps we are going to have to take to fix No Child Left Behind. And together with what we are already doing to make college more affordable for millions more students, I am confident these reforms will help us meet the goal that I set when I took office, which is, by the end of the decade, we will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world. So these steps will require reforms. They will require a change in rules and standards and even attitudes. But let me just point out, there is no avoiding the fact they will also cost some money. It requires reform, but it costs some money. Making it possible for families to send their kids to college costs money. I understand that. And for too long, Government's been spending more than it is been taking in, and we cannot keep that up.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskenmoremiddleschoolarlington", "title": "Remarks at Kenmore Middle School in Arlington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kenmore-middle-school-arlington", "publication_date": "14-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2545, "text": "We are going to have to cut whatever spending we can afford to do without. So I have called on a 5-year freeze on annual domestic spending. That will cut the deficit by more than $400 billion over the next decade, making that kind of spending a much smaller share of the economy, smaller than it is been in 50 years. Right now we are sitting down with Republicans and Democrats to find other ways to get our deficits under control. We cannot cut education. We cannot cut the things that will make America more competitive. I mean, think about what happens in your own family when somebody loses a job or has an illness and you need to cut back. What do you do? You start by skipping that vacation you'd been planning, or you see what is on TV instead of going to the movies. Maybe you start packing your own lunch. There are a whole bunch of things that you might do. The last thing you are going to do is to dip into your child's college savings. You are not going to give that up. Well, what is true for your family is true for the American family. A budget that sacrifices our commitment to education would be a budget that is sacrificing our country's future. That would be a budget that sacrifices our children's future, and I will not let it happen. So yes, I am determined to cut our deficits. But I refuse to do it by telling students here, who are so full of promise, that we are not willing to invest in your future. I am not willing to tell these young people right here that their education is not a priority. I am talking about students like Katherine Diaz, who says, I think I should have the opportunity to be who I want to be. And it turns out that Katherine wants to either be a professional violinist or the first woman President of the United States. She might do both. professional violinist, President. Or I am talking about Roberto Claure. He says, With good schools and good teachers, we can grow up to be anything we want. It turns out Roberto wants to be the first Hispanic President of the United States. So you guys will have to work out, sort of, the sequence.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkskenmoremiddleschoolarlington", "title": "Remarks at Kenmore Middle School in Arlington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-kenmore-middle-school-arlington", "publication_date": "14-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2546, "text": "Secretary Bell and ladies and gentlemen, I am delighted to be here today to join you in honoring some of the finest secondary schools in America. And I want to extend a special greeting to the students in the audience. May I also extend a warm welcome to the principals who are here today, including Mrs. Vera White, who was kind enough to show me through Jefferson Junior High School this morning. both of us have to keep a lot of people happy. You have the PTA; I have the voters. When a Congress leaves town, it is no accident we call it a recess. But I am pleased to help honor the 262 middle, junior, and senior high schools that are receiving awards today for outstanding educational performance. Today we honor you for doing a superb job of educating students and for setting an example that all our schools can follow. We must remember, though, that American schools have not always performed as well as those represented here today. From the early sixties to 1980, combined SAT scores declined steadily, dropping by 90 points. Science achievement scores of 17-year-olds showed a steady drop. And, most shocking, our National Commission on Excellence in Education reported that in 1980 more than one-tenth of America's 17-year olds could be considered functionally illiterate. The dropout rate increased so much that by 1982, 27 percent of our students failed to complete high school, and dropout rates among minority students were higher than 40 percent. Now, this erosion in academic achievement took place during the very period, overall, when spending was up by over 600 percent. The crisis in our schools was symptomatic of a much larger crisis in our country. We were living under a tired philosophy of government knows best. It was out of touch with the reality of a changing world. And while spending was going up, that tired philosophy was dragging America down. Big taxing and spending had led to soaring interest rates and inflation, and all over the world our once-proud nation was no longer known for strength and resolve but for vacillation and self-doubt. And since the whole aim of our schools is to prepare our children for the future, it was only natural that when leaders lost faith in our future, many of our principals, teachers, and students felt robbed of their sense of purpose and self-esteem. Well, the American people decided to put a stop to that long decline, and in the past few years our country has seen a rebirth of vitality and freedom a great national renewal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremonyhonoringthe19831984winnersthesecondaryschoolrecognitionprogram", "title": "Remarks at a Ceremony Honoring the 1983-1984 Winners in the Secondary School Recognition Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremony-honoring-the-1983-1984-winners-the-secondary-school-recognition-program", "publication_date": "27-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2547, "text": "We have knocked inflation down, and all across our land a powerful economic expansion is providing new products and new work for millions. Once again, the United States is respected throughout the world as a force for peace and freedom. This is a springtime of hope for America. When we came to Washington, we knew that the problems in education had not developed overnight and could not be cured overnight. We knew the key to educational improvement was not proposing still more Federal involvement and control, but helping to chart a new course that challenges State and local governments, teachers, administrators, students, and parents to meet the goals of an agenda for excellence. That is why one of our first actions was to appoint a National Commission on Excellence in Education. And today from Maine to California parents, teachers, school administrators, and principals have begun the crucial work to carry out the Commission's recommendations by improving fundamentals of basic teaching and learning. Since the Commission's report, we have been witnessing a great reawakening of learning, reflecting a culmination of concern over the quality of American education at all levels. On the State level, progress has been significant. When our administration took office only a handful of States had task forces on education. Today they all do, and many have begun to work on pay incentives for teachers. They know that to promote good teaching we must reward good teachers. On the local level, parents, teachers, and administrators are making dramatic strides. The PTA reported last year that after a 20-year decline in its membership, 100,000 new members joined the organization. As with so many challenges throughout our history, the American people are showing again that it can be done. Although we are doing much to make our schools more like the temples of learning we all want them to be, I do not believe there is an educator in this room, or in America, who would not agree that we have barely begun. Our challenge is to sustain and build on the progress that we are now making. We cannot reach for the future without a firm grasp of basic educational tools and the importance of traditional values. Learning cannot take place without discipline. Today, in schools across our land, many teachers cannot teach because they lack the authority to make students take tests and turn in homework. School disorder destroys the learning atmosphere, drives good teachers out of teaching, and hurts minority and low-income students who are concentrated in urban schools where the problem is most severe.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremonyhonoringthe19831984winnersthesecondaryschoolrecognitionprogram", "title": "Remarks at a Ceremony Honoring the 1983-1984 Winners in the Secondary School Recognition Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremony-honoring-the-1983-1984-winners-the-secondary-school-recognition-program", "publication_date": "27-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2548, "text": "To keep learning in our schools, we must get crime, drugs, and violence out. We cannot expect to raise a new generation of responsible leaders in a lawless environment. We cannot expect young Americans to master the complexities of computers if they are high on drugs and alcohol. We must teach our sons and daughters a proper respect for academic standards, for codes of civilized behavior, and for knowledge itself. As the National Commission forcefully argued, we must also get our students back to the proper study of basic subjects. Today too many students are allowed to abandon vocational and college prep courses, so when they graduate, they are prepared for neither higher education, nor work, nor the training they may later need to keep up with technological advances. In 1980, 35 States required only 1 year of math for a high school diploma; 36 required only 1 year of science. We must insist that all our students master math, science, history, reading, and writing, the fundamentals of our civilization. Earlier this month, I signed into law the Education for Economic Security Act. It authorizes more scholarships for science and math teachers to help raise the level of instruction in those crucial basics. If we fail to instruct our children in justice, religion, and liberty, we will be condemning them to a world without virtue, a life in the twilight of a civilization where the great truths have been forgotten. In many schools, students are being taught the dangers of nuclear weapons and the burdens of national defense. Well, let us make certain they understand not only the price of defending America but the price of failing to. The students from St. George's University School of Medicine learned in Grenada that freedom is worth sticking up for. And while it makes sense that our children learn of our nation's problems, I hope they are also learning that Americans are good and decent people who face up to those problems with courage and conviction. Yes, we are human, we have our faults. But by any objective measure, we live in the freest, most prosperous nation in the history of the world, and our children need to know that. Jeane Kirkpatrick, Ambassador to the United Nations, said, ... we must learn to bear the truth about our society, no matter how pleasant it may be. So, we have identified long-neglected problems. We are beginning to turn them around.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremonyhonoringthe19831984winnersthesecondaryschoolrecognitionprogram", "title": "Remarks at a Ceremony Honoring the 1983-1984 Winners in the Secondary School Recognition Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremony-honoring-the-1983-1984-winners-the-secondary-school-recognition-program", "publication_date": "27-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2549, "text": "We are remembering the all-important foundation of basic educational tools, values, and discipline all good and important steps of progress, but still not good enough. If the world of learning is to meet the needs of America's future, then we must clearly see where America is headed. You know, during my own lifetime I have seen this country change so much. Cars had been invented, but very few people had one. In the winter, people got around by horse and sleigh. A huge number of Americans were farmers, and the oneroom schoolhouse was common. Those dirt roads gave way to sleek interstate highways. The commercial development of the airplane, then the creation of the jet engine, revolutionized our transportation. In agriculture, innovations in farm equipment and techniques made it possible for more and more workers to leave the fields to pursue other jobs. As they did so, our great industries grew became the mainstay of our economy. Today we are well into a new revolution driven by technologies that offer virtually unlimited opportunities for satisfying jobs and personal fulfillment. This revolution is based in large part on an American breakthrough development of the microchip. Through a vast burst of creativity in the use of microchips, the human race has projected its computational technology beyond all time and size into new galaxies of inner space, where distances are measured in billionths of a meter, time is measured in trillionths of a second, and costs drop to thousandths of a penny. I, just a few years ago, received a great shock when I was told about a satellite of ours and a communications thing in which the entire Encyclopaedia Britannica could be transmitted in a matter of something like 3 or 4 seconds. Today our children learn to tell time on digital watches. They mix traditional games like baseball with the latest video craze. And they grow up with constant exposure to the mass media, watching television some 25 hours a week. Today's children can expect to live longer, have more leisure, enjoy better health, change jobs more often, and move to more new locations then ever before. We have heard it said that our nation's most important recess 1 is the mind of a child, and that is truer than ever. Not long ago we were asking how America could bring the world of learning into better harmony with the world of work. Well, those worlds must not only come together, but also strengthen and enrich each other.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremonyhonoringthe19831984winnersthesecondaryschoolrecognitionprogram", "title": "Remarks at a Ceremony Honoring the 1983-1984 Winners in the Secondary School Recognition Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremony-honoring-the-1983-1984-winners-the-secondary-school-recognition-program", "publication_date": "27-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2550, "text": "Our vision of education must be as forward-looking as our vision of the rest of American life. This will mean a school system that teaches our children how to enrich their lives by using telecommunications as educational tools, that shows them how to educate themselves so they will be able to keep their skills current in an everchanging job market, and that gives them an appreciation of the arts and humanities so that they may broaden their vision and deepen their understanding of the values that give life meaning. One way of helping American schools better serve and shape our future is to keep bringing technology into more classrooms. Now, when I was a boy, an apple was some- thing you brought the teacher. Today you learn on an Apple or a MacIntosh or an IBM. Already our schools and universities have begun to make extensive use of the technological revolution. Young children can use computers to teach themselves colors and basic concepts like up and down or fast and slow. Others, older students, can use computers to sharpen their grasp of virtually any subject from math to history. Computers can tie in with vast libraries and, in effect, put those libraries in every classroom. One dramatic advantage of the new technology is that, as we put it to use in our schools, it can case the burden on our teachers. In any given classroom, some students are able to work quietly with computers while their teacher spends time with others perhaps with students who require more personal attention. At the same time, technology can produce new opportunities for learning in the workplace and the home. Audiovisual courses can teach workers how to use new techniques and equipment, and computers can help them prepare for new fields. In the home, personal computers can put all the world's great art, literature, and drama at a family's fingertips. Two-way cable television stations can bring classroom instruction into the living room, and new techniques of viewer participation can enable people in the home to take tests and practice skills. If we apply technology to education with thoughtful skill, good education will be available to all. Education and technology will enable all to participate fully in the wonders and benefits of American life. It is long been a goal of our space shuttle, the program, to some day carry citizen passengers into space. But today I am directing NASA to begin a search in all of our elementary and secondary schools and to choose as the first citizen passenger in the history of our space program one of America's finest a teacher.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremonyhonoringthe19831984winnersthesecondaryschoolrecognitionprogram", "title": "Remarks at a Ceremony Honoring the 1983-1984 Winners in the Secondary School Recognition Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremony-honoring-the-1983-1984-winners-the-secondary-school-recognition-program", "publication_date": "27-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2551, "text": "Now, I promise you there will be a little bit of voluntarism in that, also. But when that shuttle lifts off, all of America will be reminded of the crucial role that teachers and education play in the life of our nation. I cannot think of a better lesson for our children and our country. So, now we know that there is reason for hope. We can see an exciting future, but we also know what the current problems are. We have defined them, studied them, quantified them. We have made some progress in combating them, but not enough. Now is the time to set ourselves some additional challenges. We have slowed the downward trend in SAT scores in the past few years. We may even have ended that trend. We have to challenge ourselves further, and we must challenge ourselves as individuals. The state cannot do it for us. This town and the Federal Government cannot do it for us. We have to challenge ourselves to get moving again. I propose that, like an Olympic athlete, we set ourselves some goals four specific challenges and go for it. Before this decade is out, scholastic aptitude test scores should regain at least half the losses of the last 20 years a big challenge. States should reduce their high school dropout rates to less than 10 percent. But from the teachers and principals and administrators that I have met over the past 3 1/2 years, believe me, they have or should I say, you? are up to the challenge. Violence in the schools is, in some ways, the toughest of our problems. But, again, I know we are up to it. A Gallup Poll now shows that the number of parents with children in public schools who cite violence as their major concern is down from 29 percent last year to 23 percent this year. Before this decade is out, every school in the Nation should have adopted clear discipline codes, and the percentage of parents who cite school safety as a major concern should be half of what it is now. You know, our country is perfectly poised to meet these challenges and reach these heights. So many things have begun righting themselves the past few years, or, I should say, you have helped right them. It is a time of good feeling about the future. It is a time of progress. And we are showing ourselves again that effort and dedication and tenacity really make a difference. As a young fellow said recently, America's on top again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremonyhonoringthe19831984winnersthesecondaryschoolrecognitionprogram", "title": "Remarks at a Ceremony Honoring the 1983-1984 Winners in the Secondary School Recognition Program", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremony-honoring-the-1983-1984-winners-the-secondary-school-recognition-program", "publication_date": "27-08-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2563, "text": "I just thought we ought to come out here in the brisk morning sunshine and wake up together. I want to thank the representatives here from all parts of the communications industry, from the foundation world, from various civil rights and other civic groups for being here, and coming in and giving me a chance to make this statement, because I had intended to go to Secretary Daley's conference today on bridging the digital divide, and because I am going to Worcester, I could not do that. So they came in this morning, and we had a visit. I want to thank them for being here and for their commitment and for all those who are not here but who are at the conference. This conference is about closing the digital divide. And we have worked hard on that for the last several years in very specific contexts. Under the Vice President's leadership, we have worked to make sure that eventually a digital divide will not deprive business of the technology-savvy workers they need and will not hurt our educational systems today. We started with the first NetDay in California, back in 1994, when only 3 percent of our classrooms were wired and only 14 percent of our schools were. Now we know that, through the public-private partnerships that have been established all over America, through the Telecommunications Act and the E-rate, which the FCC set to make sure our poorest schools could afford to be connected, we are now up over 50 percent of the schools, from 3 percent, and over 80 percent of the classrooms, from 14 percent, since 1994. I am very pleased by that, and we are on our way to meeting our goal sometime next year of having all of our schools wired and, soon after that, all of our classrooms wired. I want to thank the Vice President and all the people in various industries who have supported us and helped us in this regard. But as Secretary Daley's most recent Falling Through the Net report shows, there is still a lot more to do. We must connect all of our citizens to the Internet not just in schools and libraries but in homes, small businesses, and community centers. And we must help all Americans gain the skills they need to make the most of the connection. So this morning, as they go back to their meeting, I want to announce a series of new plans and partnerships that will expand on both these efforts to use the combined forces of public, private, and nonprofit sectors, finally to slam shut the digital divide.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedigitaldivideandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on the Digital Divide and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-digital-divide-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "09-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2564, "text": "First, I have decided to lead a prominent delegation, including top CEO's, on a new markets tour this spring to focus specifically on the digital divide out in America. As we have done on our previous tours, we will visit communities that have not fully participated in our Nation's economic growth. And yet, in the communities we will also see how partnerships between the public and private sectors can unleash the power of the Internet to link children and adults to a lifetime of learning, to provide access to distant medical care, to empower parents, to assist job seekers, to enhance safety, and foster economic development. Second, I am signing an executive memorandum to ensure that closing the digital divide will be a vital goal not just for Secretary Daley and for us here in the White House but throughout the Federal Government. For example, I am directing Secretary Daley to work with the private sector to develop a national strategy for connecting all Americans to the Internet and directing Secretaries Daley, Riley, Herman, Cuomo, and Shalala to expand our growing network of community technology centers. I just ask you all to think about this one thing. What do you believe the economic impact would be if Internet access and usage were as dense in America as telephone access and usage? I think it is clear that we need to keep working until we achieve this goal. Third, with the help of many other groups, the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights is launching an initiative to empower the entire civil rights community through an expanding civilrights.org website, through leadership forums and even modern-day freedom riders who will bring high-tech training to the doorsteps of nonprofit organizations. As the Congress of National Black Churches has said, the digital divide is a key civil rights issue of the 21st century. That is why our civil rights organizations must be ready, wired, and able to lead the change. Fourth, the Benton Foundation is bringing together companies from across the computing, telecommunications, software, and Internet industries, as well as the Urban League and several other large private foundations, to create the Digital Divide Network, an enormous clearinghouse of information for information on public and private efforts to bring technology to underserved communities. For the first time, we will have one-stop shop for tracking our progress in every community and for learning exactly what is worked and what has not .", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedigitaldivideandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on the Digital Divide and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-digital-divide-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "09-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2569, "text": "Each year we set aside a special day to pay special tribute to our men and women in uniform. Today is Armed Forces Day and, on behalf of a grateful nation, I would like to offer them our thanks and appreciation. Their job is unusually difficult not only because it involves hardship and danger, or because it requires long periods away from families and loved ones, or even because it may demand the giving of one's life in defense of our nation. The difficulty of the military profession grows out of all of these, plus the fact that our service men and women are always faced with several of the most fundamental questions we ask as individuals and as a nation the questions of war and peace and the use of force in the world. Americans have asked these questions again and again for more than 200 years. They are still debating them today. The answers lie in seeming paradoxes, underlying truths that may appear contradictory on the surface. The most fundamental paradox is that if we are never to use force, we must be prepared to use it and to use it successfully. We Americans do not want war and we do not start fights. We do not maintain a strong military force to conquer or coerce others. We want to prevent war by deterring others from the aggression that causes war. If our efforts are successful, we will have peace and never be forced into battle. That is the paradox of deterrence. The men and women in our Armed Forces also live with a second paradox. They spend their entire time in service training to fight and preparing for a war which we and they pray will never come. As individuals, these men and women want peace as much as we do as a nation. In fact, they want it even more, because they understand that war is not the romantic heroism we read about in novels or see in the movies, but the stark truth of suffering and sacrifice and the slain promise of youth. Our service men and women know firsthand the horrors of war and the blessings of peace, but they also know that just wanting peace is not enough to guarantee that peace will be sustained. As George Washington said, To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual ways of preserving peace. Today, Americans are again asking important questions about war and peace. How could we prevent nuclear war, and how could we reduce American and Soviet nuclear arsenals? The answers to these questions are not found in simple slogans, but again, in paradoxes. To prevent nuclear war, we must have the capability to deter nuclear war.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationtheobservancearmedforcesday", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on the Observance of Armed Forces Day", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-the-observance-armed-forces-day", "publication_date": "21-05-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2570, "text": "This means we must keep our strategic forces strong enough to balance those of the Soviet Union. It must be absolutely clear to the Soviets that they would have no conceivable advantage in threatening or starting a nuclear war. In seeking to reduce American and Soviet nuclear arsenals, we must convince the Soviet Union that it is in our mutual interest to agree to significant, mutual arms reductions. And to do that, we cannot allow the current nuclear imbalance to continue. We must show the Soviets that we are determined to spend what it takes to deter war. Once they understand that, we have a real chance of successfully reaching arms reduction agreements. Last month I sent to the Congress a proposal to modernize our intercontinental ballistic missile force. By building the MX Peacekeeper and small, single warhead missiles, we will not only preserve our ability to protect the peace, we will also demonstrate that any Soviet quest for nuclear superiority will not work, that it is in everyone's interest to end the arms race and to agree to mutual arms reductions. The MX and other modernization measures will help us to achieve our fundamental goal, and that is to strengthen the peace by seeking arms reduction agreements that make for more security and stability by reducing overall force levels while permitting the modernization of our forces needed for a credible deterrent. I know that the paradox of peace through a credible military posture may be difficult for some people to accept. Some even argue that if we really wanted to reduce nuclear weapons we should simply stop building them ourselves. That argument makes about as much sense as saying that the way to prevent fires is to close down the fire department. It ignores one of the most basic lessons of history, a lesson that was learned by bitter experience and passed down to us by previous generations. Tyrants are tempted by weakness, and peace and freedom can only be preserved by strength. So, let us resolve today, as we honor the brave men and women who serve in our Armed Forces, to give them the support they need to protect our cherished liberties and preserve the peace for ourselves and our children. Till next week, thanks for listening, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationtheobservancearmedforcesday", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on the Observance of Armed Forces Day", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-the-observance-armed-forces-day", "publication_date": "21-05-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2573, "text": "And I want all of you to know that it is good to be back in Indiana, and it is good to once again speak to the National Association of Counties. To tell you the truth, though, I figure that in addressing some 4,000 fellow public officials I have got to be on my toes. And it has to do with a fellow that was the only living survivor or left alive years later of the Johnstown flood. And he made quite a thing out of public speaking. He was in great demand at luncheon clubs and so forth to tell of the experiences of having gone through that terrible thing, the Johnstown flood. Well, his time came, and there he was facing St. Peter. And as he entered heaven, St. Peter said, You know, if you have got anything special that you'd like to talk about from down on Earth, people up here like to hear things from back there. I have been speaking for a long time. And he told him what he'd been doing. So, he led him into an auditorium, and here it was packed and jammed. And St. Peter told them a newcomer from Earth was there and had an interesting story to tell them. And then as he introduced him and turned away and whispered when he went past him and said, That fellow with the beard on the aisle in the front row his name is Noah. But I come to you today with immense respect and respect for the hundreds and hundreds of, well, people that are here and I was told how many were here, 4,000, so I'd better say that instead of the hundreds. But I come before you today with immense respect and respect for the offices you hold so close to the people themselves respect for your service to our nation at the most basic levels of our democracy. You know many of your constituents by face and by name. And you preside at commission and board meetings, where they voice their concerns. You know what it is to be stopped on the street to explain a decision. In recent years, you have worked imaginatively to increase private economic development in your communities the best way to ensure economic growth. And day in and day out, you know what it is to be held responsible for government actions. You know what it is, in short, to do the will of the people. This is why I want to enlist you in the campaign that I began on the 3d of July on the steps of the Jefferson Memorial.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationcountiesindianapolisindiana", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Counties in Indianapolis, Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-counties-indianapolis-indiana", "publication_date": "13-07-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2574, "text": "There I called on all Americans to complete the work of the authors of the Declaration of Independence with an Economic Bill of Rights, a bill that will restore to us the freedoms that our Founding Fathers believed we should always have, a bill of rights that will protect us and future generations from the needless and wrongful encroachment of government upon our lives. For make no mistake, the danger is grave. And many in Congress are intent upon returning to the days of unrestrained and irresponsible government present company, I might add, is excepted. I know which side Governor Myers or Congressman Myers is on. Delay after delay, missed deadline after missed deadline the entire budget process looks like intentionally staged chaos, chaos to provide a cover for those in Congress whose aim is to shift resources from the people's interest to the special interests. Indeed, a recent article in the Washington Post described how one member of the House Public Works and Transportation Committee circulated a bill asking well, it was to fill in the blanks, and the form was asking other members to sign up for their favorite pork-barrel project. And according to the Post, few could resist grabbing-quote a piece of the action. Now, I have spoken before about this congressional urge to grab a piece of the action, but this is so important for you and all the American people to understand that I'd like to give you examples. To begin with, there is the highway bill with its massive demonstration projects that give more of the funds to a few, hand-picked areas. This approach deprives you of the necessary resources to return Federal dollars to places where they are really needed. I vetoed that bill earlier this year. By one vote, Congress managed to override my veto. Well, in part, so that Congress could allow a certain major city to add an extension to its mass transit system. The system will be so expensive, and for so few people, that it would be cheaper to buy each rider a new car every 5 years for the next half a century. Also part of the highway bill, Congress chose to spend $870 million for the continued construction of a subway system in a major city on the west coast. The city is in sound economic condition, could have financed the construction independently, but perhaps the really remarkable part of it all is that the route of the subway is still undetermined. Eight hundred and seventy million in a hole in the ground, and where it comes out, nobody knows.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationcountiesindianapolisindiana", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Counties in Indianapolis, Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-counties-indianapolis-indiana", "publication_date": "13-07-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2575, "text": "There is the Federal program that will spend millions to build luxury hotels, restaurants, and condominiums-that is right, fancy condominiums. I barely had time to figure out what yuppies were before Congress started to subsidize them. There are the farm programs that provide little or nothing for the many family farms, but that gave one wealthy farmer more than $13 million and that gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to a Texas landowner who is neither American nor in need of public assistance. He is the Crown Prince of Liechtenstein. But there is one program Congress recently voted on that pretty much says it all. This year the Congress of the United States, in its deep and unfathomable wisdom, voted 8 million of your tax dollars to establish get ready a center for the study of weeds. Now, I do not know whether I want to know any more about weeds. But you know, there are some days sitting in that Oval Office, with these bills coming across my desk, when I do not know whether to laugh or cry. Now, I have been accused in recent days of campaigning for our Economic Bill of Rights in order to distract attention from other events in Washington. Well, it so happens that I have been campaigning for economic rights for more than three decades, and I intend to go on doing so for years to come. putting an end to unrestrained spending. Stop the spending, and no more taxes. And while I am getting a few things off my chest, something else has been bothering me lately. Critics have claimed that in opposing our administration on the issues, they are at some kind of an unfair disadvantage, that this Presidency is somehow based more on personality than on policy. Well, the truth is, no President can remain popular unless he retains the fundamental support of the American people on the issues. So, I invite my critics I welcome my critics to go after me on the issues just as hard as they please. It all reminds me about Senator Gore of Oklahoma a story told back in the early 1900's. And one day an opponent of his in the Senate, stung by Gore's criticism, took to his feet and shouted, If you were not blind, I'd beat you to within an inch of your life. And Senator Gore simply responded, Blindfold the so-and-so, and point him in my direction. Tax hikes, budget-busting spending bills, job-destroying protectionism, a new round of soaring inflation the momentum in Washington is building.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationcountiesindianapolisindiana", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Counties in Indianapolis, Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-counties-indianapolis-indiana", "publication_date": "13-07-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2576, "text": "As I have said since the beginning of this campaign, today virtually all that stands between us and a return to the malaise economy of the 1970's is the Presidential veto. And to make this point so clear that Congress cannot possibly understand me, permit me once again to repeat my commitment. As far as I am concerned, our tax reform for the American people is, to borrow the title of the current hit movie, untouchable. And if any tax hike ever comes across my desk, my handling of the veto pen will make the way Elliott Ness went after Al Capone look like child's play. But important as the Presidential veto power may be, we dare not rely upon it alone. No, we need more to protect the hard-won achievements of these past 6 years. And it is for this reason to protect our prosperity and our jobs, to promote more growth and opportunity that I have proposed our Economic Bill of Rights. The people are entitled to the fruits of their labor and shall not be burdened by excessive taxation. What does this mean? It means that more than a mere majority of the Congress should be required to raise taxes not just 50 percent plus one, maybe 60 percent, maybe two-thirds. I know when I was Governor of California it took twothirds of the legislature to pass the budget, and it took 60 percent of the voters to pass a bond issue. They have cried out in fright in Washington as if I have suggested something unconstitutional with regard to raising taxes. The future of succeeding generations shall not be mortgaged to the national debt through deficit spending. The Congress shall be required to balance the budget each and every year. Special interest legislation shall not be hidden from the people. The President shall have the right to veto individual appropriations. The President shall have the line-item veto. I used it 943 times when I was a Governor, and I miss it in Washington. The people are entitled to pursue their own livelihood, free from excessive regulation and tax-subsidized competition. I will appoint a Presidential commission to spearhead efforts to privatize public-owned enterprises. Educational development, creativity, and initiative will be fostered by diversity in our educational system. Welfare programs must not harm the structure of family and community. Through the use of incentives, the Congress will seek to lift the least fortunate to independence and full participation in American life and economy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationcountiesindianapolisindiana", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Counties in Indianapolis, Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-counties-indianapolis-indiana", "publication_date": "13-07-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2577, "text": "The Congress shall pass no measure that slows growth, shrinks markets, or destroys jobs by erecting high tariffs or other trade barriers. The Government shall take seriously the 5th and 14th amendment guarantees to life, liberty, and property. Whenever government expropriates the use or value of private property, whether outright or through government regulations, owners will be justly compensated. The burden of government shall not be hidden from view. The Congress shall require that a financial impact statement accompany each bill, specifying the economic growth, employment or the effect on economic growth and employment, and competition overseas. These last two points, truth in Federal spending and the requirement for a financial impact statement, bear directly upon your work as county officials. For in recent years, Congress has not been satisfied with just spending hundreds of billions of Federal funds. Congress has wanted to spend still more money, including the funds of State and local governments. The Federal Government appropriates millions for this or that program, then mandates that you participate in the program by spending millions of your own dollars or by complying with certain national standards to avoid the loss of Federal funds. In all this, mandates is just a fancy word for big government in Washington pushing around the levels of government that are closest to the people. Under our proposals, whenever Congress considered legislation that would impose costs on State and local governments, a statement of those costs would appear in the legislation itself, not buried in some obscure committee report. Still more significant, Congress would be required to state what they expect the impact to be on State and local governments and where the funds would come from, not leave it to local officials like you to explain to your constituents why you are forced to raise taxes because of something that happened in Washington. take federalism seriously and treat State and local governments with respect. Now, all that sounds good to me, but you are the one whose opinions count. Is not it high time Washington put its own house in order and stopped pushing you around? Socialist countries seem to experience some economic malaise precisely to the extent that they are Socialist. And in the Communist world, we see economic stagnation, material backwardness of every kind. Yes, in concentrating on it all but exclusively, the Soviet Union has been able to build its military into a formidable force. When was the last time you bought a car or there are some other things there even a good cheese or a videocassette recorder and the label read, Made in the U.S.S.R. ?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationcountiesindianapolisindiana", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Counties in Indianapolis, Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-counties-indianapolis-indiana", "publication_date": "13-07-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2578, "text": "In our own nation, too, we have recent examples that prove how important it is for government to respect economic rights. No property is more private, no property is more personal, even intimate, than an individual's income. It directly represents the labor, day-in and day-out, of one's mind and hands. It is used for the necessities of life itself, to provide for one's family, to make possible the adventure of building a better life. Yet during the 1970's, the Federal Government showed a high-handed disregard for this most fundamental form of property, taxing it at higher and higher levels, permitting inflation to raise effective tax rates again and again. Well, our administration changed all that. We cut tax rates, indexed tax brackets, then simplified the entire tax system with our historic tax reform. The connection between effort and reward was reestablished, giving virtually every participant in our economy new incentives for achievement. Today unemployment stands at the lowest rate in almost 8 years. Government revenues at the Federal level and for most State and local governments have actually gone up. The stock and bond markets have risen to record highs. And come this Thanksgiving, this tax cut-led expansion if it is still going on on Thanksgiving Day will go into the books as the longest peacetime expansion ever to take place in this nation. And perhaps most important, we have seen the creation of more than 13 million new jobs. Yet all that we have achieved our hard-won victory over inflation, the millions of new jobs all these are in danger. It is our duty to protect them, to secure for ourselves and our children the economic rights that will enable our nation, now and into the 21st century, to become a still greater land, a land of ever-increasing prosperity and ever-widening opportunity. In this bicentennial year of our Constitution, I submit to you that we see in the vision of the Founding Fathers and in the Constitution itself the promise of a government that is good, because it respects its citizens' rights, both political and economic, and that has chosen once and for all to live within its own means. And now I ask you to join me; join me, my friends, in making that promise come true. I cannot conclude without telling another little story here. I have got a new hobby.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationcountiesindianapolisindiana", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Counties in Indianapolis, Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-counties-indianapolis-indiana", "publication_date": "13-07-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2585, "text": "Boy, he was hot to-Thank you, Chairman Wilhelm, for your outnight, was not he? And thank you, Senator Bradley, for being here with us tonight and for your work on this event and for your steadfast effort to get a health care bill out of the Senate Finance Committee that actually protects the American people's health care. And I want to ask all of you here to help him be reelected to the Senate in New Jersey this year. We need him back there. In addition to all the dignitaries from New York, I understand that we have two Democratic congressional candidates from New Jersey, and maybe you could raise your hands. Shine a light on that man; he is running for office. There you are, Lou, it is good to see you. Ladies and gentlemen, when I was nominated for President by Governor Cuomo, I thought he gave one of the best speeches I ever heard. And about halfway through it, I looked at Hillary and I said, Who is he talking about anyway? By the time he got through that speech, I felt like a real President. And tonight I am also in his debt for his wonderful words, for his profound way of telling the truth, for his leadership in New York, and for his love for New York. People ask me sometimes kind of cynics, who do not know what it is like to really love where you are from how Mario Cuomo could be doing this again. And I said, I may be the only person in America that understands this, but if I had not been just absolutely obsessed with the direction the country was taking in 1992 and convinced it was wrong, I'd still be Governor of my State. It is the best job in the world if you are lucky enough to be in a place where you love. And he loves this State. He loves you, and you ought to keep him doing what he is doing. I also want to say, I am glad to see all the musicians here with all their talent. I hope I get to hear a little music before I have to go tonight. But there is really nothing for me to say; Mario said it all. Ditto, I could say. Let me say the stakes this year are very high because they will determine the extent to which and the shape of our continued forward progress. When I was elected President, we'd had 12 years of exploding deficits.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionnewyorkcity1", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-new-york-city-1", "publication_date": "27-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2586, "text": "And I knew we had to bring the deficit down, we had to bring interest rates down, we had to get investment up in our people, we had to put the American people first again. And we came up with a plan, with the help of a lot of people from New York, including my National Economic Adviser, Bob Rubin, that would do those things. And when I say well, maybe it sounds good but it is not human sometimes to say, we had the biggest deficit reduction in history; we are going to have 3 years of deficit reduction in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was President of the United States; we have had two budgets passed on time for the first time in 17 years; last year we had the first year without a Presidential veto in 60 years. And you say, well, what does all that mean? 3.4 million of your fellow Americans have jobs that they did not have. That is what it means. Sixteen million American taxpayers with children, who work for a living, are going to get an income tax cut out of our economic plan, so they will be encouraged to stay working and not go on welfare 16 million of them. Twenty million students are eligible, 20 million students are eligible for low-interest-rate loans and better repayment terms under the student loan program because we changed that, so no one will ever have an excuse that The cost is too much, and I cannot go to college again. Ninety percent of the small businesses in this country, under that economic program, were eligible for a tax cut. All they had to do was invest more money in their business, hire more people, and make this economy grow. Five and a half million Americans refinanced their homes because the interest rates went down. I just came back from St. Louis; in the previous 4 years they lost 2,000 jobs. In the first year of our administration, they gained 28,000 as automobiles in America came back. That is what it means. How many million people, we will never know, under the Family and Medical Leave Act, are now able to take a little time off when their baby's born or when their parents are sick? We know that thousands of lives will be saved because of the Brady bill. We know that; we have evidence of that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionnewyorkcity1", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-new-york-city-1", "publication_date": "27-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2587, "text": "We know that because of that assault weapons ban, police will be able to go out on the street with a little more confidence that they will not be outgunned by the people they are supposed to protect the rest of us from. We know that. These are real things that affect the real lives of real people. It is not easy to break habits of gridlock that, frankly, are the province not just of the other party, which says no a lot of the time, but of the cumbersome procedures which grip Washington. But we have been working on it. The world trade agreement, GATT, hung around for 7 years. We are going to ratify it this year. The family leave law hung around for 7 years and got vetoed twice . The Brady bill took 7 years, but it passed. The assault weapons ban to give you an idea of how difficult change is, we had for the assault weapons ban, all the living former Presidents, every police organization in the United States of America, and this President working as hard as he could, and we beat the NRA by two votes. But we are doing it. We are breaking gridlock. We are making changes. It is affecting people's lives in ways that are profound and important. And a lot of it involves not just the Government doing something for somebody but empowering people to do something for themselves. Governor Cuomo's son, Andrew, now a leader and Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, has been a leader in empowering people, starting with the homeless to the people in public housing, to live safe, constructive lives. We are trying to change the rules. No more Government handouts but Government handups, real partnerships, real community building, really trying to help people take control of their own lives. These things matter to real people. And the American people are beginning to sense this. And the more they sense it, the more we will be able to cut through the fog and let the clear sky show and the more we will be able to run on what we have done for the American people to help them help themselves. It is going to make a real difference in the life of this country. Americans have a well-known cynicism for Government. My senior Senator back home used to say that half the American people are convinced the Government would mess up a one-car parade. But you know something? We do some things pretty well. The Republicans talked about bringing down the deficit. We did it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionnewyorkcity1", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-new-york-city-1", "publication_date": "27-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2588, "text": "They talked about generating economic growth. We contributed to that. They talked about having less Government. You know, they always complained about that. But when our budgets are implemented, we will reduce over 5 years the National Government by a quarter of a million people, not by firing people but by attrition. We will use all the savings to pay for that crime bill to put another 100,000 police officers on the streets of New York and the other cities of this country. We will have the smallest Federal Government since John Kennedy was President. It will be producing more work, and the American people will be safer on their streets. That is the kind of thing that we ought to do. We can make Government work for ordinary people in ways that make sense and change lives. But let me say, everything I have tried to do to empower people to get the economy going, to make Government work for ordinary people again, all of those things are embodied in this struggle to provide health care to all Americans. People have been trying to do it for 60 years. Roosevelt wanted to do it; Truman wanted to do it. President Nixon President Nixon proposed requiring employers and employees to buy health insurance. President Carter tried to do it. We have worked for months and months and months. We worked for 9 months and involved thousands and thousands of people to put together a proposal. It will not be right for everybody. Surely, there is some things that can be improved about it. I went out and listened to the American people. They said, do a little more for small business and make sure you are going to protect small business, and make it a little less regulatory. And trust the American people to take more voluntary actions at work, but make sure you cover everybody. So we made some changes, and we did that. And there are now bills on the floor of the House and the Senate for the first time ever in the whole history of the Republic that would cover all Americans with health care. But the forces of opposition are very strong. We were talking at dinner how the great Italian political theorist, Machiavelli, said 500 years ago there was nothing so difficult in all of human affairs than to change the established order of things. Because the people that lose know it, and they fight you like crazy. And the people that are going to win are never quite sure you can deliver the goods. And so they are often not there in the trenches.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionnewyorkcity1", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-new-york-city-1", "publication_date": "27-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2589, "text": "Today we had over 100 distinguished doctors and medical personnel from all over America, including many from New York City, representing the academic health centers of America. And a brilliant doctor stood up and said, you know, people say they wish to protect what is best about American health care and fix what is wrong, but they are afraid they will mess it up if they try to fix it. Unless we finally join the ranks of all other advanced countries and provide health care to everybody, we are not going to be able to afford to keep our finest medical centers going, training the finest doctors and nurses and medical professionals. He said they run ads against the President's program, saying that if you cover everybody you will ration health care. Tell that to the 39 million Americans that do not have any health care. I say that to make this point. breaking gridlock, defeating special interests, arguing for a future, and asking people to work toward that future and making Government work for ordinary people, not to give them anything but to permit them to access a system that will enable people to take care of themselves and their families. I spend a lot of time talking to laboring groups of people, saying, I am trying to make change your friend and not your enemy; support my trade policies. Yes, it'll change the economy more and you will have to change jobs more often, but we will be more prosperous and we will provide lifetime training policies for you. And here are all these things I am trying to do to change our education and training policies to make change your friend. But I just want to tell you folks, I met two kids today when I came to New York. Whenever I go to a city, I try to let the Make-A-Wish Foundation or some other group bring some children to see me who are sick and who have health problems. And one of these children had a condition that may be fatal, but it is been in remission for a couple years 12-year-old boy, just graduated at the top of his class in elementary school here in New York City. He may have a good, long, healthy life, but I am telling you, if his parents lost their jobs, what would he do for health care? And if they tried to get another job, could they get health coverage for a child like that?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionnewyorkcity1", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-new-york-city-1", "publication_date": "27-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2590, "text": "I met a 17-year-old boy Mayor Dinkins, you can be proud of this who was wheelchair-bound, has been all his life, has a severe muscular disorder from childhood very bright young man, computer expert, wanted to write me on the White House E-mail, and I told him I was too dumb to use it, but I'd read it if he sent it. And he gave me a letter he prepared about obstacles for handicapped children and what his life was going to be like. And he said, You know, this wheelchair of mine cost, I think he said, $15,000. And he said his parents were immigrants, both of them were immigrants. And he said, Because my mother works for the city of New York, our family has been able to maintain a middle class lifestyle because our health policy pays for 80 percent of my bills. But it is been hard even for us. I had expensive surgery. I have this expensive wheelchair; I will have to replace it soon. But he said, So many of my young friends are almost destitute who are physically handicapped because of the conditions that exist. And if we were getting a good deal, the rest of us, that would be fine, but your country's spending 40 percent more on health care than any other country in the world. And it is only because we have refused to discipline ourselves to provide health care to everybody, like all our competitors do, that these stories are out there. We have to fight those who say we cannot do it. We can turn this economy around. If we can bring this deficit down, when nobody thought we could do it, if we can break gridlock, we can do this too. I ran for this job because I wanted to do what I could with the power vested by the framers of our Constitution in the Presidency to change the lives of ordinary Americans for the better. And anything, anything that diverts, divides, distracts, or destroys the spirit and the purpose of the American people, when we have so much on our plate here at home and around the world, is not good. And anything that unifies and makes us believe in ourselves and makes us better and gives our children a chance to have a better future is good. That is what we represent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteereceptionnewyorkcity1", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Reception in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-reception-new-york-city-1", "publication_date": "27-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2591, "text": "Woodrow Wilson once said that the Office of President requires the constitution of an athlete, the patience of a mother, and the endurance of an early Christian. Personally, I think he may have overstated the requirements of the Presidency. But from very long and close observation of 34 years, it seems to me that President Wilson may have been describing the requirements for congressional page. So, whether your experience on the Hill has been long or brief, each of you in this page class this morning has been through a very rigorous and a very demanding test. And I want you to know--each of you to know--that I am extremely proud of you. From this point on you will turn upward along many different paths. All of you are exceptional young men with exceptional training. I am sure that in your choices of professions or other pursuits many of you will achieve exceptional success. Whatever your pursuit, however, I hope that the experience you have had at the heart of our representative democratic system will always be a part of your life. Even if you do not choose a career of public service, I hope as private citizens you will live your lives with a high and an active sense of public duty and responsibility. This is a time of change in America. All of us are awakening to the fact that America today is far different from the land into which my generation or your generation was born. The answers, the attitudes, and the approaches of 30 years ago, or 20 years ago, or even 5 years ago, are not now adequate to meet the new obligations or the new opportunities of the 1960's. As one who shares with you a very abiding respect and affection for the Congress, I am especially gratified and pleased by the response that Congress itself has made last year and this year toward meeting the change of our changing times. Congress has done much to silence the critics and the cynics who have belabored it and who have attempted to downgrade it. You can all be proud that you served during a season when the Congress of the United States was strengthened and revitalized as a functioning, responsive, and conscientiously responsible branch of our system of government. And I am pleased that at their own direction they are now engaging in a considerable amount of introspection and study on how they can make the Congress stronger and better and more effective. As this is a changing land, so America stands as a part of the changing world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthegraduationceremonytheschoolforcapitolpageboys", "title": "Remarks at the Graduation Ceremony of the School for Capitol Page Boys.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-graduation-ceremony-the-school-for-capitol-page-boys", "publication_date": "15-06-1965", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2592, "text": "There are some who would have mankind believe that the only choices of these times are choices between political philosophies. In a real sense, the choice facing men in every nation today, old or young, large and small, is a choice between moving into the modern world with all of its unlimited potential or turning back toward the restrictive world that is dominated by the dogma and the doctrine of the 19th century. So, in your lifetimes, and in the lifetimes of a majority of the nations on earth, the total of human knowledge has doubled twice. The growth of human knowledge has made obsolete many of the causes of friction and contention and division among nations. Certainly the advance of human knowledge has made war itself obsolete and impossible as a means of resolving differences between large or small nations. Above all, the growth of human knowledge has rendered obsolete and archaic the doctrine on which the dogma of communism was constructed. Man today has in his capacity the potential of ending human misery or ending human life. We can really, for the first time, see the promise and the prospect of eliminating hunger and poverty, illness, bias, and prejudice in our own land and, we would hope, all around the world. So, this is the work that we want to do. And this is the work which your generation will do. And that is why I have said over, and over, and over again that we of the United States invite all peoples--East and West--to pull back their curtains, and to tear down their walls, and to come out of the darkness of dogma and walk all together in the bright light of human knowledge and human freedom toward the peace that mankind must make together, and must keep together, on this earth. I have seen many classes of Capitol pages graduate throughout the years. I would say that the class of which you are members faces the brightest and the most thrilling and the most hopeful prospects of any. For never before have young men like yourselves had so sure and so strong a prospect of being a part of the constructive building of a sane and a sensible and a rational world. Whatever profession you choose as your own, I hope you will never forget that the ultimate success of our system rests upon the contributions that every citizen makes to public service. What did I do today to make my country better, to make it stronger, to make my Government more efficient and more useful?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthegraduationceremonytheschoolforcapitolpageboys", "title": "Remarks at the Graduation Ceremony of the School for Capitol Page Boys.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-graduation-ceremony-the-school-for-capitol-page-boys", "publication_date": "15-06-1965", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2593, "text": "And whether as the elected or the elector you will have a great opportunity to be leaders of your times in fostering the responsible and the responsive politics that is needed at every level--local and State, as well as national and international ? You have been privileged to know some of the great leaders of these times in the legislative halls. And I hope that when your time comes you will keep faith by being leaders then in the cause of peace and freedom for the world, and for progress for all of humankind. I went to sleep last night after reading a letter from a mother who was the mother of only one child, and that boy was now 20 years of age. And she had just gotten a letter from him and he said in 20 days he would be on his way to Viet-Nam. And she said, Mr. , I hesitate to take your time to write this letter, but I did not want to see my boy go away unless and until I could have your assurance that our Government and our country needs that boy and needs him where he is going. He had lost his father. It was a difficult letter to dictate an answer to, but I had to write it this morning. And I told her that our liberty and our freedom was so precious, and liberty and freedom was in danger. And we had to call upon those who were capable and equipped to help us protect it. And all of us in our own way were doing the very best we could to preserve freedom, and that I did think it was necessary. The mother had said in her letter that if t felt that, that she would not , under any circumstances, object, although she did have to admit that while she did not want him out of the service, and she did not want him not to face up to his duty, she had to admit that she did not look with any favor to his going to that place at this time. So, those of you who in a short time will be in the service of your country in one capacity or another, know how blessed you are to live in a system that was inherited by you as the result of the sacrifice of many thousands of young men like yourselves. I believe that as you leave your present work that you will have gained from the halls of the Congress a sense of duty and a sense of responsibility that will always make the job of serving your country a pleasant one for you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthegraduationceremonytheschoolforcapitolpageboys", "title": "Remarks at the Graduation Ceremony of the School for Capitol Page Boys.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-graduation-ceremony-the-school-for-capitol-page-boys", "publication_date": "15-06-1965", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2621, "text": "I first apologize for the fact that we have kept you waiting. But as we came through the city the crowds were so large that we were unable to keep on our schedule. that the people of Berlin are free and that despite a wall this is one city and one people and one nation. I saw many signs as we came through the streets of the city some were in English, most were in German. The ones in German, of course, I could not understand. But there was one sign that was a combination that made me feel very much at home. I first came to this city 22 years ago. At that time most of those that I see here, or many of those, were not yet born. And to many who came here then, Berlin seemed to be a city without hope and without a future. But the pessimists at that period, over 20 years ago, did not know the people of Berlin. And it is you who have done it. It is you who have rebuilt this great city; it is you who have stood the shock of crises; it is you who have kept the faith in yourselves and in your allies. Berlin may look lonely on the map -but it is a vital part of the world that believes in the capacity of man to govern himself with responsibility and to shape his destiny in dignity. If this is an age of symbols, one of the great symbols of the age is this city. And what you do here is done for free men everywhere throughout the world. You stand for a cause much bigger than yourselves and this is the greatest destiny that a man or a woman can have. Because your will to remain free strengthens the will to freedom of all men; your courage in the face of deliberate and constant challenge fortifies the courage of all those who love liberty. The presence of an American President in Berlin, following a recent visit by a British Prime Minister, is another kind of symbol. It is a way of demonstrating unmistakably our long-standing commitment to the people of West Berlin. No unilateral move, no illegal act, no form of pressure from any source will shake the resolve of the Western nations to defend their rightful status as protectors of the people of free Berlin. All the world admires bravery. Bravery in a crisis is expected of those who love freedom; what is much more difficult, much more rare, is bravery day-by-day the steady fortitude that resists remorseless pressure and refuses to permit the slow erosion of liberties.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesiemensfactorywestberlin", "title": "Remarks at the Siemens Factory, West Berlin.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-siemens-factory-west-berlin", "publication_date": "27-02-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2622, "text": "That is the remarkable bravery of the Berliner, and it stands as a shining example to people everywhere throughout the world. The partnership between our two peoples was forged back in the dark days of the blockade when men like Lucius Clay and Ernst Reuter1 personified our determination to survive as free men. It is appropriate, 20 years after the end of that blockade, that we pay tribute to all who suffered for the ideal of freedom in those days of physical privation and spiritual triumph. As I viewed the progress of this vital city today, I knew that that sacrifice was not in vain. You have justified the support and the commitment of your friends and, as a result, no city in the world has more friends, or more devoted friends, than has the city of Berlin. The American responsibility here is derived from the most solemn international agreements. But what we have gone through together in those 24 years has given those agreements a special meaning. Berlin must remain free. I do not say this in any spirit of bravado or belligerence. I am simply stating an irrevocable fact of international life. Our commitment to the freedom of Berlin has never been more steady, never more firm than it is today. that Berlin shall be free and that Berlin shall live. For its part, Berlin has remained steadfast. No one should doubt the determination of the United States to live up to its obligations. The question before the world is not whether we shall rise to the challenge of defending Berlin we have already demonstrated that we shall. The question now is how best to end the challenge and clear the way for a peaceful solution to the problem of a divided Germany. When we say that we reject any unilateral alteration of the status quo in Berlin, we do not mean that we consider the status quo to be satisfactory. Nobody benefits from a stalemate, least of all the people of Berlin. Let us set behind us the stereotype of Berlin as a provocation. Let us, all of us, view the situation in Berlin as an invocation, a call to end the tension of the past age here and everywhere. Without haste, but without rest. That is how, step by step, we shall strive together to construct a durable peace. There were times in the past when Berlin had to stand its ground in defiance of powerful forces that threatened to overwhelm it. Your determination in those times of danger demonstrated beyond the shadow of a doubt that threats and coercion could never succeed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesiemensfactorywestberlin", "title": "Remarks at the Siemens Factory, West Berlin.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-siemens-factory-west-berlin", "publication_date": "27-02-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2623, "text": "I am indeed proud to join that company of men which has been awarded this medal during these years since Mr. Hoover first accepted it. And that reminds me that 30 years is just too long a time to elapse between Republican Presidents. And that is a sentiment which I think Mr. Hoover would share. Ladies and gentlemen, as I listened to the statistics with which I was overwhelmed by General--and we called him Slam Marshall--I had the feeling it was a rather good thing he did not know all those figures, and give them to me somewhere along about December of 1944. I would have been so impressed that I think my mind would have been taken off the war. And certainly it is enlightening, even at this late date, to find out exactly what such devoted and professionally competent people achieved. And indeed it was the confidence of military men that our technical and professional people could do this. That was at the bottom of the plan that came later to be known as Operation Overlord. This plan came finally to a preliminary state of completion in about April of 1942. It was placed before General Marshall and all of the possibilities were explained to him, and he approved and later got the approval, of course, of the President and the British counterparts. But they also had the great faith that the American engineering profession could provide us the equipment and the materiel that would be needed, finally, for victory. There are one or two incidents that General Marshall did not mention. I am not going to go too deeply into statistics, but there is a story--a true one--that I thought always was interesting. The American engineers equipped with the kind of mechanisms such as he mentioned , went over to Malta; and there was a British air officer, General Park, a very competent and gallant man, who knew that the Americans needed a new fighter field fight close by. The only spot that was possible to use was an island and I think it was named Gozo, but if I am wrong General Gruenther will tell me after we leave this meeting. But anyway it was nothing but a mountain. And the British having long ago given up with their hand tools on building this field, said to the engineer colonel visiting for the evening, How long would it take you to get this field ready? And the British thought, at least, that anything under a year, if you could do it at all, would be all right. And this man took a look and said, Oh, 12 to 14 days.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponreceivingthehoovermedalaward", "title": "Remarks Upon Receiving the Hoover Medal Award", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-receiving-the-hoover-medal-award", "publication_date": "10-01-1961", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2624, "text": "And the British officer was so astonished, and really so insulted in a sense, he said, When can you start? .... Well, he said, let us see what headquarters will give me. And he cabled back to Africa--he was over in Sicily--and it happened that all this equipment was in a harbor in Philippeville and ready to go, so it went right over. From the time the equipment reached there, 13 days later, our first fighter flew on and off the field. And General Park made a special flight to me and said, I take back everything about American bragging; it is all true. And then, many months later, we were about to go across the Rhine, and we made finally, down near Wesel, what we called a power crossing. It was way down toward the mouth--it was flooded rivers and it looked pretty bad--all the bridges of course were blown, as the general said. But we wanted a railroad bridge just to the north of the river, and so the supply people, showing their confidence in themselves, invited me-and I think it was 12 days later--to ride on the first train that was to go across the Rhine on their bridge. They had not yet gotten all the piles and equipment on the side. Well, the amazing thing is that 11 days I went up and they were ready to go, and I did not have time to stay, but they cut off a piece of rail and gave it to me as a trinket to show that they had done it. That was another of those great accomplishments that people called impossible and therefore took a little time to do. But finally there was one little incident that impressed me almost more than any other. We had in Normandy what is called the bocage country, and it is a country that is very closely bounded and broken up with hedges, fields the size of this room are not uncommon, and these hedges are so old that they have banks of earth formed up around them. And so you have these big hedges--enormous--sometimes 20 feet high--15 feet and that kind, growing out of these big banks of earth. Every time our tanks would try to go across, of course, they would belly up, and even a machine gun would go through them, and we were losing tanks and pretty helpless. His name was Culin, and he had an idea.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponreceivingthehoovermedalaward", "title": "Remarks Upon Receiving the Hoover Medal Award", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-receiving-the-hoover-medal-award", "publication_date": "10-01-1961", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2625, "text": "And his idea was that we could fasten knives, great big steel knives in front of these tanks, and as they came along they would cut off these banks right at the ground level--they would go through on the level keel--would carry with themselves a little bit of camouflage for awhile. And this idea was brought to the captain, to the major and to the colonel, and it got high enough that somebody did something about it-and that was General Bradley--and he did it very quickly. Because this seemed like a crazy idea, they did not even go to the engineers very fast, because they were afraid of the technical advice, but then someone did have a big question, Where are you going to get the steel for all this thing? Well now, happily, the Germans tried to keep us from going on the beaches with great steel chevaux de frise --big crosses, they were all big bars of steel down on the beach where the Germans left it. And he got it--got these things sharpened up--and it worked fine. The biggest and happiest group I suppose in all the Allied Armies that night were those that knew that this thing worked. Now Sergeant Culin later had a leg shot off, but he is still strong and healthy--in New York the last time I saw him--a salesman. And he is one of those humble Americans who had an idea, who had the courage to bring it up to someone who could do something about it. And unquestionably he saved--the idea, properly implemented, of course, by technical and professional men--saved thousands of lives. So that I submit that sometimes your engineering profession can profit by a little bit of lay imagination and wit. By no means, my friends, did I mean to supplement General Marshall's history with these little accounts, but I could not help having my mind jumping around to the theatre of those years, and exciting years. I cannot tell you how proud I am for the award I have been given, how complimented I am by General' Marshall's brilliant remarks this evening, and how happy indeed that I have met so many of you this evening. see you again one day, when I am not quite so busy as today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponreceivingthehoovermedalaward", "title": "Remarks Upon Receiving the Hoover Medal Award", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-receiving-the-hoover-medal-award", "publication_date": "10-01-1961", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2646, "text": "I am very proud and very delighted to be here on this particular occasion. I was saying, for the one real Westerner up here at the head table, he sure is duded up. You know, I was very worried--and we were just talking about it--we were worried, Did they really mean that? So you can imagine my relief when I met Pete out there at the airport and saw, yep, they did, because I had a picture of myself standing up here this way in front of a bunch of people dressed like the lawyer from the East. But I can only tell you, after a year and a half in Washington, somebody says casual western to me, that is what they are going to get. The Senate has been called the most exclusive club in the world. The hundred men and women there represent the 50 States. And you know, sometimes we forget or sometimes we are young enough that we just did not know or were not aware that that is exactly what the Senators do represent-that not too many years ago it was changed to popular election?and that Senators were actually chosen by State governments. They are there to represent the interests in this federation of sovereign States of their particular sovereign State as well as the national interests of the federation. In about 10 weeks, Californians are going to choose which of two men is best able to represent the State. One of them has held the highest elective office in this State, that of Governor. He took office 8 years ago, in the middle of the fiscal year, with a $500 million surplus in the State cash box. Previous to that, the State of California had returned the last surplus before that $500 million-we could not return it because the administration had to leave in the middle of the fiscal year?but the one previous to that we turned back $850 million in the form of a rebate. And I have often thought nothing ever delineated so clearly the difference between the two parties as the statement of a Senator in the opposing party who stormed into my office one day when we were giving back that $850 million and said he considered that giving that money back was a misuse of public funds. Well, the new Governor did not give back the $500 million. And now he seeks to move on to greener fields, leaving the State a few million dollars in the hole, which is against the constitution of the State of California.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraisingdinnerlosangelescaliforniaforunitedstatessenatecandidatepete", "title": "Remarks at a Fund-raising Dinner in Los Angeles, California, for United States Senate Candidate Pete Wilson", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fund-raising-dinner-los-angeles-california-for-united-states-senate-candidate-pete", "publication_date": "23-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2647, "text": "And it is a little frightening when you stop to think that if he were in Washington, he would not be dealing in millions, he'd be dealing in billions. Now, as an alternative, we can choose a man who was a part of the California State Legislature when California was climbing out of that fiscal swamp, turning back to the people surpluses every time we got one as rebates to the people. He then became mayor of one of our great cities. And that city is recognized nationwide as one of the best run communities in the United States. Will we make our choice based on campaign slogans or spot ads? Or will we, the people of California, do as Al Smith admonished once and look at the record? Is there any relationship between what the Governor says he will do and what the Governor has done? I understand, though, that a Senator from Massachusetts is going to come out here and campaign in his behalf. That same Senator from Massachusetts came out and campaigned for a relative of the present Governor 16 years ago when I was running. And he made a great point up and down the State that the people should watch out, because I had never held public office before. Well, you know, he had never held public office before he became a Senator. As a matter of fact, he'd never held a job. But let me try and tell you how important it is that we hold this slim lead that we have, that slim majority in the United States Senate. It is the first time that we have had a majority in one of the Houses of Congress in decades. And without that, we could not achieve what has been achieved in the last year and a half. Well, I think one of the most historic changes in government?a 180-degree turn from the historic pattern over the last decades of tax and tax and spend and spend, and do not worry about the public debt, we owe it to ourselves. When we took office, it was at the end of 2, years of double-digit inflation?12.4 percent was the rate when we arrived; the interest rate, 21 1/2 percent, prime rate. The rate of increase in government spending had touched 18 percent, and 2, million workers, in that last campaign year of 1980, had lost their jobs. We were not quite to the middle of the fiscal year when we took office so the '81 budget was in place, and there was not much we could do about that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraisingdinnerlosangelescaliforniaforunitedstatessenatecandidatepete", "title": "Remarks at a Fund-raising Dinner in Los Angeles, California, for United States Senate Candidate Pete Wilson", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fund-raising-dinner-los-angeles-california-for-united-states-senate-candidate-pete", "publication_date": "23-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2648, "text": "But we had to proceed immediately with the fiscal budget for '82, which would go into effect on October of 1981. That budget was you know, under the pattern in Washington budgets are proposed for a few years in advance. The unemployment kept on increasing, the recession of 1980 became the recession of 1981. But I remember campaigning in which I stood in communities and areas in which the unemployment rate at that time had reached as high as 20 percent, and I called it a depression. And I was immediately corrected by the incumbent, who said it was a recession. I do not know whether you will recall, but I told him that a recession was when your neighbor lost his job; a depression was when you'd lost yours-- --and relief would be when he lost his. But we proposed an economic recovery program almost the instant that we were there, and it was a long and hard struggle, if you will remember. And then just about this time of year a year ago, we passed and I signed here in California our economic recovery program which reduced proposed government spending over the next 3 years by $130 billion and contained also the greatest tax cut?single tax cut in the history of the United States. Now, the program did not go into effect until October of last year, but by September the critics were already calling it a failure. It had not started yet, so to make it easier to identify they renamed it Reaganomics. Now, I do not think they were trying to honor me? ?with that, but if they were, I just want them to know that I had already received a distinguished honor that they could in no way equal. In the tiny village of Ballyporeen in County Tipperary in Ireland, where my great-grandfather left from to come to America, they have named a pub after me. You see, if you are for free enterprise, the word gets around. It continues to be phased in over a 3-year period. The second part of that, the second phase was the tax cut that you all received on the first of July. The 12.4-percent inflation rate has been running at less than 6 percent for the last 6 months. And after a decade of decline, after a time when incomes went up some 120-odd percent but the actual real earnings of the American people kept going down and the standard of living kept going down, personal income for July -- that single month, up 1 percent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraisingdinnerlosangelescaliforniaforunitedstatessenatecandidatepete", "title": "Remarks at a Fund-raising Dinner in Los Angeles, California, for United States Senate Candidate Pete Wilson", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fund-raising-dinner-los-angeles-california-for-united-states-senate-candidate-pete", "publication_date": "23-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2649, "text": "And if you wanted to annualize that instead of keep on doing that every month, that is a 12-percent increase. Disposable personal income after payment of income tax went up 2.1 percent in July. The savings rate?and in this country of ours, for the last several years personal savings, the very essential to having a capital pool for investment that industry can borrow from -- that savings has been less than that of our counterparts in the other industrial nations in the world. But in June, before the tax cut, it had gone up to 7.3 percent. It had been 6.9 percent in May. It has been steadily down for the months and a long time before, as I have said. You do not get the figures as early on that one, so we will wait a few weeks before we know what it is for July. Housing starts were up 34 percent in July. The permits for new housing were up 174,000 over June. Ninety-day Treasury notes upon which we were paying 15 1/2-percent interest?the government was paying just a couple of weeks ago--are now down to less than 8 percent. Fraud and waste--and we have a task force that is been in that and reporting to me every 6 months, and the last report on their 6 months they had saved $5.8 billion for us?thousand of audits, thousands of indictments, and hundreds and hundreds of convictions. And last year's tax cut, which as I say was to be phased in over a 3-year period, is still the largest tax cut in history in spite of what happened last week, because over the 3 years, the coming 3 years, even with the bill that has just been passed, the American people will get a tax cut in these 3 years of $335 billion. And accompanying that will be spending outlay reductions of $280 billion. federalism. There is a program that we have been working with Governors-well, some Governors.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraisingdinnerlosangelescaliforniaforunitedstatessenatecandidatepete", "title": "Remarks at a Fund-raising Dinner in Los Angeles, California, for United States Senate Candidate Pete Wilson", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fund-raising-dinner-los-angeles-california-for-united-states-senate-candidate-pete", "publication_date": "23-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2650, "text": "We have been working with mayors, we have been working with city council members, county officials, State legislatures, to work out a return to the tenth amendment; to give back to the States and the cities and the counties of this country the programs, the powers, the authority that were unjustly seized by the Federal Government in denial of the tenth amendment of the Constitution; to put government, as much as possible, those functions that are proper, back in those levels of government that are closest to the people. Now, who would you like to have in California helping administer that switch back to that kind of federalism? Someone whose first great battle of history-making proportions was against the medfly? Or someone who has served in the State legislature for years, someone who has now served as the mayor of one of our major cities for years, who knows the local problems and knows what the Federal Government should do if we are to have the kind of honest government, efficient government that we should have for all of us throughout the Nation? If ever there was a watchword that was appropriate, it is in this election. And that is, with Pete Wilson's opponent, with regard to him, that we should say, Pay attention to what he does, not what he says. Let me just give you a little example. It was not too long ago that he stepped up to the 155-millimeter microphones and fired a salvo at Jim Watt. And it was all about--he single-handedly, the Governor of California, was going to protect the coastline of California from the threat of oil. And this summer alone, the present Governor of California has approved drilling permits for 20 more wells on the very edge of the Santa Barbara sanctuary. Well, when we were in Sacramento, as Pete knows, we'd laid out some of the great scenic areas of California and drew lines out to the 3-mile limit and said, No matter what, there will be no drilling inside these beautiful scenic areas. And a Republican administration in Washington continued the line on out beyond the 3-mile limit and said, We will observe your sanctuaries. They may not be in the sanctuary, but you can throw a rock from any one of them into the sanctuary from where they are going to be drilled. So, as I say, he talked a great war; he has not exactly been fighting that war. This?I cannot tell you?and This is the first time I have ever been a before-dinner speaker.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraisingdinnerlosangelescaliforniaforunitedstatessenatecandidatepete", "title": "Remarks at a Fund-raising Dinner in Los Angeles, California, for United States Senate Candidate Pete Wilson", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fund-raising-dinner-los-angeles-california-for-united-states-senate-candidate-pete", "publication_date": "23-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2651, "text": "But nothing of what we have achieved, nothing of what we have accomplished could have been done if we did not, for one of these rare moments in history, have that majority in the United States Senate. I'd like to have a majority in the other House, but in off-year elections history says that you do not usually gain in that off-year election. But I can tell you this. The Senator who is coming out to campaign for Pete's opponent is a member of a very exclusive little group of a half a dozen Senators who have set an all-time record in the history of the Senate for spending; in fact, more spending than any other Senators that have ever been there. We know some of the things advocated by Pete's opponent and what he would stand for. I have not touched on another area, but one of which I am very proud. When we took office, the supposed voluntary military was a failure. People were talking that we could not exist or have a good defense without the draft. Now, even though we have a registration?and I am convinced that that is worth keeping?I am opposed to a peacetime draft and I am even more so now, because we do not need it. We found that half our airplanes could not fly on any given day for lack of spare parts. We found that on any given day there were Navy vessels that could not leave port either because they did not have enough crew or they did not have enough parts. And we set out to do something about that. Now, we have been accused of spending too much on military and cutting social reform programs too much, and I know which side Pete's opponent would come down on on that, and I know where Pete would come down from his experience as a legislator. I think it should be recognized that when John F. Kennedy was President, only 27 percent of his budget went for the social reforms to help the needy and the helpless in this country, and 46 percent went for defense. In our budget for 1983, about 53 percent of our budget is going for the needy and the helpless, and only 29 percent is going for defense. And yet, the morale, the esprit de corps, the reenlistments of men in the service?men and women in the service today, the level, the educational level of the people going into the service making it a career, is something we have not seen in a great many years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraisingdinnerlosangelescaliforniaforunitedstatessenatecandidatepete", "title": "Remarks at a Fund-raising Dinner in Los Angeles, California, for United States Senate Candidate Pete Wilson", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fund-raising-dinner-los-angeles-california-for-united-states-senate-candidate-pete", "publication_date": "23-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2652, "text": "And I just have to tell you one of my favorite little stories about that. Our Ambassador to Luxembourg wrote me a letter, and he said that he had been up on the East German border, visiting the Second Armored Cavalry Regiment. And he told me how great they looked. And then he said that one of these fellows, a 19-yearold trooper, followed him over to his helicopter and asked him if he could get a message to me. And the kid said, Well, will you tell the President that we are proud to be here, and we ain't scared o' nothin'. I just thought you'd like to know about the attitude of those who are guarding our shores, because they are the real freedom fighters. It is by doing their job and doing it right that they can be a deterrent to war. And you have never gone into a war because you were too strong; you go into them when the other fellow thinks you are not strong. So, you have, really, a clear-cut choice here. The more strength we have in the Senate, the more we can gain allies over there in the House. You send Pete Wilson. San Diego will find a way to get along without him. You send Pete Wilson to Washington. And just?if you cannot send him, do not send anybody. And, as I say, I know I am preaching to the choir, because you would not be here if you did not -- --feel that way. But God bless you all. And we are going to keep it up in Washington. And we are going to keep the country turned around on this new course until we have reduced the percentage of gross national product that is being taken by the Government and being spent by the Government until once again Government is back spending within its means. And then my dream is that day we make the first payment, I do not care what size it is, on the national debt to prove to our kids that we are not going to dump it all on them. Let me just say, deep, if you will, in your hearts?! said, I think, the last time I was out here and, maybe, to many of you, I do not know all the national anthems in the world, but I do know this. I do not know of any other that ends with a question. Does that star spangled banner yet wave o'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraisingdinnerlosangelescaliforniaforunitedstatessenatecandidatepete", "title": "Remarks at a Fund-raising Dinner in Los Angeles, California, for United States Senate Candidate Pete Wilson", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fund-raising-dinner-los-angeles-california-for-united-states-senate-candidate-pete", "publication_date": "23-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2653, "text": "You have done me a very great honor. Perhaps you can imagine what a feeling it is for a citizen of one of the newest of the great nations to be made a citizen of this ancient city. It is a distinction which I am sure you are conferring upon me as the representative of the great people for whom I speak. One who has been a student of history can not accept an honor of this sort without having his memory run back to the extraordinary series of events which have centered in this place. But as I have thought to-day, I have been impressed by the contrast between the temporary and the permanent things. Many political changes have centered about Rome, from the time when from a little city she grew to be the mistress of an empire, and change after change has swept away many things, altering the very form of her affairs, but the thing that has remained permanent has been the spirit of Rome and of the Italian people. That spirit seems to have caught with each age the characteristic purpose of the age. This imperial people now gladly represents the freedom of nations. This people which at one time seemed to conceive the purpose of governing the world now takes part in the liberal enterprise of offering the world its own government. I have been reflecting in these recent days about a colossal blunder that has just been made-the blunder of force by the Central Empires. If Germany had waited a single generation, she would have had a commercial empire of the world. She was not willing to conquer by skill, by enterprise, by commercial success. She must needs attempt to conquer by arms, and the world will always acclaim the fact that it is impossible to conquer it by arms; that the only thing that conquers it is the sort of service which can be rendered in trade, in intercourse, in friendship, and that there is no conquering power which can suppress the freedom of the human spirit. I have rejoiced personally in the partnership of the Italian and the American people, because it was a new partnership in an old enterprise, an enterprise predestined to succeed wherever it is undertaken-the enterprise that has always borne that handsome name which we call Liberty. Men have pursued it sometimes like a mirage that seemed to elude them, that seemed to run before them as they advanced, but never have they flagged in their purpose to achieve it, and I believe that I am not deceived in supposing that in this age of ours they are nearer to it than they ever were before.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecapitolromeitaly", "title": "Remarks at the Capitol in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-capitol-rome-italy", "publication_date": "03-01-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2656, "text": "You got a lot of people standing outside trying to get in. Would anybody like to give up their slot? I want to just pay my respects. CPAC is really, what a job they have done, and I am thrilled to be back in the heart of Texas with the proud conservative patriots, who are courageously leading the battle to frankly save our country. That is what it is about. For a year before election, the fake news media said Texas was in play. It is in play. You know what in play means? And they were right, except it was totally in play for me. No, it was in play for me. They said, The polls have closed in Texas. ENTITY has won Texas. But how long did we listen to it? It was in play. it will never be in play if we have the right candidate. This state is never going to be in play. this is a very, very special place, and we are going to keep it the way it is, and we are going to bring back your energy. I told you this was going to happen. I told you. Actually, Texas believed us. With the help of everyone here today, we will defeat the radical left, the socialists, Marxists, and the critical race theorists. Whoever thought would be even using that term. We will secure our borders. We will stop left wing cancel culture. We will restore free speech and fair elections, and we will make America great again. From the very beginning, the people in this room have been some of the staunchest and fiercest supporters of our incredible movement, the greatest political movement in the history of our country. And I can say that, and nobody ever even challenges me. They do not challenge us. I want to personally thank each and every one of you for your incredible support, and your support of CPAC. You never stopped fighting for me, and I will never, ever stop fighting for you. I especially want to thank two wonderful and really extraordinary people who make this incredible event possible. You know them almost as well as I do. You have taken it to a whole new level. I appreciate it. Everybody appreciates it. Also with us is a true Texas conservative, and a real leader. He is fast on the draw. We love Ken. He is going back home to mom. His mom is a big supporter of ours, by the way. He is going to have a rough night.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2657, "text": "We are grateful to be joined as well by a wonderful, wonderful, not only political person, but a wonderful person, Governor Kristi Noem. And we have many, many members of Congress here. Could I ask our great Congress men and women to stand up please, right now? And countless other conservative leaders and politicians and people that we love and we respect, and we are fighting with and we are fighting for. For generations, the American conservative union has helped lead the charge to defend our values, protect our country, and preserve our glorious American heritage. You see they are taking our heritage away. But today that heritage is under threat like never before. He is mild by comparison. In a matter of mere months, Joe Biden has brought our country to the brink of ruin. Right here in Texas we are the epicenter of a border and migration crisis unlike anything anyone has ever seen before in the history of our country. At the same time, they have totally obliterated your energy industry. I told you. Under my administration, we achieved a historic reduction in illegal immigration. We ended the horrible catch and release, where we catch a criminal and release him into our country. We actually said, Nope, it is called stay in Mexico. And it worked very well, and we had the support of Mexico. Who else could do that? And you have a great president of Mexico, a friend of mine. He is done a great job. We are on opposite sides of the spectrum, but we got along great, and he is been terrific, and I appreciate it. We stopped asylum fraud, and we struck critical agreements with other countries to stop illegal immigration. We called it, in fact, remain in Mexico. Get released, and you never see these people again. They say, Come back in three years for a court case. We reduced drugs pouring across our border by the highest percentage ever. We shut down the migrant caravans. You have not seen those caravans. In those caravans, you have some deadly people. We dealt a crippling blow to MS-13. We deported criminal aliens by the thousands and thousands and thousands, and we built almost 500 miles of border wall, the exact wall that the border patrol wanted. I thought we could use nice concrete plank. They said, Sir, we want steel, concrete, and rebar. So we can all the drones the Democrat Remember they wanted drones? I said, Drones are not going to stop people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2658, "text": "Do you remember the statement during the campaign? Everything's obsolete like two days after they come up with it nowadays. They got a better one. In a thousand years, you will say, Wheels and walls. She has a nice wall around her house. Now the Biden administration has turned the border into the single greatest disaster in American history, and perhaps in world history. Nobody's ever seen a border like this. Other countries do not have a border like this. Illegal border crossings are up over 1,000% from last year. For the last three months in a row, more illegal alien minors have arrived than any other month in United States states history. This is the major pipeline for MS-13. These are the worst gang members, they say, anywhere in the world. They bring recruits to every state in our country. they run it like a business. What a job he is done. Think of that, and they are being resettled in cities and towns all across the United States at tax payers' expense. And the people in those cities and towns have no idea that they are coming. The tax payers will also be forced to pay for relatives to be flown from Central America to join them. Did you ever hear of chain migration? You come in illegally, and we will also bring your mother, your father, your grandparents, your brothers, your sisters, your aunts, your uncles. We had on the West Side Highway. He was driving rapidly down the West Side Highway at a very excessive speed. A big group of people, and he decided to make a right turn, and he killed many, and he maimed many. People go out because they want to put themselves in shape, and they end up going back home missing a leg, missing a couple of arms, or dead. And he had the right to bring people in with him. And he had many that he brought in, but we took very good care of him. But this administration does not do that. Many of these children, for the first time ever, it is a terrible thing that is happening to them, are on suicide watch. They end up in a place that they have no idea where it is. Meanwhile, ICE removals are at the lowest level ever, and they are great people. All of America's now one giant sanctuary city. We were fighting sanctuary cities, and doing very well. They are meant for criminal aliens. That is what they are meant for.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2659, "text": "Under our administration, we sent a very different message to the coyotes, human traffickers, child smugglers, vicious criminal cartels, and savage MS-13 gang members. When I was president, illegal alien criminals knew that if they trespassed across our border, they would be caught, they would be detained, and they would be sent to jail, or we would send them the hell back to where they came from. We created the most secure border in all of American history by far. Biden's border crisis is also helping drive an unprecedented crime wave, and you see the crime wave. Even without this you see all in Democrat run cities. The bloodshed and violence in these cities is reaching epidemic proportions. Homicides are up 42% in Los Angeles, 37% in Philadelphia, 68% in Atlanta, and over 500% in Portland over this time last year. What they did to Portland, and nothing happens to Antifa, and nothing happens to BLM. But to people that are patriots or conservatives or Republicans, they stay in jails for extended periods of time, and they destroy their lives. We are not going to take it anymore. In New York City, crime is out of control. It is at record levels with nobody being prosecuted except of course innocent Republicans are being prosecuted. The Democrats know their policies on crime are so unpopular, so radical, so crazy, they are now trying to pretend they never led the defund the police movement in the first place. We never said defund the police. You know who did it? The Republicans did it. That is what they do. ENTITY had to do with Russia. He loves Russia. He loves Putin. He loves everybody. After two years, they figured, gee. And after awhile, people actually believed this stuff. But now they are saying, Defund the police. We did not say it. You have to be wise to it. If you support defunding the police, vote for the radical left Democrats, and you see what is happening to the cities where they defunded the police. If you want more police and more cops on the streets, vote for America first Republicans or let us put it very simply, vote for MAGA. The same far left Democrats who are defunding police are also leading an all out crusade to strip you, the law abiding citizens of America, of your God given Second Amendment rights. I told you again. I told you. I told you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2660, "text": "And I preserved that right 100%, and you think that was easy? Republicans must never waiver in demanding that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. But it is not only the Second Amendment that the leftists want to destroy. They are hard at work to abolish the First Amendment as well. Probably all amendments, when you get right down to it. The radical left and big tech's attack on free speech is unlawful. To protect the Constitutional rights and liberties of every citizen, this week I filed a major class action. Lot of people are joining. We are suing Facebook, Twitter, and Google. And to show you the arrogance, I was just talking to Mercedes, I guess. Matt, you announced that they are trying to take this incredible, I think much more than 50% of our country. Because there is no way they can be 50% with defund the police, sanctuary cities. And all of the crazy things that they espouse. But I heard they just filed where they want to take everybody down. It is like a spoiled child. I want that toy, dad. But I also want this one, this one, this one. We are taking Mark Zookerbucks, Jack Dorsey, and the other Silicon Valley billionaires to federal court, and we will keep on fighting until we have stopped this assault on our liberties and until we have restored the sacred right to freedom of speech for every single American. Could anybody believe we are even talking about this subject two years ago, three years ago? Who would have believed it? In addition to their malicious attacks on free speech, these Silicon Valley tyrants are also attacking our democracy itself. The big tech election interference in 2020 was an outrageous assault upon our Republic and upon the American voter. Terrible thing has happened to our country. We are being laughed at all over the world. Our election has been studied by other countries. They are not going to do it that way. Mark Zuckerberg alone spent $ 400 million dollars on election meddling. In virtually all of the key swing states, he funded unmanned and unprotected drop boxes that were deployed in Democrat run cities and heavily Democrat precincts to scoop up ballots which were supposedly 94, 95, 96% for Joe Biden, because he campaigned so well from his basement. How about where Biden did substantially better in the swing states than Barack Hussein Obama with the black population? Now, even though he did terribly throughout the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2661, "text": "But in those five places, he did very well. You know about that, Louie, right? He did five places, he did very well. But they practiced that and countless other schemes to illegitimately and illegally boost the Democrat vote. I can tell you what happened. At the same time, the big tech giants worked together to suppress and diminish news coverage that was negative for Joe Biden. Look at all these stories that came up, and they were wiped out. Anything negative for Biden or the radical left Democrats, they just suppressed. The New York Post broke one of the biggest scandals ever to emerge in a presidential election, providing extraordinarily detailed evidence of the corruption of Joe Biden and where is Hunter Biden? He is painting right now for 500,00 a piece. His highest and best use, I can tell you, is in a studio to paint. He set a record for the highest price for a person that never painted a picture before. Then without any basis whatsoever, Twitter and Facebook banned the New York Post's account of this terrible story. After the election, one poll showed that at least 10% of Joe Biden's voters would have switched their vote if they had known about Joe and Hunter Biden's scandals, enough to flip the results of numerous states. But do not worry about it, because we won those states anyway. We won them all. They would have found the votes. They would have found those votes. If it was reported, they would have found the votes. Little more, they would have churned out some more ballots. The truth was covered up, and it had a giant impact on the election. This must never happen to another party's presidential candidate again. We are a laughing stock all over the world. And you know who knows it better than even the people in this room? They know it. Furthermore, these big tech companies interfered with and undermined the sacred integrity of the ballot box by censoring any honest discussion of election fraud. You say election fraud, you get canceled. The cancel culture, they are very tough on it. But the thing they really do not want is because we are too close to home. They could not help themselves. It does not go all the way, but it goes far enough and you see what they did. They want to stay away from talking about the election results. Every time the media references the election hoax, they say the fraud is unproven.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2662, "text": "You saw what happened in Georgia the other day. They found 35,000 votes. Then they deleted in Georgia over 100,000 votes. Because they were so bad voters, I said, Why did not you try doing it before the election? Why did not you do it before the election? We always had the reputation of being a wonderful, brilliant country for voting, and now everyone knows. The governor of Georgia and Georgia secretary of state let us down. They let us down. And by the way, the voting law they passed is far weaker than that of Texas and other states. You hear that, Mr. Attorney General? They do not even have signature verification. Could you imagine passing a voting law? But they are getting a little good because everyone thinks, Oh, they are passing this no, it is not. And you notice they are the only state that is being sued by the federal government. Because it is an easy target, because the governor and the secretary of state will not defend like that guy will defend. So I only speak the truth. And the reason the Attorney General of the United States is going after Georgia is it is so bad what they have done, and they will probably win, and that defense will not take place. They go out and they really worked very hard on finding the right state to look at. Now Stacey Abrams in Georgia got them to sign what is called a mandated consent decree, which was not approved by the legislature, therefore it is illegal, and makes it very easy for Democrats to cheat and to win elections. You do not have too many of them in Texas, do you, Louie? He only beat 22 people. I said, Doc, how about if I take a cognitive test? He said, Well, you can do it, sir. Well, I said, What is wrong with that? He said, After the first five questions, it gets very hard. I said, Let us take a shot at it, and we did it and we aced it, right? I aced it. And one of the doctors said he is never seen anybody that aced it. And some of those questions are not easy. I will tell you that. How do you think Joe would do on a cognitive test? Unfortunately, this was an election where the person that counts the votes was far more important than the candidate, no matter how many votes that candidate got, and we got record numbers of votes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2663, "text": "It is a disgrace to our nation and we are truly being scorned and disrespected all over the world. Never forget that the radical left is not the majority in this country. And when you look at their policies, there is just no way that can happen. They fight against the military, always fighting budgets, military. We need strong military right now, so strong. And now we have those brand new F-35s and everything's brand new, and we have a great military, or it is coming soon and they will not be able to stop it. But the radical left cheat in elections and the fake news media cheats in polling, like having me down 17 points just before the election in Wisconsin. ENTITY ABC News, Washington Post, just before now when people hear that, it is called suppression, they say, We love the president, but we are going to stay home. Let us watch television, Harry. Harry's going to stay home with Janet. I am down 17 points, and I felt I was winning the state, and we did, in my opinion, win the safe, but it was very close. Even by their fake numbers, it was very close. And interestingly in 2016, the exact same thing happened. I was down 19 points and I won the state. They had 17 instead of 19. We got her by surprise in 2016. Americans do not support the woke left. The people are with us. You have no idea how much. In a recent, highly respected Rasmussen poll, 58% of voters say the media is truly the enemy of the people. Think of that, 58%, and only 23% disagreed. Nobody can tell me that defunding the police, open borders, raising your taxes it used to be, you are running for office, We are going to cut your taxes. This is the only time in history, We are going to raise your taxes. Oh, I am going to vote for him. I want to raise them. And they are raising your taxes so you can waste this money on the Green New Deal, which is nonsense. So they want to put back the regulations. I took off more regulations than any president in history. And that is what gave us really I actually think, Louie, it was more important than the taxes, than cutting taxes. But we took off the regulations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2664, "text": "Used to take 20 years to get highways approved and roads approved, and we got it down to two, and we are going to try and get it down to one. Well, we were going to get it down to one. It will get back up to about 18 or 20 pretty soon, and then we will bring it down one day. The Democrats are terrible on policy, but they are very vicious and they are smart and they stick together. They do not have Mitt Romneys and little Ben Sasses and Bill Cassidy. He campaigns in the great state of Louisiana. Every ad has ENTITY in it. ENTITY, ENTITY, ENTITY, ENTITY, and then he votes to impeach me. Can you believe it? But I always sort of felt that about that guy. But you have another very good senator there, John Kennedy. And Bill Cassidy cannot walk down the streets of Louisiana without having nasty things said to him, and they do not have anyone, the Democrats, like the warmonger and most quoted Republican in the history of our country by Democrats, Liz Cheney. Every time a Democrat gets up to make a speech you know this, fellows, right? You have to live with her, I guess. Democrats are ruthless, but they are united. They do not have these Romney types. They do not have them. It must be wonderful to live like that, but they have bad policy and they have policy that is going to destroy our country. Like socialists and communists movements throughout history, today's leftists do not believe in freedom, they do not believe in fairness, and they do not believe in democracy. They believe in Marxist morality. Anything is justified as long as it hurts their political opponents and advances the radical agenda of their party. Before our very eyes, the radical left Democrats are turning the law itself into a weapon for partisan persecution. It is really look at what they are doing to incredible people like Rudy Giuliani. I mean, he is an incredible greatest mayor in the history of the city of New York, great crime fighter. And at the same time, they are weaponizing the IRS against conservatives and Christians just like they did with the tea party, except worse. There are now two sets of laws in this country, one for the left wing mob, the rioters and the rampagers who can do whatever the hell they want to whomever they want to do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2665, "text": "And there is another set of rules for law-abiding, conservative Americans, happen to be Republicans, who simply want to speak their minds and exercise their rights, like to talk about a rigged election. But Rudy Giuliani and I mean that. He is by far the greatest mayor of the city. And now you realize, it means more right now, Matt, that it would have meant five years ago when you say that, because you see what the hell is happening to our cities, New York in particular. But one of the great crime fighters of his generation has had his law license taken away by the radical left, all because he was fighting against an election result that he saw was corrupt. That means you can never, ever fight anything. Probably will not for a long time, but we are not letting it happen. Under the standard that has now been applied to Rudy, lawyers are no longer free to represent their clients and their livelihood itself depends on one thing only, whether or not they want to fight the corruption. And because he fought, they took away his law license in New York and in Washington, DC. This is a man I lived in New York. You could walk down the streets. You were proud of the city. You are not proud of the city anymore. While many Democrats fought viciously and got caught lying about the 2016 election they were lying nothing happened. You remember Russia? I see Devin here. When I came in, he was in the basement of an office building, the basement of the White House. He is going through files and files because he knew that what shifty Schiff was saying was pure bullshit. You got it. You understood it. And he and another great one I could give it to everybody here, frankly, as far as I am concerned, because they are great. And you have a star on your left. Devin always knows who to sit next to, but Devin received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, along with Jim Jordan of Ohio for the incredible courage they showed. But he got it a long time ago with, Russia, Russia, Russia. I tell this story, during the campaign guys would come up to me and we are doing well. Sir, do you know anything about Russia? What am I supposed to know? Russia, I know Russia. Sir, what do you have to do with Russia? Do you have anything to do with her?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2666, "text": "Then after about four or five guys coming up, I'd say, What the hell is going on with Russia? And then we went through years with Mueller and there was no collusion. 18 angry Democrats, oh they went after us. They will send everything into New York. They will give it a shot now. 18, they have already done that. In fact, it is photocopies they used. They used photocopies of the same stuff I beat in Washington. If anyone should be losing their jobs, their law licenses, and being investigated for crimes, it is not Rudy Giuliani, it is Adam Schiff. He used to stand up at a microphone and he used to lie like hell. I'd say, This guy is He'd stand up, This is a sad day for our union. ENTITY works for Russia. I'd say, What the hell is he talking about? And I am the one that exposed Russia for the biggest thing they have ever done, the pipeline to Europe. I shut it down, and now Biden opened it up. They are going to make a fortune. All of the other perpetrators who have faced no consequences whatsoever, even though they knew it was a scam that they created. They created a scam. And I must be honest with you, I have never said this because I did not want to, but I will. I am very disappointed that Bill Barr was unable to hold anyone accountable for the countless abuses of power by the Democrats. We did not hold the corrupt officials who spied on our campaign remember I said, They are spying on our campaign. Not the authors of the phony dossier, they were not held responsible. Not the women who slandered and lied and defamed Brett Kavanaugh. They said, Brett Kavanaugh, he had an affair. They did not go after them. Not any of the illegal leakers, not any of the people that were responsible for corrupting our elections. He wanted nothing to do with it. He just did not want to do it. I always liked him. But I said, Bill, you got to move your ass. Our country is under attack. But he became a different man when the Democrats viciously stated that they wanted to impeach him. We want to impeach him. We are going to impeach Bill Barr. We are going to impeach him. I understand that. So I guess I can understand it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2667, "text": "But I just a day ago received a statement from the US attorney, highly respected, in Pennsylvania, that Bill Barr would not allow him to investigate voter fraud. Can you believe it? So I understand in the nation. But the US attorney was not allowed to investigate what this just came out in a letter. You do not even know about this, Devin, right? What do you think? We have a letter. You will have to get it from him because I want to stay out of it. Get it from the US attorney, but I am sure he will be willing to provide it, but he is given it to us. He was not allowed to do his job. And I saw that. He was all enthused, and then all of a sudden it was like he was turned off. This was true with so many others that when the justice department, they failed to call out the late night ballot stuffing that took place in Georgia. Where they made up a story of a water main break in order to get people and security to leave the premises, and then they went into a rampage of stuffing, essentially, the ballots. But now that event, because of me and some very good people, is in court. And Bill Barr told me, Sir, we have looked at it. We found nothing. All you have to do is look at that tape. I said to them, But what about the water main? Oh, I did not hear about that. Well, I heard about it. They said there was, and the people ran, except a group of people came back. All you have to do is look at the tape. It is incredible what tapes can show. The fact is, Republicans play a much nicer, kinder game than the Democrats, but based on what we have seen and what we are witnessing now with all of the prosecutorial and other misconduct going on, perhaps Republicans will have to rethink their game plan. Louie Gohmert would agree with that. Louie Gohmert, I have to be careful with him. Do not say I said it, but actually Louie Gohmert's worse than any Democrat, but we have to hold him back. We hold him back, Doc Ronny, right? What do you think of that, Louie? You just heard something for the first time. And by the way, where is Durham? Why did not they use the very well-done Horowitz Report?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2668, "text": "Former ENTITY speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Dallas. Even the New York Times wrote the most vicious editorial about James Comey based on the Horowitz report, which talked about the crimes and bad acts committed by Comey, McCabe and others. This is even before you go with Durham. I'd like to thank Inspector General Horowitz for that report. They did not want to use it. I do not know what the hell they are thinking. But if you cannot wait for Durham, just read a man named Daryl Cooper's brilliant thread on Twitter. He tells the whole story. You got to read it. As he put it, We know as fact the Steele dossier was the sole evidence just to justify spying on the ENTITY campaign. They spied on my campaign and nothing will happen to them. Can you imagine if I spied on Biden's campaign or Obama's campaign? They spied on my campaign, we caught them, and nothing happened. The FBI knew the Steele dossier was a DNC operation, paid for by DNC and crooked Hillary Clinton, who by the way, is the most angry person in the United States today. She said, Why the hell did not you do that for me in 2016? I got it. No, she said, Why did not you do it for me? The New York Times asked me a question, what happened in 2020 that was different from 2016? I said, Well, I will tell you. We did much better in 2020. We got 12 million more votes. We won by a much bigger margin. 2016 was very close, but Hillary said, Why did not you do that for me? Why did not you cheat for me, damn it? Steele's source told the FBI the info, was totally unserious, and they did not inform the court of any of this, and they kept on spying on the ENTITY campaign. In addition, the press is part of this crooked operation. You know that. Big tech censored the opposition. Political violence was legitimized and encouraged by the left. And then ENTITY, the President of the United States, was banned from the social media, as we call it, by sleazebags I was banned by sleazebags. I was banned by bad people. In other words, the entire system was rigged against the American people and rigged against a fair, decent, and honest election.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2669, "text": "For decades, the conservative movement acted as if all that mattered were policy fights in Washington or that all it would take to prevail was winning a small handful of Supreme Court cases. And we are disappointed in the Supreme Court. I am disappointed, but the battle is so much bigger and so much broader than any of that. The radical left has been methodically taking over every giant centralized institution in American life. The school systems, you see that, the universities, the bar associations, look at what happened to Rudy Hollywood journalists, the big banks, big tech, and even the Supreme Court where we are getting some unexpected rulings because the nine justices do not want to be packed. And the Democrats are in a position to pack the court and they do not want to be packed. So they do not want to look at the election. They said, we do not want to see it. We had by that gentleman right there from the great state of Texas, we had almost 20 states. And we thought we had a case where the standing was so good. You know, I wanted to do it personally, but they said, Sir, you are the president. You have no standing. I said, What kind of a system? They said, The thing that has the standing are states. And if you could get one or two or three They got almost 20 and they were really strong about it. And you know, the justices never looked at the case. And many of the judges did not look at the case, but we do have cases going on right now where I think you have patriot judges. But if the justices got their way, they will not be packed. In other words, what happened is vicious things. Look at the Schumer statement that he said when he was on the court steps. So, he is no longer protected because he is not In Congress, if you are a guy like Adam Schiff, you can lie and lie and lie. You cannot do anything, you have immunity. But once you step out of that building, Schumer said horrible things. He said a mafia like statement to the judges. But they are playing the ref, you know, playing the ref? I love Bobby Knight. He came out from great state of Indiana. He came out, he endorsed me. It was over in Indiana, but Bobby Knight used to scream at the refs. And they'd say, Why are you doing that? I am not worried about this goal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2670, "text": "That is what is happening with our Supreme Court. We do not want to have 24 judges. You know, they said 13. I said, the Democrats are too smart for 13. Why would they have 13? And you know, if they would've looked at the case, we would have won that case in my opinion. And they would have never been packed because you would've had a beautiful veto sitting right in the oval office. I would have vetoed it because it is a terrible thing. But the Democrats are vicious to the Supreme Court and to Kavanaugh. Yeah, Bill Barr, they screamed, we are going to impeach him. We are going to impeach him. And it changes people. We are going to impeach him on women that admitted ultimately that nothing happened. They were not even in the country, one of them. But with Brett Kavanaugh, they are screaming, We are going to impeach him every time . And we are going to impeach him. How does he get out of that by voting for the Democrats? And he went through what no other person I have ever seen go through. That hearing was the most vicious, horrible hearing I think in the history of our country. I do not think there is ever been anything worse than that. In New York City and state, far left Democrats actually ran for office promising to prosecute me, my family, and my company, without knowing anything about me. I never even heard of these people. They did not know nothing about me. We are going to get him. We are going to get him. We are going to get ENTITY. A lot of people running, she won on the basis, We are going to get him. What did he do? I do not know, but we will find something. No, no, how would you like this? They are in search of a crime. To them, it did not matter whether any laws had been broken. The crime was opposing the radical left Democrat party. It is a political persecution, like something straight out of the communist countries that you see around the world. Yet, it is happening here in America at the hands of radical left Democrats. And the Republicans again, they just do not seem to understand at that top level, what the hell is happening. They do not do it the same way. And maybe they are going to have to change our job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2671, "text": "And our mission is to resist this poison and fight for our Republic, with all of our heart and with all of ourselves. For decades, the career politicians who sold out our country shipped away our millions and millions of jobs and sent our children to die in endless foreign wars These people sold out our country. As vice-president Joe Biden flew his son Hunter around the world on Air Force Two, sucking up money like a vacuum cleaner, Hunter's emails show that he collected millions and millions of dollars from foreign nations, including Ukraine. And Joe Biden said, they are not getting the billion dollars unless that prosecutor is out. Could you imagine if I said that? If I said that they impeached me and nothing happened. Can you imagine if I said, They are not getting their billionaire and voila, he was gone. I do not know what the hell he was thinking when he Did he know the tape was running when he did that? And they will destroy our country and they will do whatever they can to do it. Hunter said that he gave half of his salary to pop and that he paid vast amounts of money for Joe Biden's expenses. Now, Joe Biden has all these houses. He is always been like a Senator or a Congressman, right? Louie, I did not know you made that kind of money that you had mansions. You have mansions? Does Louie Gohmert have mansions all over Texas? He is got one house and that is enough. No, but Joe's got a lot of toothbrushes. Yet not a single member of our treacherous, corrupt political establishment has ever experienced anything like the deranged and demented persecution that has been directed at me, my family, and everyone associated with us, everybody. I came down the escalator with our great future first lady. She had a very successful career. Did really well until she met me and so much for that career. She gets it better than anybody. And she loves you people. She loves you, but that is when all of these witch hunts began. Make America Great Again. And now, it is also because I got more votes, 75 million, than anybody in the history of the presidency. Think of it, in the history, usually they go down a little bit second term and they win, but they go down a little bit. I was told by a great pollster, really somebody great, John McLaughlin, one of the most respected one.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2672, "text": "Sir, you got 63 million votes. If you get it up to 64 or 65, nobody can beat you. I got it to 75 and I lost in quotes. And what they have done to this movement, I think they have made the movement stronger. I will tell you, in a certain way, I think that is. I will never forget it. On election night, we did so much better than they ever thought in their wildest imagination. That they just said, The hell with it. What they did, what they did. I am also leading in the polls against Harris. Because not a lot of people think that Joe's going to be running, but you never know. It is a strange world and everyone else who is going to run on the radical left, whether it is on the Democrat side or the I love my Republicans, but we are really kicking their ass too. But we love them. But we like it because they are friends of ours, right? I think we can say that affectionately. And they are working hard and you saw a lot of them this weekend. But the Democrats want me out and they want me out as fast as possible. And here I am, I could have a nice, beautiful life. And here I am on a Sunday in Texas. No, I said to Matt and Mercedes because I have done this and we have had And by the way, you have a poll coming out. You know, they do that straw poll, right? He will not tell me. I know Matt, he will not tell me. I will tell you, here is the story. If it is bad, it'll be front page news in the newspapers. If it is great, they will not even cover it. I hate to tell you that, Matt. And I do not want to convince him to do a bad Paul, but you know the straw poll. So, I did this years ago and I got these great straw polls. It was the first time I ever did it. And I was a novice, but it was right here at CPAC. And I am so proud of the jump. I mean, look at this room. We have thousands of people trying to come in. I mean our only thing is next time we will have to get a bigger place, I guess, right? But I said to Matt, and much more importantly, I said to Mercedes, I said, Give me Death Valley. The worst slot, we will fill it up.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2673, "text": "He said, Well, sir, that would be Sunday afternoon because most people are doing other things. You do not have to give me Friday night or Saturday night, which is easy. We love doing it the hard way. I said, Give me any time you want on Sunday that is good. And look at this crowd we got. Nah, we will give Saturday night to Louie and to the doc. We are going to give Saturday night to Devin. They give me Sunday and I love Sunday. It reminds me of church and that is okay. I said, Give me your worst time. And he gives me the worst time. And he just broke his record. The radical left and the failed political establishment hates our movement for a simple reason because together we took on the corrupt special interests. We faced down the open borders that you are saying so much, how bad are these borders. They are coming out of the prisons, they are coming out of everywhere in these other countries. murderers, drug dealers, human traffickers of women. We stood up to the absurd dictates of political correctness. And we called out the people who were getting rich bleeding our country dry. And many of them were politicians. Against the howls and cries of the corporate interests and the Washington lobbyists, we demanded fair trade for the American workers and we did a great job on that. We finally ended the worst trade deal in the history of our country, NAFTA. I do not want to disrespect our past, but the people that negotiated that deal were either stupid or corrupt. They say both. We withdrew from the horrible Transpacific Partnership, would have destroyed your automobile business. We pulled out of the world health organization scam. I pulled out because they are like a pipe organ for China, right? they called me, would they want us back? So, the guy, just nice guy, he wants us back. Sir, we really want you back. We really want you back. I said, How much are we paying? How much is China paying? So let me ask you a question. We have 325 million people not including illegal aliens. Which who the hell knows. I do not think they have any idea what But we have 325 million people. China has 1.4 billion people. They are paying 39. We are paying 500. So let me ask you a question. Would you take us back if we paid 39?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2674, "text": "I said, Okay, I am going to think about it. I could not even get back in for 39 because everybody including Doc Ronnie thought it was amazing that I pulled out because he understands it is a pipe organ for China and for others, but mostly for China. So I said, So, I would get back in for 39 million? I did not go back in even at 39 and otherwise I turned it down. And now because of the rigged election, we are out, he is in. He went back in for the same price that they were paying before. 450 million in terms of when you are dealing with billions and trillions and all of this, it is not It is a lot of money. This is every year we pay almost 500 million. They pay 39 million. Their country is much larger, but why would not they say we will do it for 39 or in theory less? I think they would have taken it. In fact, one of the reasons I was not happy, I should have started off lower, Matt. Instead of 30, I said, How about would you do it for nine? So, they go back in and nobody said, We will go back in, but we want to come back in at 39 million or 30 million or 20 million. And now they are going to be paying what we have been ripped off for years. And we do not have control of it. China has total absolute control. We have none. What do you think of that, Matt? Our acting You took a lot of abuse. I just see you there. So, we have this deal and they just go in We built an aircraft carrier and the aircraft carrier has all sorts of problems. They decided to use magnets for the elevators that bring Magnets. You are in the middle of the ocean, big waves, bullets being shot at your ship. You got magnets. I could take this little glass of water, drop it in the magnets, that is the end of the elevator. And then they throw the plane off and they decided to do it through electric instead of steam, right? So, they have a catapult. And for 60 years it is been steam operated. They decide to do it. Let us make it out of electric. So, I go to the ship because it is been under construction for years, it was going to cost two and a half billion. It is going to end up costing 18 billion.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2675, "text": "They even moved the tower from the center to the back of the ship, making it much harder for pilots to land. By the way, the single hardest thing for a pilot to do is land on an aircraft carrier, even great pilots cannot do it. If they are a little bit claustrophobic That carrier looks big, but when you are up there flying and moving along at rapid speeds, and you are looking at this massive ocean and you have a little deck that you have to land on, it is the hardest thing to do. So they move the thing back so it made it much tighter instead of putting it in the middle where it is a wider part of the ship, a whole thing. That is sir, where they keep the ammunition. I said, Wait a minute, they built the tower I do not want to be the captain of that ship by the way. So I said, I went to visit the ship and I was not interested in seeing the admiral, the admiral said, Sir Admiral so-and-so The things out to sea trials is not working. Actually, you are like central casting, but I want to see the catapulters. So, I meet these five guys. How long have you been doing it, Jim? I said, Let me ask you, you have a problem with it? He said, Because if it breaks, you have to go through graduate school at MIT to fix it. And with the steam, we had the same power or more and we could fix it with a blowtorch and a hammer. And I love that steam in my face, sir. He said, The steam. I said, Why did they go with electric? He said, Unnecessary because it takes us one minute and 59 seconds to put the plane on and hook it up. And by the time we do that, sir, we are all set. We have so much steam we do not know what to do with it. So, I said, So you mean they spent all of this money. They spent $900 million as of a year ago to try and fix it. I told them that three When I first came in, I am very good at this stuff. I said, Electric. I will put it out of commission. I will throw it on the electric circuits. And it is just, I mean, it is so we do things so stupidly. So they are at $18 billion. And I said, did you sue the shipyard?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2676, "text": "Then I meet with the architect. Have you ever designed a ship before? My first question, Have you ever designed a ship before? I am telling you foreign countries are laughing at us. They are laughing at us. We renegotiated the Korea trade deal and we built the greatest economy of the history of the world with a record 160 million people working. And I do not want to see any negotiations of tax increases by Senate Republicans. Because I see certain rhinos they keep walking over to the White House. You know, guys like Romney and they walk over to the White House. The other half, the Senator from Louisiana, he was over there. I do not want to name them all because a couple of them are fine, but they go over there, they are getting fleeced. They come out, we have a deal. We have a deal. We have a deal. You do not want to get into that. We have a deal. They said they had a deal. 20 minutes later when the radical left heard that Biden agreed to something they went crazy and then Biden said, We do not have a deal anymore. And what they are doing is they are saying, We will agree to raise your taxes. Saying we will agree to raise your taxes if you approve this radical left infrastructure deal, where most of the money, almost none of the money's going to real infrastructure, which is roads, bridges, et cetera. I am telling the Republican senators right now that we are not going to stand for it if you raise our taxes. We had the greatest tax decrease in the history of our country, and we are not going to have you raise it. In order to say you have made a bipartisan deal. You know, they are dying to say, Matt, that we made a bipartisan deal. You do not have to do that, because you are getting fleeced. And it is going to destroy our country. Despite the pleading and begging of the outsourcers and globalists, I took on China like no president had ever done before. You know that? We made a great deal with China, which has immeasurably helped our farmers and manufacturers, and we put the Chinese Communist Party on defense for the first time ever in our history of our country. We never took in 25 cents. They are paying us millions. Biden, he wants to end the tariffs. If he does, China will take over the whole deal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2677, "text": "He campaigned on ending tariffs, which was stupid. But he campaigned on ending tariffs. We are taking billions and billions, and we convinced the world that we have to watch China. When I took over, we had a deficit with China of 507 billion dollars. But now China is totally on the offense, making Joe Biden and our country look week, and pathetic. We ignored the hysterics of the socialist left and withdrew from the unfair one sided Paris climate accord. We unleashed America's energy resources, and achieved American energy independence for the first time in the history of our country. And we do not need windmills in Texas and lots of other places. We do not need windmills. They ought to end that program as quickly as they can. When the plague came in from China, I dragged the slow and complacent bureaucrats from the FDA, and the CDC into the Oval Office. I pushed them like they have never been pushed before, and thanks to the relentless efforts of my administration and me, we got miraculous therapeutics straight to patients with historic speed, and we produced three vaccines to end the pandemic in record time. We did it in less than nine months. They said a minimum of three years, probably five years, and sir, it probably will not happen at all. If we did not have that, we would be in a position like perhaps over a 100 years ago, right? Over 100 people, I hear different number. We beat back the failed foreign policy establishment to withdraw from the disastrous Iran nuclear deal. We recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. We ended the endless wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, and other countries. And we brought our beautiful troops back home. Now terrible things are happening in Afghanistan. We had everything in place to finish withdrawing responsibly, and Joe Biden is turning it into a total disaster. They do not respect him. He is leaving behind billions and billions of dollars of equipment. I told these generals, I want every nail brought back home. Instead, the Taliban is now parading around with our weapons that Joe Biden allowed them to capture. But with all of that being said, we should get out. Everything we do, we refuse to bow down to the radical left, the RINOs, the political establishment, and instead we insist on standing up for America, and making America great again and always putting America first.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2678, "text": "Every day, more people are realizing that we were right on all of the key issues, and that this is one reason why our endorsement has become, and it is really not just my endorsement, it is your endorsement, has become the most powerful weapon in politics. Because if they were not exact, they will come out at me, you would not believe. 120 of the 122 candidates we endorsed in Congressional primary elections won. But we had a great string of endorsements. We love the candidates we endorse. We are endorsing a lot of good ones right now in the Senate primary elections. Cannot say I am happy about all of them, but that is okay. So far in the 2022 election cycle, we are already 10 and 0 on endorsements, and you are going to check this. In the face of the Biden administration's far left campaign to transform our country and erase our history, we are not backing down. When we regain control of Congress, we will immediately regain control of our border, and it is not that easy. I watched a lot of good Congressmen get onto it. What we have to do is redo the ENTITY edict. We negotiated with those countries, and it was not simple. We will hold China accountable for the damage and suffering they have caused, and make them pay trillions of dollars in reparations to us and to the world. We will break up the big tech monopolies, and bring back free speech. We will take back our elections, and finally, we will always include a thing called voter ID. The Democrats are now saying, Oh, we always wanted voter ID. 88% of the people in the country want voter ID, so now the Democrats again, same old story. They are saying, We want voter ID. We have always wanted voter ID. We will completely defund and bar critical race theory. And if government run schools are going to teach children to hate their country, we will demand school choice that we already have. If you listen to the media or watch the evening newscast, our country has really gone bad. We do not talk about how America can lead the world. We do not talk about stopping crime or the hundreds and hundreds of people that are being shot in Democrat run cities and what to do about it. We do not talk about ending the drugs pouring across our borders. Which I had greatly reduced with our wall and so many other things that we are doing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2679, "text": "And most importantly, we never talk about the great future of our country. We do not talk about any of this stuff anymore. The Democrat controlled media talks race, race, race for political reasons. And they always have, but never like this. But it is hurting our country, and more than anyone else, our great minority communities. It is hurting them very badly. The Democrat obsession with race is only dragging us backward into the past, and it is bringing our country down to a point where even China and Russia are lecturing us on human rights, race, and they are doing it in a very humiliating fashion. During my administration, our country was respected again. In conclusion, our party and our movement, we are all united by the same shared American values, and by unyielding resolve to defend our beloved nation for citizens of every race, religion, color, and creed. We take great pride in our country, and we teach the truth about our history. We celebrate our rich heritage and national traditions. We honor George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and all of our national heroes. And of course, we always respect our great American flag. We believe in patriotic education for our children, and we strongly oppose the radical indoctrination of America's youth. We are committed to defending innocent life, and to proudly upholding the Judaeo Christian values of our nation's founders. We embrace free thought. We stand up to political correctness, and we reject the intolerance of left wing cancel culture. We believe in our Constitution and in law and order. We want law and order. We demand law and order. We do not want people shot and killed in our cities. We totally respect and support the men and women of law enforcement. We are devoted to our communities. We are loyal to our fellow citizens, and above all, we live by the words of our national motto, in God we trust. These are the convictions that define our movement today, and must define the Republican Party, which has truly become the party of the working man and woman. We have a much different party than we had five years ago. You were in big trouble, Republicans, and look what is happening. Now for the next 16 months, we must pour every ounce of our energy into winning a historic victory in the midterms.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2680, "text": "We will never give up our search for truth and justice for what happened in the corrupt presidential election of 2020 because without that truth, we cannot have an honest election in 2022 or 2024, no matter what they want to tell you. And our country will soon stand proudly for free and strong and proper elections again. The election fraud of 2020 is the single most requested topic for me and others to talk about. Because think of what they have done. What they have done is so sad. Look what is happened to our country in just a short number of months. Everyone here today and every conservative all across our land needs to decide right now that together we will save this country. We will not rest until our American heritage of freedom, liberty, and justice is once again safe and once again secure. We owe our country nothing less than that. Our glorious American inheritance was passed down to us by generations of American patriots who gave everything they had. Their sweat, their blood, and even their way of lives to build America into the greatest nation in the history of the world, and we are not going to let it be taken away from us by a small group of radical left Marxist maniacs. We will protect and defend our cherished American legacy and freedom for ourselves, for our children, and for every future generation. My fellow Americans, our movement is the greatest in American history, and it has just begun. With your help, your devotion, your brilliance, and your drive, we will carry forward the torch of American liberty. We will lead the conservative movement and the Republican Party back to victory, and it will be a greater victory than this party has ever had. We will take back the House. We will take back the Senate, and then after witnessing all that has gone wrong in our country in such a short period of time, with our borders, with our economy, with crime, we will take back that glorious White House. That sits so majestically in our nation's capital. And it is the most beautiful house of all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpcpac2021speechtranscriptdallastx", "title": "Donald Trump CPAC 2021 Speech Transcript Dallas, TX", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-cpac-2021-speech-transcript-dallas-tx", "publication_date": "11-07-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2709, "text": "And thanks for inviting me so I can come home. I really appreciate the Knights of Columbus. This strong organization believes in families and faith and compassion for those in need. And I am honored you'd invite me to the 122d Convocation of this great organization. I appreciate Carl Anderson and his leadership. I have gotten to know Carl because, you see, he is more than just an introducer of Presidents. He is a person who works with Presidentsat least this President. And I am proud to have his help. It is good to see my family friend Virgil Dechant. Virgil, it is good to see you, sir. I am proud to be here with Cardinal McCarrick. It is good to see you, sir. He is a neighbor in my temporary residence. I appreciate Cardinal Egan. I appreciate Cardinal Rigali of the great city of Philadelphia, Cardinal Francis George of Chicago, Cardinal Keeler of Baltimore, Maryland. I thank you for your presence. I am honored to be in the presence of Cardinal Macharski, the Archbishop of Krakow, who succeeded the Holy Father in that role. I appreciate Bishop Wilton Gregory's leadership of the Conference of Catholic Bishops. I appreciate Your Eminences and Your Excellencies, reverends, monsignors, fathers, and deacons. I appreciate the officers and directors, State deputies, board of directors, delegates, ladies and gentlemen, Knights, and my fellow Americans. Two months ago, I had the privilege of visiting His Holy Father Pope John Paul II at the Vatican. It was my third meeting with His Holy Father since I took office, and for those of you who have ever met him, you know I am telling you the truth when I tell you being in his presence is an awesome experience. On the occasion, I had the special honor of presenting him with America's highest civil award, the Presidential Medal of Freedom. It was my chance to express our Nation's respect for a devoted servant of God and a true hero of our time. Pope John Paul II has been a unique and commanding voice for the cause of the poor, the weak, the hungry, and the outcast. He has challenged our Nation and the entire world to embrace the culture of life. He is called upon us to uphold and affirm the dignity of every person, rich and poor, able and disabled, born and unborn. He is called us to love and serve our neighbors in need.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheknightscolumbusconventiondallastexas", "title": "Remarks to the Knights of Columbus Convention in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-knights-columbus-convention-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "03-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2710, "text": "Few organizations have worked harder and done more and met this challenge than the Knights of Columbus. I know you are proud of your organization, and you should be. The Knights were born in New Haven, Connecticut. Come to think of it, so was I. From your foundations in a small church basement, you have raised up one of the great America organizations dedicated to charity and mutual assistance and the fight for civil liberties. I am proud to say that my family has contributed to your ranks. And he ye sand he recently took his Third Degree. I will see him this weekend. I will pass on the word, aim for the Fourth. Jeb knows, as I do, that your works of mercy are making our society more compassionate, changing the lives of millions of citizens. Compassionate work changes our society one heart and one soul at a time. Last year, the Knights raised and donated a record $130 million to charity. You also volunteered for an unprecedented 61 million hours of community service. You obviously have heard the call. I was pleased to hear this story about the Knights in Corpus Christi, Texas, at the Mother Teresa Day Shelter. They are mopping the floors, collecting laundry soap, blankets, and food for 130 homeless men and women. They are not giving the orders; they are serving the people. If I need help, I just give the Knights a call such a powerful example. Americans across this great land know that they can do the same, that they can serve our country by helping someone in need. We are grateful for your service to the men and women in uniform and to our Nation's veterans. You have sent hundreds of thousands of prayer books to those working to make our country more secure and to bring freedom in parts of the world that are desperate for freedom. You bring comfort and strength to our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. I want to thank you for taking time to visit our wounded and disabled veterans, for providing comfort to their families, to give them a word of thanks. See, you'rethe Knights are soldiers in the armies of compassion. You have heard the call. You are helping this Nation build a culture of life in which the sick are comforted, the aged are honored, the immigrant is welcomed, and the weak and vulnerable are never overlooked. You have a friend in this administration. You have somebody who wants to work with you to change America for the better. We have a responsibility in Government to do things to help overcome recession and corporate scandal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheknightscolumbusconventiondallastexas", "title": "Remarks to the Knights of Columbus Convention in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-knights-columbus-convention-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "03-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2711, "text": "That is why I put forth an economic stimulus plan to encourage small-business growth, a plan that will help get jobs moving so people can work and do their duty as a mom or a dad and put food on the table. And we are making progress. When I came to Washington, I was concerned about a school system that simply shuffled children through grade after grade, year after year, and hoped for the best. Oftentimes, what we found out was kids with great hearts were graduating from schools but could not read. I challenged the soft bigotry of low expectations by raising the bar, insisting on high standards, by making sure the money we spentand we did spend more moneywent to help those who needed extra help early, before it was too late. I believe you have got to measure in order to know. Because we measure, we know that now more minority children are learning to read at grade level, and that is good for America. I want to thank the Knights for their help inhelping low-income parents in Washington, DC, escape from schoolshave their children escape from schools that will not teach and will not change. Because of the work of the Knights of Columbus and other concerned citizens in our Nation's Capital, poor parents now have a choice. They will have a $7,500 scholarship so they can afford to send their schooltheir child to a private school or parochial school their choice to make. You know, one of the great statistics of this modern era is the fact that more people are owning their own home. It seems like to me an optimistic society is one that encourages ownership, more people owning their own business, people being able to own and manage their own health care account, people beingown a piece of their retirement policy that they can pass on from one generation to the next, and people owning their own home. I love a society in which more and more people are able to say, Welcome to my home; come to my home. This country has added more than 1.6 million minority homeowners in the past 2 years. Today, the American homeownership rate is the highest ever and the highest ever for minorities. When you own something, you have a vital stake in the future of your country. I want to work with the Knights for reasonable and compassionate immigration reform, to bring good, hard-working people out of the shadows of American life and to ensure that America is always a welcoming nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheknightscolumbusconventiondallastexas", "title": "Remarks to the Knights of Columbus Convention in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-knights-columbus-convention-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "03-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2712, "text": "I recognize, like you recognize, that amidst the great prosperity of America, amongst our great wealth, there are pockets of despair in this country, and we have got to do something about it. We must address despair so America is hopeful for every single person. See, we got fellow citizens who are trapped in the misery of drugs and gang violence, collapse of the family. Our society and our Government have a responsibility. You have a responsibility. Those of us honored to hold high office have a responsibility. We are doing some practical things. We have got a community-wide effort to help educate kids to the dangers of using drugs. We believe in collaborative efforts; people all throughout society must work to reduce the demand for drugs. Listen, we will do all we can to bust the thugs, interdict the drugs coming in from foreignoverseas. But we have got to work on demand. And teen use of drugs is down by 11 percent from 2001 to 2003. There is a lot of work to be done on health care, but one place I know we can continue to work together on is health care for the poorest of the poor. We have expanded and built over 600 community health centers in America. I want to double the number so the 16 million poor Americans can get primary health care without putting a strain on the emergency rooms of our hospitals, whether they be public or private. We have got to pay forwe've got to work on additional welfare reforms to help people find a job, help them have the skills necessary to work so they realize the dignity that comes from being independent from Government and, at the same time, strengthen marriage and the family as part of welfare reforms. But I believe one of the most effective ways our Government can help those in need is to help the charities and community groups that are doing God's work every day. I believe Government needs to stand on the side of faith-based groups, not against faith-based groups, when they come to saving lives. Government can hand out money, and of course there will be arguments whether we are handing out enough or not. But what Government can never do is put love in a person's heart or a sense of purpose in a person's life. You see, in order to heal help the lonely, it works every time when a loving soul puts their arm around and says, What can I do to help you? How can I help you in your life? What can I do to make your life better?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheknightscolumbusconventiondallastexas", "title": "Remarks to the Knights of Columbus Convention in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-knights-columbus-convention-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "03-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2713, "text": "Many are called by God to do so, and Government must stand on the side of those millions of acts of mercy and kindness that take place on a daily basis. And so the Faith-Based Initiative that I have launched recognizes the need there be separation of church and state. But the state should never fear the good works of the church. And the truth of the matter is, there is a culture inside Government which resents and fears religious charities and has discriminated against them. We are changing that. I want to thank the Knights for their help in changing that attitude in Washington, DC. Our goal is to end the unfair discrimination against faith-based charities by the Federal Government. And we are making substantial progress. In December 2002, I issued an Executive orderI was hoping, frankly, that Congress would pass a law. I got tired of the process debate. See, I am focused on results. For those of you who pay attention to Washington, you know what I am talking about when I say the process bogs down. So I signed an Executive order mandating equal treatment for faith-based charities in the Federal grantmaking process. What that means is, is that faith-based groups ought to be allowed to apply for Federal grants just like everybody else should be allowed to apply. Faith-based groups will not be allowed to discriminate against who they serve, and they will not use the Federal money to proselytize. But they are allowed to use the money to change hearts and souls, to help save lives, to embetter the world we live in. Religious charities that are effectively helping the poor should have a fair and equal chance to compete for Federal money. And thisin 2003, discretionary grants to faith-based programs was over a billion dollars. We are making progress. We are using Federal taxpayers' money for effective use in helping to save lives. We are providing a social network of lovinghelping loving souls interface with people so they can realize a better tomorrow. Three years ago, I established the Compassion Capital Fund. If you want to access Federal money, here is how you do it. If you want to start up a faith-based program, here is some of the lessons learned. In other words, what we are trying to say is not only are we going to allow those faith-based programs that already exist to access Federal money, we want to help others spring up and understand the pitfalls to succeed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheknightscolumbusconventiondallastexas", "title": "Remarks to the Knights of Columbus Convention in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-knights-columbus-convention-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "03-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2714, "text": "The fund provides grants to faith-based and community organizations as well to help them fund their programs for the poor and the hungry and the homeless. We have awarded $56 million under this program. Today I release another $43 million to the compassionate Federal grant program. We are moving forward on another initiative, which is mentoring for the children of prisoners. I mean, if the job of Government is to try to set priorities, a priority is to help children of prisoners find love. Imagine what a tough life it is for a young boy or girl to go see his or her mom or dad behind prison bars. These are children who need help. They are vulnerable to gangs and crime and despair. They are desperate for responsible adults in their life who can give them what many of them long for, which is love and tenderness. The best way to do that is to encourage all groups, including faith-based groups, to provide mentors. And it is happening in America. For those of you who are mentoring the children of prisoners, thank you for what you are doing to make America a more welcoming place. We have awarded grantstoday we have unleashed another $45.5 million of grants to programs, all aimed at doing this. I will tell you another program that is important is to help the addict, is to help the person so stuck on drugs that they cannot realize the great human potential that God has given them, and they need desperate help. I believe that some counseling programs work, no question about it. But I also know programs that change the heart works. When a person changes their heart, they change their habits. Government is not good at changing hearts. The Almighty God is good at changing hearts, which happens to be the cornerstone of effective faith-based programs. And therefore, when it comes to spending Federal money to help addicts, I have asked the Congress, and the Congress has agreed to allow us to use vouchers to go to the person who is seeking help. That person can use that voucher at any kind of program he or she chooses, including faith-based programs, to help heal hearts and save lives. In other words, some of these are the ways thatwhat I am telling you is, things are changing in the Nation's Capital when it comes to invigorating the Faith-Based Initiative, and the Knights have helped a lot. I appreciate your efforts to level the playing field when it comes to grantmaking.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheknightscolumbusconventiondallastexas", "title": "Remarks to the Knights of Columbus Convention in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-knights-columbus-convention-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "03-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2715, "text": "And because of your efforts, America is changing for the better. I needed someone to lead this program, so guess who I turned to? I found Towey. Jim Towey is the Director of the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives. He is with me. His job is to help the faith communityby the way, all faithsall faiths, Christian, Jew, or Muslimall faiths understand what is possible now. Let us be frank about it. Many faith-based programs do not want to interface with Government. They are afraid of losing the ability to practice their faith. How can you be a faith-based program if you are not allowed to practice your faith? Towey's job so Towey has got a big job. It is to change a culture, a suspicious culture, and we are making progressa suspicious culture in Washington, a suspicious culture in the grassroots. He goes to meet Mother Teresa for the first time. He shows up at one of her homes for the dying in India, and the sister who greeted him assumed he was there to work. That is what I assume every day that Towey shows up. So she gave Jim some cloth and said, Go clean the sores of a dying man. He says it changed his life, that experience. He went on to work full-time for the Missionaries of Charity. Incredibly enough, Jim Towey, Director of the Office of Faith-Based Initiatives in the White House, was Mother Teresa's lawyer. I ask you, what kind of society is it where Mother Teresa needs a lawyer? It is a society that needs tort reform. I appreciate your good work, friend. The Knights of Columbus are transferring lives with works of compassion, and, just as importantly, you are defending the values of faith and family that bind us as a nation. I appreciate your fight to protect children from obscenity. I appreciate your working to protect the Pledge of Allegiance, to keep us one Nation under God. I want to thank youI want to thank you for the defense of the traditional family. That is a most fundamental institution for our society. I appreciate the fact you are promoting the culture of life. We are making progress here in America. Last November, I signed a law to end the brutal practice of partial-birth abortion. This law is urgently needed, and my administration will vigorously defend it in the courts. I was pleased to sign the Born-Alive Infants Protection Act.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheknightscolumbusconventiondallastexas", "title": "Remarks to the Knights of Columbus Convention in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-knights-columbus-convention-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "03-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2716, "text": "I want to thank the Knights on that piece of legislation. I signed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. Common sense and conscience tells us that when an expectant mother is killed, two lives are ended, and the criminal should answer for both crimes. I was pleased to sign legislation supporting maternity group homes. We will continue to work to help crisis pregnancy centers. We will work together to strengthen incentives for adoption and parental notification laws. The Knights have been helpful, and I appreciate your help. My 2005 budget, I proposed to more than triple Federal funds for abstinence programs in schools and community-based programs above 2001 levels. I will continue to work with Congress to pass a comprehensive and effective ban on human cloning. Human life is a creation of God, not a commodity to be exploited by man. I look forward to working with the Knights to defend the sacred bond of marriage. A few activist judges have taken it upon themselves to redefine the institution of marriage by court order. I support a constitutional amendment to protect the sanctity of marriage by ensuring it is always recognized as the union of a man and woman as husband and wife. I appreciate the Knights' stand on this issue. I also appreciate the Knights of Columbus' stand on the Federal judiciary. I have a responsibility as President to make sure the Federal judicial system runs well. I have nominated superb men and women for the Federal benches who will strictly and fully interpret the law, not legislate from the bench. In all these areas, caring for the poor and protecting the vulnerable, affirming life, and defending the family, we are depending on the goodness and compassion of the American people. See, the strength of this country is not our military might. It is not the size of our wallet. The strength of this country is the hearts and souls of the American people. And it is an incredible honor to be the President of such a nation, a President of a nation of compassion and decency and honor and such powerful values that we are able to bring people from all walks of life under the rubric of being an American. I appreciate the prayers of the people of this country. People I will never get to say thanks to in person, lift Laura and me up in prayer. It is a remarkable aspect of the Presidency. More significantly, it is a remarkable aspect of the life of the United States of America. I am grateful for your prayers. I am grateful for your great service and the example you set for our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheknightscolumbusconventiondallastexas", "title": "Remarks to the Knights of Columbus Convention in Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-knights-columbus-convention-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "03-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2778, "text": "This is the biggest stage I have been on in quite a while. I am told it is so big because you are having the Oak Ridge Boys tonight. I want to thank your president, Bill Taylor, for the invitation to come here and Bob Elsner for that fine introduction, especially what he said about health care. I look out in this crowd and see many friends of mine from across the country. I saw my good friend Neil Offen, the president of the Direct Selling Association, a minute ago. And I have already spotted five or six people in the audience that I have known for years. I thank you all for inviting me here and for giving me a chance to talk about health care today. I'd like to just begin by trying to put this very briefly in the context in which I view it as your President. I think my job is to do everything I can to help every American reach his or her God-given potential and to try to bring the American people together to make our country stronger. In other words, even though you often do not read about it in these terms, the real purpose of our political system, when it is working properly, is to get people together and to get things done. In the last year, we have been able to bring the deficit down, keep interest rates down, see economic growth come back into this country. In the last 3 months of last year we had the highest growth rate in a decade, the biggest increase in productivity from American workers in 8 years. If our budget is adopted, the one I have presented to the Congress, we will have 3 years of decline in the Federal deficit for the first time since Harry Truman was President and the first real reduction in discretionary nondefense spending since 1969, if this budget is adopted. At the same time, we are moving the money around so we will be investing more in Head Start, more in medical research, more in new technologies to support defense conversion and to rebuild the American economy. We are beginning to turn this situation around and to make this Government work for the American people. But this year we have a lot of other challenges we are facing. The Congress is working on a very important crime bill to put more police officers on the street, to stiffen penalties appropriately, to provide alternative punishments to first-time youthful offenders, to provide some ways for kids to stay out of jail, to take assault weapons off the street. They are doing a lot of important things.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2779, "text": "And the Congress is dealing with that as we speak. The Congress will take up welfare reform, a subject on which I have worked for well over a decade now. And I hope they finally will make welfare a second chance, not a way of life, for all Americans and enable us to bring children up in a better fashion. The Congress is going to have a chance now to finally pass a campaign finance reform bill, which will increase the confidence of the American people in the way we do our business here, and a lobby reform bill. But I can tell you that if over the long run we expect the American people to be a stronger community, if we expect our economy to have the funds necessary to invest in the growth opportunities of the 21st century, and if you want your Federal Government to be able to respond to the challenges of today and tomorrow, we must address the health care crisis. It is not just a problem for individual American workers and families, it is a problem for the Federal budget and for the national investment patterns. I can tell you, just to give you two examples, in addition to the fact that almost every American, at least those who do not work for larger businesses or for the Government, is at some risk of losing his or her health insurance or of having the inability to change jobs because someone in the family got sick, and almost every small business is at risk of having their premiums explode or their deductibles and copays explode, you also should know that this is a serious competitive problem for us. We are spending 14.5 percent of our income on health care. The Germans are just a little bit over 8 percent of their income. Only the Canadians are at 10 percent of their income. If you think about spotting our competitors 512 cents on every dollar spent, that is a significant issue. And almost all of you represent a group of business people who have personally experienced that. Now, should we spend more money than other countries on health care? I would argue we should and we must, because we invest more in medical research and technology. And we lead the world in that, and that generates jobs, opportunities, and incomes. We have these great academic health centers. Every American, just about, would be happy to pay a premium for that. Must we spend more? The answer to that is, yes, we must; as long as we have higher rates of violence and ENTITY and teen pregnancy than other countries, we will have higher bills.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2780, "text": "Does that account for all of the difference? A lot of it is directly related to the way we finance health care. In the budget we are adopting, we are cutting defense this year for the first time since 1969. If my budget's adopted, we will cut nondefense spending. Social Security will go up, but only by the rate of inflation, and it is paid for by the Social Security taxes, which are in surplus. We will have to pay more on interest on the debt as it accumulates, although not as much as we would if interest rates were not low. The only thing in this whole budget that is really going up by more than the rate of inflation in the Federal budget is health care costs, 2 and 3 times the rate of inflation. And if we do not do something about it, then the rising cost of Medicare and Medicaid will mean that 2 or 3 or 4 years from now, none of you, no matter whom you represent, will be able to come to Washington and say, How about a new airport, how about a new port, how about a new highway program? How are you going to keep up with our foreign competitors in the seven, eight areas of new technology that will control the future? because we will be spending all of the money you give us in revenues on health care, while we cut everything else. And I believe that after 60 years of false starts, we actually have an opportunity to do the right thing, that is, to give every American and every American family health security and have it be the right thing for the American economy and for the future of the United States. For individuals, health security means freedom from fear and the freedom to prosper and the freedom to make choices that now are becoming narrower and narrower for most Americans in health care. For the Nation, it means the ability to bring health care costs within inflation, to have the chance finally to control the deficit, and to allow many businesses now struggling with this problem to be able to invest, to become more productive without having to make the decision to basically terrify their own employees by cutting back health care so much. Does anybody have all the answers? If it were easy and someone had all of the answers, it would have been done before. You represent more than 22,000 members who serve millions of Americans, tens of millions of Americans, engineers and teachers, pharmacists and farmers and bankers and Red Cross volunteers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2781, "text": "Those are the kind of people served by the American Society of Association Executives. Next year you will turn 75, and for threequarters of a century you have shown the importance of representation, of what can be done when people honestly seek to represent the genuine interest and feelings of their members and come together in a spirit of fairness and openness and try to achieve a common goal. Well, I feel that I almost ought to be a member of this group. I could have a little tag that said the Association of All the American People. And the members of my group want us to deal with the health care problem, and we are trying to do it. The American people want health care to be there when they need it, and they want it to be there at a reasonable price. That is what health insurance used to mean, what it can mean again. I know that because of the opposition of various interest groups and because some of them have changed their position under withering political heat, there are some who have already said, Well, we will not get health care reform; yet again, the people against it will prevail. Well, I say to the naysayers and the pessimists that, not quite so fast. I have seen a lot of endeavors in which I was involved over the last 15 years given up for dead, including my own endeavors, political endeavors. But it is a funny thing about our system here in America. The American people and their representatives, in the end, more than half the time, do the right thing when given the chance. I do not know how many Members of the Congress I have had tell me privately in the last week that they are actually becoming more optimistic that we will get a genuine health reform bill out that will provide health security to all Americans. The reality is, and everyone knows this, that while we have the best health care in the world, people who have health insurance today might not have it tomorrow. People who can afford it today might not be able to afford it tomorrow. People who have choices with which they are satisfied today might lose all those choices tomorrow. Preexisting conditions today leave 81 million Americans at risk. It means they can be denied coverage or their rates can be raised or they cannot leave the job they have got for a new one because they will not be able to carry insurance with them. A lot of you represent small businesses.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2782, "text": "A lot of people would like to leave a bigger business and start their own business or might want to seek a better career opportunity that is in a smaller business than the one in which they are in. But if they have some member of their family that is been sick, they are literally trapped where they are, and they cannot do that. Three out of four Americans have lifetime limits on their policies which means that, for many of them, they can lose their coverage just when they need it the most. Two million families lose their health insurance every month, 100,000 of them permanently. We have seen an increase in the number of Americans without health insurance from 37 to 39 million just in the last 2 years. The health care we have is good, if we can get it. But the health care financing system does not serve the American people well. It leads to massive cost-shifting. It leads to, by far, the biggest paperwork burden of any health care system in the world. And I would like to say in simple terms what I believe we should do to fix it. First, we should guarantee private insurance to every American. Second, we should guard the right to choose a doctor and improve the quality of health care plans. Third, we should limit how much insurance companies can raise rates based on whether your business is large or small or you work for the government, whether you are older or younger or whether someone in your family has been sick. And we should make it illegal for people to drop others. But we must set up a system in which insurance companies themselves will not be forced into bankruptcy if we make it illegal to drop them, which is why it is important for people to be able to be insured in large pools. Third, we want to protect and improve Medicare and health care for older Americans. Fourth, we want to provide benefits through the workplace, because that is where 9 of 10 Americans who have insurance already get it. I know that a lot of people have seen this health security card. But if you know how to use a credit card or a bank card or a Social Security card, people can figure this out. Under the system we have proposed, every American would get a card which stands for not a Government program but guaranteed private insurance and private health providers. The card would permit every American to choose a health care plan, to choose a doctor, to fill out one simple form, and to get health care for a whole year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2783, "text": "And at the end of the year, Americans would be able to pick another plan or stay with the same plan or make a different decision. It would not stop any American, over and above that, from paying another private physician for some other service if that was desired. It would, in other words, give more choice than half the American work force has today in their health care plan. Beginning by guaranteeing private insurance for all means that everyone must be covered. That is not only the only way to guarantee security, it is the only way to stop cost-shifting. As long as an insurance company can deny coverage or drop from coverage, then no one is really secure, and some Americans will have to pay the price for other Americans' health care because those who do not have insurance will eventually get health care when it is too late and too expensive, often at an emergency room. And then the cost will be passed on to all the rest of you who are paying for your health care right now in the usual way. That is why I have said that I cannot sign and, indeed, would have to veto a bill that pretended to reform the health care system without providing a system by which everyone is covered. Because unless everyone is covered, there is no cost control, there is no end to cost-shifting, there is no real security, and there is no balance in the system. We are the only country in the world that has not figured out how to do this with an advanced economy, and we ought to be smart enough to do it. I mean, basically when I see all these ads that say we cannot do it, I say, these people are telling me my country is dumber than these other countries. I do not believe that. Or they are telling me that the price of having great health care and great teaching hospitals and great medical research and extraordinary technology is that you have to have some people who do not have anything and all the rest of us have to pay for that besides. I do not believe that. The benefits package ought to be comprehensive enough to encourage primary and preventive health care because that saves money over the long run. That is a very important part of this. Immunizations, mammograms, physicals, prescription drugs, all those things actually avert our health care costs when properly done and keep us healthier. We spend too much time in America treating people when they are sick and not enough time keeping people healthy in the first place.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2784, "text": "Secondly, we want to preserve and enhance choice as the best guarantee that the quality of American medicine will remain the best in the world. People should be able to choose on their doctors and their health care plans; it guarantees quality. Under our proposal now, everyone would have a chance to make at least one from among three choices, at a minimum, every year. You could choose traditional fee-for-service medicine; you could choose an HMO, for example; you could choose a preferred provider organization that physicians and others organized themselves. But every year you would be given the chance, once again, to make that choice under our proposal. More and more people under the pressures of the present system are living with shrinking choices. And a lot of people are quite properly worried that those shrinking choices will not only interfere with their choice but will interfere with the quality of health care. There have been a lot of articles written in thoughtful publications in the last few months pointing out that choice is a rapidly vanishing facet of American health care today, and that in fact the attack on our plan as limiting choice is simply not true; that by guaranteeing at least three choices and that you get to make a decision every year again, that we are building into this system a higher level of choice and therefore a guarantee of competition and quality that otherwise would not be the case. Now, the other thing that I want to say about this system is that affordable insurance should be there and should not be able to be taken away. That is why we want to make it illegal for rates to be raised unreasonably or for coverage to be dropped based on age or previous condition of illness. And we know that in order to do that and be fair to the private insurance companies, we have to let people be in large pools. That is, this is what all of you know as community rating. That is the only way you can guarantee that small businesses and selfemployed people and farmers, for example, through some sort of cooperative system, can have access to the same good rates that people in big business and Government do, still have community rating, not discriminate against the old, not discriminate against the worker who is had a sick child or a spouse with cancer, and not bankrupt the insurance companies. If they are going to be able to be a part of this, you have to have some system of community rating.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2785, "text": "They put the control of the health care system of America back into the hands of the American people on the one hand and health care providers on the other. Today, the control is determined by the financing, and it is in the hands of the insurance companies. And very often they do what they do because of the way we are all organized and divided, so that even if they do not want to do something that has a harmful effect, the economics of their business dictate it because of the way the system is set up. We cannot permit that to go on anymore. The American people should have the power to choose. The American health care providers should have the power to deliver. But it should not be organized the way it is now so that the people who are providing the financing in the middle have all the control and themselves are in a position not to make it fairer for many people. We cannot have the security of millions of our people in jeopardy, with a system that they are basically satisfied with when they have it but which could vanish overnight. Medicare is one of the best things about American health care because it works and has very low administrative costs, providing health security for millions of older Americans. The question is, how do we keep Medicare healthy as our population gets older? The fastest growing group of Americans in percentage terms are people over 80-hope to be one of them before long. But how are we going to do that? How are we going to take care of our own as health care costs keep rising? We believe that we have to keep Medicare but that we have to recognize that the present system is heavily tilted toward institutionalized care which will not be necessary for some people and which will be explosively expensive as the percentage of our people living in higher age brackets goes higher and higher and higher. So our system, number one, covers prescription medicine along with Medicare, which Medicare does not do now-because we believe there is ample evidence that that keeps people healthier and will save money over the long run; a year's worth of medicine might cost the same thing as a day or two in a hospital-and secondly, by beginning to phasein a long-term care system where we give people some help for making noninstitutional choices, for keeping their parents at home or finding adult day care centers or having in-home care.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2786, "text": "Because otherwise, you are looking at a population, by the turn of the century and the end of the first decade of the next century, which we simply cannot afford to maintain and would be bad for our country, unless we have more different options to deal with this rapidly aging population. So under our proposal, if you get Medicare you keep it, which also includes the doctor of your choice and medical security. We achieve some savings in the Medicare program by bringing the rate of inflation in Medicare down to twice the rate of normal inflation. When you hear there are all these cuts in Medicare, do not believe it. We are just going to bring the rate of inflation down to twice the normal rate of inflation and take those savings to pay for prescription medicine and to pay for the beginnings of a new and more comprehensive long-term care system. We cannot do anything to mess up health care security for older people. But we must strengthen it. Finally, I think we should guarantee these benefits at work. And this is, after all, among the organized folks the most controversial decision of all. Nine out of ten Americans who have private insurance get it at work. Eight out of ten Americans who do not have any insurance have someone in their family who works. Expanding the present system lets us reach out to most of the uninsured and is based on shared responsibility. It is the easiest and simplest way to accomplish the goal. You can never stop cost-shifting until everybody's got insurance. Consider this-I just mentioned welfare reform earlier-if we take a welfare mother with two little kids who says, I hate welfare, and I want to get off of it, and I want to support my children, and you give that fine person job training, and then the woman finds a job. And she goes to work for a small business at an entry-level pay slot, because she got a very limited education, and no health care benefits at the office. And that woman goes from getting a welfare check to getting a paycheck; she begins to pay taxes. She is now paying taxes for someone who made a different decision, who stayed on welfare to keep getting Medicaid, the Government-funded health care program for poor people, which she has given up to go to work. That, by the way, is the central reason that we are having some difficulty moving people from welfare to work. People do not want to hurt their children. Again, this is a system that no other country has.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2787, "text": "So we have to find a way to do it. Now you say, well, but it is really tough on restaurants who have a lot of young people who are healthy and who do not want to pay for health insurance anyway. Or it is tough on people who have a lot of part-time workers. Some do and some do not ; UPS has over 100,000 part-time workers and insures them all. But you say, it is tough on businesses with part-time workers, and it is certainly tough on small businesses that are eking by. But that is why we reasoned that if we do this, we have to give substantial discounts for small businesses with low average payrolls, low profit margins, difficult times. And the self-employed, for the first time, under our bill, get 100 percent tax deductibility, not limited tax deductibility as they do now. These things will make this insurance more affordable, plus which, if small businesses and self-employed people are in larger pools, they will not be paying higher rates as they do now. One reason small business people have to either not cover their folks or reduce coverage every year is that the average small business premium is 35 percent higher than the average government premium or big business premium. And you cannot blame people for doing something in the face of those kinds of economics. Another reason is, as a restaurant owner told me-the other day I was in Columbus, Ohio, and this restaurant owner said to me, Look, I am getting the worst of all worlds. I have 20 employees full-time and 20 part-time. She says, I cover my 20 full-time employees. I do not cover the parttime employees. I feel guilty that I do not cover the part-time employees and mad that my competitors do not cover the full-time employees, and I am having to pay higher rates because we had one person, me, in our group of 20 that was sick. She said, I am getting the worst of all worlds, too high insurance, my competitors have an advantage because I am covering my employees and they are not covering theirs, and I feel just terrible that the part-timers do not get any insurance at all. She said, I would gladly do it all if everybody were treated the same way and we had access to competitive rates.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2788, "text": "So I would argue that this is still the fairest and best way to make sure everyone is covered, discounts for smaller business, full deductibility for the self-employed, and a system which permits us to overcome the discrimination in rates that small business endures today. It uses what is right about the American system, the health care, and fixes what is wrong, the financing. It guarantees permanent private insurance, safeguards the right to choose a doctor and a plan, limits how much rates can be raised because of categories and makes it illegal for people to be dropped, protects and improves Medicare and the health care of senior citizens, and provides health benefits to the workplace. Now, the largest associations of America's family physicians, pediatricians, nurses, and pharmacists have supported this health care plan. Our approach was not designed to hurt anyone. It did have to make some difficult choices. It was designed for the American people. It was about giving life to our best values and dealing with one of our biggest problems. It was about giving families who work hard and do their best to raise their kids the security they deserve; stopping people from paying more because of the irresponsibility of others; stopping a situation in which 8 million older Americans, every month, who are not poor enough to be on the Medicaid program but are on Medicare and have to have medicine every month, 8 million, choosing between food and medicine. It was, in short, about dealing with a problem that is only going to get worse unless we fix it now and doing it in a way that does not interfere with what is finest about our health care system. It is about, ultimately, the freedom of the American people to be free from fear, the freedom to preserve choice, the freedom to preserve quality, and the freedom to grow and prosper into the 21st century, putting our values to work and believing that it is irrational to say that we cannot do something that our competitors have figured out how to do. That is why I think this year we will give every American the freedom that only real health care security can mean. I would encourage you to participate in this outreach, to respond to your communities, the people you honorably represent, not to agree with every jot and tittle of everything in the plan we have presented. If we involve thousands of people and work for months and we know how complicated this is, but the basic things we have to do are fairly simple and straightforward.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericansocietyassociationexecutives1", "title": "Remarks to the American Society of Association Executives", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-society-association-executives-1", "publication_date": "08-03-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2789, "text": "This week, we received encouraging reports that show our economy is gaining strength. Consumer confidence hit a 2-year high in July. Existing home sales hit an alltime new record in June. The homeownership rate has hit a new all-time high. And since last summer, our economy has grown at a rate as fast as any in nearly 20 years. These gains in our economy have come at a time when Americans are benefiting from the full effects of tax relief. I have traveled across America meeting small-business owners who are investing tax savings into new equipment, and I have met families who are using tax savings to pay for their children's needs. All of this added economic activity is creating opportunity. Since last August, Americans have started work at more than 1.5 million new jobs, many of them in high-growth, high-paying industries. The impact of our growing economy is being felt in Washington, where estimates of Government deficits are shrinking. My administration now forecasts that the combined deficits in 2004 and 2005 will be about $100 billion less than previously expected, and because of my policy of strengthening the economy while enforcing spending discipline in Washington, we remain on pace to reduce the deficit by half in the next 5 years. These are hopeful signs, and we must make sure our economy continues to gain momentum. Families are working hard to make ends meet, and these families depend on good policies in Washington that promote growth, new jobs, and new opportunities. Thanks to the No Child Left Behind Act, we are improving our public schools so students learn basic skills like reading, writing, math, and science. We have expanded Pell grant college scholarships so that more students can attend college, and we are helping community colleges train workers for the new high-skill jobs being created in our growing economy. We are giving individuals more control over their health care dollars through newly created health savings accounts, and we must also address the rising costs of health care by enacting commonsense reforms in our medical liability system. We must continue to open up foreign markets to American goods, because on a level playing field, American workers and farmers and entrepreneurs can compete with anybody, anytime, anywhere. We must enact reforms to our legal system so hard-working entrepreneurs are not run out of business by frivolous lawsuits. We must have a national energy policy so we become less dependent on foreign sources of energy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress802", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-802", "publication_date": "31-07-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2792, "text": "On Sunday, our Nation will observe the fourth anniversary of the September the 11th terrorist attacks. Every American has memories of that day that will never leave them. We remember the images of fire and terror at the Pentagon, in Pennsylvania, and in the heart of New York City. We remember the ruthlessness of those who murdered the innocent and took joy in their suffering. We remember the courage of the police and firefighters and rescue personnel who rushed into burning buildings to save lives, knowing they might never emerge. And we remember the victims, moms and dads, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives, and the loved ones they left behind. As night fell on America on September the 11th, 2001, we felt grief and great sorrow. Yet we also saw that while the terrorists could kill the innocent, they could not defeat the spirit of our Nation. The despair and tragedy of that day were overcome by displays of selflessness, courage, and compassion. And in the days and weeks that followed, America answered history's call to bring justice to our enemies and to ensure the survival and success of liberty. Four years later, Americans remember the fears and uncertainty and confusion of that terrible morning. But above all, we remember the resolve of our Nation to defend our freedom, rebuild a wounded city, and care for our neighbors in need. Today, America is confronting another disaster that has caused destruction and loss of life. This time the devastation resulted not from the malice of evil men but from the fury of water and wind. Hurricane Katrina flattened entire towns along our gulf coast and left one of America's most storied cities under water. Tens of thousands have lost homes and loved ones and all their earthly possessions. The storm took countless lives and forced hundreds of thousands of people to flee from their communities, with no assurance of returning soon. Once more, our hearts ache for our fellow citizens, and many are left with questions about the future. Yet we are again being reminded that adversity brings out the best in the American spirit. In this time of great suffering, we have seen the courage and determination of rescue personnel who willingly risk their lives to save the lives of others. We have seen the spirit of America's armies of compassion who have rallied in response to this tragedy. Faith-based organizations and community groups and individual citizens across the country are caring for those affected by the storm and comforting those whose loved ones are lost or missing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress393", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-393", "publication_date": "10-09-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2794, "text": "And I am just delighted to be with you today to celebrate the work of those wonderful Americans we call Points of Light. And I think our First Lady is a Point of Light. So I salute her for what she is done in literacy and helping this country understand the importance of reading. There is another guy here who is been a personal Point of Light to me, and that is Gregg Petersmeyer, who many of you know. In a sense it was his dream and his dedication that made all this possible. I do not need to do it, but I will anyway. You said it all with your own lives. Tom Ehrlich of the Commission on National and Community Service, Dick Munro of the Points of Light Foundation, and Solon Cousins of the National Center for Community Risk Management and Insurance . Ray Chambers, what an inspiration he has been in this whole voluntarism concept; Pete McCloskey; also George Romney, who I hope is here with us today. What an honor it is to have Larnelle here, Larnelle Harris, for helping make this event so very special. Anybody that can get up without a pitch pipe or a band and do what he did, we have got to look them over and see what makes him tick. But I will tell you, his song said it all; his song got right to the heart. And I understand that he is just been nominated for his seventh Grammy Award. And Presidents ought not to do this, but I know who I am rooting for. But above all, Barbara and I wanted to come over and thank the Points of Light that we are honoring today. I know that many of them have gone to great efforts to get here. And lots of folks ask me about the phrase, Points of Light. And some say it is religion; others say, well, it is a patriotic theme, like the flag; and others think it is an image of hope. But I think that Points of Light are all of these things and yet still something more. It is what happens when ordinary people claim the problems of their community as their own. And it is the inspiration and awakening to the God-given light from within, lit from within, and it is the promise of America. We have got Points of Light here today from all 50 States, shining all the way from Anchorage to Harlem, Miami to Maine. Each of you here today knows what I mean by that. Each of you found within yourselves your own special genius for helping others.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscelebrationthepointslight", "title": "Remarks at a Celebration of the Points of Light", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-celebration-the-points-light", "publication_date": "14-01-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2795, "text": "the human dignity in the eyes of a homeless man; the musicians and business leaders in an inner-city gang; the light and laughter in the shadows of a shattered life. I have always believed that in each individual, there is a Point of Light waiting to be revealed; in each community, a thousand miracles waiting to happen. And when I assumed this great office, I pledged to do all I could to honor, encourage, and increase volunteer efforts until their light filled every dark corner of our country. We began with a national strategy. first, changing attitudes so that all Americans define a successful life as one that includes serving others; and second, identifying what is already working so that those efforts can be enlarged and multiplied; and third, encouraging leaders to help others become Points of Light; and fourth, reducing volunteer liability, because I believe that it is time that we ought to care for each other more and sue each other less; and fifth and finally, within every community, linking people to ways that they can help. Everything I have done as President has tried to support this strategy. And that is why we have worked together to create the Points of Light Foundation, the Commission on National and Community Service, and then the National Center for Community Risk Management and Insurance. We envision national service not as a Government program, not even as a White House initiative but as a grassroots movement, a movement that makes full use of the many different ways that Americans want to help. This strategy is significant not because it indicates Washington's role but because it illuminates yours. And this is something where it is easy to miss the constellation for the stars. You see, it is not just Points of Light that are important. It is the idea that every community in America could be filled with light. America could become like this room. You are only a fraction of the stories that we have told. And those stories are only a fraction of those that could be told. You know, look around this room and then picture what would happen throughout America if every former gang member discovered the Rodney Dailey within and offered young people good alternatives to life on the streets. Imagine if every member, every member of a club, like the Rotary Readers, filled someone's life with the wonder of reading. Or what if every little girl found the imagination to follow Isis Johnson to clothe the cold and feed the hungry in her little corner of America. Imagine what America would look like.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscelebrationthepointslight", "title": "Remarks at a Celebration of the Points of Light", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-celebration-the-points-light", "publication_date": "14-01-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2796, "text": "Regardless of what we believe Government should do, all of us agree that no serious social problem in this country is going to be solved without the active engagement of millions of citizens in tens of thousands of institutions, schools and businesses, churches and clubs, armies of ordinary people doing extraordinary things. Government has a critical role in helping people and so does solid, sustainable economic growth. But people, people, not programs, solve problems. And somewhere in America, every serious social problem is being solved through voluntary service, for therein lies the greatest national resource of all. a job skill, a free hour, a pair of strong arms. And that is what I mean when I say that from now on, any definition of a successful life must include serving others. Let me tell you another story about success. Today, I have recognized the 1,014th Daily Point of Light, the Lakeland Middle School eighth grade volunteers. These remarkable young people from Baltimore have overcome their own challenges to become tutors and role models for younger students in special education. Their special courage reminds me of the words of a poet who said, The generosity is not in giving me that which I need more than you do, but in giving me that which you need more than I do. That courage has made the Lakeland eighth graders into the wonderful and confident young people who grace our lives today. Because I know that America is filled with young people who want to help, I signed an Executive order last October that created the President's Youth Service Award. And as with the President's Physical Fitness Award, young people in voluntary service will be able to receive Presidential recognition in their local communities. I want to thank the boards of the commission, the foundation, and the American Institute for Public Service for their help in implementing this program. What all of us seek in our life is meaning and adventure. And it is through service that all of us can find both. If I could leave but one legacy to this country, it would not be found in policy papers or even in treaties signed or even wars won; it would be return to the moral compass that must guide America through the next century, the changeless values that can and must guide change. And I am talking about a respect for the goodness that made this country great, a rekindling of that light lit from within to reveal America as it truly is, a country with strong families, a country of millions of Points of Light.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscelebrationthepointslight", "title": "Remarks at a Celebration of the Points of Light", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-celebration-the-points-light", "publication_date": "14-01-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2797, "text": "I thank you all so much for your steadfast leadership in this important cause. I also want to thank Senator Lott and Senator Daschle in their absence and, indeed, all the Members who are here. And if you would just indulge me in one personal remark, this is probably the largest gathering of Members of Congress anywhere in Washington today, except in the Chambers of the House and Senate. And I would like to take a moment to pay my respects to the memory of our friend Congressman Bruce Vento, who passed away earlier today, a great teacher, a great Representative, a wonderful human being. I also want to join the previous speakers in thanking all those who worked so hard on it, Charlene Barshefsky and Gene Sperling, who accompanied her to China, and they worked on this deal until the 11th hour. We knew it would take until the 11th hour. We only hoped by then they would not be too tired to tell time, so we would be able to finish. I thank Secretaries Glickman, Summers, and Mineta; and Secretary Slater, Secretary Shalala, who are here, John Podesta and Sandy Berger. I cannot thank Bill Daley and Steve Ricchetti enough for the extraordinary job they did to lead our efforts to secure passage of this initiative, along with Chuck Brain and Mary Beth Cahill. I want to thank all the State and local officials, the retired officials and business leaders who helped us, and I would like to acknowledge two great champions of trade who I just saw in the audience, just because I am glad to see them, former Congressman Sam Gibbons and former Congressman and Agriculture Secretary Mike Espy. This is a great day for the United States and a hopeful day for the 21st century world. This signing ceremony marks the culmination of efforts begun almost 30 years ago by President Nixon, built on by President Carter, who normalized our relations with China, pursued firmly by Presidents of both parties to normalize ties with China in ways that preserve our interests and advance our values. During that time, China has grown more prosperous and more open. As the world economy becomes vastly more complex and interconnected, China's participation in it, according to the rules of international trade, has only become more important for America, for Asia, and the world. Today we take a major step toward China's entry into the World Trade Organization and a major step toward answering some of the central challenges of this new century.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationpermanentnormaltraderelationswithchina", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation on Permanent Normal Trade Relations With China", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-permanent-normal-trade-relations-with-china", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2798, "text": "For trade with China will not only extend our Nation's unprecedented economic growth, it offers us a chance to help to shape the future of the world's most populous nation and to reaffirm our own global leadership for peace and prosperity. I guess I ought to point out that our work's not over when I sign the bill. For China must still complete its WTO accession negotiations and live up to the agreements it has negotiated with us and our partners before it can join. But when it happens, China will open its markets to American products from wheat to cars to consulting services, and our companies will be far more able to sell goods without moving factories or investments there. Beyond the economy, however, America has a profound stake in what happens in China, how it chooses to relate to the rest of the world, and whether it is open to the world, respectful of human rights, upholding the rule of law at home and its dealings with other nations. Of course, opening trade with China will not in and of itself lead China to make all the choices we believe it should. But clearly, the more China opens it markets, the more it unleashes the power of economic freedom, the more likely it will be to more fully liberate the human potential of its people. As tariffs fall, competition will rise, speeding the demise of huge state enterprises. Private firms will take their place and reduce the role of government in people's daily lives. Open markets will accelerate the information revolution in China, giving more people more access to more sources of knowledge. That will strengthen those in China who fight for decent labor standards, a cleaner environment, human rights, and the rule of law. We also will continue to press China to meet its commitments on stopping the transfer of dangerous technology and deadly weapons. We will continue to be a force for security in Asia, maintaining our military presence and our strong alliances. We will continue to support, from the outside, those who struggle within China for human rights and religious freedom. I want to say a special word of thanks to Congressmen Levin and Bereuter. Because of them, we will have both normal trade relations and a good new policy tool to monitor our human rights concern. They made this a better bill, and all Americans are in their debt. There are so many Members here today, I cannot introduce them all, but some who had no institutional mandate to do so also joined us in fighting hard for this bill.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationpermanentnormaltraderelationswithchina", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation on Permanent Normal Trade Relations With China", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-permanent-normal-trade-relations-with-china", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2799, "text": "I, in particular, thank those of you who worked so closely with me in this regard, and all the rest of you who fought hard for this. Let me say, in case you have all forgotten, this thing was hard to pass. This was a lot of trouble. And I would just like to close in reiterating something that I often said in these endless meetings we had in that room right up there on the third floor where, ironically, President Franklin Roosevelt had his office during World War II. I do think this is a good economic deal for America. I think it will increase our exports and, over the long run, will strengthen our economic position in the world. But I think, by far, the most important reason to ratify this agreement is the potential it gives us to build a safer, more integrated world. You heard Senator Moynihan talking about the day he joined the Navy. In the last 60 years of the 20th century, we fought three major wars in Asia. We can build a whole different future there now. We concluded a trade agreement with Vietnam. Today a very high official from North Korea came into the Oval Office to bring a message from the leader of North Korea. But nothing-nothing-can enhance the prospects of peace and the prospects of a very different 21st century like having China take the right path into the future. Like all people in the United States, the Chinese people ultimately will have to pick their own path. And they will make their own decisions. We cannot control what they do, but we can control what we do. We overcame fears, misgivings, honest disagreements, to come together in a stunning bipartisan coalition. One Republican House Member shook hands with me today, and the first thing he said is, Well, he said, I am glad to see you, ENTITY. And I thought, Well, if there had to be just one time, this is the time, because we did something together here that gives our children and our grandchildren the chance the live in a world that is coming together, not coming apart. It gives all of us the chance to meet the common threats of the future together as free and interdependent people. Our children will live in a world in which the information technology revolution, the biotechnology revolution, and the increasing globalization of the economy will force them to find ways to meet our common challenges and seize our common opportunities together. It is hard to imagine how that future will work if China is not a part of it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationpermanentnormaltraderelationswithchina", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation on Permanent Normal Trade Relations With China", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-permanent-normal-trade-relations-with-china", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2816, "text": "I think all of you can see before me the results of a tremendous amount of work and cooperation among all those in our Government who are interested in the present and future strength of our Nation's number one economic resource, and that is agriculture. I think it is also accurate to point out that more than has ever been the case in the past, that professional nutritionists and their representatives, private citizens, consumer groups, have been involved in the preparation of this legislation. Another fact that I think would be undisputed is that in the last 40 years, there has never been such a far-reaching and important piece of legislation passed relating to American agriculture. This is an important concept for us all. We are very eager to continue our preeminent position in international agricultural trade circles. Public Law 480, which permits us to dispose of American food products in a beneficial way, is enhanced. Foreign trade with the sale of our own agricultural commodities is enhanced. We have in this bill, too, a new approach to the food stamp question. This has sometimes been considered as an anomaly or an anachronism in a modern day Department of Agriculture. But I think this legislation that has been included in the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 is a great step forward in providing a simple food stamp system and one that would be easy to administer, one that is more equitable, which eliminates the pervasive threat of fraud. I'd also like to point out that this bill includes many other features--a renewed emphasis and an enhancement of our research program in agriculture that is so important to every family. It, for the first time, makes a major step toward tying target prices to actual production costs. This has been one of the most controversial issues that the Congress has had to face. Obviously, because production costs vary so widely from one community to another, and a bill of this kind has to deal with average prices or cost of production throughout the country, there still remain and will inevitably remain some inequities. But this bill makes a giant step toward tying target prices with production costs, and it also narrows its focus on individual commodities so that there can be more equity insured. This bill also sets up a means for maintaining adequate food reserves. Although we have been blessed recently with bountiful crops, we do not have an excessive reserve supply of crucial food and feed items on hand.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningintolawthefoodandagricultureact1977", "title": "Remarks on Signing Into Law the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-into-law-the-food-and-agriculture-act-1977", "publication_date": "29-09-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2817, "text": "This bill permits us to maintain adequate reserves, and it also encompasses a provision that is very dear to me, and that is that most of the reserves will be under the control of farmers and that there is a very careful safeguard against the dumping of agricultural products on the market, artificially, to force prices down and, therefore, to damage the economy of farm families. We have moved in this bill to correct a very serious economic problem that exists among the farm communities of our Nation by increasing target and loan prices for the 1977 crop. And I believe that this will certainly be a good investment both this year and in the future. Another aspect of this bill that particularly ,appeals to me is the reduction of Government interference in the agricultural economy. This is always devoutly to be sought, and I think the Congress has very wisely achieved this goal in this current legislation. We have eliminated acreage allotments. Quite often in the past, acreage allotments historically have evolved into a financial measure of the benefit of Government programs, and they are bought and traded like actual property. This bill moves to eliminate those acreage allotments. We have also maintained an important element in the set-aside authority for the Agriculture Secretary. And very shortly now, set-aside regulations will be promulgated by this Department. And I think the cost of this bill, because of its wise drafting, will be less and less as the future years go by. We have an exceptional case at the present time in agriculture, where additional expenditures are required. One of the elements of agricultural legislation and appropriations which is often overlooked is that at least half the costs that are normally attributed to an agricultural bill are actually in the form of redeemable loans. And this is not an expenditure from the Federal Government; it is an investment in a very good and sound commodity. The loan is secured and the loans are repaid, but under our present accounting system, this is identified as an expenditure, and it tends to distort in the public mind the degree of Federal investment in agriculture. I'd like to close by saying that I am very proud of the good work that has been done this year, and in years gone by, by Senator Talmadge, the chairman of the Senate committee and, of course, by Tom Foley and Bob Poage and all those Democrats and Republicans who've worked with them, both within the committee and on the floor of Congress.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningintolawthefoodandagricultureact1977", "title": "Remarks on Signing Into Law the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-into-law-the-food-and-agriculture-act-1977", "publication_date": "29-09-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2818, "text": "During these first days of 1984, I would like to share with you and the people of the world my thoughts on a subject of great importance to the cause of peace-relations between the United States and the Soviet Union. Tomorrow the United States will join the Soviet Union and 33 other nations at a European disarmament conference in Stockholm. The conference will search for practical and meaningful ways to increase European security and preserve peace. We will be in Stockholm with the heartfelt wishes of our people for genuine progress. We live in a time of challenges to peace, but also of opportunities to peace. Through times of difficulty and frustration, America's highest aspiration has never wavered. We have and will continue to struggle for a lasting peace that enhances dignity for men and women everywhere. I believe that 1984 finds the United States in the strongest position in years to establish a constructive and realistic working relationship with the Soviet Union. We have come a long way since the decade of the seventies, years when the United States seemed filled with self-doubt and neglected its defenses, while the Soviet Union increased its military might and sought to expand its influence by armed forces and threat. Over the last 10 years, the Soviets devoted twice as much of their gross national product to military expenditures as the United States, produced six times as many ICBM's, four times as many tanks, twice as many combat aircraft. And they began deploying the SS-20 intermediate-range missile at a time when the United States had no comparable Weapon. History teaches that wars begin when governments believe the price of aggression is cheap. To keep the peace, we and our allies must be strong enough to convince any potential aggressor that war could bring no benefit, only disaster. So, when we neglected our defenses, the risks of serious confrontation grew. Three years ago, we embraced a mandate from the American people to change course, and we have. With the support of the American people and the Congress we halted America's decline. Our economy is now in the midst of the best recovery since the sixties. Our defenses are being rebuilt, our alliances are solid, and our commitment to defend our values has never been more clear. America's recovery may have taken Soviet leaders by surprise. They may have counted on us to keep weakening ourselves. They have been saying for years that our demise was inevitable. They said it so often they probably started believing it. This may be the reason that we have been hearing such strident rhetoric from the Kremlin recently.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthenationandothercountriesunitedstatessovietrelations", "title": "Address to the Nation and Other Countries on United States-Soviet Relations", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-nation-and-other-countries-united-states-soviet-relations", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2819, "text": "These harsh words have led some to speak of heightened uncertainty and an increased danger of conflict. America's deterrence is more credible, and it is making the world a safer place-safer because now there is less danger that the Soviet leadership will underestimate our strength or question our resolve. We are witnessing tragic conflicts in many parts of the world. Nuclear arsenals are far too high, and our working relationship with the Soviet Union is not what it must be. Deterrence is essential to preserve peace and protect our way of life, but deterrence is not the beginning and end of our policy toward the Soviet Union. We must and will engage the Soviets in a dialog as serious and constructive as possible-a dialog that will serve to promote peace in the troubled regions of the world, reduce the level of arms, and build a constructive working relationship. Neither we nor the Soviet Union can wish away the differences between our two societies and our philosophies, but we should always remember that we do have common interests and the foremost among them is to avoid war and reduce the level of arms. There is no rational alternative but to steer a course which I would call credible deterrence and peaceful competition. And if we do so, we might find areas in which we could engage in constructive cooperation. Our strength and vision of progress provide the basis for demonstrating with equal conviction our commitment to stay secure and to find peaceful solutions to problems through negotiations. That is why 1984 is a year of opportunities for peace. But if the United States and the Soviet Union are to rise to the challenges facing us and seize the opportunities for peace, we must do more to find areas of mutual interest and then build on them. I propose that our governments make a major effort to see if we can make progress in three broad problem areas. First, we need to find ways to reduce, and eventually to eliminate, the threat and use of force in solving international disputes. The world has witnessed more than 100 major conflicts since the end of World War II. In other regions, independent nations are confronted by heavily armed neighbors seeking to dominate by threatening attack or subversion. Most of these conflicts have their origins in local problems, but many have been exploited by the Soviet Union and its surrogates. And, of course, Afghanistan has suffered an outright Soviet invasion. Fueling regional conflicts and exporting violence only exacerbate local tensions, increase suffering, and make solutions to real social and economic problems more difficult.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthenationandothercountriesunitedstatessovietrelations", "title": "Address to the Nation and Other Countries on United States-Soviet Relations", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-nation-and-other-countries-united-states-soviet-relations", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2820, "text": "Further, such activity carries with it the risk of larger confrontations. Would it not be better and safer if we could work together to assist people in areas of conflict in finding peaceful solutions to their problems? But we must recognize that the gap in American and Soviet perceptions and policy is so great that our immediate objective must be more modest. As a first step, our governments should jointly examine concrete actions that we both can take to reduce the risk of U.S.-Soviet confrontation in these areas. And if we succeed, we should be able to move beyond this immediate objective. Our second task should be to find ways to reduce the vast stockpiles of armaments in the world. It is tragic to see the world's developing nations spending more than $150 billion a year on armed forces-some 20 percent of their national budgets. We must find ways to reverse the vicious cycle of threat and response which drives arms races everywhere it occurs. With regard to nuclear weapons, the simple truth is America's total nuclear stockpile has declined. Today we have far fewer nuclear weapons than we had 20 years ago, and in terms of its total destructive power, our nuclear stockpile is at the lowest level in 25 years. Just 3 months ago, we and our allies agreed to withdraw 1,400 nuclear weapons from Western Europe. This comes after the withdrawal of 1,000 nuclear weapons from Europe 3 years ago. Even if all our planned intermediate-range missiles have to be deployed in Europe over the next 5 years-and we hope this will not be necessary-we will have eliminated five existing nuclear weapons for each new weapon deployed. We must accelerate our efforts to reach agreements that will greatly reduce nuclear arsenals, provide greater stability, and build confidence. Our third task is to establish a better working relationship with each other, one marked by greater cooperation and understanding. Cooperation and understanding are built on deeds, not words. Peaceful trade helps, while organized theft of industrial secrets certainly hurts. Cooperation and understanding are especially important to arms control. In recent years we have had serious concerns about Soviet compliance with agreements and treaties. Compliance is important because we seek truly effective arms control. However, there is been mounting evidence that provisions of agreements have been violated and that advantage has been taken of ambiguities in our agreements. In response to a congressional request, a report on this will be submitted in the next few days. We must take the Soviet compliance record into account, both in the development of our defense program and in our approach to arms control.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthenationandothercountriesunitedstatessovietrelations", "title": "Address to the Nation and Other Countries on United States-Soviet Relations", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-nation-and-other-countries-united-states-soviet-relations", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2821, "text": "In our discussions with the Soviet Union, we will work to remove the obstacles which threaten to undermine existing agreements and a broader arms control process. Examples I have cited illustrate why our relationship with the Soviet Union is not what it should be. We have a long way to go, but we are determined to try and try again. We may have to start in small ways, but start we must. In working on these tasks, our approach is based on three guiding principles-realism, strength, and dialog. Realism means we must start with a clear-eyed understanding of the world we live in. We must recognize that we are in a long-term competition with a government that does not share our notions of individual liberties at home and peaceful change abroad. We must be frank in acknowledging our differences and unafraid to promote our values. Strength is essential to negotiate successfully and protect our interests. If we are weak, we can do neither. Strength is more than military power. Economic strength is crucial, and America's economy is leading the world into recovery. Equally important is our strength of spirit and unity among our people at home and with our allies abroad. We are stronger in all these areas than we were 3 years ago. Our strength is necessary to deter war and to facilitate negotiated solutions. Soviet leaders know it makes sense to compromise only if they can get something in return. Well, America can now offer something in return. Strength and dialog go hand in hand, and we are determined to deal with our differences peacefully through negotiations. We are prepared to discuss the problems that divide us and to work for practical, fair solutions on the basis of mutual compromise. We will never retreat from negotiations. I have openly expressed my view of the Soviet system. I do not know why this should come as a surprise to Soviet leaders who've never shied from expressing their view of our system. But this does not mean that we cannot deal with each other. We do not refuse to talk when the Soviets call us imperialist aggressors and worse, or because they cling to the fantasy of a Communist triumph over democracy. The fact that neither of us likes the other system is no reason to refuse to talk. Living in this nuclear age makes it imperative that we do talk. Our commitment to dialog is firm and unshakeable, but we insist that our negotiations deal with real problems, not atmospherics. And that is why I proposed over 2 years ago the zero option for intermediate-range missiles.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthenationandothercountriesunitedstatessovietrelations", "title": "Address to the Nation and Other Countries on United States-Soviet Relations", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-nation-and-other-countries-united-states-soviet-relations", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2822, "text": "Our aim was and continues to be to eliminate an entire class of nuclear arms. Indeed, I support a zero option for all nuclear arms. As I have said before, my dream is to see the day when nuclear weapons will be banished from the face of the Earth. Last month the Soviet Defense Minister stated that his country would do everything to avert the threat of war. Well, these are encouraging words, but now is the time to move from words to deed. The opportunity for progress in arms control exists. The Soviet leaders should take advantage of it. We have proposed a set of initiatives that would reduce substantially nuclear arsenals and reduce the risk of nuclear confrontation. The world regrets-certainly we do-that the Soviet Union broke off negotiations on intermediate-range nuclear forces and has not set a date for the resumption of the talks on strategic arms and on conventional forces in Europe. Our negotiators are ready to return to the negotiating table to work toward agreements in INF, START, and MBFR. We will negotiate in good faith. Whenever the Soviet Union is ready to do likewise, we will meet them halfway. We seek to reduce nuclear arsenals and to reduce the chances for dangerous misunderstanding and miscalculations, so we have put forward proposals for what we call confidence-building measures. They cover a wide range of activities. In the Geneva negotiations, we proposed to exchange advance notification of missile tests and major military exercises. Following up on congressional suggestions, we also proposed a number of ways to improve direct channels of communications. Last week, we had productive discussions with the Soviets here in Washington on improving communications, including the hotline. Now these bilateral proposals will be broadened at the conference in Stockholm. We are working with our allies to develop practical, meaningful ways to reduce the uncertainty and potential for misinterpretation surrounding military activities and to diminish the risk of surprise attack. Arms control has long been the most visible area of U.S.-Soviet dialog. But a durable peace also requires ways for both of us to diffuse tensions and regional conflicts. Everyone's interest would be served by stability in the region, and our efforts are directed toward that goal. The Soviets could help reduce tensions there instead of introducing sophisticated weapons into the area. This would certainly help us to deal more positively with other aspects of our relationship. Another major problem in our relationship with the Soviet Union is human rights.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthenationandothercountriesunitedstatessovietrelations", "title": "Address to the Nation and Other Countries on United States-Soviet Relations", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-nation-and-other-countries-united-states-soviet-relations", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2823, "text": "Soviet practices in this area, as much as any other issue, have created the mistrust and ill will that hangs over our relationship. Moral considerations alone compel us to express our deep concern over prisoners of conscience in the Soviet Union and over the virtual halt in the emigration of Jews, Armenians, and others who wish to join their families abroad. that the Soviet Union live up to its obligations. It has freely assumed those obligations under international covenants, in particular its commitments under the Helsinki accords. Experience has shown that greater respect for human rights can contribute to progress in other areas of the Soviet-American relationship. Conflicts of interest between the United States and the Soviet Union are real, but we can and must keep the peace between our two nations and make it a better and more peaceful world for all mankind. Our policy toward the Soviet Union-a policy of credible deterrence, peaceful competition, and constructive cooperation-will serve our two nations and people everywhere. It is a policy not just for this year, but for the long term. It is a challenge for Americans; it is also a challenge for the Soviets. If they cannot meet us halfway, we will be prepared to protect our interests and those of our friends and allies. But we want more than deterrence. We seek genuine cooperation. We seek progress for peace. Cooperation begins With communication. And, as I have said, we will stay at the negotiating tables in Geneva and Vienna. Furthermore, Secretary Shultz will be meeting this week with Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko in Stockholm. This meeting should be followed by others, so that high-level consultations become a regular and normal component of U.S.-Soviet relations. It will bring out the best in us. It also calls for the best in the Soviet Union. We do not threaten the Soviet Union. Freedom poses no threat. It is the language of progress. We proved this 35 years ago when we had a monopoly on nuclear weapons and could have tried to dominate the world, but we did not . Instead, we used our power to write a new chapter in the history of mankind. We helped rebuild war-ravaged economies in Europe and the Far East, including those of nations who had been our enemies. Indeed, those former enemies are now among our staunchest friends. We cannot predict how the Soviet leaders will respond to our challenge. But the people of our two countries share with all mankind the dream of eliminating the risk of nuclear war.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthenationandothercountriesunitedstatessovietrelations", "title": "Address to the Nation and Other Countries on United States-Soviet Relations", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-nation-and-other-countries-united-states-soviet-relations", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2824, "text": "It is not an impossible dream, because eliminating these risks are so clearly a vital interest for all of us. Our two countries have never fought each other. Indeed, we fought common enemies in World War II. Today our common enemies are poverty, disease, and above all, war. More than 20 years ago, President Kennedy defined an approach that is as valid today as when he announced it. So let us not be blind to our differences, he said, but let us also direct attention to our common interests and to the means by which those differences can be resolved. Well, those differences are differences in governmental structure and philosophy. The common interests have to do with the things of everyday life for people everywhere. Just suppose with me for a moment that an Ivan and an Anya could find themselves, oh, say, in a waiting room, or sharing a shelter from the rain or a storm with a Jim and Sally, and there was no language barrier to keep them from getting acquainted. Would they then debate the differences between their respective governments? Or would they find themselves comparing notes about their children and what each other did for a living? Before they parted company, they would probably have touched on ambitions and hobbies and what they wanted for their children and problems of making ends meet. And as they went their separate ways, maybe Anya would be saying to Ivan, Wasn't she nice? She also teaches music. Or Jim would be telling Sally what Ivan did or did not like about his boss. They might even have decided they were all going to get together for dinner some evening soon. Above all, they would have proven that people do not make wars. People want to raise their children in a world without fear and without war. They want to have some of the good things over and above bare subsistence that make life worth living. They want to work at some craft, trade, or profession that gives them satisfaction and a sense of worth. Their common interests cross all borders. If the Soviet Government wants peace, then there will be peace. Together we can strengthen peace, reduce the level of arms, and know in doing so that we have helped fulfill the hopes and dreams of those we represent and, indeed, of people everywhere.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressthenationandothercountriesunitedstatessovietrelations", "title": "Address to the Nation and Other Countries on United States-Soviet Relations", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-nation-and-other-countries-united-states-soviet-relations", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2825, "text": "Listen, before I want to say something, I am traveling with a guest and a friend who represents thousands of people all across this country who are affiliated with the Democrat Party. My friend has come from Georgia to share a message with you about how we are going to work with Republicans and Democrats and independents to carry the great State of Pennsylvania. I am thrilled to be traveling with him. because we are going to carry Pennsylvania on November the 2d. And that is what I am here to do. I am here to ask for your vote and ask for your help. I am asking that you turn out your friends and neighbors to the polls. I am asking you to continue to make the phone calls and put up the signs. I am asking you to do everything you can because with your help, we will make America a safer country, a stronger country, and a better country for every single citizen. Perhaps the most important reason to put me back into office is so that Laura will be the First Lady for 4 more years. When I asked her to marry me, she said, Fine, just make me a promise. Promise me I will never have to give a political speech. I said, Okay, you got a deal. Fortunately, she did not hold me to that deal. She is giving a lot of speeches, and when she does, the American people see a fine, compassionate, strong First Lady. I am proud of my runningmate, Dick Cheney. I admit it, he does not have the waviest hair in the race. You will be happy to hear I did not pick him because of his hairdo. I picked him because of his judgment. I picked him because of experience. He is getting the job done for the American people. He and Zell serve in the Senate together. I am proud to have Rick Santorum as my campaign manager for the State of Pennsylvania. I am proud to-excuse me-call him friend, and I know you are proud to call him Senator. And I hope you put Arlen Specter back in there. We need to work with him for 6 more years. I am honored to be on the stage with Joe Pitts, Congressman from this area. I want to thank Pat Toomey for the class he showed during the primary campaign. I appreciate his leadership and his service to the Congress. I want to thank all the candidates who are here, people running for office. I wish you all the best coming down the stretch.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2826, "text": "I want to thank my friend Daron Norwood and the Matt Goss Band for singing. Most of all, I want to thank you all. You have lifted our spirits for being here. You are kind with your time, and I want to thank you for coming. This election comes down to some clear choices-- Audience members. This election comes down to some clear choices, clear choices for our families. We have issues of great consequence. The first clear choice is the most important because it concerns the security of your family. All the progress on every other issue depends on the safety of our citizens. It will be the first Presidential election since September the 11th, 2001. Americans will go to the polls in a time of war, an ongoing threat unlike any we have ever faced before. The terrorists who killed thousands are still dangerous, and they are determined to strike again. And the outcome of this election will set the direction of the war against the terrorists. The most solemn duty of the American President is to protect the American people. If America shows uncertainty or weakness in this decade, the world will drift toward tragedy. This will not happen on my watch. Since that terrible morning of September the 11th, 2001, we fought the terrorists across the Earth, not for pride, not for power but because the lives of our citizens are at stake. We have strengthened the protection of the homeland. Tom Ridge, the former Governor of your State, is doing a great job as the Secretary of Homeland Security. We are strengthening our intelligence capabilities. We are transforming our military. We are staying on the offensive. We will strike the terrorists abroad so we do not have to face them here at home. And part of our strategy is to spread liberty. We believe in the transformational power of liberty to change societies. Think what happened in Afghanistan; think about what is happened there. It was not all that long ago that young girls could not go to school, and if their mothers did not toe the line of the ideologues of hate which ran that country, they were whipped in the public square and sometimes executed in a sports stadium. Because we acted in our self-interest, because we acted to destroy Al Qaida's capacity to train in Afghanistan, millions of people went to vote in a Presidential election. The first voter in that election was a 19-year-old woman. Freedom is on the march, and America is more secure for it. Iraq will be having Presidential elections in January.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2827, "text": "That society has come a long way from the days of torture chambers and mass graves. By spreading freedom and liberty, we not only secure ourselves in the short term, we spread the peace that we all long for so our children and our grandchildren can grow up in a hopeful tomorrow. A President has to lead with consistency and strength. In a war, sometimes your tactics have to change but not your principles. Americans have seen how I do my job. Even when you might not agree with me, you know what I believe and where I stand and where I intend to lead our country. On good days and on bad days, whether the polls are up or the polls are down, I am determined to win this war on terror and to protect the American people. And I will always support the men and women who wear their Nation's uniform. I want to thank those who wear the uniform. I want to thank the families of our military. And I want to thank the veterans who are here who have set such a great example. We have a duty to support those in harm's way with all the resources they need, necessary for them to do their job. That is why I went to the United States Congress and asked for $87 billion of supplemental funding to support our troops in combat. And we got good support in the Congress. Matter of fact, the support was so strong that only 12 United States Senators voted against the supplemental funding request, 2 of whom were my opponent and his runningmate. Only four members of the United States Senate voted to authorize the use of force and then voted against providing the funding for our troops in combat-only four, two of whom were my opponent and his runningmate. So they asked him-they asked him-I am sure the people of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, are just as surprised as people all around the country when he gave his famous answer about his vote. He said, I actually did vote for the $87 billion, right before I voted against it. He is given a lot of explanations since then, a lot of them. One of the most interesting ones of all was that it was just a complicated matter. After repeatedly calling Iraq the wrong war and a diversion, Senator Kerry this week seemed shocked to learn that Iraq was a dangerous place full of dangerous weapons. The Senator used to know that, even though he seems to have forgotten it over the course of the campaign. Iraq was a dangerous place run by a dangerous tyrant who had a lot of weapons.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2828, "text": "We have seized or destroyed more than 400,000 tons of munitions, including explosives, at more than a-thousands of different sites, and we are continuing to round up more weapons every day. I want to remind the American people, if Senator Kerry had his way, we would still be taking our global test. Saddam Hussein would still be in power. He would control all those weapons and explosives and could have shared them with our terrorist enemies. Now, the Senator is making wild charges about missing explosives when his top foreign policy adviser admits, quote, We do not know the facts. The Senator is denigrating the action of our troops and commanders in the field without knowing the facts. Unfortunately, that is part of a pattern of saying almost anything to get elected, like when Senator Kerry charged that our military failed to get Usama bin Laden at Tora Bora, even though our top military commander, General Tommy Franks, said, The Senator's understanding of events does not square with reality. And our intelligence reports placed bin Laden in any of several different countries at the time. Our military is now investigating a number of possible scenarios, including that the explosives may have been moved before our troops even arrived at the site. And a political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your Commander in Chief. When it comes to your security-when it comes to the security of our families, my opponent takes a very different approach. He says that September the 11th did not change him much at all. He says the war on terror is primarily a law enforcement and intelligence gathering operation. Well, September the 11th changed me. I remember the day I was in the-at Ground Zero, on September the 4th, 2001. There were workers in hardhats there yelling at me at the top of their lungs, Whatever it takes. I remember a man grabbed me by the arm, he looked me square in the eye, and he said, Do not let me down. Ever since that day, I wake up every morning trying to figure out how to better protect America. I will never relent in defending America, whatever it takes. The second clear choice in this election concerns your family budget. When I ran for President 4 years ago, I pledged to lower taxes for American families. And I kept my word. We have doubled the child credit to $1,000 per child. We reduced the marriage penalty. The Tax Code should encourage marriage, not penalize marriage.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2829, "text": "We created the lowest-a lower tax bracket of 10 percent so working families would get help. We reduced income taxes for everybody who paid income taxes. We helped our farmers. We helped our ranchers. We helped our small-business owners. After-tax income-that is the money in your pocket- increased by about 10 percent since I became your President. Our economy has been through a lot, and I want you to remind your friends and neighbors about these facts. First, 6 months prior to our arrival in Washington, the stock market was in serious decline, and then we had a recession. Then we had corporate scandals, and then the attacks of September the 11th cost us about a million jobs in the 3 months after that fateful day. By cutting the taxes, we spurred consumption and investment, and our economic policies have led us back to growth. Our economy is growing faster than in any nation in the industrialized world. We have added 1.9 million new jobs since August of 2003. The national unemployment rate is 5.4 percent, which is lower than the average rate of the 1970s, the 1980s, and the 1990s. The unemployment rate in Pennsylvania is 5.3 percent. Home-ownership rate is at an alltime high. The small-business sector of our economy is flourishing. The entrepreneurial spirit is strong, and we are not going to go back to the days of tax and spend. My opponent has very different plans for your budget. He is going to take a big chunk out of it. He voted against all the tax relief that I suggested Congress pass. If he'd had his way, the average family in America would be paying $2,000 more in taxes to the Federal Government. All told, during his 20 years in the United States Senate, he has voted to raise taxes 98 times. I would call that a predictable pattern. When a Senator does something that often, he must really enjoy it. During this campaign, he is proposed $2.2 trillion of new spending. Now, that is a trillion with a T. That is a lot even for a Senator from Massachusetts. So they said, How are you going to pay for it? And he said, Oh, we are just going to tax the rich. Now, you have heard that before. Be wary when you hear, Oh, we are just going to tax the rich.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2830, "text": "My opponent has promised 2.2 trillion, but when you run up the top two brackets, you only raise between 600 and 800 billion. There is a gap between that which he promised and that which he can deliver. And guess who usually fills that gap? The third clear choice in this election involves the quality of life of our families. A good education and quality health care are important to a successful life. As a candidate, I pledged to challenge the soft bigotry of low expectations by reforming our public schools. And as President, I kept my word. We passed education reforms to bring high standards to our classrooms and to make schools accountable to our parents. We are seeing progress all across America. Math and reading scores are on the rise. Achievement gaps, particularly for minority students, are closing all across our country. We are building on these reforms. We will extend them to our high schools so that no child is left behind in America. We will continue to improve our lives. We will expand health savings accounts so small businesses can cover their workers and more families are able to get health care accounts they manage and call their own. We will create association health plans so small businesses can join together and buy insurance at the same discounts that big companies are able to do. We will help families in need by expanding community health centers. We will make sure every eligible child is enrolled in our Government's low-income health insurance programs. And to help the families of Pennsylvania, we will do something about the frivolous lawsuits that are running up the cost of medicine and running good doctors out of practice. Like other States, you have got an issue when it comes to these medical liability lawsuits. I met too many good ob-gyns who have been run out of practice because their premiums have gone up too high. I have met expectant mothers here in Pennsylvania who are worried about whether they and their baby will get the health care they need. You cannot be pro-doctor and pro-patient and pro-personal-trial-lawyer at the same time. You have to make your choice. My opponent made his choice, and he put a personal injury trial lawyer on the ticket. I have made my choice. I am standing with the doctors of Pennsylvania, with the patients of Pennsylvania. I am for medical liability reform-now. My opponent has got a different view when it comes to health care.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2831, "text": "I remember our debate, when he looked right in the camera and he said his health care plan, the Government has nothing to do with it. I could barely contain myself. The Government has got a lot to do with it. Eight out of ten people would be signed up to a Government program. Think about the idea of making it easier for people to sign up for Medicaid. It means small businesses will no longer provide coverage for their employees because the Government will. And people would be moved from private insurance to Government insurance. You see, when the Government writes the checks, the Government starts making the rules. And when it comes to health care, when the Government makes the rules, the Government starts making your decisions. And they start making the decisions for you, and they start making the decisions for the doctors. It is the wrong prescription for American families. In all we do to reform health care, we will make sure the decisions are made by doctors and patients, not by officials in Washington, DC. The fourth clear choice in this election involves your retirement. Our Nation has made a solemn commitment to America's seniors on Social Security and Medicare. When I ran for President 4 years ago, I promised to keep that commitment and improve Medicare by adding prescription drug coverage. I kept my word. Seniors are now getting discounts on medicine with drug discount cards. Low-income seniors are getting $600 of help this year and $600 of help next year to help them afford prescription drugs. And beginning in 2006, all seniors will be able to get prescription drug coverage under Medicare. And we will keep the promise of Social Security for our seniors, and as we do so, we will strengthen Social Security for generations to come. I want you to remember what happened in the 2000 campaign. It is-it is pretty predictable what takes place when it comes to elections. You might remember, they said, If George W. gets elected, our seniors will not get their checks. Well, I want you to remind your friends and neighbors when you are out gathering up the vote that George W. did get elected, and our seniors did get their checks. And our seniors will continue to get their checks under Social Security, no matter what the politicians try to scare you with. Baby boomers like me are in pretty good shape when it comes to the Social Security trust. But we need to worry about our children and our grandchildren. We need to worry about whether the Social Security system will be there when they need it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2832, "text": "And that is why I think younger workers ought to be able to take some of their own money and put it in a personal savings account, a savings account that will earn a better rate of return, a savings account they call their own, a savings account that the Government cannot take away. My opponent takes a different approach when it comes to Social Security. He declared he will protect Social Security. But I want you to remind people that he voted eight times for higher taxes on Social Security benefits. And when it comes to the next generation, he has not offered anything at all when it comes to strengthening Social Security. The job of a President is to confront problems, not to pass them on to future generations and future Presidents. In a new term, I will bring people together and strengthen the Social Security system for generations to come. In this campaign, I am speaking to the hopes of all Americans. The President's job is not to lead one party, but to serve the entire Nation. I am proud to have lifelong Democrats like Zell Miller by my side, and he is joined by millions of other Democrats across our country who are supporting our ticket. As the citizens of this Nation prepare to vote, I want to speak directly to the Democrats. I am a proud Republican, but I believe my policies appeal to many Democrats. In fact, I believe my opponent is running away from some of the great traditions of the Democrat Party. If you are a Democrat and you want America to be strong and confident in our ideals, I'd be honored to have your vote. The Democratic Party has a great tradition of leading this country with strength and conviction in times of war and crisis. I think of Franklin Roosevelt's commitment to total victory. I think of Harry Truman's clear vision at the beginning of the cold war. I think of John Kennedy's brave declaration of American ideals. President Kennedy said, The rights of man come not from the generosity of the state but from the hand of God. Many Democrats look at my opponent and wonder where the-that great tradition of their party has gone. My opponent takes a narrow, defensive view of the war on terror. As the United States of America hunts down the terrorists and liberates millions from tyranny and aids the rise of liberty in distant lands, my opponent counsels retreat, votes against supporting our troops in combat, downplays the power of democracy, and accepts and adopts a narrow so-called realism that is little more than defeatism.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2833, "text": "I believe American leadership is the hope of the repressed, the source of our great security, and the greatest force for good in this world. I believe the liberation of captive peoples is a noble achievement that all Americans can be proud of. If you are a Democrat who wants America to lead with strength and idealism, I would be honored to have your vote. The Democratic Party has a tradition of support for our public schools. The party of Lyndon Johnson and Hubert Humphrey always stood up for the right of poor and minority children to get the best education America could offer. Many Democrats look at my opponent and wonder where that firm conviction has gone. Just as teachers and principals across America are lifting the sights of our schools and raising the test scores of minority children, my opponent is talking about weakening the standards and going back to the old days of stagnation and excuses for failure. I got into politics and I ran for Governor of Texas because I wanted to challenge that soft bigotry of low expectations. I did not want to stand by and watch another generation of students miss out on the opportunity of our great country. When I came to Washington, I made schools my first domestic priority. We have increased funding to record levels. We are demanding results for our children of every background. If you are a Democrat who believes in strong public schools that teach every child, I'd be honored to have your vote. Americans of both political parties have always had respect and reverence for the institution of marriage. Never in our history has marriage been a partisan issue; it is not a partisan issue today. Yet, many Democrats look at my opponent and wonder, where is his commitment to defending the basic institution of civilization? He says he supports marriage, but he will do nothing to defend it. My opponent even voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman. More than two-thirds of Democrats in the Senate supported that act, and President Bill Clinton signed it into law. On the issue of protecting marriage, the Senator from Massachusetts is outside the mainstream of America and outside the mainstream of the Democratic Party. I believe that our society must show tolerance and respect for every individual, yet I do not believe this commitment of tolerance requires us to redefine marriage. If you are a Democrat who believes that marriage should be protected from activist judges, I'd be honored to have your vote. The Democrat Party has also a great tradition of defending the defenseless.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2834, "text": "I remember the strong conscience of the late Democratic Governor from Pennsylvania, Robert Casey, who once said that when we look to the unborn child, the real issue is not when life begins but when love begins. I remember the moral clarity of the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, Democrat of New York, who said that partial-birth abortion is, quote, as close to infanticide as anything I have ever come upon. Many Democrats look at my opponent and see an attitude that is much more extreme. He says that life begins at conception but denies that our caring society should prevent even partial-birth abortion. Preventing partial-birth abortion is an ethical conviction shared by many people of every faith and by people who have no religion at all. I understand good people disagree on the life issue, so I have worked with Republicans and Democrats to find common ground on difficult questions and to move this goodhearted Nation toward a culture of life. If you are a Democrat who believes that our society must always have room for the voiceless and the vulnerable, I would be honored to have your vote. There are Democrats all over America, north and south, east and west, who believe their party's nominee does not share their deepest values. I know the Democrats are not going to agree with me on every issue. Yet on the big issues of our country's security, victory in the war against terror, improving our public schools, respecting marriage and human life, I hope people who usually vote for the other party will take a close look at my agenda. If you are a Democrat and your dreams and goals are not found in the far left wing of the Democrat Party, I'd be honored to have your vote. And next Tuesday, I ask you to stand with me. And I want to thank each and every one of you who have come today for standing with me. I appreciate your support. I appreciate your convictions. I appreciate your good work. I believe in the future of this country. One of my favorite quotes was written by a Texan named Tom Lea. He said this, he said, Sarah and I live on the east side of the mountain. It is the side to see the day that is coming, not to see the day that is gone. During the course of this campaign, my opponent has spent much of the time talking about the day that is gone. I am talking about the day that is coming. We have been through a lot together in the last 4 years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslititzpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Lititz, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lititz-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "27-10-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2835, "text": "Scotty Campbell and fellow Government employees, it is a pleasure to be with you. Also, I hope all of us have long years of service in the future in Washington. I have just come back from a very fine visit to New Jersey to see a new steelplant that is exciting for an engineer and a President to observe. This is the most modern steelplant in the world. Each employee produces 1,340 tons of steel per year, including all the executive management. This is the highest productivity per steelworker in the world. They use 30 percent as much energy as the former steelplants used. They make steelrod of the highest quality, and 50 percent of it, you might be interested in knowing, is sold at this time to the People's Republic of China, successfully competing in price half the world away with the Japanese steelplants that are much closer. The dynamism and competence of our own Nation and its free enterprise system, in my judgment, is equaled by the dynamism and confidence and the competence of the public servants like you, who represent the American people in our Federal Government. I came to the Presidency determined to make my own administration and the Government in general more responsive to the American public and at the same time more efficient in the delivery of services to those who look to us for leadership and for service. Since taking office, I have seen repeatedly that the key to the more effective Government, which we all desire, has been our creation of a more productive, more dynamic, and more cost-conscious Federal workforce. In 1978, with the help of many of you assembled here, I was able to sign into law a bill which completely overhauled the civil service system of the Federal Government for the first time in a hundred years. It was Scotty Campbell's concept, which the Congress courageously passed for my signature. It was one of the most significant achievements of my own administration. The Civil Service Reform Act gives Federal managers, like many of you, some of the same management incentives that have proved so effectively to make our private economy and its free enterprise system competitive and the pride of the entire world. It emphasizes performance, not just longevity. It lets us select individual public servants and reward them, and thereby in a positive way encourage others to excel. Today's ceremony is unprecedented, and it is also long overdue, in my judgment. Too often we single out Federal managers only when there is been a problem.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocuments1980presidentialrankawardsfortheseniorexecutiveserviceremarkstheawardsceremony", "title": "1980 Presidential Rank Awards for the Senior Executive Service Remarks at the Awards Ceremony", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1980-presidential-rank-awards-for-the-senior-executive-service-remarks-the-awards-ceremony", "publication_date": "09-09-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2836, "text": "We focus attention only on the shortcomings of the Federal bureaucracy and our public servants. This is no way to run a government, nor any enterprise. Federal managers exert an enormous influence on us all. Your responsibilities are often staggering in their scope and complexity and difficulty. Some of you are the most important executives in America. Where we find excellence, we need to acknowledge and reward that 'excellence publicly. I am pleased to be present today for this distinguished executive awards ceremony to 49 men and women who've served our Nation so well. Let me say that your service to our country has been truly distinguished. You are the best of the Government's senior executives; in my opinion the best of the best. I know that the awards have already been issued to you, but I'd like to name just a few that have come to my attention personally and, I think, are representative of the entire group's achievements. Harold Denton of the NRC has won wide praise for his performance following the Three Mile Island accident. I talked to Harold just a few hours after this accident occurred. When I went to the Three Mile Island plant the Sunday following the accident I went into the control room with Harold, and from then on I saw on television every night his calm, professional, reassuring voice letting the American people know that they need have no fear. Chris Kraft of NASA made space travel the safest transportation in the world. He has directed, as you know, and was principal organizer of the Mission Control Center in Houston of Mercury, Gemini, and the Apollo space missions, one of the most notable technological achievements in history. Claude Farinha saved the United States Air Force $28 million through better logistics management, an achievement which would ordinarily not go recognized to the American people. I am sure that Scotty Campbell has already recognized individually what you all have accomplished. But on behalf of 240 million Americans, I want to say from the bottom of my heart, as ENTITY, thank you for what you have meant to our country. These awards today are a solid investment for our country. The millions of dollars that you 49 people have saved, saved the taxpayer, could fund the senior executive bonuses for many decades in the future, even generations. In honoring you I hope to encourage others, all public servants, to higher levels of accomplishment. And I also want to make your excellence known to your employers, the people of America. God bless every one of you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocuments1980presidentialrankawardsfortheseniorexecutiveserviceremarkstheawardsceremony", "title": "1980 Presidential Rank Awards for the Senior Executive Service Remarks at the Awards Ceremony", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1980-presidential-rank-awards-for-the-senior-executive-service-remarks-the-awards-ceremony", "publication_date": "09-09-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2883, "text": "We hold a statewide festival and mark the day with lei draping ceremonies, parades, hula competitions and other festivities. It is a day to honor Kamehameha the Great, who unified the Kingdom of Hawaii, and to celebrate the rich culture and traditions of the Hawaiian people. Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization. It was a top priority of my immediate predecessors in this body - Senators Inouye and Akaka. For more than three decades they worked together in the Congress to advance priorities important to Hawaii and the nation. They made history at almost every step of their careers - securing dozens of firsts in the House and Senate. But for the indigenous people of the United States - Senators Inouye and Akaka will be forever remembered for their work as members and then chairs of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and for their advocacy on behalf of American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians. I want to acknowledge their legacy and to thank Senator Akaka for the role that he continues to play in the great State of Hawaii and in the Native Hawaiian community in particular. And, here is the reason that I have chosen to carry forward this fight on behalf of Native Hawaiians. because it is right to seek justice. Native Hawaiians are the only federally recognized Native people without a government-to-government relationship with the United States and they deserve access to the prevailing federal policy of self-determination. Opponents have argued that Native Hawaiians are not Indians as if the word applies to Native people of a certain racial or ethnic heritage or is limited to indigenous people from one part of the United States, but not another. In the U.S. Constitution, it is clear our Founding Fathers understood it was the tribal nations' sovereign authority that distinguished them from others. It was the fact that tribes were Native groups with distinct governments that predated our own, that justified special treatment in the Constitution and under our federal laws. In what is now the United States, European contact with Native groups, began in the 15th and 16th centuries on the East Coast, and the 16th and 17th centuries on the West Coast; while in Alaska and Hawaii, European contact was delayed until the 18th century. Throughout the centuries a myriad of factors influenced how various Native groups were treated. The historical timeframe when policies and programs were applied to various Native groups may have been different.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "schatzsenategovnewspressreleasesschatzdeliversmajorfloorspeechonachievingfairnessfornativehawaiians", "title": "Schatz Delivers Major Floor Speech On Achieving Fairness for Native Hawaiians", "source": "https://www.schatz.senate.gov/news/press-releases/schatz-delivers-major-floor-speech-on-achieving-fairness-for-native-hawaiians", "publication_date": "11-06-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Brian Schatz"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2884, "text": "But what was consistent throughout, were the federal policies and actions intended to strip Native Americans of their languages, weaken traditional leadership and family structures, divide land bases, prohibit religious and cultural practices, and break communal bonds. And, these policies were as harmful and unjust to Native Hawaiians as they were to Alaska Natives and American Indians. There was a thriving society that greeted Captain James Cook when he landed on the shores of Hawaii in 1778. Prior to their first contact with Europeans, Native Hawaiians had a population of at least 300,000. They were a highly organized, self-sufficient society and they had their own rules, laws, language and culture. In his journals, Captain Cook referred to the indigenous people of Hawaii as Indians because it was the established English term in the 18th century to describe Native groups -regardless of their race, ethnicity or their governmental structure. But, just like many Native Americans and Alaska Natives on the continent, the name Native Hawaiians chose in their own language was -Kanaka Maoli - The People. From 1826 until 1893, the United States recognized the independence of the Hawaiian Government as a distinct political entity. We extended full and complete diplomatic recognition, and entered into five treaties and conventions with the Hawaiian monarchs to govern commerce and navigation. These treaties are clear evidence that Native Hawaiians were considered a separate and distinct nation more than a century after contact. But, on January 17, 1893, the legitimate government of the Native Hawaiian people was removed forcibly, by agents and armed forces of the United States. The illegality of this action has been acknowledged in contemporary as well as modern times by both the Executive and Legislative branches of our federal government. An investigation called for by President Cleveland produced a report by former Congressman James Blount. U.S. diplomatic and military representatives had abused their authority and were responsible for the change in the government. As a result of these findings, the United States Minister to Hawaii was recalled from his diplomatic post and the military commander of the United States armed forces stationed in Hawaii was disciplined and forced to resign his commission. In a message to Congress in December of 1893, President Cleveland described the events that brought down the Hawaiian Government as an act of war, committed with the participation of a diplomatic representative of the United States and without authority of Congress. And, he acknowledged that by such acts, the government of a peaceful and friendly people was overthrown.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "schatzsenategovnewspressreleasesschatzdeliversmajorfloorspeechonachievingfairnessfornativehawaiians", "title": "Schatz Delivers Major Floor Speech On Achieving Fairness for Native Hawaiians", "source": "https://www.schatz.senate.gov/news/press-releases/schatz-delivers-major-floor-speech-on-achieving-fairness-for-native-hawaiians", "publication_date": "11-06-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Brian Schatz"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2885, "text": "President Cleveland concluded that a substantial wrong has thus been done which a due regard for our national character -as well as the rights of the injured people - requires we should endeavor to repair and he called for the restoration of the Hawaiian monarchy. The Provisional Government refused to relinquish power and in July of 1894, declared itself to be the Republic of Hawaii. TheProvisional Government advocated annexation of Hawaii to the United States and began to lobby the Congress to pass a treaty of annexation. Hawaii's monarch at the time, Queen Liliuokalani, presented a petition to the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a formal statement of protest to the Secretary of State. The petition, signed by more than 21,000 Hawaiian men and women, represented more than half of the Hawaiian census population and was compiled in less than three weeks. It also included the signatures of approximately 20,000 non-Hawaiians who supported the return of the islands to self-governed rule. The Petition Against Annexation was a powerful tool in the defeat of the annexation treaty in 1897. In the next year, however, proponents of annexation introduced the Newlands Joint Resolution, a measure requiring only a simple majority of votes to gain passage. The annexation of Hawaii passed with the much reduced threshold of votes, and was signed into law by President McKinley in July of 1898. For almost two centuries after the founding of our nation, federal policies of removal, relocation, assimilation and termination, decimated Native communities and worsened the socio-economic conditions for American Indians, Alaska Natives and Native Hawaiians. The policy of banning Native language use in the schools was adopted by the territory of Hawaii. Native children were punished for speaking Hawaiian, just as American Indians and Alaska Natives were punished for using their own languages in school. The policy of allotting parcels of land to individual Indians began in 1887, as a way to break up the reservations and communal lifestyles. In 1906, it was expanded to include Alaska Natives. In 1921, it was applied to Native Hawaiians. In an attempt to reverse the damage done by these policies, since the 1920's, the Congress has established special Native Hawaiian programs in education, employment, health care and housing. And, the Congress has extended to Native Hawaiians many of the same rights and privileges accorded to American Indians and Alaska Natives. The Congress has consistently recognized Native Hawaiians as native peoples of the United States on whose behalf it may exercise its powers under the Constitution.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "schatzsenategovnewspressreleasesschatzdeliversmajorfloorspeechonachievingfairnessfornativehawaiians", "title": "Schatz Delivers Major Floor Speech On Achieving Fairness for Native Hawaiians", "source": "https://www.schatz.senate.gov/news/press-releases/schatz-delivers-major-floor-speech-on-achieving-fairness-for-native-hawaiians", "publication_date": "11-06-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Brian Schatz"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2886, "text": "In 1993, the Congress passed, and President Clinton signed, legislation known as the Apology Resolution - a formal acknowledgement and apology by the Congress. This legislation recognizes that the overthrow of the Hawaiian government resulted in the suppression of the inherent sovereignty of the Native Hawaiian people and the deprivation of the rights of Native Hawaiians to self-determination. It has been 20 years since the passage of the Apology Resolution, but the federal government has not yet acted to provide a process for reorganizing a Native Hawaiian governing entity. This inaction puts Native Hawaiians at a unique disadvantage. Of the three major groups of Native Americans in the United States - American Indians, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians -only Native Hawaiians currently lack the benefits of democratic self-government. Indigenous Hawaiians, like tribes on the continental United States, formed a Native community with their own government; this political entity existed before the founding of the United States; and, Native Hawaiians share historical and current bonds within their community. 200,000 acres of Hawaiian Homes Commission Act land and share an interest in the income generated by 1.2 million acres of public trust lands under the Hawaii Admission Act. Although the Congress has passed more than 150 statutes to try to address some of the negative effects of earlier federal actions and policies, data reveal persistent health, education and income disparities. Native Hawaiians experience disproportionately high rates of unemployment and incarceration; and, Native Hawaiian children are over represented in the juvenile justice system. Hawaiian families rank last in the nation in average annual pay and face the highest rates of homelessness. Separate is not equal, and that is why I urge the federal government to treat Native Hawaiians fairly. It is long past time for the Native Hawaiian people to regain their right to self-governance. Two years ago the State of Hawaii passed a historic measure to explicitly acknowledge that Native Hawaiians are the only indigenous, aboriginal, maoli population of Hawaii and to establish a Native Hawaiian Enrollment Commission. My good friend and the former Governor of Hawaii, John Waihee, was appointed Chairman and is leading the effort to register Native Hawaiians. This landmark effort is widely supported by the State of Hawaii, our Congressional delegation and our citizens. I want to acknowledge the Commission, commend its vital work, and urge Native Hawaiians to take advantage of this opportunity to help reorganize a representational government. The actions and commitments of the State of Hawaii and the Roll Commission are crucial.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "schatzsenategovnewspressreleasesschatzdeliversmajorfloorspeechonachievingfairnessfornativehawaiians", "title": "Schatz Delivers Major Floor Speech On Achieving Fairness for Native Hawaiians", "source": "https://www.schatz.senate.gov/news/press-releases/schatz-delivers-major-floor-speech-on-achieving-fairness-for-native-hawaiians", "publication_date": "11-06-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Brian Schatz"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2887, "text": "Well, it is good to see all of you here tonight. I would not be standing here today were it not for people like Ernie Green. And she is got the most adorable kids, and I do not know how she keeps up with everything. But as Michelle said, If you want something done, put a woman in charge. So-- --all right, everybody got--women, you got a little too excited on that. You know, I have been thinking a lot lately about this campaign gearing back up, and obviously, it evokes memories of 2008. And I think back to that night in Grant Park when all the work, all the traveling through Iowa, all the stops by diners and in folks' living rooms and in barns in some cases-- --had all culminated in this incredible moment, a moment that was less about me than it was about the American people and the commitment that we made to each other, that we wanted a country that was true to its founding ideals, but had adapted to a new century, an America that was big in spirit and bold in vision. And I said on that night that this was not the end, but rather, it was the beginning. Because what we understood even then was that our country had reached a crossroads. That we had a series of decisions that were going to help determine the future not just of our children, but our grandchildren and our great-grandchildren. That we were living in an age in which the world had shrunk; it had become more interconnected than ever before. And that if we did not make some critical decisions now, if we stopped just kicking the can down the road, but we decided that we were actually going to seize the moment and transform our education system and finally fix our health care system and deal with our energy policy so that we were no longer subject to the whims of the spot oil market, and if we did not transform our foreign policy to recognize the visions and dreams of billions of people around the world who were yearning to be free--if we did not make some fundamental changes, that we might be the first generation that was passing on an America that was less hopeful, that was less generous, and that all those people who felt the American Dream slipping out of their fingers, that somehow that loss of hope would continue. And I said at the time, this is going to be an uphill climb. None of us did.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser7", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-7", "publication_date": "16-05-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2888, "text": "It turned out that on that night we had already lost millions of jobs because of the financial meltdown and the recession. And it was not until a few months after my Inauguration that we realized we would ultimately lose 8 million jobs before any of our economic plans had a chance to take effect, the worst recession since the Great Depression. And there are families all across the country that are still suffering from the aftershocks of that. And in some cases, the actions we took were not always popular. But we knew that it was vital for us to act boldly and swiftly to address the crisis. And let us take a look at what we were able to accomplish. An economy that was shrinking by about 6 percent has now grown for five consecutive quarters. An economy that was shedding jobs every month now has seen over 2 million jobs created just in the last 14. An auto industry that some had written off now are making profits again and have hired back all their workers. We got the economy moving in the right direction. And along the way, we did a few other things. Along the way, we did a few other things. We decided that we did not want equal pay for equal work to be just an empty slogan, so we strengthened laws to make sure that our daughters are treated as well as our sons. We decided that in a nation as wealthy as ours, it was unacceptable for people to go bankrupt just because they got sick. And so after 100 years, we finally delivered on the promise of making sure that we had affordable, accessible health care in this country for all people. We made record investments in clean energy, record investments in basic research, and restored science to its rightful place. We made the largest Federal investment in education in our history, but we did not just put more money in. We decided we were finally going to deliver on reform and help catalyze reforms in 40 States all across the country to make sure that schools are doing right by every single student, K through 12. And we also made sure that young people are able to afford to go to college, so we took away billions of dollars of subsidies that were going to banks and put those in the student loan system so that millions more young people were able to go to college without taking on tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars' worth of debt. We appointed a couple more women on the Supreme Court, including the first Latina. We ended the law that said that you could not serve your country because of who you loved.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser7", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-7", "publication_date": "16-05-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2889, "text": "We made the biggest infrastructure investment in this country since Dwight Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System. Internationally, we brought 100,000 troops back from Iraq and are ending combat operations. We regained momentum in Afghanistan and are now in the process of transition, where we can bring our troops home. We have gone after Al Qaida relentlessly and made America safer in the process. And we have restored around the world a sense of America as a responsible actor that will uphold the principles of human rights and liberty and democracy. And in between, we have dealt with pirates and-- --do you remember? Remember pirates-- --H1N1 and an oil spill and locusts? And I could not be prouder of our record over the last 2 years. Promises were made during the campaign, and so many promises have been kept. And yet, all across America, folks are still struggling. We have been able to avert the worst possible crises, but a lot of those challenges that we confronted in 2008, those challenges are still out there. Wages and incomes have flatlined for the middle class all across America. The rates of poverty in too many communities are way too high. In too many schools, too many of our children still drop out without hope, without vision for the future. We still do not have an energy policy in this country that is equal to our potential and our greatness. And we are still vulnerable to high gas prices that are just killing families all across America right now. We still have not reformed our broken immigration system. So we have too many people living in the shadows, being exploited by workers, driving down the wages of workers as a consequence, because those employers are not subject to the rules. And families are being broken up in the process. We still have not fully transformed our economy so that we are competitive the way we need to be and are creating jobs at the pace we need and growth at the rate that we need. And so we still got so much work to do. The challenges we confronted were not the work of 1 year or 2 years or even one term. And that is why I am going to need you. That is why, in some ways, this campaign may be even more important and more challenging than 2012. We have to finish what we started. We have to finish what we started, in 2012 and beyond, and that is why I am going to need you, all in.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser7", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-7", "publication_date": "16-05-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2890, "text": "Part of what made our campaign special was you, going out knocking on doors and organizing, some of you traveling to other States in the middle of winter, occasionally getting doors slammed in your faces. But that energy, that inspiration that you gave me, the commitments you made to each other about the kind of country you wanted to live in, that spirit we need now more than ever. And that is part of the reason why we decided not to have our campaign here in Washington, DC, but to have it based again in Chicago. Because I do not want a campaign that suddenly is all about the insiders, suddenly is all about the pundits and the lobbyists. And I wanted to make sure that we had a campaign that was rooted and grounded in what folks are talking about around the kitchen table and around the water coolers all across America. Because what is at stake right now is not any particular policy; it has to do with a broader vision of where we want to take our country. I gave a budget address a while back, and a lot of people reported on the numbers and the debt and the deficit and why this is so important. And let me tell you, we as Democrats, we as progressives, need to be just as concerned about the debt as anybody else. Because that is how we will be able to move our vision forward--investing in education, investing in infrastructure, investing in clean energy--if we have got a government that lives within its means. So we have got to be concerned about that. But this broader budget debate that is now carrying over and will probably continue all the way until November of next year, it is also about what our vision of the country is. Are we a country that is going to continue to be able to do big things? Are we going to continue to make a commitment that every child, regardless of race or station or region, can achieve their dreams because they have got a school system that is delivering for them? Are we going to continue to be a nation that has the best infrastructure, moving products and services and people and information from place to place, because we have invested not just in roads and bridges and ports and airports, but in broadband lines and smart grids? Are we investing in the future the way previous generations invested in us?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser7", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-7", "publication_date": "16-05-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2891, "text": "Are we going to continue to make sure that here in the United States of America we are discovering the new great sources of energy that will help us save the planet, even as we are strengthening our economy and are putting our people back to work? Are we still dreaming big dreams in America? And are we going to continue to be a country that makes sure that our senior citizens can retire with dignity and respect and that Medicare is going to be there for them and Social Security is going to be there for them? And as we grapple through these problems, are we going to make sure that the burden is shared by everybody? We are going to have to make tough choices. But are we going to make sure that folks like me, who have been so blessed by this country, that we are doing our part? The other side right now, their only agenda is to provide tax cuts to folks like me. And you know what, we all like tax cuts, but-- --no, I mean, I have never met somebody who said, No, no, no. But you know what, I do not want $200,000 in my pocket if I know that that means that 33 seniors are going to have to pay an extra $6,000 for their Medicare services. I do not want special favors for me if it means that a whole bunch of kids are being cut out of Head Start. See--and the reason I do not want it is not just out of a sense of charity. It is because my life is better when, as I am driving down the street and I pass by a school, I know, you know what, that school is doing a great job for those kids. And if I pass by a senior couple holding hands and I think to myself, you know what, that might be me and Michelle some day. And I like the fact that I live in a country where they have got some security in their golden years. That is the kind of America that I want Malia and Sasha to inherit. That is the kind of America I want all of your children and grandchildren inheriting. That is what this debate is about. That is what this campaign is about. That is what this election is about. So let me just close by saying this. There have been times over the last 2 1/2 years where I know you all have gotten frustrated sometimes. I know all these conversations you are having. Oh, why did Obama compromise with the Republicans on that?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteefundraiser7", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Fundraiser", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-fundraiser-7", "publication_date": "16-05-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2897, "text": "Senator Biden, Senator Hatch, Senator Kennedy, Senator Sarbanes, one of Janet Reno's Senators, Senator Connie Mack. Senator Graham called me last night. He is in Florida today with the First Lady at a health care hearing. And he said he had an excused absence from the Attorney General. The ENTITY and Congressman Edwards are here, and we are delighted to see all of them. I also would say we are delighted to be joined by Mr. Justice White and Mrs. White. Let me say that it is a great honor for me to be able to be here at this ceremony today with Janet Reno, her family, and a few of her many friends. I'd like to say a special word of thanks to Stuart Gerson, who has served ably and honorably as Acting Attorney General since the Inauguration. I think we owe him a round of applause. Somehow I do not think any of my other proposals will pass the Senate by the same vote margin- -that Janet's confirmation did. I especially want to thank Senator Biden and Senator Hatch and the members of the Judiciary Committee for waiving the normal waiting period between hearings and the confirmation vote, making this event possible today and making it possible for us to proceed immediately with the urgent tasks at hand. But more than anything else, I think it is clear that Janet Reno made her own swift confirmation possible, showing the Senate and all who followed the hearings the qualities of leadership and integrity, intelligence, and humanity that those gathered in this room have recognized for a very long time. You shared with us the life-shaping stories of your family and career that formed your deep sense of fairness and your unwavering drive to help others to do better. You showed us that your career in public service, working on the front lines in your community, fighting crime, understanding the impact on victims and on neighborhoods, mending the gritty social fabric of a vibrant but troubled urban area, is excellent preparation for carrying forward the banner of justice for all the American people. You will help to guide the Federal Government to assist State and local law enforcement in ways that really count. You demonstrated that you will be a formidable advocate for the vulnerable people in our society and especially for our children. Most of all, you proved to the Nation that you are a strong and an independent person who will give me your best legal judgment whether or not it is what I want to hear.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheswearingattorneygeneraljanetreno", "title": "Remarks on the Swearing-In of Attorney General Janet Reno", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-swearing-attorney-general-janet-reno", "publication_date": "12-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2898, "text": "Less than one year has passed since I first stood at this podium, in this majestic chamber, to speak on behalf of the American people and to address their concerns, their hopes, and their dreams. That night, our new administration had already taken very swift action. A new tide of optimism was already sweeping across our land. Each day since, we have gone forward with a clear vision and a righteous mission - to make America great again for all Americans. Over the last year, we have made incredible progress and achieved extraordinary success. We have faced challenges we expected, and others we could never have imagined. We have shared in the heights of victory and the pains of hardship. We have endured floods and fires and storms. But through it all, we have seen the beauty of America's soul, and the steel in America's spine. Each test has forged new American heroes to remind us who we are, and show us what we can be. We saw the volunteers of the Cajun Navy, racing to the rescue with their fishing boats to save people in the aftermath of a totally devastating hurricane. We saw strangers shielding strangers from a hail of gunfire on the Las Vegas strip. We heard tales of Americans like Coast Guard Petty Officer Ashlee Leppert, who is here tonight in the gallery with Melania. Ashlee was aboard one of the first helicopters on the scene in Houston during the Hurricane Harvey. Through 18 hours of wind and rain, Ashlee braved live power lines and deep water to help save more than 40 lives. Ashlee, we all thank you. We heard about Americans like firefighter David Dahlberg. He is here with us also. David faced down walls of flame to rescue almost 60 children trapped at a California summer camp threatened by those devastating wildfires. To everyone still recovering in Texas, Florida, Louisiana, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands - everywhere - we are with you, we love you, and we always will pull through together, always. Some trials over the past year touched this chamber very personally. the legend from Louisiana, Congressman Steve Scalise. I think they like you, Steve. We are incredibly grateful for the heroic efforts of the Capitol Police officers, the Alexandria Police, and the doctors, nurses, and paramedics who saved his life and the lives of many others; some in this room. In the aftermath of that terrible shooting, we came together, not as Republicans or Democrats, but as representatives of the people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2899, "text": "But it is not enough to come together only in times of tragedy. Tonight, I call upon all of us to set aside our differences, to seek out common ground, and to summon the unity we need to deliver for the people. that no people on Earth are so fearless, or daring, or determined as Americans. If there is a mountain, we climb it. If there is a frontier, we cross it. If there is a challenge, we tame it. If there is an opportunity, we seize it. So let us begin tonight by recognizing that the state of our Union is strong because our people are strong. And together, we are building a safe, strong, and proud America. Since the election, we have created 2.4 million new jobs, including -- including 200,000 new jobs in manufacturing alone. After years and years of wage stagnation, we are finally seeing rising wages. Unemployment claims have hit a 45-year low. African American unemployment stands at the lowest rate ever recorded. And Hispanic American unemployment has also reached the lowest levels in history. Small-business confidence is at an all-time high. The stock market has smashed one record after another, gaining $8 trillion, and more, in value in just this short period of time. The great news -- the great news for Americans' 401, retirement, pension, and college savings accounts have gone through the roof. And just as I promised the American people from this podium 11 months ago, we enacted the biggest tax cuts and reforms in American history. Our massive tax cuts provide tremendous relief for the middle class and small business. To lower tax rates for hardworking Americans, we nearly doubled the standard deduction for everyone. Now, the first $24,000 earned by a married couple is completely tax-free. We also doubled the child tax credit. A typical family of four making $75,000 will see their tax bill reduced by $2,000, slashing their tax bill in half. In April, this will be the last time you will ever file under the old and very broken system, and millions of Americans will have more take-home pay starting next month - a lot more. We eliminated an especially cruel tax that fell mostly on Americans making less than $50,000 a year, forcing them to pay tremendous penalties simply because they could not afford government-ordered health plans. We repealed the core of the disastrous Obamacare.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2900, "text": "We slashed the business tax rate from 35 percent all the way down to 21 percent, so American companies can compete and win against anyone else anywhere in the world. These changes alone are estimated to increase average family income by more than $4,000. Small businesses have also received a massive tax cut, and can now deduct 20 percent of their business income. Here tonight are Steve Staub and Sandy Keplinger of Staub Manufacturing, a small, beautiful business in Ohio. They have just finished the best year in their 20-year history. Because of tax reform, they are handing out raises, hiring an additional 14 people, and expanding into the building next door. One of Staub's employees, Corey Adams, is also with us tonight. He supported himself through high school, lost his job during the 2008 recession, and was later hired by Staub, where he trained to become a welder. Like many hardworking Americans, Corey plans to invest his tax cut raise into his new home and his two daughters' education. I was told that by the man that owns that company that is doing so well. Since we passed tax cuts, roughly 3 million workers have already gotten tax cut bonuses - many of them thousands and thousands of dollars per worker. And it is getting more every month, every week. Apple has just announced it plans to invest a total of $350 billion in America, and hire another 20,000 workers. And just a little while ago, ExxonMobil announced a $50 billion investment in the United States, just a little while ago. This, in fact, is our new American moment. So to every citizen watching at home tonight, no matter where you have been, or where you have come from, this is your time. If you work hard, if you believe in yourself, if you believe in America, then you can dream anything, you can be anything, and together, we can achieve absolutely anything. Tonight, I want to talk about what kind of future we are going to have, and what kind of a nation we are going to be. All of us, together, as one team, one people, and one American family can do anything. We all share the same home, the same heart, the same destiny, and the same great American flag. Together, we are rediscovering the American way. In America, we know that faith and family, not government and bureaucracy, are the center of American life.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2901, "text": "The motto is, In God We Trust. And we celebrate our police, our military, and our amazing veterans as heroes who deserve our total and unwavering support. Here tonight is Preston Sharp, a 12-year-old boy from Redding, California, who noticed that veterans' graves were not marked with flags on Veterans Day. He decided all by himself to change that, and started a movement that has now placed 40,000 flags at the graves of our great heroes. Young patriots, like Preston, teach all of us about our civic duty as Americans. And I met Preston a little while ago, and he is something very special - that I can tell you. Thank you very much for all you have done, Preston. Preston's reverence for those who have served our nation reminds us of why we salute our flag, why we put our hands on our hearts for the Pledge of Allegiance, and why we proudly stand for the National Anthem. Americans love their country, and they deserve a government that shows them the same love and loyalty in return. For the last year, we have sought to restore the bonds of trust between our citizens and their government. Working with the Senate, we are appointing judges who will interpret the Constitution as written, including a great new Supreme Court justice, and more circuit court judges than any new administration in the history of our country. We are totally defending our Second Amendment, and have taken historic actions to protect religious liberty. And we are serving our brave veterans, including giving our veterans choice in their healthcare decisions. Last year, Congress also passed, and I signed, the landmark VA Accountability Act. Since its passage, my administration has already removed more than 1,500 VA employees who failed to give our veterans the care they deserve. And we are hiring talented people who love our vets as much as we do. And I will not stop until our veterans are properly taken care of, which has been my promise to them from the very beginning of this great journey. All Americans deserve accountability and respect, and that is what we are giving to our wonderful heroes, our veterans. So, tonight, I call on Congress to empower every Cabinet Secretary with the authority to reward good workers and to remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the American people. In our drive to make Washington accountable, we have eliminated more regulations in our first year than any administration in the history of our country. We have ended the war on American energy, and we have ended the war on beautiful clean coal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2902, "text": "We are now very proudly an exporter of energy to the world. In Detroit, I halted government mandates that crippled America's great, beautiful autoworkers so that we can get Motor City revving its engines again. Many car companies are now building and expanding plants in the United States - something we have not seen for decades. Chrysler is moving a major plant from Mexico to Michigan. Toyota and Mazda are opening up a plant in Alabama - a big one. And we have not seen this in a long time. Very soon, auto plants and other plants will be opening up all over our country. For many years, companies and jobs were only leaving us. They want to be in the United States of America. To speed access to breakthrough cures and affordable generic drugs, last year the FDA approved more new and generic drugs and medical devices than ever before in our country's history. We also believe that patients with terminal conditions, and terminal illness, should have access to experimental treatment immediately that could potentially save their lives. People who are terminally ill should not have to go from country to country to seek a cure. I want to give them a chance right here at home. It is time for Congress to give these wonderful, incredible Americans the right to try. One of my greatest priorities is to reduce the price of prescription drugs. In many other countries, these drugs cost far less than what we pay in the United States. That is why I have directed my administration to make fixing the injustice of high drug prices one of my top priorities for the year. America has also finally turned the page on decades of unfair trade deals that sacrificed our prosperity and shipped away our companies, our jobs, and our wealth. Our nation has lost its wealth, but we are getting it back so fast. The era of economic surrender is totally over. We will work to fix bad trade deals and negotiate new ones. And we will protect American workers and American intellectual property through strong enforcement of our trade rules. As we rebuild our industries, it is also time to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure. America is a nation of builders. We built the Empire State Building in just one year. Is not it a disgrace that it can now take 10 years just to get a minor permit approved for the building of a simple road? I am asking both parties to come together to give us safe, fast, reliable, and modern infrastructure that our economy needs and our people deserve.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2903, "text": "Tonight, I am calling on Congress to produce a bill that generates at least $1.5 trillion for the new infrastructure investment that our country so desperately needs. Every federal dollar should be leveraged by partnering with state and local governments and, where appropriate, tapping into private sector investment to permanently fix the infrastructure deficit. And we can do it. Any bill must also streamline the permitting and approval process, getting it down to no more than two years, and perhaps even one. Together, we can reclaim our great building heritage. We will build gleaming new roads, bridges, highways, railways, and waterways all across our land. And we will do it with American heart, and American hands, and American grit. We want every American to know the dignity of a hard day's work. We want every child to be safe in their home at night. And we want every citizen to be proud of this land that we all love so much. We can lift our citizens from welfare to work, from dependence to independence, and from poverty to prosperity. As tax cuts create new jobs, let us invest in workforce development and let us invest in job training, which we need so badly. Let us open great vocational schools so our future workers can learn a craft and realize their full potential. And let us support working families by supporting paid family leave. As America regains its strength, opportunity must be extended to all citizens. That is why this year we will embark on reforming our prisons to help former inmates who have served their time get a second chance at life. Struggling communities, especially immigrant communities, will also be helped by immigration policies that focus on the best interests of American workers and American families. For decades, open borders have allowed drugs and gangs to pour into our most vulnerable communities. They have allowed millions of low-wage workers to compete for jobs and wages against the poorest Americans. Most tragically, they have caused the loss of many innocent lives. Their two teenage daughters - Kayla Cuevas and Nisa Mickens - were close friends on Long Island. But in September 2016, on the eve of Nisa's 16th Birthday - such a happy time it should have been - neither of them came home. These two precious girls were brutally murdered while walking together in their hometown. Six members of the savage MS-13 gang have been charged with Kayla and Nisa's murders.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2904, "text": "Many of these gang members took advantage of glaring loopholes in our laws to enter the country as illegal, unaccompanied alien minors, and wound up in Kayla and Nisa's high school. Tonight, everyone in this chamber is praying for you. Everyone in America is grieving for you. I want you to know that 320 million hearts are right now breaking for you. We love you. While we cannot imagine the depths of that kind of sorrow, we can make sure that other families never have to endure this kind of pain. Tonight, I am calling on Congress to finally close the deadly loopholes that have allowed MS-13, and other criminal gangs, to break into our country. We have proposed new legislation that will fix our immigration laws and support our ICE and Border Patrol agents - these are great people; these are great, great people - that work so hard in the midst of such danger so that this can never happen again. We are proud that we do more than any other country anywhere in the world to help the needy, the struggling, and the underprivileged all over the world. But as President of the United States, my highest loyalty, my greatest compassion, my constant concern is for America's children, America's struggling workers, and America's forgotten communities. I want our youth to grow up to achieve great things. I want our poor to have their chance to rise. So, tonight, I am extending an open hand to work with members of both parties, Democrats and Republicans, to protect our citizens of every background, color, religion, and creed. My duty, and the sacred duty of every elected official in this chamber, is to defend Americans, to protect their safety, their families, their communities, and their right to the American Dream. Here tonight is one leader in the effort to defend our country, Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent Celestino Martinez. He goes by DJ and CJ. He said, Call me either one. So we will call you CJ. At one point, MS-13 leaders ordered CJ's murder. But he did not cave to threats or to fear. Last May, he commanded an operation to track down gang members on Long Island. His team has arrested nearly 400, including more than 220 MS-13 gang members. And I have to tell you, what the Border Patrol and ICE have done - we have sent thousands and thousands and thousands of MS-13 horrible people out of this country or into our prisons.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2905, "text": "So I just want to congratulate you, CJ. And I asked CJ, What is the secret? And I like that answer. Now let us get Congress to send you - and all of the people in this great chamber have to do it; we have no choice. CJ, we are going to send you reinforcements, and we are going to send them to you quickly. It is what you need. Over the next few weeks, the House and Senate will be voting on an immigration reform package. In recent months, my administration has met extensively with both Democrats and Republicans to craft a bipartisan approach to immigration reform. Based on these discussions, we presented Congress with a detailed proposal that should be supported by both parties as a fair compromise, one where nobody gets everything they want, but where our country gets the critical reforms it needs and must have. The first pillar of our framework generously offers a path to citizenship for 1.8 million illegal immigrants who were brought here by their parents at a young age. That covers almost three times more people than the previous administration covered. Under our plan, those who meet education and work requirements, and show good moral character, will be able to become full citizens of the United States over a 12-year period. The second pillar fully secures the border. That means building a great wall on the southern border, and it means hiring more heroes, like CJ, to keep our communities safe. Crucially, our plan closes the terrible loopholes exploited by criminals and terrorists to enter our country, and it finally ends the horrible and dangerous practice of catch and release. The third pillar ends the visa lottery, a program that randomly hands out green cards without any regard for skill, merit, or the safety of American people. It is time to begin moving towards a merit-based immigration system, one that admits people who are skilled, who want to work, who will contribute to our society, and who will love and respect our country. The fourth and final pillar protects the nuclear family by ending chain migration. Under the current broken system, a single immigrant can bring in virtually unlimited numbers of distant relatives. Under our plan, we focus on the immediate family by limiting sponsorships to spouses and minor children. This vital reform is necessary, not just for our economy, but for our security and for the future of America. In recent weeks, two terrorist attacks in New York were made possible by the visa lottery and chain migration.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2906, "text": "In the age of terrorism, these programs present risks we can just no longer afford. It is time to reform these outdated immigration rules, and finally bring our immigration system into the 21st century. These four pillars represent a down-the-middle compromise, and one that will create a safe, modern, and lawful immigration system. For over 30 years, Washington has tried and failed to solve this problem. Most importantly, these four pillars will produce legislation that fulfills my ironclad pledge to sign a bill that puts America first. So let us come together, set politics aside, and finally get the job done. These reforms will also support our response to the terrible crisis of opioid and drug addiction. We have to do something about it. In 2016, we lost 64,000 Americans to drug overdoses - 174 deaths per day; 7 per hour. We must get much tougher on drug dealers and pushers if we are going to succeed in stopping this scourge. My administration is committed to fighting the drug epidemic and helping get treatment for those in need, for those who have been so terribly hurt. The struggle will be long and it will be difficult, but as Americans always do - in the end, we will succeed. As we have seen tonight, the most difficult challenges bring out the best in America. We see a vivid expression of this truth in the story of the Holets family of New Mexico. Ryan Holets is 27 years old, an officer with the Albuquerque Police Department. He is here tonight with his wife Rebecca. Last year, Ryan was on duty when he saw a pregnant, homeless woman preparing to inject heroin. When Ryan told her she was going to harm her unborn child, she began to weep. She told him she did not know where to turn, but badly wanted a safe home for her baby. You will do it, because you can. He heard those words. He took out a picture of his wife and their four kids. Then, he went home to tell his wife Rebecca. In an instant, she agreed to adopt. The Holets named their new daughter Hope. Ryan and Rebecca, you embody the goodness of our nation. As we rebuild America's strength and confidence at home, we are also restoring our strength and standing abroad. Around the world, we face rogue regimes, terrorist groups, and rivals like China and Russia that challenge our interests, our economy, and our values.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2907, "text": "In confronting these horrible dangers, we know that weakness is the surest path to conflict, and unmatched power is the surest means to our true and great defense. For this reason, I am asking Congress to end the dangerous defense sequester and fully fund our great military. As part of our defense, we must modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal, hopefully never having to use it, but making it so strong and so powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else. Perhaps someday in the future, there will be a magical moment when the countries of the world will get together to eliminate their nuclear weapons. Last year, I also pledged that we would work with our allies to extinguish ISIS from the face of the Earth. One year later, I am proud to report that the coalition to defeat ISIS has liberated very close to 100 percent of the territory just recently held by these killers in Iraq and in Syria and in other locations, as well. We will continue our fight until ISIS is defeated. Near Raqqa, last November, Justin and his comrade, Chief Petty Officer Kenton Stacy, were on a mission to clear buildings that ISIS had rigged with explosive so that civilians could return to that city hopefully soon, and hopefully safely. Clearing the second floor of a vital hospital, Kenton Stacy was severely wounded by an explosion. Immediately, Justin bounded into the booby-trapped and unbelievably dangerous and unsafe building, and found Kenton, but in very, very bad shape. He applied pressure to the wound and inserted a tube to reopen an airway. He then performed CPR for 20 straight minutes during the ground transport, and maintained artificial respiration through two and a half hours and through emergency surgery. Kenton Stacy would have died if it were not for Justin's selfless love for his fellow warrior. Tonight, Kenton is recovering in Texas. And Justin is wearing his new Bronze Star, with a V for valor. Staff Sergeant Peck, all of America salutes you. Terrorists who do things like place bombs in civilian hospitals are evil. When possible, we have no choice but to annihilate them. When necessary, we must be able to detain and question them. And when captured overseas, they should be treated like the terrorists they are.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2908, "text": "In the past, we have foolishly released hundreds and hundreds of dangerous terrorists, only to meet them again on the battlefield - including the ISIS leader, al-Baghdadi, who we captured, who we had, who we released. So today, I am keeping another promise. I just signed, prior to walking in, an order directing Secretary Mattis, who is doing a great job, thank you -- to reexamine our military detention policy and to keep open the detention facilities in Guantanamo Bay. I am asking Congress to ensure that, in the fight against ISIS and al Qaeda, we continue to have all necessary power to detain terrorists, wherever we chase them down, wherever we find them. And in many cases, for them, it will now be Guantanamo Bay. At the same time, as of a few months ago, our warriors in Afghanistan have new rules of engagement. Along with their heroic Afghan partners, our military is no longer undermined by artificial timelines, and we no longer tell our enemies our plans. Last month, I also took an action endorsed unanimously by the U.S. Senate just months before. I recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Shortly afterwards, dozens of countries voted in the United Nations General Assembly against America's sovereign right to make this decision. In 2016, American taxpayers generously sent those same countries more than $20 billion in aid. That is why, tonight, I am asking Congress to pass legislation to help ensure American foreign-assistance dollars always serve American interests, and only go to friends of America, not enemies of America. As we strengthen friendships all around the world, we are also restoring clarity about our adversaries. When the people of Iran rose up against the crimes of their corrupt dictatorship, I did not stay silent. America stands with the people of Iran in their courageous struggle for freedom. I am asking Congress to address the fundamental flaws in the terrible Iran nuclear deal. My administration has also imposed tough sanctions on the communist and socialist dictatorships in Cuba and Venezuela. But no regime has oppressed its own citizens more totally or brutally than the cruel dictatorship in North Korea. North Korea's reckless pursuit of nuclear missiles could very soon threaten our homeland. We are waging a campaign of maximum pressure to prevent that from ever happening. Past experience has taught us that complacency and concessions only invite aggression and provocation. I will not repeat the mistakes of past administrations that got us into this very dangerous position.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2909, "text": "We need only look at the depraved character of the North Korean regime to understand the nature of the nuclear threat it could pose to America and to our allies. Otto Warmbier was a hardworking student at the University of Virginia - and a great student he was. On his way to study abroad in Asia, Otto joined a tour to North Korea. At its conclusion, this wonderful young man was arrested and charged with crimes against the state. After a shameful trial, the dictatorship sentenced Otto to 15 years of hard labor, before returning him to America last June, horribly injured and on the verge of death. He passed away just days after his return. Otto's wonderful parents, Fred and Cindy Warmbier, are here with us tonight, along with Otto's brother and sister, Austin and Greta. You are powerful witnesses to a menace that threatens our world, and your strength truly inspires us all. Tonight, we pledge to honor Otto's memory with total American resolve. Finally, we are joined by one more witness to the ominous nature of this regime. In 1996, Seong-ho was a starving boy in North Korea. One day, he tried to steal coal from a railroad car to barter for a few scraps of food, which were very hard to get. In the process, he passed out on the train tracks, exhausted from hunger. He woke up as a train ran over his limbs. He then endured multiple amputations without anything to dull the pain or the hurt. His brother and sister gave what little food they had to help him recover and ate dirt themselves, permanently stunting their own growth. Later, he was tortured by North Korean authorities after returning from a brief visit to China. His tormentors wanted to know if he'd met any Christians. He had - and he resolved, after that, to be free. Seong-ho traveled thousands of miles on crutches all across China and Southeast Asia to freedom. Most of his family followed. His father was caught trying to escape and was tortured to death. the truth. Today, he has a new leg. But, Seong-ho, I understand you still keep those old crutches as a reminder of how far you have come. Your great sacrifice is an inspiration to us all. Seong-ho's story is a testament to the yearning of every human soul to live in freedom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpstateunionaddress", "title": "Remarks by President Trump in State of the Union Address", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-state-union-address/", "publication_date": "30-01-2018", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2910, "text": "I told somebody in the Oval Office before we came out here that, unlike a lot of us who are transients, Alice Rivlin's not going anywhere. Congressman Davis, Congressman Clinger, Congresswoman Morella, Congresswoman Norton, Mayor Barry, President Clarke, members of the City Council, and other friends of the District of Columbia, this is a very important day and a very important piece of legislation for all of us who care about our country's Capital and for all of us who love Washington as a city. I have lived here not only as President but also as a college student. I know this to be a city not only of our national monuments and political centers but also a city of neighborhoods, of Shaw and Anacostia and Cleveland Park and Adams Morgan and so many others. So this is a very important day for a city, a city and thousands and thousands of people who live in it, who love it, who care about it, who have lives, many of them who have nothing to do with the politics of the Nation's Capital but who deserve to live in a city that works, that functions, and that also can symbolize the very best in America. The health of the city and the security of its citizens have been threatened by the financial crisis. And I applaud all those who have come together to work together to begin the road back. The purpose of the bill I am signing today is just that; it is a road back. The Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Act will speed the District's recovery and return to fiscal health and will help over the long run to improve the delivery of services to its citizens. For the past 2 years, I have worked hard to turn the economy of our country around. And we have seen dramatic improvements in the deficit, in the ability of this country to create jobs, and having a Government that is both smaller and more efficient. But none of that means very much to people whose own lives are troubled with insecurity. And the citizens of the District of Columbia need to know that security, stability, growth, and opportunity will be the hallmarks of their living in our Nation's Capital. This effort, as Alice Rivlin has said, is proof of what we can accomplish when we work together, when we put the interests of real people first, when we ignore partisan politics, and when we get on with the job at hand.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthedistrictcolumbiafinancialresponsibilityandmanagementassistance", "title": "Remarks on Signing the District of Columbia Financial Responsibility and Management Assistance Act of 1995", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-district-columbia-financial-responsibility-and-management-assistance", "publication_date": "17-04-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2926, "text": "We are pleased tonight to welcome again a good friend who comes representing not one but two valued allies of the United States. I refer, of course, to the Federal Republic of Germany and to Harvard University. Our guest is one of the few men in public life whose title, Doctor, was earned academically long before it was conferred by honorary degree. Erhard, all Americans join in congratulating you upon the richly deserved honor that you have received and we are grateful that you honor us as our guest in this garden this evening. When the Chancellor was last in the United States, I expressed to him the hope that the dose relationship and the healthy friendship between our countries would grow in strength and in meaning. I am proud to say tonight that that hope has been the reality of the intervening half year. It is evident to us that the relations between our countries have never been better than at this time tonight. Our understanding is deepening, our cooperation is broadening, our hopes for the future are rising. We have come forward together, your country and mine, along the path of insuring freedom and security in a world where both are constantly threatened. German effort and foresight and determination and dedication along with those of our allies in Western Europe have made it possible to convert age-old rivalries into new and constructive relationships. Tonight our hopes rise from this foundation, the only real foundation that can support and sustain them, the foundation of strength. We of the United States of America value highly this relationship with the Federal Republic of Germany. The ties between the people of America and the people of Germany are many and close. From the dark days of our Valley Forge to the bright age of mankind's exploration of space the cause of freedom has prospered when the peoples of our two countries have worked together in peace. Tonight we are working together as allies in NATO, tonight we are working together as friends in freedom, and tonight we are working together as partners in peace. I have no doubt that Germany and the United States will continue to move along that road together surmounting the obstacles and serving the opportunities that we encounter together along that way. Our goal and our purpose is peace; peace with honor, peace with justice, peace under freedom. We seek to move only on a course of peace and justice, never a course of fear or hostility.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandchancellorerhard", "title": "Toasts of the President and Chancellor Erhard", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-chancellor-erhard", "publication_date": "12-06-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2927, "text": "Together with our allies we shall work to open new avenues of trade and we shall work to build new bridges of ideas toward the East, to improve relations, to lessen tensions, to enhance the prospect of all of us living in this world in peace. As we all recognize, there can be no real and lasting peace in Europe, or in the rest of the world for that matter, until Germany is united, united by self-determination in peace and in freedom. This can be done, and the people of the United States are determined that it shall be done to end the inequities and injustices of the division of the German people--until there is a unified Germany. Only the representative and democratic government of the Federal Republic of Germany can speak for the German people. It is a very great honor and a very proud privilege, Mr. Chancellor, to have you in our midst this evening. The scene is a little different from our last meeting, the friendship is a little stronger. I ask those of my friends who have come here this evening and our distinguished guests to join me in raising your glasses to the President of the Federal Republic of Germany, to the friendship between the people of the United States and all the people of Germany always. First of all let me express my gratitude for the congratulations which you expressed to me on the occasion of the honor which was bestowed upon me yesterday when I was granted an honorary doctor's degree at Harvard. This in itself would be sufficient to make me very happy, very proud indeed. But I was even more happy about this distinction and that honor because it afforded me an opportunity to come over again to the United States of America and to meet with you, Mr. President, and to have new talks with you, exchange of views, exchange of hopes, exchange of worries and problems. Some people said after our meeting in Texas at the end of last year that was, so to speak, the honeymoon between the two of us and they raised a warning voice saying, 'Well, let us wait until this period of the honeymoon is over; now everything is pleasant, everything is beautiful, but then they will be faced with the rough realities.' I think the honeymoon is over now and today we have reached, if I may put it this way, the state of marriage, but based on trust, on faithfulness. I think these are the pillars of this relationship between the two of us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandchancellorerhard", "title": "Toasts of the President and Chancellor Erhard", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-chancellor-erhard", "publication_date": "12-06-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2928, "text": "Though our talks dealt with a number of very serious problems, Mr. President, today I had the impression that our personal friendship had deepened and was strengthened over the last 6 months. And if I speak of the personal relationship between the two of us, I would add that I am inclined to apply that also to the relationship between our two countries, our two nations. As I look back over the period since I have been in political office, that means since the end of the last war, I think it was at that time unique, unique and unparalleled in world history, that the victor who had gained unimaginable strength and power through his victory showed such great generosity by helping all the countries of the world, including the vanquished, to reconstruct their countries. In this way you helped to secure the peace in the world. I said to you this morning, Mr. President, when we had our conversation, I understood that your feelings were a bit bitter about the fact that so little gratitude was shown by the countries for what the United States has done after the last war. But such is human nature, one cannot expect gratefulness, and what one has received in the way of good deeds is very easily forgotten. the more happy and pleased, Mr. President, to be able to say that these things are not forgotten in Germany. The German people will always remember what they have received from the United States of America, and this I feel is the basis of the friendship that exists between our two countries. That is the basis, the foundation, of the trust and confidence which enables genuine cooperation. I think we have all the essential objectives in common; and even if there should be some misunderstanding, some differences from time to time, I think there can be no doubt whatsoever, neither here in the United States nor in the Federal Republic of Germany, that this friendship between our two countries is a firm one, that there is also this conviction that we have common tasks and common missions to fulfill. I am not so presumptuous to say that Germany could speak for Europe, but on the other hand I feel that the Federal Republic of Germany can be, must be the stabilizing factor, the stabilizing element, in Europe. By our attitude we can show how necessary, how desirable it is for Europe to come closer to the United States and also to try and tie the United States of America, or let me put it this way, the North American Continent more closely to Europe.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandchancellorerhard", "title": "Toasts of the President and Chancellor Erhard", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-chancellor-erhard", "publication_date": "12-06-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2929, "text": "We do not want to divide and to split up the world amongst ourselves, but though we ourselves in Germany, in our country, experience this tragic division and whatever it means, we want to make a contribution to overcome all these difficulties. I hope, I am sure we will succeed--what we have in common is this hope on behalf and for all the world. Today we are trying to make our contribution to these common objectives. We feel this responsibility for the countries which are still in a somewhat backward and underdeveloped stage, or countries which still have to live in slavery. On the other hand, we are grateful to you, Mr. President, and to the United States of America for the understanding you have been showing for our particular German problem. I have said on several occasions on this visit-I said it also today when I had the honor to address the Senate of the United States--that it would not be a good and a right alliance, it would not be real friendship, if each country were to look at its own interests only, were to look at the geographical area in which itself is situated and would not look beyond that. And it would be a bad alliance, it would be a bad friendship, if every partner were not ready also to stand up for the other partners. We fully recognize the seriousness of your problems. I think of Cuba, I think in terms of South Viet-Nam, we consider them also to be our problems. We also feel an obligation, as you are understanding our particular situation in the Federal Republic of Germany, our particular problems, and I hope and I am sure that this is a good firm foundation of our friendship and cooperation. And where there is so much good will and deep and honest friendship I am absolutely convinced that this good relationship will continue between our two countries and that it will continue to be an element of freedom, of security, and of peace in the world. President, today during our conversations we have assured one another of our mutual sympathy, and when I have done that I think it was more than a diplomatic phrase or a diplomatic formula. It was, so to speak, let me say that quite frankly, a human confession and I think it was understood in that way by the two of us. We are convinced that it is our common task, and I say that with all humility which is due to us Germans and which we must observe, I think this is a common task with which we are confronted.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandchancellorerhard", "title": "Toasts of the President and Chancellor Erhard", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-chancellor-erhard", "publication_date": "12-06-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2930, "text": "It is great to be here in Michigan and with the United auto workers. As they say, in parts of my state, I got brung up on General Motors. My father ran a General Motors agency. He did not own it, but he ran it and cars or cars or cars. By the way, I still have my '67 Corvette that is new. I still keep that, but I got to tell you, I am waiting for that electric one you just made that goes 210 miles an hour, but that is a different story. Look, earlier this week and the reason we are a little bit late here, we found as I was getting off the plane, the press asked me a legitimate question that I did not have the background on because it occurred on the plane. Earlier this week, we celebrated Labor Day. And here in the heart of the American automobile industry, we never forget everything that we owe the unions. And unions, as you have heard me say many times, built this country. Unions built the economy. The economic engine has driven American manufacturing dynamism. And literally in the case of the auto workers, you are the ones that did it. So I want to thank you again, UAW region one, for hosting me today. And it is great to see Senator Stabenow. Got a chance to spend a little time with the governor, but Senator Stabenow and I worked together on an awful lot of matters over the years in the United States Senate. She was a great partner to me when I was vice president and we worked in lockstep to get the people in Michigan back on their feet. We are joined by one of the best and brightest and hardest working governors around, my friend, Gretchen Whitmer. And if you are wondering what responsible strong executive leadership looks like in ENTITY, just look at this executive right here. Governor, you have done an incredible job steering the people of Michigan through a turbulent time. Much of it is brought on by Donald Trump's lack of leadership. You have listened to the experts and you have led with science and you put the needs of the people, who are hurting first, helping them get through this crisis. Meanwhile, on the day that we hit 190,000 dead in the United States, because of ENTITY, we just learned from the Washington Post columnist Bob Woodward that the president of the United States has admitted on tape in February he knew about ENTITY that had passed through the air. It was much more deadly than the flu.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenspeechtranscriptwarrenmichiganseptember9", "title": "Joe Biden Speech Transcript Warren, Michigan September 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-speech-transcript-warren-michigan-september-9", "publication_date": "09-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2931, "text": "He knew and purposely played it down. Worse, he lied to the American people. He knowingly and willingly lied about the threaded pose to the country for months. He had the information. Now, while this deadly disease ripped through our nation, he failed to do his job on purpose. It was a life and death betrayal of the American people. If he acted two weeks sooner, back in March, 54,000 lives would have been spared in March and April alone. His failure has not only costs lives. He sent our economy in a tailspin. It costs millions more in American livelihoods. This is a recession created by Donald Trump's negligence. And he is unfit for this job as a consequence of it. How many kids are starting a new school year the same way they ended the last one at home? How many frontline workers are exhausted and pushed to the limits? And how many families are missing loved ones at their dinner table tonight because of his failures? It is a dereliction of duty. We are going to hear a lot more about this. I am sure, not just from me, but from the news media and a lot of others, but I want to ask you one simple question. What is the value of a promise? What is the worth of a woman or man's word, of a president's word, if it is not matched with action? In 2016, then candidate Trump came here to Warren just a few days before the election. Here is what he said. He said, If I am elected, you will not lose one plant. You have plants coming into this country. You are going to have jobs again. You will not lose one plant. I promise you. I promise you. That is what he said. Donald Trump makes a lot of promises. He promised that he alone could stop the off shoring of jobs. He promised he bring back jobs, stop companies from leaving. He could do what, Nobody else could do it, but him. Nut he promised it has administration would enforce every last buying American provision on behalf of the American people. And what makes his wild claims and hopes, he now hopes we do not notice what he said or will not remember. And when he does follow through or does not do with follow through the exact opposite, he is hoping we just have poor memories. He does not give us much credit, but the American people are smart, honest, decent, and they are hard working.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenspeechtranscriptwarrenmichiganseptember9", "title": "Joe Biden Speech Transcript Warren, Michigan September 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-speech-transcript-warren-michigan-september-9", "publication_date": "09-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2932, "text": "And we expect our president to be straight with us, to do what he or she says they are going to do. So let us look at the reality of Donald Trump's economy and what exactly his promise to the American people and workers are worth. He is on track to be the first president since Herbert Hoover in the Great Depression to see the number of jobs in our economy go down, not up while being president. Our economy's down 4.7 million jobs since he took office, 4.7. Even before President Trump's failed response to ENTITY crashed through our economy, his reckless and chaotic trade policy had thrown American manufacturing into recession. It was already contracting in 2019, even when ENTITY hit, before it hit. Trump was creating an average of 500,000 jobs fewer per year than the last three years when President Obama and I were an office. When the GM transmission plant here in Warren close last year, I bet the workers around were not all that comforted by Trump's empty promises. Under Donald Trump, Michigan lost auto jobs, even before ENTITY did. Has Trump delivered on stopping companies from shipping jobs overseas, American jobs? You already know the answer. The rate of offshoring by federal contractors, there are people that get federal dollars from the federal government to do things. The off shoring, big companies being paid by US Taxpayers has doubled, doubled under Trump. They have doubled the number that had been off shored. He invited companies to the White House to make what he called the pledge to American workers. He could not even keep those firms from outsourcing. Many were given lucrative federal contracts, but then some of them turned around and shipped 7,000 jobs overseas. Under President Trump, US trade deficit has grown. It is hit an all time high. Let me say that again. US trade deficit is at an all time high under Trump in the last three years. President Trump's answered all this as the same as he is answered everything. Corporate tax giveaways that actually ward off shoring. You heard me right. Giveaways that reward offshoring. If you offshore, you get more tax breaks. His 2017 tax bill slashed taxes on companies that sent production and jobs overseas. Those corporations then make huge profits by shipping these foreign made products back to the United States to sell to American consumers. And no industry has taken a greater advantage of Trump's offshoring tax loopholes than the pharmaceutical industry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenspeechtranscriptwarrenmichiganseptember9", "title": "Joe Biden Speech Transcript Warren, Michigan September 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-speech-transcript-warren-michigan-september-9", "publication_date": "09-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2933, "text": "Big pharma lobbied Trump for a handout. That is exactly what they got from him. US pharma is building factories overseas instead of the United States, skipping out on having to pay US taxes and then sending those same foreign made drugs back to American consumers, all while raising their prices on prescription drugs that union families and working people have to rely on. And in the process by the way, he is trying to do away with all healthcare in America. During a pandemic, we are seeing not only the inequity of this policy, but the enormous vulnerability that this creates for our own health security. And our security requires us to have supply chains of the necessary drugs based here, not overseas. Like the rest of President Trump's promise it has nothing to do with reality. It is all a bunch of hot air. In fact, contracts awarded by US governments to foreign companies using American tax dollars went up 30% since he is been president. So to recap, one, Trump has not stopped companies from closing plants and sending jobs overseas. Two, he is rewarded companies that have cut jobs and failed to invest here at home with billions of dollars in tax breaks. And three, he is awarding more and more federal contracts to foreign companies. President Trump has broken just about every promise he is ever made to the American worker. He is failed our economy and our country. But look, would you really expect anything different from this guy? From someone who called those of you and those who are serving in uniform, who have given their lives to the country losers and suckers? Let me tell you something. He volunteered to go to Kosovo to help them set up a government in the middle of the war. I know I am being proud here, but he is the only foreigner has a monument that they raised and built in service to him, thanking him for what he did. My son also then as attorney general volunteered to go to Iraq for one year. No one who served this nation has been a loser or a sucker. Or would you expect anything different than someone who could stand next to a father of a fallen soldier and say at a cemetery and say, I do not get it. What was in it for them? What was in it for them? Donald Trump does understand what it means to serve something bigger than yourself. He does not understand duty, honor, country. He lives by a different code.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenspeechtranscriptwarrenmichiganseptember9", "title": "Joe Biden Speech Transcript Warren, Michigan September 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-speech-transcript-warren-michigan-september-9", "publication_date": "09-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2934, "text": "Yes, Donald Trump and I have a pretty different philosophy when it comes to giving our word. Mine means something. When I tell the American people I am going to do something, I follow through. Here in Michigan, you know that is true. When Barack and I took office back in 2009, the economy was crashing. We inherited an economy in free fall. And millions of Americans, including so many right here in Michigan, lost their jobs, their homes, and their savings. With the help of Debbie breaking her neck here, President Obama and I worked hard. He put me in charge of the Recovery Act. I spent a lot of time here in Michigan and Detroit, working with you and Senator Stabenow, and thinking every single day about the folks on the factory line, busting their necks, just trying to put food on the table. A lot of folks were all ready to count Detroit out as well as the auto American industry to count it out. But I knew what Debbie knew. It is never a good bet to bet against the American worker. So when we promise to stand with the American auto industry, we delivered. We did not do it to help wealthy investors or pad bonus checks for CEOs, we did it to save an iconic American industry, a testament to the skills and ingenuity of American manufacturing. When Detroit declared bankruptcy, I was right here working alongside the city leaders to get the lights turned back on to revitalize the future of Detroit. Well, nearly 20,000 auto manufacturing jobs have been lost in Michigan under Trump. Nearly 80,000 were created during the Obama Biden administration. I have got long history. I am not just talking about what I am going to do, but delivering results for Michiganders. And now, we need to do it again. We need to do the hard work, not only to recover, but to build the economy back for the future once more. That is why my build back better agenda, that is what it is all about. Back in July, I made the first plank in my agenda a plan to modernize American manufacturing and technology to ensure that the future is made in America, by all of you. And today, I am announcing some additional steps to make this plank even stronger. First, we are going to impose a tax penalty on companies that avoid paying US taxes by off shoring jobs and manufacturing, only to sell those goods back to the American consumer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenspeechtranscriptwarrenmichiganseptember9", "title": "Joe Biden Speech Transcript Warren, Michigan September 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-speech-transcript-warren-michigan-september-9", "publication_date": "09-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2935, "text": "If your big corporate strategy is to boost your shareholders profits, your CEOs' bonuses by moving jobs out, well, we are going to make sure you not only pay full US taxes on those profits, but we are going to guarantee. We are going to add a 10% off shoring penalty surge tax to your bill. No more deductions for writing off expenses for the cost of sending jobs overseas, which is a big deal that could be done here at home by qualified American workers. I am not looking to punish American business, but there is a better way. That is what this is about. You are the best craftsmen and women in the world. If you are ready to make it in America, then just like there are consequences for off showing, there will be rewards and incentives for creating good paying jobs here at home. Today, I am announcing my new Made in America tax credit, a 10% advanceable tax credit for companies that invest in the United States and American workers, to help accelerate the recovery under our build back better agenda. So if your company revitalizes a closing facility here in the United States, like the transmission plant that got closed last year, we will take care of 10% of the investment that company makes to reopen it. If you retool a manufacturing facility to make it more competitive, for example, by shifting to help build a new fleet of clean American vehicles made by UAW members, we will make sure that is more than affordable for you. We are going to make sure you will get a tax credit. If you reshore jobs that have previously been sent overseas, expand your operations in the United States or increase wages for manufacturing jobs will make an even smarter strategic decision for your company because we will make sure you get a tax credit. These two steps on top of my plans to close each and every one of the Trump loopholes that he created in 2017 with his tax cut to reward companies with big tax breaks for off shoring. If you are going to want to build things here in the United States, because under our administration, the Biden Harris Administration, is going to deliver on the promise to buy American. It is been a law for almost a century, but we have never lived up to it. Today, the US government spends about $600 billion of taxpayer's money on federal contracts annually. And that money should go to support American jobs and American businesses. But President Trump has only ever treated it like it was a weak suggestion.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenspeechtranscriptwarrenmichiganseptember9", "title": "Joe Biden Speech Transcript Warren, Michigan September 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-speech-transcript-warren-michigan-september-9", "publication_date": "09-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2936, "text": "Agencies of the federal government can waive the requirements, explanations that Trump does not bother even kick back on. We are going to change that when I am president. In my first week, I will sign a series of executive actions to make sure we enforce by America and direct the full purchasing power of the federal government to fulfill his promise, starting by closing those waiver loopholes immediately. And I promise you, I will use the full power of the Defense Production Act to enforce buy American and tighten the rules for public infrastructure projects, roads, bridges, canals, airports. And I am going to crack down on companies that label products as made in America, even if they are coming from China or elsewhere. We found out that on Trump's watch a company selling deployment bags to active duty troops being deployed falsely claimed this product was made in America. When in fact, it was really made mostly in China. Trump did not do anything to respond. I am not going to let that happen on my watch. We are going to have an office at the White House dedicated to making sure everyone is playing by the same made in America rules. And one more thing, when I say we are going to use the purchasing power of the federal government to reinvigorate domestic manufacturing, I mean. We are going to do that with the American automobile industry as well. United States government owns and maintains an enormous fleet of vehicles. We are going to convert those government vehicles into electric vehicles, made in America, sourced right here in the United States of America. With the government providing the demand and support to retool factories that are suggesting they are struggling to compete, the United States automobile industry will set up expanding the capacity in the United States, not China, to lead the world in clean energy vehicles. I cannot wait to get, I said, behind that all electric Corvette that goes 210 miles an hour. I mean it. Last year, that converted Corvette set a speed record of 210.2 miles per hour, electric vehicle. So do not tell me we do not still make the best cars right here in the United States of America, and trucks. We are going to make it easy for American consumers to switch to electric vehicles. We are going to build on all the new infrastructure we are going to build on highways. We are going to build a network of 500,000 charging stations across America, providing prevailing wage jobs for the IBW and other craftsmen all across the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenspeechtranscriptwarrenmichiganseptember9", "title": "Joe Biden Speech Transcript Warren, Michigan September 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-speech-transcript-warren-michigan-september-9", "publication_date": "09-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2937, "text": "And together, this will mean, listen to me now, 1 million new jobs in the American automobile industry, 1 million. With supply chain, as well as the associated infrastructure, we can do this. We can do this. We can revitalize our industrial base as the heart of the American middle class. Think about the worker in Warren who when the transmission plant closed, he told a reporter and I am quoting him, Getting a good GM job 23 years ago for me was like winning the lottery, he said. I was trying to start a family. I was able to buy a house. I went to Disney world, all that. A job that felt like winning a lottery because it opened the door to a life that you wanted for yourself, because it gave you dignity, allowed you to provide for your family. It should be an absolute expectation for everyone. I do not accept the defeatist view that the forces of automation and globalization mean we cannot keep good paying union jobs here in America and create more of them. I do not buy for one second that the vitality of American manufacturing is a thing of the past. We have the most qualified workers in the world. American manufacturing, is the old expression you heard your grandpop say or your grandmother, was the arsenal of democracy in World War II. It is going to be part of the engine of American prosperity now in 2021, and we are going to make it happen with American grit, American determination, and American union workers. That is my promise to you. And keep in mind, back in the 30s, they set up the law relating to unions. It said that not you could have a union, it said the government should encourage unions to increase . You are going to have the best, most friendly union president in history of the United States of America, when I am in the White House. I want to thank you all, for all you do. I want to thank you all. I carry with me I do not have it. I gave it to my staff. I carry with me in my pocket Do I have that around, anyone? I gave it away. Anyway, I carry a schedule in my pocket that lists every single day the number of troops lost in Afghanistan and Iraq. The back of the schedule is always a black box. You cannot really see it. It says daily US updates.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenspeechtranscriptwarrenmichiganseptember9", "title": "Joe Biden Speech Transcript Warren, Michigan September 9", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-speech-transcript-warren-michigan-september-9", "publication_date": "09-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2956, "text": "I want to thank all the outstanding leaders that we have got here today. I want to introduce some of them. We have got Secretary of Labor Tom Perez here. We have got Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan here. Senator Gary Peters is in the house. Now, I have to say, I love the Secret Service, I love the Beasts that they put me in and-that is what we call the cars I drive in, the Beasts. So I like my ride these days. And it was made in Michigan too. But I just had a chance to look at these new Mustangs, and I have got to say that the Mustangs had a little more style, a little more flavor. Bill Ford is in the house. Surprisingly enough, we talked a little bit about Sunday. You beat us twice. But all I can say-because I am used to saying this, I am a Bears fan-there is always next year. And look, you have got a lot to be hopeful for. First of all, you have got one of the best defenses in the league. And if there is one thing that you can take to the bank when talking about Detroit is that Detroit always comes back. One of my New Year's resolutions is to make sure that more Americans in Wayne, more Americans in Michigan, more Americans all across this great country-that everybody feels like they are coming back. And there is no doubt, thanks to the steps that we took early on to rescue our economy and to rebuild it on a new foundation, we are entering into the new year with new confidence that America is coming back. Now, you do not have to take my word for it. And let us face it, a lot of times the media does not like reporting on good news, but every once in a while, it is important for us to hear some good news, not to make us complacent, but to give us confidence that if we work harder, we can make even more good news. Last year, 2014, was the strongest year for job growth since the 1990s. We have now had a 57-month streak of private sector job creation. We have created nearly 11 million new jobs. That is the longest stretch in our history of private sector, uninterrupted job creation. Here is another way of thinking about it. Since 2010, we, America, have put more people back to work than Europe, Japan, and every other advanced economy combined. American manufacturing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefordmotorcompanymichiganassemblyplantwaynemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Ford Motor Company Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-ford-motor-company-michigan-assembly-plant-wayne-michigan", "publication_date": "07-01-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2957, "text": "After a decade of decline, American manufacturing is in its best stretch of job growth since the 1990s. Here in Michigan, manufacturers have created more than a hundred thousand jobs, helping to cut your unemployment rate in half. So we are making more stuff. We are selling it around the world. America is the number-one producer of oil, the number-one producer of gas. It is helping to save drivers about a buck-10 a gallon at the pump over this time last year. And the cars that you make help everybody go a little further on that gallon of gas. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act-also known as Obamacare-about 10 million Americans gained health insurance just over this last year. We have cut our deficits by about two-thirds. I'd like people to think about that, because when they do surveys of, like, ordinary folks on the street and they ask them, are the deficits going up or are they coming down, everybody automatically assumes, well, Government spending and deficits must be going up. Deficits have come down by two-thirds since I took office-by two-thirds. And after 13 long years, our war in Afghanistan has come to a responsible end, which means more of our brave troops have come home and spent time with their families during the holidays. These 6 years have been tough, demanded hard work, demanded sacrifice on everybody's part. You guys know that more than most. Which means that as a country, we have every right to be proud of what we have got to show for all that hard work. Do not let anybody tell you otherwise. We have got the best cards, and we are doing better than just about anybody else on Earth. And now that we have got some calmer waters, now that the worst of the crisis is behind us, if we all do our part, if we all pitch in, then we can make sure that this rising tide is actually lifting all the boats, not just some. We can make sure that the middle class is the engine that powers American prosperity for decades to come. building on the progress that we have already made. But I have got to admit, I have only got 2 years left in office; I did not want to wait for the State of the Union to talk about all the things that make this country great and how we can make it better. It is like opening your Christmas presents a little early.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefordmotorcompanymichiganassemblyplantwaynemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Ford Motor Company Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-ford-motor-company-michigan-assembly-plant-wayne-michigan", "publication_date": "07-01-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2958, "text": "So today I am here in Detroit, going to talk about the incredible things that have happened in the auto industry and what more we can do with manufacturing. Tomorrow I am going to visit Arizona, a State that is -was hit about as hard as anybody by the housing crisis, because we want to talk about how we are making homeownership a reality for more middle class families. On Friday, I am going to go to Tennessee, a State that is making big strides in education, to show how we can help every American get the education they need to get ahead in this new economy. But today I wanted to come here to Michigan because this State proves no matter how tough times get, Americans are tougher. So-and plus, I wanted to see the new Mustang. Now, just-let us just take a minute and think about what you have had to fight through. A few years ago, nearly one in five autoworkers got a punch in the gut with a pink slip. The year before I took office, 400,000 jobs vanished in this industry-400,000. And then, as the financial crisis built, we faced what once seemed unimaginable when just two of the Big Three-GM and Chrysler-were on the brink of failure. Now, this is the heartbeat of American manufacturing right here. And we had a choice to make. We could have kept giving billions of taxpayer dollars to the auto industry without asking for accountability or change in return. But that would have just kicked the problem down the road. We could have done nothing, which some people said we should do, and let those companies fail. But think about what that would have meant for this country. The suppliers, the distributors, the communities that depend on the workers who patronize the restaurants and shop at the stores-all those companies would have gone under also. And look, the fact is, nobody was in a stronger position than Ford. Bill and the team had done a great job steering Ford through tough times, but Bill and others are the first to admit that you could have had a cascading effect if the whole supply chain in the U.S. auto industry starts declining. We would have lost this iconic industry, sold for scraps. And folks like you-the men and women who built these companies with your hands-would have been left hanging out to dry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefordmotorcompanymichiganassemblyplantwaynemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Ford Motor Company Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-ford-motor-company-michigan-assembly-plant-wayne-michigan", "publication_date": "07-01-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2959, "text": "And the communities you depended on-the schoolteachers, the small-business owners, the servers in the diner, and, let us face it, the barkeep--I am just saying. Are you a barkeep, or you are just waving at me? Their jobs were at stake too. And it is more than that. The jobs in the auto industry have always been about more than a paycheck. They are a source of pride for generations. It was representative of what it meant to get into the middle class. You work hard in this job, you could afford to raise a family, buy a house, go on vacation, retire with some dignity. You knew you were making something that people could count on. It meant something. Every car you sent off the line brought you that step closer to doing the right thing by your family and giving something to your kids and having a sense of security in your life. So plants like this one built more than just cars, they built the middle class in this country. So in exchange for the help, we demanded responsibility. We said to the auto industry, you have got to change with the times. Labor and management worked together, settled their differences. Everybody put some skin in the game. Everybody made some sacrifices. It was not just some, it was not just the workers who gave something up-everybody. when workers and businesses work together; when whoever is in the boardroom and folks on the floor, they both understand they are in it together. And we believe America is best when everybody is in it together. And we rejected the false choice that either unions or businesses could succeed but not both. You know what, what is going to work for the company is also going to work for that worker and vice versa, which means when the company is doing better, then the workers have got to get their share as well. And Ford rejected the false choice that they could either take care of their shareholder or take care of their worker. They did both. We believed in shared sacrifice and that shared sacrifice leads to shared prosperity. Now, I have got to tell you, I was talking to the Detroit News. What was it like when you were making this decision? Even in Michigan, it was not popular. I remember they did a poll and, like, in Michigan, it was like only 10 percent were in favor. And look-and it was not on my to-do list when I ran for President.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefordmotorcompanymichiganassemblyplantwaynemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Ford Motor Company Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-ford-motor-company-michigan-assembly-plant-wayne-michigan", "publication_date": "07-01-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2960, "text": "I was not expecting to have to do this. But I ran not to be just doing the popular things, I ran not just to do the easy things, I ran to do the right thing. And that bet has paid off for America, because the American auto industry is back. Now, part of the reason that we wanted to start this trip here is not just because I wanted to see the new Mustang--not just because the American auto industry is back, but because last month, we actually marked a milestone. Last month, the rescue of the auto industry officially came to an end. The auto companies have now repaid taxpayers every dime and more of what my administration invested in you. You paid the taxpayers back with your hard work, with your dedication. And over the past 5 years, this industry created about 500,000 new jobs. Last year, American autoworkers churned out cars faster than any year since 2005. Ford has brought jobs back from Mexico, created nearly 24,000 new jobs across this country, including 1,800 new jobs right here in this plant. one production line for gas, electric, hybrid, plug-in vehicles. That is the first in the world, right here in Wayne, Michigan. That is always cool when you do something first. And you are helping rebuild the middle class for the 21st century. Just down the road, in Lincoln Park, UAW-Ford Joint Apprenticeship Program is providing workers with hands-on training in the skills that employers need for the jobs of tomorrow. And nationally, by the way, 87 percent of all apprentices are employed after they complete their apprenticeship program, with an average starting wage of $50,000. So the more folks we get into apprenticeships, the more folks are getting middle class jobs. And that is why I called on last year for businesses across the country to create more and expand more apprenticeship programs. And since then, we have seen the largest increase in apprenticeships in nearly a decade. And now my administration is investing a hundred million dollars in an American Apprenticeship Grant competition. We are going to build on this momentum. We are going to expand successful programs. We want young people to see that they have opportunities. They do not all have to go to a 4-year college. They can get an apprenticeship, save some money, start working, build a family, buy a home, get some Lions tickets.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefordmotorcompanymichiganassemblyplantwaynemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Ford Motor Company Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-ford-motor-company-michigan-assembly-plant-wayne-michigan", "publication_date": "07-01-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2961, "text": "And some of the most high-tech, fuel-efficient, high-powered, heart-pounding, good-looking, well-designed, fuel-efficient cars in the world are once again designed, engineered, forged, and built not in Europe, not in Asia, right here in the United States of America. So because of you-because of you-manufacturing has a future in this country. Manufacturing's actually grown faster than other parts of the economy. You know what, we have got to get back to America; we have got to relocate. And that means, because of you, the middle class has a future in this country. And by the way, so has Motor City. A year and a half ago, Detroit became the largest city ever to file for bankruptcy. Today, under the leadership of Mayor Duggan, Detroit is charting a new course. Businesses and private investors are making big investments, including Ford, which is helping to launch a tech startup incubator downtown. Residents are fighting blight, securing abandoned homes, cleaning up neglected neighborhoods. We are seeing stories of young people who left town for other opportunities, did not think they could make it here, and suddenly, they are saying, You know what, maybe I want to get back to Detroit, hoping to be part of the rebirth of this city. Now, this city still faces big challenges, but you are coming back. Just like the auto industry is going to have to continue to come up with new ideas and new designs and address competition. Just like the Lions got to still come up with a little more work. We may not all root for the Lions, but America is rooting for Detroit. America is rooting for Detroit. And behind the stories of plants and cities and economic data, it is people. It is all of you. So I will just close with a story of a guy named Ramone, because we are rooting for guys like Ramone. Ramone spent 8 years in the military, served in Afghanistan, served in Iraq. So Ramone is somebody who fought for our freedom, fought for our security. But sometimes, we give lip service to supporting our troops, and then when they come home, they get lost. So when Ramone came home, he had a hard time finding a job because it was a tough economy. He did not want to be a burden on his family, so he moved into a homeless shelter, took whatever work he could get.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefordmotorcompanymichiganassemblyplantwaynemichigan", "title": "Remarks at the Ford Motor Company Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-ford-motor-company-michigan-assembly-plant-wayne-michigan", "publication_date": "07-01-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2967, "text": "Prime Minister Gandhi, Nancy and I are delighted to welcome you to the White House. And let me add a personal note. It is good to see you here again as leader of the great Indian democracy, which provides a unique opportunity for us to broaden and deepen the dialog we began last autumn in Mexico. Through our talks, we can help to reach a renewed recognition of the mutual importance of strong, constructive ties between India and the United States. In searching for words to describe the focus of your visit to Washington this week, I came upon a statement that you had made in Delhi when Roy Jenkins visited in 1980. And at that time, you said, The great need in the world today is to so define national interest that it makes for greater harmony, greater equality and justice, and greater stability in the world. Well, that is more than an eloquent description of enlightened national interest. It can also serve to describe the foundation of the relationship between the United States and India, a relationship we seek to reaffirm this week. A strengthening of that relationship, based on better understanding, is particularly important at this time. Your father once said that the basic fact of today is the tremendous pace of change in human life. The conflicts and the tensions of the 1980's pose new challenges to our countries and to all nations which seek, as India and the United States do, freedom in a more stable, secure, and prosperous world. As leaders of the world's two largest democracies, sharing common ideals and values, we can learn much from one another in discussing concerns and exploring national purposes. From this understanding can come greater confidence in one another's roles on the world's stage and a rediscovery of how important we are to one another. Prime Minister Gandhi, we recognize that there have been differences between our two countries, but these should not obscure all that we have in common, for we are both strong, proud, and independent nations guided by our own perceptions of our national interests. We both desire the peace and stability of the Indian Ocean area and the early end of the occupation of Afghanistan. We both seek an equitable peace in the Middle East and an honorable settlement of the Iran-Iraq conflict. We both seek a constructive approach to international economic cooperation, building on the strong links even today being forged between the economies of the United States and India.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthewelcomingceremonyforprimeministerindiragandhiindia", "title": "Remarks at the Welcoming Ceremony for Prime Minister Indira Gandhi of India", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-welcoming-ceremony-for-prime-minister-indira-gandhi-india", "publication_date": "29-07-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2971, "text": "A particularly warm welcome to the Members of Congress, both House and Senate, that are with us today. I have just come from a working session in the White House, working with some of the great experts on school choice. The parents, I think, made the most significant contribution to our working session because their dreams for their kids are the same dreams that all of us have. They want their kids to have a first-class education. They know from practical experience that a good education is absolutely essential to making a good living and to making a good life. So let me just share a little from that meeting. Janette Williams told me about her son, Javon. The Williamses are here with us somewhere here today whoops, here she is over here. Her kid starred on 60 Minutes, and that says something about the guy, if you go on that program and come off in one piece. But here is what she said, and this is serious. She said, At his old school that was crowded, he used to get so bored that he would walk out. And thanks to the choice program in Milwaukee, he is at a new school. He is not doing those things anymore. He is doing his homework; he is even helping clean up the classroom after school. They took the energy and turned it around. Now, the Governor here, Tommy Thompson, the Governor of Wisconsin, is here with us today. I am sorry that Polly Williams, who is been at the forefront of the school choice movement, could not be here, but she is at home looking after her mother. I would salute her values. But we miss her very, very much. Together, Polly and Tommy Thompson, the Governor, have taken the lead in helping parents like Janette Williams realize her dreams for her son Javon, creating scholarships for 1,000 Milwaukee children from low-income families so that they can attend private schools. Now, theirs is a bold experiment, to give low-income families more of the same choices of schools already available to wealthier families. Mike Joyce of the Bradley Foundation was also in our meeting. And Bradley recently joined with other foundations and Milwaukee businesses to raise $3 million so that Milwaukee's low-income families will be able to choose their family's schools, including the religious schools. Mike told us this morning that parents picked up every one of the 4,500 scholarship applications the day after the scholarships were announced, 4,500, that fast.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingproposedlegislationestablishgibillforchildren", "title": "Remarks Announcing Proposed Legislation To Establish a GI Bill for Children", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-proposed-legislation-establish-gi-bill-for-children", "publication_date": "25-06-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2972, "text": "And do not let anybody tell you that the people of Milwaukee do not care about their kids' education. No one should underestimate what is at stake here. A revolution is underway in Milwaukee and across this country, a revolution to make American schools the best in the world. I salute our Secretary of Education who is helping lead that revolution, Lamar Alexander. Together with the Nation's Governors, we have set six ambitious national education goals. And I might say that this was not a partisan move; Democrats and Republicans alike of the Governors coming together to set six ambitious national education goals. In 44 States and 1,400 communities, we have already launched America 2000 to meet these goals. Even earlier still, in January 1989, just before I was sworn in as ENTITY, we helped organize the White House Conference on Choice in Education. We believed then and we believe today a few fundamental truths. Parents, not bureaucrats, know what is best for their kids. At this point I would like to salute one of the two in purple, Barbara Bush for her pointing this out to parents, that it is what they do, what happens in their home. Barbara's done a lot of that here and around the country. I might say that Marilyn Quayle's taking that same message of parental involvement all across our country, and we are very grateful to her. So, it is our belief then that parents, not the Government, should choose their children's schools. So today I am proposing that we take another giant step forward in this revolution. I am sending to Congress legislation that would authorize an ambitious demonstration program, half a billion new Federal dollars to help communities all across America give $1,000 scholarships to children of middle- and low-income families so they can choose which schools their kids will attend. This revolution is in the greatest American tradition. We have done it before, and it is worked. Forty-eight years ago this very week, President Roosevelt signed the GI bill, creating scholarships that veterans could use at any college, any college of their choice. The GI bill created opportunity for Americans who never would have had it, and in doing so it helped create the best system of colleges and universities in the world. Now we can do that again, this time by helping State and local governments and we are delighted the Mayor of Milwaukee is with us here today this time by helping State and local governments create the best elementary and secondary schools in the world. The GI bill for children will help.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingproposedlegislationestablishgibillforchildren", "title": "Remarks Announcing Proposed Legislation To Establish a GI Bill for Children", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-proposed-legislation-establish-gi-bill-for-children", "publication_date": "25-06-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2973, "text": "It will provide that help to these families. These dollars to spend at the schools of their choice will become the muscle that parents need to create the best schools for their kids. Let me say to those who will attack our school choice initiative on the ground that it permits Government money to go to religious schools, you are wrong. This is aid to the families, not aid to institutions. And again, if you set the clock back to the creation of that original GI bill, no one told the GI's that they could not go to S.M.U. or Notre Dame or Yeshiva or Howard. I have not heard Members of Congress suggest that students stop using Pell grants and guaranteed student loans at Baptist colleges or Presbyterian seminaries. I do not hear an outcry because poor children at Catholic schools get their lunch paid for by Federal taxpayers. In the same way, parents must be free to use this money at the school they believe will best teach their child, whether the school is public, private, or religious. Accepting students with vouchers does not mean a school must sacrifice school prayer. I simply do not buy the idea that someone cannot make a good decision just because that person is poor. We heard the same argument when we proposed child care vouchers for low-income families or when we proposed help for public housing tenants to own their own homes. So it is my belief that we ought to let families own their own home and choose their own schools regardless of their income level and give them help. Give them a shot at the American dream, if you will. All of this new money can go to public schools if that is where the child chooses to go, where the family chooses to have the kid go. That decision will be in the hands of families, where it belongs. First, I want to make it clear that we are not talking here about a new Federal entitlement program. The Federal Government cannot afford one more entitlement, even for education. The United States already spends more per student for schools than any country in the world except Switzerland. I do not have to tell you where we stand in the international rankings of educational performance at the level we are talking about here today. Our universities and colleges are respected and have achieved the highest levels of achievement. But that, unfortunately, is not true as we talk about K through 12. So we need a revolution in American education, not more money to do it the same old way.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingproposedlegislationestablishgibillforchildren", "title": "Remarks Announcing Proposed Legislation To Establish a GI Bill for Children", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-proposed-legislation-establish-gi-bill-for-children", "publication_date": "25-06-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2974, "text": "Investment in our schools will remain a primarily State and local responsibility. But Federal support for State and local scholarships can be a catalyst. For schools that attract choice students, it will give teachers and principals a welcome source of new funds. For our children, choice can help open up opportunities, create genuine change in our schools. For too long, we have shielded schools from competition, allowed our schools a damaging monopoly power over our children. This monopoly turns students into statistics and turns parents into pawns. It is time we began thinking of a system of public education in which many providers offer a marketplace of opportunities, opportunities that give all of our children choices and access to the best education in the world. And so it is our firm belief, it is our firm belief that this GI bill for children will move America inevitably in that direction. Milwaukee is not the only place in America that our revolution is underway. Last year in Indianapolis, Pat Rooney and the Educational CHOICE Charitable Trust began to offer tuition vouchers to Indianapolis students. I understand a bus-load of parents and students drove all night to be here today. If you are still awake, welcome, a special welcome to all of you. In San Antonio, the CEO Foundation has earmarked $1.5 million in vouchers for children in their community. Joe Alibrandi and thousands of supporters are pushing for a ballot initiative to provide voucher scholarships for every school-age child in the State. Overall in 1991, 10 States approved some form of new choice legislation, and 37 States had choice legislation pending in one form or another. I have been told that there may just be a few folks here from Pennsylvania. The children of Pennsylvania will have school choice. From California to East Harlem, from coast to coast, the leaders of the school choice movement are sparking a revolution in American education. They are the true heroes of this education reform, and some of them are here with us today. They are not afraid to stand up to the status quo, to say loud and clear that when it comes to educating our kids, business-as-usual simply is not good enough. Barbara and I and the Vice President and Marilyn, and certainly our Secretary, are very proud to stand with you. It will succeed because it draws its strength from the very heart of the American creed. We have no truth more enduring than the idea that every American should have the opportunity for a first-class education. We have no principles more important than freedom, opportunity, and choice.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingproposedlegislationestablishgibillforchildren", "title": "Remarks Announcing Proposed Legislation To Establish a GI Bill for Children", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-proposed-legislation-establish-gi-bill-for-children", "publication_date": "25-06-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2979, "text": "Today I am able to talk to you in a more hopeful and positive vein about how we are moving this Nation and the world toward a lasting peace. We have brought ourselves to a time of transition, from war toward peace, and this is a good time to gain some perspective on where we are and where we are headed. Today I am sending to the Congress my second annual comprehensive report on the conduct of our foreign affairs. It discusses not only what we have done but why we have done it, and how we intend to proceed in the future. I do not intend to summarize all that is in my detailed report on foreign policy at this time. How we are getting out of the war this Nation has been in for the past 6 years; How we have created a new and different foreign policy approach for the United States in a greatly changed world; and How we are applying that approach in working with others to build a lasting peace. The most immediate and anguishing problem that faced this Administration 2 years ago was the war in Vietnam. Two years ago, when this Administration took office, there were almost 550,000 Americans in Vietnam. Within 60 days we will have brought home 260,000 men, and this spring I will announce a new schedule of withdrawals. Two years ago, the additional demands of the Vietnam war cost us approximately $22 billion per year. That cost has been cut in half. Much of the progress in Vietnam was due to the success of the allied operations against the enemy sanctuaries in Cambodia last spring. American casualties after Cambodia have been half the rate they were before Cambodia. Our decision to clean out the sanctuaries in Cambodia saved thousands of American lives. And it enabled us to continue withdrawing our men on schedule. Just as last year's cutoff of supplies through Cambodia has saved lives and insured our withdrawal program this year, the purpose of this year's disruption of the Ho Chi Minh Trail in Laos is to save lives and insure the success of our withdrawal program next year. The disruption of the Communist supply line through Laos is being accomplished by South Vietnamese troops, with no U.S. ground troops or advisers. Their army is doing the fighting, with our air support, and the intensity of the fighting is evidence of the importance of that supply line to the enemy. We have kept our commitments as we have taken out our troops. South Vietnam now has an excellent opportunity not only to survive but to build a strong, free society.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressaboutsecondannualforeignpolicyreportthecongress", "title": "Radio Address About Second Annual Foreign Policy Report to the Congress.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-about-second-annual-foreign-policy-report-the-congress", "publication_date": "25-02-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2980, "text": "Thanks to the disruption of so much of the enemy's supplies, Americans are leaving South Vietnam in safety; we would much prefer to leave South Vietnam in peace. Negotiation remains the best and quickest way to end the war in a way that will not only end U.S. involvement and casualties but will mean an end to the fighting between North and South Vietnamese. On October 7, we made a proposal that could open the door to that kind of peace. an immediate standstill cease-fire throughout Indochina to stop the fighting, an Indochina peace conference, the withdrawal of all outside forces, a political settlement fair to both sides, the immediate release of all prisoners of war. I reaffirm that proposal today. It is supported by every government in Indochina except one the Government of North Vietnam. I once again urge Hanoi to join us in this search for peace. If North Vietnam wishes to negotiate with the United States, they will have to recognize that time is running out. With the exception of the prisoners-of-war issue, if North Vietnam continues to refuse to discuss our peace proposals, they will soon find they have no choice but to negotiate only with the South Vietnamese. Our eventual goal is a total withdrawal of all outside forces. But as long as North Vietnam continues to hold a single American prisoner, we shall have forces in South Vietnam. The American prisoners of war will not be forgotten by their Government. I am keeping my pledge to end America's involvement in this war. But the main point I want to discuss with you today and the main theme of my report to the Congress is the future, not the past. It matters very much how we end this war. But to end a war in a way that will not bring on another war is far from simple. In Southeast Asia today, aggression is failing thanks to the determination of the South Vietnamese people and to the courage and sacrifice of America's fighting men. aggression trained back, a war ending. What America does or fails to do will determine whether peace and freedom can be won in the coming generation. That is why the way in which we end this conflict is so crucial to our efforts to build a lasting peace in coming decades. The right way out of Vietnam is crucial to our changing role in the world and to peace in the world. To understand the nature of the new American role we must consider the great historical changes that have taken place.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressaboutsecondannualforeignpolicyreportthecongress", "title": "Radio Address About Second Annual Foreign Policy Report to the Congress.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-about-second-annual-foreign-policy-report-the-congress", "publication_date": "25-02-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2981, "text": "For 25 years after World War II, the United States was not only the leader of the non-Communist world, it was the primary supporter and defender of this free world as well. But today our allies and friends have gained new strength and self-confidence. They are now able to participate much more fully not only in their own defense but in adding their moral and spiritual strength to the creation of a stable world order. Today our adversaries no longer present a solidly united front; we can now differentiate in our dealings with them. Today neither the United States nor the Soviet Union has a clear-cut nuclear advantage; the time is therefore ripe to come to an agreement on the control of arms. Our foreign policy must change with it. We have learned in recent years the dangers of over-involvement. That deceptively smooth road of the new isolationism is surely the road to war. Our foreign policy today steers a steady course between the past danger of over involvement and the new temptation of under-involvement. 1 We will maintain our commitments, but we will make sure our own troop levels or any financial support to other nations is appropriate to current threats and needs. We shall provide a shield if a nuclear power threatens the freedom of a nation allied with us or of a nation whose survival we consider vital to our security. But we will look to threatened countries and their neighbors to assume primary responsibility for their own defense, and we will provide support where our interests call for that support and where it can make a difference. These principles are not limited to security matters. We shall pursue economic policies at home and abroad that encourage trade wherever possible and that strengthen political ties between nations. As we actively seek to help other nations expand their economies, we can legitimately expect them to work with us in averting economic problems of our own. As we continue to send economic aid to developing nations, we will expect countries on the receiving end to mobilize their resources; we will look to other developed nations to do more in furnishing assistance; and we will channel our aid increasingly through groups of nations banded together for mutual support. This new sharing of responsibility requires not less American leadership than in the past, but rather a new, more subtle, form of leadership. No single nation can build a peace alone; peace can only be built by the willing hands and minds-of all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressaboutsecondannualforeignpolicyreportthecongress", "title": "Radio Address About Second Annual Foreign Policy Report to the Congress.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-about-second-annual-foreign-policy-report-the-congress", "publication_date": "25-02-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2982, "text": "In the modern world, leadership cannot be do-it-yourself the path of leadership is in providing the help, the motive, the inspiration to do it together. In carrying out what is referred to as the Nixon Doctrine, we recognize that we cannot transfer burdens too swiftly. We must strike a balance between doing too much and preventing self-reliance, and suddenly doing too little and undermining self-confidence. We intend to give our friends the time and the means to adjust, materially and psychologically, to a new form of American participation in the world. How have we applied our new foreign policy during the past year? And what is our future agenda as we work with others to build a stable world order? In Western Europe, we have shifted from predominance to partnership with our allies. Our ties with Western Europe are central to the structure of peace because its nations are rich in tradition and experience, strong economically, vigorous in diplomacy and culture; they are in a position to take a major part in building a world of peace. Our ties were strengthened on my second trip to Europe this summer and reflected in our close consultation on arms control negotiations. At our suggestion, the NATO alliance made a thorough review of its military strategy and posture. As a result, we have reached new agreement on a strong defense and the need to share the burden more fairly. In Eastern Europe, our exchange of state visits with Romania and my meeting last fall with Marshal Tito in Yugoslavia are examples of our search for wider reconciliation with the nations that used to be considered behind an Iron Curtain. We shall cooperate in our political and economic relations across the Atlantic as the Common Market grows. We and our allies will make the improvements necessary to carry out our common defense strategy. Together we stand ready to reduce forces in Western Europe in exchange for mutual reductions in Eastern Europe. The problems of Africa are great, but so is her potential. The United States will support her peoples' efforts to build a continent that provides social justice and economic expansion. Recently, we have paid new respect to their proud traditions. Our trade, credit, and economic policies have been reexamined and reformed to respond to their concerns and their ideas, as well as to our own interests. Our new Latin American policy is designed to help them help themselves; our new attitude will not only aid their progress but add to their dignity. Great changes are brewing throughout the American hemisphere.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressaboutsecondannualforeignpolicyreportthecongress", "title": "Radio Address About Second Annual Foreign Policy Report to the Congress.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-about-second-annual-foreign-policy-report-the-congress", "publication_date": "25-02-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2983, "text": "We can have no greater goal than to help provide the means for necessary change to be accomplished in peace and for all change to be in the direction of greater self-reliance. a new Asia is emerging. The old enmities of World War II are dead or dying. Asian states are stronger and are joining together in vigorous regional groupings. Here the doctrine that took shape last year is taking hold today, helping to spur self-reliance and cooperation between states. In Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and the Philippines, we have consolidated bases and reduced American forces. We have relaxed trade and travel restrictions to underline our readiness for greater contact with Communist China. While continuing to help our friends help themselves, we must begin to consider how regional associations can work together with the major powers in the area for a durable peace. We will work to build a strong partnership with Japan that will accommodate our mutual interests. We will search for consecutive discussions with Communist China while maintaining our defense commitment to Taiwan. When the Government of the People's Republic of China is ready to engage in talks, it will find us receptive to agreements that further the legitimate national interests of China and its neighbors. In Asia, we can see tomorrow's world in microcosm. An economically powerful democratic free nation, Japan, is seeking new markets; a potentially powerful Communist nation, China, will one day seek new outlets and new relations; a Communist competitor, the Soviet Union, has interests there as well; and the independent non-Communist nations of Southeast Asia are already working together in regional association . These great forces are bound to interact in the not too distant future. In the way they work together and in the way we cooperate with their relationship is the key to permanent peace in that area the Far East, the scene of such a painful legacy of the recent past, can become an example of peace and stability in the future. In the Middle East, the United States took the initiative to stop the fighting and start the process of peace. Diplomacy was at an impasse. The danger of local conflict was magnified by growing Soviet involvement and the possibility of great powers being drawn into confrontation. America took the lead in arranging a cease-fire and getting negotiations started. We are seeing to it that the balance of power, so necessary to discourage a new outbreak of fighting, is not upset. Working behind the scenes, when a crisis arose in Jordan, the United States played a key role in seeing that order was restored and an invasion was abandoned.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressaboutsecondannualforeignpolicyreportthecongress", "title": "Radio Address About Second Annual Foreign Policy Report to the Congress.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-about-second-annual-foreign-policy-report-the-congress", "publication_date": "25-02-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2984, "text": "We recognize that centuries of suspicion and decades of hostility cannot be ended overnight. There are great obstacles in the way of a permanent, peaceful settlement, and painful compromise is required by all concerned. We are encouraged by the willingness of each of the parties to begin to look to the larger interest of peace and stability throughout the Middle East. There is still the risk of war, but now for the first time in years the parties are actively calculating the risks of peace. The policy of the United States will continue to be to promote peace talks-not to try to impose a peace from the outside, but to support the peace efforts of the parties in the region themselves. One way to support these efforts is for the United States to discourage any outside power from trying to exploit the situation for its own advantage. The United States is fully prepared to play a responsible and cooperative role in keeping the peace arrived at through negotiation between the parties. We know what our vital interests are in the Middle East. Those interests include friendly and constructive relations with all nations in the area. Other nations know that we are ready to protect those vital interests. And one good reason why other nations take us at our word in the Middle East is because the United States has kept its word in Southeast Asia. the relations between the world's two great super powers. Over the past e years, in some fields the Soviet Union and the United States have moved ahead together. We have taken the first step toward cooperation in outer space. We have both ratified the treaty limiting the spread of nuclear weapons. Just 2 weeks ago, we signed a treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons from the seabeds. These are hopeful signs, but certain other Soviet actions are reason for concern. We must also discourage the temptation to raise new challenges in sensitive areas such as the Caribbean. In the long run, the most significant result of negotiations between the super powers in the past year could be in the field of arms control. The strategic arms limitation talks with the Soviet Union have produced the most searching examination of the nature of strategic competition ever conducted between our two nations. Each side has had the chance to explain at length the concerns caused by the posture of the other side. The talks have been conducted in a serious way without the old lapses into propaganda. If both sides continue in this way, there is reason to hope that specific agreements will be reached to curb the arms race.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressaboutsecondannualforeignpolicyreportthecongress", "title": "Radio Address About Second Annual Foreign Policy Report to the Congress.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-about-second-annual-foreign-policy-report-the-congress", "publication_date": "25-02-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2985, "text": "Taking a first step in limiting the capacity of mankind to destroy itself would mark a turning point in the history of the postwar world; it would add to the security of both the Soviet Union and the United States, and it would add to the world's peace of mind. In all our relations with the Soviets, we shall make the most progress by recognizing that in many cases our national interests are not the same. It serves no purpose to pretend they are; our differences are not matters of mood, they are matters of substance. But in many other cases, our separate national interests can best be pursued by a sober consideration of the world interest. We will not reduce our defenses below the level I consider essential to our national security. A strong America is essential to the cause of peace today. Until we have the kind of agreements we can rely on, we shall remain strong. But America's power will always be used for building a peace, never for breaking it only for defending freedom, never for destroying it. America's strength will be, as it must be, second to none; but the strength that this Nation is proudest of is the strength of our determination to create a peaceful world. We all know how every town or city develops a sense of community when its citizens come together to meet a common need. The common needs of the world today, about which there can be no disagreement or conflict of national interest, are plain to see. We know that we must act as one world in restoring the world's environment, before pollution of the seas and skies overwhelms every nation. We know we must stop the flow of narcotics; we must counter the outbreaks of hijacking and kidnaping; we must share the great discoveries about the oceans and outer space. The United States is justly proud of the lead it has taken in working within the United Nations, and within the NATO alliance, to come to grips with these problems and with these opportunities. Our work here is a beginning, not only in coping with the new challenges of technology and modern life but of developing a worldwide sense of community that will ease tension, reduce suspicion, and thereby promote the process of peace. That process can only flourish in a climate of mutual respect. We can have that mutual respect with our friends, without dominating them or without letting them down. We can have that mutual respect with our adversaries, without compromising our principles or weakening our resolve.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressaboutsecondannualforeignpolicyreportthecongress", "title": "Radio Address About Second Annual Foreign Policy Report to the Congress.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-about-second-annual-foreign-policy-report-the-congress", "publication_date": "25-02-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2986, "text": "President, it is an honor and a pleasure to welcome you on your first official visit to the United States. You and all the people of Mali are good friends of the United States. In addition to deeply appreciating your support on international issues, we admire Mali as a country where people of different ethnic and religious backgrounds respect each other and live together in peace. You and your country have also courageously embarked on an economic reform program. As a result, Mali has been one of the major aid recipients in Africa, and we are pleased to have been able to assist you with this program. President, we are also pleased by your visit because you represent not only Mali but also the Organization of African Unity, of which you were recently elected chairman. And we ask you to accept our congratulations on your election to this important post. Earlier this year, the OAU celebrated its 25th anniversary. During its history, the OAU has played a vital role in resolving regional conflicts in Africa and has helped African countries to work together to solve problems and promote economic development. Under your leadership, Mr. President, I am confident the OAU will continue with these crucial activities. You have already demonstrated your interest in helping to promote regional settlements in southern Africa and the western Sahara. We hope the OAU can play an even more active role in solving those regional problems and play a key role in promoting development in Africa by encouraging economic reform and cooperation. Bolokoni kelen te bele ta-One finger cannot lift a rock. I think this proverb expresses perfectly the goal and the strength of the Organization of African Unity. And we wish you and the OAU great success in working together to achieve common goals during your time as chairman and throughout the OAU's next 25 years. President, we look forward to talking with you over the next few days, not only about bilateral concerns and African regional issues but about concerns we share in other parts of the world. For Africa, I believe-which represents nearly one-third of the member nations of the United Nations-truly has come of age as a participant in the international arena. Let me say again how pleased we are to welcome you to the United States. We wish you an enjoyable and profitable visit. Thank you, and God bless you. President, I should like on behalf of my delegation and my own name to express my very sincere thanks to you for the kind invitation extended to us to visit this great nation, the United States of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthewelcomingceremonyforpresidentmoussatraoremali", "title": "Remarks at the Welcoming Ceremony for President Moussa Traore of Mali", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-welcoming-ceremony-for-president-moussa-traore-mali", "publication_date": "06-10-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2987, "text": "Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to make some fairly brief comments today about the situation in Kosovo and the humanitarian issue, and also about the good news today we received on the domestic economy. Let me make the economic remarks first, and then I will talk about Kosovo and refer to the folks from the administration who are here to my right. As I think all of you know by now, it was reported today that last month the unemployment rate in the United States dropped to 4.2 percent, the lowest in this long expansion and the lowest monthly unemployment rate the United States has enjoyed since 1970. This is also an expansion that is widening the circle of opportunity. We had, among other things in this last monthly report, the lowest Hispanic unemployment rate ever recorded. Now we know also that real wages went up last year at the highest rate in two decades. Now, these economic indicators are more than just economic indicators; they mean wider opportunity and a better chance for millions of Americans to have stronger families and give their children a better chance. It is a reminder of the gains we have made because we have done the right things economically for the long run. And now we must act to extend that prosperity. That means, among other things, we have to be very, very smart about how we deal with the question of the surplus. In the coming months, I will continue to insist that a substantial portion of the surplus-the majority-as I have outlined since the State of the Union, be set aside in a way that will save Social Security and Medicare and will enable us to pay down the debt, to keep interest rates low, to keep investment high, to keep this economy going. I hope that today this good news on unemployment will remind us of how we got here and not make us forget how we got here. Now, let me say a few words about Kosovo, and in particular, the humanitarian situation. Hattie Babbitt, the Deputy USAID Administrator; Julia Taft, the Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration; General John McDuffie, the Chairman's Director for Logistics of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and Eric Schwartz, who is our Director for Multilateral and Humanitarian Affairs at the NSC. The humanitarian situation, as all of you know, remains grave in Kosovo. Since last year, nearly one in three people there have been pushed from their homes. I met this morning with representatives of humanitarian organizations that are leading relief efforts in the area. They are doing courageous work under difficult circumstances.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleconomyandkosovarrefugeesandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on the National Economy and Kosovar Refugees and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-economy-and-kosovar-refugees-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "02-04-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2988, "text": "We want to support them in every way we can. I can tell you that I was very impressed that they reported that the refugees coming out strongly support the action that NATO has taken and clearly understand that that action did not provoke the attempt to remove them from their homes, that that is part of an operation that has been going on since last year, that there were 40,000 troops and nearly 300 tanks-Serbian troops and tanks-massed in and around Kosovo at the time the peace talks in France broke up. And they are quite clear that what has happened to them was what was planned for quite a long while. And I appreciate the support-and the great difficulty of maintaining it-of these people who have suffered so much. Now, what are we doing about this? This week I authorized an additional $50 million in emergency aid to augment our contributions to the UNHCR and to the other relief organizations and to ensure that our military can do more to help them get aid to the people in need. Today NATO agreed that its forces in Macedonia should support the relief effort there by providing transport, shelter, and logistical support. While many people are arriving in neighboring countries, and Macedonia and Albania are especially burdened, we are able to provide help there-although we need more countries to join us in providing help there. We must be increasingly concerned about the plight of displaced people who are actually trapped inside Kosovo and are under attack or certainly vulnerable to attack by Serbian forces. That is why our airstrikes are now increasingly focused on military targets there. There is no doubt that what Mr. Milosevic wants to do is to keep the land of Kosovo and rid it of its people. We cannot let that happen with impunity. I said yesterday in Virginia to our troops, and I want to say again, we must be determined; we must be persistent; we must be patient if we expect to see this mission through. And I am absolutely determined to do that. We have to make sure that Mr. Milosevic pays a heavy price for this policy of repression. We have to seriously diminish his capacity to maintain that policy. Ultimately, we want to make it possible for the victims to return home, to live in security, and enjoy self-government. Let me also reaffirm what I said yesterday about the three ENTITY infantrymen who were seized on Wednesday as they were carrying out a completely peaceful mission in Macedonia.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleconomyandkosovarrefugeesandexchangewithreporters", "title": "Remarks on the National Economy and Kosovar Refugees and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-economy-and-kosovar-refugees-and-exchange-with-reporters", "publication_date": "02-04-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2989, "text": "As I am sure most of you realize, this is an historic occasion not only because of the visit that the President of the Republic of Korea is paying to the United States in an official capacity--because this is the first time in this administration and probably in any administration that a state dinner is being given by the President of the United States for the head of the government of another State, in this case the Republic of Korea, and I am honored that it is in my own State of California and here in the great city of San Francisco. We have tried to create to an extent the atmosphere which you would find in the White House. The President was pointing out that when he was at the White House at a state dinner there that the audience was not as large, because only 110 could be seated at a White House state dinner. The wines are from California, the record will show. The flowers are from California, and much of the audience is from California. But the Marine Orchestra, which for 100 years has been the President's orchestra in the White House, was brought from Washington, and the Strolling Strings from the ENTITY came from Washington. We brought them here because we want you to hear them, because one of mine and my wife's most pleasant memories and fondest memories of Korea was in the year 1953 when we became acquainted with the great love of music of the Korean people. Tonight, in attempting to bring to those in this audience who come from California and all over the Nation something of the feeling of Korea that I have and that l believe the people of the United States do have and should have so they will know the facts, I would like to speak, not simply in my capacity as head of state and head of government, officially welcoming another head of state and head of government, whose friendship we value, but I would like to speak from the hearts of all of the American people to the people of Korea. And I would like to tell this audience what Korea means, what it means to me, what I think it means to America and to the world. Korea, first, is a land much like California, a thousand miles of mountains and rivers and valleys. Korea is a land which is very varied in its climate, and in its physical conditions. Korea, to many in the United States, means a war, a war that was difficult, a war that cost casualties, a war that was controversial.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandpresidentparkstatedinnersanfrancisco", "title": "Toasts of the President and President Park at a State Dinner in San Francisco", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-president-park-state-dinner-san-francisco", "publication_date": "21-08-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2990, "text": "But we should think of Korea tonight in a different sense, because as President Park has often reminded us each time he comes to the United States, he speaks of a different Korea. One, it means courage. In all of the world, and I have been to most of the countries of the world, there are no people more courageous than the people of Korea. They proved their courage fighting for their own freedom in a war that ended 16 years ago. They are proving it by fighting alongside the persons of the United States and those of South Vietnam and other countries in the war in Vietnam with 50,000 Koreans there. And they prove it by maintaining one of the largest armed forces in the world in order to meet the threat which is posed against them in the north. And this kind of courage Americans admire. Korea means courage, therefore, to us. Korea also means friendship and alliance in the deepest sense, not the friendship and alliance simply of words, but the friendship and alliance which goes beyond that, and which involves cooperation not just in a war in Vietnam, but in building the new collective arrangements in Asia, which are so important to peace in the Pacific. And as all of the people in this audience, particularly from California, will realize. peace in the Pacific is essential if we are going to have peace in the world. Because we must remember that the wars that we have been engaged in in the last quarter of a century on three occasions came from the Pacific. But, finally, Korea today means something else that we need to be reminded of. It means self-reliance. It means self-respect. It means independence. You see it in the faces of the Korean people when you go to that country. You see it in the faces of that wonderful children's choir, the orphans' choir, when they come to America and sing so beautifully that the tears come to your eyes when you think of what they have been through, and yet how happy they can be despite all that. And you see it when you realize, as I realized on every occasion today, that Korea is a country which has received aid from the United States, but a country that wants to develop the ability to stand on its own feet. On occasion after occasion, the President and Mrs. Park have expressed the appreciation of the Korean people for the aid they have received from the United States. We have aided over 100 countries over the last 25 years. Some of those programs have been successes. More of them have been failures.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandpresidentparkstatedinnersanfrancisco", "title": "Toasts of the President and President Park at a State Dinner in San Francisco", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-president-park-state-dinner-san-francisco", "publication_date": "21-08-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2994, "text": "It is great to be in the State capitol. Being here today calls to mind the first time I spoke on the senate floor, almost 20 years ago. And I was passionate, idealistic, ready to make a difference. And I probably needed a little dose of reality when I first arrived. So one day, I rose to speak about a bill. And I thought I'd made some compelling points, with irrefutable logic. And I was about to sit down, feeling pretty good about myself, when Pate Philip sauntered over to my desk. Now, for the-there are some young people here, so for those of you who do not remember, Pate Philip was the senate majority leader at the time. He was a marine, and a big shock of white hair, stomped-chomped on a cigar, was so politically incorrect that it is you do not even know how to describe it. But he always treated me well. Kid, that was a pretty good speech. In fact, I think you changed a lot of minds. But you did not change any votes. So that was my first lesson in humility. The next came when I presented my own first bill. It was a simple piece of legislation that would make it a lot easier for Illinois manufacturers to hire graduating community college students. I did not know any serious opposition, so I asked for a vote. And what I got was a good hazing. Could you correctly pronounce your name for me? I am having a little trouble with it. And being in my early thirties at the time, I was a little cocky. And he went on to complain that my predecessor's name was easier to pronounce than mine, that I did not have cookies at my desk like she did, how would I ever expect to get any votes without having cookies on my desk. I definitely urge a no vote, he said, whatever your name is. And for the next several minutes, the senate debated on whether I should add an apostrophe to my name for the Irish or whether the fact that Obama ends in a vowel meant that I actually belonged to the Italians--and just how many trees had had to die to print this terrible, miserable bill, anyway. And I said, If I survive this event, I will be eternally grateful and consider this a highlight of my legal and legislative career. And I asked for a vote.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2995, "text": "And initially, the tote board showed that it was going down, but at the last minute it flipped, and my bill passed. But I was duly reminded that I was a freshman in the minority. And I want to thank all my former colleagues in both chambers for not letting me forget it. Now, to be a rookie in the minority party, as I was, is not much fun in any legislature. And we were called mushrooms, because we were kept in the dark and fed a lot of manure. But one benefit of being in such a position-not being invited into the meetings where the big deals were being made-is that I had a lot of time to get to know my colleagues. And many of us were away from our families, and so we became friends. We went to fish fries together. And we'd go to union halls. We'd play in golf scrambles. We had a great bipartisan poker game at the Illinois Manufacturers' Association. Boro Reljic would host, and folks like Dave Luechtefeld and Terry Link, others, would join in. We'd eat downstairs, and I cannot say I miss the horseshoes. But away from the glare of TV or the tweets or the GIFs of today's media, what we discovered was that despite our surface differences-Democrats and Republicans, downstate hog farmers, inner-city African Americans, suburban businesspeople, Latinos from Pilsen or Little Village-despite those differences, we actually had a lot in common. We cared about our communities. We cared about our families. We cared about America. We fought hard for our positions. We voted against each other all the time. And party lines held most of the time. But those relationships, that trust we'd built meant that we came at each debate assuming the best in one another and not the worst. I was reminiscing with Christine Radogno; we came in in the same class. And we were on opposite sides of most issues, but I always trusted her and believed that she was a good person. And if we had a bill that we might be able to work together on, it was a pleasure to work with her on. Or Dave Syverson, who-we worked together on the Public Health and Welfare Committee, and we got some important work done that made a difference in people's lives. And we did not call each other idiots or Fascists who were trying to destroy America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2996, "text": "Because then we'd have to explain why we were playing poker or having a drink with an idiot or a Fascist who was trying to destroy America. And that respect gave us room for progress. And after I'd served here for 6 years, my party finally gained the majority. Emil Jones became the president of the senate. And by then, I had made some friends across the aisle, like Kirk Dillard, who I believe is here today, and we were able to pass the first serious ethics reform in 25 years. working closely with law enforcement, who knew by then that we cared about cops and sheriffs and prosecutors, and working with folks like John Cullerton, we passed Illinois' first racial profiling law, which was good for police officers and minority communities. And because someone like my friend, John Bouman, who worked at the Shriver Center on Poverty Law, helped us build coalitions across the State, including with business, and was able to then reach out to Republicans, we were able to increase tax credits for the working poor and expand health insurance to children in need. And we would not bend on our most deeply held principles, but we were willing to forge compromises in pursuit of a larger goal. We could fight like heck on one issue and then shake hands on the next. Somebody like Jesse White was able to travel around the State and people did not even know what party he was necessarily from because he brought so much joy with the Tumblers and the work that they were doing. So I want you to know that this is why I have always believed so deeply in a better kind of politics, in part because of what I learned here in this legislature. a State of small towns and rich farmland and the world's greatest city; a microcosm of America, where Democrats and Republicans and Independents and good people of every ethnicity and every faith shared certain bedrock values. I just saw a story the other day showing that if you rank all 50 States across categories like education levels and household incomes and race and religion, the one State that most closely mirrors America as a whole is Illinois, this State. And I learned by talking to your constituents that if you were willing to listen, it was possible to bridge a lot of differences. I learned that most Americans are not following the ins and outs of the legislature carefully, but they instinctively know that issues are more complicated than rehearsed sound bites, that they play differently in different parts of the State and in the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2997, "text": "They understand the difference between realism and idealism, the difference between responsibility and recklessness. They have the maturity to know what can and cannot be compromised and to admit the possibility that the other side just might have a point. And it convinced me that if we just approached our national politics the same way the American people approach their daily lives-at the workplace, at the Little League game, at church or the synagogue, with common sense and a commitment to fair play and basic courtesy-that there is no problem that we could not solve together. And that was the vision that guided me when I first ran for the United States Senate. That is the vision I shared when I said we are more than just a collection of red States and blue States, but we are the United States of America. And that vision is why, 9 years ago today, on the steps of the Old State Capitol just a few blocks from here, I announced my candidacy for President. Now, over these 9 years, I want you to know, my faith in the generosity and the fundamental goodness of the American people has been rewarded and affirmed over and over and over again. I have seen it in the determination of autoworkers who had been laid off, but were sure that they could once again be part of a great, iconic Americans industry. I have seen it in the single mom who goes back to school even as she is working and looking after her kids because she wants a better life for that next generation. I have seen it the vision and risk-taking of small-businessmen. I have seen it time and time again in the courage of our troops. But it is been noted often by pundits that the tone of our politics has not gotten better since I was inaugurated-in fact, it is gotten worse; that there is still this yawning gap between the magnitude of our challenges and the smallness of our politics. Which is why, in my final State of the Union Address, and in the one before that, I had to acknowledge that one of my few regrets is my inability to reduce the polarization and meanness in our politics. I was able to be part of that here and yet could not translate it the way I wanted to into our politics in Washington. And people ask me why I have devoted so much time to this topic. And I tell them it is not just because I am ENTITY and the polarization and the gridlock are frustrating to me.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2998, "text": "The fact is we have gotten a heck of a lot done these past 7 years, despite the gridlock. We saved the economy from a depression. We brought back an auto industry from the brink of collapse. We helped our businesses create 14 million new jobs over the past 6 years. We cut the unemployment rate from 10 percent to 4.9 percent. We covered nearly 18 million more Americans with health insurance. We ignited a clean energy revolution. We got bin Laden. We brought the vast majority of our troops home to their families. There is no doubt, America is better off today than when I took office. So I-see, I did not want this to be a State of Union speech--where we have the standing up and the sitting down. Come on, guys, you know better than that. I mean, I have got a serious point to make here. I have got a serious point to make here because this is part of the issue, right? We have an importation of our politics nationally and on cable and talk radio, and it seeps into everything. The point I am trying to make is, I care about fixing our politics not only because I am ENTITY today or because some of my initiatives have been blocked by Congress. That happens to every President, happens to every Governor, happens to everybody who participates-anybody who participates in a democracy. You are not going to get a hundred percent of what you want all the time. The reason this is important to me is, next year, I will still hold the most important title of all, and that is the title of citizen. And as an American citizen, I understand that our progress is not inevitable. It must be fought for and won by all of us, with the kind of patriotism that our fellow Illinoisan, Adlai Stevenson, once described not as a short, frenzied outburst of emotion, but the tranquil and steady dedication of a lifetime. It requires citizenship and a sense that we are one. And today, that kind of citizenship is threatened by a poisonous political climate that pushes people away from participating in our public life. It turns folks off. It discourages them, makes them cynical. And when that happens, more powerful and extreme voices fill the void. And that is how we end up with only a handful of lobbyists setting the agenda. That is how we end up with policies that are detached from what working families face every day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2999, "text": "That is how we end up with the well connected who publicly demand that government stay out of their business, but then whisper in its ear for special treatment. to give everybody a shot in a changing economy, to keep America safe and strong in an uncertain world, to repair our climate before it threatens everything we leave for our kids. So that is what is on my mind as I come back to Illinois today. What can we do, all of us, together, to try to make our politics better? And I speak to both sides on this. Because all of you know, it could be better, and all of you would feel prouder of the work you do if it was better. So, first, let us put to rest a couple of myths about our politics. One is the myth that the problems with our politics are new. American politics has never been particularly gentle or high minded, especially not during times of great change. As I mentioned when I visited a mosque in Maryland last week, Thomas Jefferson's opponent tried to stir things up by suggesting he was a Muslim. So I am in good company. But that is nothing compared to the newspaper which warned that if Jefferson were elected, murder, robbery, rape, adultery, and incest will be openly taught and practiced. His Vice President, Aaron Burr, literally killed Alexander Hamilton in a duel. I do not want to even tell you what Andrew Jackson's opponents said about his momma. Lincoln, himself, was routinely called weak, wishy-washy, a yahoo, an unshapely man, the obscene ape of Illinois, and my favorite, a facetious pettifogger. I do not know what that means--but it sounds insulting. So, comparatively speaking, today is not that bad, as long as you have got a thick skin. There is also the notion sometimes that our politics are broken because politicians are significantly more corrupt or beholden to big money than they used to be. Now, there is no doubt that lobbyists still have easier access to the halls of power than the average American. There is a lot of work that we need to do to make sure that the system works for ordinary people and not just the well connected. That is true at the Federal level; that is true at the State level. Folks are not entirely wrong when they feel as if the system too often is rigged and does not address their interests.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3000, "text": "But, relative to the past, listen, I am confident we have got enough rules and checks to prevent anyone in my Cabinet from siphoning whiskey tax revenue into their own pockets like President Grant's administration did. patronage, bribery, and money laundering. It is not as easy as it was to whip up tens of thousands of phantom votes, whether in Chicago or South Texas. From the Teapot Dome to Watergate, history tells us we should always be vigilant and demand that our public servants follow the highest ethical standards. But the truth is that the kind of corruption that is blatant, of the sort that we saw in the past, is much less likely in today's politics. So we do not want to romanticize the past and think somehow it is a difference in the people being elected. And it also is not true that today's issues are inherently more polarizing than the past. Remember, we endured 4 years of civil war that resulted in hundreds of thousands of dead Americans. This country was divided on a fundamental question. The fault lines of Vietnam, the culture wars of the sixties-they still echo into our politics a half-century later. We have been arguing since our founding over the proper size and role of government; the meaning of individual freedom and equality; over war and peace and the best way to give all of our citizens opportunity. And these are important debates that everybody should join, with all the rigor that a free people require. And so it is important for us to understand that the situation we find ourselves in today is not somehow unique or hopeless. We have always gone through periods when our democracy seems stuck. And when that happens, we have to find a new way of doing business. We are in one of those moments. We have got to build a better politics, one that is less of a spectacle and more of a battle of ideas, one that is less of a business and more of a mission, one that understands the success of the American experiment rests on our willingness to engage all our citizens in this work. And that starts by acknowledging that we do have a problem. And we all know it. What is different today is the nature and the extent of the polarization. How ideologically divided the parties are is brought about by some of the same long-term trends in our politics and our culture.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3001, "text": "A great sorting has taken place that drove Southern conservatives out of the Democratic Party and Northern moderates out of the Republican Party, so you do not have within each party as much diversity of views. And you have got a fractured media. Some folks watch FOX News; some folks read the Huffington Post. And we can choose our own facts. We do not have a common basis for what is true and what is not. I mean, if I listened to some of these conservative pundits, I would not vote for me either. I sound like a scary guy. You have got advocacy groups that, frankly, sometimes benefit from keeping their members agitated as much as possible, assured of the righteousness of their cause. Unlimited dark money-money that nobody knows where it is coming from, who is paying-drowns out ordinary voices. And far too many of us surrender our voices entirely by choosing not to vote. And this polarization is pervasive, and it seeps into our society to the point where surveys even suggest that many Americans would not want their kids to date someone from another political party. Now, some of us do not want our kids dating, period. But this is not just an abstract problem for political scientists. This has real impact on whether or not we can get things done together. This has a real impact on whether families are able to support themselves or whether the homeless are getting shelter on a cold day. It makes a difference as to the quality of the education that kids are getting. But so often, these debates-particularly in Washington, but increasingly in State legislatures-become abstractions. It is as if there are no people involved, it is just cardboard cutouts and caricatures of positions. It encourages the kind of ideological fealty that rejects any compromise as a form of weakness. And in a big, complicated democracy like ours, if we cannot compromise, by definition, we cannot govern ourselves. I am proud of that. I make no bones about it. I am going to make another point here. I believe that people should have access to health care. I believe they should have access to a good public education. I believe that workers deserve a higher minimum wage. I believe that collective bargaining is critical to the prospects of the middle class and that pensions are vital to retirement, as long as they are funded responsibly. I appreciate that, but I want to make this larger point. I believe we are judged by how we care for the poor and the vulnerable.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3002, "text": "I believe that in order to live up to our ideals, we have to continually fight discrimination in all its forms. I believe in science and the science behind things like climate change and that a transition to cleaner sources of energy will help preserve the planet for future generations. I believe in a tough, smart foreign policy that says America will never hesitate to protect our people and our allies, but that we should use every element of our power and never rush to war. I believe that there are a lot of Republicans who share many of these same values, even though they may disagree with me on the means to achieve them. I think sometimes my Republican colleagues make constructive points about outdated regulations that may need to be changed or programs that, even though well intended, did not always work the way they were supposed to. And where I have got an opportunity to find some common ground, that does not make me a sellout to my own party. So trying to find common ground does not make me less of a Democrat or less of a progressive. And the same applies to a Republican who, heaven forbid, might agree with me on a particular issue or if I said America is great, decided to stand during a State of Union. You are not going to get in trouble. Because folks are worried, well, I am going to get yelled at by you, or this blogger is going to write that, or this talk show host is going to talk about me, and suddenly, I have got a challenger, and calling me a RINO or a not a real progressive. So when I hear voices in either party boast of their refusal to compromise as an accomplishment in and of itself, I am not impressed. All that does is prevent what most Americans would consider actual accomplishments, like fixing roads, educating kids, passing budgets, cleaning our environment, making our streets safe. No, it cuts both ways, guys. The point is, it cuts both ways. Our Founders trusted us with the keys to this system of self-government. Our politics is the place where we try to make this incredible machinery work, where we come together to settle our differences and solve big problems, do big things together that we could not possibly do alone. And our Founders anchored all this in a visionary Constitution that separates power and demands compromise, precisely to prevent one party or one wing of a party or one faction or some powerful interest from getting a hundred percent of its way.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3003, "text": "tax cuts without cuts to services- Everything will be fine, but we will not spend any money ; war without shared sacrifice- We are going to be tough, but do not worry, it will be fine ; union bashing or corporate bashing without acknowledging that both workers and businesses make our economy run. That kind of politics means that the supporters will be perennially disappointed. It only adds to folks' sense that the system is rigged. It is one of the reasons why we see these big electoral swings every few years. Now, I do not pretend to have all the answers to this. If I did, I would have already done them through an executive action. A sense of humor is also helpful. But I do want to offer some steps that we can take that I believe would help reform our institutions and move our system in a way that helps reflect our better selves. And these are not particularly original, but I just want to go ahead and mention them. First is to take-or at least reduce some of the corrosive influence of money in our politics. Now, this year, just over 150 families-150 families-have spent as much on the Presidential race as the rest of America combined. Today, a couple of billionaires in one State can push their agenda, dump dark money into every State-nobody knows where it is coming from-mostly used on these dark ads, everybody is kind of dark and the worst picture possible. And there is some ominous voice talking about how they are destroying the country. And they spend this money based on some ideological preference that really is disconnected to the realities of how people live. They are not that concerned about the particulars of what is happening in a union hall in Galesburg and what folks are going through trying to find a job. They are not particularly familiar with what is happening at a VFW post-- They have not heard personally from farmers outside of the Quads and what they are going through. Those are the voices that should be outweighing a handful of folks with a lot of money. I am not saying the folks with a lot of money should have no voice; I am saying they should not be able to drown out everybody else's. And that is why I disagree with the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision. I do not believe that money is speech or that political spending should have no limits or that it should not be disclosed. I still support a constitutional amendment to set reasonable limits on financial influence in America's elections.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3004, "text": "But amending the Constitution is an extremely challenging and time-consuming process, as it should be. So we are going to have to come up with more immediate ways to reduce the influence of money in politics. There are a lot of good proposals out there, and we have to work to find ones that can gain some bipartisan support, because a handful of families and hidden interests should not be able to bankroll elections in the greatest democracy on Earth. The second step towards a better politics is rethinking the way that we draw our congressional districts. And now, let me point this out. I want to point this out, because this is another case of cherry-picking here. This tends to be popular in States where Democrats have been drawing the lines among Republicans and less popular among Republicans where they control drawing the lines. So nobody's-let us be very clear here, nobody has got clean hands on this thing. Nobody has got clean hands on this thing. The fact is, today, technology allows parties in power to precision-draw constituencies so that the opposition's supporters are packed into as few districts as possible. That is why our districts are shaped like earmuffs or spaghetti. And it is also how one party can get more seats even when it gets fewer votes. And while this gerrymandering may insulate some incumbents from a serious challenge from the other party, it also means that the main thing those incumbents are worried about are challengers from the most extreme voices in their own party. That is what is happened in Congress. The House of Representatives there, there may be a handful-less than 10 percent-of districts that are even competitive at this point. So if you are a Republican, all you are worried about is what somebody to your right is saying about you, because you know you are not going to lose a general election. Same is true for a lot of Democrats. So our debates move away from the middle, where most Americans are, towards the far ends of the spectrum. And that polarizes us further. Now, this is something we have the power to fix. And once the next census rolls around and we have the most up-to-date picture of America's population, we should change the way our districts are drawn. In America, politicians should not pick their voters; voters should pick their politicians. And this needs to be done across the Nation, not just in a select few States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3005, "text": "Now, the more Americans use their voice and participate, the less captive our politics will be to narrow constituencies. No matter how much undisclosed money is spent, no matter how many negative ads are run, no matter how unrepresentative a district is drawn, if everybody voted, if a far larger number of people voted, that would overcome in many ways some of these other institutional barriers. And that is why a third step towards a better politics is making voting easier, not harder, and modernizing it for the way that we live now. You liked the redistricting thing, but not letting people vote. I should get some applause on that too. Look- . Listen, 3 years ago, I set up a bipartisan Commission to improve the voting experience in America. It had the election lawyers from my campaign and from Mitt Romney's campaign. They got together outside of the context of immediate politics. And I actually want to thank this Assembly for moving to adopt some of its recommendations. Thanks to the good work of my dear friend, Senator Don Harmon, and many of you, there is a new law going into effect this year that will allow Illinoisans to register and vote at the polls on election day. It expands early voting, something that makes it a lot easier for working folks and busy parents to go vote. If you are a single mom, and you have got to take public transportation to punch a clock, work round the clock, get home, cook dinner on a Tuesday in bad weather, that is tough. Why would we want to make it so that she could not do it on a Saturday or a Sunday? How is that advancing our democracy? So this law will make a difference. I am proud of my home State for helping to lead the way. In 2012 and 2014, the States with the highest voter turnout all had same-day registration. Reduce these barriers to voting. And I'd encourage this Assembly to take the next step. Senator Manar and Representative Gabel have bills that would automatically register every eligible citizen to vote when they apply for a driver's license. Democrats, Republicans, Independents, seniors, folks with disabilities, the men and women of our military. And as one of your constituents, I think you should pass that legislation right away. I think the Governor should sign it without delay. Let us make the Land of Lincoln a leader in voter participation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3006, "text": "Let us set the pace, encourage other States across the country to follow our lead, making automatic voter registration the new norm across America. Now, just during the course of this talk, it is been interesting to watch the dynamics, obviously. In part because so much of our politics now is just designed for short-term, tactical gain. If you think that having more voters will hurt you on election day, then suddenly, you are not interested in participation. And if you think that the gerrymandering is helping you instead of hurting you, then you are not for those proposals. We get trapped in these things. If we were setting up a set of rules ahead of time, and you did not know where you stood, which party you were going to be in, if you did not have all the data and the poll numbers to tell you what is going to give you an edge or not, you'd set up a system that was fairer. You'd encourage everybody to be part of it. That is what we learned in our civics books. The fact that we cannot do that, that brings me to my last point, which is, even as we change the way system works, we also have a responsibility to change the way that we, as elected officials and as citizens, work together. when the system is fair, but also when we build a culture that is trying to make it work. Recently, I have been thinking a lot about something a friend of mine, Deval Patrick, once said to his constituents when he was Governor of Massachusetts. He said, Insist from us and from each other a modicum of civility as the condition for serving you. This is what he told voters. Insist on us having a modicum of civility. I think that is something that all of us, as Americans, have to insist from each other. Our children are watching what we do. They do not just learn it in school, they learn it by watching us, the way we conduct ourselves, the way we treat each other. If we lie about each other, they learn it is okay to lie. If we make up facts and ignore science, then they do not -they just think it is just their opinion that matters. If they see us insulting each other like school kids, then they think, well, I guess that is how people are supposed to behave.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3007, "text": "The way we respect-or do not -this-each other as citizens will determine whether or not the hard, frustrating, but absolutely necessary work of self-government continues. And I have got daughters that are getting older now, and one of the most important things about being a parent, I think, is them just seeing what you do not when you are out in public, not when you are dealing with somebody important, but just how do you do-how do you treat people generally. I want to live up to their expectations. And in that same way, I want this democracy to live up to the people's expectations. We cannot move forward if all we do is tear each other down. And the political incentives, as they are today, too often rewards that kind of behavior. That is what gets attention. So it will require some courage just to act the way our parents taught us to act. It should not , but in this political environment, apparently, it does. We have got to insist to do better from each other, for each other. Rather than reward those who'd disenfranchise any segment of America, we have got to insist that everybody arm themselves with information and facts and that they vote. If 99 percent of us voted, it would not matter how much the 1 percent spends on our elections. Rather than reward the most extreme voices or the most divisive language or who is best at launching schoolyard taunts, we should insist on a higher form of political discourse in our common life, one based on empathy and respect, which does not mean you abandon principle. Rather than paint those who disagree with us as motivated by malice, to suggest that any of us lack patriotism, we can insist, as Lincoln did, that we are not enemies, but friends; that our fellow Americans are not only entitled to a different point of view, but that they love this country as much as we do. Rather than reward a 24/7 media that so often thrives on sensationalism and conflict, we have to stand up and insist, no, reason matters, facts matter, issues are complicated. When folks just make stuff up, they cannot go unchallenged. And that is true for Democrats if you hear a Democrat make something up, and that is true for a Republican if you see a Republican cross that line. that it can be a genuine victory that means progress for all sides.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3008, "text": "And rather than preventing our kids from dating people in other parties-well, I may have issues about dating, generally--but we can trust that we have raised our kids to do the right thing and to look at the qualities of people's character, not some label attached to them. And maybe, most of all, whenever someone begins to grow cynical about our politics or believes that their actions cannot make a difference or it is not worth participating in, we have got to insist-even against all evidence to the contrary-that in fact they can make a difference. And in this job of being a citizen of the United States of America, that is a big deal. Now, Abraham Lincoln was not always the giant that we think of today. He lacked formal schooling. After just one term in Congress, his opposition to the Mexican-American War damaged his reputation so badly, he did not run for reelection. He was denounced as a traitor, a demagogue, an enemy sympathizer. He returned to his law practice and admitted he was losing interest in politics entirely. And then, something happened that shook his conscience. Congress effectively overturned the Missouri Compromise, that flawed and fragile law that had prohibited slavery in the North and legalized it in the South, but left the question ultimately unsettled. And stunned by this news, Lincoln said he'd been roused as he had never been before over what it meant for America's future. And so, here in Springfield, at the State fair, he got back in the game, and he delivered the first of his great antislavery speeches to a crowd of thousands. And over the next 6 years, even as he lost two more political races, his arguments with Douglas and others shaped the national debate. That is when he uttered those brilliant words on the steps of the Old State Capitol that A house divided against itself cannot stand, that this government cannot endure permanently, half slave, and half free. And through his will and his words and, most of all, his character, he held a nation together, and he helped free a people. And those victories did not solve all of our problems. He would be attacked at times for the compromises he was prepared to make by abolitionists and folks from his own side. It would be 100 years more until the law guaranteed African Americans the equal rights that they had been promised. Even 50 years after that, our march is not yet finished.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheillinoisgeneralassemblyspringfieldillinois", "title": "Remarks to the Illinois General Assembly in Springfield, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-illinois-general-assembly-springfield-illinois", "publication_date": "10-02-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3021, "text": "Ladies and gentlemen, 36 years ago, when President Kennedy came here, he said, The Sun does not always shine in West Virginia, but the people do. Today we have the Sun and the people. Thank you for making Hillary and Chelsea and me feel so welcome. Thank you, Governor Caperton, for being my friend and supporter and for the fine job you have done. Governor Caperton did a lot to put West Virginia on the national map by putting computers in the schools of your children. If you reelect Al Gore and Bill Clinton, in the next 4 years we will hook every one of those classrooms in America and in West Virginia up to the information superhighway, so that all of our children will have world-class education. They are consistent with my own, and they depend upon initiatives like the one that Marilyn just talked about. I want you in the governorship, and we will work together to get West Virginia's unemployment rate down to and below the national average. Thank you, Congressman Wise, for all that you do in Congress and for heading the Democratic Policy Group and putting our party in Congress squarely on the side of raising the minimum wage, increasing educational opportunity, increasing access to health care, and growing the economy for 4 more years. And thank you, Nick Rahall, your Congressman, for all the work he has done to build the infrastructure of our country and this State. You know, if you put the Democrats in the majority in Congress again, Nick Rahall will be chairman of that committee again and can do more good for you. I thank you and Sharon for being such good friends to Hillary and to me. Ladies and gentlemen, I want you to know that when we signed that Kennedy-Kassebaum bill this week, which said to 25 million Americans, you cannot be cut off your health insurance if somebody in your family gets sick, and you cannot lose it if you change jobs-in addition to the sponsors of that bill, the people who were most responsible for bringing it up and hammering it home to the public consciousness were Jay Rockefeller and the First Lady of the United States, because they fought for health care before it was popular. And I want to thank both your Congressman and your Senator and two of our guests who are out here, Senator Wendell Ford and Congressman Mike Ward from Kentucky, who are here with the Governor of Kentucky, Paul Patton, and the former first lady, Phyllis George Brown.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbeginningwhistlestoptourhuntingtonwestvirginia", "title": "Remarks on Beginning a Whistlestop Tour in Huntington, West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-beginning-whistlestop-tour-huntington-west-virginia", "publication_date": "25-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3022, "text": "We thank you all for coming, because when our friends in the opposition tried to pass a budget that would have given us a two-tiered system of Medicare, one for the wealthy and one for the poor; that would have turned away from our historic commitment to health care for families with people with disabilities, for the elderly in nursing homes, for the poorest children in our country; that would have cut our investment in education when we need to spend more and cut our investment in protecting the environment when we need to invest more, and I vetoed it, they upheld my veto. If it had not been for them, none of this would have happened. Let me thank all the other officials who are here. I thank all the State officials who are here, your treasurer; your secretary of state; your attorney general; your agriculture commissioner; your auditor; the president of the senate, Senator Tomlin; your party chair, Chuck Chambers; and former Governor Smith. I thank all of you for coming here. I thank President Cecil Roberts of the UMW for being here. I thank President Wade Gilley of Marshall University. I want to say a special word of thanks to the State of West Virginia for the Chief of Staff to the Secretary of the Treasury, Sylvia Matthews, from Hinton, West Virginia, who is here with me today, one of the brightest and best people in our administration. And I would like to say a special word of gratitude to one woman who is here, Emma Williams. She is the mother of Bill Morton, who was the special assistant to Secretary Ron Brown. And Bill was killed on that plane with Ron, serving our country, helping to grow our economy, standing up for America, and I will always remember and love him for it. Your story, your spirit, that is what we have been fighting for for the last 4 years, more stories like this, people who are down but not out, people who give other people a chance to make something of their lives. And that is what our enterprise community initiative did, working with your mayor here, working with your city council, working with the local business people when you lost that factory. That is the kind of initiative we need to move this country forward. We have got to turn our country around economically, person by person, family by family, town by town. That is what I have tried to do to let enterprise take root in every community in America, every one. More Marilyn Milnes, that is what this election is all about.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbeginningwhistlestoptourhuntingtonwestvirginia", "title": "Remarks on Beginning a Whistlestop Tour in Huntington, West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-beginning-whistlestop-tour-huntington-west-virginia", "publication_date": "25-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3023, "text": "My fellow Americans, 4 years ago I came to you in West Virginia and told you that West Virginia was a lot like my home State of Arkansas. I told you that I believed we were on the verge of the greatest age of possibility in American history, where more of our people would have more chances to live their dreams than ever before but only, only if we found a way to meet the challenges of the 21st century and preserve our timeless values. We had high unemployment, stagnant job growth, wages were leveled or going down for many people, the crime rate was going up. We had a host of social problems that were unaddressed. Our country seemed to be more divided by harsh political rhetoric and just sort of drifting into the future. But I knew that we could turn this around. And I come here to say to you, I am on my way to Chicago. And I am going on a train because I want to see the people like you that I have been working for and fighting for for 4 years and because I want America to see people like Marilyn Milne who are the product of our efforts for the last 4 years and because I want America to know we are on the right track in this country and we are going forward, we are not turning back. Dorothy Slack, 82 years old, who is given 1,300 hours to the Ronald McDonald House; Richard Lowe, who threw the javelin in the Special Olympics; Ocie Lockhart, of only one of 716 athletes of the United States to go to the 1997 Special Olympics in Canada; all the people of Marshall University who bring health care and preventive care to isolated towns and villages of this region. It does take a village to raise a child, help a family, build a community, and lift the country, and you are doing it in West Virginia. I want the American dream of opportunity for all alive for everybody who is responsible enough to work for it. We ought to walk arm in arm, hand in hand, into the future together. And I am determined that we will still be the strongest force for peace and freedom and prosperity in the world. This is still a dangerous world, still a world with untapped opportunities, and America needs to lead the way into the new future we want for the world we want our children to live in. Now, folks, you have heard a lot of this, but I just want you to remember it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbeginningwhistlestoptourhuntingtonwestvirginia", "title": "Remarks on Beginning a Whistlestop Tour in Huntington, West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-beginning-whistlestop-tour-huntington-west-virginia", "publication_date": "25-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3024, "text": "I want to tell you very briefly what we have done, remind you very briefly of what we would not let be done, and talk just a little bit about what we are going to do for the next 4 years. That is mostly what I want to do in Chicago. But I want you to be the vote and the voice and the steps of our moving America forward. Just think of this-you heard about the 10 million new jobs; that is a lot of people. The 10 million new jobs came because, first, we decided we would cut the deficit in half to get interest rates down so people could invest in America again and afford to borrow money for businesses and homes. That is what we had to do. This is the first time that the deficit has gone down all 4 years in a ENTITY's term since the 1840's, before the Civil War. Ask our friends what they say about that. And my opponent and the Speaker of the House led the fight against that move. They said it would wreck the economy and increase the deficit. Well, it produced 10 million jobs and it gave 15 million families a tax cut and it was the right thing to do. It is moving us forward. There are almost 4 1/2 million new homeowners, and 10 million Americans have refinanced their home mortgages at lower interest rates because we got those interest rates down. We did the right thing, and they were wrong to oppose it. Because of the health care bill, 25 million Americans have access to health care. Because of the minimum wage bill, 10 million Americans have a rising wage. Another thing in the minimum wage was that it made 90 percent of the small businesses in this country eligible for a tax cut if they invest more in their businesses, and it made it easier for people like Marilyn to get pensions for herself and her employees, and that is very important, too. Twelve million Americans, working Americans, have been able to take a little time off from work without losing their jobs when there is a baby born or a parent sick because of the Family and Medical Leave Act. Our opponents led the fight against it. It is good for America. The crime rate has come down for 4 years in a row. We are midway through putting those 100,000 police on the street. We have to finish the job. Our opponents last year tried to take back that commitment to 100,000 police. They are trying to restrict it today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbeginningwhistlestoptourhuntingtonwestvirginia", "title": "Remarks on Beginning a Whistlestop Tour in Huntington, West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-beginning-whistlestop-tour-huntington-west-virginia", "publication_date": "25-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3025, "text": "We want people safe on our streets, and we know the policemen will do the job. Help us keep that commitment to America; help us stay after it. We have supported policies that made the air cleaner for 50 million Americans. We cleaned up more toxic waste dumps in 3 years than they did in 12. We defended our country's national parks. We are moving this country in the right direction. We expanded the college loan program so all these students at Marshall and other places could have access to lower cost loans with better repayment terms. And we created a national service program so children could earn their way through college by doing community service. We are moving in the right direction. We are on that right track. And unemployment in West Virginia is 4 points lower than it was 4 years ago. If we keep going at one point a year, it will be 4 percent by the year 2000. I'd like to do it, if you will help me. I want you to remember that. When people say, Why should we support Bill Clinton and Al Gore, tell them what I told you and ask them what their answer is and ask them why they fought it. And I want you to remember that in the pivotal moment of 1995, when they said to Bill Clinton and Al Gore and Jay Rockefeller and Robert Byrd and Bob Wise and Nick Rahall, If you do not take our budget, if you do not walk away from the commitment of health care to the elderly in nursing homes, to families with people with disabilities in them, to the poorest children in this country, if you do not walk away from the commitment to invest in the environment and the education of our children and our future, we are going to shut the Government down, we said, Have at it. We do not stand for blackmail; we stand up for America. Now, the most important thing is, shall we keep going on the right track or turn around? Would you take a U-turn if you were going in the right direction? In the next 4 years, we have got to build on the health care work. We have to make it possible for people who are unemployed to keep their health insurance for at least 6 months when they are unemployed. Their families should not be put on the street without a doctor just because people lose their jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbeginningwhistlestoptourhuntingtonwestvirginia", "title": "Remarks on Beginning a Whistlestop Tour in Huntington, West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-beginning-whistlestop-tour-huntington-west-virginia", "publication_date": "25-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3026, "text": "We have to make the next 2 years of education, the first 2 years of college, just as universal in the next 4 years as a high school education is today, with a tax credit for those 2 years and a tax deduction for all college tuition up to $10,000 a year. And we ought to have the right kind of tax cut. The right kind of tax cut is one that is targeted to people who need it, focused on building strong families and educating people so that they will be more productive, they will grow the economy, they will be stronger, and is paid for in a balanced budget. That is what our tax cut does. Give people tax breaks to go to college, give people tax reductions if they have young children, give people an expanded IRA that they can withdraw from for a first time or health care or education needs, but do not give people a big tax cut that costs over $500 billion that will blow a big hole in the deficit, raise interest rates, raise your mortgage rates, your credit card payments, your car payments, and require even worse cuts than the ones we vetoed last year. I have said a thousand times, but I will say one more time, I know we still have problems. There are still too many people who want work who do not have it. We have got to give all those people that we are saying-on welfare-there is no more guaranteed check anymore-we have got to make a lot more Marilyn Milnes because they are entitled to work if we are going to cut them off a check for their kids. We have got to give them the jobs. We have got to create the jobs. I know there are still people who have worked hard and do not have a pay raise. And we have got to give those folks the education they need and challenge their employers to be responsible when they make a profit to share their income with their employees so we can go forward and grow together. I know that. But I will say again, as I have said over and over and over again since 1991, if we want a country where the American dream is alive for everybody who will work for it, if we want a country where people are coming together, not being divided, if we want a country that is leading the world for peace and freedom and prosperity, we have got to have opportunity for all, responsibility from all, and a sense of community. We are all in this fight for the future together.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbeginningwhistlestoptourhuntingtonwestvirginia", "title": "Remarks on Beginning a Whistlestop Tour in Huntington, West Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-beginning-whistlestop-tour-huntington-west-virginia", "publication_date": "25-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3027, "text": "I appreciate I appreciate your interest in our country. I appreciate your interest in our democracy. I want to thank you for caring about Gracias. As I was saying, I want to thank you for caring about the elections the upcoming elections. It is vitally important that citizens all across our country take their responsibilities seriously and to show up to the polls. Of course, I have got a few suggestions on who those citizens might support, starting with right here in Pennsylvania. It is in Pennsylvania's interests that Jim Gerlach become the next United States Congressman. I say that with confidence, because he is a good, honorable man who is got a good, strong record. People know he is the kind of fellow who does in office that which he says he is going to do. He is got a track record that inspires confidence from people of both political parties, people who do not care about political parties. No, he is the right man for this job, and I want to thank you for supporting him. I say supporting him thanks for showing up. See, I understand how you win elections, and that is when people such as yourself not only go to the polls, but you convince your neighbors to go to the polls. You go to your community centers, your houses of worship, your wherever you go to hang out your coffee shops, and you tell your neighbors about their responsibility. And while you are doing that, you tell your neighbors about Jim and others running for office. And while you are telling them about Jim, you might as well tell them about your next Governor. When you are out rounding up the vote, make sure you round up the vote for Mike Fisher and Jane Earll. I know something about his track record in getting votes. In the year 2000, I was a pretty heavy lift for the ticket, I must confess, here in Pennsylvania. He outpolled me by not 1,000 votes, not tens of thousands of votes, but hundreds of thousands of votes. This is a man who can appeal to people of both parties, because people in Pennsylvania know he can get the job done. No, we are here to thank you for your care about America. I am here to thank you for your participation in the political process. I am here to ask you to turn out the vote. I am here to ask you to do whatever it takes to make sure you crank up a good, healthy vote. It is important for our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3028, "text": "Before I do, I want to recognize a fine United States Senator, and that is Arlen Specter. I am proud that Arlen is here with us today. I appreciate these two Senators a lot. I will tell you one reason I appreciate them, because they understand what it takes to have a good Federal judiciary. I have appointed good people to the bench good, solid citizens who are not only fine lawyers but people who understand their job is not to serve as a legislator but as a judge. We have got plenty of legislators; what we need are good, solid, sound judges. And the record of the United States Senate is abysmal when it comes to confirming my judges; it is a lousy record. If we had more Senators like Specter and Santorum, we would get the judges through. We would have a record for which the Senate could be proud. We need to change the Senate for a lot of reasons, and one of them is to make sure we have got a good, sound Federal judiciary. I appreciate Governor Schweiker for being here. I appreciate his service to the State of Pennsylvania. He has done a really fine job. He has done a good job, and I am proud of his service, and I know he is as well. I appreciate Mark. I am honored you are here today, Mark, and thanks for doing what you did for the good folks of Pennsylvania. I want to thank the members I want to thank the members here from the mighty Pennsylvania congressional delegation. These fine Members of the United States Congress have been steady friends and strong allies, and they represent your State with class and distinction. We have got another candidate on stage who we certainly hope she wins. That would be Melissa Brown, running for the United States Congress. Melissa is running on a lot of issues. One issue she holds dear to her heart, as do I, is medical liability reform. And one of the things we have got to worry about is the affordability of health care and the accessibility of health care. We want to make sure our citizens have got access to health care at reasonable prices. One of the reasons why prices is rising is because of frivolous and junk lawsuits against our medical community. Everybody ought to have access to the courts, and that is vital. People ought to be able to take their claims to the court of law. But the problem is, the scales of justice have tipped way too far one direction.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3029, "text": "There are too many lawsuits which prevent good people from getting their cases heard. There are too many lawsuits which are driving up the cost of medicine. There are too many lawsuits which are driving good doctors out of the practice of medicine. We need medical liability reform. I appreciate you running, Melissa, and I wish you all the best. I want to thank Alan Novak and Bob Asher and all the good folks who are the grassroots activists here in Pennsylvania. I appreciate your care and your concern for our country. Today, unfortunately, you draw you drew the short straw. She sends her best. She is doing great, by the way. She is I am really proud of her. People now have figured out why I asked her to marry me. A lot of people are wondering why she said yes. I love her dearly. I am proud of her. And I want to thank you for your concern for her too. I am concerned about making America a stronger and safer and better place; that is what I am concerned about. I am concerned about making sure that we meet some important goals. One of the most important goals of all is to make sure every child in America gets a good education. That is one of the priorities of Jim Gerlach. We passed good legislation. The legislation challenges what I call the soft bigotry of low expectations. See, Jim understands this philosophy. These Members of Congress do as well, as does Arlen Specter. He knows that in order for us to have a hopeful society, we must as a society set high standards. It does not matter where they go to school. It does not matter if their parents speak English as a first language. We believe in local control of schools. See, we trust the people in Pennsylvania more than we trust the folks in Washington, DC, to chart the path to excellence. We believe you ought to work with your Governors and your school boards to make sure that children get the right curriculum and the right basic education in order to succeed. That is why we believe you have got to trust parents and teachers. We believe in promoting the basics when it comes to subjects such as reading. That is what we believe. If every child can learn, therefore we want to know whether every child is learning, all across our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3030, "text": "So therefore, in return for the largest increase in Federal expenditures for education that was last year Pennsylvania received $1.7 billion from the Federal Government the largest amount of dollars spent, we are now, for the first time, asking the question, Is the money being wisely spent? For the first time, we are beginning to we are saying, Show us whether or not the children of any State, children who are in the districts that receive this money, whether or not they can read and write and add and subtract. We believe that every child in America has the potential, and we want to see whether or not they are learning. And if and if they are, if standards are being met, if our vision that every child can learn is successful, we will praise the teachers. And for those of you who teach, thanks for taking on such a noble cause and working in a noble profession. But as a society, to make sure no child gets left behind, we must be willing to challenge failure, to challenge the status quo. When we find children in schools which will not teach and will not change, we must have the courage as a society to demand something different for our children. No child should be left behind in America. I look forward to welcoming yet another ally in this vision from the State of Pennsylvania, and that ally will be Jim Gerlach. I also know I will have an ally when it comes to dealing with your money. Well, the Government spent this money; the Government spent that money. Anytime somebody is looking for a job and cannot find work means we have got a problem. So long as there are people trying to put bread on the table for their families and they cannot find work, we have got to do everything we can to increase the job base. Therefore, it is important to send people to Congress who understand jobs, understand the role of Government is not to create wealth but an environment in which the small business can grow to be a big business, in which the entrepreneurial flourish entrepreneurial spirit can flourish in America. When times are slow or when the economy is bumping along, one of the ways to make sure that the job base is invigorated is to let people keep more of their own money. See, when you keep more of your own money, you are likely to demand a good or a service. And when you demand a good or a service in this marketplace, somebody is likely to produce the good or a service.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3031, "text": "And when somebody produces the good or a service, somebody is more likely to find work. The tax relief plan came at exactly the right time for our country's economy. Over the next 10 years, the tax relief plan means there will be $58 billion more in Pennsylvania citizens' pockets over 10 years. You get to decide what to do with the money. You get to decide how to spend it. By the way, the marriage penalty is a bad tax. The code ought to encourage marriage, not discourage marriage. That is a savings of $68 billion more money in your pockets if the tax cuts were permanent. Senate rules have it that the tax cuts will not be permanent. That is why this is an issue in this campaign. In order for small businesses to plan, in order to make sure a horrible tax, the death tax I say horrible; it is bad on small businesses; it is bad on farmers; it is bad on ranchers. If you are worried about urban sprawl, you ought to be for the permanent repeal of the death tax, so people are not forced to sell their properties because the Federal Government . For the good of our economy, for the good of job creation, for the good of a stimulative package we need to make sure the tax cuts are permanent. I mean, there is a lot of things we can work on together. We need an energy bill which encourages conservation and renewables but also makes us less dependent on foreign sources of crude oil. We need a terrorism insurance package that will get our hardhats back to work. No, there is a lot Congress can do to make sure that the jobs picture improves for everybody, all across America. I look forward to working with Jim in the United States Congress to make sure that people who want to find work are able to do so, all across the country. And I say that because so long as we love free-dom and we love freedom there is going to be an enemy which hates America. It is hard to explain to your youngsters why somebody would hate us. But you have just got to tell them there are some who have hijacked a great religion. These people do not value life like we do in America. They are nothing but a bunch of cold-blooded killers. They hate freedom; they hate countries which embrace freedom; and therefore, they hate us since we are the beacon for freedom. We love our freedoms, and we will not change. Times have changed in America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3032, "text": "Times have changed after September the 11th. It used to be we thought oceans would protect us. A lot of us growing up said, We do not have to really worry about some of the conflicts overseas. We may be involved, we may not be involved, because we are protected, we are isolated from the harsh realities of some of the killings that were taking place on different continents, so we could pick and choose. We do not have any choice in this new war, see. We learned that the enemy has taken the battlefield to our very own country. My most important job is to protect America. My most important job is to do everything we possibly can to protect innocent life from a group of killers. That is why I have started and stimulated a discussion on Iraq. I wanted the American people to know that there is a new reality which we face, a reality that oceans no longer protect us, the reality that this person in Iraq has killed his own people with weapons of mass destruction, a reality that he has invaded countries, the reality that he has stiffed the United Nations for 11 years. Sixteen different resolutions have been passed calling on this man to disarm. Sixteen times he is ignored world mandates. These are the realities we face, and we must deal with it. I appreciate the Members of the Senate; I appreciate the Members of the House of Representatives for voting overwhelmingly to send with one voice this message that Saddam Hussein must disarm, that the world for the sake of peace, for the sake of peace here at home, for the sake of peace in the Middle East, for the sake of world peace Saddam Hussein must do what he promised. For the sake of having an international body which is effective, the United Nations must make the resolve, must be resolved to deal with this person, must resolve itself to be something more than the League of Nations, must resolve itself to be more than just a debating society, must resolve itself to help keep international peace. It is an important time in our history to determine whether or not we are going to be a nation which is willing to work with others to keep the peace. But if they will not the United Nations cannot make its mind up if Saddam Hussein will not disarm, we will lead a coalition to disarm him for the sake of peace. These are the new realities we face in America, the serious realities that we must deal with for the sake of our children, for the sake of our children's children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3033, "text": "The new reality here at home is to do everything we can to protect the American people from a possible attack. I want to thank you for training a good man named Tom Ridge to be the first Adviser on Homeland Security. He is doing a very good job. I know you are proud of him, and so am I. Our friend has not let us down. One of the things he advised me, along with others in my administration, was that the best way to protect the American people in the long run is to set up a Department of Homeland Security. Let me explain to you why. First of all, you have got to know that there is a lot of good people working a lot of long hours to do everything we can to disrupt, deny any enemy. If we get a hint that somebody's thinking about doing something to us moving, trying to do something to us we are moving. We are absolutely on alert. We are doing everything we can to protect the American people. I appreciate that the House of Representatives moved incredibly quickly on a Department of Homeland Security. They passed a really good measure. It gives us a chance with the homeland security to take over 100 agencies involved with defending the homeland and putting many of their functions under one Department, so that the number one priority of these agencies and/or the good people working in these agencies is your protection. One way to make sure we focus the attention of a scattered group of agencies is to have one agency, so that if need be, cultures can change; if need be, there can be a direct focus. I want to thank Senator Specter's leadership on this issue. He is deeply concerned about the protection of the homeland. He and I have had some quality discussions on this issue. But let me tell you what the problem is in the Senate, from my perspective that the Senate has said, We will give you a Department of Homeland Security, but you have got to pay a price. And the price is, is that we will roll back an important authority that every President since John F. Kennedy has had. And that authority says that I have the ability to suspend certain labor rules for the sake of national security. For the sake of security securing the country, we will not have labor rules get in the way of the President being able to do whatever it takes to protect America. We have got a border which we must enforce.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3034, "text": "We need to know who is coming into America, what they are bringing into America, and if they are leaving when they say they are going to leave America. It is an important function of the Federal Government. You have got your Customs, your INS, and your Border Patrol. Sometimes they have different strategies per sector along the border. They are wearing different uniforms. They have got different cultures. They all share in the responsibility of protecting our border. For the sake of homeland security, this administration and future administrations must have the ability to put the right people at the right place at the right time to protect America. We asked customs agents to wear a radiological detection device to determine whether or not weapons of mass destruction were coming into America. It made sense to us. If you are worried about weapons of mass destruction, wear one of these devices. The head of the working group there said, No, we are not going to have this on a mandatory basis. For the sake of national security, that work rule ought to be suspended. It took 4 months of discussions to determine whether or not customs agents ought to be wearing a radiological detection device. The right to people to organize is very important. But for the sake of national security, the Senate will not take away one of the most precious authorities Presidents since John F. Kennedy has had. I would not have to worry about Jim Gerlach's vote on this issue. The best way to secure America, however, is to hunt the enemy down, one person at a time, and bring them to justice. The best way to protect America is to find these killers where they try to hide and bring them to justice, which exactly is what the United States of America is going to do. And we are making good progress. We are making good progress. Sometimes it is hard to tell it, because this is not the kind of war that we are used to. You used to could count territories seized or tanks destroyed or airplanes knocked out of the sky and say, Gosh, we are making progress. The fleet has been damaged; therefore, we are making progress. These are killers who hide in caves and send youngsters to their suicidal deaths. That is who we are trying to find. They kind of ooch around the dark corners of the world and look out, peep out around the corner in the meantime, send these suicide squads. It does not require a lot of equipment.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3035, "text": "It does not require a lot of money, although we are doing everything we can to cut off their money. But we are making progress. One reason we are making progress is the doctrine that says, Either you are with us, or you are with the enemy it still stands. Our coalition partners understand the stakes. This bombing in Indonesia reminded everybody how dangerous these people can be. They do not care about innocent life. It does not bother them in the least that innocent citizens lose their life. What bothers them, though, is that the United States and our friends and allies are on the hunt. And we are going to stay on the hunt. We are going to get them running, and we are going to keep them running until we bring them to justice. Slowly but surely, we are finding them. Slowly but surely, we are hunting them down, one person at a time. We have probably hauled in or arrested, whatever you want to call it, a couple of thousand. The point is, is that when you combine it all, we have made a fairly good size dent into the Al Qaida terrorist network. The other day a guy named bin al-Shibh popped his head up. He is no longer a problem for the United States of America. It is just the realities of the 21st century. The new kind of war is going to require a patience and determination by this great Nation. We not only remember what took place; we also understand the stakes. We understand our responsibilities. We understand our duty to not only people who live in this country, but because every life matters, we understand our duty elsewhere. And that is to defend freedom. Slowly but surely, we are going to defend, and we are going to defeat this enemy. And it does not matter how long it takes, my fellow Americans. There is not a calendar on my desk that says, well, suchand-such a date, it is time to haul them home; it is time to quit. That is not how we think in America. Tomorrow I am going to sign a defense appropriations bill, one of the largest increase the largest increase since Ronald Reagan was the President, for two reasons two reasons. I want to share with you why I asked for this increase. I want to thank the Senate; I want to thank the House for passing that bill. We are going to send two messages.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3036, "text": "One, anytime we put our troops into harm's way, they deserve the best pay, the best training, and the best possible equipment. That is the very least we owe them and their loved ones. And for those of you who have got loved ones in the military, our military has my complete confidence. There is no finer group of men and women who wear the uniform than the uniform of the United States of America. And the second message we send, it does not matter how long it takes, this country is in for the long haul, that we believe in freedom, that we understand obligations, that we understand that some in the world may blink, but we are not blinking. We know that history has called us into action, and we are going to do everything we can to defend America and to defend the freedoms which we hold dear. There is no question in my mind we are going to succeed. I am an optimist about the future. I am an optimist because I know this that if we remain tough and if we are strong and we continue to speak clearly about that which matters in life, if we hold dear the values of freedom, if we fight terror we can achieve peace. We can achieve peace not only for America; we can achieve peace in parts of the world where some have quit on peace. We can achieve peace in the Middle East, can achieve peace in South Asia. No, the United States has got an opportunity to lead the world toward peace. The enemy hit us. They did not know who they were hitting. They probably thought we'd file a lawsuit or two. They do not understand America. They do not understand our people. They do not understand our courage. They do not understand our drive. They do not understand that we long for peace, but we are tough enough to achieve the peace if we have to be. That is what they do not know. And what they did not also understand is that here at home, the evil done to us is going to lead to a better America is going to lead to a better America. Now, Government can help Government can help have a better America. We have a good education system. We are working hard to achieve that. Medicine has evolved; Medicare is essentially stuck in the past. For the sake of our seniors, for the sake of a better life we need to modernize Medicare and make sure there is a prescription drug benefit for our seniors.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3037, "text": "We need to make sure, as we rewrite the welfare laws, as Jim can tell you, it is important to make sure that work is the cornerstone of welfare policy. People find dignity in work, and therefore we can make America a better life by helping people find work and be trained for work and be qualified for work. But Government is limited in its capacity to make America a better place. We can hand out money, but what Government cannot do is put hope in people's hearts or a sense of purpose in people's lives. This is done when a fellow American puts their arm around somebody in need and says I love you. America is going to be a better country after the evil done to us, because we understand that in order to change America, we can do so, one person, one soul, one conscience at a time, by loving somebody just like we'd like to be loved ourselves. Out of the evil done to America is going to come incredible good, because this Nation's strength lies not in the halls of our Government but in the hearts and souls of the American citizens. A lot of good folks took a step back after that fateful day and said, What is my life all about? I am going to remind my child every single day I love them. A lot of good folks said, I want to help the community in which I live be a better place. No, the enemy hit us, but in so doing, they aroused an American spirit that understands that being a patriot is somebody more than just putting your hand over your heart. Being a patriot is helping those who hurt find solace, those who are hungry find food, those who yearn for love find love. No, the enemy hit us, but they did not know who they were hitting. There is no question in my mind that we can achieve peace. There is no question in my mind that we will be a better country, because this is the finest country, full of the greatest people on the face of the Earth. May God bless, and may God bless America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdowningtownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks in Downingtown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-downingtown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "22-10-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3044, "text": "Chairman Betchkal, Reverend Smith, my friend Patti LaBelle you did well with and without your singers. Let me join Santa Claus in also saying that we miss two important members the Pageant of Peace lost in the last year, Joe Reilly and Bill Harris. The spirit of Christmas was alive in them every day, and we remember them. I told Hillary when we were sitting here that I never quite get into the spirit of Christmas until I come here to the Pageant of Peace. America's Christmas tree is famous all over the world. Believe it or not, there is even a new movie in Japan about two people who came to Washington and fell in love under this Christmas tree. We come here tonight to celebrate that magic, to rejoice in the spirit of the holiday season, no matter what our faith, a spirit of sharing and giving, of gathering with family and friends and coming together as one community. You can see it everywhere at this time of year. And of course, at Christmas we come together especially to celebrate the birth of a child who came into the world without a home, only a stable's roof to shelter him, who grew to teach the lesson of love and peace that has truly changed the world. Blessed are the peacemakers, he said, and those words still call us to action. As we look around the world tonight, we know the spirit of peace is strong enough to triumph over the forces that still threaten it. Let us be grateful that our Nation is at peace and rejoice in the progress we have made to bring about peace on Earth. And let us not forget the work still to be done, from Bosnia to the Middle East to the Korean Peninsula. Today our brave men and women in uniform are helping other people in other lands to make their peace. And across our country this holiday season people are joining in peace to feed the hungry, to bring toys to poor children who otherwise would not have them, and to reconcile our own differences. At Christmas and throughout the year the greatest gift of all we can give our own children is to make their world more safe, more peaceful, and more possible for them to make the most of their God-given potential. It is for our children that we must dedicate ourselves to making peace wherever we can, around the world, in every community, in our own homes, and perhaps most important, in our own hearts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslightingthenationalchristmastree13", "title": "Remarks on Lighting the National Christmas Tree", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lighting-the-national-christmas-tree-13", "publication_date": "05-12-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3045, "text": "Like, have you noticed a lot of security around here? It is such an honor to welcome you. I love welcoming champs to the White House, and these are clearly great champs. You know, the playoffs have got to be tough at that time of year, after you have played so long and your legs are a little tired-except you romped through the playoffs. I do not know if many Americans understand that, but this team went 16-5 through the first four rounds, became the first west coast team in the NHL to win the Stanley Cup. And so it is my honor to welcome you to the White House. I do want to welcome the owner, Henry Samueli; appreciate you coming. I had the privilege of being in pro sports as a baseball owner. I never had the chance to come to the White House as a baseball owner. I had a little trouble on the division crowns as a baseball owner. But I understand how-what a joy it must be to represent an ownership group, to watch a team you care about win the Stanley Cup, and win any championship. I really want to say something about Randy Carlyle, the head coach. It is got to be hard to be a head coach of such great athletes. I do not know if you are ever in the newspaper. But I am proud to have you here. I tend not to try to single out a player, but nevertheless, when you have an MVP in your midst, I am proud to recognize you; glad you are here. I do want to welcome the commissioner. This is not the first time we have been together like this; it will probably be the last like this. But I know you will keep coming back to the White House to promote the champs in a sport you love. I want to thank the mayor of Anaheim, my friend Curt Pringle. It must be a big deal when the Ducks win the Stanley Cup for the people of Anaheim, and I am honored that you are here. I also want to welcome Congressman Eddy Royce. Of course, we welcome all the players, all the personnel, all the fans. The Ice Dogs--are here to see the Ducks. Well, here they are; you got a chance to see what they look like. I bet you they would tell you that in order to be a Stanley Cup champ, you have to work hard and skate hard and make right choices in life, just like these folks did that are standing up here with me.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2007stanleycupchampionanaheimducks", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2007 Stanley Cup Champion Anaheim Ducks", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2007-stanley-cup-champion-anaheim-ducks", "publication_date": "06-02-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3046, "text": "The Stanley Cup was awarded 115 years ago, which makes it the oldest trophy in professional sports. The Cup bears the names of not only the teams that won it but more than 2,000 names of the individuals who have raised the Cup in victory. And these men behind me now have their name on the Cup. The interesting thing about the Stanley Cup, it is the only professional sports trophy that every player on the championship team gets to take home for a day. This Cup has been to some odd places. For example, it went to Elvis's place in Memphis, Graceland. It has taken a turn on the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. It has seen the inside of an igloo and a New York City jail. It stood next to a giant statue of Lenin and a 55-foot Jolly Green Giant in Blue Earth, Minnesota. The Cup has been to countless bars and nightclubs across the world, and I am sure some of the players are pleased the Cup cannot talk. Last year, the Cup made its first visit to a combat zone. Nineteen players- former NHL players-took this cup to Kandahar Air Base in Afghanistan for a ball-hockey game with Canadian and American troops. I promise you, our troops were thrilled to see the Cup. And whoever thought of it, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for supporting those kids. The Anaheim Ducks also took the Cup on many adventures, traveling with it to Canada, Sweden, Finland, and England. Chris Pronger and Todd Marchant each took it home to use it as a cereal bowl for the kids--pretty hungry kids. Sean O'Donnell filled it with dog food so that his Lab, Buddy, could eat from it. You know, I was wondering why Barney and my dogs took such a liking to the Stanley Cup. Ducks players have used their time to help lift the lives of others. This is what I am particularly grateful for. The Ducks took the Cup to the Mattel Children's Hospital at UCLA and the Children's Hospital in Orange County, where it brought joy to somebody who is suffering. That must have been a fantastic experience, to see somebody's face light up who was having a pretty tough go in life, and I want to thank you for that. I appreciate the fact that you took the Cup to the Orangewood Children's Foundation, where it helped raise the spirits of those who have been- who are victims of abuse and neglect.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2007stanleycupchampionanaheimducks", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2007 Stanley Cup Champion Anaheim Ducks", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2007-stanley-cup-champion-anaheim-ducks", "publication_date": "06-02-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3090, "text": "On behalf of the Obama family Michelle, Malia, Sasha, Bo, and me I want to wish everyone a very happy Thanksgiving. For us, like so many of you, this is a day full of family and friends, food and football. It is a day to fight the overwhelming urge to take a nap, at least until after dinner. But most of all, it is a time to give thanks for each other and for the incredible bounty we enjoy in this country. As a nation, we have just emerged from a campaign season that was passionate, noisy, and vital to our democracy. But it also required us to make choices. And sometimes those choices led us to focus on what sets us apart instead of what ties us together; on what candidate we support instead of what country we all belong to. to remember that despite our differences, we are, and always will be, Americans first and foremost. the ability to spend time with the ones we love, to say what we want, to worship as we please, to know that there are brave men and women defending our freedom around the globe, and to look our children in the eye and to tell them that here in America, no dream is too big if they are willing to work for it. We are also grateful that this country has always been home to Americans who see these blessings not simply as gifts to enjoy, but as opportunities to give back; Americans who believe we have a responsibility to look out for those who are less fortunate, to pull each other up and move forward together. Right now, as we prepare to gather around our dinner tables, there are families in the Northeast who do not have that luxury. homes, possessions, even loved ones. And it will be a long time before life gets back to normal for them. Over the last few weeks, we have seen FEMA personnel, National Guard, and first-responders working around the clock in hard-hit communities. We have seen hospital workers using their lunch breaks to distribute supplies; families offering up extra bedrooms; the fire department advertising free hot showers; buses full of volunteers coming from hundreds of miles away; neighbors sharing whatever they have food, water, and electricity and saying again and again how lucky they are to have a roof over their heads. It would have been easy for these folks to do nothing, to worry about themselves and leave the rest to someone else. But that is not who we are; that is not what we do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsweeklyaddress374", "title": "The President's Weekly Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-weekly-address-374", "publication_date": "22-11-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3091, "text": "It is a great honor to be here at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies. I want to thank Dr. Park for, a few moments ago, making me an honorary alumni of the university. Now, I know that this school has one of the world's finest foreign language programs, which means that your English is much better than my Korean. Now, this is my third visit to the Republic of Korea as President. I have now been to Seoul more times than any other capital, except for Washington, DC, of course. This reflects the extraordinary bonds between our two countries and our commitment to each other. I am pleased that we are joined by so many leaders here today, Koreans and Americans, who help keep us free and strong and prosperous every day. That includes our first Korean American Ambassador to the Republic of Korea, Ambassador Sung Kim. I have seen the deep connections between our peoples in my own life among friends and colleagues. I have seen it in so many patriotic Korean Americans, including a man born in the city of Seoul, who came to America and has dedicated his life to lifting up the poor and sick of the world. And last week I was proud to nominate him to lead the World Bank, Dr. Jim Yong Kim. I have also seen the bonds in our men and women in uniform, like the American and Korean troops I visited yesterday along the DMZ, freedom's frontier. And we salute their service and are very grateful for them. We honor all those who have given their lives in our defense, including the 46 brave souls who perished aboard the Cheonan 2 years ago today. We stand together, and the commitment of the United States to the defense and the security of the Republic of Korea will never waver. Most of all, I see the strength of our alliance in all of you. a truly global Korea. So to all the students here today, this is the Korea your generation will inherit. And I believe there is no limits to what our two nations can achieve together. For like your parents and grandparents before you, you know that the future is what we make of it. with your smart phones and Twitter and Me2Day and Kakao Talk. It is no wonder so many people around the world have caught the Korean wave, Hallyu. In advance of my visit, our Embassy invited Koreans to send us your questions using social media. Some of you may have sent questions.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshankukuniversityforeignstudiesseoul", "title": "Remarks at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-hankuk-university-foreign-studies-seoul", "publication_date": "26-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3092, "text": "Have you posted, yourself, a supportive opinion on a website under a disguised name, pretending you are one of the supporters of ENTITY? I had not thought of this. But the truth is I have not done this. But I have not done that myself. So our shared future--and the unprecedented opportunity to meet shared challenges together--is what brings me to Seoul. Over the next 2 days, under President Lee's leadership, we will move ahead with the urgent work of preventing nuclear terrorism by securing the world's nuclear materials. our vision of a world without nuclear weapons. Three years ago, I traveled to Prague, and I declared America's commitment to stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and to seeking a world without them. I said I knew that this goal would not be reached quickly, perhaps not in my lifetime, but I knew we had to begin, with concrete steps. And in your generation, I see the spirit we need in this endeavor, an optimism that beats in the hearts of so many young people around the world. It is that refusal to accept the world as it is, the imagination to see the world as it ought to be, and the courage to turn that vision into reality. So today, with you, I want to take stock of our journey and chart our next steps. securing the world's vulnerable nuclear materials in 4 years so that they never fall into the hands of terrorists. And since then, nations, including the United States, have boosted security at nuclear facilities. South Korea, Japan, Pakistan, and others are building new centers to improve nuclear security and training. Nations like Kazakhstan have moved nuclear materials to more secure locations. Mexico, and just yesterday Ukraine, have joined the ranks of nations that have removed all the highly enriched uranium from their territory. All told, thousands of pounds of nuclear material have been removed from vulnerable sites around the world. This was deadly material that is now secure and can now never be used against a city like Seoul. We are also using every tool at our disposal to break up black markets in nuclear material. Countries like Georgia and Moldova have seized highly enriched uranium from smugglers. And countries like Jordan are building their own countersmuggling teams, and we are tying them together in a global network of intelligence and law enforcement. Nearly 20 nations have now ratified the treaties and international partnerships that are at the center of our efforts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshankukuniversityforeignstudiesseoul", "title": "Remarks at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-hankuk-university-foreign-studies-seoul", "publication_date": "26-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3093, "text": "And I should add that with the death of Usama bin Laden and the major blows that we have struck against Al Qaida, a terrorist organization that has actively sought nuclear weapons is now on the path to defeat. So, in short, the international community has made it harder than ever for terrorists to acquire nuclear weapons, and that has made us all safer. We are building an international architecture that can ensure nuclear safety. But we are under no illusions. We know that nuclear material, enough for many weapons, is still being stored without adequate protection. And we know that terrorists and criminal gangs are still trying to get their hands on it as well as radioactive material for a dirty bomb. We know that just the smallest amount of plutonium--about the size of an apple--could kill hundreds of thousands and spark a global crisis. The danger of nuclear terrorism remains one of the greatest threats to global security. And that is why here in Seoul, we need to keep at it. We are expecting dozens of nations to announce over the next several days that they have fulfilled the promises they made 2 years ago. And we are now expecting more commitments--tangible, concrete action--to secure nuclear materials and, in some cases, remove them completely. This is the serious, sustained global effort that we need, and it is an example of more nations bearing the responsibility and the costs of meeting global challenges. This is how the international community should work in the 21st century. And Korea is one of the key leaders in this process. securing our own material and helping others protect theirs. We are moving forward with Russia to eliminate enough plutonium for about 17,000 nuclear weapons and turn it instead into electricity. I can announce today a new agreement by the United States and several European partners toward sustaining the supply of medical isotopes that are used to treat cancer and heart disease without the use of highly enriched uranium. And we will work with industry and hospitals and research centers in the United States and around the world to recover thousands of unneeded radiological materials so that they can never do us harm. taking concrete steps towards a world without nuclear weapons. As a party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, this is our obligation, and it is one that I take very seriously. But I believe the United States has a unique responsibility to act; indeed, we have a moral obligation. I say this as President of the only nation ever to use nuclear weapons.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshankukuniversityforeignstudiesseoul", "title": "Remarks at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-hankuk-university-foreign-studies-seoul", "publication_date": "26-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3094, "text": "I say it as a Commander in Chief who knows that our nuclear codes are never far from my side. Most of all, I say it as a father who wants my two young daughters to grow up in a world where everything they know and love cannot be instantly wiped out. Over the past 3 years, we have made important progress. With Russia, we are now reducing our arsenal under the New START Treaty, the most comprehensive arms control agreement in nearly 20 years. And when we are done, we will have cut American and Russian deployed nuclear warheads to their lowest levels since the 1950s. As President, I changed our nuclear posture to reduce the number and role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy. I made it clear that the United States will not develop new nuclear warheads. And we will not pursue new military missions for nuclear weapons. We have narrowed the range of contingencies under which we would ever use or threaten to use nuclear weapons. At the same time, I have made it clear that so long as nuclear weapons exist, we will work with our Congress to maintain a safe, secure, and effective arsenal that guarantees the defense not only of the United States, but also our allies, including South Korea and Japan. My administration's nuclear posture recognizes that the massive nuclear arsenal we inherited from the cold war is poorly suited to today's threats, including nuclear terrorism. So, last summer, I directed my national security team to conduct a comprehensive study of our nuclear forces. But even as we have more work to do, we can already say with confidence that we have more nuclear weapons than we need. Even after New START, the United States will still have more than 1,500 deployed nuclear weapons and some 5,000 warheads. I firmly believe that we can ensure the security of the United States and our allies, maintain a strong deterrent against any threat, and still pursue further reductions in our nuclear arsenal. Going forward, we will continue to seek discussions with Russia on a step we have never taken before, reducing not only our strategic nuclear warheads, but also tactical weapons and warheads in reserve. I look forward to discussing this agenda with President Putin when we will meet in May. Missile defense will be on the agenda, but I believe this should be an area of cooperation, not tension. And I am confident that, working together, we can continue to make progress and reduce our nuclear stockpiles.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshankukuniversityforeignstudiesseoul", "title": "Remarks at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-hankuk-university-foreign-studies-seoul", "publication_date": "26-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3095, "text": "Of course, we will consult closely with our allies every step of the way, because the security and defense of our allies, both in Europe and Asia, is not negotiable. Here in Asia, we have urged China, with its growing nuclear arsenal, to join us in a dialogue on nuclear issues. And more broadly, my administration will continue to pursue ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. And after years of delay, it is time to find a path forward on a new treaty that verifiably ends the production of fissile materials for nuclear weapons, ends it once and for all. strengthening the global regime that prevents the spread of nuclear weapons. When I came into office, the cornerstone of the world's effort, which is the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, was fraying. Iran had started spinning thousands of centrifuges. North Korea conducted another nuclear test. Over the past 3 years, we have begun to reverse that dynamic. Working with others, we have enhanced the global partnership that prevent proliferation. The International Atomic Energy Agency is now conducting the strongest inspections ever. Countries with nuclear weapons, like the United States and Russia, will move towards disarmament; countries without nuclear weapons will not acquire them; and all countries can have access to peaceful nuclear energy. Because of these efforts, the international community is more united and nations that attempt to flout their obligations are more isolated. Of course, that includes North Korea. Here in Korea, I want to speak directly to the leaders in Pyongyang. The United States has no hostile intent toward your country. We are committed to peace. And we are prepared to take steps to improve relations, which is why we have offered nutritional aid to North Korean mothers and children. Your provocations and pursuit of nuclear weapons have not achieved the security you seek; they have undermined it. Instead of the dignity you desire, you are more isolated. Instead of earning the respect of the world, you have been met with strong sanctions and condemnation. You can continue down the road you are on, but we know where that leads. more broken dreams, more isolation, ever more distance between the people of North Korea and the dignity and the opportunity that they deserve. To the leaders of Pyongyang, I say, this is the choice before you. This is the decision that you must make. Today we say, Pyongyang, have the courage to pursue peace and give a better life to the people of North Korea.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshankukuniversityforeignstudiesseoul", "title": "Remarks at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-hankuk-university-foreign-studies-seoul", "publication_date": "26-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3096, "text": "This same principle applies with respect to Iran. Under the NPT, Iran has the right to peaceful nuclear energy. In fact, time and again, the international community, including the United States, has offered to help Iran develop nuclear energy peacefully. But time and again, Iran has refused, instead taking the path of denial, deceit, and deception. And that is why Iran also stands alone as the only member of the NPT unable to convince the international community that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes--the only member. That is why the world has imposed unprecedented sanctions, slowing Iran's nuclear program. The international community is now poised to enter talks with Iran's leaders. Once again, there is the possibility of a diplomatic resolution that gives Iran access to peaceful nuclear energy while addressing the concerns of the international community. Today I will meet with the leaders of Russia and China as we work to achieve a resolution in which Iran fulfills its obligations. It is always my preference to solve these issues diplomatically. Iran's leaders must understand they too face a choice. Iran must act with the seriousness and sense of urgency that this moment demands. Iran must meet its obligations. Treaties are binding, rules will be enforced, and violations will have consequences. We refuse to consign ourselves to a future where more and more regimes possess the world's most deadly weapons. a renewed commitment to harnessing the power of the atom, not for war, but for peaceful purposes. After the tragedy at Fukushima, it was right and appropriate that nations moved to improve the safety and security of nuclear facilities. We are doing so in the United States. It is taking place all across the world. As we do, let us never forget the astonishing benefits that nuclear technology has brought to our lives. It prevents disease in the developing world. It is the high-tech medicine that treats cancer and finds new cures. And of course, it is the energy--the clean energy--that helps cut the carbon pollution that contributes to climate change. Here in South Korea, as you know, as a leader in nuclear energy, you have shown the progress and prosperity that can be achieved when nations embrace peaceful nuclear energy and reject the development of nuclear arms. And with rising oil prices and a warming climate, nuclear energy will only become more important. That is why, in the United States, we have restarted our nuclear industry as part of a comprehensive strategy to develop every energy source. We supported the first new nuclear power plant in three decades.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshankukuniversityforeignstudiesseoul", "title": "Remarks at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-hankuk-university-foreign-studies-seoul", "publication_date": "26-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3097, "text": "We are investing in innovative technologies so we can build the next generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants. And we are training the next generation of scientists and engineers who are going to unlock new technologies to carry us forward. One of the great challenges they will face and that your generation will face is the fuel cycle itself in producing nuclear energy. The very process that gives us nuclear energy can also put nations and terrorists within the reach of nuclear weapons. We simply cannot go on accumulating huge amounts of the very material, like separated plutonium, that we are trying to keep away from terrorists. And that is why we are creating new fuel banks to help countries realize the energy they seek without increasing the nuclear dangers that we fear. That is why I have called for a new framework for civil nuclear cooperation. We need an international commitment to unlocking the fuel cycle of the future. In the United States we are investing in the research and development of new fuel cycles so that dangerous materials cannot be stolen or diverted. And today I urge nations to join us in seeking a future where we harness the awesome power of the atom to build and not to destroy. In this sense, we see how the efforts I have described today reinforce each other. When we enhance nuclear security, we are in a stronger position to harness safe, clean nuclear energy. When we develop new, safer approaches to nuclear energy, we reduce the risk of nuclear terrorism and proliferation. When nations, including my own, fulfill our responsibilities, it strengthens our ability to ensure that other nations fulfill their responsibilities. And step by step, we come closer to the security and peace of a world without nuclear weapons. I know that there are those who deride our vision. There are those who say ours is an impossible goal that will be forever out of reach. But to anyone who doubts the great progress that is possible, I tell them, come to Korea. Come to this country, which rose from the ashes of war----a country that rose from the ashes of war, turning rubble into gleaming cities. Stand where I stood yesterday, along a border that is the world's clearest contrast between a country committed to progress, a country committed to its people, and a country that leaves its own citizens to starve. Come to this great university, where a new generation is taking its place in the world, helping to create opportunities that your parents and grandparents could only imagine.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshankukuniversityforeignstudiesseoul", "title": "Remarks at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-hankuk-university-foreign-studies-seoul", "publication_date": "26-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3098, "text": "Your Majesty, this historic house has witnessed many historic occasions, but as all of our guests here today I am sure will agree, and as those who are listening on television and radio will understand, no visit to this house has a greater historical significance than your visit to the White House again. First, because in all the world today you, as Chief of State, have served longer--53 years--than any Chief of State in the world, and we honor you for that. Second, because I have the honor of receiving you here in the White House as an official state visitor. In the whole history of the United States, over 190 years, this has not been the case with any official visitor. You broke the record with four Presidents today. Third, because you are the first visitor, official visitor, to this country since my inauguration as ENTITY from the great continent of Africa, to which you have offered such outstanding leadership. For these reasons we honor you today, and also for others that I will mention briefly. We honor you because of the personal leadership that you have provided for your country, an ancient land, a proud people, but one which under your leadership has moved forward in the field of economic and social progress dramatically in these last years. Second, because in this great continent of Africa, a very old continent with many new nations, you have provided the counsel and the guidance and the leadership to the new nations, to the new leaders, which was so essential, and also the example for unity, unity which transcends differences in the continent. The fact that the Organization of African Unity is in your capital city is an indication of that leadership. But finally, to all of us who are here, those of us who go back a few years, we welcome you as one who appealed to and inspired the whole conscience of the world in 1936, when you, standing virtually alone, spoke out against aggressive totalitarianism; and as a result of speaking out, you gave an example, an example which should have been followed then, but an example which today, historians will recall, provided inspiration to leaders and people throughout the world. As we look back over your life, as we look back over your leadership, we can truly say that no chief of state or head of government can be welcomed to the United States of America who really touches our hearts more than you touch our hearts, because you stand for those great principles, principles of independence, principles of national dignity, principles of unity which transcend differences between nations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswelcomethewhitehouseemperorhaileselassieiethiopia", "title": "Remarks of Welcome at the White House to Emperor Haile Selassie I of Ethiopia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-welcome-the-white-house-emperor-haile-selassie-i-ethiopia", "publication_date": "08-07-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3108, "text": "I WANT each of you to know how welcome you are to this house that belongs to all of you. It seems to me that it is a little dark in here. If it is, it is because of the new budget and we are trying to economize on our light bill. It may surprise you, but the lights on this establishment are $4600 a month alone, so you can imagine how many checks will have to have deductions to even pay the light bill. I am reminded of the story that the Postmaster General told me about getting a letter from a little boy who had lost his father and whose widowed mother was having difficulty making ends meet. Please send mom $100 to help with the family. The letter wound up on the Postmaster General's desk and he was quite touched by it. He at that time still had a little money left over from what he had earned at Prudential, so he took a $20 bill out of his pocket, put it in a Postmaster General's envelope, put an air mail stamp on it, and sent it to the little boy. Much obliged for all you have done. We appreciate it. But we need another $100. If you do not mind, when you send it to momma this time, do not route it through Washington, because they deducted 80 percent of it there. I have a little statement prepared here expressing my gratitude, but I think I want to say something else before I get into that. You businessmen have a very unique role in our Government, and a very special responsibility. You are the symbols of the free enterprise system. You are what makes the difference in the type of government we have and the type that our challenger has. Someone asked me the other day if I did not think I was making a rather dangerous venture when, contrary to the practice of the last few years, I sent a budget to Congress that did not add $5 billion on to take care of increased population and increased needs, and by withholding that amount out of the economic bloodstream if I did not think we would lack the financial stimulus necessary to give us the prosperity we wanted. I have thought of that. I have carefully analyzed it and reviewed it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewparticipantsplansforprogressequalopportunityagreements1", "title": "Remarks to New Participants in Plans for Progress Equal Opportunity Agreements.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-participants-plans-for-progress-equal-opportunity-agreements-1", "publication_date": "22-01-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3109, "text": "But I believe by trying to keep our budget this year as low as the one last year, by trying to arrest the advance and establish a ceiling, and by assuring the businessmen we are not going to keep our foot on his neck, and we are going to turn him loose to invest his capital and build new plants, provide new jobs, reward him and praise him instead of flout him and take revenge on him , I am betting that with the tax reduction and the $9 billion that will go into consumers' hands as a result of lowering the withholding from 18 to 14 percent, the lower corporation taxes we will have, although they are only slightly lower-I am betting that the free economy and private business can do for the economic bloodstream what the Government appropriations do. Now if they do not do it, I know how to spend it, but I am going to give them that chance. And it is going to be many months before we know the answer. But I sincerely and genuinely believe that any system that is just enough to give us the power that is ours today as the leading nation in the world, and that permits a son born of a tenant farmer, as I was 55 years ago, to rise to the place I now hold, I believe that is the system that is going to prevail among all the philosophies of the world. I do not think it is our population, our resources, or even our industrial know-how that are going to be the predominating factors in our victory. I think the thing that, when the final gong is sounded, the thing that is going to determine whether we survive or not, is our free enterprise system. I believe that the capitalist who sends his dollar out with the hope of getting a return on it, the manager that gets up at daylight and works to midnight and develops stomach ulcers handling the men and the money, and the worker who takes the sweat of his brow and hits that production line at a trot, taking pride in what comes off that assembly line--the combination of those three, all of whom get a slice of the pie, along with a Government that is friendly and helpful and encouraging, and providing incentive, making the fourth partner-- I believe that they can outdo and outproduce and outwork and outright any collective system in the world! I believe the individual reward that comes to each of those elements is such as to provide the incentive that will never permit any other philosophy to overtake us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewparticipantsplansforprogressequalopportunityagreements1", "title": "Remarks to New Participants in Plans for Progress Equal Opportunity Agreements.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-participants-plans-for-progress-equal-opportunity-agreements-1", "publication_date": "22-01-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3110, "text": "I think that is the real reason or justification we had for selling wheat to the Russians. We had it rotting in our barns and the rats were eating it. We had all that our stomachs would hold and all we could store, and we did it with a third of the acres that they have. I do not gloat over it, but it is satisfying to me to know that we have got to send our wheat over there to show them that we can feed ourselves and they cannot feed themselves. So in the final analysis, if we survive this challenge of our century, it is going to be because of the responsibilities of the free enterprise system. And you are a symbol of it. Now I came down here today to tell you not that you are just welcome in this house, but I am so proud that you are here. I am grateful to you and I want to express the gratitude of ENTITY and the gratitude of the American people to each of you and to the thousands of stockholders that you represent. Because you have taken a very strong, a very positive, and a firm step forward in signing the Plan for Progress and joining the President's Equal Employment Opportunity program. You have allied yourselves and your workers with some 141 of the leading corporations in this Nation in a demonstration that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States still mean what they say. You have worked to eliminate bias and discrimination and prejudice from American life. We believe that you will increase your efforts in the immediate future. We believe that when you do, you keep firm faith with those forefathers who founded our great free enterprise system. We know we have the wealth, we know we have the economic power to lead the world. But we must never forget that in this world we are outnumbered 17 to 1. We must have moral standards of the highest order and consciences that are always clear of any guilt of mistreatment of our fellowman or for any artificial reason. Then we can even more proudly say that our leadership is deserved and our concepts are enduring, and there is a reason why America is first in the world picture. During my nearly 3 years as Chairman of this Committee,1 I have observed and learned. It has been one of the most rewarding experiences of my 33 years of public life. that you would like to be remembered not for your financial statement as much as for your human concern, your feeling for your fellowman, and for doing what is right and what is just.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnewparticipantsplansforprogressequalopportunityagreements1", "title": "Remarks to New Participants in Plans for Progress Equal Opportunity Agreements.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-new-participants-plans-for-progress-equal-opportunity-agreements-1", "publication_date": "22-01-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3111, "text": "The gathering and publication of news has a deeper significance than is sometimes realized. No large enterprise can exist for itself alone. It ministers to some great need, it performs some great service, not for itself, but for others; or, failing therein, it ceases to be profitable and ceases to exist. This is the case with the Associated Press. It is one of the eyes of mankind which never slumbers. Without ceasing, it assembles each day the events of each part of the world, and transmits them to every other part. The fundamental reason for this lies in the fact that it is felt to be of vital importance to each man, and each community, to know what other men and other communities are doing. The news is printed and read, not for the mere purpose of entertainment, amusement and recreation, but almost entirely for the practical purpose of information, in order that by means of accurate knowledge of what others are doing a course may be laid out of accurate and successful action. Faith in the American people means a faith in their ability to form sound judgments, when once the facts have been presented to them clearly and without prejudice. It is this educational work, national in its scope, that the Associated Press performs, and upon its integrity and fairness depends in large measure the course of public opinion in the United States. This work is done without any tinge of personal or political opinion. A very practical need exists, and it is met by a very practical service. It is individual in its nature. It is a personal service for each one of us, making its appeal entirely to the intelligence of the individual and recognizing fully the American ideal of intellectual independence. This conception is not exactly at variance with, but certainly supplementary to, the long cherished American ideal of the independence of the individual and the independence of the nation. The work of the Associated Press, both necessary and logical, indicates that the true method would appear to lie in recognizing the broad principle of our individual and national dependence, calculating the requirements which flow from that condition, and governing ourselves accordingly. Complete independence means complete coordination and cooperation. From this principle arises the oft-repeated law of service we can help ourselves only as we help others. A knowledge and an understanding of others become absolutely necessary, in order to make our ideals practical. One of the preeminent requirements of our country at the present time is to reestablish and emphasize in the public mind this law of service.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3112, "text": "The danger to America is not in the direction of the failure to maintain its economic position, but in the direction of the failure to maintain its ideals. The principle of service is not to be confounded with a weak and impractical sentimentalism. It does not mean that either the individual or the nation is to assume the burdens which ought to be borne by others. It is warranted in considering self to the extent of recognizing that it is justifiable to accumulate and hold the resources which must necessarily be used to serve ourselves, our own household, and our own nation. It recognizes also the necessity of serving others, and when the need arises for meeting a moral requirement, of making individual and national sacrifices sufficient to maintain the cause of righteousness. Some of the recent developments in Washington have revealed the dangers to which I refer in a very dramatic way. Beginning nearly 10 years ago our country entered a period when conditions were altogether artificial and abnormal, culminating in the strained and lurid events of our participation in the war. The old standards of action were either suspended or entirely cast aside. Altogether too many of those in a position to do so began to take advantage of the necessities of the situation for their own profit. Finally nearly all of those in responsible positions throughout the entire civilized world had but one main object in view, which was the winning of the war. They began to make almost every consideration and motive subsidiary to that great effort. Totally inconceivable amounts of money were raised and expended with a lavishness which a few months before would have been believed impossible, and which now seems like some wild nightmare. Notwithstanding the great wave of patriotic fervor which swept over the land; notwithstanding the tremendous sacrifices which the people in every walk of life made, and stood ready to make; almost unconsciously these conditions developed, which I mention not for any purpose now to criticize, where the least scrupulous became the greatest gainers and a considerable part of our population was thrown into a morbid financial state of mind, which even the best intentioned did not wholly escape. The desire for profits and more profits kept on increasing, and the quest for easy money became well-nigh universal. All of this meant an attempt to appropriate the belongings of others without rendering a corresponding service.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3113, "text": "This condition began to subside nearly four years ago, but it left along its course a trail of vicious and criminal selfishness which in diminishing degree has ever since been attempting to gratify an appetite grown all the sharper through indulgence, and a general credulity to rumors of large sums of money demanded and paid on account of every conceivable motive and action. From all of this sordidness the affairs of government, of course, suffered. In some of it a few public officers were guilty participants. The encouraging thing at present is the evidence of a well-nigh complete return to normal methods of action, and a sane public opinion. The gravity of guilt of this kind is fully realized and publicly reprehended. There is an exceedingly healthy disposition to uproot it altogether, and administer punishment wherever competent evidence of guilt can be produced. That I am doing and propose to continue. Another phase of lingering extravagance, from which the country has not yet fully recovered, is revealed by a consideration of the bills which are pending before the Congress, calling for an expenditure of public money. Exceedingly great efforts have been put forth to reduce the cost of government. Hundreds of thousands of public employees have been released, and every department has been thoroughly deflated and placed under most competent financial supervision. The country as a whole is demanding with great vigor every possible relief from the burden of every unnecessary public expenditure. Yet notwithstanding this, minority groups of one kind or another, and organizations, sometimes almost nation-wide in their ramifications, are making the most determined assaults upon the public treasury. I am advised by the Director of the Bureau of the Budget that careful computation discloses that there are bills pending that are seriously pressed for passage, not including the bonus, which would increase the expenditures of the Federal Government for next year by about $3,600,000,000. This would mean that outside of the Post Office Department, which is practically self-sustaining, the present rate of expenditure would be more than doubled. Each one of these items taken by itself is not large, and its supporters argue that certainly the Government can afford to make this small additional payment. But taken in the aggregate they make the stupendous sum I have mentioned, and their assumption by the Government would mean nothing less than financial disaster to the nation. The law of service must be applied to this situation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3114, "text": "Our country is very rich, but were its possessions increased many-fold, it would not be warranted in paying out money except for value received. Value received on the part of the Government is estimated by a general consideration of all the attending conditions. At present our country does not need a greater outlay of expense, but a greater application of constructive economy. The same state of mind is revealed again in the determined resistance which is made to the adoption of a sound method of taxation. The main argument of the opposition can all be reduced to the supposition that the general public can be relieved of taxation and a greater proportion of taxes laid oil the rich. I shall not examine the soundness of this proposal, the economic injury which it would inflict, or its impossibility as a working principle. I mention it as another example of an attempt to minister to a supposed desire to evade the law of service. It seems as though the public is assumed to desire to have the advantages of a government without paying its part of the cost of maintaining it. Besides being convinced that such a result is utterly impossible of accomplishment, I am even more firmly of the belief that it misrepresents the general attitude of the public mind. Moreover, the success of the Government does riot lie in wringing all the revenue it can from the people, but in making their burden as light and fairly distributed as possible, consistent with the proper maintenance of the necessary public functions. The Government itself, in order to be successful, and all of those connected with it, must put all of their energy upon what they can do for the people, not upon what they can get out of them. These are some of the reasons which reveal to us why, in our domestic affairs, we must be possessed of accurate information of the doings and needs of others, in order that we may best serve ourselves by serving them through appropriate action. We are all a part of one common country. To be in a healthy and successful condition economically, means a free interplay of competition in service, based upon that mutual faith in each other which we term public confidence.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3115, "text": "Notwithstanding the disturbing character of recent revelations, notwithstanding the enormous pressure for the passage of legislation which would greatly increase the cost of maintaining the Government of the United States, notwithstanding the failure of a majority of the Congress up to the present time accurately to comprehend and expeditiously to minister to the need of taxation reform, I believe that the requirements of economy and reduced taxes will be met in a way not inconsistent with the great resources of our country. While I have thought it desirable to point out dangerous tendencies, I know that with few exceptions the management of our Government has been and is in honest and competent hands, that its finances are sound and well managed, and that the business interests of the nation, including the owners, managers and employees, are representative of honorable and patriotic motives, and that the present economic condition warrants a continuation of confidence and prosperity. It has both the power and disposition to maintain itself in a healthy economic and moral condition. But it can not do this by turning all its thoughts in on itself, or by making its material prosperity its supreme choice. Selfishness is only another name for suicide. The progress of the world rests on courage, honor and faith. If America wishes to maintain its prosperity, it must maintain its ideals. When we turn to our foreign relations, we see the working out of the same laws. If there is one ideal of national existence to which America has adhered more consistently than to any other, it has been that of peace. Whatever other faults may be charged to our country, it has never been quarrelsome, belligerent, or bent on military aggrandisement. After all, the main support of peace is understanding. It is a matter of accurate information by one government and one people about other governments and other peoples. If our country is to stand for anything in the world, if it is to represent any forward movement in human progress, these achievements will be measured in no small degree by what it is able to do for others. Up to a little more than twenty-five years ago, America gave almost its entire attention to self-development. In that it achieved an unequaled success. The service which it rendered to others was to a considerable degree one of example. It revealed the ability of the people to take charge of their own affairs. It demonstrated the soundness and strength of self-government under free institutions, while affording a refuge for the oppressed of other lands.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3116, "text": "The great influence which the mere existence of American institutions exercised upon the rest of the world would be difficult to overestimate. At the end of a long period of steady accomplishments of this nature came the war with Spain, which left our country a world power with world responsibilities. It is not too much to say that in meeting and bringing to a successful conclusion that conflict our country performed a world service. This was followed by a period of most remarkable industrial development. There were great consolidations of properties, enormous investments of capital, and a stupendous increase of production, all accompanied by a growth of population reaching many millions. This was our condition at the outbreak of the World War. For a long time we sought to avoid this conflict, on the assumption that it did not concern us. On that subject we were lacking in accurate information. We found, at last, that while it was also the grave concern of others, it did concern us intimately and perilously. We took our part in the war at length, in the defense of free institutions. We believe, while acknowledging that we were only one of the contributing elements, that our participation was a decisive factor. The result was a demonstration of the strength of self-governing peoples, and a victory for free institutions. Our action at this time was distinctly a world service. America made its sacrifice for what it believed was the cause of righteousness. The sacrifices made on these occasions, which resulted in a benefit to others, resulted likewise in a benefit to ourselves. Even the evil effects which always arise from war and its aftermath have only tempered, not obliterated, these results. A flow of material resources set in toward our country, which is still going on. The general standards of living were raised. In the resulting plenty many of the did hardships of existence were removed. Our country came into a position where it had a greatly increased opportunity for world leadership. In moral power it took a higher rank. There can be little doubt that our presence at the treaty table softened the terms and diminished the exactions of the victorious nations, where joint covenants of defensive alliance were in part substituted for the usual territorial transfers. Our country refused to adhere to the covenant of the League of Nations with a decisive rejection which I regard as final. Following this came a continuing effort to collect reparations, which the economic chaos of Germany after a time caused to be suspended.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3117, "text": "This resulted in the French seizure of the Ruhr, with Allied conferences, plans and discussions for renewing payment of reparations under some settled method of permanent adjustment. Although indirectly interested by reason of our commerce, and more especially because of the debts due to us, in having a European settlement, our Government felt that the fundamental questions involved in all these discussions were the direct political concern of Europe. Our policy relative to the debts due to us from European countries was well known, and we refused to submit them to these discussions. This never meant that America was not willing to lend its assistance to the solution of the European problem in any way that did not involve us in their purely political controversies, whenever opportunity presented a plan that promised to be just and effective. But we realized that all effort was useless until all parties came to a state of mind where they saw the need to make concessions and accept friendly counsel. In December of the year of 1922 our Secretary of State, Mr. Hughes, set out the American proposal in an address which he delivered at New Haven. He recognized that settlement of the reparations question was probably impossible if approached after the method of a political problem. It was not so much a question to be dealt with by public officers or diplomatic agencies, which must necessarily reflect to a very marked degree the political state of mind of the various countries, but was represented as me which could be solved by the application of pure business talent and experienced private enterprise. To such an effort of business men, unhampered by every unnecessary political consideration, Mr. Hughes expressed the belief that competent American citizens in private life would be ready to lend their assistance. Its correctness was finally demonstrated when Mr. Dawes, Mr. Young and Mr. Robinson were invited by the Reparations Commission for that purpose, and consented to serve. The finding of the experts, which is known as the Dawes Report, has recently been made and published. It shows a great deal of research and investigation, and a broad comprehension of the requirements of the situation. It has been favorably received by the Reparations Commission. It is gratifying to understand that the Allies are looking upon it with full sympathy, and Germany has expressed a willingness to cooperate in the execution of the plan. There appears to be every reason to hope that the report offers a basis for a practical solution of the reparations problem.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3118, "text": "I trust that it may commend itself to all the European Governments interested as a method by which, through mutual concessions, they can arrive at a stable adjustment of the intricate and vexatious problem of reparations, and that such an outcome will provide for the restoration of Germany and the largest possible payments to the other countries. If this result is secured, the credit which will be due to the Secretary of State, Mr. Hughes, to ENTITY Harding for adopting it and supporting it, and to the three Americans and their assistants, by whose wisdom and discretion it was formulated and rendered so acceptable, will be sufficient to warrant the lasting approbation of two continents. A situation at once both intricate and difficult has been met in a most masterful way. Our countrymen are justified in looking at the result with great pride. Nothing of more importance to Europe has occurred since the Armistice. Part of the plan contemplates that a considerable loan should at once be made to Germany for immediate pressing needs, including the financing of a bank. I trust that private American capital will be willing to participate in advancing this loan. Sound business reasons exist why we should participate in the financing of works of peace in Europe, though we have repeatedly asserted that we were not in favor of advancing funds for any military purpose. It would benefit our trade and commerce, and we especially hope that it will provide a larger market for our agricultural production. It is notorious that foreign gold has been flowing into our country in great abundance. It is altogether probable that some of it can be used more to our financial advantage in Europe than it can be in the United States. Besides this, there is the humanitarian requirement, which carries such a strong appeal, and the knowledge that out of our abundance it is our duty to help where help will be used for meeting just requirements and the promotion of a peaceful purpose. We have determined to maintain, and can maintain, our own political independence, but our economic independence will be strengthened and increased when the economic stability of Europe is restored. We hope further that such a condition will be the beginning of a secure and enduring peace. Certainly it would remove many of the present sources of disagreement and misunderstanding among the European nations. When this adjustment is finally made, and has had sufficient time of operation to become a settled European policy, it would lay the foundation for a further effort at disarmament in accordance with the theory of the Washington Conference.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3119, "text": "Although that gathering was able to limit capital battleships, it had to leave the question of submarines, air craft, and land forces unsolved. The main reason for this was the unsettled and almost threatening condition that still existed in Europe. A final adjustment for the liquidation of reparations ought to be the beginning of a new era of peace and good will. In the event that such a condition develops, it becomes pertinent to examine what can be done by our own country, in cooperation with others, further to rid ourselves and the rest of the world of the menace and burden of competitive armaments and more effectively insure the settlement of differences between nations, not by a recourse to arms, but by a recourse to reason; not by action leading to war, but by action leading to justice. Our past experience should warn us not to be overconfident in the face of so many failures, but it also justifies the hope that something may be done where already there has been some success, and at least we can demonstrate that we have done all that we can. As a result of American initiative there is already in existence the Hague Tribunal which is equipped to function wherever arbitration seems desirable, and based in part on that, and in part on the League, there is the International Court of Justice, which is already functioning. A proposal was sent to the last Senate by PRESIDENT Harding for our adherence to the covenant establishing this court, which I submitted to the favorable consideration of the present Senate in my annual message. Other plans for a World Court have been broached, but up to the present time this has seemed to me the most practical one. But these proposals for arbitration and courts are not put forward by those who are well informed with the idea that they could be relied upon as an adequate means for entirely preventing war. They are rather a method of securing adjustment of claims and differences, and for the enforcement of treaties, when the usual channels of diplomatic negotiation fail to resolve the difficulty. Proposals have also been made for the codification of international law. Undoubtedly something might be accomplished in this direction, although a very large body of such law consists in undertaking to establish rules of warfare and determining the rights of neutrals. One of the difficulties to be encountered would be the necessity of securing the consent of all the nations, but no doubt the agreement of the major Powers would go very far in producing that result.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3120, "text": "I do not claim to be able to announce any formula that will guarantee the peace of the world. There are certain definite things, however, that I believe can be done, which certainly ought to be tried, that might relieve the people of the earth of much of the burden of military armaments and diminish the probability of military operations. I believe that among these are frequent international conferences suited to particular needs. The Washington Conference did a great deal to restore harmony and good will among the nations. Another purpose of a conference is the further limitation of competitive armaments. Much remains to be accomplished in that direction. It would appear to be impractical to attempt action under present conditions, but with a certain and definite settlement of German reparations firmly established, I should favor the calling of a similar conference to achieve such limitations of armaments and initiate plans for a codification of international law, should preliminary inquiries disclose that such a proposal would meet with a sympathetic response. But the main hope of success lies in first securing a composed state of the public mind in Europe. It is my firm belief that America is in a position to take the lead in this direction. It is undoubtedly too much to suppose that we hold very much of the affectionate regard of other nations. At the same time we do hold their respect. Our position is such that we are trusted and our business institutions and Government considered to be worthy of confidence. If there is disappointment in some directions that we do not enter alliances with them, it is more than overbalanced by the knowledge that there is no danger that we shall enter alliances against them. It must be known to every people that we are seeking no acquisition of territory, and maintaining no military establishment with unfriendly and hostile intent. Like our political institutions, all of this is a powerful example throughout the world. Very many of the nations have been the recipients of our favor, and have had the advantage of our help in some time of extremity. We have no traditional enemies. We have come to a position of great power and great responsibility. Our first duty is to ourselves. The freedom of the people politically, economically, intellectually, morally and spiritually, must continue to be advanced. This is not a matter of a day or a year. It may be of generations, it may be of an era. It is for us here and now to keep in the right direction, to remain constant to the right ideals.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheannualluncheontheassociatedpressnewyorkcity0", "title": "Address to the Annual Luncheon of the Associated Press in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-annual-luncheon-the-associated-press-new-york-city-0", "publication_date": "22-04-1924", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Calvin Coolidge"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3133, "text": "The Bethlehem Steel Company this morning announced an across-the-board increase of almost 5 percent in steel mill products. resulting in a price increase exceeding one-half billion dollars to the American consumer, --setting back the efforts of all Americans to reverse the current inflationary trend and get back on the road to price stability, --creating pressures for price increases across the whole range of products that are made out of steel, --eroding our world competitive position and jeopardizing our balance of payments, and --aggravating the steel industry's own problems in meeting competition from foreign producers and substitute materials. Steel prices have been moving gradually upward on a selective basis. I stated last May, and I quote, The relative stability of steel prices has been one of the key favorable factors in our recent price record, and it must be preserved. The steel companies and the union reached a collective bargaining agreement yesterday. The terms of their settlement are high. That settlement will result in some increases in steel costs, but the announced Bethlehem price increase far exceeds any reasonable calculation of the cost of the wage settlement. Steel is the Nation's basic industrial product and the industry's pricing decisions affect our entire economy. Inflation in steel is inflation for the Nation. American consumers are now threatened by a price increase that will take $600 million a year directly out of their pockets and pocketbooks and at the very time they are paying increased taxes as their contribution to the urgent task of restoring price stability. According to the ticker this afternoon, Bethlehem Steel Company, with sales buoyed by second-quarter hedged buying against a strike that never came, today reported net profits of $93,400,000 for the first half of 1968, a 41 percent increase over last year's first half. The public interest must be recognized by the entire steel industry in its price decisions at this critical time. I spoke on this general subject to the Business Council, as some of you may remember, that met at Hot Springs back on May 11, 1968. I believe at the ranch on July 23, 1968, I had another statement to make on it for your reference.1 The Cabinet Committee on Price Stability made reference to it in a release to you in July of 1968. Those statements are available to you through the Press Office if you care to take them. We are reserving the $91 million for impacted school aid that the Congress added to the second 1968 supplemental bill over and above our budget.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1211", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1211", "publication_date": "31-07-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3134, "text": "These funds are in addition to those requested by the administration and they will add to 1969 budget expenditures. Both the House and Senate have also added another $110 million to the fiscal 1969 request for impacted school aid. Therefore, these two items will add $200 million to the 1969 budget over and above that requested. Faced with the requirement in the law to cut expenditures in the budget by $6 billion in fiscal 1969, I do not believe that it is good public policy to add another $200 million to that budget. In other words, the Congress in one breath says you must cut $6 billion from your budget as you send it to Congress, and while doing that, we add another $200 million over and above that budget. That would make $6 billion 200 million we would have to cut out. We knew that the anticipated relief expenditures for public welfare--public assistance expenditures--because of the action taken by the Ways and Means Committee by postponing for a year the legislation in that regard, will cost us probably $125 million more. We know that the Supreme Court ruling, the man-in-the-house ruling, will probably cost another $75 million, making an additional $200 million there. Because of the extra good weather and the bountiful harvest in wheat and other commodities, no human can guess, but we are anticipating the possibility that extra funds will be required for additional payments. It is not unlikely that we would have to cut $6 1/2 billion or close to $7 billion from the budget I proposed. Therefore, I do not believe that we should add to that budget now in any way, where it can be avoided. There are 4,300 school districts involved in this matter, but there are 138 school districts which receive a substantial amount of their revenue from this source. These are school districts in which there are a large number of A students. An A student is the student whose parents work or live in a Government installation and, therefore, do not contribute to the local taxes. Of the $91 million, only $22 million would go for A student entitlements, that is, where the parents live and work in Government installations and do not contribute to local taxes. Out of the $201 million for fiscal '68 and '69, approximately 25 percent, I am informed, would go to A students. I would agree to the payment for the full entitlement for A students in fiscal 1968 and 1969 if Congress had decided in its wisdom that that was essential.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1211", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1211", "publication_date": "31-07-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3135, "text": "It is a great honor to be with you tonight. Let me just begin by expressing special thanks to Governors Tom Kean and Mike Castle, chairman and vice chairman of the RGA , John Rollins, the finance chairman and vice chairman of the-or Glen Holden, I should say, who is exceptional efforts have helped to make this evening a success. And of course, I must also recognize our national chairman, Frank Fahrenkopf, who is here. You know, whenever I am asked to speak at a dinner, I get a little self-conscious about the length of a speech. And this is really inappropriate, but I am going to tell it anyway. I hope you have not heard it before, because usually I am an after-dinner speaker instead of a before-dinner speaker. But the joke that I was going to tell you was a little story that took place in ancient Rome at the Colosseum. A little band of Christians out there in the sand on the floor of the Colosseum, crowd up there in the seats, and then they were going to turn the lions loose on them. And the lions came roaring out and charging down on this little huddled mass of people. And one of them stepped forward and said a few quiet words, and the lion stopped and laid down. Well, the crowd was enraged that they were not going to get the show that they'd expected. Caesar was so mad that he had them bring the man to him, and he said, What did you say that made the lions act like that? He said, I just told them that after they ate there would be speeches. As one chief executive among many, I feel right at home. I have always said one of the greatest strengths of America is the diversity of our Federal system. As we have begun to loosen the bonds of centralized control, the States have shot forward, often showing Federal Government the way. The American people now look to the Republican Party as the party of new ideas. And it is Republican Governors who are out front, taking risks, breaking new ground, putting those new ideas into practice-everything from enterprise zones to welfare reform. Yes, we thought of the enterprise zone. We have not been able to get it through the Congress. But I do not know how many States now around the country have enterprise zones, and they are flourishing and succeeding in their mission. Is not it about time that Washington followed the lead of the States and passed a constitutional amendment to balance the budget?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstherepublicangovernorsclubannualdinner", "title": "Remarks at the Republican Governors Club Annual Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-republican-governors-club-annual-dinner", "publication_date": "15-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3136, "text": "the lineitem veto. I remember one new idea I had when I was Governor. It taught me a lot about leadership and its limits. When I first came into the Governor's mansion, I thought it would be a great way to improve efficiency if I asked everybody to work a few extra days a month-on Saturday. I cannot claim a lot of success with that one. But the best thing about this dinner is seeing how the ranks of Republican Governors have grown since last year. We are talking about a 50-percent increase-from 16 to 24 Governors. And we are looking to add to that number in the elections this year, with Bob Livingston running in Louisiana, Jack Reed in Mississippi, and John Harper in Kentucky. But the critical test will come in 1988. We have 12 gubernatorial races that year. Of these, 8 are seats that we have to hold on to and 4 then that we have to win. Few races could be more important, few campaigns more crucial, to the future of our country. What happens in those elections will have repercussions that extend far beyond the State capitals and far beyond State lines-all the way, in fact, to Washington, DC, and the House of Representatives on Capitol Hill. That is because reapportionment comes up in 1991. And in all too many cases, having a Republican Governor is the only shot we have at getting a fair deal. an end to the antidemocratic and un-American practice of gerrymandering congressional districts. In the races, Republicans won half a million more votes than the Democrats, but the Democratic Party won 31 more seats. In California, one of the worst cases of gerrymandering in the country, Republicans received a majority of votes in congressional races, but the Democrats won 60 percent more races. The Democratic-controlled State legislatures have so rigged the electoral process that the will of the people cannot be heard. They vote Republican but elect Democrats. A look at the district lines shows how corrupt the whole process has become. The congressional map is a horror show of grotesque, contorted shapes. Districts jump back and forth over mountain ranges, cross large bodies of water, send out little tentacles to absorb special communities and ensure safe seats. One Democratic Congressman who helped engineer the gerrymandering of California once described the district lines there as his contribution to modern art. it is the American values of fair play and decency. And it is time we stopped them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstherepublicangovernorsclubannualdinner", "title": "Remarks at the Republican Governors Club Annual Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-republican-governors-club-annual-dinner", "publication_date": "15-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3137, "text": "Frank Fahrenkopf and the Republican Party have challenged the Democrats' gerrymandering in court, but ultimately it is in the State legislatures that the battle for fairness must be won. And that is why we need more Republican Governors to oversee the process and why Republicans have to campaign with all heart and soul for Republican State legislative candidates. As far as the ENTITY is concerned, he is not going to be sitting around the Rose Garden in 1988. I am going to be out on the campaign trail, telling the American people the truth about how the electoral process has been twisted and distorted, that it is time to give the votes back to the people. Vote Republican in 1988. The fact is democratic gerrymandering is just one symptom of a larger problem. We have seen a dimension of this problem this last month on the Hill during the debate over the confirmation of Judge Bork to the Supreme Court. During the hearings, Attorney General William French Smith spoke for many of us when he expressed his shock and dismay. I have never seen such misrepresentation, such distortion, and such outright lying. There are people in very important positions in this government who are lying to the American public. I have never seen anything like it, and I hope I never see anything like it again. But former Attorney General William French Smith is not alone in his opinion. One of the most respected, honorable men in this nation, Chief Justice Warren Burger, echoed this when he accused the opposition to Judge Bork of disinformation. Judge Bork's nomination will soon be before the full Senate. The purpose of Senate debate is to allow all sides to be heard. Honorable men and women should not be afraid to change their minds if they are based on that debate. It will call into question the idea of free, fair, and civil exchange. And it will mean that on critical issues, like the fight against crime and drugs and keeping those who are unelected from unconstitutionally taking power into their own hands-each of us and each of our children will be the losers. I do not believe that nominees to the Supreme Court should have to pass litmus tests administered by single-interest lobbies. Such tactics are better suited for campaigns and elections than for Supreme Court nominations. Our agenda is quite simple-to appoint judges who do not confuse the criminals with the victims and who believe the courts should interpret the law, not make it. That starts with the Supreme Court.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstherepublicangovernorsclubannualdinner", "title": "Remarks at the Republican Governors Club Annual Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-republican-governors-club-annual-dinner", "publication_date": "15-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3138, "text": "It takes leadership from the Supreme Court to help shape the attitudes of the courts in our land and to make sure that principles of law are based on the Constitution. This is the standard to judge those who seek to serve on the courts-qualifications, not distortions; judicial temperament, not campaign disinformation. The process of confirming Justices for our nation's highest court has been transformed in a way that should not and, indeed, must not be permitted to occur again. And, yes, people can have different opinions. But when have we ever seen an instance in which the confirmation of a Justice to the Supreme Court has resulted in private interest groups raising money and putting on television ads and campaigns as if they were running an election-and campaigns based on distortion-when the men and women of the Senate are supposed to sit, go over the qualifications of the individual that has been appointed, and make their decision on whether they believe those qualifications suit him for the position. Well, that is what we have to get back to. When the message gets out, I believe the American people will reject the politicization of our judiciary. When the people begin to hear the truth, they will demand an independent judiciary, free from high pressure politics and founded on the principle of judicial restraint. And Judge Bork is a man of courage. He is decided to push forward, to take the vote on his confirmation to the full Senate. And he is going forward because he knows that the wrong done him is nothing compared to the wrong done to our nation and our system of justice. Robert Bork deserves better. America deserves better. I cannot conclude without talking again about an issue that I found so many people are unaware of, and that is getting back to this gerrymandering that has taken place. From 1931 through 1980-50 years-only two Presidents had a Republican Congress-both House and Senate. Each one of them only had it for 2 years. One was a Democratic President, Harry Truman, for 2 of his several years, and the other one was Ike Eisenhower, who had a Republican Congress for 2 out of his 8 years. But for 46 out of those 50 years, the opposition party had both Houses of the Congress. In these, going on 8 years that I have been here, I did have one House for 6 years, the Senate, and the House of Representatives continued to be in the other party's hands.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstherepublicangovernorsclubannualdinner", "title": "Remarks at the Republican Governors Club Annual Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-republican-governors-club-annual-dinner", "publication_date": "15-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3139, "text": "And now for this final 2 years, we are back to having them, once again, in control in both Houses. You have people on one side out there in the legislature, then people on the other side in the Executive Office. That is not what the checks and balances were supposed to be. And certainly, when every Democratic President in those 50 years, with the exception of one 2-year period, had a Congress of their own party, and then when the Republicans had a Congress of the other party for everything but 2 years-all Republican Presidents until my term with having at least one party for a while-the significant thing is we can look back from the inside, where we are in our administration, and tell you that none of the things we have accomplished could have been accomplished had we not had that one Republican House, the Senate, for those 6 years. And now we are back to the regular way of doing things if they continue to have their way. And it all stems out there in the States, their legislators and their Governors, where the redistricting takes place. I saw it firsthand, because when I was Governor of California, one of the years for redistricting came up. And I vetoed what they came up with. And we finally ended turning it over to the Supreme Court. But they'd been in power so long that I did not even have the Supreme Court on my side. But it is so wonderful for all of you to gather here and to do what you are doing. And I know that I have to let you have your dinner and get out of here. I really was just standing here, hoping that I could think of a good get-off line. But it has been wonderful, and you have got some great Governors here. And this country's strength is based not on what is inside the beltway here in Washington, it is based on the fact that we are a federation of 50 sovereign States with a great independence. And one of the things that I will be the happiest about is that one of my goals has been, ever since I came here, to restore the Federal system and return to the States the authority and autonomy that has been unjustly seized by the Democratic Party in the years that have gone past. And let us get back to those 50 different States. Thank you all very much, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstherepublicangovernorsclubannualdinner", "title": "Remarks at the Republican Governors Club Annual Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-republican-governors-club-annual-dinner", "publication_date": "15-10-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3144, "text": "Businesses and families cannot get credit, and small businesses cannot secure the loans they need to create jobs and get their products to market. Now is the time for Washington to act with the same sense of urgency that Americans all across the country feel every single day. With the stakes this high, we cannot afford to get trapped in the same old partisan gridlock. That is why I have worked closely with leaders of both parties on a recovery and reinvestment plan that saves or creates more than 3 million jobs over the next 2 years, cuts taxes for 95 percent of American workers, and makes critical investments in our future--in energy and education, health care, and a 21st century infrastructure. The vast majority of the investments in the plan will be made within the next 18 months, immediately creating jobs and helping States avoid painful tax hikes and cuts to essential services. And every dime of the spending will be made available to the public on recovery.gov, so every American can see where their tax dollars are going. But as we act boldly and swiftly to shore up our financial system and revitalize our economy, we must also make sure that the underpinnings of that economy are sound; that our economic infrastructure is rebuilt to handle the traffic of the global economy; that our cutting-edge science and technology remain the envy of the world; that our policies promote the innovative and competitive nature of this economy and facilitate the incubation and commercialization of our startups and small businesses, the very engine of our job creation. These are the tasks of the Commerce Department. And I believe that Judd Gregg is the right person to help guide the Department towards these goals. Judd discovered the family business at an early age. His father, Hugh Gregg, was elected the youngest Governor of New Hampshire when judge--Judd was a boy. At a time when the mills in Nashua closed down and folks were laid off, he watched his dad work tirelessly to attract new industry, the kind that created jobs that carried with them a sense of dignity and self-worth. Judd's father even found the time to publish a book titled All I Learned About Politics, and in keeping with his legendary sense of humor, all of its pages were blank. When the book is written about Judd Gregg, it will tell the story of a man with his own proud record of service on behalf of the American people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenominationsenatorjuddgreggbesecretarycommerce", "title": "Remarks on the Nomination of Senator Judd A. Gregg To Be Secretary of Commerce", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-nomination-senator-judd-gregg-be-secretary-commerce", "publication_date": "03-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3145, "text": "As a businessman, attorney, State executive councilor, Congressman, Governor in his own right, and now as a Senator, he is seen from all angles what makes our economy work for communities, businesses, and families, and what keeps it from working better. As former chairman of the Senate Budget Committee and Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, Judd has been involved in nearly every facet of public policy. And as Commerce Subcommittee chair on the Senate Appropriations Committee, he is already quite familiar with the Department I have chosen him to lead. Judd is famous--or infamous, depending on your perspective--on Capitol Hill for his strict fiscal discipline. It is not that he enjoys saying no, although if it is directed at your bill, you might feel that way. It is that he shares my deep-seated commitment to guaranteeing that our children inherit a future they can afford. Now, clearly, Judd and I do not agree on every issue; most notably who should have won the election. But we agree on the urgent need to get American businesses and families back on their feet. We see eye to eye on conducting the Nation's business in a responsible, transparent, and accountable manner. And we know the only way to solve the great challenges of our time is to put aside stale ideology and petty partisanship and embrace what works. As one of the Republican Party's most respected voices and skillful negotiators, Judd is a master of reaching across the aisle to get things done. He will be an outstanding addition to the depth and experience of my economic team, a trusted voice in my Cabinet, and an able and persuasive ambassador for industry who makes it known to the world that America is open for business. Commerce defies every wind, overrides every tempest, and invades every zone. These are the words carved into the walls of the Department that I am so pleased Judd Gregg has agreed to lead. And as we act boldly to defy the winds of this crisis and outride the tempest of this painful moment, I can think of no finer steward for our Nation's commerce. I expect the Senate's quick confirmation of their esteemed colleague, and I look forward to working with Judd in the years ahead. And I'd like Judd to say just a few words.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenominationsenatorjuddgreggbesecretarycommerce", "title": "Remarks on the Nomination of Senator Judd A. Gregg To Be Secretary of Commerce", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-nomination-senator-judd-gregg-be-secretary-commerce", "publication_date": "03-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3174, "text": "On Wednesday night I will present my plan to generate jobs and increase the incomes of the American people. This morning I want to talk with you for a few moments about that program, its goals, and the thinking that went into it. As I have traveled our country over the last year and a half, a single theme has emerged repeatedly from all of you in every region and from every walk of life. bold, comprehensive change to reverse the trickle-down policies of the 1980's and restore the vitality of the American dream. Over the last 12 years, while the middle class saw their tax burdens rise and their incomes go down, the wealthiest Americans, whose incomes went up, often by paperwork manipulation and moving jobs overseas, saw their taxes go down. Higher deficits came with lower taxes on the wealthy. And those deficits forced Government to cut back on essential services to the middle class, the working poor, and the neediest Americans. Good families in embattled neighborhoods saw their children getting by with outdated school books, going to school in neighborhoods that were ever more dangerous, while the wealthiest Americans in protected communities watched their bankbooks grow. Our economy suffered through two grinding recessions, and our job-creating engine stalled. The status quo simply is not working for working families anymore. The experts say we are in a robust economic recovery. our best companies doing better, people being able to refinance their homes, and consumer confidence on the upswing since the election. The unemployment rate has been over 7 percent for 14 months now, and we are 3 million jobs behind where we ordinarily would be in a real economic recovery. And the risk of doing the same old thing is far higher than the cost of change. If we do not change, the American economy and the living standards of our broad middle class will continue to decline, and many of us and most of our children will not enjoy the standard of living that past Americans have. It requires us to forsake the old order and to embrace a new one. Change means asking everyone to pull his or her own weight for the common good.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress527", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-527", "publication_date": "13-02-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3175, "text": "Under my economic program, we will build an America where even the most privileged pay their fair share, not because we want to soak the rich but because we want to stop soaking the middle class and ask everybody to bear a fair share of the load; an America where the most impoverished move off welfare and go back to work; an America where middle class families who work hard and play by the rules are rewarded in their own lives and can pass on to their children a more prosperous future than they inherited from their parents; and yes, an America where Government is not immune from the sacrifices it asks of our people. Just this week I cut the White House staff by 25 percent and saved $10 million compared to the budgets of my predecessors. I have ordered further administrative cuts in Federal departments and agencies of $9 billion over the next 4 years, with more to follow from tough and smart management. I am also ordering an investigation into the enormous cash bonuses paid to officials of the departing administration. In some cases it was done just minutes before I was sworn into office. While I deeply admire the dedicated members of our Federal services, we simply cannot have extravagant payments made to departing bureaucrats and political cronies at a time when most people are tightening their belts. If Government is going to ask the American people to contribute, it must lead by example and learn to do more while spending less. That is a challenge I have embraced and one I will present to the Congress on Wednesday. Next, we will take the battle to the special interests. We will demand that those who see the Tax Code as a table game to be won rather than a social compact to be respected pay their fair share of taxes. I will keep my pledge to restore fairness to the Tax Code. We will raise taxes on the wealthiest individuals and companies in our society. That will be one of their contributions to create the high-skill, high-wage economy that we seek. And I will say to the drug companies, the insurance companies, and the others who profit from the status quo, they must join our cause to make comprehensive reforms in our medical care system. The time has come for all Americans to have affordable health care, a real chance at a healthy life. In return for these contributions, we are determined to create long-term, good-paying private sector jobs. We will encourage the development of new technologies and find markets for them all across America and around the word. We will provide special incentives to new businesses and small businesses to create the jobs of the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress527", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-527", "publication_date": "13-02-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3176, "text": "Next week, when the full Congress returns from Easter recess, they will have less than 75 working days left to make this year a year of real progress for the American people. There is no more important critical piece of unfinished business than our need to ensure that every American, young and old, has adequate, affordable health care. Today I want to again urge the Congress to step up to this challenge by making the passage of a strong Patients' Bill of Rights and the provision of a voluntary Medicare prescription drug benefit top priorities when they return to Washington. The more than 190 million Americans who use managed care or other insurance plans have waited too long for a strong, enforceable Patients' Bill of Rights. They deserve the right to see a specialist, to emergency room care wherever and whenever they need it, and the right to hold health care plans accountable for harmful decisions. Last year, in an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote, the House passed a strong Patients' Bill of Rights that provides the right protections all Americans need and deserve. But more than 6 months later, the bill is still languishing in Congress. Despite their pledge to complete a real bill, the Republican majority has not only delayed action, it is actually considering legislation that would leave tens of millions of Americans without Federal protections. We need a strong bill that protects all Americans and all plans, not one that provides more cover for the special interests than real coverage for American patients. Congress also has an obligation to strengthen Medicare and modernize it, with a voluntary, affordable prescription drug benefit. No one creating a Medicare program today would even think of excluding coverage for prescription drugs. Yet more than three in five older Americans still lack affordable and dependable prescription drug coverage. Just this week we saw further evidence of the unacceptable burden the growing cost of prescription drugs places on senior Americans. According to a report by the nonprofit group, Families USA, the price of prescription drugs most often used by seniors has risen at double the rate of inflation for 6 years running, a burden that falls hardest on seniors who lack drug coverage because they simply do not receive the price discounts most insurers negotiate. Seniors and people with disabilities living on fixed incomes simply cannot continue to cope with these kinds of price increases. That is why we must take action to help them, not next year or the year after that but this year. My budget includes a comprehensive plan to modernize Medicare and provide for a long overdue prescription drug benefit for all beneficiaries.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress106", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-106", "publication_date": "29-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3188, "text": "I want to speak about the ongoing and increasingly urgent efforts to avoid default and reduce our deficit. Right now the House of Representatives is still trying to pass a bill that a majority of Republicans and Democrats in the Senate have already said they will not vote for. It is a plan that would force us to relive this crisis in just a few short months, holding our economy captive to Washington politics once again. In other words, it does not solve the problem, and it has no chance of becoming law. What is clear now is that any solution to avoid default must be bipartisan. It must have the support of both parties that were sent here to represent the American people, not just one faction. It will have to have the support of both the House and the Senate. Senator Reid, a Democrat, has introduced a plan in the Senate that contains cuts agreed upon by both parties. Senator McConnell, a Republican, offered a solution that could get us through this. There are plenty of modifications we can make to either of these plans in order to get them passed through both the House and the Senate and would allow me to sign them into law. And today I urge Democrats and Republicans in the Senate to find common ground on a plan that can get support from both parties in the House, a plan that I can sign by Tuesday. Now, keep in mind, this is not a situation where the two parties are miles apart. We are in rough agreement about how much spending can be cut responsibly as a first step toward reducing our deficit. We agree on a process where the next step is a debate in the coming months on tax reform and entitlement reform, and I am ready and willing to have that debate. And if we need to put in place some kind of enforcement mechanism to hold us all accountable for making these reforms, I will support that too if it is done in a smart and balanced way. But we are almost out of time. We need to reach a compromise by Tuesday so that our country will have the ability to pay its bills on time, as we always have, bills that include monthly Social Security checks, veterans' benefits, and the Government contracts we have signed with thousands of businesses.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefederalbudget0", "title": "Remarks on the Federal Budget", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-federal-budget-0", "publication_date": "29-07-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3189, "text": "Keep in mind, if we do not do that, if we do not come to an agreement, we could lose our country's AAA credit rating, not because we did not have the capacity to pay our bills--we do--but because we did not have a AAA political system to match our AAA credit rating. And make no mistake, for those who say they oppose tax increases on anyone, a lower credit rating would result potentially in a tax increase on everyone in the form of higher interest rates on their mortgages, their car loans, their credit cards. hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, terrorist attacks. This is not one of those crises. The power to solve this is in our hands. And on a day when we have been reminded how fragile the economy already is, this is one burden we can lift ourselves. We can end it with a simple vote, a vote that Democrats and Republicans have been taking for decades, a vote that the leaders in Congress have taken for decades. It is not a vote that allows Congress to spend more money. Raising the debt ceiling simply gives our country the ability to pay the bills that Congress has already racked up. I want to emphasize that. The debt ceiling does not determine how much more money we can spend, it simply authorizes us to pay the bills we already have racked up. It gives the United States of America the ability to keep its word. Now, on Monday night, I asked the American people to make their voice heard in this debate, and the response was overwhelming. If you want to see a bipartisan compromise--a bill that can pass both Houses of Congress and that I can sign--let your Members of Congress know. Keep the pressure on Washington, and we can get past this. And for my part, our administration will be continuing to work with Democrats and Republicans all weekend long until we find a solution. The time for putting party first is over. The time for compromise on behalf of the American people is now. And I am confident that we can solve this problem. I am confident that we will solve this problem. For all the intrigue and all the drama that is taking place on Capitol Hill right now, I am confident that common sense and cooler heads will prevail. But as I said earlier, we are now running out of time. It is important for everybody to step up and show the leadership that the American people expect.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthefederalbudget0", "title": "Remarks on the Federal Budget", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-federal-budget-0", "publication_date": "29-07-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3190, "text": "Well, let me express my thanks and appreciation for the visit from President Arroyo. As we discussed during our meeting here and our delegations, the relationship between the United States and the Philippines dates back many years. It is a friendship that is forged not only in treaties and trade relationships and military relationships, but it is also strengthened by very personal ties that exist between our two countries. We are proud to have 4 million persons of Filipino ancestry contributing to our country each and every day, in all walks of life. The fact that we have Filipino veterans who have fought side by side with American soldiers on behalf of freedom, all those things have strengthened the relationship between our two countries. I am very pleased that President Arroyo has made such good progress on dealing with counterterrorism issues. She has initiated a peace process in Mindanao that we think is-has the potential to bring peace and stability to a part of the Philippines that has been wracked by unrest for too long. We are very grateful of the strong voice that the Philippines has provided in dealing with issues in Asia, ranging from the human rights violations that have for too long existed in Burma, to the problems that we are seeing with respect to nuclear proliferation in North Korea. I am looking forward to my travels to Southeast Asia, and the Philippines will be the coordinating country in the U.S. relationship with ASEAN, the primary organization-strategic organization for Southeast Asian countries. And in addition, the Philippines will be chairing the nonproliferation treaty conference that will be taking next-place next year. And so we are going to have a busy agenda together working to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons, improving the multilateral partnerships in Asia that can create greater security and greater prosperity for all countries. And in addition, we continue to be grateful for the outstanding contributions that the Philippines has made with respect to U.N. peacekeeping around the world. So although the Philippines is not the largest of countries, it, in using a phrase from boxing, punches above its weight in the international arena, and we are very grateful that President Arroyo has visited us here today. And we are looking forward to using this meeting as a way of launching even greater cooperation between our two countries in the years to come. On GDP, I do not have a crystal ball, and I have not received the figures yet, but I think if you look at the consensus of economists right now, it confirms that we have seen a significant slowing down of the contraction over the last several months.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksduringmeetingwithpresidentgloriamacapagalarroyothephilippinesandexchange", "title": "Remarks During a Meeting With President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo of the Philippines and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-during-meeting-with-president-gloria-macapagal-arroyo-the-philippines-and-exchange", "publication_date": "30-07-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3191, "text": "There are a lot of indicators out there that tell us that job losses, although still way too high, are not at the pace that we were seeing in January or February. Housing prices went up for the first time in 3 years. You are not seeing the huge volatility or panic that you were seeing. And so all of that is a sign that we have stepped away from the precipice. As Ben Bernanke and others across the ideological spectrum have indicated, we were in a position where we could have gone into a great depression. But I suspect that the GDP numbers will still show that the economy contracted in the second quarter, that job loss is still a huge problem. And you do not have to read GDP numbers to see that, all you got to do is talk to the American people who are still losing jobs, losing homes, and worried about their ability to keep their health care and finance their child's college educations. So we are not going to rest until we have seen not just a technical improvement in GDP but until the American people's job prospects, their incomes have rebounded, and that is going to take some time. With respect to tonight, you know, I am, I have to say, fascinated with the fascination about this evening. As you know, this idea was prompted when I was talking to Sergeant Crowley, and he said, Well, maybe I will have a beer in the White House some day, and I said, Well, you know, I am sure that can be arranged. This is three folks having a drink at the end of the day and hopefully giving people an opportunity to listen to each other. It is an attempt to have some personal interaction when an issue has become so hyped and so symbolic that you lose sight of just the fact that these are people involved, including myself, all of whom are imperfect. And hopefully instead of ginning up anger and hyperbole, everybody can just spend a little bit of time with some self-reflection and recognizing that other people have different points of view. And so I will be surprised if you guys all make this the lead as opposed to a very important meeting that we just had with one of our most important partners in the world, but the press has surprised me before.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksduringmeetingwithpresidentgloriamacapagalarroyothephilippinesandexchange", "title": "Remarks During a Meeting With President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo of the Philippines and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-during-meeting-with-president-gloria-macapagal-arroyo-the-philippines-and-exchange", "publication_date": "30-07-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3197, "text": "After that introduction, I am thinking many things. I am thinking, I wonder how long it will be before Miguel will run for office. I am thinking, it is much better to have such a friend than an opponent. Thank you for being my friend in ways that are personal as well as political. You may, however, have caused me quite a problem tonight, not over Vieques but over saying I have a Hispanic soul. And if I am the first black President and the first President to have a Hispanic soul, I am afraid they will never let me go home to Ireland. What a joy it is to have somebody like you in Congress who is not ashamed to have a good time being in public life. We ought to all enjoy it and be honored. You know, when I see people trudging around here all the time, complaining about how hard public life is and all the burdens, I say, You know, they are not giving these jobs away. People come to me all the time and say, Has not this been just awful for you? You know, a few turns in the road one way or the other and I could be home doing deeds, wills, and divorces. I am grateful to be here, and I like it, every day of it. And Loretta likes it, and she is grateful to be here, and I appreciate that. Secretary Slater, who represented me at home today in Arkansas at the funeral of Daisy Bates, a great hero of the civil rights movement; Administrator Alvarez; Maria Echaveste; my former Secretary of Transportation and Energy, Federico Pen a, who did a superb job in both places, it is nice to see you. I would also like to thank another former member of my administration who is here tonight, who is now working for Vice President Gore, Janet Murguia. Her brother was just confirmed as the first Hispanic Federal judge from Kansas, so we have got one of them on the payroll, anyway. I want to thank all the people at my table and other places who had so much to do with the success of this evening, Joe and Alfie and Roger and Leo and all the others. Thank you, Joe Andrew and the others who are here from the DNC. Make sure we all have a good time out there, will you? And let me say one serious word before I go forward.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3198, "text": "There is one person I really wish were here tonight, who died a couple of days ago, the great mayor of Sacramento, California, Mayor Joe Serna. Mickey Ibarra would be here, but he is out there representing me at that service today. So I ask you all to remember Isabel Serna and the family in your prayers. They have been through a lot. He was a magnificent mayor and a great Democrat and a great friend of mine. He was one of those people who enjoyed public service, had a good time doing it, and was proud down to the last day his health would no longer permit him to serve and I ask you to remember. one, Secretary Richardson, who is still in the administration; and the other whom I wish were here, Henry Cisneros, who has served us so ably and is such a great man. I thank him. Now, as all of you know, we are trying to finish this year's budget, and we are trying to do a few other things before the Congress goes home. And I'd like to mention just a few of them because I think they relate particularly to the concerns of the Hispanic community. We are fighting to get a reaffirmation of the commitment that Congress made last year, right before the election, that the majority, the Republican majority has voted to go back on. But I am determined that we will reinstate it, and that is to put 100,000 teachers out there in the early grades so we can lower class size and give our children a better education. We are fighting to give our hardest pressed communities that still have a high crime rate 50,000 police officers on the street. We are fighting to raise the minimum wage, which I think is very, very important, especially for lower income workers, many of whom are Hispanic. You know, we lifted over 1 1/2 million Hispanics out of poverty by doubling the earned-income tax credit in 1993 and then by raising the minimum wage. And it is time to raise it again. And I hope we can prevail, and I hope you will help us. We are trying to pass hate crimes legislation. We are trying to pass legislation that will enable disabled people to go into the work force and not lose their Medicaid health insurance.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3199, "text": "We are trying to pass the Caribbean Basin initiative and the African trade bill, which would open our markets to the Caribbean nations and African nations and open their markets more to us and put our Caribbean neighbors on a more equal footing with our Mexican neighbors in our trading relations. All of those things can still be done before the Congress goes home. And insofar as any of you have influence with anyone, I hope you will get out there and help us with our agenda, because all these things reflect the deepest values of the Democratic Party and our commitment to the future. I just want to make a couple of other points. I do not want to keep you late, and most of you have heard me give a lot of speeches. I had a very emotional day today. I was thinking about many things. I am about to leave to go to Europe. Hillary and Chelsea just left to go to the Middle East to continue the work that I was doing last week in our hope that we can, over the next 100 days, actually get a framework for a final peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Then I am going to Turkey and to Greece, two great friends of America, in the hope I can help them resolve some of their difficulties over Cyprus and other issues before I leave office. And then I am going on to Bulgaria, a great ally of ours, to try to keep pushing to make peace in the Balkans, where we have had to take up arms in Bosnia and Kosovo to stop ethnic cleansing and slaughter. And today I had this incredible experience, which would have been wonderful for any President but was especially wonderful for me. I hosted in the White House about 30 members of the United States Congress, Republicans and Democrats, and a couple of hundred other people to give the Congressional Gold Medal, the highest award Congress can award, to the nine students who integrated Little Rock Central High School 42 years ago. For those of you who are old enough to remember that or young enough to have studied it, you may know also that, in addition to the courage of the young children and the power of the Supreme Court's decisions and the court orders, the power of the Presidency was necessary for the integration of Little Rock Central High School when President Eisenhower sent in the 101st Airborne Division and later federalized the Arkansas National Guard to stop the obstruction. Today I signed a bill naming the Old Executive Office Building after President Eisenhower because he worked there many years in the military.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3200, "text": "That building, until the Great Depression, housed all the offices of the executive branch, including all the offices of what was then called the War Department, except for the Treasury Building and the Office of the President. So Dwight Eisenhower actually worked in that building as long as he worked in the White House as President. And his son, General John Eisenhower, who is also a noted historian, and John's wife and their daughter were there, so I asked them to come. So Dwight Eisenhower's son and granddaughter were actually present as we recognized these nine students. And because Arkansas is my home, I have lived with the reality of these people all my life, since I was 11 years old. And I said today that these nine students, in their simple desire to get a better education became, as children, our teachers. When I lived at home, literally 99 percent of all children in my State went to segregated schools. And we may have had an opinion one way or the other, but everybody more or less accepted it was the way it was. Where do you stand; what do you believe; how will we live? Thirty years later, I hosted them in the Governor's Mansion for the 30th anniversary of Little Rock Central High. I brought them all in, and I showed them all the rooms where the then-Governor planned the obstruction to keep them out the school. They got a big kick out of that. And 40 years later, 2 years ago, I went home to Little Rock, to the steps of Little Rock Central High School which in the 1920's was voted the most beautiful school building in America, and it is still a magnificent structure and I held the doors open for them, with our Governor, as they walked freely through the front door, something they had not been able to do 40 years ago. And then 2 years later, they came to the White House, with all their myriad family, kinfolks, and friends, for a celebration that truly represented America at its best. And to end it with you you and all those you represent have been so good to me and to Hillary and to the Vice President and Mrs. Gore is a great privilege. I just want to leave you with a couple of thoughts. Number one, many of you helped me in 1992 because you knew we did not want to keep on going the way we were going, because we had economic problems and social discord and political drift, and Government was discredited.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3201, "text": "So you knew what you were against, and you were willing to try something else. But I was just an argument for most of you. Most of you never met me before I started running for President, and you decided to give me a chance. So the first thing I want to say to you is it is not an argument anymore. Together, we made a good decision, and we have changed America for the better. Seven years later, when you go home tomorrow and you go back across the country and people ask you why you were there, you can say, Well, we gave him a chance, and we tried it their way. And as has already been said, we not only have had the most diverse administration with the most diverse appointments, including the judicial appointments more of whom I am trying to get up for a vote by the way in history, but we have the longest peacetime expansion in history, 19.8 million new jobs, the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years, the lowest welfare rolls in 30 years, the lowest crime rates in 30 years, the lowest poverty rates in 20 years, the lowest female unemployment rate in 46 years, the first back-to-back budget surpluses in 42 years, with the smallest Federal Government in 37 years. It is the right direction for America. So the second thing I want to say to you is, we have got to decide now, what are we going to do with this. Because even if I pass everything I am trying to pass, if we get a good minimum wage bill and the 100,000 teachers and the 50,000 police and we get the antienvironmental riders off the bills and we pass the Caribbean Basin/Africa trade initiative, we do all the things I mentioned to you, there still will be a lot for America to do. And of all Americans, Hispanics ought to be able to think about this, our country, as we would our family. I remember one of the nicest nights we ever shared at the White House, Federico and I, was when we previewed that wonderful movie Mi Familia at the White House. In my lifetime, which is stretching on and on as the days go by, in my lifetime, this is the first chance America has had to have, on the one hand, the prosperity and confidence that we have and, on the other, to be unburdened by serious, wrenching foreign threats to our security or domestic crises.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3202, "text": "In the 1960's we had, for a brief period more or less, the best economy we'd ever had, with low unemployment, low inflation. But we had, first, the civil rights crisis to deal with and then the war in Vietnam. Now what do you do, as a person, as a family, as a business, if things are better than they have ever been, but you can look ahead to the future and clearly see challenges and opportunities that will not be met or seized if you do not do certain things you are not doing now? What do you do? That is the great question before our people. I can tell you you know, I do not know about you, but I will just use my own life; from the time I was a little boy, one of the well, when I first ran for office, let me start with that. I asked an old sage in Arkansas politics, I said I was running really well in this race for Governor. In politics, you are always most vulnerable when you think you are invulnerable. How many times can you remember in your own life, when you broke your concentration, when you got divided, when you made a stupid mistake because you thought things were rocking along so well, nothing bad could happen? How many times has that happened to a family or to a business, where you just think things are going to roll on forever? I am telling you, this is a precious jewel we have been given, a gift we have been given as a country, to look ahead and say, Okay, what are the big challenges? You ought to make your own lists. I will just give you a few. The number of people over 65 is going to double in 30 years. Medicare is supposed to run out of money in 15 years. Seventy-five percent of our seniors cannot afford prescription drugs but need them to stay alive and maintain their quality of life. How are we going to deal with the aging of America? We have the largest number of children in our schools in history, the first time more people than the baby boom, and by far more diverse. Loretta was talking about that Republican newsletter from northwest Arkansas. Northwest Arkansas is one of the fastest growing areas of America, has been for 20 years, and one of the most racially and religiously homogeneous areas in the country. And all of a sudden, boom, they have this big infusion of Hispanics.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3203, "text": "The Catholic Church there now has a Spanish mass every Sunday and has had for the last several years. And that is nothing if you are from Orange County, but if you are from northwest Arkansas, that is a huge deal. We also have a big influx of people in western Arkansas from Southeast Asia. But last year, our State ranked first or second I am not sure which, but I am sure it is one of the two in the percentage growth of Hispanic population. Joe Andrew did not mention this, I do not think, but in addition to all the mayors we have celebrated, we have had a truly historic, breathtaking election in the State of Mississippi, where we won the governorship in a State where they did not think a Democrat could be elected for love or money. And part of it was the overwhelming African-American turnout. All over the South, their voices are being heard. And we only won the election by about 6,000 votes, so everybody can take credit for the victory. So we have to think about this. What are we going to do for all these children? They need a world-class education. If we do it right, the diversity of America will be a blessing in a global society. What are we going to do about the fact that this fabulous recovery has left people and places behind? Unemployment on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation is 73 percent. Upstate New York, outside of the suburbs in New York City, if it were a separate State, would rank 49th in job growth since I have been President. Hawaii, burdened by the collapse of the Asian economy, is the only State with no economic growth the inner cities, the Mississippi Delta, Appalachia. How are we going to bring prosperity to people and places left behind? Do we have the will to guarantee economic growth for a generation of Americans by taking America out of debt? I gave a budget to the Congress that will get us out of debt over the next 15 years, for the first time since 1835. And the progressive party, the Democrats, ought to be for that. It sounds like a conservative thing it is but it is the progressive thing to do in a global economy. Because if the government is not borrowing money, you can borrow it for less, and our trading partners can get more for less, and then they can be better partners with us, and they can lift their people out of poverty. How are we going to grow the economy and meet our environmental responsibility? We have proved you could do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3204, "text": "Are we going to keep doing it? We have got the lowest crime rate in 30 years. If you do, let me just give you one statistic. The accidental death rate of children from gun shots in the United States is 9 times the rate of the next 25 biggest industrial economies combined. I think we now know we can bring the crime rate down. Why do not we set a realistic goal? I mean realistic in terms of our dreams. Why do not we say we will not quit until America is the safest big country in the world? And if we want that, how are we going to do it? Last night, I appeared in the first-ever townhall meeting on the Internet, which was interesting for me, since one of the reasons I asked the Vice President to join the ticket is because I was so technologically challenged. It was quite a thrill for me to do that. But there is a digital divide, and it can have huge consequences. I was in northern California the other night, meeting with people who work for eBay. Do you all ever use eBay? You want to hear something interesting? Over 20,000 Americans now make a living on eBay, not working for eBay, trading on eBay, many of them former welfare recipients. Think of what we could do in America to close the economic divide if we could close the digital divide, if usage and access to computers and connections to the Internet were as dense as telephone ownership and usage. Now, these are the kind of things we ought to be thinking about. Well, I think one of them is we can start running away from each other because we have all of a sudden gotten afraid of trade. We need to keep expanding trade but work harder to put a human face on it, to take into account legitimate environmental issues and labor issues, but not to run away from the fact that with 4 percent of the world's people and 22 percent of the world's income if we want to continue to grow, we have got to sell something to the other 96 percent. And if we want to sell something to them, particularly since we are richer, we have to be willing to buy things. The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, chemical, and biological, and the possibility that they can be made in smaller quantities, like everything else is smaller. We have got cell phones so small now my big old fingers will not even hit the numbers right.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3205, "text": "The miniaturization of all things technical will apply to weapons, as well, make no mistake about it. This is a serious challenge, the growth of terrorism around the world, the prospect that the terrorists, the drug runners, the organized criminals will all start working together, and the rampant threat of racial, ethnic, and religious wars big challenges. Which brings me to the last one. Can we truly make our motto, E Pluribus Unum, real as we grow ever more diverse? It requires, I would argue, three things. One is we have to respect, not just tolerate not just tolerate but respect and celebrate our differences. You know, I do not have the same attitude as the people that put out that memo Loretta talked about. I think it is a lot more interesting in America as we grow more diverse. I will never forget the first Cinco de Mayo celebration I went to in San Francisco. I mean, what have we been doing here? You know, I used to when I was Governor of my home State, I used to go to a place called Little Italy to eat spaghetti in a town called Slovak, to meet with the farmers that came there in the 1848 revolution. And now we are just repeating our history in technicolor, times four. But let us stop all this tolerance stuff. We need respect and celebration of our differences, number one. Number two, we need to recognize that, as we have from the beginning, we have genuine differences of opinion, which ought to be forthrightly and publicly argued. In that sense, and if that is all we are doing, partisanship is not necessarily a bad thing. When people say partisanship with a little negative edge, what they really mean is these people in Washington are fighting their partisan battles trying to increase their power without concern for the public interest. But we will always have honest differences. I know why I am a Democrat in the year 1999. And I have friends in the Republican Party who know why they are Republicans. And we honestly see the world in different ways. We ought to create a safe and constructive way for people to feel free to think and argue. But the third thing we have to do is to recognize that the differences we celebrate and the differences we fight over, neither one of them are nearly as important as our common humanity. And that is what the world keeps forgetting, at its peril.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3206, "text": "Do not you think it is interesting that, at a time when we talk about the Internet this and finding a cure for cancer, and last year we actually were able to transplant nerves into the spine of laboratory animals that had had their spines severed, and for the first time ever they have movement in their lower limbs. Two years ago we identified the two genes that are the biggest predictors of breast cancer for women. Within a couple of years, when mothers take their babies home from the hospital, we will be able to give them a genetic map which will say, here are the things your child has a greater than normal propensity for, but if you do the following things, you can minimize them. A lot of people I know, experts in the field, actually believe within a very few years babies will be born with a life expectancy of nearly a century within a very few years. Is not it interesting, at this time, with all this marvelous stuff happening, not to mention all the techno-joys we can have, that the biggest problems we have in the world are rooted in the oldest failing of human society? We are afraid of people who are different from us. And when you are afraid of somebody who is different from you, it is easy to formalize that fear in dislike or hatred, and it is a short step to dehumanizing them, after which it is a short step to taking violent action against them and to thinking it really does not matter. I will never forget being in the airport at Kigali, Rwanda, talking to a woman who thought she had been killed, because she was cut up in one of the machete rampages in the Rwandan genocide, and she woke up to find her husband and her six children all slashed to death around her. She is the only surviving one, knowing that they had been betrayed by her neighbor, a person they lived with, lived next to her, in total peace for years, and boom, like that, they started the fight between the Hutus and Tutsis, and people turned on a dime, betrayed their neighbors-for-life, and let people be slaughtered. Now, there are lots of other stories that are heroic on the other side. But what happens to people?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3207, "text": "Why are the Catholics and the Protestants still fighting in Northern Ireland when the Irish Republic has got the fastest growing economy in Europe, and their common heritage is rich and fascinating and interesting, and they could be having arguments in bars or in Parliament and making money, instead, and educating their children? What is it that is keeping the Israelis and the Palestinians from taking these last few steps, the Syrians from joining in? Why are there other terrorist and rejectionist groups that are prepared to go out and kill innocent civilians to keep the Israelis and the Palestinians and the Syrians from making their final peace agreement? If you look at America, you look at the success of people from the Indian subcontinent in America from India, from Pakistan, from Bangladesh the phenomenal success, if you look at the fact that India will be bigger than China in 20 years, that they both have big scientific bases of expertise, why are they fighting over the line of control in Kashmir? Why cannot they work that out? Why is that such a big problem that they keep spending money preparing to go to war with one another instead of educating their children and alleviating the abject poverty that is holding them down and keeping them from their full potential? But you get the point. Why did I have to go into Europe and bring the power of the American military to bear in Bosnia and Kosovo to keep people from slaughtering mostly Muslims, although others were involved too. Same reason, in a more thank God mundane but still very cruel way people were spitting on and kicking and cursing those nine kids when they tried to go to Little Rock Central High School 42 years ago. One of the great human weaknesses is that when people get organized, they think that, in order for their tribe to matter, the other tribe has to matter less. In order for their lifestyle to be validated, somebody else's has to be invalidated, that every difference of opinion turns out to be a difference justifying the dehumanization of your opponent. This is a very dangerous thing, made more dangerous, not less, by the collision of societies and the close contact and the openness of borders. So we need you for another reason. We need you in the Democratic Party. We need you as Americans. We need you to remind us of what the concept of family means to you. What are the obligations of people who are in your family? What do we owe to one another?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteehispanicleadershipforumdinner", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Hispanic Leadership Forum Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-hispanic-leadership-forum-dinner", "publication_date": "09-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3208, "text": "Of course, I want to start my remarks by extending to all of you the President's apologies for not being present at lunch today. This meeting was to be a high point of his trip. I am sure you all know as well of his great respect and warm feelings for former Prime Minister Kaifu. And it is with real regret that he was not able to be here at lunchtime today. I talked to his doctor just an hour ago. The doctor is a former classmate of mine at college. I know him very well, so I can assure you the information is correct. The doctor has told the President in very strict terms to rest this morning. He will be resuming his schedule later today and, I am sure, will express to all of you his deep regret at not being able to join you at this wonderful gathering. Prime Minister, members of the Diet, distinguished guests, it is a deep honor to be here today. President has asked me to make his remarks to you this afternoon. Although there have been minor grammatical changes in pronouns, this is the President's speech. We come to Japan at the culmination of a long and productive journey. Today we stand at a turning point in history. The Soviet Union has vanished and with it the delusions of communism. Centuries-old enemies in the Middle East are tempering ancient hatreds in pursuit of peace. Freedom's phoenix is rising from the ashes of tyranny in nations from Latin America to Eastern Europe and from Cambodia to Mongolia. Freedom's rebirth was painful, its triumphs inscribed in blood, its truce seared by the fires of war and sacrifice. First, that isolationism and protectionism lead to war and deprivation; and second, that political engagement and open trade lead to peace and prosperity. These last few years we again learned of the power of ideas. Technologies that transmit ideas in the blink of an eye carry the human spirit over barricades and through barbed wire. They hurdle walls designed to hold back the truth. We live in a world transformed, shrunken by swift travel and instant communication, drawn closer by common interests and ambitions, propelled forward by people's imaginations and dreams. As leaders of this transforming world, the United States and Japan must help build a new international order based on the rule of law, respect for human rights, and political and economic liberty. We must shape a world enriched by open trade and robust competition, a world that will create a better life for people of all nations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstextremarksthejapanesewelcomingcommitteeluncheontokyo", "title": "Text of Remarks at the Japanese Welcoming Committee Luncheon in Tokyo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/text-remarks-the-japanese-welcoming-committee-luncheon-tokyo", "publication_date": "09-01-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3209, "text": "The United States lies between two great oceans, the Atlantic and the Pacific. We are a nation of the Atlantic by birth, but our ties to the Asia-Pacific region deepen daily. Our two-way trade is now $310 billion annually, one-third larger than that with Europe. American businesses cannot flourish in Asia unless the economies of Asia thrive and grow. At the same time, Japan's growth needs American markets open and growing. Since 1975, the number of Americans of Asian origin has nearly quadrupled. What happens here is very important to us. And at the core of our continuing Asian engagement stands our alliance with Japan. At each stop during his visit to the region, the President has stressed the challenges we must face, addressing the new security requirements of our transforming world, promoting democracy, and generating world economic growth and prosperity. Let me expand upon that by focusing on the special relationship that the United States enjoys with Japan. Rarely in history have two nations with such different and differing historic cultural roots developed such an extraordinary relationship. Our people are bound by shared security, by democracy, and by our deep economic ties. There are those who doubt the future of this relationship. Here in Japan you have a saying, Some rain must fall to prepare the ground for building. We can all see that without progress we may be in for some rough weather. And I must be frank in saying that there are problems in our economic relationship. Speaking not only for the United States but for many developed countries, Japan's trade surplus is too high, and its market access too restricted. President Bush has come to Japan as a friend, seeking solutions to these concerns, believing that the expansion of free and fair trade will do nothing but strengthen our relationship. We in the United States are confident about our capacity for partnership. Our areas of common interest are too important. We enjoy a strong security bond with Japan. Japan's generous host-nation support for U.S. forces stationed here is an important demonstration of shared responsibilities. Let us make the most efficient use of our defense resources by building greater coordination of our military forces and by promoting the two-way flow of defense technology. Such cooperation enhances our security and builds even stronger political ties between us. The Gulf crisis sparked spirited debate here about Japan's global role. That makes it all the more profound that no nation outside the Gulf region provided more generous financial support than did Japan.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstextremarksthejapanesewelcomingcommitteeluncheontokyo", "title": "Text of Remarks at the Japanese Welcoming Committee Luncheon in Tokyo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/text-remarks-the-japanese-welcoming-committee-luncheon-tokyo", "publication_date": "09-01-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3210, "text": "The American people and peace-loving people everywhere appreciate deeply your contribution, Japan's contribution, to the United Nations coalition in the Gulf. Even before the Gulf war, but especially in its aftermath, Japan has continued to define its growing role in world affairs. An increasingly active, engaged, and responsible Japan is critical to a forward-looking post-cold-war community. This brings us to the second area of our relationship, our foreign policy cooperation. We must fulfill the bright promise of our global partnership. Together, we produce 40 percent of the world's gross national product. We contribute together 40 percent of all bilateral aid. We have the ability to marshal unrivaled resources to build a better future if our foreign policies are well coordinated. America has a responsibility here, but it is a responsibility we share with Japan. The upcoming conference on assistance to the nations of the former U.S.S.R., now the Commonwealth of Independent States, is a timely example of such foreign policy coordination. The collapse of the Soviet Union has also spurred questions within Japan about the durability of U.S.-Japan alliance. For decades, this alliance has stood as the bulwark of American-Japanese international cooperation. It is today every bit the linchpin of regional stability and bilateral cooperation that wise men foresaw years ago. The demise of the Soviet Union may confront us both with ominous dangers, but it also presents us an historic opportunity. The leadership Japan and other Asian nations can provide to help transform a once-totalitarian empire into market-oriented and democratic states helps guarantee the future peace and stability of our world. Let me add that with the changes in the former Soviet Union, the United States sees no reason why Japan should not regain the Northern Territories. We share this goal, and in whatever way we can, we will help you attain it. We cannot imagine meeting the foreign policy challenges of our time without Japan as a partner. That is why today Prime Minister Miyazawa and President Bush will issue a document called the Tokyo Declaration, setting out the basic principles and major challenges of our global partnership. By putting into words the fundamentals of the two great partners, we hope to guide the way through the turbulent waters ahead. We must be clear about our responsibilities and our requirements, for our renewed alliance will do much to define the shape of the post-cold-war world. Third, we must deepen our understanding of each other.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstextremarksthejapanesewelcomingcommitteeluncheontokyo", "title": "Text of Remarks at the Japanese Welcoming Committee Luncheon in Tokyo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/text-remarks-the-japanese-welcoming-committee-luncheon-tokyo", "publication_date": "09-01-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3211, "text": "For all of our interaction politically and economically, our peoples know too little of the other's history, traditions, and language. We welcome the work of the Center for Global Partnership in expanding exchanges and interactions, intellectual, scientific, and cultural. Thanks to such programs, our two nations will have an ever-increasing number of people who have lived in each other's country, speak each other's language, and understand more fully how important we are to each other. Although more than 200,000 Asian students now study in American colleges and universities, more Americans must immerse themselves in Asian societies and cultures. As the exchange of free people and ideas flows between our nations and as the cold war ends in victory for our cause, our economic relations have taken center stage. This brings me to the fourth and most important point. If we are to expand our economic ties, we must face up to the economic tensions that threaten our relations. We must reduce those tensions now by opening markets and by eliminating barriers to trade and investment. Japan will sell about $90 billion worth of goods and services to the United States this year. We will sell nearly $50 billion to Japan. Isolation and protectionism must remain the sleeping ghosts of the past, not the waking nightmares of the future. We must reject these failed notions in the sure knowledge that expanding markets mean expanding jobs and increasing prosperity for both our countries. We must ensure a continued strong two-way economic relationship between Japan and the United States, with markets more open to new goods and services, manufacturers more open to new competitive ideas, the financial services industry competing on a fair basis, and an equitable flow of technology on both sides. Our two countries share a special responsibility to strengthen the world economy. Yesterday the President and the Prime Minister announced a strategy for world growth which commits both our countries to domestic policies to stimulate growth. Expanded domestic demand in Japan translates into additional exports to Japan for American products and jobs at home. And we are seeking broad support for growth policies among other industrialized countries as well. Many American businesses learned during the past decade that the old ways no longer work in our changing international marketplace. Our companies have cut costs, improved quality, and championed innovation. As a result, our products sell in markets everywhere they have access. And candidly, such access is still limited in Japan. We must reduce the trade imbalance between us, not through managed trade, through gimmicks or artificial devices, but simply by gaining true and welcome access to your markets.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstextremarksthejapanesewelcomingcommitteeluncheontokyo", "title": "Text of Remarks at the Japanese Welcoming Committee Luncheon in Tokyo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/text-remarks-the-japanese-welcoming-committee-luncheon-tokyo", "publication_date": "09-01-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3212, "text": "We want to create fair opportunities for traders and investors, both buyers and sellers, by removing the barriers both seen and unseen to open and equitable trade. American business does not need a handout and does not want one. Some say that perhaps it is time to help the United States out of a sense of pity or compassion. Let me tell you, we are looking for no such help. What the United States wants from Japan is for Japan to recognize its international economic responsibility for its own sake and for the sake of the global marketplace upon which Japan depends. When we express appreciation to those who seek to open Japanese markets, it is not because we need a handout but because we know an open Japan is good for us all. Our companies simply expect the chance to compete fairly in markets around the world. Our Government remains committed to open markets, and we will further reduce our own trade barriers as our friends dismantle their own. Our two countries have embarked on a unique experiment in economic independence called the Structural Impediments Initiative. In this effort, each side pinpoints the other's barriers to competitiveness, and each commits to reduce them. We both must reinvigorate this commitment to market access, whether for high quality American products or quality American services. The beneficiaries will be the workers and consumers on both sides of the Pacific. It means greater openness in many sectors of the Japanese economy still biased against outside investment. These practices hurt American companies, but they also hurt Japanese consumers. Americans want the same things you want, a better quality of life for themselves and their families. Americans never say, Please raise our prices. Every worker is also a consumer, and economic competition brings them great choices and lower prices. In fact, the Toys-R-Us store that the President visited in Kyoto offers prices up to 30 percent lower than its Japanese competition. The stunning success of the consumers' response to its sister store north of Tokyo tells the same story. That is good for us, and it is good for you. We sold more exports last year than ever before. We enjoy a trade surplus with Europe. About one-third of our economic growth between 1985 and 1990 was attributable to merchandise exports. To Japan, our manufactured exports are up 70 percent since 1987, a $20 billion increase that represents almost half a million jobs. Still the overall trade deficit with Japan remains large. And I might add, its persistence is truly the exception among our trading partners.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstextremarksthejapanesewelcomingcommitteeluncheontokyo", "title": "Text of Remarks at the Japanese Welcoming Committee Luncheon in Tokyo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/text-remarks-the-japanese-welcoming-committee-luncheon-tokyo", "publication_date": "09-01-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3213, "text": "We have waited a long time, but now the time has come for equal access. Fairplay is in both our interests. As you know, the United States and Japan also face the urgent challenge of leading the way to a successful conclusion of the Uruguay round. Because of the benefits we each derive from free trade, Japan and the United States bear a special responsibility for tackling the remaining difficult issues quickly and decisively. The success of the round depends on bold, farsighted leadership. We must lift our gaze to the glimmering horizon of broader prosperity and not worry over the stones in our immediate path. Yes, all of us have problems with portions of the so-called Dunkel draft, but we cannot let the progress it represents slip through our fingers. If we allow that draft to be picked apart by special interests, who wins? The GATT round is the world's best hope for expanding trade for all countries. They believe very, very strongly in creating a level playing field for everyone. We want all our trading partners to give the United States companies the same kind of opportunities that their firms enjoy in the United States. And it creates a basis for even greater freedom and greater prosperity for all. Many of our Japanese friends argue that the United States must improve its competitiveness, and they are right. We recognize that some of our bilateral trade imbalance stems from causes other than restricted market access. One reason for Japan's competitiveness is because Japan has saved and invested at a rate double that of the United States. You have focused on applied research and development and new manufacturing technologies. Your companies have established fine quality control systems. You have developed a highly educated labor force and have taken the long view to develop markets abroad. There is much for us to learn from you. We are taking steps to boost our competitiveness. We can and will increase our rate of savings and investment. We will continue to boost our manufacturing's excellence. We will reduce the budget deficit. To stimulate innovation, risk, and longer term business outlook, the President is pushing for investment incentives, R&D credits, and capital gains tax cuts. It would be easier if our politicians saw the positive effect on Japan's competitiveness due to low capital gains rates. And America must raise its educational standards. Our America 2000 education strategy will fuel a revolution for better quality schools. This is another path to competitiveness. The education achievements of Japan and others in the Asia-Pacific region inspire us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstextremarksthejapanesewelcomingcommitteeluncheontokyo", "title": "Text of Remarks at the Japanese Welcoming Committee Luncheon in Tokyo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/text-remarks-the-japanese-welcoming-committee-luncheon-tokyo", "publication_date": "09-01-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3214, "text": "That is why President Bush has invited the countries of the Pacific Rim to send their education ministers to Washington for a conference this spring to seek new ways to cooperate and to learn from each other's accomplishments. With the President today, traveling with him, is a delegation of America's top business leaders. They have come to explore new business opportunities in all the nations the President has visited. Every one of them can tell you that despite the fact that our economy is facing some new tough times right now, America still draws upon tremendous strengths. We have many of the world's finest universities. American technology remains on the cutting edge in many advanced fields such as computers and biotechnology. It has the added advantage of drawing upon the strengths and insights of many cultures, including Japan's. The chief executive officers accompanying the President will also tell you that they care about American jobs. They care about American exports. We know that the Asian-Pacific market offers enormous potential to those American businesses that will accept the challenge of competition. That same competition has propelled Japan toward world leadership. Open markets around the world has provided Japan with economic prominence. Japan must now join the ranks of world leadership in strengthening free markets and freedom. Finally, let me leave with you a message that the President wished to give directly to the people of Japan. fairness, trust, and respect. We expect nothing less, and we ask for nothing more. Today marks a turning point for us in many ways. Together, we face the next millennium, a new order for the ages, a new world of freedom and democracy. We stand as the world's powers with the future presenting us with a decision. The United States has made its choice against isolationism and in favor of engagement, against protectionism and for expanding trade. Today we bid Japan to do the same because engagement and open trade are in your best interest. Together, let us shape a new and open world, a world of vigorous competition and dazzling innovation. Let us build a world of greater prosperity and peace than ever before, if not for the sake of ourselves, then for the sake of our children. This is the finest legacy that we could bequeath to them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstextremarksthejapanesewelcomingcommitteeluncheontokyo", "title": "Text of Remarks at the Japanese Welcoming Committee Luncheon in Tokyo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/text-remarks-the-japanese-welcoming-committee-luncheon-tokyo", "publication_date": "09-01-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3217, "text": "Well, first of all, let me tell you what I'd like to do. I like small events like this, with fewer people. And what I'd like to do most of what I have to say about the last 8 years I said at the convention in L.A., and maybe you saw it, and if you did, there is nothing else I can say. I would like to just talk for a few minutes, not long, and then just take the microphone away and have a conversation. If you have got anything you want to ask me or you have anything you want to say or if you'd like to give a speech, just feel free to do it. I want to thank you, Mitch, for what you said. It means more to me than I can say. I want to thank Sim and Debbie, who have been great friends to me and my family. We met them through Senator Boxer, but I cannot-I do not even have the words to say how grateful I am to you for how good you have been to all the members of my family, my motherin-law, my brother-in-law, my nephew. I feel like a bag lady around you. Here is what I'd like you to think about. If somebody asks you tomorrow, Why did you come here and give this money, what would your answer be? Besides, you know, you wanted to get in here and look at this unbelievable house. If I'd found this house when I was 6 years old, I never would have gone out of it. But anyway, this is what I would like to say. When I ran for ENTITY in 1992, only my mother thought I could win. And I did it. It was not easy for me. I was very happy being Governor of my State. My family was in good shape. I was having a great time with my friends. But I had some very definite ideas about how our country ought to work and how we should change direction. And I was afraid that the country was really in trouble. And I thought, well, even if I do not win, maybe we can move the country off the dime. And the first time I realized I had a chance to win was when I was in the snows of New Hampshire in late 1991, and I was going to a little town called Keene, up in northern New Hampshire.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteedinnerhiddenhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Dinner in Hidden Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-dinner-hidden-hills-california", "publication_date": "24-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3218, "text": "So I was asking these young people who were helping me in New Hampshire, I said-they said, We are going to go up here and have a town meeting, but you have got to understand there are six people running for the Democratic nomination. And President Bush is at 70 percent, but New Hampshire is a basket case, and people are hurting . And I said, Look, I said, get to the bottom line here. How many people do I have to have at this town meeting to avoid being humiliated? And they said 50. And I said, Well, what if we get 100? I said, What if we get 150? I was fifth in the polls in New Hampshire. I had nearly negative name recognition. But I had put out this booklet telling people exactly what I would do if I got elected, not what I would try to do. So we showed up in Keene, and 400 people showed up, and the fire marshal shut it down. And keep in mind, they did not -they were not coming there because they were committed to me. They were coming there because they heard that somebody who was serious about the problems of America wanted to talk to them and listen to them and try to change the direction of the country. And I saw those 400 people-I got on the phone and called Hillary and said, This thing may run a little further than we think here. But I say that to make the first point, which is that to a degree that is often underestimated, the Nation's business is like other businesses. It really matters if you have got a clear analysis of where you are, a clear vision of where you want to go and if you lay out what you are going to do. And it is a lot easier to do the job if you get people around you who want to be on the team, and they work like crazy. It makes a difference. The problems of the Nation yield to efforts in the same way the problems of any other enterprise does. And I think sometimes we forget that. And I have been very blessed and have had a great Cabinet and a great staff and people who work like crazy and who had far less destructive ego problems and far fewer sharp elbows than the previous administration had suffered from. And as hard as it is going to be to leave in many ways, that is the way the system is supposed to work. And so that brings me to the present moment.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteedinnerhiddenhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Dinner in Hidden Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-dinner-hidden-hills-california", "publication_date": "24-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3219, "text": "The only thing I ever worried about in this election was that the American people would somehow believe it was not important because times were good, that somehow the consequences of their collective decisions on election day were somehow not profound. It is very often easier to make a good decision when you are up against a wall than it is when times are good. Nobody over 30 years old can deny having made at least one colossal mistake in their life, not because times were so bad but because things seemed to go so well, you thought you did not have to concentrate anymore-nobody. If you live long enough, you make those mistakes. So the first thing I want to say is, I have spent a lot of time in my life studying the history of my country. I love it very much. If you come to my office in the White House, you will see a lot of-you will see an original edition of the only book Thomas Jefferson ever wrote and two original printings of George Washington's Farewell Address. I have studied this country closely. I am not sure we have ever had a time when we have had, at the same time, so much economic prosperity, so much social progress with the absence of gripping internal crisis or external threat. So the main issue here in this election season is, what do people believe this election is about anyway? Governor Bush gave a beautiful speech in Philadelphia. It was eloquent, and it studiously avoided being specific about what he would do if he were President. Al Gore gave a very good speech in Los Angeles, which revealed who he was. But most important of all, he said-he gave a lot of respect to the American people. And unlike other job interviews, you are running for ENTITY. You have to define the job. The people want you to say what you think the job is and then what you will do. So he said, If you hire me, this is what I will do. And lo and behold, he got a bigger bump out of our convention than they got out of theirs, even among people, I suspect, who were not sure they agreed with everything he said or maybe he could not remember more than two or three things. He said, This is what it is about.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteedinnerhiddenhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Dinner in Hidden Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-dinner-hidden-hills-california", "publication_date": "24-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3220, "text": "So the first thing I want to say to you is, based on 8 years of experience, is that anyone who wants to be President in a dynamic time should be flexible enough to admit that he might have been wrong, flexible enough to change course, but it really matters whether you have thought through what you were going to do with this job when you get it. It is a great comfort when the storms come and when you are in all kind of conflict and all this political stuff is happening in Washington the way it does, and people who are in the business or around it primarily for power are pulling back and forth-if you get up every day with a very clear idea of what you said you were going to do and what you believe the country needs, it is an unbelievable asset to America. So one good reason to be for this guy is, he actually talks about what he would do if he were President in great detail, with the benefit of a unique amount of experience. Now, this may seem self-evident to you, but you go back and look at all the Presidential campaigns in the 20th century. In New Hampshire, I knew that America was moving to this because Senator Tsongas, who was from Massachusetts next door, who won the New Hampshire primary, and I got 60 percent of the vote between us in a six-way race, and we were the only two people that put out very detailed plans of what we would do. The second thing I want to say is, what I think we should be thinking about is how we keep this thing going, first of all. What could go wrong with this economy? How do we head off the problems, maximize the opportunities? And then what are the really big challenges out there for America? Because when you have this luxury and this kind of circumstance, you ought to be going after the big challenge. What are we going to do when all the baby boomers retire and there is two people working for every one person drawing Social Security? What are we going to do when all of America looks like California-there is no majority race- and we have the biggest bunch of school kids we have ever had from all these diverse racial, ethnic, religious backgrounds and with different first languages. The most diverse school district, interestingly enough, is not Los Angeles or New York or Chicago; it is Fairfax County, Virginia, just across the river from Washington, where there are children from 180 different racial and ethnic groups with over 100 different native languages.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteedinnerhiddenhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Dinner in Hidden Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-dinner-hidden-hills-california", "publication_date": "24-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3221, "text": "And I spent a lot of time there. What I want to say-because California has done a lot of good work in education the last few years, and I am honored to have the attorney general and the speaker here tonight. We know something we did not know 20 years ago, when Hillary and I started working on public schools. We actually know how to turn failing schools around. We actually know what it means to say all children can learn. I was in a school in Harlem the other day where 2 years ago, 80 percent of the kids were doing reading and math below grade level. Two years later-2 years later- in one of the poorest neighborhoods in New York City, 74 percent of the kids were doing reading and math at or above grade level-2 years. But the one thing America has never done, ever-and there was no real penalty to it before, but there is now-we have never taken what works in some places and been able to make it work everywhere for our schools. How are we going to do that? People used to make fun of Al Gore when he talked about global warming. We just got a study from one of the polar icecaps that indicates the 1990's were the warmest decade in a thousand years. I think we ought to have somebody in the White House that understands that. I personally think we ought to keep paying down the debt until we get out of debt for the first time since 1835, because that will keep interest rates lower, and our growth in this 8-year period has been more generated by private sector growth than any economic recovery in the 20th century. You can make your own list. But you think about the big things. That is what America ought to be focused on. The third thing I would like to say, and I think by far the most important, is that we need, as a nation, to have, in my judgment, a unifying, a synthesizing view of human society and human history. I have always tried to bring people together. I ran for ENTITY because I hated what I was hearing out of Washington every night. There was nobody in Congress to get on television and get their 15 seconds at night on the evening news unless they were somehow coming up with a wedge issue that divided us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteedinnerhiddenhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Dinner in Hidden Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-dinner-hidden-hills-california", "publication_date": "24-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3222, "text": "But if you think about the way you run your family or your business or any other enterprise, if you spent most of your time on what divided you and none of your time trying to get together, the whole society would fall apart. And yet, national politics, because it is a long way from us and operates at a fairly high level of abstraction, at a time when people do not believe you can do anything right, there is no way to make any headway politically unless you have wedge issues. And I think one of the signal achievements of this administration in rolling back the Gingrich revolution was to reject the politics of division in favor of the politics of unity. And you know, my political philosophy is very simple and borne of my life experience. I think everybody counts; everybody ought to have a chance; and we all do better when we help each other. That is what I believe. I actually believe that. And there is an interesting book out that I recommend, written by a man named Robert Wright, who previously wrote a book called The Moral Animal. It is called Non Zero, and it is a reference to game theory. You know, a zero-sum game is one where, in order for me to win, you have got to lose, or vice-versa, like a golf match. One of them will win; one of them will lose. But the argument he makes in this book is that as societies grow more and more complex and we become more and more interdependent, both within and beyond national borders, we have a greater and greater stake in finding ways to win together. And that, basically, he makes an historical argument for Martin Luther King's wonderful famous saying that, the arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice. And I guess we all like books that agree with us. But I have spent my whole life believing that we waste a lot of our lives by trying to lift ourselves up by putting other people down. So if I could leave America with one wish, it would not be even for continued prosperity; it would be to find some way to get over all this stuff that we are hung up about, respect our differences, relish our differences, teach children to be proud of their ethnic, their racial, their religious heritage; but somehow understand that, underneath it all, the most important thing of all is our common humanity. And I think it is more important than ever before because of the scientific and technological advances we face.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteedinnerhiddenhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Dinner in Hidden Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-dinner-hidden-hills-california", "publication_date": "24-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3223, "text": "Terrorists will be able to come across national borders with chemical and biological weapons in plastic cases that will not show up on airport metal detectors. The forces of division will be able to do things. If we do not do something about the ENTITY epidemic in Africa and the growing rates in South Asia and the rapidly growing rates in the countries of the former Soviet Union, it will eventually come back around to this country where we are making real headway. If we do not do something about the total breakdown of public health systems in poor countries around the world, all these places that we are looking for to buy our products, because we have got 4 percent of the world's people and 22 percent of the world's wealth, they are not going to have any money; they will not even have any people to buy our products. There are African countries that, within a decade, will have more people in them in their sixties than in their thirties. So what I want to say is, look, I think the best time in human history is unfolding. I think the children in this room tonight will grow up, if we make good decisions, in the most exciting, peaceful, prosperous, interconnected time in all of human history. But nothing happens by accident. So if somebody asked you tomorrow why you came, I hope you will say, Well, I think they have had a pretty good 8 years. The country is going in the right direction. Number two, they seem to have a pretty good idea of what they will do if I give them the job. Number three, I want somebody that will take on big things. I do not want to blow this, certainly the chance of 50 years. And that is basically the defining, enduring dream of the 20th century Democratic Party. And if I have contributed to it, I am grateful. But you know, this is an interesting position for me. I always tell everybody, for most of my life, I was the youngest person who was doing whatever it was I was doing. Now I go in a room, most people are younger than me. Now people look at me like I have got a leg in the grave. My party's got a new leader. My family's got a new candidate. I am the Cheerleader in Chief of the country. What am I supposed to do? I will tell you, the thing that I really want out of all of this is just for you to make the most of it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteedinnerhiddenhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Dinner in Hidden Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-dinner-hidden-hills-california", "publication_date": "24-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3224, "text": "And I will just leave you with this one story. I think that if I had any success, part of it was the way I was raised. I think most American people thought I was pulling-I think the people that served this dinner tonight ought to have the same chance to send their kids to college that you do. I believe that. I believe that disabled people ought to be able to access modern technology, because I do not think their bodies ought to keep them from living however much of their dreams that they can live. I went to Flint, Michigan. I will close with this story, because this will make the point. I went to Flint, Michigan, this week to go to one of the community computer centers we are setting up around the country in low-income areas, to try to make sure that people can access the information resources for the Internet. And I got a bunch of stuff in the budget that would put a thousand of these up. But the reason I went to Flint is that it used to be the automotive capital of Michigan, even more than Detroit. They have had to rebuild their whole economy, but they have maybe the best outreach programs to the disability community in their city of anyplace in the country. So I saw software where blind people were working on braille and putting it into the Internet, and then the computer would speak back to them, so they know that they got the Email right or the message right. And I saw the deaf people working on it, and the computer would write back to them so that they could see that they had gotten it right. And this wonderful woman said to me, You know, I get E-mails every week from a guy in North Carolina named Joe Martin, and I understand you know him. And I said, Yes, I do know him. I will tell you about Joe Martin, because I think we ought to empower everybody to live like this. In the 1980's, when I was a young Governor, I was active in something called the Southern Growth Policy Board. And it is a group of Governors and legislators and other folks, businesspeople and educators. And we worked on growing the southern economy and trying to catch it up to the rest of the country. And basically, we worked on jobs and schools; that is what we did. One of the North Carolina delegates was this guy, Joe Martin, whose brother was the Republican Governor of North Carolina.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdemocraticnationalcommitteedinnerhiddenhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Democratic National Committee Dinner in Hidden Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-democratic-national-committee-dinner-hidden-hills-california", "publication_date": "24-09-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3225, "text": "Well, one of the great pleasures of this job, but also one of my responsibilities, is making sure that we are preserving our Nation's treasures so that they can be enjoyed by our children, our grandchildren, our great-grandchildren. And over the years, over a hundred sites have been set aside as national monuments, everything from the Statue of Liberty to the Grand Canyon. So today I am continuing that proud tradition by adding another monument to the list. Fort Monroe in Hampton, Virginia, has played a remarkable role in the history of our Nation. It was the site of the first slave ships to land in the New World. But during the Civil War, almost 250 years later, Fort Monroe also became a refuge for slaves that were escaping from the South and helped create the environment in which Abraham Lincoln was able to sign that document up there, the Emancipation Proclamation. In September, Fort Monroe closed its doors as a military base. But thanks to the advocacy of some outstanding citizens and historians and elected officials who are represented here, as well as the great work of our Department of the Interior and Ken Salazar and the all the people who have been involved in making this day possible, we are going to continue this legacy, making Fort Monroe a national monument. This is going to give an opportunity for people from all across the country to travel to Fort Monroe and trace the history that has been so important to making America what it is. It is also going to be an incredibly important economic boost to the region. Local officials estimate that this may end up creating as many as 3,000 jobs in the region. It will add millions of dollars to the local economy in and around Hampton. Not only is it good for the people of that region now, but it also allows us to set aside this incredibly important site for the enjoyment and appreciation of generations to come. So I want to thank everybody who is here for the great work that they have done. I am looking forward to not only visiting myself, but also taking Malia and Sasha down there so they get a little bit a sense of their history. And I thank the Commonwealth of Virginia for giving us this opportunity to appreciate the remarkable history of their State, but also of this country. So with that, I am going to sign this bill or Executive order. As I said, there is a strong economic component to this. We think we can see additional jobs in Virginia as a consequence of this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningproclamationestablishingthefortmonroenationalmonumentandexchange", "title": "Remarks on Signing a Proclamation Establishing the Fort Monroe National Monument and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-proclamation-establishing-the-fort-monroe-national-monument-and-exchange", "publication_date": "01-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3228, "text": "It is great to have you at the White House. Otto Warmbier has just passed away. He spent a year and a half in North Korea. A lot of bad things happened. But at least we got him home to be with his parents, where they were so happy to see him, even though he was in very tough condition. It is a brutal regime, and we will be able to handle it. But I want to thank you all for being here, special people. I am thrilled-really thrilled-to welcome many of you for the first time and certainly the first time meeting as the American Technology Council. We are joined by an incredible group of leaders on the absolute cutting edge of innovation, including many CEOs from the world's most successful businesses. We have approximately $3.5 trillion of market value in this room, but that is almost the exact number that we have created since my election. In fact, I think we have you beat by a little bit, and-which is a pretty good number. But I congratulate you all. You have done an amazing job. A lot of ideas have come out of the room today, and a lot of ideas will over the next short period of time. I also want to welcome Secretary Mnuchin, Secretary Kelly, Administrator Verma, and my Budget Director, Mick Mulvaney. I want to thank Jared and Chris-Chris Liddell-for assembling such a spectacular group of people. I want to thank Ivanka for working so hard on it; it is a real passion. Our goal is to lead a sweeping transformation of the Federal Government's technology that will deliver dramatically better services for citizens, stronger protection from cyberattacks, which we were just discussing in the Oval Office with a little bit smaller group. And it is a big-that is a big problem, there is no question about it. We are going to be working on it, and we are going to solve the problem-and up to a trillion dollars in savings for taxpayers over the next 10 years. We are embracing big change, bold thinking, and outsider perspectives to transform Government and make it the way it should be and at far less cost. My administration has already taken very historic steps to modernize critical IT systems and make Government more transparent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksduringroundtablediscussionwiththeamericantechnologycouncil", "title": "Remarks During a Roundtable Discussion With the American Technology Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-during-roundtable-discussion-with-the-american-technology-council", "publication_date": "19-06-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3229, "text": "As an example, you are seeing what we are doing with the airports, with all of the billions and billions of dollars that has-have been spent on planes flying all in the wrong directions, we are getting it changed. They have spent many billions of dollars, and we are getting that whole system fixed. VA Secretary Shulkin recently announced that we are upgrading technology to allow the seamless transfer of veterans' medical records from the Defense Department, which has been a huge problem for decades and decades for our great veterans. We will have it fixed very soon, but it is been a problem for many, many decades. Across Government, we are fixing problems in months that others have not fixed in many, many years. Fifty years ago, our Government drove the innovation that inspired the world and put Americans on the Moon. Today, many of our agencies rely on painfully outdated technology, and yet we have the greatest people in technology that the world has ever seen right here with us in this room. And most of them are just nodding as I say that. They are actually agreeing with me, which--that is interesting, Eric, right? Government needs to catch up with the technology revolution. We are going to change that with the help of great American businesses like the people assembled. The businesses represented here today employ hundreds of thousands of American workers. Your innovation has shaped the modern world and created millions of jobs. America should be the global leader in government technology just as we are in every other aspect, and we are going to start our big edge again in technology, such an important industry. I view it from the standpoint of jobs and other things; you view it somewhat differently. But we are all in the same ballpark. My administration is embracing a new spirit of innovation that will make life better for all Americans. And when it comes to what we are here for today, American technology, we are working very diligently with everybody, including Congress, on immigration so that you can get the people you want in your companies. And it is been a tremendous problem that you have had over the past long period of time. So we are working very hard on that, and we will be able to solve that problem. I want to thank everyone in the room for lending your time again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksduringroundtablediscussionwiththeamericantechnologycouncil", "title": "Remarks During a Roundtable Discussion With the American Technology Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-during-roundtable-discussion-with-the-american-technology-council", "publication_date": "19-06-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3230, "text": "I am honored today to sign a bill that is an important step in an effort to secure our border, while promoting trade and commerce. It is a good piece of legislation. And I want to thank the members of both parties who have worked hard to get this bill to my desk. I want to thank Tom Ridge, who is here. At least that is what some of the Members are saying. I particularly want to thank Senators Kyl and Brownback and Kennedy, Feinstein, and Hatch for being here fine, fine Members of the United States Senate. I want to thank you for coming. I also want to appreciate Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner and George Gekas as well. These Members worked hard on this legislation. I want to thank the members of my administration who are here. I also want to say hello to Arlene Howard. Howard, it is good to see you. A lot of folks might remember you can stand up. Arlene gave me her son, George's, badge and as a reminder of the evil that had been done to our country. I remember when I went over to Yankee Stadium to throw out the ball there at the World Series, Arlene's one of Arlene's other sons was there. I want to thank Peter Johnson, who was George's partner for 12 years. It is good to see you. I want to welcome you all. I was looking at Arlene and the brave folks here; it reminds me of what was done to us there on September 11th and how important it is that we remain tough and strong and diligent as we seek justice, as we chase down these killers one by one and bring them to justice. And that is a major responsibility of all of ours, and it is a responsibility we take seriously. The country is united in our drive for justice. This Nation is determined, and we are patient, much to the chagrin of the enemy. It must make them really worried to know that we do not have a calendar that says, on such-and-such a date we are going to quit, that when it comes to our free-doms defending our freedoms and securing our homeland and protecting our innocent Americans and never forgetting what happened on September the 11th, we are some kind of tough. We have got responsibilities here at home as well, and it starts with our borders. Our borders process an incredibly huge number of people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningtheenhancedbordersecurityandvisaentryreformact2002", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-enhanced-border-security-and-visa-entry-reform-act-2002", "publication_date": "14-05-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3231, "text": "It may come as a surprise to some of you, but there is over 500 million people a year enter America, and half of those are our own citizens that may have been traveling. We have 11 million trucks come across our borders. We have 51,000 foreign ships call into our ports. It reminds us that no nation can be totally secure or more secure, unless we are well-protected and unless our borders are well-screened. We must know who is coming into our country and why they are coming. We must know what our visitors are doing and when they leave. And we must always protect the rights of our law of law-abiding citizens from around the world who come here to conduct business or to study or to spend time with their family. That is what we are known for. We are known for respect. But on the other hand, we can do a better job of making our borders more secure and make our borders smart. We must use technology and be wise about how we use technology, to speed the flow of commerce across our borders and to identify frequent travelers who pose no risk. We should be directing resources to risk. We ought to be routing out smugglers and focusing on criminals and, of course, stopping terrorists from coming into the country. The bill I sign today enhances our ongoing efforts to strengthen our borders. The purpose of this bill is to help our country do a better job of border security. It authorizes 400 additional inspectors, investigators, and other staff on the INS over the next 5 years. We are adding manpower, obviously. It makes it easier for the INS and other Federal agencies to get better information about people and products that come into America. It requires every foreign visitor desiring entrance into the United States to carry a travel document containing biometric identification that would be fingerprints or facial recognition that will enable us to use technology to better deny fraudulent entry into America. It strengthens the requirements that all commercial passenger ships and airplanes entering the United States provide a list of passengers and crew before arrival, so that border authorities can act immediately to prevent someone from entering the country if he or she poses a threat to our citizens. It makes a lot of sense to do that. We should have probably been doing it a long time ago. These new measures will only be effective if Federal authorities have access to important information. One of the things we have learned is how to better share information. Right now, the FBI and the CIA do a good job of sharing information.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningtheenhancedbordersecurityandvisaentryreformact2002", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-enhanced-border-security-and-visa-entry-reform-act-2002", "publication_date": "14-05-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3232, "text": "Information is getting better shared from the Federal to the State to the local levels. But we have got to do a better job of sharing information and expanding information to the INS and the State Department and Customs agents and throughout the intelligence community. We have just got to do a better job. This bill enables us to modernize our communication, so the information flows freely and quickly. The legislation requires law enforcement and intelligence communities to continue to develop a list of suspected terrorists and to maintain that list and to make it readily available, so that nobody is granted entry into the United States that is on the list. In other words, we are beginning to gather information overseas in a much better way. We have got a vast coalition of nations that are still with us. They heard the message, Either you are with us, or you are not with us. They are still with us. And we are sharing information, and we can use that better use that information with our own agencies here at home, to make sure that we really button us up, that we do our job, the job the American people expect. The bill did not have everything I wanted. I wanted a temporary extension of 245 in the bill, which basically allowed certain immigrants, sponsored by their families or employers, to become legal residents without having to leave the country, so that families can stay together. I thought that made sense. It is not a part of the bill. I intend to work with Congress to see if we cannot get that done here pretty quick. Yet, the commonsense measures will help us meet the goal, and that is important. It will help us meet the goals of legitimate commerce and important travel. And at the same time, it will help us keep the country secure. Basically what we are saying is, this is part of a legislative part of a national strategy. Tom's worked on the national strategy. He is worked with our respective agency heads. And Congress has been a great partner in this strategy. You know, sometimes in Washington we actually are able to put our political parties aside and focus on what is best for the country. And we are able to say, let us make sure America comes is the first priority of all of us. And this has happened in this bill. So it is my honor to welcome both Republicans and Democrats from the legislative branch of Government here as I sign this important legislation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningtheenhancedbordersecurityandvisaentryreformact2002", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Enhanced Border Security and Visa Entry Reform Act of 2002", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-enhanced-border-security-and-visa-entry-reform-act-2002", "publication_date": "14-05-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3233, "text": "Scripture tells us, We count as blessed those who have persevered. Michelle and I are humbled to be with you once again. Thirteen years since the peace of an American morning was broken. Thirteen years since nearly 3,000 beautiful lives were taken from us, including 125 men and women serving here at the Pentagon. Thirteen years of moments they would have shared with us. Thirteen years of memories they would have made. your determination to carry on, your resolve to live lives worthy of their memories. As Americans, we draw strength from you. For your love is the ultimate rebuke to the hatred of those who attacked us that bright, blue morning. They sought to do more than bring down buildings or murder our people. They sought to break our spirit and to prove to the world that their power to destroy was greater than our power to persevere and to build. America endures in the strength of your families who, through your anguish, kept living. You have kept alive a love that no act of terror can ever extinguish. You, their sons and daughters, are growing into extraordinary young men and women they knew you could be. By your shining example, your families have turned this day into something that those who attacked us could never abide, and that is a tribute of hope over fear and love over hate. America endures in the tenacity of our survivors. After grievous wounds, you learned to walk again and stand again. After terrible burns, you smiled once more. For you, for our Nation, these have been difficult years. But by your presence here today, in the lives of service that you have led, you embody the truth that no matter what comes our way, America will always come out stronger. America endures in the dedication of those who keep us safe. The firefighter, the officer, the EMT who carries the memory of a fallen partner as they report to work each and every day, prepared to make the same sacrifice for us all. Because of these men and women, Americans now work in a gleaming Freedom Tower. We visit our great cities, we fill our stadiums and cheer for our teams. We carry on, because, as Americans, we do not give in to fear ever. America endures in the courage of the men and women who serve under our flag.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswreathlayingceremonythepentagonmemorialarlingtonvirginia1", "title": "Remarks at a Wreath-Laying Ceremony at the Pentagon Memorial in Arlington, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-wreath-laying-ceremony-the-pentagon-memorial-arlington-virginia-1", "publication_date": "11-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3234, "text": "I am profoundly honored to be here within the four sacred mountains, especially on Navajo Nation Sovereignty Day. I want to thank young Myra Jodie. Did not she do a wonderful job up here? Thank you, Congressman Tom Udall; the vice president, Taylor McKenzie; Chief Justice Robert Yazzie; Speaker Edward Begay; members of the Navajo Tribal Council; Shiprock Council Mayor William Lee; and we have with us today the president of the National Congress of American Indians, Sue Masten thank you for being here; to all the honored Governors of pueblos and tribal leaders. the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo; the Interior Deputy Secretary, David Hayes; the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, Carl Whillock; and the person most responsible for working with you, Assistant Secretary of the Interior Kevin Gover I thank him for all he has done; Federal Communications Commission Chairman Bill Kennard and Commissioner Gloria Tristani. And I'd like to thank the people from the White House who are here, especially Gene Sperling, who put together this digital divide tour, and Lynn Cutler, who is my liaison to Indian country all over the United States. I thank them. Senator Robert Bennett, who came from Utah; Representative Bill Jefferson, who came from New Orleans, Louisiana; Silvestre Reyes from El Paso, Texas; and Stephanie Tubbs Jones, who came from Cleveland, Ohio. I want to thank my friend of more than 20 years now, your former Governor, Bruce King, and his wife, Alice, thank them for being here. I want to thank the renowned basketball star Rebecca Lobo, who came with me today. And I thank Reverend Jesse Jackson for coming. I thank all the high-tech leaders who are here. And there was one young man who meant to come with me today who could not come, a man I admire very much not only for his success but for the way he has handled adversity, Notah Begay. And I think we ought to give him a big hand. I also want to recognize two young women who are here, because they were in the First Lady's gallery at my State of the Union Address, members of the Navajo Nation and former volunteers for AmeriCorps, Christina and Justina Jones. I am very proud of them and all the other young Dine people who have served not only the Navajo Nation but our Nation as a whole as AmeriCorps volunteers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepeoplethenavajonationshiprocknewmexico", "title": "Remarks to the People of the Navajo Nation in Shiprock, New Mexico", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-people-the-navajo-nation-shiprock-new-mexico", "publication_date": "17-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3235, "text": "Let me also express my deep gratitude to the Navajo Code Talkers who provided our. And I want to thank Senator Jeff Bingaman for working to ensure that you receive the national honors you so richly deserve. All Americans should know of the exploits of the young Navajo men, some as young as 15, who enlisted in the Marine Corps in World War II, helped to develop an ingenious code based on your language, and became the communications link to and from the frontlines of the Allies in the Pacific war. One of our most enduring images of freedom is that of the marines hoisting the American flag over Iwo Jima. Well, there are many American military commanders from that conflict who will tell you that the United States might never have taken Iwo Jima or won countless other battles in the Pacific if it were not for the bravery, the sacrifice, and the unbreakability of the code of the Navajo Code Talkers. It is fitting that we begin this day by recalling their achievements. After all, there are few people in America who better embody the power of communication. In fact, if you think about it, the system the Code Talkers used has real similarities to the beginning of the worldwide network we call the Internet. Both systems were developed for sending information quickly, securely, and reliably during times of war. Both had the power to change the course of history. For more than 50 years after the Code Talkers were able to communicate with one another, over great distances in the Pacific, it is still hard to communicate between many parts of the Navajo Nation itself. In much of America, it takes just a modest amount of money and time to get someone on the Internet. But here, an astonishing 37 percent of the households are without electricity, about 70 percent without phone service, more than half without work. I am here because I believe the new technologies like the Internet and wireless communications can have an enormous positive impact in the Navajo Nation. They can help you to leapfrog over some of the biggest hurdles to develop your economic and human potential. They can be a vehicle for job growth, for education, for health care, for employment opportunities. I know the Navajo Nation has already begun to see this potential, as President Begaye said. Here in Shiprock, the closest public library is more than 30 miles away.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepeoplethenavajonationshiprocknewmexico", "title": "Remarks to the People of the Navajo Nation in Shiprock, New Mexico", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-people-the-navajo-nation-shiprock-new-mexico", "publication_date": "17-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3236, "text": "Yet, thanks to your new PowerUP partnership, children and parents now are able to browse some of the great libraries of the world simply by going to the Boys and Girls Club. On the western side of the Navajo Nation, rural health clinics are now linked through computers to the finest medical specialists at the University of Arizona. Your new Navajo Able initiative, funded in part by the Department of Education, is providing technologies to help children with disabilities write and communicate on computers. At Dine College, even rural campuses have state-of-the-art computer labs, where students soon will conduct real-time teleconferences with professors all around the globe. Almost 30 years ago, when I was a young man, still a student with no money and no prospect reasonably of becoming ENTITY, for sure I first drove across New Mexico. I fell in love with the land and the people. I had my first opportunity to buy for my mother and the girlfriend who became my wife some beautiful Navajo jewelry. Now, just imagine if all the remarkable silversmiths and weavers of the Navajo Nation could sell their work not only in local markets but in national and global markets as well. Just imagine if all remote health clinics were connected electronically to major medical centers. Imagine if Dine could commute to high-tech, high-paying jobs in large cities just by getting on a computer here in Shiprock. Imagine if all your children had access to the same world of knowledge at the same instance as children in the wealthiest communities in America. The potential is staggering, and we have to seize it. I am here today to pledge that the National Government will do its part in ways that honor your tribal sovereignty. Ever since I have been ENTITY, we have worked to try to empower the tribes of our Nation. I will never forget the day in 1994, when I had the chance to welcome leaders of more than 300 American Indian tribes to the White House, the first time this had been done since President James Monroe's administration, in 1822. You know, when I was just a very young boy, I used to go to the county public library in my hometown in Arkansas. I can remember spending day after day reading histories of Native American tribes and biographies of famous chiefs. I remember once I read in the biography of Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce that incredible statement he made, From this day, I will fight no more, forever.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepeoplethenavajonationshiprocknewmexico", "title": "Remarks to the People of the Navajo Nation in Shiprock, New Mexico", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-people-the-navajo-nation-shiprock-new-mexico", "publication_date": "17-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3237, "text": "But as we all know, though many of your ancestors gave up fighting and gave up land and water and mineral rights in exchange for peace, security, health care, and education, the Federal Government did not live up to its end of the deal. And I have worked hard to change it. There is nothing more important to me than getting this government-to-government relationship right, but getting it right in a way that will empower you to lift yourselves and your children to fulfill your potential and your dreams, not a patronizing relationship but an empowering one, not a handout but a hand up, a genuine partnership so that your children can live their dreams. As Congressman Udall said, I did ask in the State of the Union Address for the largest budget increases in history for new and existing programs to assist tribal nations. That is why I traveled last year to the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota, the home of the Lakota Sioux. That is why I made Indian country an important focus of our new markets initiative. Let me tell you what that is. I believe the only way to keep this economy growing is to bring economic opportunity to the people and the places who have been left behind. More businesses, more jobs, more incomes means growth without inflation for the rest of America. People in New York City and Los Angeles and Seattle and Dallas and Atlanta and Miami, they all have a stake in your economic success. And I am here to bring that message to you, and through our friends in the media, to them. I want to give Americans who have money the same incentives to invest in underdeveloped areas in America we now give them to invest in underdeveloped areas of Latin America or Asia or Africa. I want Americans to look first to people here at home who need work and education, who need technology and opportunity. Our E-rate initiative, to provide discount rates to schools and hospitals and libraries that could not otherwise afford them, an initiative pioneered by our Vice President, Al Gore, and championed by this administration for years, has helped to equip every classroom in the consolidated school district with computers and the wiring to connect to the Internet. My new budget provides a major new initiative to prepare Native Americans for careers in technical fields.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepeoplethenavajonationshiprocknewmexico", "title": "Remarks to the People of the Navajo Nation in Shiprock, New Mexico", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-people-the-navajo-nation-shiprock-new-mexico", "publication_date": "17-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3238, "text": "It provides $2 billion in tax incentives to encourage the private sector to donate computers, sponsor community technology centers available to adults as well as children, and provide technology training for workers; $150 million to train every single new teacher on how to use this technology effectively in the classroom; and $100 million to create 1,000 community technology centers all across the country, to serve all the people of the community the old, the young, those in between, those with disabilities, and those without education, everyone who can benefit from tapping into this new technology. And I want you to know that I am joined here today by private sector leaders who are part of our national call to action. Hundreds of organizations, including all 32 tribal colleges, have answered this pledge. And I want to highlight just some of the public and private commitments being made to benefit the Navajo Nation and Native Americans all across our country. First, and very important, our Federal Communications Chairman, Bill Kennard, is proposing to expand the Lifeline program to ensure that every Native American who needs it will be able to get basic phone service for as little as $1 a month. In this day and age, when we want every American to have access to the Internet, we must first make sure that every American has access to a phone, so there will be a line to hook into. Second, Native American Systems, headed by Robert Rutherford, a Choctaw, is committing $100,000 state-of-the-art satellite communications to the Red Rock Day School, to provide equipment to 30 other BIA schools in other parts of Indian country. Tachyon is providing satellite Internet access to Dine College and the Lake Valley School. Compaq will provide $500,000 to spur the TechCorps schools partnership, which uses the Internet and TechCorps volunteers to help teachers make the best use of technology in the classroom. Four Navajo Nation schools participated in the pilot of TechCorps schools. Today I am proud to say that this new commitment will make it available to all Navajo Nation schools and all K-through-12 schools nationwide for Native Americans. Microsoft will provide $2.75 million in software and technical support for the American Indian Tribal College program, which will directly benefit Dine College. Andersen Consulting has committed $100,000 to support small business in Indian country, something we need more of. We need access to capital, training, technological support.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepeoplethenavajonationshiprocknewmexico", "title": "Remarks to the People of the Navajo Nation in Shiprock, New Mexico", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-people-the-navajo-nation-shiprock-new-mexico", "publication_date": "17-04-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3243, "text": "And it is a pleasure to be with you on this beautiful Virginia day. Let me first thank Mr. Robert Bass and Mr. Jack Walter of the National Trust for Historic Preservation for hosting this event. And we are fortunate to have the Secretary of the Interior with us, Manuel Lujan. John Warner, Chuck Robb; Congressman George Allen, and other members of Congress. I am delighted to be with you on this special day. It is an honor to be here with the people of Orange County, for this is the community that nurtured the father of our Constitution, James Madison. Citizens of this county launched Madison's political career, sending him to the Virginia House of Delegates when he was just 25 years old. In 1789, Orange County, almost by itself, provided Madison's margin of victory in gaining a seat in the First Congress of the United States. Here is the home where Madison developed and sustained his deep love of liberty, of religious freedom, economic freedom, intellectual freedom. Here at Montpelier, Madison immersed himself in the historical and philosophic study that shaped our Constitution. And here, he promised his constituents he would work to enact a Bill of Rights. I am especially pleased to announce that our fiscal year '93 budget will seek $1 million in Federal support for the restoration of Montpelier. Two hundred years ago this week, the Virginia General Assembly ratified the Bill of Rights. And with this action, three-fourths of the States had approved the Bill of Rights, thus making it a part of our Constitution. Americans have celebrated all of 1991 as the bicentennial year of the Bill of Rights. And thanks to efforts by schools and foundations and corporations, government bodies, active individuals, we have marked the year with many outstanding educational programs, including a national tour exhibiting Virginia's own original copy of the Bill of Rights. Next year, an exhibit on the Bill of Rights, organized by the U.S. Information Agency, will be the centerpiece of the United States Pavilion at the Expo in Seville. Congress has resolved that we observe the Bill of Rights bicentennial with a Year of Thanksgiving for the Blessings of Liberty. As a gesture of my esteem for James Madison and his home community, I am signing here at Montpelier the Presidential proclamation of this bicentennial celebration. May God bless all of you, and may He always keep the American people free and dedicated to Madison's ideals of a just society.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningtheyearthanksgivingfortheblessingslibertyproclamationorangecounty", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Year of Thanksgiving for the Blessings of Liberty Proclamation in Orange County, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-year-thanksgiving-for-the-blessings-liberty-proclamation-orange-county", "publication_date": "16-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3261, "text": "I am coming to you from aboard the United States ship Theodore Roosevelt, which left yesterday from Norfolk, Virginia, on a 6-month mission. What I have seen on this ship today only increases my pride not only in the sailors and marines I met but also in every soldier, every sailor, every airman, every marine who serves our Nation, from Rhein-Main Air Force Base in Germany, where Americans are leaving to airdrop lifesaving supplies into Bosnia, to Somalia, where our Armed Forces have served with great distinction and made every American proud. I am honored to join you on Armed Forces Radio. the privilege of meeting Americans all across our Nation, the opportunity to hear about their lives and their dreams for our future, and of course, the opportunity to become the President of the United States. Your day at the office can be 6 months or longer. And it is not for the money, it is always for the country. dedication and responsibility and the willingness of you and your loved ones to bear a tremendous level of sacrifice. You commit your daily energies and even your lives to benefit your fellow Americans. Our armed services stand as one of history's great successes. Every color, every background, every region of our society is represented in America's Armed Forces. The American military pioneered our Nation's progress toward integration and equal opportunity. It is constantly adapted to change and always rising to the challenge of change. You, and all who wear America's uniforms, are what make the United States a true superpower. It is your skill, your professionalism, your courage, and your dedication to country and service that constitutes the muscle, the sinew, and the soul of our strength. And today I salute you. I want to say a special word about the Navy since I am on board this fine ship today. It means a lot to a Commander in Chief to have a ready fleet. Where is the nearest carrier? This ship's namesake, President Theodore Roosevelt, once said, The Navy of the United States is the right arm of the United States and is emphatically the peacemaker. Theodore Roosevelt was the first American ever to win the Nobel Peace Prize, in part with the help of the United States Navy. We have a great stake, you and I, in maintaining a strong American defense and in working hard even at the end of the cold war. The Theodore Roosevelt played an important part in the end of the cold war.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthearmedforces", "title": "Radio Address to the Armed Forces", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-armed-forces", "publication_date": "12-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3262, "text": "In 1988, it was here that an American Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff first welcomed his Soviet counterpart to visit an American aircraft carrier. That was when my friend Admiral William Crowe and Marshal Sergey Akhromeyev stepped aboard this ship to meet the crew and watch flight operations just as I have done today. It was a key milestone on the path to the end of the cold war. The specter of Soviet tanks rolling westward across the northern German plains no longer haunts us. Saddam Hussein confirmed that. The tragic violence in Bosnia reminds us of that every day. The proliferation of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction is unfortunately a growing, not a receding, menace. And human suffering, such as that in Somalia, may not threaten our shores but still requires us to act. These challenges are new in many ways, but we dare not overlook their significance. Blinders never provide security. A changed security environment demands that we change our security arrangement. Yes, we are reducing the defense budget because of the end of the cold war, but we are not downsizing for its own sake, we are trying to rightsize our security for security's sake. Our military first must be exceptionally mobile, with first-rate sealift, airlift, and ability to project power. Our military must be agile, with an emphasis on maneuver, on speed, and on technological superiority. Our firepower must be precise so that we can minimize the exposure to harm for men and women who wear our uniform and reduce civilian casualties. Our military must be flexible so that we can operate with diverse coalition partners in different parts of the world. Our forces must be smart with the intelligence and communications we need for complex threats. And above all, our military must be ever-ready, given the unpredictability of new threats. None of these goals are possible without a quality force. The people on this ship and all of you who are listening to me exemplify that quality. It is your skills, your experience, your training, and your dedication that will get the job done for America and guarantee that our vital interests can be protected. While all of you carry out your mission so far from home, we back home will be engaged in many debates on defense policy. I will tell you that there are changes which lie ahead. Defense cuts are, and have been for the last several years, a fact of life, an inescapable consequence of the new world you have worked so hard to create.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthearmedforces", "title": "Radio Address to the Armed Forces", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-armed-forces", "publication_date": "12-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3263, "text": "As you watch the news or read newspapers, you will hear us talk of new roles and missions and you will see news about bases and budget cuts. But as we reduce defense spending, we must not leave the men and women who won the cold war out in the cold. As these bases close, as close some of them must, we must not close our eyes and our hearts to the need for new investments and a need to create new jobs in communities with old bases. Defense spending has been declining since 1986, but there is been no real plan about what to do on it, no real plan for military personnel mustered out, no real plan for civilian workers who have lost their jobs or for the communities who have been hurt or for the companies who have been devastated. We can be buffeted by change, or we can act boldly to use this change to make our country stronger and safer and smarter. That is why it is so important to make the investments we need in defense conversion, in education and training and new jobs in new industries. I want to help ensure that those of you who choose to leave the military in the years to come return to a nation of jobs and growth and opportunity. I am immensely proud of who you are and what you are doing. And as these changes proceed I pledge that as long as I am your President, you and the other men and women in uniform will continue to be the best trained, the best prepared, the best equipped Fighting force in the world. There is no single decision I take more seriously than those involving the use of force. As I weigh crises that confront America around the world, you will be in my mind and in my heart. This is, on balance, a very hopeful time. But still, it is full of challenges. We can be glad that your mission is not darkly framed by the cold war's confrontation with a nuclear adversary. But many new duties and dangers are taking the place of that single stark threat, some of them yet unknown. There is no sonar, no radar that can enable us to fathom all the changes in terrain over which we are about to set sail. Napoleon had a standing order to his corps commanders to, quote, March to the sound of the gun. He meant that when the shooting starts on a battlefield, it is the soldier's obligation to move into the fight. Today, there are many different security challenges into which we must all move.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthearmedforces", "title": "Radio Address to the Armed Forces", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-armed-forces", "publication_date": "12-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3264, "text": "I just want everybody to know that it is now my second term, so rather than Hail to the Chief, we are going with that from here on out. Now, before we get started, I am going to exercise some Presidential prerogative to say a few words about two very special people who are here tonight. This will humiliate them, but I am going to go ahead and do it anyway. Jess Wright and Kenny Thompson both work on my staff, crucial members of my team since way back in Iowa in 2007. Over the weekend, Kenny popped the question, and Jess said yes. So I want to congratulate-publicly-Kenny Thompson, Jess Wright. We love them. They have been loyal, shown such great friendship to me, and I am so glad that they have gone ahead and taken the plunge. By the way, guys, Justin Timberlake just got married to this lovely young lady right here, Jessica Biel. So Justin can probably offer you a few pointers. And, Justin, they are looking for a wedding singer. Tonight I am speaking not just as a President, but as one of America's best known Al Green impersonators. We do not even know ourselves how that music has endured for so long and how that came out of us. All I know is I have been looking forward to tonight because, let us face it, who does not love this music? These songs get us on the dance floor. Even the Governor of Tennessee said he is going to dance tonight. They get stuck in our heads. We go back over them again and again. And they have played an important part in our history. In the sixties and seventies, Memphis knew its share of division and discord and injustice. But in that turbulent time, the sound of Hi and Duke and Sun and Stax records tried to bridge those divides, to create a little harmony with harmony. The great Memphis musician Don Nix went to an all-White school, and he described what it was like. If you could imagine, nobody's ever heard R&B music before. White kids had never heard it. And you can imagine what that did to us. So he and others kept playing music that everybody could get in to. They created a whole new sound, and as they did, they broke down barriers. On McLemore Avenue, in the heart of a segregated city, Stax Records was integrated from the studio musicians all the way to upper management.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspbssperformancethewhitehousememphissoul", "title": "Remarks at PBS's In Performance at the White House: Memphis Soul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pbss-performance-the-white-house-memphis-soul", "publication_date": "09-04-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3265, "text": "Booker T. Jones and Steve Cropper, who are both here tonight, helped form one of the city's first integrated bands. They were not allowed to go to school together. But no one could stop them from playing music together. And that was the spirit of their music-the sound of Soulsville, U.S.A. -a music that, at its core, is about the pain of being alone, the power of human connection, and the importance of treating each other right. After all, this is the music that asked us to 'try a little tenderness'. It is the music that put Mr. Big Stuff in his place. Can you dig it? So it is really no surprise that Memphis soul swept the Nation, and it has stood the test of time. Tonight we bring it to the White House. We have got folks here who were there at the beginning, legends like Mavis Staples, Charlie Musselwhite, William Bell, and Eddie Floyd. We have got artists like Cyndi Lauper and Ben Harper and Queen Latifah, who still turn to Memphis for inspiration. We have got Justin Timberlake, a proud son of Memphis who is never forgotten his roots, and the Alabama Shakes, who are bringing the Muscle Shoals sound to a new generation. So to all of you, even more than for the music you have created, I want to say a special thank you for the difference that you have made in our lives. More than half a century after Soulsville, U.S.A., first opened its doors, you still bring us together. You still remind us how much we have in common. You still help us imagine a better place. And you promise, through your beautiful music, that you can take us there. So tonight we are going to start things off with two extraordinary artists who span the generations. In the heyday of soul music, no band had more hits than the group known simply as Sam and Dave.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspbssperformancethewhitehousememphissoul", "title": "Remarks at PBS's In Performance at the White House: Memphis Soul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-pbss-performance-the-white-house-memphis-soul", "publication_date": "09-04-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3268, "text": "To Messrs. Mays and Fritts, thank you both, and to all of the rest of the leaders of the NAB that are here today. And also I understand there are a lot of Members of the United States Congress here. In my line of work, you always pay your respects to the Members of Congress in the forlorn hope that they will do it exactly my way someday. It is my privilege this morning to be back before America's family of broadcasters, the National Association of Broadcasters. And I cannot help but marvel at these huge screens as I walked in here. You know, if I were as large as my image on these screens, imagine how easy it would be for me to get my way with the Congress. And this convention is also displayed, I am told, on monitors throughout the arena, and from here, beamed around the world. I will try to finish each sentence without a preposition. But there was a time when most Americans knew their Presidents distantly, from woodcut prints in the weekly newspaper. The circle of democracy in ancient Athens and Rome was even more limited, just to those within hearing range of the debates inside the Parthenon or the Forum. But today, through free over-the-air broadcasts, you have brought millions of living rooms within hearing range; you have made every home a part of the American forum. In fact, on this very day, you are providing for the 6,000 foreign broadcasters in attendance, through your international seminars, and through USIA's WORLDNET a seminar for the world. Television, which began as the American forum, has become the world forum. And so, when a lone brave man stood up to a column of tanks in Tiananmen Square, the world stood with him. When the people of Prague sang the first Christmas carols in over 40 years, the world sang with them. And when the first German took the first hammer to that wall of shame in Berlin, the world shared in an historic act of courage. We all know that governments can censor, governments can silence, but the voice of freedom will not be stilled as long as there is an America to tell the truth. These sounds and images of the Revolution of '89 belong to the world. But it was here in America that a free people first explored how to put the airwaves into the service of democracy. We accept regulation, but we firmly reject government programming. We reject government ownership of stations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationbroadcastersatlantageorgia", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Broadcasters in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-broadcasters-atlanta-georgia", "publication_date": "02-04-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3269, "text": "And most of all, we reject censorship. You see, the freedom that this association enjoys probably takes for granted is a model for the world. democracy, private investment, competitiveness, stewardship. We will see what competitiveness means just this afternoon I am going out to visit a General Electric plant in Cincinnati, where free workers transformed foreign investment into foreign business. Tomorrow I am going to Indianapolis help promote stewardship, where the city works with citizens to cultivate an urban forest. But these are not what you'd call isolated whistlestops. America's ideas are powerful, and through the power of communication, we share them with the world. After all, we live in a time when commodity prices and travel reservations and fast-breaking news flash from Hong Kong to Tokyo, Tokyo to Bonn, Bonn to Boston, all in the blink of an eye. Roam among the hundreds of exhibits in this convention center, and you will find 22 football fields chock-full of the latest gadgets in telecommunications personal computers and modems, fax machines, lasers, optical fibers, satellites all strands in a growing web of world communications, a growing network linking all of us, a global village. it is the essence of who and what we are. Last May, I discussed the future of Europe with the citizens of Mainz, a German city nestled in the green hills along the Rhine River. And it was while I was there that I appreciated anew the Biblical expression, In the beginning was the Word. For it was in that German town that the inventor of the printing press, Johann Gutenberg, first put the scholarship of the ages into the hands of millions of knowledge-hungry readers. His one invention made possible all the pamphlets and journals of the Enlightenment and of the American Revolution, from the call to arms of Thomas Paine to the cool logic of The Federalist Papers. You might argue that out of that one invention sprang the very idea called America. images projected on color television and evoked by the sounds of radio. But while Western democracy broadened as our knowledge broadened, the circle of democracy and knowledge narrowed under Communist regimes that took power on many continents. For these nations, truth was something to be twisted and stretched by the brutal hands of authority, manipulated beyond recognition. The Czech author Kundera calls this time the kingdom of forgetting, when whole nations almost forgot their heroic histories and finest traditions. Radio Marti, Radio Liberty, Radio Free Europe and, God bless it, the Voice of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationbroadcastersatlantageorgia", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Broadcasters in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-broadcasters-atlanta-georgia", "publication_date": "02-04-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3270, "text": "To fully appreciate what these broadcasts mean, you need only ask someone who listened to them. Sichan Siv, a young man now works on our White House staff he is a Cambodian, an American who lived through the horrors of the killing fields. And he is told me that when the Khmer Rouge took control of a village the very first items they confiscated were the radios, for if they respected and feared anything, it was the power of free information. But even under the threat of death, men and women like Sichan Siv were so hungry for news from the outside world that they would turn on a hidden transistor radio at the lowest possible volume and then put it up flush to one ear. We take free news broadcasts for granted in America, but some people risked death to hear the truth. And some people still do, and we are not going to let them down. No government should fear free speech, whether it is from entertainment programs or accurate, unbiased news about world events. And that is why Congress strongly supported TV Marti and why I strongly support TV Marti. We will scrupulously adhere to the letter of the law. The voice of freedom will not be stilled as long as there is an America to tell the truth. that free flow of ideas. Americans have always stood for free speech, and we always will. So, I have come here to ask something of you. I ask you to stand by your traditions, the best traditions of America. I ask you, once again, to stand for TV Marti and to stand for freedom. If we broadcast freedom, our message will be heard. After the bloodshed at Tiananmen Square and the expulsion of the VOA from China, I was heartened to see that Beijing relented a little bit and permitted a VOA correspondent to return. In the Soviet Union, publications that once vilified the Voice of America now praise it. Warm words of support even come from Izvestia. A commentator in Moscow News thanks VOA and says that it uses, and here is the quote, our own broadening sources of information better than we do and without delay return to us what they have gathered. And now Radio Free Europe has bureaus in Warsaw, in Budapest, and VOA even has one in Moscow, an unthinkable development just a few years ago.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationbroadcastersatlantageorgia", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Broadcasters in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-broadcasters-atlanta-georgia", "publication_date": "02-04-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3271, "text": "The very fact that it is no longer considered remarkable for USIA's WORLDNET to link live programs from Washington to Kiev, or from Chicago and New York to Gdansk and Warsaw, is in itself remarkable. It happened in part because of the power of truth. Czechoslovakia's playwright-President Vaclav Havel paid a very personal tribute to this power in his recent visit to Washington. First he came to the White House and told me personally what this broadcasting of the truth had meant to those who were fighting for freedom. And then he visited the Voice of America and met the employees of its Czech division. It was a very poignant encounter, for though Havel did not recognize any of them by face, he knew them all by name the instant he heard them speak. I am determined that America will continue to bear witness to the truth. America must never lose its voice. Just as President Havel and others who were once under Communist domination have thanked us, I am convinced that the people of Cuba will thank us when they, too, win the liberty they yearn for. Still, we can envision a time when the purpose of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty could be utterly fulfilled. But for now, these networks, along with USIA's WORLDNET and VOA, must continue in Eastern Europe until change is complete. We are still seeing the struggle for freedom, and this must continue until all that struggle is won by the forces of freedom. Free stations and newspapers are still struggling to take root. Their access to their Western colleagues is still erratic. We need to be there now more than ever before to describe and explain our own two centuries of experience in building a democracy. We can also assist the Eastern Europeans in sharing among themselves their own experience in democracy. they need to know how the process of reform is working with their neighbors. So, if one nation adopts a novel path to reform, pollution control, or currency law, the others need to be able to benefit from that experiment. And we must also look ahead to the challenges of a new century. To prepare for our future role, I have directed that an interagency review be conducted of U.S. Government international broadcasting. And of course, we will be looking for advice from many outside the Government. After all, when it comes to setting an example of a free press, the best example must come from you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationbroadcastersatlantageorgia", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Broadcasters in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-broadcasters-atlanta-georgia", "publication_date": "02-04-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3272, "text": "The Peace Corps is teaching English in Eastern Europe as the lingua franca of business and journalism, but it is not tasked to offer a model of journalistic excellence. Only the American press corps can pick up where the Peace Corps leaves off and provide a model of accuracy, fairness, and objectivity. As broadcasters, you can and you are transferring American know-how to the East. You are working with VOA to train and orient foreign broadcasters visiting the United States. In February the director of Polish radio and television visited your headquarters, in part to seek the counsel and assistance of American broadcasters. And you have sent your representatives to meet with their counterparts inside the Soviet Union. And on top of this, you are helping Americans to invest in joint ventures to establish new radio and television networks in the East. So, most of all, I am here to recognize your energetic, international leadership. Do not neglect this hemisphere and this hemisphere's quest for democracy. We need no longer act in the fine tradition of the Underground Railroad. But before the Revolution of '89, America regularly received the speeches of Lech Walesa, Vaclav Havel, and other brave men and women of conscience on smuggled tapes. And through the power of broadcasting, America became the courier of freedom, returning the eloquent words of these leaders back to their people, returning hope and the promise of liberty to half a dozen lands. And by working together, our American vision is fast becoming a reality for the world. I can tell you many friends in this audience that there has never in my view been a more exciting or challenging time to be ENTITY of the United States. The change is mind-boggling the changes around the world. The bid of freedom is irreversible. It is bound to happen to places denied freedom today. But the importance of your work, the importance of your commitment to open, fair journalism is unparalleled in any time in our history. So, I came here to say thank you thank you all for what you are doing, thank you for the support you have been able to give this administration. And may God bless you. And most of all, may God bless the United States of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheannualconventionthenationalassociationbroadcastersatlantageorgia", "title": "Remarks at the Annual Convention of the National Association of Broadcasters in Atlanta, Georgia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-annual-convention-the-national-association-broadcasters-atlanta-georgia", "publication_date": "02-04-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3273, "text": "I have participated in many rallies in my life. So, I want to thank everybody for being here for this limited audience event. It means a lot to me, and I know it means a lot to the Vice President. And let me begin by wishing the President and the First Lady a full and speedy recovery from the ENTITY illness that they are now dealing with. And of course, we wish the same for my colleagues in the Congress, as well as the many, many millions of Americans who are struggling with this terrible disease. What the last few days have told us is, if there was ever any doubts, it should now be clear that no one, no one, is safe from this pandemic. It does not matter if you are a frontline worker in a hospital. And I want to take a moment to thank all of the doctors and the nurses and the medical personnel who have put their lives on the line to protect all of us. And it does not matter if you are an essential worker in a supermarket, if you are a packing house worker, if you are a bus driver, and it does not matter if you are the President of the United States. Each and every one of us is vulnerable, and we will remain vulnerable until there is a vaccine or a perfected cure. That is the reality, and there is no way to get away from that. There are some who say that we have to make a choice between having a strong economy and protecting the American people from this terrible disease. The truth is, we will never have a strong economy so long as this pandemic continues to surge as it is today. We will never have a strong economy if people are afraid to go to work, afraid to go to school, afraid to shop, or afraid to have dinner at a restaurant, or afraid to do all of the things that we normally do. We will never have a strong economy unless we get this pandemic under control. Is the solution to this crisis to shut down the economy and lock everybody in their homes? We can keep our country moving forward if we do so in a way that is disciplined, not dangerous, that is responsible, not reckless. Now, I want to ask you and the American people some very simple questions. Which candidate for President has shown that he will be disciplined, that he will be responsible in dealing with this pandemic?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesandersnhrallyspeechforjoebidenkamalaharrisoctober3", "title": "Bernie Sanders NH Rally Speech for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris October 3", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-nh-rally-speech-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-october-3", "publication_date": "03-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3274, "text": "Which candidate for President has made it clear that he will develop policies based on the advice of the best scientists in our country and the world? Which candidate for President will develop national protocols and guidelines and model the behaviors we all need to engage in to keep our families, our neighbors, and ourselves safe? Which candidate has the temperament to see us through this difficult crisis? Let me repeat that point. Which candidate has the temperament to see us through this difficult crisis? I do not think there is any doubt that the answer to those questions is that in the worst public health crisis of the last 100 years, we need Joe Biden as our president. Now, let me say a word about the economy. Let me be blunt, tell you the way it is. And that is that the working class of this country is in more desperation today than at any time since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Tens of millions of our fellow citizens have lost their jobs as a result of this pandemic. They have lost their incomes. They have lost their health insurance. They have depleted their life savings. They cannot afford to pay their rent or their mortgages. And in too many cases, in the richest country on Earth, they cannot afford to put food on the table for their kids. Today, the percentage of Americans who lack employment is at the highest level in 45 years, while tens of millions of Americans who do have jobs are often working part-time for starvation wages. And as bad as the economy is in general, it is far worse for the African American and Latino communities. During this pandemic, nearly 60% of Latino families and 55% of African-American families have either experienced a job loss or a pay cut. Meanwhile, and it is important to make this point because it is not made often enough, while the working class of this country is being devastated as a result of the pandemic, not everybody in America is hurting. The truth is that at a time of massive income and wealth inequality, over the last six months, that situation has gotten- In the last number of months, 643 billionaires, that is not a lot of people, have seen their wealth go up by $845 billion. And let me just say that again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesandersnhrallyspeechforjoebidenkamalaharrisoctober3", "title": "Bernie Sanders NH Rally Speech for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris October 3", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-nh-rally-speech-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-october-3", "publication_date": "03-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3275, "text": "While 30 million Americans have lost their jobs, while 12 million Americans have lost their health insurance, while 29 million Americans do not have enough food to eat, while 40 million of our people face eviction, 643 billionaires increased their wealth by $845 billion over the last six months alone. So, that is the state of the economy today. And let us be very clear, despite what you may have heard over the past four years, the economy has not been very good for the working class of this country. And sometimes we lose track of that, but here is the truth, you do not have over the last four years, and I am not now just talking about the last six months, but you do not have a strong economy when half of our people are living paycheck to paycheck. Do you all know what living paycheck to paycheck is about? I grew up in a family that lived paycheck to paycheck. Joe Biden grew up in a family that lived paycheck to paycheck. Many of you are living paycheck to paycheck. If you got one. It was not a good economy for the last four years when 87 million Americans were uninsured or under-insured, could not get to a doctor when they were sick, and unbelievably and horrifically when 68,000 Americans were dying each year, because they could not go to the doctor when they got sick. Can you imagine that? Richest country in the history of the world, 68,000 of our people die each year, because they cannot get to a doctor when they get sick, because they lack the money and do not have any health insurance. It is not and has not been a good economy when over 40 million workers were earning starvation wages of less than $15 an hour. And here, again, is the simple truth, nobody in America can make it on eight, or nine, or $10 an hour. And over the last four years, it has not been a good economy. When a half of older workers, and we do not talk about this enough, when half of older workers had no retirement savings. Imagine being 55, 60, 65, you do not got a nickel in the bank and now you are on retirement. And how do you do that with any shred of dignity? Half a million of our people are homeless, including many veterans who put their lives on the line to defend us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesandersnhrallyspeechforjoebidenkamalaharrisoctober3", "title": "Bernie Sanders NH Rally Speech for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris October 3", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-nh-rally-speech-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-october-3", "publication_date": "03-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3276, "text": "And as part of that housing crisis that we are experiencing some 18 million families are spending half of their incomes on housing or more! How do you take care of your basic needs if you are spending half of your income on housing. But I must tell you, over the last four years, it was again a great economy for the billionaire class and it has become even better for them during this horrific pandemic. My friends, we need an economy that works for all of us, not just the few. And it is not just in recent years, it is not just over the last four years. Here is something else that we do not talk about. Over the last 45 years, there has been a massive redistribution of wealth in America, but sadly, that redistribution has gone in the wrong direction. Since 1990, while the top 1% saw their wealth go up by $22 trillion, you got that? Top 1% saw their wealth increase by $22 trillion, the bottom half of America saw their wealth actually go down. Today, the average worker in America, and this is really quite astounding when you consider the growth of technology and the explosion in productivity, the average American worker today is now making $34 a week less than he or she did 47 years ago after adjusting for inflation. Can you imagine that? Over a 47-year period, an explosion in technology, increase in worker productivity, and yet the average American is earning less than he or she did 47 years ago. What I understand, and I believe you understand, and the American people know is that we are all becoming more and more outraged with the corporate greed that we are seeing every single day. The American people are sick and tired of large, profitable corporations shutting down here in America and then moving to low wage countries all over the world. They are sick and tired of seeing CEOs now make 300 times more than their average employees. While they give themselves huge bonuses, they cut back on their health care benefits of their workers. The American people are sick and tired of that corporate greed. They are sick and tired all of us paying by far the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. While at the same time, the pharmaceutical industry makes 10. the same time, the pharmaceutical industry makes tens of billions of dollars in profit, year after year after year. In my view, the American people understand that we can no longer sustain an economy which has more income and wealth inequality today than at any time since the 1920s.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesandersnhrallyspeechforjoebidenkamalaharrisoctober3", "title": "Bernie Sanders NH Rally Speech for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris October 3", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-nh-rally-speech-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-october-3", "publication_date": "03-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3277, "text": "When three people own more wealth than the bottom half of this country; three people; that is not acceptable. Under Joe Biden and under a Democratic Congress, we are going to change all of that. Together, we are going to end a rigged tax code that allows billionaires to pay a lower tax rate, an effective tax rate, than nurses, teachers, and truck drivers. While at the same time, we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major country on earth. So together, what this campaign is about, and what we must do in the future, is bring our people together by the millions to create a government and an economy that works for all of us, not just the 1%. Now, it is no great secret that Joe Biden and I disagree on a number of issues. But there is also no question that the economic proposals that Joe Biden is supporting are strong, and will go a long, long way to improving life for working families. I want to take a minute to talk about those proposals. Because of everything that is going on in this crazy world today, I think there has not been enough focus on Joe's economic proposals. Joe Biden, you, and I know that it is not acceptable that tens of millions of Americans work at starvation wages. People cannot make it on nine, 10 bucks an hour. Joe knows that, you know that, I know that. That is why Joe Biden is going to help us raise that minimum wage to at least 15 bucks an hour. What Joe understands is that if you work 40 hours a week, you should not be living in poverty. Joe Biden also understands that it is absurd that women make 75 cents on the dollar compared to men. That is why Joe is going to make sure that we have equal pay for equal work. Joe also knows that the path toward a stronger middle class is strengthening trade unions in America. Right now, all across this country, there are millions of workers who want to join unions. But because of the heavy-handed corporate tactics that now exist, it is impossible for them to do that. Joe and I and the United States Congress are going to go forward and make it easier for workers to join unions, engage in collective bargaining. Joe also understands that we have got to stop providing corporate welfare to companies that are throwing American workers out on the street and moving abroad. It is absolutely insane that we provide welfare to these guys.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesandersnhrallyspeechforjoebidenkamalaharrisoctober3", "title": "Bernie Sanders NH Rally Speech for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris October 3", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-nh-rally-speech-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-october-3", "publication_date": "03-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3278, "text": "Then they say thank you and they shut down factories and plants in America. There is something else that Joe understands. And that is that in the midst of the worst economic crisis in our lifetimes, we need to create millions and millions of good-paying union jobs. The fastest way to do that is to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure; our roads, our bridges, our wastewater plants, our water systems; and to build millions of units of affordable housing. I will tell you what else Joe understands. He understands that we have got to end the international embarrassment of the United States being the only major country on Earth not to guarantee paid medical and family leave. When a woman in America gives birth, she should not be forced to go back to work after one or two weeks. When a child gets sick, Mom or Dad should be able to stay home, take care of that kid, and not lose a day's pay. I want everybody to hear it because it is not been talked about enough. That is why Joe Biden has proposed at least 12 weeks of paid family and medical leave for working families. When we talk about babies and we talk about young children, we all know that our current childcare system is dysfunctional, and it is totally inadequate. Our children and their parents deserve high-quality, reliable, and affordable childcare. That is why Joe has proposed universal pre-K education for every three- and four-year-old child in this country. When we talk about having the best educated workforce in the world, Joe understands that we have got to make public colleges and universities tuition free for the working class of this country. And that we must substantially reduce student debt in America. And at a time of massive income wealth inequality, Joe Biden understands that we must- Equality, Joe Biden understands that we must demand that the wealthiest people and the most profitable corporations in our country start paying their fair share of taxes. No more tax breaks for billionaires while half a million Americans sleep out on the street. No more tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas or shift their profits to the Cayman Islands. Joe also understands that one out of five Americans who walk into their doctor's office and gets a prescription, they cannot afford to fill that prescription because of the outrageous cost of prescription drugs in this country. And what Joe Biden knows and what I know is that if anybody is serious about healthcare reform, we have finally got to summon the guts to take on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesandersnhrallyspeechforjoebidenkamalaharrisoctober3", "title": "Bernie Sanders NH Rally Speech for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris October 3", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-nh-rally-speech-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-october-3", "publication_date": "03-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3279, "text": "During my campaign for the presidency I took a trip from the Midwest, a few miles into Canada to buy insulin for diabetics. And we have got millions of people who were dealing with diabetes and the need for insulin. We went 15 minutes away from Detroit, Michigan into Ontario, Canada. We bought the same damn insulin as sold in the United States for 1/10th the price that was charged in America, 1/10th the price. And together, Joe knows, I know, and you know that we have to take on the collusion, the price-fixing and the greed of the pharmaceutical industry, so that Americans no longer pay the highest prices in the world for the medicine we need. Now, as many of you also know, the United States is the only major country on Earth not to guarantee healthcare to all people as a human, right. Meanwhile, despite paying almost twice as much per person for healthcare as the people of other countries, over 90 million Americans today are uninsured or under-insured. And unbelievably, over a half a million people go bankrupt every single year because they cannot afford to pay their medical bills. While Joe and disagree on the best path to get to universal coverage, his proposal will greatly expand access to healthcare and make it more affordable for tens of millions of people across this country. And here is an important point that has not been talked about enough during this campaign. He is going to lower the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 60, meaning millions of more people will be eligible for Medicare. He will expand Medicare to cover dental core, eye glasses and hearing ENTITY. And he will substantially increase funding for community health centers to make sure that millions of Americans get the primary health care and the mental health care that they desperately need. Joe knows that when you talk about healthcare, you are talking about mental healthcare as well. And by the way, if the Democrats gain control of the Senate, you are looking at the chairman of the subcommittee on health. And trust me that the healthcare industry and the drug companies will understand a very new reality when that happens. Let me conclude by once again, thanking all of you for coming out today and for saying that in the wealthiest country, in the history of the world and I want everybody to remember that, sometimes we forget it. We are the wealthiest country, not only in the world, but in the history of the world. We need to create an economy that works for all of us. That works for our children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesandersnhrallyspeechforjoebidenkamalaharrisoctober3", "title": "Bernie Sanders NH Rally Speech for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris October 3", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-nh-rally-speech-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-october-3", "publication_date": "03-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3280, "text": "It is good to be back in Grand Junction. It was about 4 years ago, around this time, that I was first in Grand Junction. We had a bunch of bales of hay. You remember that? I have got a couple of people I want to acknowledge. And I am a little sweet on Deanne, not just because of a great introduction, but also because she is a nurse, and I just love nurses because they do such a great job every day. Also, we have got one of your outstanding U.S. Senators, Michael Bennet, in the house. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar. Now, those of you who have a seat, feel free to take a seat. Those of you who do not , just remember to bend your knees because sometimes I have people drop off in the middle of even when I am not talking too long, just because they have been standing too long. So especially when it is warm like this. I love you back. Now, obviously, this is a smart crowd, and so I know that most of the last couple of weeks, you have been watching the Olympics, cheering on our U.S. athletes over in London. You have been spending time with family and trying to get outdoors, at least when it cools off. But unless you have been able to hide the television completely or your cable is broke, then you may be aware there is a pretty intense campaign going on right now. And the reason it is such an intense campaign is because the choice that we face in November could not be bigger. This is not just a choice between two candidates or two political parties. It is a choice about two fundamentally different visions for the country, two fundamentally different paths. And the direction that we choose the direction that you choose when you walk into that voting booth in less than 3 months is going to have a direct impact not just on our lives, but on the lives of our children and our grandchildren for decades to come. Now, 4 years ago, we came together Democrats, but also Independents and some Republicans to restore the basic bargain that had built this country, that had made us the most prosperous nation on Earth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallygrandjunctioncolorado", "title": "Barack Obama Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Grand Junction, Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-grand-junction-colorado", "publication_date": "08-08-2012", "crawling_date": "01-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3281, "text": "It says that if you put in enough effort, you can find a job that pays a decent wage, pays the bills; that you can afford to have a home that you call your own; that you have health care you can count on when you get sick; that after a lifetime of labor, you can put away enough to retire with dignity and respect; and most importantly, that you can give your kids the kind of education and opportunity that allows them to dream even bigger and do even better than you could ever imagine. That is the promise of America. That is the promise of America. Now, when we came together, we knew restoring that bargain that deal, that compact was not going to be easy. because we had seen what had happened in the previous decade. The cost of everything from health care to college was going up. And then, it all culminated in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, a crisis that robbed too many of our friends and our neighbors of jobs, the value of their homes, their savings. And all that pushed the American Dream even further out of reach for too many working people. But you know what, we have spent the last 3 1/2 years digging ourselves out of that hole. We averted a depression, created 4.5 million new jobs, 500,000 in manufacturing. We saved an auto industry. We worked to make sure that health care was secure for families. And what we discovered during the course of these difficult times is that a crisis does not change our character. It does not change who we are as a people. our toughness, our grit, our resilience, and our ability to come together and work together on behalf of this country. And when we came together in 2008, we understood that there is a core decency, that there is a goodness to the American people, and we need to make sure that that is reflected in what happens in Washington. So, after 3 1/2 tough years, we are still going. We are here to build an economy where hard work pays off, so that no matter who you are or what you look like or where you come from, here in America, you can make it if you try. That is what this campaign is about, Colorado. And that is why I am running for a second term as President of the United States of America. We have the capacity to meet any challenge, because we have still got the best workers in the world. We have got the best entrepreneurs in the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallygrandjunctioncolorado", "title": "Barack Obama Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Grand Junction, Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-grand-junction-colorado", "publication_date": "08-08-2012", "crawling_date": "01-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3282, "text": "We have got the best scientists and researchers in the world and the best colleges and the best universities in the world. We are still a young nation, and we have got the greatest diversity of talent and ingenuity, and people want to come here from every corner of the globe. And so no matter what the naysayers tell us, no matter how dark the other side tries to make things look, the fact is, there is not another country on Earth that would not gladly trade places with the United States of America. So we can solve our problems. What is standing in our way is not that we do not have good ideas or we do not have solutions to problems like energy independence or improving our schools. What is standing in our way is our politics. You have got a bunch of folks in Washington who think the only way is their way and who think that the only way to go forward is to go right back to the same policies that got us into this mess in the first place. They believe in the old top-down economics that we spent an entire decade trying and that did not work. My opponent, Mr. Romney, and his friends in Congress, when you look at their economic ideas, when you look at, you know, they have spent a lot of time on commercials, saying how there are not enough jobs and the economy is not growing fast enough. And then, you ask them, okay, well, what is it that you are thinking about doing? And you know, I am not exaggerating, it boils down to two things. First of all, they want to give more tax cuts to folks at the very top. Idea number two is let us get rid of regulations that we put into place to make sure that Wall Street does not misbehave again and we do not have another meltdown or getting rid of regulations that help protect our air and our water or getting rid of regulations that protect consumers from unscrupulous lenders. You get rid of regulations, and you cut taxes for wealthy Americans, and somehow, jobs and prosperity will all rain down on all of us. If you think I am exaggerating, you go to their websites, you look at the bills that have been passed by this House of Representatives. That is where they will take us if they win. In fact, the centerpiece of Mr. Romney's entire economic plan is this new $5 trillion tax cut.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallygrandjunctioncolorado", "title": "Barack Obama Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Grand Junction, Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-grand-junction-colorado", "publication_date": "08-08-2012", "crawling_date": "01-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3283, "text": "And now I want you to pay attention here; we are going to do a little math. I like that; somebody said they love math. All right, so we have known for a while that a lot of this new $5 trillion tax cut would go to the wealthiest 1 percent of all households. But last week, an independent nonpartisan organization crunched the numbers. They looked, what does this mean, $5 trillion? Keep in mind, by the way, the defense budget is about $500 billion. So a $5 trillion tax cut is over 10 years is like a tax cut that is as big as our entire defense budget every single year. So these guys were trying to analyze what does this mean. They found that Governor Romney's plan would raise taxes on middle class families with children by an average of $2,000. Now, the reason is as he says that this $5 trillion tax cut he will pay for by doing other things, by slashing education or making Medicare into a voucher. But even after he makes all the cuts to education and training and science and research and transportation and environmental protection, you name it, it turns out, he is still short. So the only way that you could actually pay for it is to have you pick up the bill. So you would then pay $2,000 extra every year not to reduce the deficit, not to help our kids get an education, not to rebuild our roads and our bridges or lay broadband lines into rural communities. He would ask the middle class to pay more in taxes so he could give another $250,000 to people making more than $3 million a year. Now, he was asked about this, his campaign was asked about it, and if this sounds like an idea that would be difficult to explain to the American people, you are right. Let us just say there was a whole different kind of gymnastics being performed by Mr. Romney than what is been happening in the Olympics. So they were twisting, and they were turning and doing backflips and trying to say, well, this is a biased report, despite the fact that the head of this nonpartisan center used to work for President Bush. But it is not surprising that he was trying to scramble a little bit, because they have tried to sell this old, trickle-down tax cut fairy dust before. It is not a plan to create jobs. It is not a plan to lower the deficit. It is not a plan to move our economy forward.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallygrandjunctioncolorado", "title": "Barack Obama Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Grand Junction, Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-grand-junction-colorado", "publication_date": "08-08-2012", "crawling_date": "01-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3284, "text": "It is not a plan to build the middle class. We do not need more tax cuts for folks like me. We need tax cuts for working Americans who are trying to raise a family and keep our families healthy and send our kids to college and keep a roof over their heads. That is who needs some help. to fight for you. Now, you guys still bending your knees? You have got some water; get hydrated. Michelle made me promise that I cannot sing to others anymore. Because she wants me to just sing to her, you know? But look, Grand Junction, I have got a different plan for America. Four years ago, I promised to cut middle class taxes. That is exactly what I have done. The typical family has seen their taxes go down by about $3,600. So when you talk to your friends or neighbors and they say, he is a big, spending, tax-raising Democrat you have got to tell them, no, actually, if you are in the middle class, your taxes have gone down. So now I want to keep taxes exactly where they are for the first $250,000 of everybody's income. So if your family makes under 250,000 which, by the way, 98 percent of Americans do, 97 percent of small businesses do you will not see your income taxes increase by a single dime next year. And by the way, I have told Congress I told the Republicans in Congress I said, let us do it now. You guys say you do not want to see anybody's taxes go up; I do not want to see anybody who is making $250,000 or less see their taxes go up. Let us go ahead and sign a bill. But shockingly enough they have not agreed so far, because they are holding you guys hostage to try to get tax cuts for the top 2 percent. Now, look, if you are fortunate enough to be in the other 2 percent of Americans, you are still going to get a tax cut on the first $250,000 of your income. So if you make 260,000, the first 250, you are still keeping all that tax cut. It is just that little bit over 250. Now, if you are making $5 million, you can afford it. All we are asking for folks who have been blessed like me I mean, I am not being self-interested here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallygrandjunctioncolorado", "title": "Barack Obama Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Grand Junction, Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-grand-junction-colorado", "publication_date": "08-08-2012", "crawling_date": "01-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3285, "text": "It is not like I love paying taxes, but I understand I have got certain obligations because this country has been so good to me. So what I have all we are saying is for folks in the top 2 percent, let us go back to what we were paying under Bill Clinton. Let us contribute a little bit more so we pay down our deficit and we can still invest in things like education that help our kids succeed. Now, keep in mind, just in case you are talking to your friends or neighbors again and they say, well, that just a little bit of tax increase on the top 2 percent, that will not cut the deficit, they are right. We have got to do more. So we have already cut a trillion dollars. Federal spending is growing at a slower rate than any time since Dwight Eisenhower. I will make sure Government continues to do its part, and we will cut out spending we do not need. But I am not going to pay for a massive new tax cut for millionaires and billionaires by gutting investments that have always made us strong as a country. And by the way, just like we tested their plan under the previous administration and it did not work, we have tested my plan because, as you will recall, under Bill Clinton, when those taxes were a little bit higher on folks like me, the economy grew faster than it has in years, 23 million new jobs. We went from a deficit to a surplus. And folks at the top did well. We created a lot of millionaires to boot. And the reason is that, look, when a construction worker has a got a little money in his pocket, now he starts thinking about buying a new car. When a teacher has security in her job, now she might go to a restaurant once in a while. And so what happens is, when the middle class is strong, suddenly, businesses have more customers, businesses have more profits, businesses decide to hire more workers. That is how we build a strong economy, not from the top down, from the middle out, from the bottom up. That is the choice in this election. That is why I am running for a second term for President of the United States. Now, let me say, you can see how this plays out on a whole bunch of issues, not just taxes and the deficit. When the American auto industry was on the brink of collapse, more than 1 million jobs at stake, Governor Romney says, let us let Detroit go bankrupt.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallygrandjunctioncolorado", "title": "Barack Obama Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Grand Junction, Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-grand-junction-colorado", "publication_date": "08-08-2012", "crawling_date": "01-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3286, "text": "I said let us bet on American workers. So now I want to make sure that the jobs of tomorrow, including advanced manufacturing jobs, that they are not taking root in China or Germany. I want them to take root in Colorado, in Ohio, in Michigan. Governor Romney and I have a different theory. He spent his private sector experience investing in companies that were called pioneers of outsourcing. I want to stop giving tax breaks to companies that are shipping jobs overseas. Made in America. That is what I believe. Romney says it was tragic for me to end the war in Iraq, like I promised. I think after a decade of war, it is time to do some nation-building here at home. Thanks to the incredible service of our men and women in uniform, Iraq is in charge of its own destiny. We are bringing troops home from Afghanistan. We went after bin Laden and Al Qaida, and we got them. So now let us take half of the savings that we were spending on war, and let us use it to put people back to work rebuilding schools, rebuilding bridges, rebuilding roads, improving our airport systems, improving our ports so that we can move goods and services that will make our economy strong not just now, but in the future. And by the way, that also helps us pay for providing services that our men and women in uniform have earned. Our veterans fought too hard for us for them to have to fight for a job or a roof over their heads when they come home. I am running to make sure America once again leads the world in educating our kids. I want to hire new teachers, especially in math and science. Help 2 million people go to community colleges to train for the jobs that businesses are hiring for right now. And I want to make sure that every young person can afford to go to college. We have already expanded student aid; now we need to bring tuitions down. to give our young people a chance. On housing and foreclosures, Mr. Romney says let the market just bottom out. I say let us let every American refinance their homes at historically low rates, save $3,000 per family, per homeowner. That could actually boost the economy and strengthen the housing market. When it comes to health care, he wants to kill Obamacare. I am implementing Obamacare because it was the right thing to do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallygrandjunctioncolorado", "title": "Barack Obama Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Grand Junction, Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-grand-junction-colorado", "publication_date": "08-08-2012", "crawling_date": "01-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3287, "text": "Already, as we speak, 6.5 million young people under the age of 26 can stay on their parent's plan. Millions of seniors have saved hundreds of dollars on their prescription drugs, and we are closing the doughnut hole. Individuals and businesses are getting rebates from their insurance companies because insurance companies have to use most of the money they get in premiums to provide care, not for CEO bonuses and administrative costs. If your child has a preexisting condition, insurance companies cannot turn them down. Soon, adults who have preexisting conditions cannot be turned down. So if that is what Mr. Romney wants to get rid of, despite the fact that he did the same thing in Massachusetts and it worked pretty well then that is a different that is a choice in this election. You know, I do not think we should be refighting some of the battles he wants to refight. I think you should be able to serve your country no matter who you are. I do not think it makes sense for us to take away control that women have over their own health care decisions. But most of all, most of all, I want to make sure that that original bargain that made this country great, that basic idea that if you work hard you can make it, that that is restored. And everything we do from health care to education, to manufacturing, to our infrastructure, to our investment in science and research all of this is designed to make sure that we have got a strong middle class going forward, that no matter what you look like, where you come from, that everybody has got a fair shot and everybody is doing their fair share and everybody is playing by the same set of rules. And now we have got to pass on that same promise to the next generation. Now, over the last over the next 3 months 89 days, to be precise the other side will be spending more money than we have ever seen. You have got these guys writing $10 million checks. You have got these super PACs that are just going crazy. I do not know why they are running all these ads, because basically, they only have one ad. It is just a variation on the same ad, which is, the economy is not where it should be and it is ENTITY's fault. Because they know they cannot sell their actual plans; they do not have plans. Their message is designed to try to win an election, but it is not a plan to create jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallygrandjunctioncolorado", "title": "Barack Obama Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Grand Junction, Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-grand-junction-colorado", "publication_date": "08-08-2012", "crawling_date": "01-07-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3297, "text": "Today we have moved one step closer toward gaining broad bipartisan support for GATT. I am pleased to announce that an understanding has been reached with Senator Dole to reaffirm our United States sovereignty and to make sure that the reaffirmation will be protected in the GATT process. That means that the WTO will be accountable and fair and will meet our expectations. The Uruguay round is the largest, most comprehensive trade agreement in world history. It creates hundreds of thousands of high-paying American jobs. It slashes tariffs on manufactured and agricultural goods. It protects intellectual property. It is the largest international tax cut in history. Most importantly, this agreement requires all trading nations to play by the same rules. And since the United States has the most productive and competitive economy in the world, that is good news for our workers and our future. For the past 50 years, our country has led the world to create a more open and a more prosperous trading economy. A bipartisan vote in support of the Uruguay round next week will ensure that we will lead the world for decades to come. I want to express my deep thanks to Senator Dole, to Senator Packwood, Senator Moynihan, who are here, and ask them to speak. I thank Ambassador Kantor for his heroic work in this endeavor and the Secretary of the Treasury, Secretary of State for what they have done. The Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury and I are going to have to excuse ourselves to go meet with the Mexican Presidentelect, President Zedillo. I also want to make a brief announcement today. As part of our ongoing nonproliferation efforts, Kazakhstan has delivered into our security nuclear materials capable of making some 20 nuclear weapons. That means that one more threat of nuclear terrorism and proliferation has been removed from the world. Today-this is a good day-we are making progress toward making our people more secure and more prosperous. Again, let me say how excited I am about the prospect of the GATT round passing the Congress and to express my appreciation to Senator Dole for the very constructive working relationship that we have had. I'd like now to excuse the Secretary of State and Secretary of Treasury and ask the others who are here to make some comments, beginning with Senator Dole.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthegeneralagreementtariffsandtrade", "title": "Remarks on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-general-agreement-tariffs-and-trade", "publication_date": "23-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3306, "text": "Thank you, Alvah Chapman, CADCA's founding chair, who first talked to me about this some years ago now. I thank all the families who are here today who have sustained losses. And I want to say a special word of thanks to Lori Plank for having the courage to be here, just 2 weeks after she lost her husband, along with her husband's parents and her beautiful child. I thank them for coming and for devoting themselves to the proposition that the best way they can honor Ed Plank is to do whatever can be done to stop this madness from killing more Americans. Let me say to all of you that this issue is especially close to me. Most of you, because of what you do, probably know I grew up in an alcoholic home, and I have a brother I love very much who could have been killed by the cocaine habit he had. And we all have to do whatever we can to get it out of our lives. We have to deal with the question of law enforcement and punishment. We have to deal with education and treatment and prevention. We have to deal with all those things that can be done by the President and all those things that can be done by legislators at the national, State, and local level. But in the end, this problem will be changed when America changes, when we assume responsibility for ourselves, our families, and our communities. And therefore, what you are doing-what you are doing-and what other Americans are doing in attempting to assert that sort of responsibility over their own lives for their families and for their communities is the most important thing that can be done in America today. And it is up to the rest of us to support you as well as we possibly can. Of course, parents have a special role to play because we all know that the best crime prevention, the best antidrug program in this country always has been a good family with strong parents. We know that it is the Government's job to uphold the law, to promote order, but parents must teach right from wrong, and we must all support that. And where the parents are not there or cannot do it, then the community must step in and do their best, which is what so many of you are trying to do.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityantidrugcoalitionsamericaforum", "title": "Remarks to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-anti-drug-coalitions-america-forum", "publication_date": "02-11-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3307, "text": "I want to say again that I thank Lee Brown for the work he has done to get the urgent message out to our young people that they are wrong if they think that drug use is not dangerous as well as illegal and that they have the power to do something about it. It is one of the cruel ironies of this battle that drug use has stabilized or is actually declining among young adults, but casual drug use, especially marijuana, continues to go up among teenagers. We have to get that message out there. We owe it to the generation of young people, some of whom are in this audience today. I also want to say that we know that here in Washington, there are things that we can and must do to try to deal with the problems of the drug supply as well as the law enforcement problems in our country. And we have developed a strategy to tackle this problem from top to bottom. We began by taking on the notorious Cali cartel, the biggest drug cartel in the world. For years, the Cali cartel pumped drugs into the American economy and into the veins of the American people with impunity. But after years of operating largely untouched by Colombian law enforcement, I am proud to say that seven of the eight top drug traffickers in the Cali cocaine cartel were arrested by Colombian authorities with our support and cooperation in 1995. Investigative activity by United States enforcement agencies provided much of the evidence against the Cali kingpins. We are also using our military and our law enforcement activities beyond our borders in other ways. We are working more closely together among ourselves and with other countries. We are beginning to have a real impact. But we know that cutting off the supply is only half the equation. As long as the demand remains great in America, people will figure out how to provide some supply. We have to take more steps here in this country to reduce demand. We have to take more steps to punish people who are making a killing by killing other people. And we have to take more steps to empower people like you to do the education, the treatment, and the prevention work that will turn this generation of young people away from this madness. A year ago with the enactment of the crime bill, we attempted to give the American people the tools they need to do what has to be done here at home. We put more police on the street, and we did more to get guns and drugs and children off the street. The 100,000 police commitment of the Federal Government is running ahead of schedule and under budget.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityantidrugcoalitionsamericaforum", "title": "Remarks to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-anti-drug-coalitions-america-forum", "publication_date": "02-11-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3308, "text": "The crime rate is down in almost every State in America, in no small measure because people are out there in uniform, walking the streets in the communities, doing what they can to help prevent crime. More and more law enforcement officers are in our schools through programs like the D.A.R.E. program, trying to help educate children and prevent the drug problem from taking hold. Three strikes and you are out is now the law of the land, and more and more career criminals are being tried under it and convicted under it. We are taking steps against the terrible problems of violence against women. And the crime bill, together with the education bills that were passed in our budget, have increased our commitment to drug treatment as well as to education and other prevention strategies, which is also important. If you think about what your National Government does directly- well, we do the national defense directly. We do some law enforcement directly. We do some things directly through the mail, the Social Security checks, the Medicare checks. But a lot of what we do-in the form of education, in the form of protecting the environment, in the form of promoting law enforcement and safe streets, in the form of growing the economy-a lot of what we do, we do in partnership with individuals at the community level. And we have tried to focus on that very sharply. So we have tried to bring down the size of the Federal bureaucracy but to increase the commitment of the Federal Government at the grassroots level so you could do what needs to be done. We know that for the first time in a long time, as I said, the crime rate is down. In addition to the crime rate being down, you might be interested to know that over the last 3 years, the welfare rolls are down, the food stamp rolls are down, the teen pregnancy rate has come down 2 years in a row, and the poverty rate is down. Child support payments are up 40 percent, and the college loan delinquency rate is down by 50 percent. There is a real sense that this country is coming back together around core values, and that is very important. Having said that, we know that crime, welfare, poverty, violence, and drug abuse are still far too high. There are too many kids out there who are not a part of something wholesome and positive and bigger than themselves; the people are not taking responsibility for their future and trying to help them take responsibility for themselves.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityantidrugcoalitionsamericaforum", "title": "Remarks to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-anti-drug-coalitions-america-forum", "publication_date": "02-11-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3309, "text": "And there is still way too much violence in this country, as the tragic example of the Plank family shows. So let me say-and Jim made a reference to it, but it is in this context that I want you all to see and make your own judgments about the budget battle now raging in Washington. We do have to continue to bring this deficit down, and we do need to balance our budget. I am proud of the fact that it is gone from a $290 billion a year budget to $164 billion a year budget in just 3 years. And I am -you might be interested to know that as a percentage of our income, the United States now has the lowest budget deficit of any industrial country in the world, except for Norway, in the entire world today. Now, that does not mean that we do not need to do more. We built up such a huge debt in the 1980's and early nineties. We need to do more. But it means we have to do it in a way that is consistent with our values. Why do we need to eliminate the deficit? Because we want to grow the economy and raise incomes and give our children a brighter future. But we have to do it in a way that looks to our values, give people a chance to make the most of their own lives, to strengthen families, to reward work and family, and to help communities solve their problems. That is the purpose of this. That is why I have said repeatedly I think it is a mistake to balance the budget if we cut education or if we harm the health care system or undermine the environment or weaken law enforcement or raise taxes on working families. If you look at the work at which you are involved, you are doing this work, but it makes a difference if the Nation is contributing to law enforcement. It makes a difference if the Nation is contributing to drug education. It makes a real difference if the Nation is contributing to the treatment programs. We simply cannot balance the budget in a way that puts our children at risk or that weakens our resolve to fight the drug problem. And we do not have to do that. We cannot walk away from the fight against drugs and violence. We have to walk right into it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityantidrugcoalitionsamericaforum", "title": "Remarks to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-anti-drug-coalitions-america-forum", "publication_date": "02-11-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3310, "text": "If the Plank family, bearing the burden of their grief only 2 weeks old, have the courage to come here and stand up for making America a better place to live, a drug-free place to live, a violencefree place to live, if these other families that have sustained their terrible losses have the courage to come here, surely the rest of us can have the courage and vision and wisdom to say, we can deal with our budget problems in Washington without walking away from our values and our responsibilities. Let me say that one of the things that concerns me most as ENTITY is to see the economy coming back and all these indicators that society is getting healthier, and then to see underneath it that juvenile violence is still going up and that casual juvenile drug use is still going up. If we do not turn that around, then all of these directions could be brought to a screeching halt as more and more of these juveniles become adults. And I told the Attorney General that in terms of law enforcement we need to focus on the problem of juvenile violence more than ever before to see what can be done there. We cannot tolerate the killing of an innocent child by gang members simply because her parents drove down the wrong street. We cannot tolerate the killing of innocent children in schools or what happened in Maryland not very long ago, an honor student standing at a bus stop just happened to be in the way, in the crossfire of two gangs that took a notion to shoot at each other. We cannot tolerate the shooting of one youth by another simply because the killer felt that he was shown disrespect and therefore had a right to shoot another child. That is not the America that won World War II or the cold war or that stood for freedom and opportunity for the whole world. And that is not the America we can afford to leave to our children. We also have to deal with this whole problem of casual drug use. You heard Jim Burke talk about it; you heard Lee Brown talk about it. There is a lot of evidence that young people simply have-starting in about 1991, began to believe that some kinds of casual drug use simply were not dangerous and did not have to be countenanced very seriously. It is not true because as a pure medical matter, marijuana is more toxic than ever before, because people who do it are now mixing it with other things, like huffing all these dangerous fumes, because very often they get into other drugs. We have got to do something about it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityantidrugcoalitionsamericaforum", "title": "Remarks to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-anti-drug-coalitions-america-forum", "publication_date": "02-11-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3311, "text": "Most of our children are busy building good lives. Most of our kids are more than happy to show up for activities like this. They are not involved in violent activities. They are doing well in their schools. I think that we forget sometimes what we need to ask these young people to do is what these young people are doing here. If the kids are doing well-and the vast majority are-if the kids are emphasizing the importance of staying in school and staying drug-free-as the vast majority are-we need to ask more of them to do what these young people are, to be an example to their peers, because many of them can have far more influence over young people their age than the rest of us old fogies can. And we need to applaud them and give them encouragement. The other thing I want to say, just to reemphasize what Jim Copple said and what Jim Burke said, we need every community in America to be a part of this alliance. Every community in America should have a group that is a part of this alliance, because we know that we can make a difference. It is simply not true that you cannot whip this problem. And a lot of you are living evidence of that. The citizens of Pierce County, Washington, for example, who have the safe streets campaign to combat illegal drug and gang activity and violence that accompanies these problems, they know their efforts are making a difference. They have closed down over 600 drug dealing locations in 12 communities and reduced calls to 911 by 23,000. Not just an urban problem, Hamilton, Missouri, citizens are banding together, using such innovations as a youth peer court in conflict mediation beginning in the 4th grade to educate and empower young people. There is a lot of things you folks are doing that are working. The real problem we have in America is that we have not learned yet to figure out how to take a solution that works in one community and put it into every community which is not doing anything. So I want to say to you, I want you to keep up the good work, but we have to find a way to say to every community in America, If something is working somewhere else, you are really doing your children and your future a disservice if you have not done it in your community. Every community in America should be a part of this alliance.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityantidrugcoalitionsamericaforum", "title": "Remarks to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-anti-drug-coalitions-america-forum", "publication_date": "02-11-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3312, "text": "In an attempt to facilitate greater progress in dealing with the problems of juvenile violence and juvenile drug use, I will convene a White House Leadership Conference on Adolescent Drug Use and Violence in January. We want to bring together people like you to highlight successes in local communities, and we want to help you build a true, national coalition to combat drugs and violence. You will be hearing more about that in the coming weeks. One of the things we want to highlight is the positive role the media can play in the fight against drugs. Every day, as many of us have said, the children of this country are bombarded with messages that tell them it is cool, sexy, attractive to drink and smoke and do drugs. But conversely, let us not forget, that the media can also play a very positive role in influencing the attitudes of our young people about the harmfulness and the unacceptability of using drugs. The Partnership for a Drug-Free America, which Jim Burke has led so ably, has proven that over and over again. The media has donated over $2 billion in support of partnership antidrug messages on television and radio, in print and outdoor billboards. Lee Brown has been able to enlist the support of a number of sports and television celebrities in new TV and radio public service campaign spots aimed at our Nation's youth, telling them they do have the power to stay drug-free. So these messages are working to change attitudes. They can make a difference. So what I want to say is, just like I want every community in the country to have an organization that is a member of CADCA, and I want you to go out to all them and get it done, just as I want the vast majority of our young people who are doing the right thing with their lives to do what these young people are doing and reach out to other kids and help them. We ask the media across this Nation, when it comes to the fight against drugs, turn up the volume. I also ask you not to forget that the media is not a national thing entirely. Lee Brown and Bill Clinton and Jim Burke and Jim Copple and all the rest, we can go to the networks and to the large media centers and say, Will you help us do this? But the media in America is a many-faceted thing. And there are things that can be done in your community by people who are more than willing to help if you ask them to do it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityantidrugcoalitionsamericaforum", "title": "Remarks to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-anti-drug-coalitions-america-forum", "publication_date": "02-11-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3313, "text": "We are all very proud of you. Dale and I were looking up at you, listening to you speak, feeling a little bit better about his retirement and my imminent retirement in the next couple of years. I'd like to thank Congressman Snyder and Congressman Berry for representing you fiercely and well and for being my friends and for doing our State proud. The three of them remind me of why I have always loved public life in Arkansas. And I am always delighted to see people who have served others and worked for others and helped others and done others service be rewarded with higher positions. And all three of them deserve it richly, and I am very pleased to see that. I'd like to thank Rabbi Levy for being here tonight, and Bishop Walker, who is my longtime friend and whose vociferous and highly public defense of me may have won an election for me back in 1982, without which I would not be here. I am glad to see you. I thank Rodney Slater for his remarks and for his extraordinary service. He has really done Arkansas proud. And there are a lot of other Arkansans who have been critical to the success our country has enjoyed in the last 6 years who are here tonight. I will probably miss some of them, but I cannot help mentioning Mack McLarty, Bob Nash, Janis Kearney, Bruce Lindsey, Nancy Hernreich, Carroll Willis, Kris Engskov; anybody else who is here from home in the administration, I apologize that I missed you. But you should be very proud of your fellow Arkansans who are making a contribution in Washington. I would like to thank Vaughn McQuary for his leadership of the party. He has done a great job, and I am proud of him. And I am glad he is coming-and to all the other dignitaries that are here tonight. David Pryor tonight gave me his Harvard card--says he is a fellow at Harvard. You know, I think I deserve some credit; I had enough guts to go to the Ivy League before I was elected to office in Arkansas. David was always one of them. He was just waiting to get out of office. You know, one of the truly great joys of my life is that I got to serve as Governor when they were Senators together, Dale and David. I admired them. I liked them. I was so proud of what we were able to do together.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerhonoringformersenatordalebumperslittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner Honoring Former Senator Dale Bumpers in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-honoring-former-senator-dale-bumpers-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "13-03-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3314, "text": "I rarely ever called them about any issue they had to vote on, and when I did, they tolerated what I had to say and then did what they thought was right. But when I saw David up here talking about Dale and I, and then Dale whispered to me a story about two friends of ours who were Senators from another State who, to put it charitably, do not like each other-and it interferes, I think, with what they are doing-I thought of how many examples I have seen, State after State after State, where good people let their egos get in the way in the Senate and do not work together. And there was no State that had a better team of Senators, but they were made 10 times better because they respected and liked and even loved each other, and they never let themselves get in the way of doing their jobs. And I appreciate it. You know, the thing I am going to miss most about having Dale Bumpers not in the Senate and not handy is that when I get really low, I cannot call him and hear his latest joke. There has never been a person who liked jokes better than Dale Bumpers, I am sure, in all of human history. You know, the three of us, we'd go on these road shows when we were all down here, we'd go to these roasts, and we'd tell each other's jokes. And if one of us would forget to tell one of our best jokes, somebody else would tell it and never give credit. But it got so bad one time, Dale Bumpers called me and said, You remember that joke you told me about a month ago? He said, I cannot remember the punch line to save my life. He said, Tell it to me again. So I was really happy, because his jokes were funnier than mine, by and large. And I got in the middle of the joke, and he remembered it, and he started laughing. And I never to this day-that was 10 years ago-I still have not finished that joke. I have crashed a plane with Dale Bumpers. I have been through all kinds of adversity and shared a lot of joy. But I would like to say something, if I might, to try to add my poor pittance to what Senator Pryor and others have already said.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerhonoringformersenatordalebumperslittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner Honoring Former Senator Dale Bumpers in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-honoring-former-senator-dale-bumpers-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "13-03-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3315, "text": "Yesterday I got to go home to Hope to dedicate the birthplace foundation, the home I lived in for the first 4 years of my life, and it was a very emotional thing. I had a lot of my family there. And I was coming back from Central America, night before last, thinking about what I could say and how I could say it in a very few words. And I said to them that in the heady days after World War II, when I was a child and first coming of age, my hometown was not perfect. It was still segregated and had its share of flaws, Mack McLarty reminded me, including a pretty bad town gossip or two. We glorify those types today. At least people used to be embarrassed about it. But I knew then that every child was raised with at least two things in my time, when I was a child coming of age. One was an immense sense of personal optimism that life was good and that you could live your dreams if you worked for them. And the other was a sense of belonging, a sense of community, a sense of responsibility to others as well as to your own life, and a clear understanding that a lot of the richness and texture and meaning of life came from being a part of a web of relationships with other people. And in that time, we also thought of, from my earliest childhood, public service as a truly noble endeavor, not that the people who were in it were perfect but that they were well motivated and that they wanted to serve and they wanted to advance our common dreams. Dale Bumpers represents all that to me in a time when it has been under assault from many quarters. And I tried to think about what it was about him that made him stand up all these years for our State, for the children, for the country, for the environment, for the Constitution, for all the things he fought for, made him believe he could cast unpopular votes, like the Panama Canal vote, and still come home and tell the people why he did it and have them stick with him. He never forgot the lessons of the past, beginning with the Constitution of the United States; he never stopped dreaming of the future; and he never lost his essential humanity. Our public life is poorer when people forget the past and ignore the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerhonoringformersenatordalebumperslittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner Honoring Former Senator Dale Bumpers in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-honoring-former-senator-dale-bumpers-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "13-03-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3316, "text": "Somebody has inquired as to whether I will be going to the opening baseball game. I hope to have that pleasure. Some 2 months ago I presented to our delegation to the Arms Conference at Geneva certain ideas which I believed would contribute to a solution of some of the problems before the Conference. They were practically incorporated in the general program by our delegation. These ideas have now been more fully discussed and developed during the visit of Mr. Norman Davis in consultation with the Secretary of State and our ENTITY and Navy advisers, with a view of enlarging their scope and application. With the months that passed, the economic burden and menace to world peace have, if anything, increased. The world needs the reduction of governmental expenditure and the spirit of peace that can come from some degree of successful issue of the Disarmament Conference at Geneva. I have, therefore, asked the Secretary of State to go to Geneva in order to explore with our delegates and those of other nations the possibility of taking some more definite and positive steps in that direction. It is the American desire to produce some concrete and definite results, even though they may not be revolutionary. That is the sole purpose of the Secretary's visit, and there will be no discussion or negotiations by the Secretary on debts. What I asked for in my message yesterday was organized, nonpartisan cooperation of all forces to reduce governmental expenses in a national emergency which insistently demands relief for the taxpayer. There are three general directions in which expenses can be reduced. A definite program to this end was placed before the Congress in the executive budget proposals, in which there was a reduction of $369 million for the forthcoming year. I welcome and hope for further cuts by the Congress, provided that such reductions do not destroy essential functions and that they are genuine and do not merely represent postponed appropriations until deficiency bills next December. There are a large number of expenditures within the bureaus and departments which cannot be reduced without a change in the laws so that the Executive or the Appropriations Committees can reduce such expenditures. In this direction the department heads have appeared before many different committees in Congress in the last months, and have pointed out a multitude of directions which could be considered by these committees for a reduction of expenditures. But most of them require repeal or amendment of laws which compel the expenditures. Seven departments alone have pointed out over 85 such different directions for consideration of those committees, and which offer possibility of very large reductions.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference923", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-923", "publication_date": "05-04-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3317, "text": "I have known this gentleman for seven years. I have never heard him make a speech. I am with him all the time. We begin and I want to thank New Hampshire for the warm welcome outside. I do not know if you have seen them, but they are all And no negatives, all positives and it is really beautiful and it is so great welcome and I am thrilled to be back at this beautiful state that we all love and so near and dear to my heart. I want to take a moment to salute your incredible outgoing chairman. Steve, what a job you have done. He loves the state, he loves the people of the state and we all love you Steve, and that is why I am going to be making an announcement about Steve. Should I do it or should I just leave it? I am also so really excited to do this because I know so many people and so many people would like to do it, but Steve is going to be stepping down and he will be coming on board as the senior advisor for my New Hampshire campaign. He is going to help us to ensure that we have a win in the granite state in 2024. We stop the communist, we stopped the Marxists. If we do not stop them this time, I think that is going to be the end. I believe that. I believe that we have to stop them and we have to stop them quickly. Now, although your next state chairman has not been announced, I believe they are going to be doing that right after this. I want to congratulate both candidates, Lou and Chris, two incredible guys for having the courage to step forward and serve. You will be hearing about that shortly. Let me also thank the New Hampshire house speaker, Sherm Packard. That means they do their job. The ones that are not shy, they do not do their job, they'd sit down. They do not have to get up because everyone knows the great job they have done. As someone who has won the New Hampshire presidential primary, not once but twice. And by the way, I believe we also won two general elections. If you want to know the truth. And I believe it very strongly in plenty of other places also, but I know better than anybody what a special role the state has, the people have. And really it is a place for American presidents.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3318, "text": "And one of the things Steve told, I told him, Steve, you can help with the campaign a little bit, but what I really want is help on that final day of voting. It used to be a day right with paper ballots. Now it is in some cases 64 days. We have 64 days to vote and we have all machines. We have no paper, we have no nothing and lots of surprises. I said, I really want the biggest help to be on election day or election period. Think of that, we have to call it an election period. Someday we will be back to paper ballots. We will be back to voter ID. We will be back to doing it the way it is supposed to be, one day voting. In France, they had an election, it was one day. They had 38 million people that took one day. By 10 o'clock in the evening, all the votes were counted. You had a winner, you had a loser. And everybody said, Good luck. But we do not have that in this country anymore. We have gone crazy in so many ways, but that is why from the very beginning I have strongly defended New Hampshire's first in the nation primary status. And there are some, you know who they are, even think about taking that cherish status away. And they wanted to take it away. And we said, No, we are not going to do it. You see what is going on with the Democrats? They taken lots of things away. You have an incredible tradition and we are going to keep that tradition and we guarantee it. And I said it last time and I said at the time before, and I have lived up to that promise just as I have many other promises. So you have it, you are first and you are going to remain first. But if you look just to try and compare and look on the other hand, lost the New Hampshire primary, Joe Biden lost it badly and it was a very tough time. He had a humiliating fifth place to feed, and now he is taken a revenge on the voters of your state by cruelly and disgracefully trashing this beloved political tradition. It is a great tradition and I hope you are going to remember that during the general election. Do not worry about it now, just general election, you are going to remember that that he took it away. He took it away. You know about that. Now, maybe that'll be stopped legally or through the courts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3319, "text": "But he wants to take it away from New Hampshire. I stand before you today and make this solemn pledge. When I am back in the White House, I will ensure that New Hampshire remains the home of the first in nation Republican primary for many, many years to come. And I think maybe more than anything else, I have proven that I keep my promises. I have proven it more than just about any president they say. But it is a true privilege to have this opportunity to speak with you. And my very first trip back to New Hampshire, this is about the beginning. We are starting, we are starting right here as a candidate for president. And you have probably seen the polls, we are really doing great. Remember I used to try In 2016, I talked about polls all the time. In 2020, I did not have to because we did not have a lot of competition. We had no competition. And I do not think we have a competition this time either, to be honest. But I talked about the polls and I will say that our polls, we are absolutely. We are so far ahead in the polls, both in New Hampshire. One came out this morning, a very nice poll, we are way ahead and one came out yesterday on Nationwide Poll, and we are 35 points up, 39 points up. We will not play prevent, defense like they do in football though however. You know about prevent, defense? The team holds them and there is no way. They hold them for almost four quarters and then they have to just stop them one more time and they go to prevent. We do not do prevent defense. Everyone in this room shares the one key mission. We are going to defeat Joe Biden, defeat Joe Biden and the radical Democrats. I think in many cases they are Marxists and communists and I used to say that seldom. Now, I say it all the time because they are. You look at what they are doing to our country, and we are going to turn New Hampshire red on November 5th, 2024. I hope we can have the help with everybody. Under Biden, our nation is being destroyed by a selfish, radical, and corrupt political establishment. Why are they doing these things? The three love it when I say that. They love that. They love hearing AOC plus three, all on one of the three. Crazy Nancy Pelosi and crying Chuck Schumer, and the group, they are running our country right into the ground.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3320, "text": "They are destroying our country. To save America, we need a leader who is prepared to take on the forces laying waste to our country. And we need a president who is ready to hit the ground running on day one and aye, here, boy, am I hitting the ground? The fake news, we have a lot of news today. Some of it is fake, but some are actually are very good. But they said when I announced I just want to put my cards in the table, we are playing that very big game right now, the biggest game of all because it involves the country and the survival of the United States of America. But when I put the cards on and then I said, All right, let us go. Well, I said, I got two years. They said, He is not doing rallies, he is not campaigning. Maybe he is lost that step. I am more angry now and I am more committed now than I ever was because Now, I read a story. I read a story where they talked about why is not he out there? It was like on a Friday night, and then I actually did something that night. Little low-key stuff and lots of There is lots of work. We have great people with us, amazing people that I have met and really gotten to know because as a non-politician, I did not know anybody. I went to Washington. I tell the story. I am driving down Pennsylvania Avenue with our great first lady and I am looking over and I am saying, I saw the hotel that I built. It was very, very successful in Pennsylvania. And we had more police and more I never saw anything like it. We are going down Pennsyl, crowds are cheering and just going absolutely crazy. I looked at our first lady, I said, Do you believe it? I am the president of the United States. So I did not know the people in Washington like a politician would who spent 25 years and then ran for president. And I have learned over four years. I know the great ones and I know the not good ones. I know the rhinos that are not going to get it done, and I know people that are going to really get it done. I had to rely on, in many cases, some rhinos that we did not even know they were rhinos or not. But they are more dangerous in many ways than the Democrats, I tell you. And we have incredible people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3321, "text": "When you think of what we have done, we had the largest tax cut in the history of our country. We had the largest regulation cuts in the history of our country. We had the safest southern border in the history of our country. We had the least amount of drugs in decades and decades. Right now, it is 10 times the drugs are pouring into our southern border as when I left. It is coming in like water and cheaper than candy. Fentanyl, you buy cheaper than candy. You can go buy a candy bar, of course, you are much more than fentanyl and they can kill the entire nation with it. And frankly, that is probably what they are trying to do. So we had it done and we had a great thing going, and we had built hundreds of miles of wall. All of the things that we did to make it so good. Stay in Mexico, nobody even heard of it. Mexico said to us, Well, we are not going to do it. I said, No, no, no, you are going to do it, a hundred percent. Then a representative came down and I dealt with somebody, a very nice woman for the State Department. She worked with Mexico, on Mexico for 25 years. She said, Sir, you cannot get these things. They will never agree to that. They will never agree to any of this stuff. I also said, I want 28,000 soldiers from Mexico guarding our borders. Will you pay for it? No, we are not paying anything. And so she smiled and not as a bad person, she smiled. I said, No, we will get it, a hundred to one. I mean, I will tell you it is not even a chance that we want. Then the representative from Mexico came into the room. And I really like, even though he is a socialist, I really like the president of Mexico. We have a very good friend. In fact, it took him a long time to call up President Biden. It took him a long time. There were many leaders of countries that just could not do it. They did not believe it actually, even though we were very tough on many countries, we were tougher in Russia than anybody would've been. They just did not believe the result. But I said, Here is what we need, we need 28,000 soldiers and we want everybody staying in Mexico, never coming into the United States until we have them approved.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3322, "text": "If you do not approve it, then we are going to put a tariff on all of the cars that you stole from our country to make in Mexico of 25%. And every product that is made in Mexico is going to have a tariff of 25% on it, which would amount to tens of billions of dollars for the United States. He said, I cannot believe you'd do that. I will sign it. And in effect, this goes on on Monday at eight o'clock in the morning. And I had the document right here, showed him the document. He said, May I take five minutes to make a call? I wonder who he called, called the president and came back. Sir, we'd be honored to give you 28,000 soldiers and we would be honored to keep everybody in Mexico, even the MS13 gang members and everything until such time as they have to. And then think of it, they did not want. They come in, they said, come into the United States. They stopped the wall construction. We had built hundreds of miles of wall, but they stopped the construction. Three weeks, it could have been the addition because we added a lot more than we originally said we were going to do. We had to wait two and a half years because the Democrats sued us. We had 11 different lawsuits. We won all of the lawsuits. I actually got a lot of the money. I took it out of the military because I consider it to be defense of our country. It is an onslaught what is coming in, and we did all of those things and then they come in and what they have done to this country is incredible. Even staying out for medical reasons, you know all about that. I mean, people are very ill and they are coming into our country. Now, they are emptying out as you know, their prisons Prisons, and they are emptying out their mental institutions. I dealt with the leaders of those countries. I know them all, and they are very streetwise. They live, and they do well, but why should they pay for mental institutions when we can dump everybody into the United States? Why should they pay for prisons? It is a big portion of their budget. Why should they take care of MS-13 gang members, the worst anywhere in the world? Why should they do that when the stupid people running the United States will do it for them? What they are doing is poisoning our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3323, "text": "Every day I think of the United States in a way This never happened. Literally, I thought of this yesterday, and I said, I am coming up to a place that gets it, and maybe I should say it, and I went to my buddy and I went to a couple of people that have been with me a long time. It is sort of strange, but I think of the United States, every day as April Fools' Day, and they said, Sir, what do you mean by that? I do not like the sound of that. I said, Well, listen to this, and I just gave a couple of ideas. We have open borders when they should be closed. We have prisoners, people from, as we just said, mental institutions and terrorists being dumped into our country when they should not be accepted. Who would do that? Who would do this? Who would allow prisoners in? He goes Biden, and he said Brandon. We have no voter ID when everyone wants voter ID. Even at the Democrat National Convention, they had a card on the front of them that was bigger than their chest, with the exception of some people. They had a card. It had everything, pictures, everything. So think of it, no voter ID when everyone wants it, even the Democrats. They did a poll, 88% of Democrats want voter ID. They do not want it because they want to cheat. That is what they are best at. We have a woke military that cannot fight or win, as proven in Afghanistan, but we lost unfortunately $85 billion of it to Afghanistan where we stupidly gave $85 billion to these people. We had them in check. We had them totally in check. Why are you speaking to him, sir? Who else do I want to speak to? Who else am I supposed to speak to? We want to end it. I told Abdul. I said, Abdul, you are killing a lot of our people. They did a lot during the Obama administration. The snipers, they were killing our soldiers left and right, a lot of them, and the roadside bombs. You all know because it is a very military state, very state-focused on the military. I said, Abdul, you are killing a lot of people. If you do this anymore, we are going to hit you harder than anybody has ever been hit by this country, and that is pretty hard.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3324, "text": "We are going to hit you so hard, left and right, up and down, you are going to regret it. This is over a telephone conversation, can you believe it? He called me Your Excellency. I wonder if he calls Biden He is still there by the way, Abdul. He cannot believe his luck. We were getting out, but we were going to get out with pride. We were going to take our military out last, not first. We took our military out, and once we took the military out, they had I could just see Abdul, tough, smart guy, sitting there, Sir, they just took the military out, and he looks at the guy and probably said, This guy is the stupidest guy. They took the military out first, and we left. Right now we have many, many hundreds, maybe thousands, but hundreds of American citizens there, they are stuck. But we did not take the equipment out, and we could have taken it out easy. I had one of our generals that is currently there say to me, Sir, I think it is cheaper to leave the equipment than to take it. 85 billion, and I said, What do you mean cheaper? We have brand-new airplanes over there. You mean it is cheaper to leave a $100 million aircraft, latest and the greatest, the helicopters, brand-new Apache helicopters, hardly used, it is cheaper to leave it than to fly? I said, Listen, so you think it is better than we could give it a half a tank of gas, fly it to Pakistan, and then take it over here, right? Let it fly its way over, a couple of gallons extra, a little bit of extra fuel, jet fuel, which today you cannot get by the way. You cannot get it because of us. I said, You think it is better just to leave it? So we left them 700,000 rifles of the best. We left them 70,000 vehicles, many of them armored, cost millions of dollars, armored plate. Four inches of steel on the bottom, you can imagine what they cost. I do not know if anyone's in the car business, but I have a friend who is very big in the business. I said, Did you ever have a car lot with 70,000 cars? He said, 70,000? If we have 200, we'd consider that oversupplied. I said, 70,000, think of it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3325, "text": "They are very good fighters, the Taliban, but they never fight at night because they do not have binoculars. We have given them brand-new thousands of binoculars, better than what we have, far better than what we have because they are brand new, they are the best. They are now one of the biggest sellers of arms to other countries because they have so much, they cannot possibly use that much. 700,000 rifles and guns they call it. We just dumped it over there and many other things, so this is what happened. We have a military that has to get back on track, and they do not want to. We have proposed mandatory electric stoves and electric cars, when everyone wants at least the option of choice because gas stoves cook better and gasoline cars go a lot longer. I have a friend who got an electric car. After two hours, he is like, Where the hell do I get this thing Where do I get electric, please? He used to drive for 12 hours. Now he drives for a very short period of time, but he is happy because he thinks he is helping the environment. I said, You are not helping the environment. If you knew where the batteries were made, all made out of China, and they are all made with minerals and substances found in China. The substance we have, more than anybody else, is something that gets refined into gasoline, and we have more, and they do not want to use it. We have people in the midst of the greatest crime wave in history that want to defund our police. Right, let us defund the police. You cannot even get in your car. You go to New York, nobody ever gets prosecuted. They go after me. I have a man, he is 75 years old, he got prosecuted because he did not pay tax on a company apartment. He did not pay a tax on a company car. 75 years old, he has a company car, did not pay tax. I guess did not pay tax on the education of his grandchildren. I paid for the education of his grandchildren. I have a lot of money. I paid for the education. They want to put him in jail. They put him in jail. Can you believe this? To the best of our knowledge, we have never seen anything like it, only if it is somehow Trump-related.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3326, "text": "Think of it, never been charged before that we know of, and they charged him criminally and they put him in jail, and it is a disgrace to our country. He is a fine man, never had a problem, I do not think he ever had a parking ticket. That is what is happening to our country. We have skipped socialism, that train has already left. We have men being encouraged to compete against women in sports, okay? The story I tell about the swimmer, where this great champion swimmer wants to win this race. She is looking up and down, and she is seen the same girls and women that she is fought and swam against. Then she looks to the right, same thing, but there is this giant standing right next to her, and he hurt her very badly because he went by her so fast that she suffered massive windburn during the race, the whole thing. I think he beat her by, what is it, 36 seconds, right? If she could win by an eighth of a second, she is going to win. She is worked all her life for this, all her life. She is going to win by an eighth of a second. She is going to set the U.S. record. He beat the record by 38 seconds. We have Antifa and BLM who hate our country and burn down our cities, and they are protected by law enforcement, while we put great American patriots in jail and destroy their lives, right? We are begging foreign nations for oil when we have far more oil than they have. I call it liquid gold that is under our feet. We decided to stop drilling oil as it hits an all-time high. It hits the all-time high, highest ever, we are going to stop drilling. Who would do that? Some friends of mine are great business people here. You got a lot of good business people up here, but they hear that when the price goes high, that is when they start. No, the price hits an all-time high, and that was the day where he said, No drill. We are going wind. Let us kill all the birds. Let us destroy our plains and our beautiful oceans and seas and everything else. And then on top of it, we sell China millions and millions of barrels of cheap oil. We are selling it to China. We demand windmills be built on our oceans.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3327, "text": "We demand they go on our prairies and our mountains and our plains, only to realize that they are killing all our birds at a level that If you go out hunting and you happen to shoot a bald eagle, they put you in jail for five years, right? They kill thousands of them with these windmills, nothing happens. It is the most expensive and least reliable form of energy on our planet, extremely expensive, and the wind turbines are all made in China. Some are made in Germany, but most are made in China. We have a president whose son's laptop from hell gets taken over and exposes massive corruption like nobody's ever seen before. You think the father Did you ever hear this? Dad, I left my laptop in a repair shop. I forgot to pick it up, and this repair guy went a little crazy when he saw what was on it. What is on it, son? Every crime that you have ever committed, pa. At what point does the father get angry, like, This kid is not working out well for me. Then the FBI goes and convinces the media that it is Russian disinformation. Remember, they went over to see the people at Twitter and other media and other agencies also, but the FBI, can you imagine the good old FBI? This is Russian disinformation, so if you hear anything about it, do not put it in. You better not do it because it is Russian disinformation. Even though they know that is a lie that they are telling them. Instead of doing that, they come after Trump. Let us go after Trump. Let us raid Mar-a-Lago. We have an FBI and Justice Department that does raid Mar-a-Lago in Florida. It is placed under lock and key. It was built actually as a southern White House by Marjorie Merriweather Post and E. F. Hutton. They willed it over to the government. Jimmy Carter turned it back. Can you believe it? And I say, Thank you, Jimmy. I appreciate it. But they asked if we could do them a favor. They saw the room. We are having very good discussions with NARA, which is what we are supposed to do. We looked at the room. They asked us, Would you do us a favor? They came down and looked at it. I told them, Absolutely, go down and look. They looked at the room. They found everything in order.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3328, "text": "They looked at the room, and they made a request, Could you put on an additional lock? We had a strong lock. Could you put on an additional? Let them put it on. We put on additional. Then they came in and they raided Mar-a-Lago after that. We were having very good discussions with NARA, but of course, NARA is very radical left. They have a red flag. Does anybody know this? It is a red flag meaning danger. The Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights, can you imagine? This is what we are dealing with. So they raided, but if you take a look at it, and if you look at all these things, all of these things, I was going to go longer, but we want to get to who the hell your next boss is going to be, okay? I was going to go a lot longer, but honestly, I said, I am not sure the cameras have that much time. That is because Steve is leaving, and he is coming with us. If he was not coming with us, I might just have to forget about New Hampshire and just mark it down to a loss, but with Steve, I do not think we can lose. I think with Steve, we are going to mark it down to a victory. In recent weeks, I have begun to introduce our bold, ambitious agenda to control and confront the colossal disasters that Joe Biden is leaving in his wake, what he is done to this country, the damage. I say all the time in the rallies, which are starting very soon, even though it is still very early. I almost enforced that we entered the rallies. Why is not he doing rallies two years early? But we are going to do them soon. I think we should do a big one up here, Steve, okay? Let us do a big one. They love our rallies. I am in Florida, and I am driving over to a big meeting, a destination. We go different ways sometimes, and they are driving over, and we have We are passing signs, and every lawn has Trump 2024, Trump. The spirit, and the spirit is because they knew what they had, and now they look at what is happening to our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3329, "text": "Within hours of my inauguration, we will restore every border security measure of the Trump presidency, we had it so good, to quickly achieve the most secure border in US history again just as we had two years ago, and I will ask Congress to establish criminal penalties for any future administration that releases millions and millions of people that you do not want in our country. I do not say that as a bad person. I mean, I have a bigger heart than anybody, but we do not want their prisoners, and we do not want people that are living in mental institutions. We do not want terrorists in our country. We do not want it. We are going to be paying a price for a long time. We have to get them out. We have to get them out. They poison our country, the people who launched this invasion because it really is an invasion. We believe those people belong in jail. When they say conservative, or liberal, or Democrat, or Republican, or independent, it is really with people of common sense. You want to have borders. You want to have voter ID. You want to have these things, and it is just Look, there is two reasons this could be happening, the list that I read, and there is so many more, but the list that I read. They are stupid, which they are not because they are great at cheating at elections. Anybody that cheats like that cannot be stupid, but they are either stupid or they hate our country, and it has to be they hate our country because who would allow this invasion of our country to take place? Despite two and a half years of working and all of the things we did, I mean, to get this stuff in place, and then they just walk away from it. We worked two and a half years to get it. We had to negotiate with Mexico and stay in Mexico. I think I pulled another tariff one on that one too, We are going to charge you so much, but they were great, and they understand it, too. They really understand it, and I came up with the name Caravan because we had caravans of 15,000, 20,000 people pouring in, not when I I will tell you what. We had it stopped pretty early, but now, if you look at these caravans, these are massive, massive caravans, and they have no idea who these people are coming into our country. Nobody is asking them about health, but it is hard to get in.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3330, "text": "I have so many people, Can you help me become a citizen? I have a guy, rich guy, wants to become a citizen, and he is gone through everything. He is gone to school to study, and this, and this, and that. He is been working for 11 years. He has not been able to pull it off. I finally said to him, You know, you have been working so hard. Why do not you just go down to Mexico, then suddenly start walking across our border? They will take you gladly. They will not even talk to you. Now, how ridiculous is it when you think people study, then they work, and they are on lists for years, and years, and years trying to come into our country legally, which we want all of those people we can get. Everybody agrees to that, right? But you have other people that are prisoners and that are very ill in many different ways, including mentally, and they just walk into our country. Although we took out thousands and thousands of MS-13 gang members. They were really killing places of They were killing Long Island and other places. Lethal drugs are pouring across our wide open border at levels never seen before and 10 times greater than just two years ago. The drug cartels are waging war in America, and it is time that America wage war on the cartels. I got very badly criticized by some of the rhinos mostly that said, Oh, behind the scenes, he was saying that maybe he is going to hit Patriot missiles into these drug dens, and they announced that. One of the stupid people like a Bolton or somebody, these are stupid people, but they said, He is going to go into those area, and he is going to hit him with a Patriot missile. I said, Well, that is going to be a couple of days of bad publicity, except everybody said, What a great idea that is. This is a crazy world we are living in, and we have to be very careful because we have a very fragile country. Just as we destroyed ISIS You know I destroyed ISIS in three weeks. You know that, General Dan Caine Raisin Cane. When I went over to Iraq because I said, Why are not we beating ISIS, Raisin Cane? He was central casting you. Most of you heard the story, but he did a great job. I was told in Washington by the Washington generals. I call them the television generals. We have great generals.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3331, "text": "We have a great army, great military. I created Space Force, which is a big deal. I said, I am going to like you. Are you kidding me? This is a Then, I said, I was told it takes three years to get rid of ISIS and maybe we could not even do it in that by Washington. I actually flew to Iraq to meet with the generals. Sir, we can do it in three weeks, sir. We can do it in three weeks. Well, why have not they done it? Sir, they did not do it because I should not say this, sir. In fact, I will not say it because you know a military person is not supposed to say. I said, Why did not you convince them to do it the way you want to do it? I am in the military, and I have to take orders. They came in from Washington and told us what to do. Even if I disagree with them, I have to take orders. I mean, I understand that. I am not sure I fully understand it because it does not seem to make a lot of sense, but militarily, I guess it does. I met him at the base of Air Force One with another general and a drill sergeant. These guys are all better looking than Tom Cruise. You got to see these guys. They are like perfect human beings. The pilots on Air Force One were landing in the desert. We are landing, and I am saying They told me, Sir, turn off your lights, please. An hour before landing, they said, Please turn off your lights, sir. Why would I turn off my Because we are landing. I said, Well, you mean we spent $7 trillion in the Middle East that we cannot land? After spending $7 trillion and by the way, millions of people killed if you include the other side, which I include, but we spent trillions and trillions. They said, Turn off your lights. Then, they come, and they not only turn off the lights, they put down the shades. So we are an hour out, and I went up to the front of the cockpit because I love going with these guys, seeing how great they are. Best pilots fly Air Force One. They take the best pilots. Anybody fly Air Force One in this room? I heard some guy over there, but the best pilots. I do not see any lights. I said, I have pretty good vision, Captain.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3332, "text": "I do not see anything ahead. Then, you hear the mechanical They call it a mechanical voice. 1,000 means you are at 1,000 feet. I am trying to be Captain, I do not see a runway up there. I could take him to Hollywood tomorrow. I do not think they ever had a problem in their life. I never saw so many people operate a plane, but these are minor details. That is why it is called Air Force One in the United States, right? We have five telephone operators. I might make one call, right? I will call our First Lady. They wait for me to make calls. We are getting 700. I just closed my eyes. In fact, I checked immediately. I wanted to see whether or not I could award myself as president the Congressional Medal of Honor. I do not think the fake news media back there would like it. They would not be happy with that. They said, This is not good, but I do not think I had the right. Anyway, I got off the plane. I see General Cane. We can take it three weeks. We can do it in three weeks. It is like central casting. You could make a movie. If I took a camera, I would've made a movie out of it, but I walk. Let us go right to work. Now, do you think Biden would say that? I do not think He'd rest for three days. He'd rest for three days, and then they'd walk him back to the plane. They would not have a discussion. No, I said, Let us go to your room. So we went up to this gorgeous room. This is an incredible fortress with 22-inch walls of concrete. I mean, this is really an amazing thing, and we go into this area that is very secure with no lights at all, practically. Then, we turned the lights on. I said, So why can you do it in such a short period of time when they told me in Washington they probably could not do it in three years? Well, sir, we'd do it differently. How would you do it differently? Well, they only attack from this location, and we are very far away. By the time the planes got there, we had it pretty much turned back. We did not have any time, but sir, I'd attack them from the front.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3333, "text": "We have many other bases, temporary bases in many cases, but they have runways. We do not have to have fancy, and I had attack them, sir, from seven different locations. I'd hit them from the front, and I'd hit them from the back. I'd hit them from up top, and I'd hit them from below, sir, and they would not know what the hell hit them. I think we will do it in about three weeks. I said, Why did not you tell this to these people? I said, General, let me give this a little thought. I go back to Washington. I said, You sure you can do this? I can do this. We can do this properly, the way it should be done. I am telling this story. I am telling this story because we have an incredible military, and you have to understand that. When you see these blundering idiots that leave $85 billion worth of equipment behind, the best equipment in the world that I bought. I bought the best Apache helicopters. I bought it. I rebuilt our entire military. We had great people. We had people that got in through the rhinos and got in some bad I mean, for the most part, we rebuilt the entire military. I tell you this because you see these blundering fools on television that say I should not be standing in front of a church with a Bible. I am standing with a Bible in front of a church that these terrorists tried to burn down the day before, and they are saying, Oh, they wish they did not walk because I tell you what. These are fools, but I am telling you because we have an amazing military. So after a short period of time, they hit them hard, and 100% of ISIS was gone. So we have a great military, but we have some fools right now on top. As I announced this week, we will eliminate federal funding for any school that pushes critical race theory or left wing gender ideology. I will get for you parents' rights, including the direct election of principals by the parents. You want to have the parents pick the principal and superintendents. We will keep men out of women's sports. We are not doing this anymore with the men out of women's sports. We are going to end that policy. Every once in a while, you will see one, and they are getting congratulated for having the courage.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3334, "text": "I do not know what takes courage, but it does. It takes courage because they get absolutely just decimated by just speaking up about something so basic as that. We will end Joe Biden's war on American energy and restore American energy independence as we had it just two years ago. We were energy independent two years ago for the first time ever, and we were soon going to be energy dominant, and we were going to make so much money with energy that we were going to reduce your taxes even further. I gave you the biggest tax cut in history, bigger than Reagan's, and we were going to reduce it further. We would've paid off the debt of our country. We were going to be supplying Europe with energy, supplying everybody with energy, and they ended it. I will quickly rebuild the greatest economy in the history of our world, and the proven formula is really low taxes. I reduced the taxes, and we took in more revenue after I reduced the taxes. So, you need the revenue. We took in more revenue. I also made it possible for companies to bring in trillions of dollars that they had overseas. They could not bring it in because bureaucratically, it was too tough, and the tax was too high. They had to pay 40% tax. Who is going to bring the money? So they let it stay in Europe, and they let it stay in Asia, and they do things there. So we took in billions, and billions, and billions of dollars came back in, and they used that money to build in our country. We will end the Chinese imports of essential goods and replace them with products made in America and made in New Hampshire, by the way. And I will force China to sell any current holdings in the United States that puts our national security at risk. They are buying land right next to our very important military areas. I took in hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes and tariffs from China. I gave 28 billion to the farmers because they were treated so badly and it was just peanuts compared to what I took in. The farmers love me. You go to Iowa. Those farmers, they better love me. But you have some wiseguy coming and say how great he is to the farmers. No, I do not think they would buy it. I gave them a checks. We split it around. Everybody got, because what China did to the farmers was incredible.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3335, "text": "And we brought many businesses back from China because of what I did with the taxes and tariffs. It gave an incentive for them to come back. And no other president has ever done anything like it. And no other president, I took in hundreds of billions. Not one other president took in 25 cents, not 25 cents. They never had the courage to talk 25 cents. And I got along great with President Xi, but he understood that we understood what the game was. What they did with the Wuhan lab, it came out of the Wuhan lab. And I said that for a long time. We will crack down harder on violent crime, investigate radical left wing prosecutors. The Democrats are supposed to do that. You have to get their permission in theory to go in. I did it for a reason. Seattle, they took over Seattle. How about they took over the police station and then ultimately I said, I do not care. We are sending in the National Guard. We sent it in. But you are supposed to wait for the governor or the mayors to ask for approval. I will tell you that. I did it. I did it the right way. The one thing that I have shown how bad they are, how bad they are and how dangerous they are because they would never call. They could have a city or state taken over and they would not call for military help. But we came into, as an example, Minneapolis. And then you have CNN saying, Not much is happening, and the reporter behind them, the whole city's burning. Do you ever see that? Behind him the entire city is in flames. So, I will support a constitutional amendment to impose term limits on members of Congress. And only a non-politician would do that. A lifetime ban on lobbying by former members of Congress because I see the things that are happening. And also cabinet members and a ban on members of Congress getting rich by trading stocks with insider information like Nancy Pelosi and her husband. We will keep America out of foolish foreign wars just as I did as commander- in-chief. And I will restore pre It is called peace through strength. By the way, and everyone thought when I ran, they said, This guy's going to be in world Remember crooked Hillary? He is going to cause a war in his first week in office, because they think that is my personality type. My personality kept us out of war.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3336, "text": "And I told you before, would've never happened with Russia. And even now I could solve that in 24 hours. I will bet you have millions. It could be millions of you. They bomb a city to the ground. But, if I were president, you would have zero chance that that war would've happened. I mean, the country, how does it ever rebuild those cities, those magnificent buildings that came down that are a thousand years old with the gold domes? You cannot do that. But it would've just So, so sad to see that. I do not think he would've He would've never done it. And let us see what happens with China and Taiwan because they see how incompetent we are. So, let us see what they are going to do there. But we will root out the deep state and stop the weaponization of federal agencies because there is a weaponization like nobody's ever seen. We will use every tool at our disposal. We will give to Steve to defend election integrity and we will dismantle the illegal censorship regime and bring back free speech to America. And as they say in New Hampshire, live free or die. This is just the beginning of our agenda. Many times I will be with you. I like it here, first of all. But I love the people here. One year from now, we will win the New Hampshire primary. And then, with the help of the good people of this state, I love the people, we are going to take back our country and we will take back the White House and we are going to straighten out the United States of America, okay? And God bless you all. Now, I am going to be reintroducing Chairman Stepanek, who is going to do a very important thing. He is going to make an announcement. So, whoever that is going to be, I am going to immediately start treating him very nicely because he will have a big impact on the election.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpdeliverskeynotespeechatnewhampshiregopannualmeetingtranscript", "title": "Donald Trump Delivers Keynote Speech at New Hampshire GOP Annual Meeting Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-delivers-keynote-speech-at-new-hampshire-gop-annual-meeting-transcript", "publication_date": "30-01-2023", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3337, "text": "Thank you all for that heartwarming reception and heartwarming can be used on this particular day. Well, it is good to be back in the great State of Michigan, and it is great to be in the Tri-City area. You know, being a native midwesterner, I am always happy when I come to this part of the country maybe because you make me feel at home. But you in Michigan champion the bedrock values on which our country was built belief in God, love of family, neighborhood, and good, hard work. Here are steadiness of purpose and strength of patriotism. My opponent may take a negative view of America, but he'd better not try to peddle his doom and gloom in Michigan. Let me just ask you a question. Do you believe America's greatest days are yet to come? Well, let me tell you, you have some outstanding candidates for the Congress who feel just the same way. Jack Lousma served with distinction as a colonel in the Marine Corps and as an astronaut. He piloted the space shuttle Columbia on one of its first flights. And today he is a candidate for the United States Senate. And he believes in keeping your taxes down, and I can guarantee you, his opponent, the present incumbent, does not believe in keeping your taxes down. But Jack knows that this will create opportunity for all Americans, and he believes in keeping America strong to keep America free and at peace. I need Jack Lousma, Michigan needs Jack Lousma, and so does America need Jack Lousma. Bill Schuette is running for the Congress, and I have to tell you he is one of the finest candidates I have ever known. Bill believes, with me, that we can save you billions of dollars by cutting government waste and fraud, and that is what is the principal difference between him and his opponent, the present incumbent. And Bill Schuette, Jack Lousma, and congressional candidate John Heussner are all determined to help us keep your taxes down. So, if you do not mind, I am going to ask a favor. If you plan to vote for our ticket, please vote for our entire ticket. Help spread the word, get out the vote, and do you mind if I say, Win 'em for the Gipper ?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallysaginawmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Saginaw, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-saginaw-michigan", "publication_date": "02-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3338, "text": "You know, I remember that line that he spoke when he made that request, the Gipper, and he said, Wherever I am, I will know about it, and it'll make me happy. But if you do, we will keep building our new future of opportunities for America. You know, Abe Lincoln said that we must disenthrall ourselves with the past and then we will save our country. And 4 years ago, that is what we did. We made a great turn, we got out from under the thrall of a government which we had hoped would make our lives better, but which wound up living our lives for us. Four years ago we began to navigate by certain fixed principles. We knew that economic freedom meant paying less of the American family's earnings to the Government, and so we cut personal tax rates by 25 percent across the board. We knew that inflation, the quiet thief, that thief was stealing, along with record interest rates, stealing your future. We knew that our national military defense had been weakened, so we decided to rebuild and be strong again to be prepared for peace. But America is back, a giant on the scene, powerful in its renewed spirit, powerful in its growing economy, and powerful in its ability to defend itself and secure the peace. And do you know something? Yet 4 years after our efforts began, small voices in the night are sounding the call to go back, to go back to the days of drift, the days of torpor, timidity, and taxes. My opponent's understanding of economics is well demonstrated by his predictions. Just before we took office, he said that our economic program was obviously, murderously inflationary. And just a short time later we brought inflation down from above 12 percent to around 4 percent. And just after our tax cuts, he said the most that he could see was an anemic recovery. And that was just before the United States' economy created 6 million new jobs in 21 months. My opponent said that decontrolling oil prices would cost you, the American consumers, $36 billion. Well, one of the first things we did was eliminate the control of oil prices, and the price of gasoline went down 8 cents a gallon. I have got it figured out that all we have to do to get our economy in absolutely perfect shape is persuade him to predict absolute disaster.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallysaginawmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Saginaw, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-saginaw-michigan", "publication_date": "02-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3339, "text": "He says he cares about the middle class, but he boasts, I have consistently supported legislation, time after time, which increases taxes on my own constituents. Does not that make you want to be one of his constituents again? He is no doubt proud of the fact that as a United States Senator he voted 16 times to raise your taxes. He is already promised, of course, to raise your taxes. But if he is to keep all the promises that he is made, he will have to raise taxes the equivalent of $1,890 for every household in the United States. That is like having a second mortgage, a Mondale mortgage. one, raise taxes; two, raise them again. The American people do not want his tax increases, and he is not going to get his tax increases. His tax plan would bring our recovery to a roaring stop. You know, if my opponent's campaign plan were a TV show, it would be Let us Make a Deal. You trade your prosperity for his surprise that is hidden behind the curtain. And if it were a book, you'd have to read it from the back to the front to get a happy ending. He sees a day in which every day is tax day, April 15th. Well, we see an America in which every day is Independence Day, the Fourth of July. We want to lower your taxes some more. We want to do it for everybody in this country so your families will be stronger, the economy will be stronger, and America will be stronger. On another subject, I am proud to say that during these last 4 years, not 1 inch of territory in the world has been lost to Communist aggression. But my opponent sees a different world. After the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, he said, It just baffles me why the Soviets these last few years have behaved as they have. But then, there is so much that baffles him. One year ago we liberated Grenada from Communist thugs who had taken over that country. And my opponent called what we did a violation of international law that erodes our moral authority to criticize the Soviets. There is nothing immoral about rescuing American students whose lives were in danger. But you know, let me try to put this all in perspective. I was a Democrat once, and for a large part of my life.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallysaginawmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Saginaw, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-saginaw-michigan", "publication_date": "02-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3340, "text": "I am sure there are many Democrats present; I hope so, because I know that all across this country are millions of patriotic Democrats who have found they can no longer follow the policies of the leadership of the Democratic Party today. In those days when I was a Democrat, the leaders of the Democratic Party were not members of that blame America first crowd. It is leaders were men like Harry Truman and, later, men like Senator Scoop Jackson and John F. Kennedy men who understood the challenges of the times. They did not reserve all their indignation for America. They knew the difference between freedom and tyranny, and they stood up for one and damned the other. To all the good Democrats who respect that tradition of their party, I say, You are not alone. We are asking you to come walk down the path of hope and opportunity with the rest of us, and in a bipartisan way a solid tradition of this country we will keep America prosperous and free and at peace. Last month an American woman walked in space Kathryn Sullivan made history. And then she returned to a shuttle, a space shuttle, in which some of the great scientific and medical advances of the future will be made. Cures for diabetes and heart disease may be possible up there indeed, I have seen evidence of that from some of the experiments conducted already. But my opponent led the fight against the whole shuttle system. He called it a horrible waste. Well, we support the space shuttle, and we have committed America to meet a great challenge to build a permanently manned space station and to do it within a decade. What America needs is high tech, not high taxes. But the point is, we were right when we made that great turn in 1980. We were right to take command of the ship, to stop its aimless drift, and to get moving again. And we were right when we stopped sending out S.O.S. and started saying U.S.A.! The United States of America was never meant to be a second-best nation. Like our Olympic athletes, this nation should set its sights on the stars and go for the gold. You know, if America could bring down inflation from 12.4 percent to 4, as we did, then we can bring it down from 4 to 0.0, and we are going to do that. If lowering your tax rates led to the best expansion in 30 years, then we can lower them again and keep America growing right into the 21st century.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallysaginawmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Saginaw, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-saginaw-michigan", "publication_date": "02-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3341, "text": "If we could create those 6 million new jobs in 21 months, then we can make it possible for every American young and old, black or white who wants a job to find a job. And if local governments around this country can establish enterprise zones to create economic growth, then we can elect people to the Congress who will free our national enterprise zones bill. This is a bill to go into the distressed areas of some of our rural areas and our major city areas and, through tax incentives, establish industry and work there that will give jobs to people that presently do not have them. Well, that bill has been buried in a committee of the Congress for more than 2 years now. And if we get the right people back there in the Congress, they will break it out, and we will have this bill that will mean hope for millions in the most distressed areas of America. We are leading a revolution in technology and pushing back the frontiers of space. And if we give American workers the tools they need in industries, old and new, then I think that American workers with the proper tools can outcompete, outsell, outproduce anyone, anytime, anywhere in the world. Our drive in this last year and a half or so to restore excellence in education has reversed a 20-year decline in the scholastic aptitude test scores. And we are going to keep raising those scores and restore American academic excellence second to none. Our crackdown on crime produced the sharpest drop ever in the crime index. And we are going to keep cracking down until your families and friends can walk on the streets at night without being afraid. We have reversed the decline in our military defenses and restored respect for America. And we are going to keep this nation strong to protect freedom and peace for us, for our children, and for our children's children. And if we make sure that America remains strong and prepared for peace, then we can begin to reduce nuclear weapons and one day banish them entirely from the face of the Earth. And as we strengthen our economy, strengthen our security, and strengthen the values that bind us, America will become a nation even greater in art and learning and greater in the love and worship of the God that made us and that has blessed us more than any other people on this Earth have ever been blessed. Now, I ran out of time a couple of weeks ago on the debate, and I did not get to finish something I started to say there. Well I am going to say it now.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallysaginawmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Saginaw, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-saginaw-michigan", "publication_date": "02-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3342, "text": "And it is to the young people of our country who are here with us today. You, you are what this election is all about you and your future. I have been seeing these young people all across the country on campuses, in schools, in rallies of this kind. And I have to tell you, this generation of young people really sparkles. Your idealism, your love of country are unsurpassed. And I want to tell you that my generation and a few generations between mine and yours -we have a sacred trust. And that is, when the time comes to turn over the reins to you, you young people out there, we are going to turn over to you an America that is every bit as full of opportunity, hope, confidence, and dreams as it was when we were your age and growing up in America. We are going to turn over to you an America that is free in a world that is at peace. We were born to be a special place between the two great oceans with a unique mission to carry freedom's torch. To a tired, disillusioned world we have always been a light of hope where all things are possible. And throughout my life I have seen America do the impossible. We survived a Great Depression that toppled governments in many parts of the world. We came back from Pearl Harbor to win the greatest military victory in world history. And in a single lifetime in my lifetime we have gone from the horse and buggy to landing astronauts on the Moon. We Americans have fought harder, paid a higher price, done more to advance the freedom and dignity of man, than any other people who ever lived on this Earth. Ours is the land of the free because it is the home of the brave. And our people will be free because we are united one people, under God, with liberty and justice for all. I am deeply honored that you have let me serve you for these past 4 years. We must continue to build upon the new beginning that we started 4 years ago. So I have come here today to ask for your support and for your vote. But now, I have gotten a little frightened reading the polls, and I will tell you why. I have a terrible feeling that some may decide their votes are not needed. Go to the polls, vote. And I will tell you, if you are going to vote for me, as you have just indicated, do not send me back there alone. You ain't seen nothin' yet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallysaginawmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Saginaw, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-saginaw-michigan", "publication_date": "02-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3343, "text": "Ladies and gentlemen, before we adjourn to the reception in honor of Justice Ginsburg, I'd like to acknowledge the presence here today of Senator Moynihan, who sponsored her so strongly in the Senate, Senator Larry Pressler of South Dakota, Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, and the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, my good friend Jack Brooks from Texas. It is good to see all of you here. This was a very important appointment to me. In one of my former lives I had the great joy and responsibility of teaching the United States Constitution and the decisions of the Supreme Court under it to aspiring but not always interested law students. We breathe life into the values we espouse through our law. It gives to every American, including the most illiterate among us, the most totally unaware of how the legal system works, a fair measure of our ideals and some reality that comes into life from the speeches given by the rest of us. This is a moment, this historic moment, therefore, that all Americans can celebrate. For no one knows better than she that it is the law that provides the rules that permit us to live together and that permit us to overcome the infirmities, the bigotry, the prejudice, the limitations of our past and our present. Her nearly unanimous confirmation by the United States Senate was the swiftest in nearly two decades. Much credit must go to her own brilliance and her thoughtful, balanced reasoning. But I thank Senators Moynihan and D'Amato for their sponsorship and assistance. I thank Chairman Biden and Senator Hatch for their contributions and all the other Senators, including those here present, who supported her. Ruth Bader Ginsburg does not need a seat on the Supreme Court to earn a place in our history books. She has already secured that. As a brilliant young law school graduate she became an early victim of gender discrimination when as a woman and mother she sought nothing more than that which every one of us wants, a chance to do her work. She met this challenge with character and determination. She took on the complex challenges of winning what seems now to be such a terribly simple principle, equal treatment for women and men before the law. Virtually every significant case brought before the Supreme Court in the decade of the seventies on behalf of women bore her mark. Today, virtually no segment of our society has been untouched by her efforts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheswearingsupremecourtassociatejusticeruthbaderginsburg", "title": "Remarks on the Swearing-In of Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-swearing-supreme-court-associate-justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg", "publication_date": "10-08-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3360, "text": "It is a privilege today to be the guest of the Government of the Republic of Uruguay, and it is a great personal pleasure to which I have looked forward for many years. Here three years ago, in this beautiful city of Montevideo, there was born a new era of friendship and confidence among the Americas. No one is entitled to more credit for this new day than Your Excellency, for you labored unceasingly and generously both as host and as statesman for the success of that conference. I believe that when history comes to be written, the origin of the new American era will be placed here in the memorable year 1933. Truly, it is an inspiration for the average citizen of all our Republics that that conference is giving back its fruits in terms of achievement for the people of the world. During the past week I have become certain of this because I have seen in the faces of the men, women, and children in Rio de Janeiro, in Buenos Aires, and, today, in Montevideo a joyful expression of hope and faith which can and will inspire us, their chosen representatives, to even greater activity in the common cause. You, Mr. President, have used a term in speaking of that great patriot, General Artigas, which can well be the inspiration of us all. You have spoken of his serene and noble spirit of applied justice. It is because of this spirit which actuated the founding fathers of the American Republics that we their followers are inspired to maintain the democratic principles for which they fought. I am particularly grateful for the kind words which you, Mr. President, have spoken concerning our policies in the United States of America. We fully join with you in the thought that the first battlefield of peace is that of securing well-being at home. It has been of special interest to me to know that you in the Republic of Uruguay have made such great advances in behalf of the well-being of your citizens. In the days of General Artigas and of his friend President Monroe, human society had, of course, little conception of the economic and social problems which we face today. None of the fathers of any of our Republics had even heard of an eight-hour day, of minimum wages, of protection for women and children, of collective bargaining between employers and employees, of old-age security, of modern sanitation, of concrete highways, of railroads or steel buildings. The fathers had no thought of the telegraph, the radio, the automobile, or of travel by fast steamships and by air.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmontevideouruguay", "title": "Address at Montevideo, Uruguay.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-montevideo-uruguay", "publication_date": "03-12-1936", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3361, "text": "They knew little of the problems of modern science, of modern finance. And yet, you and I are very certain that if they were alive today the founders of our Governments would look with approval on what we are seeking to do to use the processes of democratic government in solving the new problems. I recognize, as you do, that these new problems are common to all our Nations. I am glad that you have said that we have been compelled to abandon the comfortable attitude of statesmen of the old school. Every Nation in all the world has been compelled to recognize the fact of new conditions. It is of the utmost importance that the Nations of the New World have found it possible under vigorous leadership to find the answer within the spirit and the framework of constitutional government and democratic processes. We have not completed our task. In accordance with the objectives and theory of democratic government, that task is a continuing one. sometimes the remedies succeed, and sometimes they must be altered or improved. We learn, and ought to learn, much from each other-much that is good and some things which, from experience, we must avoid. In the case of agriculture, for example, you are familiar with the fact that in the United States we did many things in the past which ran counter to the laws of nature and of sensible economics. In many parts of my country we have used land in such a way as to diminish its productiveness, we have harmed our supply of water, and we have lost our topsoil. Today our Government seeks to work with our farming population in correcting these mistakes and in bringing back a greater prosperity and a more permanent use of the land. I cite this as an example, which you undoubtedly know of, to show the need among all our Republics of keeping in close touch with each other, for many of our problems are similar. On this delightful visit to Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay I have been impressed with the immediate need for better and quicker services of travel and communication between North and South America. I look forward to the day when, instead of the journey being long and unusual, visits between the Nations of South America and those of Central America and of North America will be so usual and simple that tens of thousands of our citizens will meet each other in friendly intercourse every year. And may I add that I hope that we shall have a much greater familiarity with each other's language.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmontevideouruguay", "title": "Address at Montevideo, Uruguay.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-montevideo-uruguay", "publication_date": "03-12-1936", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3382, "text": "I appreciate it most highly. I remember how cordial you were when I came here in 1948, and I shall never forget it. I think I told you then about how my grandfather came out here with an ox train load of merchandise, and how Brigham Young helped him out. And since that time the records have been examined and the church files show that it actually happened just as I told it. He had the first train of his own loaded with merchandise for the ENTITY, and when he got here the colonel in charge of the post had another freighter that he wanted to hold and he would not accept my grandfather's load of goods. And it almost broke him, and if it had not been for Brigham Young it would have broke him--but they worked it out and everybody was happy except the colonel in charge of the post. I have been making this trip to campaign for the Democratic Party. I am happy to do that, because I think you suspect by this time that I am a good Democrat. I believe with all my heart that it is in the best interests of the country for the Democrats to win this election. I think we are going to win it. We are going to win on the basis of our record, our platform, and our candidates. On each of these things, when you compare the Democratic situation with the Republican situation, the Democrats look so much better that there is no difficulty whatever to make a choice. The Democratic Party has been giving the country good government for the past 20 years. At home the country is in better shape than it ever has been. Abroad, we are making good progress in building up our defenses against the terrible threat of Communist aggression. At home and abroad, the Republican Party has been against almost every forward-looking proposal that we have made in these years. Now they are trying to rewrite history, but I am not going to let them get away with it. I have been reading the record on them, and I am going to keep it up, and tell the people exactly what the facts are. You see, nearly every place I go, somebody in the crowd around the street will let out a yell Give 'em hell, Harry. Well now, I do not strive for a reputation of that kind. I tell the truth on them, and that is a lot better for the country than giving them hell, because they cannot stand the truth. I hope every one of you will have an opportunity to read the Democratic platform, and the Republican platform, too.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3383, "text": "They will show you what the difference is between the two parties. I think we have the best platform any political party ever adopted, and think the Republican platform is about the worst one I ever read. Along with everything else they even endorsed that do-nothing 80th Congress. You remember it? 30 in the morning, I told the Democratic Convention that I was going to call a special session of Congress and see whether the Republicans in the 80th Congress would put their platform into effect. Oh, they had a platform that was intended to appeal to everybody in the country, so I called them together and they met for about 3 or 4 weeks and did not do a thing. I knew that was exactly what they would do--because they never do expect to carry out a platform even when it is good, but this one is so bad they cannot carry it out. If they were to win this election, you could count on them giving you the same sort of treatment you had from that 80th Congress-which won the election in 1948 for me. I told you when I was here in 1948 what the Republicans had been trying to do to your reclamation and power programs. They have been trying to do the same ever since-and you cannot trust them. The Democrats have it all over the Republicans in the case of candidates--just like we do everything else. And I do not know of any place where that is clearer than it is here in Utah. You have a fine Democratic candidate here for United States Senator--Waiter K. Granger. Walter K. Granger has made a wonderful record in Congress, and if you will send him to the Senate, you will have somebody there who will look out for your interests. Now I have known Mr. Granger for I do not know how long--15 or 18 years-and he has always been on the side of the people. You need a man like that in the Senate worse than ever now--I will say you need him from this State. For Congress you have Mrs. Reva Beck Bosone. Judge Bosone has also made a grand record in Congress. This is especially true on reclamation matters. If you send her back to Congress, and send Walt Granger to the Senate, you will have a very effective team to work for you on the reclamation projects that mean so much to this great western country. I also hope very much that you will promote your mayor, Earl Glade, to be Governor of this great State of Utah.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3384, "text": "I hope you will also send that good Democrat that was just introduced to you, Mr. McKay, to Congress. He impresses me as being a wonderful man. The best thing, you know, for your own safety, is to just vote the Democratic ticket and send them all in. I urge you most strongly to vote for our candidate for President and Vice President-Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman. I think it would be a tragedy for the present Republican candidate to be elected President of the United States. He has been a great general, but he has already shown in this campaign that he cannot be depended on to master the great political issues with which we are faced. He has surrendered to the most reactionary elements of the Republican Party. He is not the kind of man we ought to have for President. Now I like him. I made him Chief of Staff of the United States ENTITY. I sent him to Europe to command the NATO military setup, and I have every confidence in him as a military man. But as President and politician, he would not know what to do. Now, on the other hand, I am more than ever impressed each day with what Adlai Stevenson offers to the Nation. He is talking sense to the American people. And he will not be taken in by any special interest lobby. If you elect him and a Democratic Congress, the country will be safe for another 4 years. Again I want to thank you very much for this most cordial welcome. I appreciate that greeting very, very much. I am glad to be back here in Helper once more. I was here in 1948 and gave you some down to earth facts about that good for-nothing, do-nothing Republican 80th Congress, if you remember. Then you did your duty at the polls, and I want to congratulate you on the way you voted. I understand Carbon County had the best record of any county in Utah in the vote you gave the Democratic Party in 1948. And I hope you will repeat that again. I am sure you will do it over in 1952, and send Adlai Stevenson to the White House. I have always been interested in the way your good town got its name. They tell me that Helper was named for the helper engines that pull the train up these wonderful mountains you have around here. You know, I think the Republican Party needs some helper engines.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3385, "text": "It would take a whole roundhouse full of these helpers to get them elected this fall, with their terrible record holding them back. As for their candidate for President, I do not think helper engines can get him out of the trouble he is in now. With the crew he has got around him, I do not think he will ever be elected. I just do not think the people are going to elect a President who has surrendered to Taft and McCarthy and Jenner and Kern. I am glad to come to your State and tell you that I am proud of the Democratic candidate for United States Senator. Utah has a wonderful man in Walter Granger. He has been one of the best Members of the House of Representatives for the past 12 years, and I know he is going to make a great United States Senator. Your candidate for the House of Representatives, Mr. Ernest McKay, knows the importance of using our national resources for the benefit of all the people, instead of just the special interests. I met Mr. Glade this morning, the present mayor of Salt Lake City--he was there to welcome me, and I understand he is going to be the next Governor of Utah. Now when you vote for President and Vice President, remember that this country has never had two better candidates than Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman. They have shown by their record that they stand for the interests of the common everyday man. I want to tell you this, too. They are telling the truth in this campaign. They are not like some Republican politicians who are running around distorting the facts and trying to rewrite history. You can count on Stevenson and Sparkman to continue the prosperity you now have. You people here in Price Canyon area know the importance of steady employment. Twenty years ago, when the American people voted the Republicans out of office, there were 12 to 14 million people out of work in this country. But today our country is working full blast, with over 62 million people in good jobs. I told the students up at the Brigham Young University in Provo this morning that in 1932 when they were graduating, they did not know where to go for jobs. There were 14 million people out of jobs, and the graduates of that university would be lucky if they got a job at a dollar a day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3386, "text": "And then I read them an extract from a piece in the San Francisco Chronicle about the graduation of last June from colleges, in which it was said the students now have so many jobs to pick from, they do not know which one to take. Now I think you had better keep up that situation. And the reason you can do that is because the Democratic Party has courage. This thing did not come about by accident. The Democratic Party has had the courage, the wisdom, and the faith to make our economy work in a way that all Americans, not just a special few, could enjoy prosperity and full employment. Our policy is for the people. The Democratic Party's policy is the welfare and benefit of all the people, not just a few. Compare the terrible Republican record and the terrible Republican platform this year with the Democratic record and with the Democratic platform this year, and you cannot possibly go wrong because you will vote the Democratic ticket. You will only come to one conclusion. Vote your own interests--that is what you are doing. You see, the power of the Government in this country is in the people, and the people exercise that power by voting. You go to the polls and vote for your own interests--vote for the welfare of this great Nation, and vote for peace in the world, by voting the Democratic ticket, and the country will be safe for another 4 years. I appreciate it very much--very much indeed this introduction, and I am particularly happy over that synthetic truth brigade that is supposed to be following me. You know, I was shadowed in 1948 by somebody, and now I am being shadowed again. We are telling the truth on them, and that really hurts. I am here in one of my many jobs--campaigning as a leader of the Democratic Party. It is good to come to a Democratic place like this. You gave me a good big majority in 1948. You have been Democratic since 1932. You have a good Democrat representing you in Congress--Wayne Aspinall. Awhile ago when I heard your national committeeman introduce John Metzger, I did not know who he was talking about. I know him as Bill, and I think he is all right, and he will make you a good Governor. I have known him a long, long time. Bill is a go-getter, and he will be an asset to Colorado and to you. Now I want to call your attention particularly to our candidates for President and Vice President.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3387, "text": "I do not think that we have ever had abler men to head the Democratic ticket than we have in Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman. They are both men of experience in government. They are both liberal-minded gentlemen, and they will carry on this great Government of ours in the manner in which it ought to be carried on. And you must elect them in November. I am glad to see the great progress this area is making. I have been reading a copy of your good newspaper just as I came along here. I have been in politics for 30 years, and in elective public office for 30 years, and down in Missouri there are 7 metropolitan papers, and I never had one for me in my whole life. If they did get for me, I would know I was wrong. I wish we had newspapers like that in Missouri. We need them. In most places I visit, the newspapers are against the Democrats. But your paper is a good one, and I am happy to say that about your newspaper. Your paper told of the progress you are making--when most papers keep telling the people how bad things are. If you listen to most of them, you would think the country is just on the verge of ruin. There are more animals in the county this year, as compared with last; there are more acres of bearing orchard and more acres of meadow hay; people own more household furniture; stocks of merchandise are greater; there is more farm equipment, except combines; there has been a great deal of building and improvements; and mining is on the increase. Well now, that is an awful situation for the Republicans to have to swallow in a campaign year. In addition to this, I understand you have a fine new veterans hospital here that will be of great value to this whole area. I congratulate you on that record. You are especially fortunate here, but we are having the same sort of situation all over the United States. This prosperity of ours is driving the Republican politicians almost crazy. That is the reason for those four little men following me. They cannot stand to see the country so well off under a Democratic administration. I was reading a speech by the Republican candidate for President the other day. He was doing his best to prove that this prosperity did not exist--that it was all done with mirrors, according to him.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3388, "text": "Do you want to stand still, mired in the mud of this New Deal prosperity, or do you want to march down the shining corridor of progress to the Republican idea of prosperity? Well, what do you think? I know what I think, and I know I am pouring it on them so you will not have to. Do you want to march off under the orders of the Republican general, down that shining corridor --whatever that is--or would you just as soon stay behind, stuck in the mud of this terrible New Deal prosperity ? The last time the Republicans marched off with us we were a long time getting back where we belonged. Today is the first day of your community chest drive, and I hope you will take a little of that prosperity and give it to help others who need it. One of the things that the Republicans are saying is that this prosperity is due to the defense program, and to the fighting in Korea. Do not you believe it. If we did not have the defense program, we would be even more prosperous. We would have a lot of things that we are holding back on now, because of defense. That is true of the atomic energy programs, too. We are developing peaceful uses for the atom--like the submarine I started last summer in Connecticut, that has an atomic engine in it. If it were not for defense, we could go ahead much faster with the peaceful uses of the atom, and of the uranium that you are mining around here in this State. They tell me that the independent uranium producers who are doing so much to get this ore out, are running into difficulties with existing Government procedures. I am going to look into that matter when I get back to Washington and see if it cannot be straightened out, and in a way that will give the little fellow a square break. I am always for the little man. If you look over the Republican policy, you will find that they are for property. The Democratic policy is for people. I think the people come first, then the property will take care of itself. We are working for peace. That is what our defense program is for. And with God's help we will get it. At least, we will have more prosperity if you do not elect the Republicans so they can bring on another depression. Your Government under the Democratic Party has worked with you to create the prosperity we now have--and we will keep on doing just that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3389, "text": "One of the things we hope to do in the future is this Upper Colorado River storage project. This will do a tremendous lot for the whole area. The Secretary of the Interior is working on the planning of this project now, so that the dams can be built in such a way as not to damage the Dinosaur National Monument. In fact, it ought to be enlarged. After this election, we will enlarge it to accommodate the dinosaur wing of the whole Republican Party. We will fill it up with the old Republican fossils. Then maybe we could change the name of it to the Republican National Dinosaur Monument. They are still living so far in the past that they never in the world will catch up with the progress of this great Nation of ours. You cannot count on the Republicans to continue the progress we are making. They are always obstructing measures for the good of the people. And I want you to do something for me. I want you to get out the record and read it, find out just how many projects they tried to sabotage, find out their record on everything that has been for the welfare and benefit of this country; and you will find that the majority of the Republicans in Congress were against them every single time. If you read the record, you will not have any trouble whatever about making up your mind. It is in fine print, and it is the dullest document that was ever published in the history of the world. But it has the facts and the figures in it, and if you are interested in the welfare of your country, you will read that record, and then you will vote for yourselves on election day. The people of this country have the power that makes the Government. And when you exercise that franchise, you put the people in there who are to run your Government. And when you do not vote, and when you do not do your duty, you get just the kind of government you deserve. Now, do not forget, on November the 4th, go to the polls and vote for Adlai Stevenson, and this whole Democratic ticket here in Colorado and the country will be safe another 4 years. I appreciate very much that welcome, You know, when I was here in 1948, we just went through. I would not let them do it this time, because I wanted particularly to tell that band how much I appreciated them getting up at 4 o'clock and coming to serenade the President down here a few miles to the next stop.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3390, "text": "The group showed a real and unselfish interest in the Government. If the voters of Colorado and those of the country exercised the patriotism and initiative of young people like these, we would not have to urge constantly that they exercise their right to vote. Everybody ought to take it on himself to vote. There has been a rumor going around that I am out doing some campaigning for the Democratic ticket. That is my privilege as head of the Democratic Party. I am trying to tell you what the facts are and I want you to use your own judgment. That seems to worry a lot of the Republicans for some reason. I just want to tell them this is only the beginning. A lot more of them will be worried before I finish reading the terrible Republican record to the American people from one end of this country to the other. I am out here because I believe that world peace, domestic prosperity, and the principles of justice and decency will be served better by the election of a Democratic ticket. That is just what you are going to do on the 4th of November. Here in this district, you have been ably represented by Congressman Wayne Aspinall. He has done a good job for western Colorado, and I know you will elect him again for another term. I have known Bill Metzger for many, many years. He will make you a good Governor, one that you will be proud of, and I hope you will elect him, too--and I know you will. This year the Democratic Party has at the head of the ticket two of the best candidates this country has ever produced--Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman. Stevenson and Sparkman understand the problems of the little fellow, and they understand the problems of the West. They know that locked in the hills of western Colorado you have some of the most valuable natural resources to be found any place in the Nation. They know that these resources must be developed for all the people, and not just for the special interests. An example of the way to do this is the Bureau of Mines project for developing gasoline and oil products from coal and oil shale. There are about a thousand square miles in this area north and west of Rifle where beds of oil shale, hundreds of feet thick, will yield an average of 15 gallons or more of oil per ton of shale. This project promises to open up a vast new era of industrial expansion. This is a wonderful example of the way the Government can undertake experimental work and develop resources from which all the people will benefit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3391, "text": "But the Republicans are wildly running around the country trying to fool the people into believing that projects like these are socialism. They say the power dams, reclamation projects, and the whole development of this mountain area should not be carried forward by your own Government for your own benefit. And now the Republican candidate has caved in to the power lobby. He is going around, too, claiming that the Government projects represent a philosophy of the left -whatever that is--and that they are regimenting people and destroying liberty. Well, I have been looking into this subject as I have traveled around the country for the past 8 days, and I have met thousands of wonderful people, and I have not seen anybody in slavery. Nobody has complained to me about having his liberty destroyed. So, do not be fooled by this gloomy poppycock the Republicans are spreading. Vote for the party that believes in you, and believes in the future development and the prosperity of this great country. You yourselves are the Government of this country. The people are the Government, and the way they exercise the powers of government is at the polls on election day. It is your duty to go to the polls and vote for yourselves. Vote for Adlai Stevenson and John Sparkman, and the whole Democratic ticket, and you will have 4 more years of good government all across the country. I appreciate that, and I am greatly enjoying this trip through Colorado. 30 in the morning, and I did not think anybody would be up at that time of day, but the people turned out. They wanted to hear the facts and they wanted to listen--and I see you are doing it better at this time of day, and I appreciate it more than I can tell you. I have enjoyed the visit with your Congressman, Wayne Aspinall, about your progress out here, and your problems. Be sure and send him back to Congress because he has Colorado's interests at heart, and he does his job as well as any Congressman in the Congress. And I would like very much to see you vote for John William Metzger. I have known him a long time, and he is a good man and he will make you a good Governor.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3392, "text": "My principal interest in being out here, however, is to get you to understand some of the issues of this campaign, and understand also that the Democrats have nominated a man to head the ticket, and a man for Vice President--two men who are unbearable so far as ability and honor and everything else is concerned--they will never have better candidates for the Office of President than Adlai Stevenson, and John Sparkman. You will make no mistake voting for them. I am not running for office this time--I did not know whether you knew that or not-but I am going to leave the Government of the United States in good hands. Adlai Stevenson is one of the best qualified men ever to run for President. He has been a great Governor of a great State, and he has a lot of experience in foreign affairs. John Sparkman is one of the best men that the Senate has ever had there--and I spent 10 years in the Senate myself, so you know I am paying him a high compliment. One of the things that is most important to your progress and prosperity out here is the Federal program of reclamation and power projects. I have been telling the people in the West that the Republican Party is against these projects, and I have been exposing the record, showing how the Republicans in Congress have voted to hinder and obstruct and slash appropriations for these great dams and irrigation systems and powerlines. A Republican spokesman piped up the other day, and said this was unfair--that a Republican started the reclamation program. That is right, it was a Republican-Theodore Roosevelt, back in 1902, who started it. He was a Republican who had a great sympathy for the West. And you know what happened to him? He was thrown out of the Republican Party by the Wall Street bankers. He had to go out and set up a party of his own--the Bull Moose party. And the special interest groups have run the Republican Party ever since. The Republican Party always kicks out its liberals, or whips them into line. I could tell you a lot about this, and I will before this campaign is over. The reason the Republican Party cannot really be in favor of reclamation and public power, is that they let the private power lobby write their policies for them. The private power lobby has been spending millions of dollars to persuade the people that everything from TVA to Boulder Dam is creeping socialism. So naturally, the Republicans have to call it the same thing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3393, "text": "It is a good American program of developing the resources of the people for the benefit of the people. And the Democratic Party has been doing things through Congress, and getting it done, in spite of the Republican opposition One of the best things for this whole part of Colorado would be the proposed Colorado River storage project. It would bring more electric power and new and bigger industries to this area. It would mean thousands of acres of new irrigated land, and more water for farms. The plans for this project are just about complete. They are being drawn up in the Department of the Interior, under the Secretary of the Interior, Mr. Oscar Chapman. I do not have to tell you people here in Colorado about your fellow citizen, Oscar Chapman. He is one of the greatest friends the people of the West ever had. After Oscar Chapman has approved these plans for the Upper Colorado River storage project, they come to the White House. They have to be approved by the President, and then they go to Congress. Now, I will not be President when that project gets to the White House, and I cannot make any promises for the man who will be there; but I can tell you this, if Governor Stevenson is the President, it will be considered on its merits and decided in the best interests of the people. And his decision will not be dictated by the private power lobby. And that is a lot more than I can say for the Republican candidate. I am afraid he might say that this project is applying the philosophy of the left to the Government--and it might help the housewife get the dishes washed--so he will be against it. And that is what he has been saying about some of the Government dams and power projects that are under construction and have been built in these areas. If you want that Upper Colorado storage project, you had better vote Democratic. Some of you were a little careless up here in 1948, and did not vote the Democratic ticket. The situation is of vital importance to the welfare of the country, and I tell all the people, when I talk to them, that their interests are at stake. You yourselves are the ones who have the interest in this election. When you vote on November the 4th you vote for yourselves, because you are the Government.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrearplatformremarksutahandcolorado", "title": "Rear Platform Remarks in Utah and Colorado", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/rear-platform-remarks-utah-and-colorado", "publication_date": "06-10-1952", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3398, "text": "Laura and I are honored to welcome Prime Minister John Howard and his wife, Janette, back to the White House. Australia and the United States share timeless values. On opposite sides of the Pacific, our peoples created lands of opportunity and offered millions the hope of new beginnings. As frontier peoples, we cherish the spirit of discovery. We believe that men and women who dream big and work hard can create a better world. Australians and Americans also believe in the power of freedom. Our two nations were once remote outposts of liberty, lands where those escaping tyranny could find a better life. Today, freedom is on the move. Australians and Americans celebrate freedom's advance, because nations that respect the rights and dignity of their own people are the best partners for peace and the strongest anchors of stability in every region of the world. Freedom has enemies, and for more than 100 years, Australians and Americans have joined together to defend freedom. Together we fought the Battle of Hamel in World War I. Together we fought in World War II from the beaches of Normandy to the waters of the Coral Sea. Together we fought in Korea and Vietnam. And together we are fighting and winning the global war on terror. Prime Minister Howard, you and I stood together here at the White House the day before September the 11th, 2001. And our nations have stood together on every day afterwards. We admire your courage, and we appreciate your sacrifice. We share your grief over the loss of your own countrymen who were brutally attacked in Bali. We share your determination to defeat those who murder the innocent to promote their ideology of hatred. To defeat the terrorists, we must stay on the offensive, and Australia has been on the frontlines of every offensive in the war on terror. In Afghanistan, the first casualty among American allies was an Australian. In Iraq, Australian Special Operation forces were among the first coalition units on the ground. The bravery and skill of the Australian military have helped the people of these two nations claim their freedom and deny the terrorists safe havens from which to launch further attacks. War has reaffirmed the strength of our alliance, yet our alliance is only one component of our broad partnership. Australia and the United States signed a free trade agreement in 2004 because we recognize that open markets create greater prosperity for both our peoples. We are cooperating to expand trade worldwide. In the Doha negotiations, Australia and America speak with one voice.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswelcomingceremonyforprimeministerjohnhowardaustralia", "title": "Remarks at a Welcoming Ceremony for Prime Minister John Howard of Australia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-welcoming-ceremony-for-prime-minister-john-howard-australia", "publication_date": "16-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3401, "text": "This is a very happy day for me. I have had lots of discussions with Senator Glenn about this bill. Bill Clay is happy as a lark. This has put 30 years on his life today. And the Vice President and I had occasion to talk about this quite a lot during the reinventing Government effort. I have some remarks I want to make, but I hope you will forgive me if, just for a moment, since this is my opportunity to speak to the national press and to the American people as well as to speak to you, I make a brief statement about Somalia. Today I have had two serious meetings with my national security advisers, along with the meeting we had last night, to discuss the future course of the United States in Somalia. 350,000 Somalis had starved because anarchy and famine and disease had prevailed. Today we are completing the job of establishing security in Somalia that will not only permit those who are now living to enjoy the immediate fruits of our common efforts with our allies in the United Nations but also to prevent that terrible crisis from occurring as soon as we are gone. It is essential that we conclude our mission in Somalia but that we do it with firmness and steadiness of purpose. I want to emphasize that tomorrow I will be consulting with congressional leaders in both parties and with others, and then I will report to you and to the American people. But this much I want to say today. Our men and women in Somalia, including any held captive, deserve our full support. They went there to do something almost unique in human history. We are anxious to conclude our role there honorably, but we do not want to see a reversion to the absolute chaos and the terrible misery which existed before. I think the American people, and I hope the Congress will be satisfied that we have assessed our position accurately and that we have a good policy to pursue. I will discuss that with them tomorrow, as I said, and then I will be back to the American people and to the press as soon as that is done. Let me say this is something of special importance to me today. When I was a 32-year-old freshman Governor, in my first year, one of the first bills I sponsored in my legislature was a bill repealing restrictions on political activities by State employees in my State.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthehatchactreformamendments1993", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-hatch-act-reform-amendments-1993", "publication_date": "06-10-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3402, "text": "A bill that, very much like the Hatch Act, had stayed on in its present form because it was needed in a former time when, I am a little embarrassed to say, State employees decades ago would mysteriously turn up with increases in welfare checks right before the election. Well, that has not happened in a long time in my State, or in any other. And so we changed the law. And I can honestly say in all the years since, not a single solitary soul ever lodged a single solitary complaint against any of our public employees for being good citizens. Today, we put an end to a vexing contradiction in America's public life with a solution, I hasten to add, looking at the Members of Congress who are here, that is neither Democratic nor Republican but American in nature. And I thank the members of both parties who supported this important reform. We have been supporting democracy throughout the world. We have been standing up for Boris Yeltsin in the tight he is been in and cheering when he prevailed and cheering when he reaffirmed his determination to have elections. But here in our own country, millions of our own citizens have been denied one of the most basic democratic rights, the right to participate in the political process, because of conditions that have not existed for a very long time. The original purpose of the Hatch Act was to protect Federal employees and other citizens from coming under improper political pressure. But now our Federal work force is the product of merit system, not patronage. We have laws to protect our citizens against coercion and intimidation. We have guarantees that the administration of Federal laws must be fair and impartial. We have an exceedingly vigilant press and people more than eager to talk to them whenever they have been abused or think they have. The conditions which once gave rise to the Hatch Act as it was before this reform bill passed are no longer present, and they cannot justify the continued muzzling of millions of American citizens. The Federal Employees Political Activities Act, which I am about to sign, will permit Federal employees and postal workers on their own time to manage campaigns, raise funds, to hold positions within political parties. They would not be able to run for partisan political office themselves, for example, and there will be some new responsibilities, which I applaud the Federal employees' unions for embracing and supporting. While we restore political rights to these millions of citizens, we also hold them to high standards.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthehatchactreformamendments1993", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-hatch-act-reform-amendments-1993", "publication_date": "06-10-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3403, "text": "The Federal workplace, where the business of our Nation is done will still be strictly off limits to partisan political activity. Workers on the job will not even be allowed to wear political campaign buttons. At the same time, the reforms will maintain restrictions on the activities of workers in the most sensitive positions, in law enforcement and national security. Because we regard good ethics as the basis of good government, this reform strengthens criminal penalties for anyone convicted of abusing his or her position. And because we want our Federal workers to be responsible, to display an integrity worthy of the public service they perform, this reform includes a provision that allows the garnishment of Federal pay to repay private debt. That is been done in the private sector for many years. And just as we now treat Federal employees like private citizens in their political activities, there is no reason Federal workers should get special protection for privately unpaid bills and obligations. Ultimately, I believe, as Senator Glenn said, that this reform of the Hatch Act will mean more responsible, more satisfied, happier, and more productive Federal workers. When we extend the political rights of any group of Americans, we extend the political rights of all Americans. And we deepen the meaning of our own democracy. Congress has done a lot of work on that just in the last 8 months since I have been President. We have passed the motor voter bill, which expands the franchise to people who have difficulty registering to vote. Thanks to the Vice President, we have a plan that will radically change the way Government operates. It will give rank-and-file Federal employees more meaningful jobs, more say over their work, and enable us to do more with less and increase the confidence taxpayers have in the work we do around here. Serious proposals on campaign finance reform and on lobbying reform have already passed the United States Senate and are now being acted on in the House of Representatives. And I applaud them for it. Aristotle once said that, liberty and equality are best attained when all persons alike share in the Government to the utmost. Working together, we are closing in on that goal. And now, when I sign this bill, 3 million more Americans will have a chance to share in their beloved Government to the utmost.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthehatchactreformamendments1993", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-hatch-act-reform-amendments-1993", "publication_date": "06-10-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3407, "text": "On this spectacular day, I want to welcome everybody to the White House. This hurts a little bit. It does not hurt as much as the NFC Championship Game hurt but it still hurts, you guys coming to my house to rub it in. What are you going to do, go to Ditka's house next or . You guys have got to work on that. I am surprised they are not wearing cheeseheads. Look, obviously, it is good to have football right around the corner. Like every football fan, I was thrilled to have the lockout ended. Nobody likes long, frustrating negotiations with a rigid opposition, taking it to the brink. I want to recognize Packers President Mark Murphy, GM Ted Thompson, for the outstanding job they have done, as well as Coach Mike McCarthy for guiding them to the next championship. And I would like to welcome all the players to the White House; some of them I have had a chance to meet before, wonderful guys. I guess I especially have to welcome Charles Woodson. I was not asking for some certificate you are about to give me, are not you? He is really rubbing it in. And for those who do not know, I gave Charles a little bulletin board material, apparently, last year. And so after the Packers beat the Bears, Charles addressed the teameverybody on ESPN saw it; I saw it while I was working out in the morningand Charles said, If president does not want to come to watch us at the Super Bowl, then we are going to him. Then I flew to Green Bay later that week to visit a local company, and Governor Walker and Mayor Schmittwhere's Mayor Schmitt? He gave me a jersey from Charles on which he'd written, See you at the White House. So basically, Charles has been giving me a hard time now for several months. Charles, you are a man of your word. Do not mess with Charles Woodson. Now, in the Super Bowl, the Packers showed just what a championship team is made of and that you deserved those rings Coach McCarthy had you fitted on the night before. The game was a lot like your season. Some key players went down with injuries in the first half, including Donald and Charles. Your offense exploded behind one of the greatest performances by a quarterback in a Super Bowl. Your defense was flying all over the place like Clay Matthews's hair. And you brought the Lombardi Trophy back home.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2011superbowlchampiongreenbaypackers", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2011 Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2011-super-bowl-champion-green-bay-packers", "publication_date": "12-08-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3408, "text": "304 yards, three touchdowns, no interceptions. This was a performance that capped off an incredible playoff run that proved he is not just one of the best quarterbacks in the game, he is one of the best quarterbacks perhaps of all time. And I know that he is going to be having an extraordinary career going forward. We also know that the Packers are made of more than one player or one season. They are made of the people of Green Bay. Back in the twenties, fans passed the hat at the games to support the team. In 1923, after some rough financial years, local businessmen banded together to pay the bills. Two more timesin 1935 and 1950the community came to the rescue to keep the club afloat, and today, 112,000 people own a piece of this franchise. It is the only publicly owned team in pro sports, so . And after the Super Bowl, hundreds of those fans woke up the next day, put on their snow boots, and headed over to Lambeau Field to shovel it out for the victory pep rally. The Packers have raised more than $4 million for charities in communities all across Wisconsin and Michigan. More than 300 schools participate in the Packers Fit Kids program to promote childhood health. They have given scholarships to local students, sponsored food and blood drives, found creative ways to support our troops and their families. So even a Bears fan can admit that the relationship between Green Bay and its team is something special. It reflects those old-school, small-town values of community and hard work that have always defined what it meant to be an American. And Super Bowl spotlight or not, that is something that is alive in towns across this country every single day. Enjoy it while it lasts. September 25 and Sunday Night Football on Christmas Day. And if you guys are on a roll by then, just keep in mind that there is only one placeone person here who can ground all planes in and out of Green Bay if he has to. Charles, what do you got here? You can step up to the mike. Well, on behalf of the Green Bay Packers organization and all the players, we would like to present you with this. Of course, all the fans own the team, and it hurts us a little bit to give you this as well but to give you shares of the Green Bay Packers. We figured this is the only way we could get you away from the Bears.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthe2011superbowlchampiongreenbaypackers", "title": "Remarks Honoring the 2011 Super Bowl Champion Green Bay Packers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-2011-super-bowl-champion-green-bay-packers", "publication_date": "12-08-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3421, "text": "I appreciate the warm welcome. I want to thank you all for giving me a chance to come and explain why I want to be your President for 4 more years. We have done a lot since I got elected. It is and we have accomplished a lot, and we have been through a lot. The only reason to look backward is to best determine who to lead us forward. So today I am going to talk about some ideas as to how to make this country a safer, stronger, and better place for every citizen, for every single person who lives in this country. I tell the people, in front of these enthusiastic and large crowds we have been having, that, you know, probably the wisest reason to put me back in there is so that she will be the First Lady for 4 more years. I am running with a good man. I admit it, that Dick Cheney is not the prettiest face on the ticket. But that is not why I picked him. I picked him because of his sound judgment, his experience, his ability to do the job. I want to thank Dr. Bob Templin for allowing us to use this important facility. I will tell you why. Part of the reasons I am seeking the Presidency again is because I understand that if we use our community college system wisely, people will be trained for the jobs which will exist. See, in order to keep jobs here in America, we have got to have a workforce that is capable of filling the jobs of the 21st century. And one of the crucial links in making sure people have the skills necessary to fill the jobs that are coming is the community college system. And Bob understands that. I want to thank my friend Senator George Allen for being here. I want to thank Frank Wolf and Ed Schrock. I appreciate Frank's concern and dedication for those who need American help. He understands what I know, that we have a responsibility in the world to help those who hunger and those who are afflicted by disease and those who suffer under tyranny. And I appreciate Frank's deep concern not only about the citizens of this State and our country but also the deep concern about those to whom we can deliver help. Just remember, when people talk about America, just remember they are talking about a country which is leading the fight against ENTITY/ ENTITY, not only here at home but on the continent of Africa. I appreciate your leadership as well. The attorney general is with us today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdiscussionnorthernvirginiacommunitycollegeannandalevirginia", "title": "Remarks in a Discussion at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-discussion-northern-virginia-community-college-annandale-virginia", "publication_date": "09-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3422, "text": "We have got some of our citizens up here because we are going to talk about a crucial aspect of our vision, which is how to encourage an ownership society to flourish in America. I am going to get to that in a minute. Before I do, I want to talk about a couple of other points. One is that we are making progress in spreading the peace. We also know that freedom is not our country's gift to the world; freedom is the Almighty God's gift to each person in this world. And that is why that is why over the next 4 years, we will continue to work to spread freedom, for our own security and for the sake of others. We have done some hard work over the past 3 years. We must never forget the lessons of September the 11th. First of all, the enemy that we face is cruel. Unlike Americans, they do not have a conscience. They are willing to kill innocent people in order to shake our will and our resolve. As we work to secure our country, we must never forget the nature of the people. You cannot reason with them. You cannot sit down and say, Look, why will not you change your ways? And your President must clearly understand that. That is why it is important for us that is why over the next 4 years, we will engage them in places like Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere so we do not have to face them here at home. Secondly, when this country speaks, it better mean what it says, in order to make the world a more peaceful place. In other words, when we say things, we must mean what we say. And when I said that if you harbor a terrorist, you are just as guilty as the terrorist, I meant exactly that. And that is why we made the decision a tough decision, by the way; nobody wants to commit kids to war. That is what you got to understand. It is the hardest decision a President can make, and you only do so if you are convinced it is going to lead to peace. It is a different kind of war we are in, and therefore, we had to say clearly to those that were providing safe haven that you are going to be held accountable as well. Because, remember, Al Qaida was training in Afghanistan. They had taken over the country. We could not allow that to continue for our own security and for the sake of the people who lived underneath the brutal dictatorship of the Taliban.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdiscussionnorthernvirginiacommunitycollegeannandalevirginia", "title": "Remarks in a Discussion at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-discussion-northern-virginia-community-college-annandale-virginia", "publication_date": "09-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3423, "text": "And so thanks to our United States military and our friends and allies, Afghanistan is now free. Afghanistan is an ally on the war on terror. I will tell you something really interesting two things I want to share with you about Afghanistan. I can remember earlier in the spring, I think it was, people were talking about how maybe people are not going to vote. Do not you remember, there was some serious terrorist attacks on women, in particular, that had got their registration cards and were in the process. Turns out, over 8 million I think the number is 8 million Afghan citizens have registered to vote, far exceeding expectations. They want to live in a free society. They want to be able to exercise their rights as a human being. Secondly, when I was in Cleveland a while back this is like the last couple of weeks I have been traveling a lot, so it is kind of hard for me to remember exactly where I have been I went to the International Children's Game. I helped kick it off. And I was there speaking to the athletes, and right to my right I will never forget it was the Afghan girls soccer team. Now, let me tell you what is interesting about that. They would not have been in the United States they would not even have been playing soccer under the Taliban. These people were so brutal, so dark in their vision that many young girls did not have a chance to be educated. Not only do we have an ally in the war on terror, there is a more compassionate and decent society growing in Afghanistan, which is in our interests, and it is in the world's interests. As the American people look at this election, they must take a look at the candidates and determine who best understands the lessons to be learned from September the 11th. Another lesson is, is that we must deal with threats before they fully materialize. In this world of threats to our homeland, in this world where there are folks who cannot stand our country and our way of life, we must deal with threats. They must be dealt with hopefully, diplomatically; hopefully, we can cure things, problems peacefully. That ought to be the first priority of any President. However, if diplomacy fails, we must be a country that is willing to take action to defend ourselves. He had used weapons of mass destruction against his own people. He had terrorist organizations in his country. He was a sworn enemy of the United States of America. He is a person that invaded countries in his neighborhood.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdiscussionnorthernvirginiacommunitycollegeannandalevirginia", "title": "Remarks in a Discussion at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-discussion-northern-virginia-community-college-annandale-virginia", "publication_date": "09-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3424, "text": "We all looked at the intelligence. I looked at it. Members of Congress from both political parties looked at it. My opponent looked at it. Saddam Hussein was a threat. The United Nations Security Council the U.N. Security Council concluded Saddam was a threat and passed a resolution unanimously which said, Disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences. That is what the free world said. And he deceived the world again. I say again because that is what he'd been doing for a decade. And then he deceived the inspectors. Remember, with that period of time, we said, Oh, let the inspections work. We were all for that. But it was clear that he was deceiving them. So I had a choice to make, and that is, whether or not to trust a man who had used weapons of mass destruction, somebody who had used somebody who had defied the free world. My choice was, do I forget the lessons of September the 11th, or do I take actions necessary to defend our country? And given that very difficult choice, I chose to defend America. We did not find the stockpiles that we thought we would find. We have not found them yet. But he did have the capability of making weapons. Knowing what I know today, I would have made the same decision. We could not afford to take the chance that a sworn enemy of America would share capabilities with an enemy which hates us. I will tell you an interesting story and by the way, I think the candidates for President must say yes or no, whether or not they would have made the same decision. I tell the story about the seven men that came to see me in the Oval Office. They had had their right hands cut off by Sad-dam Hussein because his currency had devalued and he was looking for a scapegoat. And they had a X burned in their forehead as well, to brand them as enemies of the state, I guess; I do not know what the symbol was. But they came to see me in the Oval Office. The fellows walked in and were just overwhelmed by the majesty of a shrine to democracy, and it was imagine, seeing ENTITY . And I was emotional because the contrast between what we believe and what Saddam Hussein did to his people is just so amazing, because these people had just come from Houston, Texas, where they had received new hands because of the generosity of an American citizen named Marvin Zindler.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdiscussionnorthernvirginiacommunitycollegeannandalevirginia", "title": "Remarks in a Discussion at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-discussion-northern-virginia-community-college-annandale-virginia", "publication_date": "09-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3425, "text": "It was just a clear contrast between the brutality of a man who whimsically could have somebody's hand cut off and the great generosity and love of compassion of the American citizens who are willing to help heal somebody, no matter their religion or where they are from. A free Iraq is going to change the world. For those of you with young kids, I want you to think about a world that is going to be much more peaceful, a country more secure because, during these difficult days, we are standing true to our firm belief and our ideals that freedom equals peace. It is hard work because there are people in that in the Middle East that cannot stand the thought of a free society. It just scares them. And they do not scare us. They are tough, but we are resolute because we understand the charge of history, the charge that history has given us. We have a duty. We have a duty to keep our word. We have told the Iraqi people and the people of Afghanistan that we are with you. They are watching carefully to determine whether or not they can take a risk for freedom, or whether or not America's word does not mean anything. These are times when people will look back and say, thank goodness the American people stood true to our belief that liberty is a transforming moment in the history of the world. I talk about a stronger and better America; it means our economy needs to be strong. One of the things we better make sure is we do not raise the taxes on the people. I am going to talk about good education policy to help train workers. I will talk about energy policy to make sure we are not that we are less dependent on foreign sources of energy. Of course, I am going to talk about liability reform, medical liability reform. I will talk about tort reform, so our business people can thrive and hire people. And there are policies we need to put in place to make sure this is the best place in the world to do business. If you want jobs to stay in America, like I do, this better be a place where people feel comfortable taking risks and expanding the job base. So I have spent a lot of time talking about that in the course of the campaign. Today we are going to talk about how to encourage an ownership society in America. If you really think about it, they are much different from the times when we came up. Most of our dads at least guys my age dads worked for one company.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdiscussionnorthernvirginiacommunitycollegeannandalevirginia", "title": "Remarks in a Discussion at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-discussion-northern-virginia-community-college-annandale-virginia", "publication_date": "09-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3426, "text": "Georges generally worked for one company. At any rate, when we think about it, it was a different society back a couple of decades ago because a person stayed with the same company, had the health plan from the company, retirement plan from the company. You have got moms and dads that are both working, sometimes out of the house. And the economy is changing, and therefore, Government policy ought to change with the times. And one way to bring stability and security into a person's life is to encourage ownership. See, if you own and control your own health care plan, you can move from job to job without worrying as to whether or not you are going to get health coverage for your family. If you own your own home and building equity in your own home and you are changing from job to job, it provides great security and relief. And so we are going to talk about different forms of ownership here. But the point here is, I want you to understand that over the next 4 years we will be working to build a culture of ownership in America. We want more people owning things in this country. Let me put it to you bluntly. In a changing world, we want more people to have control over your own life. And that is a difference there is a difference in philosophy, when you think about it. A lot of the Government policies are, you know as I like to put it, we will give you the orders, and you pay the bills. If you really think about it, there is a philosophical divide here in this campaign. My judgment is, Government ought to be empowering people by giving them more control over their lives. And we will talk about some practical ways to do that. Now, look, one of the things we will always work to do is to take care of those people who cannot help themselves. As a matter of fact, a proper policy of Government is to give people the tools necessary to be able to realize their own dreams. It is making a big difference. I am telling you, when you start asking the question, Can you read and write and add and subtract? It holds people to account. We have got to end this it is a mediocre system when you quit on kids basically because of the color of their skin, you know? We are not going to do that anymore in America. In terms of health care, there is some smart things we can do. We have got to recognize there are people who cannot help themselves.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdiscussionnorthernvirginiacommunitycollegeannandalevirginia", "title": "Remarks in a Discussion at Northern Virginia Community College in Annandale, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-discussion-northern-virginia-community-college-annandale-virginia", "publication_date": "09-08-2004", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3486, "text": "Media will not show the magnitude of this crowd. Even I, when I turned on today, I looked, and I saw thousands of people here. But you do not see hundreds of thousands of people behind you because they do not want to show that. We have hundreds of thousands of people here and I just want them to be recognized by the fake news media. Turn your cameras please and show what is really happening out here because these people are not going to take it any longer. They are not going to take it any longer. They came from all over the world, actually, but they came from all over our country. I just really want to see what they do. I have never seen anything like it. But it would be really great if we could be covered fairly by the media. Big tech is now coming into their own. We beat them four years ago. We surprised them. We took them by surprise and this year they rigged an election. They rigged it like they have never rigged an election before. And by the way, last night they did not do a bad job either if you notice. And I just, again, I want to thank you. It is just a great honor to have this kind of crowd and to be before you and hundreds of thousands of American patriots who are committed to the honesty of our elections and the integrity of our glorious republic. All of us here today do not want to see our election victory stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats, which is what they are doing. That is what they have done and what they are doing. Our country has had enough. We will not take it anymore and that is what this is all about. We will stop the steal. Today I will lay out just some of the evidence proving that we won this election and we won it by a landslide. I have been in two elections. I won them both and the second one, I won much bigger than the first. Almost 75 million people voted for our campaign, the most of any incumbent president by far in the history of our country, 12 million more people than four years ago. And I was told by the real pollsters - we do have real pollsters - they know that we were going to do well and we were going to win. What I was told, if I went from 63 million, which we had four years ago, to 66 million, there was no chance of losing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3487, "text": "Well, we did not go to 66, we went to 75 million, and they say we lost. And by the way, does anybody believe that Joe had 80 million votes? Does anybody believe that? He had 80 million computer votes. You could take third-world countries. Their elections are more honest than what we have been going through in this country. Even when you look at last night. They are all running around like chickens with their heads cut off with boxes. We will not let them silence your voices. And I'd love to have if those tens of thousands of people would be allowed. And we want to thank you and the police law enforcement. You are doing a great job. But I'd love it if they could be allowed to come up here with us. And Rudy, you did a great job. He is got guts. He is got guts, unlike a lot of people in the Republican Party. He is got guts. And I will tell you. John is one of the most brilliant lawyers in the country, and he looked at this and he said, What an absolute disgrace that this can be happening to our Constitution. And he looked at Mike Pence, and I hope Mike is going to do the right thing. Because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do, all this is, this is from the number one, or certainly one of the top, Constitutional lawyers in our country. He has the absolute right to do it. We are supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our Constitution, and protect our constitution. They were given false information. They voted on it. They want it back. All Vice President Pence has to do is send it back to the states to recertify and we become president and you are the happiest people. And I actually, I just spoke to Mike. Mike, that does not take courage. What takes courage is to do nothing. That takes courage. And then we are stuck with a president who lost the election by a lot and we have to live with that for four more years. Many of you have traveled from all across the nation to be here, and I want to thank you for the extraordinary love. By the way, this goes all the way back past the Washington Monument. You believe this? Unfortunately gave, they gave the press the prime seats. I cannot stand that. But you look at that behind.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3488, "text": "I wish they'd flip those cameras and look behind you. When they make a mistake, you get to see it on television. And do not worry, we will not take the name off the Washington Monument. We will not cancel culture. You know they wanted to get rid of the Jefferson Memorial. Although, with this administration, if this happens, it could happen. They will knock out Lincoln too, by the way. They have been taking his statue down. But then we signed a little law. You hurt our monuments, you hurt our heroes, you go to jail for 10 years, and everything stopped. You notice that? And they could use Rudy back in New York City. They could use you. Your city's going to hell. They want Rudy Giuliani back in New York. We will get a little younger version of Rudy. To save our democracy. You know most candidates on election evening and, of course, this thing goes on so long. They still do not have any idea what the votes are. We still have congressional seats under review. They have no idea. They have totally lost control. They have used the pandemic as a way of defrauding the people in a proper election. But you know, you know, when you see this and when you see what is happening. They said, Sir, in four years, you are guaranteed. We want to go back and we want to get this right because we are going to have somebody in there that should not be in there and our country will be destroyed and we are not going to stand for that. For years, Democrats have gotten away with election fraud and weak Republicans. And we have great ones. Jim Jordan and some of these guys, they are out there fighting. Many of the Republicans, I helped them get in, I helped them get elected. I could name 24 of them, let us say, I will not bore you with it. And then all of a sudden you have something like this. It is like, Oh gee, maybe I will talk to the president sometime later. If this happened to the Democrats, there'd be hell all over the country going on. You are stronger, you are smarter, you have got more going than anybody. And they try and demean everybody having to do with us. And you are the real people, you are the people that built this nation. You are not the people that tore down our nation. I really believe it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3489, "text": "I think I am going to use the term, the weak Republicans. You have got a lot of them. And you got a lot of great ones. But you got a lot of weak ones. They have turned a blind eye, even as Democrats enacted policies that chipped away our jobs, weakened our military, threw open our borders and put America last. Did you see the other day where Joe Biden said, I want to get rid of the America First policy? What is that all about? How do you say I want to get rid of America First? Even if you are going to do it, do not talk about it, right? Unbelievable what we have to go through. What we have to go through. And if they do not fight, we have to primary the hell out of the ones that do not fight. You primary them. I can already tell you, frankly. But this year, using the pretext of the China virus and the scam of mail-in ballots, Democrats attempted the most brazen and outrageous election theft and there is never been anything like this. Everybody knows it. That election, our election was over at 10 o'clock in the evening. We are leading Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, by hundreds of thousands of votes. Did you see his? I wonder if he enjoyed his flight in last night. Well, I'd like to congratulate the victor. They do not go and look at the facts. But we look at the facts and our election was so corrupt that in the history of this country we have never seen anything like it. You know, America is blessed with elections. All over the world they talk about our elections. You know what the world says about us now? They said, we do not have free and fair elections. We do not have a free and fair press. It suppresses thought, it suppresses speech and it is become the enemy of the people. It is become the enemy of the people. It is the biggest problem we have in this country. And you will hear about that in just a few minutes. Republicans are, Republicans are constantly fighting like a boxer with his hands tied behind his back. It is like a boxer. We want to be so respectful of everybody, including bad people. And Mike Pence is going to have to come through for us, and if he does not , that will be a, a sad day for our country because you are sworn to uphold our Constitution.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3490, "text": "Now, it is up to Congress to confront this egregious assault on our democracy. And after this, we are going to walk down, and I will be there with you, we are going to walk down, we are going to walk down. Anyone you want, but I think right here, we are going to walk down to the Capitol, and we are going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we are probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them. Because you will never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength and you have to be strong. We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard. Today we will see whether Republicans stand strong for integrity of our elections. But whether or not they stand strong for our country, our country. Our country has been under siege for a long time. We have set it on a much greater course. We have created the greatest economy in history. We rebuilt our military. We get you the biggest tax cuts in history. We got you the biggest regulation cuts. There is no president, whether it is four years, eight years or in one case more, got anywhere near the regulation cuts. Used to take 20 years to get a highway approved, now we are down to two. I want to get it down to one, but we are down to two. And it may get rejected for environmental or safety reasons, but we got it down to safety. We created Space Force, We, we, we. Look at what we did. So we create Space Force which, by and of itself, is a major achievement for an administration. And with us it is one of so many different things. Everybody know about Right to Try. We did things that nobody ever thought possible. We took care of our vets, our vets. The VA now has the highest rating, 91%. The highest rating that it is had from the beginning, 91% approval rating. Always, you watch the VA, it was on television every night, people living in a horrible, horrible manner. We got it so that now in the VA, you do not have to wait for four weeks, six weeks, eight weeks, four months to see a doctor.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3491, "text": "If you cannot get a doctor, you go outside, you get the doctor. You have it taken care of and we pay the doctor. And we have not only made life wonderful for so many people, we have saved tremendous amounts of money, far secondarily, but we have saved a lot of money. And now we have the right to fire bad people in the VA. We had 9,000 people that treated our veterans horribly. In primetime, they would not have treated our veterans badly. But they treated our veterans horribly. Joe you are fired. Before you could not do that. You could not do that before. So we have taken care of things, we have done things like nobody's ever thought possible. And that is part of the reason that many people do not like us, because we have done too much. But we have done it quickly and we were going to sit home and watch a big victory and everybody had us down for a victory. I said to somebody, I was going to take a few days and relax after our big electoral victory. But I was going to take a few days. And I can say this. Since our election, I believe, which was such a catastrophe, when I watch. Look at the big leads we had, right. Even though the press said we would lose Wisconsin by 17 points. Even though the press said, Ohio's going to be close, we set a record; Florida's going to be close, we set a record; Texas is going to be close, Texas is going to be close, we set a record. And we set a record with Hispanic, with the Black community, we set a record with everybody. Today we see a very important event though. Because right over there, right there, we see the event going to take place. We are going to see whether or not we have great and courageous leaders, or whether or not we have leaders that should be ashamed of themselves throughout history, throughout eternity they will be ashamed. If they do the wrong thing, we should never, ever forget that they did. With only three of the seven states in question, we win the presidency of the United States. And by the way, it is much more important today than it was 24 hours ago, because I do not . I spoke to David Perdue, what a great person, and Kelly Loeffler, two great people, but it was a setup. And you know, I said, We have no backline anymore.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3492, "text": "The only backline, the only line of demarcation, the only line that we have is the veto of the president of the United States. So this is now, what we are doing, a far more important election than it was two days ago. I want to thank the more than 140 members of the House. Studying, talking, actually going all the way back, studying the roots of the Constitution, because they know we have the right to send a bad vote that was illegally gotten. They gave these people bad things to vote for and they voted because what did they know? And then when they found out a few weeks later, again, it took them four years to devise this screen. And the only unhappy person in the United States, single most unhappy, is Hillary Clinton. Why did not you do this for me four years ago? Why did not you do this for me four years ago? You could have changed the whole thing. You know, you do not see her anymore. But I want to thank all of those congressmen and women. I also want to thank our 13, most courageous members of the U.S. Senate. And Kelly Loeffler, I will tell you, she has been, she is been so great. So let us give her and David a little special hand because it was rigged against them. Let us give her and David. They fought a good race. They never had a shot. That equipment should never have been allowed to be used, and I was telling these people do not let him use this stuff. We want to thank them. Senators that stepped up, we want to thank them. I actually think though, it takes, again, more courage not to step up, and I think a lot of those people are going to find that out and you better start looking at your leadership, because your leadership has led you down the tubes. You know, we do not want to give $2,000 to people. We want to give them $600. And this has nothing to do with politics, but how does it play politically? China destroyed these people. China destroy them, totally destroyed them. We want to give them $600 and they just would not change. I said give them $2,000, we will pay it back. We will pay it back fast. You already owe 26 trillion, give them a couple of bucks.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3493, "text": "And some of the people here disagree with me on that, but I just say, Look, you have got to let people live. I think it is the primary reason, one of the primary reasons, the other was just pure cheating. But you cannot do that, you got to use your head. As you know, the media has constantly asserted the outrageous lie that there was no evidence of widespread fraud. Have you ever seen these people? Well, I am going to read you pages. I hope you do not get bored listening to it. All they, all these people, do not get bored, do not get angry at me because you are going to get bored because it is so much. The American people do not believe the corrupt, fake news anymore. They have ruined their reputation. But you know, it used to be that they'd argue with me. You'd believe me, you'd believe them. You know, they had their point of view, I had my point of view, but you'd have an argument. Now what they do is they go silent. It is called suppression and that is what happens in a communist country. That is what they do, they suppress. You do not fight with them anymore. They have a little bad story about me, they make it 10 times worse and it is a major headline. But Hunter Biden, they do not talk about him. What happened to Hunter? They do not talk about him. Well, they cannot do that because they get good ratings. And how come Joe is allowed to give a billion dollars of money to get rid of the prosecutor in Ukraine? I'd ask you that question. Can you imagine if I said that? If I said that it would be a whole different ballgame. And how come Hunter gets three and a half million dollars from the mayor of Moscow's wife, and gets hundreds of thousands of dollars to sit on an energy board, even though he admits he has no knowledge of energy? And how come they go into China and they leave with billions of dollars to manage. Have you managed money before? No, they do not talk about that. No, we have a corrupt media. I now realize how good it was if you go back 10 years, I realized how good, even though I did not necessarily love them, I realized how good. It was like a cleansing motion, right? But we do not have that anymore. We do not have a fair media anymore.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3494, "text": "And you have to be very careful with that and they have lost all credibility in this country. We will not be intimidated into accepting the hoaxes and the lies that we have been forced to believe. Over the past several weeks, we have amassed overwhelming evidence about a fake election. Last night was a little bit better because of the fact that we had a lot of eyes watching one specific state, but they cheated like hell anyway. You have one of the dumbest governors in the United States. And you know when I endorsed him, and I did not know this guy, at the request of David Perdue, he said, Friend of mine's running for governor. And you know the rest. He was in fourth place, fifth place. I endorse him, he went like a rocket ship and he won. And then I had to beat Stacey Abrams with this guy, Brian Kemp. I had to beat Stacey Abrams. And I had to beat Oprah, used to be a friend of mine. You know, I was on her last show, her last week, she picked the five outstanding people. I do not think she thinks that any more. Once I ran for president, I did not notice there were too many calls coming in from Oprah. Believe it or not, she used to like me. But I was one of the five outstanding people. And I had a campaign against Michelle Obama and Barack Hussein Obama, against Stacey. And I had Brian Kemp, who weighs 130 pounds. He said he played offensive line in football. I am trying to figure that out. I am still trying to figure that out. But I look at that and I look at what is happened and he turned out to be a disaster. You know, look, I am not happy with the Supreme Court. They love to rule against me. I picked three people. I fought like hell for them. They all said, Sir, cut him loose. He is killing the senators. You know, very loyal senators, they are very loyal people, Sir, cut him loose, he is killing us, sir, cut him loose. I must have gotten half of the senators. No, I cannot do that, it is unfair to him and it is unfair to the family. He did not do anything wrong. They made up stories, they are all made-up stories. He did not do anything wrong. I said, No, I will not do that. We got him through.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3495, "text": "And you know what, they could not give a damn. They could not give a damn. But it almost seems that they are all going out of their way to hurt all of us and to hurt our country. You know, I read a story in one of the newspapers recently how I control the three Supreme Court justices. I control them. I read it about Bill Barr, that he is my personal attorney. That he will do anything for me. Because what they do is that, and it makes it really impossible for them to ever give you a victory, because all of a sudden Bill Barr changed. I like Bill Barr, but he changed, because he did not want to be considered my personal attorney. And the Supreme Court, they rule against me so much. Because the story is - I have not spoken to any of them, any of them, since virtually they got in - but the story is that they are my puppets. And now the only way they can get out of that because they hate that it is not good in the social circuit. And the only way they get out is to rule against Trump. So let us rule against Trump. And they do that. So I want to congratulate them. But it shows you the media's genius. In fact, probably if I was the media, I'd do it the same way. I hate to say it. Today, for the sake of our democracy, for the sake of our Constitution, and for the sake of our children, we lay out the case for the entire world to hear. You want to hear it? In every single swing state, local officials, state officials, almost all Democrats, made illegal and unconstitutional changes to election procedures without the mandated approvals by the state legislatures. That these changes paved a way for fraud on a scale never seen before. I think we go a long way outside of our country when I say that. So, just in a nutshell, you cannot make a change or voting for a federal election unless the state legislature approves it. No judge can do it. Nobody can do it. So as an example, in Pennsylvania, or whatever, you have a Republican legislature, you have a Democrat mayor, and you have a lot of Democrats all over the place. They go to the legislature. The legislature laughs at them, says we are not going to do that. They say, thank you very much and they go and make the changes themselves, they do it anyway. You cannot do that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3496, "text": "In Pennsylvania, the Democrat secretary of state and the Democrat state Supreme Court justices illegally abolished the signature verification requirements just 11 days prior to the election. So think of what they did. We want voter ID by the way. Eleven days before the election they say we do not want it. Who would even think of that? We do not want to verify a signature? Think of this, you had 205,000 more ballots than you had voters. That means you had two. Where did they come from? You know where they came from? Somebody's imagination, whatever they needed. So in Pennsylvania, you had 205,000 more votes than you had voters. And the number is actually much greater than that now. Over 8,000 ballots in Pennsylvania were cast by people whose names and dates of birth match individuals who died in 2020 and prior to the election. And some dead people actually requested an application. That bothers me even more. Not only are they voting, they want an application to vote. One of them was 29 years ago, died. Over 14,000 ballots were cast by out-of-state voters, so these are voters that do not live in this state. And by the way, these numbers are what they call outcome-determinative, meaning these numbers far surpass. I lost by a very little bit. More than 10,000 votes in Pennsylvania were illegally counted, even though they were received after Election Day. In other words, they were received after Election Day. Let us count them anyway. And what they did in many cases is, they did fraud. They took the date and they moved it back so that it no longer is after Election Day. And more than 60,000 ballots in Pennsylvania were reported received back. In other words, you got the ballot back before you mailed it, which is also logically and logistically impossible, right? You got the ballot back. Let us send the ballots. But we got the ballot back before they were sent. Twenty-five thousand ballots in Pennsylvania were requested by nursing home residents, all in a single giant batch, not legal, indicating an enormous, illegal ballot harvesting operation. You are not allowed to do it, it is against the law. The day before the election, the state of Pennsylvania reported the number of absentee ballots that had been sent out. Yet this number was suddenly and drastically increased by 400,000 people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3497, "text": "It was increased, nobody knows where it came from, by 400,000 ballots, one day after the election. They said, Well, ah, we cannot figure that. Now, that is many, many times what it would take to overthrow the state. Four hundred thousand ballots appeared from nowhere right after the election. By the way, Pennsylvania has now seen all of this. They had a vote. But now they see all this stuff, it is all come to light. And they want to recertify their votes. But the only way that can happen is if Mike Pence agrees to send it back. Mike Pence has to agree to send it back. And many people in Congress want it sent back. And think of what you are doing. Let us say you do not do it. Somebody says, Well, we have to obey the Constitution. And you are, because you are protecting our country and you are protecting the Constitution. Let us say they are stiffs and they are stupid people, and they say, well, we really have no choice. Even though Pennsylvania and other states want to redo their votes. They want to see the numbers. They already have the numbers. And they want to redo their legislature because many of these votes were taken, as I said, because it was not approved by their legislature. You know, that, in itself, is legal. And then you have the scam, and that is all of the things that we are talking about. If you do not do that, that means you will have a president of the United States for four years, with his wonderful son. You will have a president who lost all of these states. Or you will have a president, to put it another way, who was voted on by a bunch of stupid people who lost all of these states. You will have an illegitimate president. That is what you will have. These are the facts that you will not hear from the fake news media. It is all part of the suppression effort. They do not want to talk about it. They do not want to talk about it. In fact, when I started talking about that, I guarantee you, a lot of the television sets and a lot of those cameras went off. And that is a lot of cameras back there. But a lot of them went off. You do not hear what you just heard. I am going to go over a few more states.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3498, "text": "But you do not hear it by the people who want to deceive you and demoralize you and control you. Just like the suppression polls that said we are going lose Wisconsin by 17 points. Well, we won Wisconsin. They do not have it that way because they lost just by a little sliver. But they had me down the day before, Washington Post/ABC poll, down 17 points. I called up a real pollster. I think you are going to win Wisconsin, sir. But when you are down 17, they say, Hey, I am not going to waste my time. I love the president, but there is no way. Despite that, despite that, we won Wisconsin. But that is called suppression because a lot of people when they see that. When you go down 17, they say, 'Let us save. Let us go and have dinner and let us watch the presidential defeat tonight on television, darling.' And just like the radical left tries to blacklist you on social media. Every time I put out a tweet, that is , even if it is totally correct, totally correct, I get a flag. I get a flag. You know, on Twitter, it is very hard to come onto my account. It is very hard to get out a message. But I have had many people say, I cannot get on your Twitter. I do not care about Twitter. But you know what, if you want to, if you want to get out a message and if you want to go through Big tech, social media, they are really, if you are a conservative, if you are a Republican, if you have a big voice, I guess they call it shadow banned, right? They shadow ban you, and it should be illegal. I have been telling these Republicans, get rid of Section 230. And for some reason, Mitch and the group, they do not want to put it in there and they do not realize that that is going to be the end of the Republican Party as we know it, but it is never going to be the end of us. This is a time for strength. They also want to indoctrinate your children in school by teaching them things that are not so. They want to indoctrinate your children. It is all part of the comprehensive assault on our democracy, and the American people are finally standing up and saying no. This crowd is, again, a testament to it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3499, "text": "I did no advertising, I did nothing. You do have some groups that are big supporters. I want to thank that, Amy, and everybody. We have some incredible supporters, incredible. But we did not do anything. Two months ago, we had a massive crowd come down to Washington. I said, What are they there for? Sir, they are there for you. We have nothing to do with it. These groups are for, they are forming all over the United States. And we got to remember, in a year from now, you are going to start working on Congress and we got to get rid of the weak Congress, people, the ones that are not any good, the Liz Cheneys of the world. We got to get rid of them. You know, she never wants a soldier brought home - I brought a lot of our soldiers home. I do not know, somewhat like it. They are in countries that nobody even knows the name, nobody knows where they are. They are losing their arms, their legs, their face. I brought them back home, largely back home. Do not go in Iraq. But if you go in, keep the oil. We did not keep the oil. And Iraq has billions and billions of dollars now in the bank. And what did we do? We got nothing. But we do actually, we kept the oil here or we get, we did good. We got rid of the ISIS caliphate. We got rid of plenty of different things that everybody knows and the rebuilding of our military in three years. And it was all made in the USA, all made in the USA, best equipment in the world. In Wisconsin, corrupt Democrat-run cities deployed more than 500 illegal, unmanned, unsecured drop boxes, which collected a minimum of 91,000 unlawful votes. They have these lockboxes. And, you know, they'd pick them up and they disappear for two days. In addition, over 170,000 absentee votes were counted in Wisconsin without a valid absentee ballot application. So they had a vote, but they had no application, and that is illegal in Wisconsin. Meaning those votes were blatantly done in opposition to state law and they came 100% from Democrat areas such as Milwaukee and Madison, 100%. In Madison, 17,000 votes were deposited in so-called human drop boxes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3500, "text": "Where operatives stuff thousands of unsecured ballots into duffle bags on park benches across the city, in complete defiance of cease-and-desist letters from state legislature. Your state legislatures said do not do it. They are the only ones that can approve it. They gave tens of thousands of votes. They came in in duffle bags. Where the hell did they come from? According to eyewitness testimony, Postal Service workers in Wisconsin were also instructed to illegally backdate approximately 100,000 ballots. The margin of difference in Wisconsin was less than 20,000 votes. Each one of these things alone wins us the state. We love the state. We won the state. In Georgia, your secretary of state who, I cannot believe this guy's a Republican. He loves recording telephone conversations. So did a lot of other. People love that conversation because it says what is going on. They are 100%, in my opinion, one of the most corrupt, between your governor and your secretary of state. And now you have it again last night. Just take a look at what happened. And the Democrat Party operatives entered into an illegal and unconstitution - unconstitutional settlement agreement that drastically weakened signature verification and other election security procedures. She took them to lunch. And I beat her two years ago with a bad candidate, Brian Kemp. But they took, the Democrats took the Republicans to lunch because the secretary of state had no clue what the hell was happening. Unless he did have a clue. Maybe he was with the other side. But we have been trying to get verifications of signatures in Fulton County, they will not let us do it. The only reason they will not is because we will find things in the hundreds of thousands. Why would not they let us verify signatures in Fulton County, which is known for being very corrupt. They will not do it. They go to some other county where you would live. The problem is Fulton County, home of Stacey Abrams. She did a good job, I congratulate her. But it was done in such a way that we cannot let this stuff happen. We will not have a country if it happens. As a result, Georgia's absentee ballot rejection rate was more than 10 times lower than previous levels because the criteria was so off. Forty-eight counties in Georgia, with thousands and thousands of votes, rejected zero ballots.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3501, "text": "In other words, in a year in which more mail-in ballots were sent than ever before, and more people were voting by mail for the first time, the rejection rate was drastically lower than it had ever been before. The only way this can be explained is if tens of thousands of illegitimate votes were added to the tally. That is the only way you could explain it. By the way, you are talking about tens of thousands. If Georgia had merely rejected the same number of unlawful ballots as in other years, they should have been approximately 45,000 ballots rejected. Far more than what we needed to win, just over 11,000. They should find those votes. They should absolutely find that. They defrauded us out of a win in Georgia, and we are not going to forget it. There is only one reason the Democrats could possibly want to eliminate signature matching, opposed voter ID, and stop citizenship confirmation. You are not allowed to ask that question, because they want to steal the election. The radical left knows exactly what they are doing. They are ruthless and it is time that somebody did something about it. And Mike Pence, I hope you are going to stand up for the good of our Constitution and for the good of our country. And if you are not, I am going to be very disappointed in you. I will tell you right now. I am not hearing good stories. In Fulton County, Republican poll watchers were ejected, in some cases, physically from the room under the false pretense of a pipe burst. Then election officials pull boxes, Democrats, and suitcases of ballots out from under a table. You all saw it on television, totally fraudulent. This act coincided with a mysterious vote dump of up to 100,000 votes for Joe Biden, almost none for Trump. 34 a.m. The Georgia secretary of state and pathetic governor of Georgia, have reached, although he says I am a great president. I disagree with president, but he is been a great president. Because of him and others, you have Brian Kemp. You know, his approval rating now, I think it just reached a record low. They have rejected five separate appeals for an independent and comprehensive audit of signatures in Fulton County. Even without an audit, the number of fraudulent ballots that we have identified across the state is staggering. Over 10,300 ballots in Georgia were cast by individuals whose names and dates of birth match Georgia residents who died in 2020 and prior to the election.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3502, "text": "More than 2,500 ballots were cast by individuals whose names and dates of birth match incarcerated felons in Georgia prison. More than 4,500 illegal ballots were cast by individuals who do not appear on the state's own voter rolls. Over 18,000 illegal ballots were cast by individuals who registered to vote using an address listed as vacant, according to the Postal Service. At least 88,000 ballots in Georgia were cast by people whose registrations were illegally backdated. Sixty-six thousand votes, each one of these is far more than we need. Sixty-six thousand votes in Georgia were cast by individuals under the legal voting age. And at least 15,000 ballots were cast by individuals who moved out of the state prior to November 3 election. They missed Georgia that much. I love Georgia, but it is a corrupt system. Despite all of this, the margin in Georgia is only 11,779 votes. Each and every one of these issues is enough to give us a victory in Georgia, a big beautiful victory. Make no mistake, this election was stolen from you, from me and from the country. And not a single swing state has conducted a comprehensive audit to remove the illegal ballots. This should absolutely occur in every single contested state before the election is certified. In the state of Arizona, over 36,000 ballots were illegally cast by non-citizens. Two thousand ballots were returned with no address. They returned, but we have not mailed them yet. You see that? So you have more votes again than you have voters. One hundred and fifty thousand people registered in Maricopa County after the registration deadline. One hundred and three thousand ballots in the county were sent for electronic adjudication with no Republican observers. In Clark County, Nevada, the accuracy settings on signature verification machines were purposely lowered before they were used to count over 130,000 ballots. If you signed your name as Santa Claus, it would go through. Over 150,000 people were hurt so badly by what took place. And 1,500 ballots were cast by individuals whose names and dates of birth match Nevada residents who died in 2020 prior to November 3 election. More than 8,000 votes were cast by individuals who had no address and probably did not live there. The margin in Nevada is down at a very low number, any of these things would have taken care of the situation. We would have won Nevada, also. Every one of these we are going over, we win.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3503, "text": "In Michigan, quickly, the secretary of state, a real great one, flooded the state with unsolicited mail-in ballot applications sent to every person on the rolls in direct violation of state law. More than 17,000 Michigan ballots were cast by individuals whose names and dates of birth match people who were deceased. In Wayne County, that is a great one. One hundred and seventy-four thousand ballots were counted without being tied to an actual registered voter. Nobody knows where they came from. Also, in Wayne County, poll watchers observed canvassers rescanning batches of ballots over and over again, up to three or four or five times. In Detroit, turnout was 139% of registered voters. So you had 139% of the people in Detroit voting. This is in Michigan. A career employee of the Detroit, City of Detroit, testified under penalty of perjury that she witnessed city workers coaching voters to vote straight Democrat while accompanying them to watch who they voted for. When a Republican came in, they would not talk to him. The same worker was instructed not to ask for any voter ID and not to attempt to validate any signatures if they were Democrats. She also told to illegally, and was told, backdate ballots received after the deadline and reports that thousands and thousands of ballots were improperly backdated. Four witnesses have testified under penalty of perjury that after officials in Detroit announced the last votes had been counted, tens of thousands of additional ballots arrived without required envelopes. Every single one was for a Democrat. I got no votes. 31 a.m. in the early morning hours after voting had ended, Michigan suddenly reported 147,000 votes. An astounding 94% went to Joe Biden, who campaigned brilliantly from his basement. Only a couple of percentage points went to Trump. Such gigantic and one-sided vote dumps were only observed in a few swing states and they were observed in the states where it was necessary. President Obama beat Biden in every state other than the swing states where Biden killed them, but the swing states were the ones that mattered. They are always just enough to push Joe Biden barely into the lead. We were ahead by a lot and within a number of hours we were losing by a little. In one Michigan county alone, 6,000 votes were switched from Trump to Biden and the same systems are used in the majority of states in our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3504, "text": "Senator Ligon, highly respected, on elections has written a letter describing his concerns with Dominion in Georgia. He wrote, and I quote, The Dominion Voting Machines employed in Fulton County had an astronomical and astounding 93.67% error rate. It is only wrong 93% of the time in the scanning of ballots requiring a review panel to adjudicate or determine the voter's interest in over 106,000 ballots out of a total of 113,000. You go in and you vote and then they tell people who you supposed to be voting for. They make up whatever they want. They adjudicate your vote. They say, Well, we do not think Trump wants to vote for Trump. We think he wants to vote for Biden. The national average for such an error rate is far less than 1% and yet you are at 93%. The source of this astronomical error rate must be identified to determine if these machines were set up or destroyed to allow for a third party to disregard the actual ballot cast by the registered voter. There is clear evidence that tens of thousands of votes were switched from President Trump to former Vice President Biden in several counties in Georgia. 11 p.m. Eastern time, while simultaneously Vice President Joe Biden was reported to have 17,213. Minutes later, just minutes, at the next update, these vote numbers switched with President Trump going way down to 17,000 and Biden going way up to 29,391. And that was very quick, a 12,000 vote switch all in Mr. Biden's favor. So, I mean, I could go on and on about this fraud that took place in every state, and all of these legislatures want this back. I do not want to do it to you because I love you and it is freezing out here. I can tell you this. So when you hear, when you hear, while there is no evidence to prove any wrongdoing, this is the most fraudulent thing anybody has, this is a criminal enterprise. And the press will say, and I am sure they will not put any of that on there, because that is no good. And you ever see, while there is no evidence to back President Trump's assertion. I could go on for another hour reading this stuff to you and telling you about it. Detroit had more votes than it had voters. Pennsylvania had 205,000 more votes than it had more.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3505, "text": "Between that, I think that is almost better than dead people if you think, right? More votes than they had voters. It is a disgrace that the United States of America, tens of millions of people, are allowed to go vote without so much as even showing identification. You are not going to have a Republican Party if you do not get tougher. They want to play so, sir, yes, the United States. The Constitution does not allow me to send them back to the States. Well, I say, yes it does, because the Constitution says you have to protect our country and you have to protect our Constitution, and you cannot vote on fraud. And fraud breaks up everything, does not it? When you catch somebody in a fraud, you are allowed to go by very different rules. So I hope Mike has the courage to do what he has to do. And I hope he does not listen to the RINOs and the stupid people that he is listening to. It is also widely understood that the voter rolls are crammed full of non-citizens, felons and people who have moved out of state and individuals who are otherwise ineligible to vote. Yet Democrats oppose every effort to clean up their voter rolls. They do not want to clean them up. And how many people here know other people, that when there are hundreds of thousands and then millions of ballots got sent out, got three, four, five, six, and I heard one, who got seven ballots. And then they say you did not quite make it, sir. We won in a landslide. They said it is not American to challenge the election. This the most corrupt election in the history, maybe of the world. You know, you could go third-world countries, but I do not think they had hundreds of thousands of votes and they do not have voters for them. I mean no matter where you go, nobody would think this. In fact, it is so egregious, it is so bad that a lot of people do not even believe it. It is so crazy that people do not even believe it. So they do not believe it. This is not just a matter of domestic politics - this is a matter of national security. So today, in addition to challenging the certification of the election, I am calling on Congress and the state legislatures to quickly pass sweeping election reforms, and you better do it before we have no country left.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3506, "text": "With your help over the last four years, we built the greatest political movement in the history of our country and nobody even challenges that. I say that over and over, and I never get challenged by the fakeness, and they challenge almost everything we say. But our fight against the big donors, big media, big tech, and others is just getting started. This is the greatest in history. You look back there all the way to the Washington Monument. We must stop the steal and then we must ensure that such outrageous election fraud never happens again, can never be allowed to happen again. We will take care of going forward. We have got to take care of going back. I have had a lot of people. Sir, you are at 96% for four years. With your help, we will finally pass powerful requirements for voter ID. You need an ID to cash a check. You need an ID to go to a bank, to buy alcohol, to drive a car. Every person should need to show an ID in order to cast your most important thing, a vote. We will also require proof of American citizenship in order to vote in American elections. We just had a good victory in court on that one, actually. We will ban ballot harvesting and prohibit the use of unsecured drop boxes to commit rampant fraud. Therefore, they get disapp - they disappear, and then all of a sudden they show up. We will stop the practice of universal unsolicited mail-in balloting. We will clean up the voter rolls that ensure that every single person who casts a vote is a citizen of our country, a resident of the state in which they vote and their vote is cast in a lawful and honest manner. We will restore the vital civic tradition of in-person voting on Election Day so that voters can be fully informed when they make their choice. And if these people had courage and guts, they would get rid of Section 230, something that no other company, no other person in America, in the world has. All of these tech monopolies are going to abuse their power and interfere in our elections, and it has to be stopped. They should be regulated, investigated, and brought to justice under the fullest extent of the law. They are totally breaking the law. Together, we will drain the Washington swamp and we will clean up the corruption in our nation's capital. We have done a big job on it, but you think it is easy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3507, "text": "You have a lot of bad people out there. Despite everything we have been through, looking out all over this country and seeing fantastic crowds. I think you have 250,000 people. Looking out at all the amazing patriots here today, I have never been more confident in our nation's future. That is a nice statement, but we have to be a little careful with that statement. If we allow this group of people to illegally take over our country because it is illegal when the votes are illegal when the way they got there is illegal when the states that vote are given false and fraudulent information. We are the greatest country on Earth and we are headed and were headed in the right direction. We are doing record numbers at the wall. Now, they want to take down the wall. We did a great job in the wall. One of the largest infrastructure projects we have ever had in this country, and it is had a tremendous impact, that we got rid of catch and release. We got rid of all of this stuff that we had to live with. They want to come in again and rip off our country. As this enormous crowd shows, we have truth and justice on our side. We have a deep and enduring love for America in our hearts. We love our country. We have overwhelming pride in this great country and we have it deep in our souls. Together, we are determined to defend and preserve government of the people, by the people and for the people. Our brightest days are before us. I think one of our great achievements will be election security. Because nobody until I came along had any idea how corrupt our elections were. And again, most people would stand there at 9 o'clock in the evening and say I want to thank you very much, and they go off to some other life. We fight like hell. And if you do not fight like hell, you are not going to have a country anymore. And I say this despite all that is happened. So we are going to, we are going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue. I love Pennsylvania Avenue. And we are going to the Capitol, and we are going to try and give. The Democrats are hopeless - they never vote for anything. But we are going to try and give our Republicans, the weak ones because the strong ones do not need any of our help. We are going to try and give them the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country. So let us walk down Pennsylvania Avenue.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "nprorg20210210966396848readtrumpsjan6speechakeypartofimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Read Trump's Jan. 6 Speech, A Key Part Of Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "10-02-2021", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3508, "text": "In our short time in your country, Melania and I have been awed by its ancient and modern wonders, and we are deeply moved by the warmth of your welcome. Last night, President and Mrs. Moon showed us incredible hospitality in a beautiful reception at the Blue House. We had productive discussions on increasing military cooperation and improving the trade relationship between our nations on the principle of fairness and reciprocity. Through this entire visit, it has been both our pleasure and our honor to create and celebrate a long friendship between the United States and the Republic of Korea. This alliance between our nations was forged in the crucible of war, and strengthened by the trials of history. From the Inchon landings to Pork Chop Hill, American and South Korean soldiers have fought together, sacrificed together, and triumphed together. Almost 67 years ago, in the spring of 1951, they recaptured what remained of this city where we are gathered so proudly today. It was the second time in a year that our combined forces took on steep casualties to retake this capital from the communists. Over the next weeks and months, the men soldiered through steep mountains and bloody, bloody battles. Driven back at times, they willed their way north to form the line that today divides the oppressed and the free. And there, American and South Korean troops have remained together holding that line for nearly seven decades. By the time the armistice was signed in 1953, more than 36,000 Americans had died in the Korean War, with more than 100,000 others very badly wounded. They are heroes, and we honor them. We also honor and remember the terrible price the people of your country paid for their freedom. You lost hundreds of thousands of brave soldiers and countless innocent civilians in that gruesome war. Much of this great city of Seoul was reduced to rubble. Large portions of the country were scarred - severely, severely hurt - by this horrible war. The economy of this nation was demolished. But as the entire world knows, over the next two generations something miraculous happened on the southern half of this peninsula. Family by family, city by city, the people of South Korea built this country into what is today one of the great nations of the world. And I congratulate you. In less than one lifetime, South Korea climbed from total devastation to among the wealthiest nations on Earth. Today, your economy is more than 350 times larger than what it was in 1960. Life expectancy has risen from just 53 years to more than 82 years today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalassemblyrepublickoreaseoulrepublickorea", "title": "Remarks by President Trump to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea | Seoul, Republic of Korea", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-assembly-republic-korea-seoul-republic-korea/", "publication_date": "07-11-2017", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3509, "text": "Like Korea, and since my election exactly one year ago today, I celebrate with you. The United States is going through something of a miracle itself. Our stock market is at an all-time high. Unemployment is at a 17-year low. We are defeating ISIS. We are strengthening our judiciary, including a brilliant Supreme Court justice, and on, and on, and on. Currently stationed in the vicinity of this peninsula are the three largest aircraft carriers in the world loaded to the maximum with magnificent F-35 and F-18 fighter jets. In addition, we have nuclear submarines appropriately positioned. The United States, under my administration, is completely rebuilding its military and is spending hundreds of billions of dollars to the newest and finest military equipment anywhere in the world being built, right now. I want peace through strength. We are helping the Republic of Korea far beyond what any other country has ever done. And, in the end, we will work things out far better than anybody understands or can even appreciate. I know that the Republic of Korea, which has become a tremendously successful nation, will be a faithful ally of the United States very long into the future. What you have built is truly an inspiration. Your economic transformation was linked to a political one. The proud, sovereign, and independent people of your nation demanded the right to govern themselves. You secured free parliamentary elections in 1988, the same year you hosted your first Olympics. after, you elected your first civilian president in more than three decades. And when the Republic you won faced financial crisis, you lined up by the millions to give your most prized possessions - your wedding rings, heirlooms, and gold luck keys - to restore the promise of a better future for your children. Your wealth is measured in more than money - it is measured in achievements of the mind and achievements of spirit. Over the last several decades, your scientists of engineers - have engineered so many magnificent things. You have pushed the boundaries of technology, pioneered miraculous medical treatments, and emerged as leaders in unlocking the mysteries of our universe. Korean authors penned roughly 40,000 books this year. Korean musicians fill concert halls all around the world. Young Korean students graduate from college at the highest rates of any country. And Korean golfers are some of the best on Earth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalassemblyrepublickoreaseoulrepublickorea", "title": "Remarks by President Trump to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea | Seoul, Republic of Korea", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-assembly-republic-korea-seoul-republic-korea/", "publication_date": "07-11-2017", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3510, "text": "Fact - and you know what I am going to say - the Women's U.S. Open was held this year at ENTITY National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey, and it just happened to be won by a great Korean golfer, Sung-hyun Park. An eighth of the top 10 players were from Korea. And the top four golfers - one, two, three, four - the top four were from Korea. Here in Seoul, architectural wonders like the Sixty-Three Building and the Lotte World Tower - very beautiful - grace the sky and house the workers of many growing industries. Citizens now help to feed the hungry, fight terrorism, and solve problems all over the world. And in a few months, you will host the world and you will do a magnificent job at the 23rd Olympic Winter Games. The Korean miracle extends exactly as far as the armies of free nations advanced in 1953 - 24 miles to the north. There, it stops; it all comes to an end. The flourishing ends, and the prison state of North Korea sadly begins. Workers in North Korea labor grueling hours in unbearable conditions for almost no pay. Recently, the entire working population was ordered to work for 70 days straight, or else pay for a day of rest. Families live in homes without plumbing, and fewer than half have electricity. Parents bribe teachers in hopes of saving their sons and daughters from forced labor. More than a million North Koreans died of famine in the 1990s, and more continue to die of hunger today. Among children under the age of five, nearly 30 percent of afflicted - and are afflicted by stunted growth due to malnutrition. And yet, in 2012 and 2013, the regime spent an estimated $200 million - or almost half the money that it allocated to improve living standards for its people - to instead build even more monuments, towers, and statues to glorify its dictators. What remains of the meager harvest of the North Korean economy is distributed according to perceived loyalty to a twisted regime. Far from valuing its people as equal citizens, this cruel dictatorship measures them, scores them, and ranks them based on the most arbitrary indications of their allegiance to the state. Those who score the highest in loyalty may live in the capital city. Those who score the lowest starve.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalassemblyrepublickoreaseoulrepublickorea", "title": "Remarks by President Trump to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea | Seoul, Republic of Korea", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-assembly-republic-korea-seoul-republic-korea/", "publication_date": "07-11-2017", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3511, "text": "A small infraction by one citizen, such as accidently staining a picture of the tyrant printed in a discarded newspaper, can wreck the social credit rank of his entire family for many decades. An estimated 100,000 North Koreans suffer in gulags, toiling in forced labor, and enduring torture, starvation, rape, and murder on a constant basis. In one known instance, a 9-year-old boy was imprisoned for 10 years because his grandfather was accused of treason. In another, a student was beaten in school for forgetting a single detail about the life of Kim Jong-un. Soldiers have kidnapped foreigners and forced them to work as language tutors for North Korean spies. In the part of Korea that was a stronghold for Christianity before the war, Christians and other people of faith who are found praying or holding a religious book of any kind are now detained, tortured, and in many cases, even executed. North Korean women are forced to abort babies that are considered ethnically inferior. One woman's baby born to a Chinese father was taken away in a bucket. So why would China feel an obligation to help North Korea? The horror of life in North Korea is so complete that citizens pay bribes to government officials to have themselves exported aboard as slaves. They would rather be slaves than live in North Korea. One person who escaped remarked, When I think about it now, I was not a human being. I was more like an animal. Only after leaving North Korea did I realize what life was supposed to be. And so, on this peninsula, we have watched the results of a tragic experiment in a laboratory of history. It is a tale of one people, but two Koreas. One Korea in which the people took control of their lives and their country, and chose a future of freedom and justice, of civilization, and incredible achievement. And another Korea in which leaders imprison their people under the banner of tyranny, fascism, and oppression. The result of this experiment are in, and they are totally conclusive. When the Korean War began in 1950, the two Koreas were approximately equal in GDP per capita. But by the 1990s, South Korea's wealth had surpassed North Korea's by more than 10 times. You started the same a short while ago, and now you are 40 times larger. You are doing something right.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalassemblyrepublickoreaseoulrepublickorea", "title": "Remarks by President Trump to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea | Seoul, Republic of Korea", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-assembly-republic-korea-seoul-republic-korea/", "publication_date": "07-11-2017", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3512, "text": "Considering the misery wrought by the North Korean dictatorship, it is no surprise that it has been forced to take increasingly desperate measures to prevent its people from understanding this brutal contrast. Because the regime fears the truth above all else, it forbids virtually all contact with the outside world. Not just my speech today, but even the most commonplace facts of South Korean life are forbidden knowledge to the North Korean people. Possession of foreign media is a crime punishable by death. Citizens spy on fellow citizens, their homes are subject to search at any time, and their every action is subject to surveillance. In place of a vibrant society, the people of North Korea are bombarded by state propaganda practically every waking hour of the day. North Korea is a country ruled as a cult. At the center of this military cult is a deranged belief in the leader's destiny to rule as parent protector over a conquered Korean Peninsula and an enslaved Korean people. The more successful South Korea becomes, the more decisively you discredit the dark fantasy at the heart of the Kim regime. In this way, the very existence of a thriving South Korean republic threatens the very survival of the North Korean dictatorship. This city and this assembly are living proof that a free and independent Korea not only can, but does stand strong, sovereign, and proud among the nations of the world. Here, the strength of the nation does not come from the false glory of a tyrant. It comes from the true and powerful glory of a strong and great people - the people of the Republic of Korea - a Korean people who are free to live, to flourish, to worship, to love, to build, and to grow their own destiny. In this Republic, the people have done what no dictator ever could - you took, with the help of the United States, responsibility for yourselves and ownership of your future. You had a dream - a Korean dream - and you built that dream into a great reality. In so doing, you performed the miracle on the Hahn that we see all around us, from the stunning skyline of Seoul to the plains and peaks of this beautiful landscape. You have done it freely, you have done it happily, and you have done it in your own very beautiful way. This reality - this wonderful place - your success is the greatest cause of anxiety, alarm, and even panic to the North Korean regime. That is why the Kim regime seeks conflict abroad - to distract from total failure that they suffer at home.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalassemblyrepublickoreaseoulrepublickorea", "title": "Remarks by President Trump to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea | Seoul, Republic of Korea", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-assembly-republic-korea-seoul-republic-korea/", "publication_date": "07-11-2017", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3513, "text": "These attacks have included the capture and torture of the brave American soldiers of the USS Pueblo, repeated assaults on American helicopters, and the 1969 drowning of a U.S. surveillance plane that killed 31 American servicemen. The regime has made numerous lethal incursions in South Korea, attempted to assassinate senior leaders, attacked South Korean ships, and tortured Otto Warmbier, ultimately leading to that fine young man's death. All the while, the regime has pursued nuclear weapons with the deluded hope that it could blackmail its way to the ultimate objective. And that objective we are not going to let it have. All of Korea is under that spell, divided in half. South Korea will never allow what is going on in North Korea to continue to happen. The North Korean regime has pursued its nuclear and ballistic missile programs in defiance of every assurance, agreement, and commitment it has made to the United States and its allies. It is broken all of those commitments. After promising to freeze its plutonium program in 1994, it repeated the benefits of the deal and then - and then immediately continued its illicit nuclear activities. In 2005, after years of diplomacy, the dictatorship agreed to ultimately abandon its nuclear programs and return to the Treaty on Non-Proliferation. And worse, it tested the very weapons it said it was going to give up. In 2009, the United States gave negotiations yet another chance, and offered North Korea the open hand of engagement. The regime responded by sinking a South Korean Navy ship, killing 46 Korean sailors. To this day, it continues to launch missiles over the sovereign territory of Japan and all other neighbors, test nuclear devices, and develop ICBMs to threaten the United States itself. The regime has interpreted America's past restraint as weakness. This is a very different administration than the United States has had in the past. Do not underestimate us, and do not try us. We will defend our common security, our shared prosperity, and our sacred liberty. We did not choose to draw here, on this peninsula -- this magnificent peninsula - the thin line of civilization that runs around the world and down through time. But here it was drawn, and here it remains to this day. It is the line between peace and war, between decency and depravity, between law and tyranny, between hope and total despair. It is a line that has been drawn many times, in many places, throughout history. To hold that line is a choice free nations have always had to make.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalassemblyrepublickoreaseoulrepublickorea", "title": "Remarks by President Trump to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea | Seoul, Republic of Korea", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-assembly-republic-korea-seoul-republic-korea/", "publication_date": "07-11-2017", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3514, "text": "We have learned together the high cost of weakness and the high stakes of its defense. America's men and women in uniform have given their lives in the fight against Nazism, imperialism, Communism and terrorism. America does not seek conflict or confrontation, but we will never run from it. History is filled with discarded regimes that have foolishly tested America's resolve. Anyone who doubts the strength or determination of the United States should look to our past, and you will doubt it no longer. We will not permit America or our allies to be blackmailed or attacked. We will not allow American cities to be threatened with destruction. And we will not let the worst atrocities in history be repeated here, on this ground, we fought and died so hard to secure. The time for excuses is over. Now is the time for strength. If you want peace, you must stand strong at all times. The world cannot tolerate the menace of a rogue regime that threatens with nuclear devastation. All responsible nations must join forces to isolate the brutal regime of North Korea - to deny it and any form - any form of it. We call on every nation, including China and Russia, to fully implement U.N. Security Council resolutions, downgrade diplomatic relations with the regime, and sever all ties of trade and technology. It is our responsibility and our duty to confront this danger together - because the longer we wait, the greater the danger grows, and the fewer the options become. And to those nations that choose to ignore this threat, or, worse still, to enable it, the weight of this crisis is on your conscience. The weapons you are acquiring are not making you safer. They are putting your regime in grave danger. Every step you take down this dark path increases the peril you face. It is a hell that no person deserves. Yet, despite every crime you have committed against God and man, you are ready to offer, and we will do that - we will offer a path to a much better future. It begins with an end to the aggression of your regime, a stop to your development of ballistic missiles, and complete, verifiable, and total denuclearization. A sky-top view of this peninsula shows a nation of dazzling light in the South and a mass of impenetrable darkness in the North. We seek a future of light, prosperity, and peace. But we are only prepared to discuss this brighter path for North Korea if its leaders cease their threats and dismantle their nuclear program.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "trumpwhitehousearchivesgovbriefingsstatementsremarkspresidenttrumpnationalassemblyrepublickoreaseoulrepublickorea", "title": "Remarks by President Trump to the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea | Seoul, Republic of Korea", "source": "https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-national-assembly-republic-korea-seoul-republic-korea/", "publication_date": "07-11-2017", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3515, "text": "To our distinguished guests here and to all the members of this important mission team, I just wanted to come by tonight to wish you well as you leave on this important mission. I view it, really, as a mission of tremendous importance, a historymaking journey to a country that is making history every day. You lead a delegation of tremendous experience and talent. Together, it is a cross-section of the private sector institutions that constitute democracy's great strength and gives practical meaning to the principles of free government. Helping Poland rejoin the community of free nations is a task that simply cannot be accomplished by government alone. It depends on building the countless exchanges that take place every day among businesses and organized labor and the academic community and their counterparts in other free countries. The trip you are making is really the first step in that process. As you know, I am taking a trip of my own this weekend. And in my meetings with Mr. Gorbachev and afterwards with our NATO allies, I can assure you that the historic developments that have taken place in Poland and of course, elsewhere in Central and Eastern Europe will be high on our agenda. I will be anxious to hear your report on the ways that we can help Poland achieve its democratic destiny and become a model of transition for these other states a model of transition to a free economy. And your work can be of great help to other countries in Eastern Europe as they move towards economic reform. I am very pleased that the initiatives that I have proposed last summer for aid to Poland and Hungary have become a reality. In just a few moments, I will sign into law a package authorizing $938 million in American aid over the next 3 years, and that will enable the United States to do its part to encourage these two nations on the road to reform. We have got to recognize, though, the fact that dollars alone will not make the difference. The secret to that success was not the price tag on the aid that we sent. Our aid came with our advice, our example, and the full engagement of our private sector in shaping the free-market system that has generated unprecedented prosperity all across Western Europe. And that lesson holds true for Poland today. Our aid must be seed money for free market reform and for the involvement of our private sector. Lane Kirkland I see Lane back there, but I do not see Bob Georgine. Normally, they are in the front row something's gone awry here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmembersthepresidentialeconomicdelegationpoland", "title": "Remarks to Members of the Presidential Economic Delegation to Poland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-members-the-presidential-economic-delegation-poland", "publication_date": "28-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3550, "text": "Laura and I are delighted to be back in Mexico. We are grateful for the warm hospitality of President Calderon and Mrs. Zavala. We appreciate the chance to dine in this beautiful setting, which calls to mind Mexico's rich history and its bright future. For Laura and me, the connection to Mexico stretches back for decades. We have come to admire your country, the people, and your culture. As ENTITY, I worked closely with my counterparts on this side of the border and made a lot of friends in Mexico. As ENTITY, Mexico was the first country I visited and the first country whose leader I welcomed for a state dinner at the White House. Over the past 6 years, I have traveled all across your nation, from here in Merida to Monterrey to Los Cabos on the Pacific Coast. And this evening the relationship between Mexico and the United States is as strong and is as vibrant as it has ever been, and President Calderon and I intend to keep it that way. The ties between our countries are deep and lasting. We are united by the bonds of family. We are united by the growing commerce that crosses our border each day. And we are united in our faith in an Almighty God. The accident of geography made our two countries neighbors, but common values have made us friends. The most important value we share is our belief in democracy, and last year, the world saw Mexican democracy in action. Across the country, large numbers of voters turned out for an election that was open, honest, and really close; come to think of it, it sounds familiar to me. Your fidelity to the democratic process was the mark of a nation growing in confidence and freedom. And in the end, the Mexican people chose a good man to be their President. Shortly before his inauguration, President Calderon came to see me in the Oval Office. I was impressed by his character, his leadership, and his devotion to the Mexican people. He is an innovative thinker with a vision of justice and prosperity for all in this nation. And during his first 100 days as President, he is shown his commitment to delivering results for all the people he has served. In my conversations today, he shared his willingness to work with members of all political parties and with people from all sectors of the civil society. Today we discussed the President's top priorities. I share those priorities. His top priority is to provide security throughout the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerhostedpresidentfelipedejesuscalderonhinojosamexicomerida", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner Hosted by President Felipe de Jesus Calderon Hinojosa of Mexico in Merida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-hosted-president-felipe-de-jesus-calderon-hinojosa-mexico-merida", "publication_date": "13-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3551, "text": "He is taking bold steps to enforce the rule of law and to crack down on organized crime and drugs, and reform the judicial system. The United States is a strong partner in these efforts. We have got work to do on our side of the border. People provide drugs because there is a demand for drugs, and the United States must do a better job of reducing the demand for drugs. And at the same time, I look forward to close cooperation. We will work with the President and other Presidents in our region to interdict the supply of drugs. President Calderon also knows the importance of creating new opportunities for Mexico's economy. He is laid out innovative policies to combat poverty and to create jobs. rewarding Mexican companies that hire first-time workers. And I appreciate his strong commitment to housing and infrastructure in southern Mexico. He is called for economic reforms that encourage competition and fight corruption. He understands the importance of free and fair trade. The United States welcomes a strong Mexican economy, and we fully understand that we must work together to facilitate a smooth transition to full trade, especially on sensitive issues such as corn and beans. President Calderon holds deep convictions on the matter of migration, and so do I. Our nations share a 2,000-mile border, and that should be a source of unity, not division. So we are working together to keep both sides of the border open to tourism and trade and closed to criminals and drug dealers and smugglers and terrorists and gun runners. I appreciate the President's commitment to secure Mexican borders on both the north and the south. And I told the President today-and I am going to keep repeating it while I am here in Mexico-that I know our country must have comprehensive immigration reform. We are a rule of law. But it is important for the American citizens to understand that family values do not stop at the Rio Grande River, and that it is in our Nation's interests to have a comprehensive immigration law so we can uphold the great values of America, values based on human dignity and the worth of each individual. We spent a lot of time talking about important issues in a very constructive and friendly way. I appreciate your candor. And I, too, would like to offer a toast to good people of Mexico and its leaders.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdinnerhostedpresidentfelipedejesuscalderonhinojosamexicomerida", "title": "Remarks at a Dinner Hosted by President Felipe de Jesus Calderon Hinojosa of Mexico in Merida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-dinner-hosted-president-felipe-de-jesus-calderon-hinojosa-mexico-merida", "publication_date": "13-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3552, "text": "I want to thank Chairman Dempsey for bringing us here together to review coalition operations to degrade and to ultimately destroy ISIL. I want to thank General Austin of Central Command and General Votel, down at the end, of Special Operations Command for their outstanding leadership as well. At this stage, some 60 nations are contributing to this coalition, including more than 20 coalition members who are represented here today, among them, Iraq, Arab nations, Turkey, NATO allies, and partners from around the world. So this is an operation that involves the world against ISIL. stopping ISIL's advance on Erbil, saving many civilians from a massacre on Mount Sinjar, retaking the Mosul Dam, destroying ISIL targets and fighters across Iraq and Syria. Obviously, at this point, we are also focused on the fighting that is taking place in Iraq's Anbar Province, and we are deeply concerned about the situation in and around the Syrian town of Kobani, which underscores the threat that ISIL poses in both Iraq and Syria. And coalition airstrikes will continue in both these areas. One of the things that has emerged from the discussions, both before I came and during my visit here, is that this is going to be a long-term campaign. We are still at the early stages. But our coalition is united behind this long-term effort. Our nations agree that ISIL poses a significant threat to the people of Iraq and Syria. It poses a threat to surrounding countries. And because of the numbers of foreign fighters that are being attracted and the chaos that ISIL was creating in the region, ultimately, it will pose a threat beyond the Middle East, including to the United States, Europe, and far-flung countries like Australia that have already seen terrorist networks trying to infiltrate and impact population centers on the other side of the world. So we are united in our goal to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL so that it is no longer a threat to Iraq, to the region, or the international community. But one of the things that is also been emphasized here today is, this is not simply a military campaign. This is not a classic army in which we defeat them on the battlefield and then they ultimately surrender. What we are also fighting is an ideological strain of extremism that has taken root in too many parts of the region. We are dealing with sectarianism and political divisions that for too long have been a primary political, organizational rallying point in the region.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithforeignchiefsdefensejointbaseandrewsmaryland", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Foreign Chiefs of Defense at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-foreign-chiefs-defense-joint-base-andrews-maryland", "publication_date": "14-10-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3553, "text": "We are dealing with economic deprivation and lack of opportunity among too many young people in the region. And so one of the interesting things to hear from our military leadership is the recognition that this cannot simply be a military campaign. This has to be a campaign that includes all the dimensions of our power. We have to do a better job communicating an alternative vision for those who are currently attracted to the fighting inside Iraq and Syria. It is going to be absolutely critical to make sure that the political inclusion that Prime Minister Abadi of Iraq is committed to is actually translated into real progress. It is going to require us developing and strengthening a moderate opposition inside of Syria that is in a position then to bring about the kind of legitimacy and sound governance for all people inside of Syria. And so, in addition to denying ISIL safe haven in Iraq and Syria, in addition to stopping foreign fighters, in addition to the intelligence gathering and airstrikes and ground campaigns that may be developed by the Iraqi security forces, we are also going to have to pay attention to communications. We are going to have to pay attention to how all the countries in the region begin to cooperate in rooting out this cancer. And we are going to have to continue to deliver on the humanitarian assistance of all the populations that have been affected. And we have three countries here Jordan, Lebanon, and Turkey who obviously are bearing an extraordinary burden from the displaced persons, not just recently over the last few months, but for several years now as a consequence of the civil war in Syria. That all plays a part in this campaign. But I want to thank all the nations who are represented here in what is a growing coalition. I am encouraged by the unanimity of viewpoints and the commitment of the countries involved to make sure that we are making steady progress. Before I close, I do want to say something about another topic that is obviously attracted a lot of attention, and that is the situation with Ebola. We have made enormous strides in just a few short weeks in standing up a U.S. military operation in western Africa that can start building the kind of transport lines and supply lines to get workers, supplies, medicine, equipment into Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea. And a number of the countries who are represented here are really stepping up and doing what is necessary in order for us to contain this epidemic. But as I have said before and I am going to keep on repeating until we start seeing more progress, the world as a whole is not doing enough.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithforeignchiefsdefensejointbaseandrewsmaryland", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Foreign Chiefs of Defense at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-foreign-chiefs-defense-joint-base-andrews-maryland", "publication_date": "14-10-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3554, "text": "There are a number of countries that have capacity that have not yet stepped up. Those that have stepped up, all of us are going to have to do more, because unless we contain this at the source, this is going to continue to pose a threat to individual countries at a time when there is no place that is more than a couple of air flights away. And the transmission of this disease obviously directly threatens all our populations. In addition, we have not only a humanitarian crisis in West Africa that threatens hundreds of thousands of lives, but we also have the secondary effects of destabilization, economically and politically, that could lead to more severe problems down the road. So everybody is going to have to do more than they are doing right now. And I am reaching out directly to heads of state and government who, I believe, have the capacities to do more. I spoke yesterday with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who agrees that everybody has to do more. And I can assure everybody that the United States will continue to do its part. With respect to Ebola here in the United States, we are surging resources into Dallas to examine what exactly has happened that ended up infecting the nurse there. Obviously, our thoughts and prayers are with her and all the courageous health care workers around the country who put themselves in challenging situations in treating this disease. We are going to make sure that all the lessons learned from Dallas are then applied to hospitals and health centers around the country. As I have said before, we have a public health infrastructure and systems and support that make an epidemic here highly unlikely. But obviously, one case is too many, and we have got to keep on doing everything we can, particularly to protect our health care workers, because they are on the front lines in battling this disease. And we have also now instituted some additional screening measures, starting at JFK Airport, that will then apply to a number of other airports where we know the bulk of travelers that may have come in contact with Ebola would be coming through. We are confident that we are going to be able to put those in place in the days ahead. But in the meantime, our thoughts and prayers are with the nurse, who, like so many nurses and health care workers around the country, day in, day out, do what they need to do, sometimes at some risk to themselves, in order to provide the kind of care that we all depend on.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithforeignchiefsdefensejointbaseandrewsmaryland", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Foreign Chiefs of Defense at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-foreign-chiefs-defense-joint-base-andrews-maryland", "publication_date": "14-10-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3555, "text": "She is become very, very popular, I will tell you that. I am very proud of her. I am honored to join you on this really, really historic occasion, the 70th anniversary of the United States Air Force, the greatest air force on the face of this Earth by far. Before we begin, I want to say that our hearts and prayers go out the people of London who suffered a vicious terrorist attack today. I spoke with a wonderful woman, British Prime Minister Theresa May, this morning and relayed America's deepest sympathy, as well as our absolute commitment to eradicating the terrorists from our planet. Radical Islamic terrorism, it will be eradicated, believe me. We will defend our people, our nations, and our civilization from all who dare to threaten our way of life. This includes the regime of North Korea, which has once again shown its utter contempt for its neighbors and for the entire world community. After seeing your capabilities and commitment here today, I am more confident than ever that our options in addressing this threat are both effective and overwhelming. Our thoughts also remain with those recovering in the wake of Hurricanes Irma and Harvey. I visited Florida yesterday, where the American people have once again shown the world how resilient, strong, and truly united we are. We are going to help our fellow Americans put their lives, their homes, and their communities back together because when Americans are in need, Americans pull together. And we know we can always count on the courageous members of our Nation's military to be there every step of the way, just like more than 400 Air Force medical personnel who have deployed to Florida to help care for the sick and the injured. To the men and women who proudly wear the Air Force uniform, who keep our country safe, and who fill our hearts with pride, thank you for your service and devotion to America. I am truly thrilled to join you today at this really incredible milestone, 70 years since the founding of the United States Air Force. We are celebrating 70 years of history, 70 years of heroes, and 70 years of victory. I also want to thank all of the amazing family members and loved ones whose sacrifices make your service possible. We love you; we appreciate you and everything you do. For seven decades the United States Air Force has pushed the boundaries of science and technology, helped restore peace and stability to troubled lands, and kept Americans safe from those who threaten our very way of life.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthe70thanniversarytheunitedstatesairforcejointbaseandrewsmaryland", "title": "Remarks on the 70th Anniversary of the United States Air Force at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-70th-anniversary-the-united-states-air-force-joint-base-andrews-maryland", "publication_date": "15-09-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3556, "text": "Nothing inspires more confidence in our friends or strikes more fear in the hearts of our enemies than the sight of American warplanes on the horizon. You patrol the sky, protect the homeland, and deliver American justice to anyone who dares to threaten our people. From the earliest wooden biplanes, to the high-tech UAVs, to the awesome power and stunning beauty of the F-35, B-2, F-22,-and I saw a lot of them today-the F-15, the F-16, the F-18, I do not know which one I like the most. But our aviators have given America total dominance of the air and space, no matter where we fly. Now when our enemies hear the F-35 engines, when they are roaring overhead, their souls will tremble, and they will know the day of reckoning has arrived. That is the way it is been since 1947, when the Air Force was born during a time of monumental change and uncertainty in the world. Unconditional victory in World War II had come at a terrible price. Millions of lives had been lost, empires had collapsed, and much of Europe laid in ruin. The threat of global communism emerged from the void left by defeated foes. And the free nations of the world once again looked to the United States to secure the peace. It was at this crucial moment that America established the Air Force as a separate military service and a truly great military service. And from that moment, America has dominated both air and space like no other nation in history. Our air superiority is unquestioned, not merely because we have the best equipment, but because we have the best people by far. From the Berlin Airlift, through the gauntlet of MiG Ally, to the skies of above the jungles of Southeast Asia and the deserts of the Middle East, American airmen have proven that they have no equal in courage, capability, or commitment. You are the ones who own the sky. You are our greatest weapon of all. In the last 64 years, American ground forces have not lost a single life to an enemy airstrike-pretty amazing-and that is truly a testament to the strategy and skill of American airmen and the essential role you play in our national defense. As Commander in Chief, I am committed to keeping the United States military the best trained, best equipped, and most technologically advanced fighting force on the planet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthe70thanniversarytheunitedstatesairforcejointbaseandrewsmaryland", "title": "Remarks on the 70th Anniversary of the United States Air Force at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-70th-anniversary-the-united-states-air-force-joint-base-andrews-maryland", "publication_date": "15-09-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3557, "text": "One of my first acts was to direct the rebuilding of our Armed Forces and rebuilding we are. Congress took an important step this year by heeding my call for a $20 billion increase in defense spending, and we are going to be doing even much more than that. But the service men and women who defend our Nation with their lives deserve the predictable and consistent funding that will help them win quickly and win decisively. And I will tell you that the new equipment that we are ordering by the billions-by the absolute billions and billions-it is equipment like you have never even thought of before. There is nobody in the world that will have anything even close to us and what we are doing, and that is my great honor, believe me. There is nobody even close. Our Armed Forces have endured continuous combat for the past 26 years, yet despite this, the number of airmen on Active Duty has dropped by one-third since the 1990s, and we have cut more than half of our fighter squadrons. That is why I am calling on Congress to end the defense sequester once and for all and to give our military the tools, training, equipment, and resources that our brave men and women in uniform so richly deserve. Each of you is fulfilling your duty to America, and now Government must fulfill its duty to you. We will stop delaying needed investments in our readiness, and we will renew our commitment to the patriots who keep America safe. In so doing, we will continue the proud legacy of service that each of you has inherited, a legacy built over the generations by legends like Yeager, Wagner, Rickenbacker, Boyd, Grissom, and Schriever-the heroes who broke barrier after barrier to push America farther. They broke so many different barriers; they went farther, faster, and they always went on to victory . Like them, each of you is a living, breathing symbol of our great country, the United States of America. The characteristics that define the Air Force aviator-boldness and bravery, action and instinct, power and grace-are woven deep into the American spirit and have defined our people since our Nation was founded. Fighter pilot is an attitude. It is self-cockiness-and you know that. It is a streak of rebelliousness. And I just met a lot of these folks. They are better looking than Tom Cruise, and we know they can fight better, and we know they can fly better.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthe70thanniversarytheunitedstatesairforcejointbaseandrewsmaryland", "title": "Remarks on the 70th Anniversary of the United States Air Force at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-70th-anniversary-the-united-states-air-force-joint-base-andrews-maryland", "publication_date": "15-09-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3558, "text": "That desire to do good, to soar past every challenger, to overcome every obstacle, and to win for your fellow citizens and the land that we love is the same desire that beats in the heart of every red-blooded American patriot. We are, and forever will be, a nation of pioneers and patriots, risk takers and renegades, aviators and astronauts. We crave adventure and achievement, exploration and enlightenment. We carved out a home in the New World, gave birth to the modern world, and we will shape tomorrow's world with the strength and skill of American hands. Because for America, the sky is never the limit. That is why the United States Air Force will remain the most awe-inspiring flying force ever known to man. Like every part of our military, the Air Force is born from the will of our people to search, to explore, to reach new heights. It is the people's will that you reflect and their power that you project to every single corner of the globe. Earlier this year, I had the honor of speaking with a great ENTITY Air Corps and Air Force legend, Lieutenant Colonel Dick Cole, the last surviving Doolittle Raider and a true American hero. Like those who serve today, Dick Cole was a common American who answered to the call of duty with uncommon devotion. His place in the pages of history might have seemed unlikely prior to that fateful mission. He had never seen the ocean before boarding a ship that would take him halfway around the world. Neither he, nor anyone else, had ever flown a B-2 ; into combat from the deck of an aircraft carrier. Nor had we ever seen anybody to use a parachute before bailing out thousands of feet above the Chinese mainland. But he knew what his country needed, and what his duty required. And there was no barrier that could stop Colonel Cole and his fellow Raiders from accomplishing their mission. It is that spirit of daring, devotion, and duty, and love of our country that has defined the Air Force for the past 70 years and will lift each of you to new heights every day from this day forward. There is no distance too far, no speed too fast, no challenge too great, and no height too high that will keep the United States Air Force-or the American people-from total victory. We will stand with you always. I am always on your wing. We are so proud of you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthe70thanniversarytheunitedstatesairforcejointbaseandrewsmaryland", "title": "Remarks on the 70th Anniversary of the United States Air Force at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-70th-anniversary-the-united-states-air-force-joint-base-andrews-maryland", "publication_date": "15-09-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3559, "text": "It is good to be with you here tonight. If it was not black tie, I would have worn my tan suit. I want to acknowledge the members of the Congressional Black Caucus and Chairwoman Marcia Fudge for their outstanding work. Thank you, Shuanise Washington, and the CBC Foundation for doing so much to help our young people aim high and reach their potential. Eric Holder. Throughout his long career in public service, Eric has built a powerful legacy of making sure that equal justice under the law actually means something, that it applies to everybody, regardless of race or gender or religion or color, creed, disability, sexual orientation. He has been a great friend of mine. He has been a faithful servant of the American people. We will miss him badly. This year, we have been marking the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act. We honor giants like John Lewis, unsung heroines like Evelyn Lowery. We honor the countless Americans, some who are in this room-Black, White, students, scholars, preachers, housekeepers-patriots all, who, with their bare hands, reached into the well of our Nation's founding ideals and helped to nurture a more perfect Union. We have reminded ourselves that progress is not just absorbing what has been done, it is advancing what is left undone. where no child will go unfed, and no youngster will go unschooled. Where no man who wants work will fail to find it. Where no citizen will be barred from any door because of his birthplace or his color or his church. Where peace and security is common among neighbors and possible among nations. This is the world that waits for you, he said. America has made stunning progress since that time, over the past 50 years, even over the past 5 years. But it is the unfinished work that drives us forward. Some of our unfinished work lies beyond our borders. America is leading the effort to rally the world against Russian aggression in Ukraine. America is leading the fight to contain and combat Ebola in Africa. America is building and leading the coalition that will degrade and ultimately destroy the terrorist group known as ISIL. As Americans, we are leading, and we do not shy away from these responsibilities, we welcome them. That is what America does. And we are grateful to the men and women in uniform who put themselves in harm's way in service of the country that we all love.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalblackcaucusfoundationphoenixawardsdinner3", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Phoenix Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-black-caucus-foundation-phoenix-awards-dinner-3", "publication_date": "27-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3560, "text": "So we have got unfinished work overseas, but we have got some unfinished work right here at home. After the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, our businesses have now created 10 million new jobs over the last 54 months. This is the longest uninterrupted stretch of job growth in our history. But we understand our work is not done until we get the kind of job creation that means everybody who wants work can a find job. We have done some work on health care too. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, we have seen a 26 percent decline in the uninsured rate in America. African Americans have seen a 30 percent decline. And by the way, the cost of health care is not going up as fast anymore either. We have saved $800 billion in Medicare because of the work that we have done, slowing the cost, improving quality and improving access. Despite unyielding opposition, this change has happened just in the last couple of years. But we know our work is not yet done until we get into more communities, help more uninsured folks get covered, especially in those States where the Governors are not being quite as cooperative as we'd like them to be. It always puzzles me where you decide to take a stand to make sure poor folks in your State cannot get health insurance even though it does not cost you a dime. That does not make much sense to me, but I will not go on on that topic. We have got more work to do. It is easy to take a stand when you have got health insurance. I am going off script now, but--that is what happens at the CBC. Our high school graduation rate is at a record high, the dropout rate is falling, more young people are earning college degrees than ever before. Last year, the number of children living in poverty fell by 1.4 million, the largest decline since 1966. Since I took office, the overall crime rate and the overall incarceration rate has gone down by about 10 percent. That is the first time they have declined at the same time in more than 40 years. But our work is not done when too many children live in crumbling neighborhoods, cycling through substandard schools, traumatized by daily violence.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalblackcaucusfoundationphoenixawardsdinner3", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Phoenix Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-black-caucus-foundation-phoenix-awards-dinner-3", "publication_date": "27-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3561, "text": "Our work is not done when working Americans of all races have seen their wages and incomes stagnate, even as corporate profits soar; when African American unemployment is still twice as high as White unemployment; when income inequality, on the rise for decades, continues to hold back hard-working communities, especially communities of color. We have got unfinished work. And we know what to do. That is the worst part, we know what to do. We know we have got to invest in infrastructure and manufacturing and research and development that creates new jobs. We have got to keep rebuilding a middle class economy with ladders of opportunity so that hard work pays off and you see higher wages and higher incomes and fair pay for women doing the same work as men and workplace flexibility for parents in case a child gets sick or a parent needs some help. We have got to build more Promise Zones partnerships to support local revitalization of hard-hit communities. We have got to keep investing in early childhood education. We want to bring preschool to every 4-year-old in this country. And we want every child to have an excellent teacher. And we want to invest in our community colleges and expand Pell grants for more students. And I am going to keep working with you to make college more affordable. Because every child in America, no matter who she is, no matter where she is born, no matter how much money her parents have, ought to be able to fulfill her God-given potential. That is what we believe. So I just want everybody to understand, we have made enormous progress. There is almost no economic measure by which we are not better off than when I took office. But-and I just list these things just so if you have a discussion with one of your friends--and they are confused. Hey, in fact, the folks who are doing the best, they are the ones who complain the most. So you can just point these things out. But we still have to close these opportunity gaps. how justice is applied, but also how it is perceived, how it is experienced. Eric Holder understands this. That is what we saw in Ferguson this summer, when Michael Brown was killed and a community was divided. And Eric spent some time with the residents and police of Ferguson, and the Department of Justice has indicated that its civil rights investigation is ongoing. Now, I will not comment on the investigation. I know that nothing any of us can say can ease the grief of losing a child so soon.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalblackcaucusfoundationphoenixawardsdinner3", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Phoenix Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-black-caucus-foundation-phoenix-awards-dinner-3", "publication_date": "27-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3562, "text": "But the anger and the emotion that followed his death awakened our Nation once again to the reality that people in this room have long understood, which is, in too many communities around the country, a gulf of mistrust exists between local residents and law enforcement. Too many young men of color feel targeted by law enforcement, guilty of walking while Black or driving while Black, judged by stereotypes that fuel fear and resentment and hopelessness. We know that, statistically, in everything from enforcing drug policy to applying the death penalty, to pulling people over, there are significant racial disparities. One recent poll showed that the majority of Americans think the criminal justice system does not treat people of all races equally. And that has a corrosive effect, not just on the Black community; it has a corrosive effect on America. It harms the communities that need law enforcement the most. It makes folks who are victimized by crime and need strong policing reluctant to go to the police because they may not trust them. And the worst part of it is, it scars the hearts of our children. It scars the hearts of White children who grow unnecessarily fearful of somebody who does not look like them. It stains the heart of Black children who feel as if no matter what he does, he will always be under suspicion. It is not the society that our children deserve. Whether you are Black or White, you do not want that for America. It was interesting, Ferguson was used by some of America's enemies and critics to deflect attention from their own shortcomings overseas, to undermine our efforts to promote justice around the world. They said, well, look at what is happened to you back home. But as I said this week at the United Nations, America is special not because we are perfect; America is special because we work to address our problems, to make our Union more perfect. We fight for more justice. We fight to cure what ails us. We fight for our ideals, and we are willing to criticize ourselves when we fall short. And we address our differences in the open space of democracy, with respect for the rule of law, with a place for people of every race and religion, and with an unyielding belief that people who love their country can change it. That is what makes us special, not because we do not have problems, but because we work to fix them. And we will continue to work to fix this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalblackcaucusfoundationphoenixawardsdinner3", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Phoenix Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-black-caucus-foundation-phoenix-awards-dinner-3", "publication_date": "27-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3563, "text": "And to that end, we need to help communities and law enforcement build trust, build understanding, so that our neighborhoods stay safe and our young people stay on track. And under the leadership of Attorney General Eric Holder, the Justice Department has launched a national effort to do just that. He is also been working to make the criminal justice system smarter and more effective by addressing unfair sentencing disparities, changing Department policies on charging mandatory minimums, promoting stronger reentry programs for those who have paid their debt to society. And we need to address the unique challenges that make it hard for some of our young people to thrive. For all the success stories that exist in a room like this one, we all know relatives, classmates, neighbors who were just as smart as we were, just as capable as we were, born with the same light behind their eyes, the same joy, the same curiosity about the world, but somehow, they did not get the support they needed or the encouragement they needed, or they made a mistake, or they missed an opportunity; they were not able to overcome the obstacles that they faced. And so, in February, we launched My Brother's Keeper. And I was the first one to acknowledge, government cannot play the only, or even the primary, role in the lives of our children. But what we can do is bring folks together, and that is what we are doing-philanthropies, business leaders, entrepreneurs, faith leaders, mayors, educators, athletes, and the youth themselves-to examine how can we ensure that our young men have the tools they need to achieve their full potential. And next week, I am launching My Brother's Keeper Community Challenge, asking every community in the country-big cities and small towns, rural counties, tribal nations-publicly commit to implementing strategies that will ensure all young people can succeed, starting from cradle, all the way to college and a career. It is a challenge to local leaders to follow the evidence and use the resources on what works for our kids. And we are going to keep on signing them up in the coming weeks and months. We need all of us to come together to help all of our young people address the variety of challenges they face. And we are not forgetting about the girls, by the way. I have got two daughters, I do not know if you noticed. African American girls are more likely than their White peers also to be suspended, incarcerated, physically harassed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalblackcaucusfoundationphoenixawardsdinner3", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Phoenix Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-black-caucus-foundation-phoenix-awards-dinner-3", "publication_date": "27-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3564, "text": "Black women struggle every day with biases that perpetuate oppressive standards for how they are supposed to look and how they are supposed to act. Too often, they are either left under the hard light of scrutiny or cloaked in a kind of invisibility. So in addition to the new efforts on My Brother's Keeper, the White House Council for Women and Girls has for years been working on issues affecting women and girls of color, from violence against women to pay equity, to access to health care. And you know Michelle has been working on that, because she does not think our daughters should be treated differently than anybody else's sons. I have got a vested interest in making sure that our daughters have the same opportunities as boys do. So that is the world we have got to reach for-the world where every single one of our children has the opportunity to pursue their measure of happiness. And we are going to have to fight for it. We have got to stand up for it. And we have to vote for it. We have to vote for it. Oh, Barack, we are praying for you. We are praying for you. Which I appreciate. But I tell them, after President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, he immediately moved on to what he called the meat in the coconut, a voting rights act bill. And some of his administration argued that is too much, it is too soon. Movement know-but the movement knew that if we rested after the Civil Rights Act, then all we could do was pray that somebody would enforce those rights. So whenever I hear somebody say they are praying for me, I say thank you. I believe in the power of prayer. But we need more than prayer. It will not relieve me of my gray hair, but it will help me pass some bills. Because people refused to give in when it was hard, we get to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act next year. Until then, we have got to protect it. We cannot just celebrate it, we have got to protect it. Because there are people still trying to pass voter ID laws to make it harder for folks to vote. And we have got to get back to our schools and our offices and our churches, our beauty shops, barber shops, and make sure folks know there is an election coming up, they need to know how to register, and they need to know how and when to vote.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecongressionalblackcaucusfoundationphoenixawardsdinner3", "title": "Remarks at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Phoenix Awards Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-congressional-black-caucus-foundation-phoenix-awards-dinner-3", "publication_date": "27-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3565, "text": "I am very proud to have been introduced by your Congressman, but I hope soon to be, if you do what is right, your Senator, Phil Gramm. Well, it is great to be back in Texas and Thank you and back in Corpus Christi visiting you again. I have campaigned here on more than one occasion, and I always notice how proudly the flag waves in the south Texas wind. It sort of says to visitors that the people here take patriotism seriously. Well, together we are going to make certain that our country always stands for freedom and our flag continues to wave proudly. There is a new spirit in America, and I am pleased to call it the new patriotism. All over the country, Americans are casting away the pessimism and self-doubt of the last decade. We are coming together, people of every race, religion, and ethnic background, rejoicing in the freedom and the opportunity of this great land. Four years ago when I was last here, I asked you for your support. I promised that if you so honored me, I would do my very best to help all of you to make America strong again, to rebuild her economy, strengthen her defenses, and to restore her confidence in the future. Well, it is been tough, but together we have, all of us and all of you, made a new beginning. We still have more to do, but I think we are headed in the right direction. And I think this election offers the clearest choice in 50 years a choice of whether we go forward together to build on our own progress, or whether we go back to the defeatism and despair of the unhappy past. Let me ask you. Does anyone want to go back to the days of high inflation? Anyone want to go back to the days of economic stagnation and a heavier and heavier tax burden? They want to keep moving forward to jobs and opportunity, forward to stable prices and economic expansion, forward to a safer and a stronger America. I think the American people are proud of the recovery they built and confident about making tomorrow even better. And I want you to know you did do this. I just told some people over in Brownsville a little while ago, as to this recovery, all we did was get the Government out of your way. You know, those who are running down this comeback story, who are trying to make us fear our future, are running down the talent and the courage of the American people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallycorpuschristitexas", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Corpus Christi, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-corpus-christi-texas", "publication_date": "02-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3566, "text": "And I just have a hunch that come election day, they are going to be sorry they did. Unhappily, there are those who still believe they can divide us against ourselves by appealing to envy, promising something for nothing, and the American people are not buying that anymore. And something else no one's buying is any scheme for raising Federal taxes based on promises from fast-talking politicians that somebody else will pay the bill. My opponent has made an enormous tax increase his first option, the centerpiece of his campaign. Does not he know you do not want greater taxes, you want a greater Texas? Raising taxes will not encourage people in Texas to work harder and be more productive; raising taxes will not stimulate investment; raising taxes will not give business the incentive to innovate and to make their companies more competitive. America does not need higher taxes. America does not need my opponent to rescue us from prosperity. America needs more growth. Those who still need help will get help, and every American who wants a job will find a job as we keep on growing. The politicians and the economic gurus who gave us stagflation stagflation, that took some doing, you know, to produce both economic decline and inflation all at the same time. And incidentally, when you meet somebody that maybe wonders why you are supporting Phil Gramm, you might remind him that one of the two names on the legislation that brought about the tax cuts and the economic progress and the reduction in government spending the names were Del Latta and Phil Gramm. Those same people warned us that cutting tax rates would lead to super inflation. Well, now that our economy is strong and growing, they are a little stuck, so they tell us now, it will not last. Well, I think it is about time we quit listening to politicians and so-called economic experts who keep selling America short. Of course, when one is so tied to the politics of the past and focusing on the negative, it is hard to have a vision of a better future. But I do not know, I see America as a soaring eagle strong, proud, and free. Now, I think there are those still around who secretly maybe agree with Ben Franklin's suggestion for our national bird. Well, 4 years ago we were not only suffering terrible economic difficulties, our country was being counted out as a world leader. Our friends and adversaries alike looked at us as a nation in decline.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallycorpuschristitexas", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Corpus Christi, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-corpus-christi-texas", "publication_date": "02-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3567, "text": "Advocates of weakness people who blamed the United States for all the troubles of the world they claimed a weaker America would be a safer America because no one would have anything to fear from us. Well, no one has anything to fear from us if they mind their own business. You know, those dedicated individuals in our Armed Forces, they were being treated as if they were at fault for world tensions. Well, we have turned that situation around, too. Today we are safer and more secure because America is rebuilding its defensive strength. It is strength, not weakness, that will ensure a peaceful future. You know, President Eisenhower knew this when he wrote, To be strong nationally is not a sin, it is a necessity. And a lot of our strength is based on the new pride in those who are serving in the Armed Forces. Morale's at a high point, and I am told by their commanders that we have got the finest group of young people in the history of our country serving today. And as long as I am President, they will never doubt that to the depth of our national soul, we appreciate the job they are doing, and we are proud of each and every one of them. As long as I am President, we are not going to quibble about supplying the weapons and the equipment that they need to do the job they are doing. We will continue our strenuous efforts to cut waste and fraud and to get the very best deal we can, but we are not going to play politics with the lives of those who are defending our country. As I said before, we do not want anyone to fear us, but I thought he was campaigning in the South today. But as I said, we do not Thank you. Well, as I said before, we do not want anyone to fear us. But I said this in 1980, what our goal would be, and I think maybe we have reached it. And that is, we do not care if they even do not love us. We just expect them to respect us. You know, contrary to what the liberals would like us to believe, by restoring America's military strength, which the previous administration had permitted to erode, we are now in a better position to negotiate with any potential adversary. And just last week, I initiated a new effort to convince the Soviet Union to return to serious arms reduction negotiations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallycorpuschristitexas", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Corpus Christi, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-corpus-christi-texas", "publication_date": "02-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3568, "text": "I am optimistic that if we remain firm, the Soviet Union will find it in its interest to join with us in reducing the number of weapons now threatening both our peoples. But we are not going to achieve this or anything else with self-doubt and unilateral concessions. I can assure you that we are trying our hardest to convince the Soviets to bargain realistically, to reach an agreement that is fair and verifiable. And I think that Minister Gromyko has returned to the Soviet Union with a better understanding of what we are, who we are, and what we are looking forward to achieving in the way of peace in the world. It is incumbent for everyone to remember that it was not the United States that walked away from the negotiating table on arms reductions, it was the Soviet Union that walked away. Now, in situations like this, we all stand together. A stronger America does not just mean better weapons; it means having the strength of character to meet our commitments. It means having the will and the political leadership to protect our national interests. And it means not shirking our responsibility to protect our children's future, even when it might be easier to ignore a potential threat. When we got to Washington, the enemies of freedom were on the move. They were encouraged by what they saw as a lack of will in the previous administration. Central America was headed for a crisis. Well, I am proud to say that we prevented a major catastrophe, something that might have endangered the security and the well-being of our country for many years to come. In the last 4 years, not 1 square inch of territory has been lost to Communist aggression. And, in one case, with quick and decisive action, we protected hundreds of American medical students from a potential hostile situation and restored freedom to the people of Grenada. And it was so wonderful when some of those young men well, all of them came back, all of the combat forces came back-and, before they left, said it was good to see God bless America written on the walls down there instead of Yankee go home. As was true in our efforts to turn around the economy, our struggle to protect Central America from Communist aggression-that effort was hampered by obstacles thrown in our path by some liberals in the Democratic Party. And please note I said some.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallycorpuschristitexas", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Corpus Christi, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-corpus-christi-texas", "publication_date": "02-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3569, "text": "They are out of step, and some of the leadership, out of step with the millions of patriotic Democrats in this land, the rank-and-file Democrats, and we are reaching out to all concerned Democrats and Independents, asking them to come walk with us down the new path of hope and opportunity and a secure America. I know they can no longer follow the advice of those who have taken this other course. I know, I think, because for a good part of my life I was a Democrat, too, and then found I could no longer follow the policies of what had developed in the leadership of that party. Now, it is important that we elect right-thinking men and women to the Congress. And that is why it is also vital for you to send Phil Gramm to the United States Senate, so Texas can have the same high quality representation that Senator John Tower has been providing you. We could not have accomplished what we have accomplished if we had not had a majority in the Senate. I need Phil Gramm. America needs Phil Gramm. We only have 1 month left. We have to work our hardest to get our message to every one of your friends and neighbors-Republicans, Democrats, and Independents alike. And I cannot leave here without noticing something here on either side of us these bands, these young people, these high school people, so many of you young people here in the crowd. For the rest of us who are not that young anymore and my friends and fellow senior citizens down here from the Hill Haven Nursing Home, I am delighted you are here what we know is that all I have been talking about up here and all that this election is about is what kind of country we are going to turn over to those wonderful young people of ours. So many of us started out in a country where we knew no matter how beset we were with poverty or what seemed to be lack of opportunity or anything, we knew that anything was possible in this country of ours. And we have a sacred obligation to see that every succeeding generation sees that same kind of an America where there is no ceiling on where they can go and what they can do. Do not let anyone and listen, when I say polls, I mean those voting polls. President Dewey told me not to look at the polls and get overconfident. God bless you all. And I know I have got to get back on that airplane out there.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksreaganbushrallycorpuschristitexas", "title": "Remarks at a Reagan-Bush Rally in Corpus Christi, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-reagan-bush-rally-corpus-christi-texas", "publication_date": "02-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3571, "text": "I am delighted to welcome you to the White Housetemporarily. Today will certainly have proved one thing to you. Let me give you a confidential briefing on what really happened in the Pentagon today.1 First of all, the elevator was Number 13. I felt sorry for that poor elevator operator. Do you have a full load there? I was interested in his reply. The operator looked at the Secretary of Defenseand swallowed once. He looked at meand swallowed twice. I turned to Bob McNamara. What is wrong with this thing? I saidin my softest voice. Do not ask me, he replied. That is real efficiency for youhe's not even out of the building and the computers have broken down. The Secretary must have read my thoughts. I have got it, Mr. President. This is February 29th and we did not program the computer for Leap Year! As we walked away, I saw Bob McNamara whip out his famous little black book. Check elevator budget at the World Bank. Driving back to the White House , I made a note of my ownfor our Republican guests tonight. The other party has been so kind to me latelyapproving just about everything that I dothat I just wanted to give their most vocal supporters an inside tip. Standing stuck inside that elevator today, I thought of my Republican friends. I hoped they would realize that it can take a long time to get to the top in this town. Years ago our predecessors were pretty independent of one anotherthe Chief Executive of the Nation and the Chief Executive of the State. But the 20th century has imposed a partnership on the two of us. Like all partnerships, sometimes we grow restless in that arrangement, as partners frequently do. But there is one thing in the last analysis we all know, whether it is a partnership in our home or in our business or in the Government that runs our country, we have got to make it work. Now that is what I am trying so hard to do. We now have more than 450 Federal grant-in-aid programs in the United States. They amount to more than $17 billion of the taxpayers' money that is spent every year. They involve almost every major function of this Government in this society. They touch the lives, I think, of every single American. We, the leaders, the Chief Executives of America, have a responsibility to all America. It is just disgraceful for us to spend any of our time and our talent chewing on each other.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandgovernorjohnvolpemassachusettsdinnerhonoringthegovernors", "title": "Toasts of the President and Governor John A. Volpe of Massachusetts at a Dinner Honoring the Governors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-governor-john-volpe-massachusetts-dinner-honoring-the-governors", "publication_date": "29-02-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3572, "text": "You have problems that need to be solved that I do not know much about, but if I can help I want to help because if you are a better Chief Executive, your State is a better State. I have problems and God knows they are legion. I do not know the answers to all of them. And I need help. If we solve them you have a better nation. You have a slice of this Nation and your children have a slice of this Nation. So we must never lose sight of the fact that some folks would like to take a little temporary advantage with great injury to the longtime national good. But I hope and I believe they are not in this room tonight. I want to pay public tribute to the tireless efforts of three good men who largely have inaugurated and brought this relationship to what it is today, between the Chief Executive of the Nation and the Chief Executives of the States. First, Governor Buford Ellington of Tennessee who left his home and came here and valiantly served me until I told him that he could probably do me more good as the Governor of Tennessee. Governor Bryant served his term here with great distinction and great appreciation from all of us who worked with him. Thanks to your cooperation and your understanding, all of us together have made these programs, I think, somewhat more effective than they would have been otherwise. Your own distinguished chairman, Governor Volpe, has said that this is the best working relationship that the Federal Government and the States have had together. I know of no one who tries harder to make it so than Governor Volpe, and I want to thank you, Governor. I have often spoken of Buford Ellington and Farris Bryantbut this is the first opportunity I have had to say anything about Price Daniel. State legislator, speaker, attorney general, Governor, and United States Senator. Now he sits in the Security Council with us. He was your colleague as Governor for many years; he was my colleague as a Senator for many years. He knows government, I think, at both endsthe local, State, and Federal level. I know Price Daniel as the soul of honor. Buford Ellington and Price Daniel and Governor Bryant. I doubt that there is a man in this room from any State in the Union who can do more with the Presidentand with the Cabinetthan Price Daniel. I tell you that only so you will know that you have a good lawyer retained here in Washington for you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandgovernorjohnvolpemassachusettsdinnerhonoringthegovernors", "title": "Toasts of the President and Governor John A. Volpe of Massachusetts at a Dinner Honoring the Governors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-governor-john-volpe-massachusetts-dinner-honoring-the-governors", "publication_date": "29-02-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3573, "text": "I am glad and gratified that Governor Daniel and his lovely wife have come here to try to bring us closer together and to serve our common interests. Last year, we made a very determined effort to put our partnership on a face-to-face basis. Cabinet officers and other high officials, at my instruction, got away from the smog of Washington and went into 44 State capitals at the request and with the approval of the Chief Executives of these States. Many other States sent their officials here to meet with us. In all, there have been more than 2,500 State and Federal officials meeting to try to better the ways to serve the people who pay all of us and entrust all of us with the responsibilities. In these meetings we explored the challenges of housing, pollution, transportation, law enforcement, New Haven railroads, education, health, job opportunities. These challenges, we know, leapfrog State boundaries. They confront us all as Americans. when a child in one area gets a better education than a child in another; when a baby in one neighborhood has a higher chance of survival than a baby in another neighborhood; when the smoke of one city poisons the air of another city; when the crowded highways in one State slow the commerce in another State. All of these start as local issues but in a very short time they stretch into national problems. The Federal Government must face up to national problems and we try to. The answers really are out there where you are, in the hinterland and hometowns of America. In the final analysis out there where Mr. and Mrs. America live, in your hometowns and in your home State We must never assume that States and cities are barren of ideas. Many of today's greatest social innovations have their roots in local government. There is no substitute that we can find for that. Local government is the living heart of the greatest ideathe American idea. It is up to us to keep it vibrant, to give it new vigor and new strength each day, to give our people new confidence. It is up to us to nourish and reawaken the pride in communities and the pride in country that made this Nation great. This can be the richest dividend of our partnership. I want to tell this story and then I will not ask your indulgence further. Sunday a week ago I spent the most delightful day, I think, that I have had since I became President.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandgovernorjohnvolpemassachusettsdinnerhonoringthegovernors", "title": "Toasts of the President and Governor John A. Volpe of Massachusetts at a Dinner Honoring the Governors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-governor-john-volpe-massachusetts-dinner-honoring-the-governors", "publication_date": "29-02-1968", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3574, "text": "GOOD EVENING TO YOU, my very dear friends, and good evening to each American across this broad land who has allowed me into their living room on their television or their radio receiver. I prize this opportunity to meet with citizens, dedicated to the policies and objectives of this administration. These policies and objectives have been placed before the Congress in a legislative program to build a better and a stronger America. I am delighted that you have come to Washington to pledge your support to those members of the present Congress who are working for this program. Happily these are both numerous and able--and to be found not only among the leaders and the seniors who helped design the program, but among our younger friends most recently elected to that august body. Naturally, I am equally pleased that you are pledged to do your individual and collective best to see that there will be many more such men and women in the next Congress. Now, what we mean by a stronger America is a nation whose every citizen has reason for bold hope, where effort is rewarded and prosperity is shared, where freedom expands and peace is secure. The legislative program that you and I support is a broad, straight legislative highway to that kind of America. Tonight, I propose that we talk frankly, even if somewhat sketchily, about that program--now in the Congress. It was laid before the Congress last January, and was designed to protect our freedoms; to foster a growing, prosperous, peacetime economy; and to fulfill the Government's obligations in helping solve the human problems of our citizenry. Now, basic to the protection of our freedom is a strong, forthright foreign policy. This we have been developing. Our foreign policy is vigorously opposed to imperialistic ambition, but devoted to harmonious cooperation with all nations and peoples who share our will to live in peace with their neighbors. It demands, this policy, unremitting effort to create and hold friends and to encourage them in staunchness of friendship with us. It requires us to be vigilant against those who would destroy us; to be calm and confident in the face of their threats. Present world conditions require a national defense program, streamlined, effective, and economical, that takes into full account our air and nuclear might. But in the longer range, our foreign and defense policies must be directed toward world disarmament. We must seek for all mankind a release from the deadening burden of armaments. We must continue to seek sensible solutions for the fateful problems posed by the atom and hydrogen bombs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmeetingdistrictchairmennationalcitizensforeisenhowercongressionalcommittee", "title": "Address at Meeting of District Chairmen, National Citizens for Eisenhower Congressional Committee.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-meeting-district-chairmen-national-citizens-for-eisenhower-congressional-committee", "publication_date": "10-06-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3575, "text": "Pursuing these purposes, we have persistently made appropriate proposals to the world--and more particularly to the Soviets--which if honestly accepted would go far toward attainment of these goals. With our friends, we must strive constantly for a freer system of world trade and investment, for strengthened trade agreement legislation, for simpler rules and regulations under which trade can be carried on. In the meantime, we must continue to render military and economic assistance abroad where our national interest is thereby served. In this way we not only build up our material and military strength so that we may oppose successfully any rash aggression by the Communists, but we help eliminate those conditions of poverty, disease, and ignorance which provide fertile breeding ground for the exploiters of discontent. It cannot be effectively described in a mere section of a general talk such as this. But because foreign affairs and foreign policy do so vitally affect the lives of each of us and all that we are attempting to do abroad, and here at home, the Secretary of State is at this moment on a trip to the West where he is delivering major addresses that will help clarify for all our citizens the position of America in world affairs. At home we have sought to preserve the sanctity of our freedoms by denying official posts of trust to the untrustworthy; by intensifying legal action against the members and leaders of the Communist conspiracy; by sharpening our weapons for dealing with sabotage. Scarcely need I assure such an audience as this that I--and my every associate in Government--will keep everlastingly at the job of uprooting subversion wherever it may be found. My friends, I do not believe that I am egotistical when I say that I believe that every American believes, at least, that about me. Now the second part of this program is a strong and a growing economy, shared in, equitably, by all our citizens! Now, we began this part of the program by uncovering and eliminating needless expenditures within the Federal Government. We proposed a reduction in taxes and reform of the tax system. Other measures involve a new farm program adjusted to current domestic and world conditions; an improved and expanded national highway system; a sound and comprehensive development of water and other natural resources; a broad housing program. We hope, also, to uproot the ingrained habit of operating the vast Post Office Department in an extravagantly wasteful and unbusinesslike manner.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmeetingdistrictchairmennationalcitizensforeisenhowercongressionalcommittee", "title": "Address at Meeting of District Chairmen, National Citizens for Eisenhower Congressional Committee.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-meeting-district-chairmen-national-citizens-for-eisenhower-congressional-committee", "publication_date": "10-06-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3576, "text": "We cannot permit the deliberate operation of our postal department at a gigantic loss because a few are opposed to adequate postal rates. Of course, we must have classification and promotional procedures for postal personnel that will serve the best interests of the Government, the public, and the postal workers themselves. Now the third great purpose outlined 5 months ago was sympathetic consideration of the human problems of our citizens, and practical assistance in solving them. Our goal for every American is better schooling; better housing; better health; and a reasonable assurance against the hardships of unemployment, against the impact of accident and illness, against poverty, against insecurity in old age. This threefold program--national security, economic, human--is the product of intensive effort by a multitude of technical experts and specialists, Government employees and executives, legislative leaders and committee chairmen. They labored diligently for months to evolve measures sound both in concept and in detail. These measures were-and are--badly needed to build the kind of America all of us ardently desire. There is nothing partisan, nothing sectional, nothing partial about them; they are for the security, prosperity, and happiness of all Americans. Now, my friends, in spite of highly publicized distractions, Congress has been hard at work. Not only have the difficult and time-consuming appropriation bills been acted upon much faster than usual, but the Congress has supported the administration in its efforts to reduce expenditures. Through legislation recently enacted, our people will have better highways. Stifling taxes on consumers have been eased. After more than 40 years of heated debate, the historic St. Lawrence Seaway project is now authorized by law. A mutual security treaty with the Republic of Korea has been approved. Now, these are but a few of a number of major pieces of legislation that have been enacted. But much still remains that is of vital significance to every American citizen. Tonight I am addressing myself primarily to a few of the important parts of the program that are now under discussion in the Congress and in different stages of the legislative process. I remind you of the $7 billion tax reduction already provided to our citizens. You know, this administration goes on the theory that the private citizen knows better how to spend his money than the Government. This program is designed to accomplish a fairer distribution of the tax burden. It will give more liberal tax treatment for dependent children who work, for widows or widowers with dependent children, and for medical expenses.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmeetingdistrictchairmennationalcitizensforeisenhowercongressionalcommittee", "title": "Address at Meeting of District Chairmen, National Citizens for Eisenhower Congressional Committee.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-meeting-district-chairmen-national-citizens-for-eisenhower-congressional-committee", "publication_date": "10-06-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3577, "text": "It will help to expand business activity and so create jobs throughout the country and will also give real encouragement to small businesses. I cannot overemphasize the importance I attach to the general policies and proposals comprehended in the tax bill, and the need for its early passage. I am sure you will agree that the Congress should enact this tax legislation, already passed by the House of Representatives. some of its benefits will begin to accrue to. the people of our country as soon as enacted, because then, with tax uncertainties removed, investors, manufacturers, and businessmen will all accelerate their activities thus creating new jobs and increasing the national income. This is an added reason for speed. Now, another pending measure, vitally necessary to every citizen, is the new farm program. Its purpose is to promote stability and prosperity in agriculture and help assure our farmers a fair share of the national income. The Nation's present farm law encourages production of great surpluses of a few commodities, and theft it prices those commodities out of their traditional markets. As a result, the Government must now spend $30,000 an hour--every hour--just to store these surpluses. In the last 12 months the Government increased its investment in price supported commodities by $2,800 million. During the next 12 months, the present law would force another increase. Now, one aspect of this amazing process appears to be little understood. Minority clamor has concealed from the majority the fact that a change from rigid price supports to flexible supports would affect less than one-fourth of the income our farmers receive. Rigid supports do not in any way affect crops that produce 77 percent of our farmers' income. Five months ago, on the advice of farm organizations, heads of agricultural colleges, a host of individual farmers, and many other experts and businessmen, I recommended that a new farm program be enacted by the Congress. This program proposes price supports with enough flexibility to encourage the production of needed supplies, and to stimulate the consumption of those commodities that are flooding and depressing the American markets. It also proposed gradualism in the adoption and application of certain phases of the new program, so that there could not possibly be an abrupt downward change in the level of price supports on basic commodities. The plan will increase markets for farm products, protect the consumers' food supply, and move food into consumption instead of into governmental storage.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmeetingdistrictchairmennationalcitizensforeisenhowercongressionalcommittee", "title": "Address at Meeting of District Chairmen, National Citizens for Eisenhower Congressional Committee.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-meeting-district-chairmen-national-citizens-for-eisenhower-congressional-committee", "publication_date": "10-06-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3578, "text": "I would always do everything within my power to see that the products of food produced by the sweat and toil of our farmers would never have to be thrown away or allowed to spoil when there were hungry people in the world. Now these surpluses are already getting to the point where only decisive and prompt action on our part is going to keep something of that kind from threatening us seriously, if not happening. Now this program will gradually dispose of the gigantic farm surpluses and promises our farmers a higher and steadier return over the years. This badly needed, new program has a bipartisan origin. The proposal is, in concept, the same as the law passed 5 years ago by a vast majority of the Members of each of the two parties in the Congress. And yet--despite the vast accumulation of surpluses in the hands of the Government--despite the declining markets at home and abroad, and increasing regimentation of the individual farmer--despite the fact that only a minority of American farmers are affected by price supports-despite the fact that even among this farmer minority, many are opposed to a program so obviously unsuited to the needs of our country--despite all of these painfully evident weaknesses, a vote, described to me as tentative, which was taken 2 days ago in a committee of the House of Representatives, called for continuance of the present farm program for an additional year. In my opinion, the circumstances are too critical to permit such a delay. Now, my fellow citizens, many have told me that it would not be good politics to attempt solution of the farm problem during an election year. The sensible thing to do, I have been told, over and over again, was to close my eyes to the damage the present farm program does to our farmers and to the rest of our people--and do this job of correction next year. In this matter I am completely unmoved by arguments as to what constitutes good or winning politics! And may I remark that, though I have not been in this political business very long, I know that what is right for America is politically right. In the proposal to correct the deficiencies in our farm program, the administration's concern is for all farmers, regardless of their politics, and for all America. I earnestly hope that the House of Representatives and the Senate will move promptly on these proposals, so that America may have a sound, stable, and prosperous agriculture.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmeetingdistrictchairmennationalcitizensforeisenhowercongressionalcommittee", "title": "Address at Meeting of District Chairmen, National Citizens for Eisenhower Congressional Committee.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-meeting-district-chairmen-national-citizens-for-eisenhower-congressional-committee", "publication_date": "10-06-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3579, "text": "And I hope you will join me in the determination to see that commonsense, good judgment, and fact will, from now on, guide the formulation of American agricultural policy. Now, aside from taxes and agricultural programs, other projects occupy legislative attention at this moment! Some of them are of great personal import to our individual citizens, and some have passed one or the other of the two Houses of the Congress. Extension of the benefits of unemployment insurance should be authorized, so that these benefits may be made available to more than six million additional workers. When this project becomes law, it will remove inequities and inadequacies which for years have limited the effectiveness of this form of income-insurance. In simple justice to a vast number of American citizens, it demands our enthusiastic support. Congress is considering increased social security benefits, and the extension of social security protection, to more than ten million additional Americans. Likewise, it has before it strengthened programs to rehabilitate disabled people, and to develop adequate medical facilities for those who suffer the misfortune of chronic illness. In this same health program are items for the construction of diagnostic centers, for nursing homes, and for rehabilitation facilities. Another measure provides for Government reinsurance to enable private and nonprofit insurance companies to give broader prepaid medical and hospital care, on a voluntary basis, to many more of our people. There is a bill to authorize a new housing program, so that every citizen may aspire to a decent home in a wholesome neighborhood. We are striving to help assure every willing American a practical opportunity to enjoy good health, a good job, a good education, a good home, a good country. And may I emphasize, we are trying to provide opportunity. We are not trying to be paternalistic with respect to anybody. Now let us look briefly, once again, at the domestic question of protecting our liberties, because this purpose underlies a number of specific bills now before the Congress. They will, when enacted, powerfully increase the effectiveness of the Government's effort to protect us against subversive activity. Several of these bills would plug loopholes through which spies and saboteurs can now slip. One would let us bar proven subversives from employment in or admission to any private facility, if the facility is essential to our defense. Another bill would take citizenship from those hereafter convicted of advocating or attempting violent overthrow of our Government.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmeetingdistrictchairmennationalcitizensforeisenhowercongressionalcommittee", "title": "Address at Meeting of District Chairmen, National Citizens for Eisenhower Congressional Committee.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-meeting-district-chairmen-national-citizens-for-eisenhower-congressional-committee", "publication_date": "10-06-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3580, "text": "Moreover, since Communist conspirators sometimes resort to telephones to plot and pass information, we believe that their own words, as learned by the FBI, should be admitted, under adequate safeguards, as evidence in security cases in Federal courts. Another bill would grant immunity from self-incrimination to selected witnesses, while requiring them to tell the truth about their associates and their fellow conspirators before courts, grand juries, and congressional hearings. All of this internal security legislation adds up to a potent package of protection against communism, without in any degree damaging or lessening the rights of the individual citizen as guaranteed by our laws and the Constitution. It will greatly assist the FBI and the Justice Department, our best weapons against the secret Communist penetration. That program now awaits congressional approval. And I know that all of us, too, await that approval. Now, I have talked frankly and simply about these matters this evening, because I want you to know why the legislative program in Congress will, when approved, make our country stronger, and help keep our people prosperous with freedoms secure. As I said earlier, many members of Congress are as deeply anxious as you and I for the passage of these essential measures. They have worked faithfully for their enactment, and I hope that they know of your support. that we shall unflaggingly pursue the enactment of the remainder of this program. We live today in an age of ceaseless trouble and danger. For all of us the challenge is clear. For all of us the future is shadowed by mushroom clouds and menaced by godless men addicted to force and violence and the continuance of anarchy among nations. Here, in our time, in our hands, and in our own courage, in our own endurance and vision, rests the future of civilization and of all moral and spiritual values of enduring meaning to mankind. Part--but only part--of our responsibility for preserving these values can be discharged through the legislative structure we propose to enact this year. May I suggest that we have less political fission and more political fusion. Let us have, in this session of the Congress, approval of this program essential to a stronger, a better, a safer America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddressmeetingdistrictchairmennationalcitizensforeisenhowercongressionalcommittee", "title": "Address at Meeting of District Chairmen, National Citizens for Eisenhower Congressional Committee.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-meeting-district-chairmen-national-citizens-for-eisenhower-congressional-committee", "publication_date": "10-06-1954", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3599, "text": "I want to thank the other officers and all of you who are here today for inviting me to come by. I know Secretary Rubin spoke earlier, and Chief of Staff Erskine Bowles is here; Gene Sperling, the Director of the National Economic Council; and Maria Echaveste, who is my new Assistant for Public Liaison and Alexis Herman's successor some of you may not know her. I wanted you to know because she will be relating to you. I want to thank you for the support that so many of you have given to Alexis Herman in the job that she held and in the job that I am confident she will hold as the Secretary of Labor. Over the last 4 years, I have worked with many of you in this group to grapple with a lot of great issues facing our Nation, from reducing the deficit to expanding trade, to investing in new opportunities for a new century. The Vice President talked about the record that our people together have amassed in the last 4 years, and it is an impressive one and one we can all be proud of. I understand you had a panel earlier this morning speculating on what has now become the conversation that we all have, which is, can it be possible that we have repealed the business cycle? And I think there is some argument for that if you look at the better inventory control, the changing nature of the economy, the more service jobs, the nature of global competition and technology, and the greater sophistication at the Fed. I mean, there are a lot of reasons for it, but I think there are some indications that we have had some real ability to manage this. But I think the most important thing to remember is that the underlying fundamentals have been good because of the productivity of the American people and our willingness to compete. And I think that if we want this to continue, which is the real question, we have to continue to do the things that will make it likely that success will prevail for another 4 years and into the next century. It is relatively rare for a country to have both peace and prosperity and the opportunity to shape its own destiny at a time when there are so many fundamental changes in the way we work and live and relate to each other and the rest of the world. You go back to the history of the country; that is a relatively rare opportunity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3600, "text": "And when it comes along, it is easy to miss because when things are going generally quite well, people are either complacent or they tend to one of the unfortunate aspects of human nature they tend to either be complacent or to be all heated up over small things, not big things, to fall out over petty divisions, not larger ones. What will it take to ensure the long-term prosperity of America? What will it take to assure that America continues to be the world's leading force for peace and freedom and security in the new world of the 21st century? What will it take to guarantee a whole new generation of Americans, not a certainty but at least a fair opportunity, to be a part of this enormous, new, exciting age? What kinds of things do we have to do? It seems to me clear that we have to finish the job of balancing the budget, to keep the interest rates down and the investment up, and to keep the economy growing. And it seems clear that we have to do a lot more than we have done to dramatically improve education at every level. I'd like to talk about those two things and then mention one or two others today. I realize that whenever I talk about the skill levels of the work force to this group, I am preaching to the saved, but I think it is worth pointing out that between 1992 and 2000, 89 percent of the new jobs created in this economy will require post-high school levels of literacy and math skills. And virtually 100 percent of those jobs will pay what is now an above average wage. But only half the people entering the work force are even nominally prepared for these jobs. Our education system is still turning out millions of young people who simply are not equipped for the new world of work. We know that we lag behind the rest of the world in math and science and that this poses a severe and growing competitive disadvantage for our country. We know that our young people have to do a better job of learning basic things and of developing the capacity to learn for a lifetime. That is why in the State of the Union Address I challenged our Nation to establish national standards in every school, in every community, in every classroom in the country and to be willing to measure whether every child has met those standards in learning, beginning at the beginning with a test of every fourth grader in reading and a test of every eighth grader in math by 1999.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3601, "text": "Now, this may seem strange; for all of us who have had children come up through schools, we know that there are a lot of standardized tests out there. But what many people do not understand is that there are not tests to national standards. That is very different from a standardized test. If you have the right if you have standards that every child should know in a subject and every child is tested, then that is a test everybody could pass. You either know what you are supposed to know or you do not . And how you rank in an average is utterly irrelevant unless you know what you are supposed to know. And it is appalling that we have hidden behind a good idea, local control of our schools, to advance a very bad proposition that algebra is somehow different in Alaska than it is in south Florida, that geography is different in the northern part of Maine than it is in San Diego. And no other country which seeks to do well in the modern economy would permit its children to keep coming up through an educational system that could not tell you whether our children know what they are supposed to know. This is especially important now that so many of our young people come from other countries. Just across the river here in Fairfax County, there is one of the four school districts in America where the schoolchildren's native tongues number more than 100. And if there are 40 percent of our kids in the third grade today who cannot read a book on their own. And we will never change this until we, first of all, say what the standards are and then, second, find a way to measure everyone. Now, today, we have made some progress in this in the last 10 or 12 years. And some of you have helped me to work on it when I was a Governor. Today, through the National Assessment of Education Progress, for example, we can measure how States are doing or how school districts are doing, but still no parent can learn if a son or a daughter is actually meeting tough national standards. Our goal should be not to drive these children down but to lift them up. Today the Department of Education is releasing the annual assessment of math performance through the National Assessment of Education Progress. It is based on a sample in the States that participate, and most States do participate now. Across the country and in almost every State, our math performance has improved in the 4th, 8th, and 12th grades. Secretary Riley will release the full results today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3602, "text": "The scores are getting better, but they also show you why every child should be tested based on these standards, for about 30 to 35 percent of the children tested still have not mastered basic math skills, those which must be known in order to continue to learn for a lifetime. So what I'd like to do is to just remind you of how you could not function if you could not measure and how things that you take for granted in the day-to-day operations of your business have literally been avoided in education under the guise of preserving local control. This has nothing to do with local control. Dick Riley, since he is been the Secretary of Education, has done more in 4 years, I believe, than any of his predecessors to try to relax unnecessary Federal rules and regulations that hamstring how local school districts spend Federal money. This is not what this is about. This is about whether you really believe if a child reads The Little Engine That Could, it is the same in New Orleans as it is in Minneapolis. No election to a school board or no State legislative action can change the fundamental elements on a chemistry table. And yet we have never been willing to subject ourselves to this sort of rigorous examination in an appropriate way. We should begin at the beginning with fourth grade reading tests and the eighth grade math tests and then build it up. I think it is highly unlikely that we can do this unless we have strong support from the business community. I know that the Business Roundtable last month endorsed the concept of tests. I am grateful for that. I am profoundly grateful for it. But what I want you to understand is, we are going to go and make sure that they are developed. The standards-based tests that are out there now, which are basically the Third International Math and Science Survey and the National Assessment of Education Progress, are very good. We just have to find a way to either take them or a variant of them and then fix it so all the so a State could get them and give them to school districts and all the students could take them and they could be properly scored. But what I need you to know is that we still need your support. The Vice President and First Lady and I, we are going to go make a lot of State legislative trips. We are going to try to advocate this around the country. But we still do not have the power to require States to do this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3603, "text": "But the business community can create the conditions in which every State will have to embrace this challenge and no one can run away. And again I say, we have to create the mentality that failing is not bad. What is bad is hiding the truth. What is bad is not taking the available tools to find out what the truth is, because we know that way over 90 percent of the kids in this country can learn what they need to know, but you have to start with where you are. And we know that if we have high expectations and then we measure them, we will eventually see people rise to them. So I thank you for the endorsement, but you have got to stay with us, and you have got to help us. And when we need business leadership to help convince this State or that State or the other State to do this, we have got to have you there, because it will not work unless all 50 States do it and everybody recognizes that this has nothing to do with local control and everything to do with international competitiveness and giving our children, every single one of them, a chance to live the life that they ought to have the chance to live. And we need you very much. Let me also say, with regard to the balanced budget we do not have to have a long conversation about this today, but it now seems clear that the balanced budget amendment will not pass. I think that is a good thing, for the reasons that I have said elsewhere. But I think it must also be clear to the American people that we must make sure that a balanced budget does pass, passes this year, and passes as soon as we can reasonably pass it. We have to now go beyond the constitutional debate to get to the specifics. I am convinced that if we pass a balanced budget plan this year, it will moderate interest rates, spur more investment, and keep growth going. I believe that. All the indicators we see that have been shown to me by Frank Raines and the Office of Management and Budget, supported by Secretary Rubin, indicate that if we can pass a balanced budget this year, dealing with the fundamentals that we are talking about trying to better manage the Medicare program, the Medicaid program, looking at the long-term health of all the other programs that we could keep it more or less in balance for two decades, based on what we now know. But you can look at the fundamentals and the demographics of things over two decades and pretty well know where you are.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3604, "text": "So it is very important that we do this. Now, I believe that we have shown, this administration, that we care about this and that we are willing to work with the Congress. Before I took office the administration's budget projections had usually been an illusion to avoid the difficult decisions that administrations did not want to make so that Congress would have to make them. Of course very often Congress did not make them, either, and each side took what the other wanted. So if one wanted tax cuts and the other wanted spending programs and, oh, by the way, they wanted to control spending, the tax cuts and the spending programs took preference over the controlling of the spending, and we wound up with a $290 billion a year deficit and a quadruple Federal debt in 12 years. Last year the deficit was $107 billion, proportionately the smallest of any major economy in the world, 63 percent lower than it had been in 1992. We have been working together first with the Democratic Congress, then with the Republican Congress, always driving it down. What has made it possible are conservative, realistic budget projections that every year have been more conservative for the deficit than what actually occurred. In other words, the deficit was even lower than we projected it to be in every year with our economic assessments. And sometimes when you read in the press, there is a difference between the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget and it looks big in one year, the truth is that we have narrowed these differences dramatically now. They are not breathtaking differences, and it is enabled us to get together and work together to have budgets that make sense. The other thing I think is important is, you hear a lot of criticism saying, Well, whenever they have one of these plans, all the savings are in the out years. But if you look at the way Medicare or Medicaid works, particularly in the Medicare program, if you look at the way some of these other programs work, the savings, by definition, compound themselves in a way that will always make the savings look bigger in the out years. The trick is to pass a plan that legally locks in tomorrow's savings today and that places strict limits on the amounts of money Congress can spend each year. If you do that, then the framework will be created which will permit us to get to balance in 2002. And it will have great credibility in the market.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3605, "text": "I know that is true because of things we have tried to do with entitlements, including placing a cap, a per capita cap on Medicaid, and extending the life of the Medicare Trust Fund for a decade by having very rigorous spending controls that will facilitate the movement to managed care, have elicited I mean, it is just it is not easy to do this. You all face these kind of decisions all the time. But I do want to say, you will see a lot of our differences aired publicly the executive, the Congress, the parties within the Congress. But this budget is well within reach. This is well within reach. And it is well within reach in a way that also would permit us to create a bipartisan process to deal with the long-term challenges of the entitlements in Medicare and Social Security as well. So you should feel positive about that. But my advice would be here and my appeal to you is to tell every one of us, every time you get a chance to say it, that you cannot celebrate Thanksgiving this year without a balanced budget. If you do not , it will have a destructive impact on the markets. If you do, it will have a positive one. But you should know, when you hear all the debates, it is in the nature of the things for the differences to be amplified. The fact is that we are well within range of being able to get this done if we will all just hunker down and kind of turn down the rhetoric and treat each other with good faith. We can get this job done in a way that I think is very good for the economy. Let me just mention two other things I'd like to ask for your help on. The first is to help in getting a budget out and in supporting a policy in both parties that fulfills our responsibilities in the world today as the world's indispensable nation. We had a bipartisan foreign policy during most of the cold war because we knew our neck was on the line, and politics stopped at the water's edge. Now it is more difficult to build a bipartisan foreign policy because the elements of it are more diverse. For example, economic policy and trade has a lot more to do with it than previously, or at least we are aware that it does I think it was always a big part of our foreign policy and because no one perceives that our neck is on the line.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3606, "text": "But the truth is that the whole world is looking to see whether America will fulfill its responsibilities to lead in an increasingly interdependent world, not only economically interdependent but environmentally interdependent and politically interdependent. Increasingly, the security threats we face are those that cross borders, like terrorism and narcotrafficking. We are in the process of building new structures, new understandings, new ways of working together. That begins with trade. We had great victories in 1993 with NAFTA and with the GATT, and in the last 4 years we have had 200 separate trade agreements. We had a great victory the other day for the cause of global trade and for the American economy. When Ambassador Barshefsky concluded the telecommunications agreement, it was a great thing. But we have been now 2 years without fast-track authority for the President. Latin America is looking at us. President Frei in Chile they just had three Asian heads of government paid visits to Chile in the last 3 or 4 months. And the whole world in Latin America is looking to see what we are going to do. So we really need to pass the fast-track authority. We need to do it this year, and we need to do it as soon as possible. And I hope that all of you will help us do this. I think most Members of Congress understand let me just give you two examples how China defines its greatness over the next 20 years will shape the next 50 years of life in America and the world. I think most Members of Congress understand that how we work through this business of trying to create a united, democratic Europe and a relationship between NATO and Russia, that that will have a lot to do with the way we live in the next 50 years. But we must understand that our neighbors to the south of us are still our greatest opportunity for the future. All but one of them are democracies. They are committed to free market economics. Other people around the world are looking to them, and we cannot pass up the chance to build closer trade ties with them. This will benefit America and will help us to deal, as I said, not just with economic matters but with political matters, with environmental matters, with a whole host of other issues. So I implore you to do what you can to help us get this done this year. Beyond that, we have to pass a balanced budget plan that still has a diplomatic budget for the United States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3607, "text": "We have continued to lower our spending on diplomacy dramatically, in a way that I think has been very counterproductive for our interests. Our request is simply to give us one penny of every Federal dollar to promote peace, to fight problems like drug trafficking and terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and to meet our obligations to the international community through the World Bank, the IMF, the other international financial institutions. My budget does reverse a downward spiral in foreign affairs spending that is been going on a long time. But you know, our Embassies around the world are working around the clock. We have had to close a lot of our consulates. We have had to weaken the efforts that we were making to help American firms win contracts and protect intellectual property rights and fight unfair business practices. We live in an interdependent world. We cannot afford to say that we just simply will see the United States Government quit the field. And I feel very strongly about this. I know that many of you do. But I ask you to help us do that. It is not a big deal in the budget, but it is a part that always, always gets cut, and it is not in our interest to cut it. The last thing I would like to do is to ask you, as I have before, to help us finish the job of welfare reform. Over the last 4 years, with 11 1/2 million new jobs in the economy, about 2 1/4 million people moved off welfare. That is the largest reduction in the welfare rolls in history. That is below the historic average since 1972. From 1972 to 1990 the historic average was 4.8 percent of the population on public assistance. In 1994 we got up to 5.4 percent. So in a booming economy, we got down to 4.6 percent, and of that, 2.25 million people who have moved off welfare, approximately a million of them moved into jobs. Depending on whose study you read, the average welfare family has between 2.3 and 2.8 people. It is mostly one child or two children in the families.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3608, "text": "Now, in the new law, the new law says that the States can let people who are able-bodied stay on welfare for 5 years and no longer; that they are not supposed to stay on welfare more than 2 years at a pop without being in the work force; that the States can establish sort of a contingency fund of about 20 percent to take care of people who are not physically or mentally able to work or who live in areas of very high unemployment. It is obvious to me that if you look at all the studies and the Council of Economic Advisers gave me a report on this, by the way, estimating that of the 2 1/4 million people that moved off the welfare rolls, about half of them moved off because of the good economy, about 30 percent of them moved off because 43 States were making extra efforts to move people from welfare to work, and about 20 percent of them moved off for we do not know why maybe because there was a 50 percent increase in child support payments, collections. And that will always lift some people off welfare. But the point I am trying to make is that to meet the requirements of this new law, which is graduated in the standards that it applies to these timetables I just mentioned, we have to move another million people into the work force from the welfare rolls in the next 4 years. And there is a law that requires it, so we have to do it whether or not the private economy produces 11 1/2 million jobs. Now, five companies, including members of this organization, Monsanto, Sprint who else Federal Express, United Airlines, and Burger King, I think, agreed to head up a national coalition to get other companies to hire people from welfare to work. If you look at what is been done in Kansas City, you see that every State has the option to offer companies the welfare check as a cash subsidy for people who will pay well above the minimum wage as an employment and training subsidy. We are trying to get more small businesses into this. We are also trying to pass through Congress a 50 percent tax credit for salaries of up to $10,000 a year, tied much more tightly than any of these jobs tax credits have in the past to just people who move from public assistance that is, from welfare to work, or single men who cannot get welfare who move from food stamps to work. There are a lot of things which can be done which lower the marginal cost to companies of hiring new people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthebusinesscouncil0", "title": "Remarks to the Business Council", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-business-council-0", "publication_date": "27-02-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3633, "text": "Let me just say a few words. And I, first of all, thank you -- thank the leader, Bob Dole, and Don Nickles and everybody for this hospitality. We have got a big and good domestic agenda. I just was up here to get your views, but to urge your support for Fast Track, which is overseas, but it is also domestic because I am convinced that it can create jobs in this country, and I think it is going to be good for the economy of the United States. I was talking to Senator Thurmond about the crime bill. I am very interested in getting a comprehensive crime package through, and I hope that, with your help, we can do it. I wanted to mention the veto strategy that Bob Dole and Al Simpson and so many of you have been active in. And it is very important because when we are in a minority, the only way we are going to get something done is to beat down the bad idea before they give us a shot at a good idea. Last year, we were very successful, thanks to the work of everybody around this table. And I just would urge your continued cooperation with the leadership. Sometimes you cannot join us, but for the most part, we have been very good about it, and I just urge your strong support for this veto strategy. It is the only way we can get decent Republican ideas -- and if we do not do it -- kind of disarray and all the chipping away on the Democrat ideas and joining up on something that we know in our hearts is not good. So, I would strongly urge your support for that. I know we are moving on transportation and energy. I know Chairman Wallop is working here -- Malcolm's working with us on that. I am leaving out some. I would make a pitch for our education strategy, America 2000. Actually, that is being received very, very well across the country. And the Governors, regardless of party, are extraordinarily supportive. I think at the grassroots level, people are beginning to understand that we are not just trying to add more money to a program in Washington, but we have got to revolutionize these schools -- create brand-new schools. It is an exciting prospect, and I urge your strong support. Later, we will have a chance to visit a little bit on what is happening overseas. But I just wanted to click off these domestic items because they are vital.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheadministrationsdomesticagenda", "title": "Remarks on the Administration's Domestic Agenda", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-administrations-domestic-agenda", "publication_date": "15-05-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3645, "text": "I want to thank you for this fine gift to the people of the United States. I am honored to accept it as a symbol of the strong and faithful friendship between our two nations. Ireland has given many gifts to America throughout our history. This very house was designed by an Irish immigrant, based on your own Leinster House in Dublin, and has since been occupied by more than a dozen Presidents of Irish descent. One of them, President John Kennedy, said on a visit to Ireland, When my great grandfather left here to become a copper in east Boston, he carried nothing with him except two things, a strong religious faith and a strong desire for liberty. The Kennedys were among millions of immigrants who came to America with that same faith and the same love of freedom. As much as any other immigrant group, Irish Americans have shaped this country for the better. They have fought in our wars, like the five Sullivan brothers who died together on one day on one ship in World War II. They helped settle our territories, like David Crockett. They helped build our cities and to this day still embody the spirit of public service. When the rollcall-when the roll was called of the policemen and firemen and emergency workers who died on September the 11th, it included many names like Donnelly and Duffy and Kelly and Sullivan. Tens of millions of Americans trace their lineage to Ireland, and so many came here in times of grief for a country they left behind. Today, we are glad to see a strong and free and rising Ireland with so much to offer its people and the entire world. The ties of family and values are adding ties of diplomacy and trade, with commerce between our nations quadrupling in just the last 7 years. September the 11th has reinforced these bonds of friendship. Ireland is a valued member of the international coalition against terrorism. Ireland has allowed American military planes to use its airports and has helped to rebuild Afghanistan. We appreciate your help in a just and vital cause. America stands with you in another cause, bringing security and stability to the people of Northern Ireland. We have seen great progress since we gathered here a year ago. Many challenges lie ahead, but I am so optimistic that by working together we can meet these challenges and help create a lasting peace. This morning we remember a good man who spread a gospel of peace. The greatest of Irish names, Saint Patrick, was brought to Ireland a slave and died there a saint. His courage and kindness helped to shape a great and noble culture.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksshamrockpresentationceremonywithprimeministerbertieahernireland", "title": "Remarks at a Shamrock Presentation Ceremony With Prime Minister Bertie Ahern of Ireland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-shamrock-presentation-ceremony-with-prime-minister-bertie-ahern-ireland", "publication_date": "13-03-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3646, "text": "Thank you, Deena, for the wonderful introduction and for the way you represent our country-and for the little local reference to Arkansas. I liked that. Thank you, Bill Hybl, for the work you do with the Olympic Committee. And I want to say a special word of thanks to Pat Milkovich for the wonderful tour of the training center today. We had a great time, and I thank you so much. I want to thank Representative Bob Filner, the Congressman from this district, for being with me today and for his support. Someone just thanked him on the way for being against having all that cargo noise coming over here and interrupting your training center. So, I figure he will take a lot of heat for that position. So, somebody who likes it might as well clap. I want to thank the Bonita Vista High School Marching Band for playing. Let us give them a hand; they are great. Some of their members have been selected to perform at the opening ceremonies in Sydney, and I know they will have a good time. I'd like to thank Mayor Horton from Chula Vista and the Chula Vista council members who are here and the county officials who are here. I am glad to see all of you here. Most of all, I'd like to thank the athletes and the coaches and the trainers that gave me a tour around this magnificent facility today. I had a great time. And I realize that most of these things I cannot do anymore but I really had a great time. Deena talked about perseverance and hard work, but I want to tell you a little something about her. She was too humble to mention her own experience with cross country championships in Portugal this year. About 100 yards into the race her throat closed up, and she could not breathe. After 5 kilometers, she blacked out and fell. It turned out a bee had flown into her mouth and stung her in the throat. But she got up and kept going, and thanks to her, the women's team still left Portugal with a medal. She gave new meaning to the term making a beeline. Give her a hand; she was great. One of the real highlights of our White House years for Hillary, Chelsea, and me has been the chance to be a part of the Olympic experience, cheering on our teams from Lillehammer to Atlanta to Nagano and now to Sydney, where at least I know my daughter is going.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunitedstatesolympictrainingcentercommunitychulavistacalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the United States Olympic Training Center Community in Chula Vista, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-united-states-olympic-training-center-community-chula-vista-california", "publication_date": "23-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3647, "text": "My wife is in a competition of her own, and I am informed that my services may be needed elsewhere; but our daughter informed us that she would be in Sydney to cheer the teams on. I am so glad to have this chance to see all the work that you are doing to prepare for the games here. You know, just moments before he won one of his gold medals, the legendary Jesse Owens said, A lifetime of training for just 10 seconds. the years and years of getting up before the Sun, the time away from your loved ones, the hard work, the sacrifice, and something that is often overlooked, the pain. I'd like to just say more than anything else, I wanted to come here to say to these team members and those who want to make the Olympic teams, we appreciate you; we thank you; and we are very, very proud of you. I have thought a lot, especially in the Olympic season, about why the Olympics mean so much to people all over the world, and especially why the American people get so completely caught up in them, why they capture our imagination and our hearts. Obviously, we love athletics. And we are highly competitive people, as that little in-your-face rap that Deena gave us showed about the American team. But I think there is even more to it than the love of competition and athletics. Everybody gets an opportunity to play, regardless of race or station in life-and increasingly, thank goodness, regardless of gender. People are valued based on their performance and their effort, not their posturing. People get a chance to do their best, and also to bring out the best in one another. And everybody, including those that do not win medals, is better off for having tried and given his or her best. You win by playing by the rules and by doing it well. I think we like the Olympics because we all think the world ought to work that way. And we know if other forms of human endeavor worked that way, we'd be better off. One of the reasons I ran for President 8 years ago is that I thought that Washington ought to work more like that. I thought it ought to be more about production and less about posturing. And it is tough for people in politics, because they know that if they produce, they may not get on the evening news.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunitedstatesolympictrainingcentercommunitychulavistacalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the United States Olympic Training Center Community in Chula Vista, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-united-states-olympic-training-center-community-chula-vista-california", "publication_date": "23-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3648, "text": "medicine for our seniors on Medicare and a Patients' Bill of Rights and an increase in the minimum wage, a lot of other things we could be doing that we could actually reach agreement on across party lines, even though it may cost everybody a few seconds on the evening news. The rules of the game there are too often, I have got an idea. You have got an idea. And you give us all a good sober reminder that in the end, when it is all said and done, we are going to be judged not by what we said but by what we have done. And I thank you for that. Now, let me just say, this day is special for a lot of reasons. On this day more than 100 years ago, the modern Olympic games were founded. It was also 100 years ago this summer that women were first allowed to compete in the Olympic games, and they did, all 11 of them. This year more than 4,000 women will compete in the Olympic games, the largest number ever. Let me say a couple of other things about this day. On this day 60 years ago one of the greatest Olympians of all time was born, Wilma Rudolph. She won her first medal the last time the Olympics were held in Australia, in 1956. And finally, today is special because it is also on this day 28 years ago that Title IX became the law of the land. Now, it is interesting that all this stuff happened on this day. But Title IX has really enabled America to live up to the Olympic spirit to give everybody a chance, to give everybody a chance to play by the rules, everybody a chance to live up to his and her God-given abilities. It is not a coincidence that in Atlanta, the first generation of women to grow up under Title IX-literally to have their whole lives in Title IX-went on to win the gold medal in soccer, the gold medal in softball, the gold medal in gymnastics, and the gold medal in basketball. Believe it or not, I found out not long ago that Title IX's requirement for equal opportunity in sports and in education does not apply to the education and training programs run by the Federal Government itself. So on this anniversary of Title IX, I am actually signing an Executive order that applies Title IX to the Federal Government's programs and prohibits discrimination of any kind in federally conducted education and training programs. Let me just say one other thing about the importance of broadening opportunities here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunitedstatesolympictrainingcentercommunitychulavistacalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the United States Olympic Training Center Community in Chula Vista, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-united-states-olympic-training-center-community-chula-vista-california", "publication_date": "23-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3649, "text": "I would like to ask all of you who are presently athletes or who have been or who are otherwise involved in this Olympic movement to continue to share your gifts, not only on the field of competition but in the playing field of life, and especially with our young people-and with those whose job it is to raise them well. Let me just give you one example of something that really concerns me. Over the last 20 years, too many of our schools have abandoned their music, their arts, and their physical education programs. You may have noticed that last week I went to New York City to be on the Today Show to talk about the VH1 music in school program, where they worked so hard to get instruments back into schools so schools can start their school music programs again. There is so much evidence that a lot of young people learn better if they have access early to music and arts programs. But it is also really troubling to me that so many schools have just completely abandoned physical education programs for all kids, while maintaining team sports. Now, a lot of the athletes behind me may be going to the Olympics in sports for which there was no competition in their schools. And they would not necessarily have been football or basketball players, or even soccer players, if their schools had competitive soccer. The percentage of high school students in daily physical education has declined more than 30 percent in the last 10 years. Today, fewer than one in three students are enrolled in phys-ed every day. Meanwhile, the percentage of young people who are overweight has doubled in the same time period. And we know that it has an effect on learning, on self-image, on self-esteem, on a sense of what you can do. Today I am directing our Secretary of Education, Dick Riley, and Donna Shalala, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to work with the U.S. Olympic Committee, our physical fitness council, and others to try to find ways to encourage more young people to get fit and stay fit. And I am asking Congress to establish a foundation that will leverage the energy, creativity, and resources of the private sector in furthering the mission of the President's Council on Physical Fitness, to help every young person in America to live an active, safe, and healthy life. I hope you will help us do that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunitedstatesolympictrainingcentercommunitychulavistacalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the United States Olympic Training Center Community in Chula Vista, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-united-states-olympic-training-center-community-chula-vista-california", "publication_date": "23-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3650, "text": "When Nancy and I celebrate Thanksgiving weekend each year in California's Santa Ynez Mountains, we find it a wonderful opportunity to be together with family and friends and, like so many Americans, a chance to reflect on all the Lord's blessings to our country. We have been particularly conscious this year of one blessing that has made this holiday season a happy one for countless more Americans, Americans who in years past were trapped in want and poverty. Only 4 years ago, as our economic policies were just taking effect, we began what became the second-longest peacetime expansion since World War II. This year the stock market has hit all-time highs, while inflation continues near all-time lows. Only this week new figures show inflation running at less than 1 percent in 1986, the trade deficit continues its substantial decline, and, above all, today more Americans are working than ever before. So, contrary to those many predictions over the last 4 years-some of them still being heard as late as last August-there is no recession. Our expansion is not only with us but continues gaining momentum, and, of course, that means more jobs for more Americans. In the past 4 years we have created more than 12 million payroll jobs, and that means 2.2 million people have lifted themselves out of poverty since 1983. As perhaps you know, it is budget preparation time in Washington. And recently, in reviewing these statistics, I reflected back on some of the solutions suggested a few years ago to our economic problems-they have been the worst since the Great Depression. I can especially remember one make-work jobs program that Congress came up with, a $5.4 billion extravaganza that would have helped a relatively tiny number of people. Because it was just this sort of marketplace intrusion and government boondoggle that had put our economy in trouble in the first place, I decided that, Thanksgiving or not, this was one turkey we did not need. And to resounding criticism from Congress and the media, I put a stop to it. Well, instead, we continued with an economic policy that lowered tax rates, cut spending, and abolished unnecessary regulations-and what a jobs program that turned out to be. We have averaged over 250,000 people finding jobs each and every month. And last month alone, close to 300,000 Americans went to work. It is people, not government, who create wealth, provide growth, and ensure prosperity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationthedeficit", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on the Deficit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-the-deficit", "publication_date": "29-11-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3651, "text": "That may sound elementary enough, but the history or our economic difficulties, especially the terribly big deficits we run each year, stem directly from our failure to remember that government consumes wealth, it does not create it. You see, it is a kind of legacy from a period when I was back in college studying economics. Following the theories of a noted English economist of the period, John Maynard Keynes, economists and politicians used to say that when bad times occur the only way to restore prosperity is to spend our way out of it with massive new government programs paid for by borrowing. We owe it to ourselves! But everybody knows you cannot spend yourself rich any more than you can drink yourself sober. And you cannot prime the pump without pumping the prime. And that is why the automatic recourse to government spending sent interest rates and inflation skyrocketing, slowed the economy, caused unemployment, and gave us what they call today a structural deficit-that is a deficit that goes up automatically each year because of a vast array of Federal programs that Congress refuses to reduce and, under the law, the President cannot cut back by himself. Since our first day in office, we have been going after this structural deficit by, first, asking for major spending cuts and, second, asking for reforms like the line-item veto and balanced budget amendment that would, well, unstructure the structured deficit. So, while we have been occupied with the Iranian issue over the past 2 weeks, let us not forget that there are many other issues that concern us. In order to pursue this issue and all the others like it on our domestic and foreign agenda, we must be certain to maintain peace in the world and keep our defenses strong while, of course, sparking our domestic economy to even greater growth. As Jefferson once said, his one fear about our Constitution was that it permitted government to borrow. Well, government has borrowed too much and spent too much. So, believe me, I will be back in Washington next week, determined to work with the Congress to get deficit spending under control and keep America growing with record numbers of jobs for American people. Until next week, thanks for listening, God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationthedeficit", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on the Deficit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-the-deficit", "publication_date": "29-11-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3662, "text": "I would not be here without your guidance and friendship. It is truly an honor to stand at this desk, which was once held by another great Illinoisan by the name of Barack Obama, delivering my maiden speech from the floor of the United States Senate to the people of Illinois, the same state that is been represented in Washington by other impressive leaders like Paul Simon and Abraham Lincoln. And it is an honor to address the people of the United States of America; the greatest nation in the world. Though we have occasionally made choices as a society that do not reflect our best selves, we are today the greatest nation in the world because of the founding ideals that have anchored our nation and because of the shared values that have guided the development and strength of our economy and people. Values like treating each other equally, showing strength and resilience in the face of hardship, and embracing the diversity that makes us who we are. They are shared values that have helped us to strive toward that more perfect union the Constitution's framers envisioned. A more perfect union that offers everyone a chance to reach his or her potential, a more perfect union that will not give up on its people, and a more perfect union whose people do not give up on themselves. We face a great deal of challenges and threats-threats I know well-but we cannot allow today's hardships to change who we are as a people, to tear down the pillars that make our nation great. Falling victim to fear and demagoguery will only ensure a weaker America for our children, and that is not a future that I want for my two-year-old daughter Abigail. When we as a society think about the future we want for all our children, it is important to remember how we got here. Our nation was not founded as the dominant global economic and military force it is today. We were not founded as the leader of the free world. Our people built that. Americans understood that when we invest in ourselves, the fabric that holds our country together only grows stronger. A scrappy gang of patriots in the American Revolution-my own family included-won us our liberty, which we used to push for greater civil and human rights and to make investments in agricultural and educational systems that sparked our economy allowing us to strengthen our military into the greatest fighting force the world has ever seen. From our founding, the United States of America was forged through fierce debates and stark divisions.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "duckworthsenategovnewspressreleasesduckworthinfirstspeechonsenateflooramericasprosperityandstrengthdependonourvalues", "title": "Duckworth in First Speech on Senate Floor: America's Prosperity & Strength Depend On Our Values", "source": "https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/duckworth-in-first-speech-on-senate-floor-americas-prosperity-and-strength-depend-on-our-values", "publication_date": "26-04-2017", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Tammy Duckworth"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3663, "text": "Slavery led to bloodshed across the country-including in the Senate chamber-and culminated in brothers killing brothers during our civil war. Yet our union made it through our greatest challenges and emerged stronger. Our strength has been on display outside of our military as well when heroes like Frederick Douglas and Harriet Tubman risked everything to help bring an end to slavery. When Martin Luther King, Jr., had a dream and when the children of the Little Rock Nine braved harassment and abuse to bring an end to segregated schools and ensure educational opportunity for all. And when the backbreaking work of Asian and American laborers united our nation from sea to shining sea with the completion of the transcontinental railroad. America catalyzed the industrial revolution, helped rescue the global community from fascism during World War II, promoted civil and human rights around the globe, explored space, launched the internet revolution, helped feed the world, built a world-class infrastructure network, developed a gold standard education system, and grew the strongest economy ever seen. We were able to win World War II not only because of the brave troops in our Armed Forces, but also because our nation's manufacturers and steel mills were able to produce the tanks, planes, firearms and other tools we needed to defeat the Nazis. We were only able to build those weapons, launch the internet revolution and send a man to the moon because we had a well-educated workforce made of people from around the globe who all had an opportunity to attend the world-class colleges and universities we'd spent generations strengthening. Our economy was able to grow to its current strength not only because of our well-educated workforce and those who came from distant lands and stayed to contribute to our society, but also because we'd invested heavily in infrastructure and built an interstate system and air and rail networks that enabled our farmers, ranchers and other producers to get their goods to market inside and outside of this country's borders. We were able to feed the world not only because of our strong agricultural sector and infrastructure, but also because of the scientific advances, supported by our educational institutions, that helped increase farm production and yields. Throughout our history, we pushed to expand human and civil rights, from the abolitionists to the suffragettes, learning from people like the Tuskegee Airmen, the Selma marchers and the LGBTQ leaders today that being inclusive and enabling people to reach their full potential only strengthens the American core.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "duckworthsenategovnewspressreleasesduckworthinfirstspeechonsenateflooramericasprosperityandstrengthdependonourvalues", "title": "Duckworth in First Speech on Senate Floor: America's Prosperity & Strength Depend On Our Values", "source": "https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/duckworth-in-first-speech-on-senate-floor-americas-prosperity-and-strength-depend-on-our-values", "publication_date": "26-04-2017", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Tammy Duckworth"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3664, "text": "We did all of these things as a result of our shared values, and we have reaped their rewards for generations. We have seen our nation's strength in our prouder moments like when America chose to go to the moon - not because it was easy but, as President Kennedy said, because it was hard. And we have seen our strength in tragedy, reuniting under a common purpose in the rubble of the Pentagon and Ground Zero on 9/11. We might get knocked down, but the America that I know-that I fought for and love-does not give up. America's greatness has never depended on the strength of any individual person, but on all of us, working together towards a common goal. But when we have failed to stay true to our core values - when we deny another person our nation's promise of opportunity - our national strength suffers. When a child cannot access the tools to succeed in school, when a woman cannot afford basic health care, when refugees fleeing terror see the door slammed in their face, when we deny civil rights on the basis of skin color or sexual orientation or religion, and when a working family cannot put food on the table, our whole nation suffers. At the end of the day, America's greatness depends on each of us remaining true to the common values of our nation. But we have lost sight of those values. The nation that built an interstate highway system, that was a refuge for immigrants who became the foundation of our economy, that pushed humanity to new heights, first with planes and helicopters and then into space. That same nation seems to have forgotten how to invest in itself. Our country that ushered in the era of aviation is now home to aging airports that struggle to compete with their global competitors. Our country, which took on the herculean task of reversing the flow of the Chicago River to protect the city's drinking water, can no longer muster the resources to modernize public water systems to prevent our children from being poisoned by lead. And our country that built the greatest military the world has ever seen-sending a signal that we will not cower to anyone-now finds itself with leaders who believe in the misguided notion that it is better for us to hide behind walls than to help lead with strength. Make no mistake, America has not lost her greatness-our nation remains the dominant force on the global stage-but if we do not act, our adversaries are positioned to overtake us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "duckworthsenategovnewspressreleasesduckworthinfirstspeechonsenateflooramericasprosperityandstrengthdependonourvalues", "title": "Duckworth in First Speech on Senate Floor: America's Prosperity & Strength Depend On Our Values", "source": "https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/duckworth-in-first-speech-on-senate-floor-americas-prosperity-and-strength-depend-on-our-values", "publication_date": "26-04-2017", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Tammy Duckworth"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3665, "text": "Though some may try to convince us the path forward is less engagement with the world, less acceptance of others and less investment in ourselves. I know that the path forward for our country cannot include-does not include-turning our backs on the shared values that built our nation. Perhaps more than any other state, Illinois knows this. We represent all the strengths of our nation, from our dynamic cities to our strong rural and industrial communities and everything in between. We are the realization of the values that have created a robust American economy, bolstered by a strong agricultural community and manufacturing sector, both of which innovate and strengthen our nation with the help of wise public policy and investments. Those investments enabled Illinois steelworkers to help us develop our farm land, build our cities and secure our military strength. American manufacturing literally built this nation. But too many of the steel mills we relied on to win World War II have been idled or shuttered completely. After years of illegal trade practices like dumping of cheap foreign products and currency manipulation by our competitors, our manufacturing base has been weakened. That hurts not only American jobs, but also our nation's military strength as well the resilience of our entire economy. We need to do a better job of keeping manufacturing jobs within our borders and we need to make the investments necessary to ensure we have a workforce trained for our 21st Century jobs. We can do better by Illinois's tens of thousands of farmers, ranchers and agricultural workers as well. They all wake up with a purpose, each farm feeding nearly 170 people every year while supporting an industry that is developing cutting-edge biofuels and other technologies. I have seen firsthand the painful price our nation pays because of our over-reliance on oil imported from our competitors and the simple fact is that American farmers are helping us improve our national security, helping strengthen our Armed Forces and our entire country every day. Our farmers are already helping produce billions of gallons of clean fuel for our cars, our factories and our military - and every single one of them helps bring us closer to energy independence. We cannot afford to leave them behind. We should be working to preserve policies like the Renewable Fuel Standard that support agriculture jobs and to open new markets, like Cuba, for their goods. For generations, our manufacturers and agricultural sector have relied on a strong infrastructure network-including roads, bridges, waterways, railways and air transportation-to get their goods to market, both domestically and internationally.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "duckworthsenategovnewspressreleasesduckworthinfirstspeechonsenateflooramericasprosperityandstrengthdependonourvalues", "title": "Duckworth in First Speech on Senate Floor: America's Prosperity & Strength Depend On Our Values", "source": "https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/duckworth-in-first-speech-on-senate-floor-americas-prosperity-and-strength-depend-on-our-values", "publication_date": "26-04-2017", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Tammy Duckworth"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3666, "text": "Illinois has often led the way, having built the nation's first elevated electric rail line in the 1800s. But today, far too much of that infrastructure is crumbling-in dire need of the investments our society once understood the need for. The down-payments previous generations made pay dividends to us all in the form of increased tourism revenue, lower-cost and more efficient shipments, easier travel and many other benefits. If we fail to continue the investments past generations have made, we risk falling behind our global competitors, hurting not only our tourism industry, but also our manufacturers and our hardworking ranchers, farmers, and producers who will find it harder and more expensive to move their goods to market. If we choose to disregard our infrastructure much longer, we simply will not be able to compete in the 21st century global economy. Improving our infrastructure is not a partisan issue; it is common sense. This is something we can all work on together, and I am proud to say that the first bill I proposed after arriving in the Senate passed unanimously-with bipartisan support-and it will cut red tape and help streamline efforts to modernize our infrastructure while helping create jobs in Illinois and around the country. Modernizing our nation's infrastructure will allow our economy to continue growing for generations to come. That is also true of supporting our schools, colleges and universities. We have developed a global gold standard of education that enabled our manufacturers, agricultural workers, engineers and brilliant Americans across all sectors to push our economy even further. There is a reason that wealthy elites across the globe, including world leaders, still send their children to our shores to be educated at world class institutions like the University of Illinois and University of Chicago. Our education system is widely recognized as the best in the world. Our teachers and institutions continue to produce some of the best trained and most skilled professionals in every field imaginable, both American and international students. But more and more Americans are no longer able to access those same educational opportunities. We have priced too many of our own children out of the market for the colleges and universities that we have developed to ensure our nation's workforce remains more skilled than our competitors. And we are failing to make the necessary investments in K-12 public institutions that - regardless of zip code - should be preparing every single one of our children to lead our country into the future. Quality primary education should not be a privilege only for the wealthy, and it should not depend on rolling the dice on receiving a voucher.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "duckworthsenategovnewspressreleasesduckworthinfirstspeechonsenateflooramericasprosperityandstrengthdependonourvalues", "title": "Duckworth in First Speech on Senate Floor: America's Prosperity & Strength Depend On Our Values", "source": "https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/duckworth-in-first-speech-on-senate-floor-americas-prosperity-and-strength-depend-on-our-values", "publication_date": "26-04-2017", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Tammy Duckworth"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3667, "text": "In the greatest and wealthiest nation in the world, a quality education should be a right for every single American child. Our nation's promise of opportunity should be a reality for every child in America, not just for those whose parents can afford it. We already have some of the world's greatest teachers, brightest students and best facilities within our own borders. All we need to do is ensure they have the resources they need to succeed. That means our kids should not have to worry about going to school hungry. Or getting the help they need after school. Or about being able to pay for college when they graduate high school. That is why I have focused on common-sense solutions to help increase access to educational opportunity, whether by helping lead the charge to make college more affordable or doing more to ensure the education we are providing people actually helps them find good-paying jobs when they graduate. In that vein, I am also disheartened by the recent erosion of civil rights protections in our nation. The calls for bigger walls and closed doors are not only bad, costly policies, they run counter to our society's shared value for inclusion over exclusion. Too many of us seem to forget the immigrant roots within our own families. If we lose sight of our nation's founding principles, as some in Washington would like us to do, we will lose out on the innovations we have seen from immigrants and immigrant families. If we had rejected immigrants years ago, Apple might never have been founded by the son of a Syrian man. I worry that, at a time when we still have so much work to do to make our union more perfect and to provide truly equal rights for all, under the current Administration we are at risk of backtracking on hard-fought progress made by civil rights leaders who bled - and even died - for the right of all Americans, regardless of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, income, or zip code to have the right to vote, to have equal protection under the law, to have basic worker protections and for the everyday rights and privileges so many of us take for granted. We still have so much progress left to make if we want the American Dream to be accessible to all Americans; equal pay for equal work, a criminal justice system that truly provides justice for all, nation-wide leave policies that enable everyone to take time to care for a sick family member or start a family, a society that is accessible for disabled Americans and truly equal for LGBTQ Americans.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "duckworthsenategovnewspressreleasesduckworthinfirstspeechonsenateflooramericasprosperityandstrengthdependonourvalues", "title": "Duckworth in First Speech on Senate Floor: America's Prosperity & Strength Depend On Our Values", "source": "https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/duckworth-in-first-speech-on-senate-floor-americas-prosperity-and-strength-depend-on-our-values", "publication_date": "26-04-2017", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Tammy Duckworth"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3668, "text": "I worry that we are at risk of going backward rather than forward. Failing to continue our nation's inclusive nature weakens our global standing as well, as the rest of the world begin to look elsewhere for moral leadership. That would be a failure for America, and a weakening of our nation that I will fight to prevent. And, of course, I also know how much our military has contributed to our nation's greatness throughout our history. We must do a better job of recognizing those contributions. Not just by purchasing equipment and technology, though what our skilled workforce has developed for them is the envy of the world, but also by ensuring that we recognize and respect the sacrifices made by our troops, our military families and our Veterans. Servicemembers embody our values of shared sacrifice and perseverance, of loyalty and selfless service-and they each make great sacrifices to protect us. They deserve from their leaders in Washington a clear sense of mission and strategy and they deserve to know we fully support them. So, when the drums of war are beating in the White House or in Congress, you can bet that I am going to be right here on the floor of the Senate asking the tough questions and making sure our leaders in Washington, especially those who have never served in uniform, fully consider the true costs of war-not just in dollars and cents but in human lives. I will also be there to remind my colleagues that we are all dishonored when any Veteran is forced lay their head down to sleep on the same streets they defended. And when our troops come home, I will be working to ensure that our Veterans receive the care and support they have earned from the sacrifices they have made. our military, our values, our infrastructure, our agriculture, our manufacturers, and our world-class educational system. If we fall prey to our fears, to our worst demons, and allow any of these pillars to fall, we will lose our opportunity to remain the envy of the world. We can rebuild the foundation of our nation's strength and revamp it for the 21st century. But we cannot simply rest on our past successes and act like our greatness is guaranteed forever. This is deeply personal for me-I would not be here today without the education that enabled me to serve in our military for more than two decades and give back to my country, both in and out of uniform. And our nation would not be as strong as it is today without the millions of individuals who sacrificed to build it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "duckworthsenategovnewspressreleasesduckworthinfirstspeechonsenateflooramericasprosperityandstrengthdependonourvalues", "title": "Duckworth in First Speech on Senate Floor: America's Prosperity & Strength Depend On Our Values", "source": "https://www.duckworth.senate.gov/news/press-releases/duckworth-in-first-speech-on-senate-floor-americas-prosperity-and-strength-depend-on-our-values", "publication_date": "26-04-2017", "crawling_date": "02-07-2023", "politician": ["Tammy Duckworth"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3679, "text": "We have just completed the first working session of our summit on trade and economic integration. We are off to an excellent start. The 34 democratically elected leaders of our hemisphere have agreed to establish a free trade area of the Americas. This historic step will produce real opportunities for more jobs and solid, lasting prosperity for our peoples. We have set the year 2005 as our deadline for negotiating a free trade area, and we have agreed that there will be real progress before the end of the century. The agreement will cover a comprehensive list of areas, from tariffs on goods to services to agricultural and intellectual property. We have set a highly detailed timetable that will include regular meetings of our ministers for trade. In less than a decade, if current trends continue, this hemisphere will be the world's largest market, more than 850 million consumers buying $13 trillion worth of goods and services. When our work is done, the free trade area of the Americas will stretch from Alaska to Argentina. It is the key building block in our creation of a partnership for prosperity. It will build upon the many bilateral and multilateral agreements already existing between our nations. We want to replace the many conflicting and different trade and other regulatory agreements with one that is consistent, while making sure to assist smaller economies in transition. We will ask the Organization of American States and the Inter-American Development Bank to assist in this transition and integration. And we have pledged that our free trade area of the Americas will not raise new barriers to nations outside our region and will be fully consistent with the rules of the World Trade Organization. We have reaffirmed our commitment to make our individual trade and environmental policies mutually supportive and to further secure the observance and promotion of workers' rights. Let me emphasize, none of us none of us underestimates the hard work ahead. But from the leaders of our hemisphere's largest economies to the smallest, we believe the rewards will be great and very much worth the effort. We believe the agreement we have made today to launch the free trade area of the Americas will produce more jobs, higher incomes, and greater opportunities for all of our people. From here we are going to a working lunch, where we will discuss issues affecting sustainable development. Our final session this afternoon will focus on the steps we will take to strengthen our democracies. I can think of no more appropriate way to end this day, the anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration on Human Rights.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingthefirstsessionthesummittheamericasmiami", "title": "Remarks Following the First Session of the Summit of the Americas in Miami", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-the-first-session-the-summit-the-americas-miami", "publication_date": "10-12-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3680, "text": "All this past week a chorus of voices has been rising to urge the Senate to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. Yesterday our Nation's military leaders and our leading nuclear experts, including a large number of Nobel laureates, came here to say that we can maintain the integrity of our nuclear stockpile without testing, and that we would be safer with the test ban treaty. Today religious leaders from across the spectrum and across the Nation are urging America to seize the higher ground of leadership to stop the spread of nuclear weapons. I want to thank those who are here, including Bishop John Glynn of the U.S. Catholic Bishop's Conference, Reverend Elenora Giddings Ivory of the Presbyterian Church, Reverend Jay Lintner of the National Council of Churches of Christ, Mark Pelavin of the Religious Action Center of Reformed Judaism, Bishop Theodore Schneider of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, Joe Volk of the Friends Committee, Dr. James Dunn; there are others here, as well. And I would like to say a special word of thanks to Reverend Joan Brown Campbell of the National Council of Churches, as she concludes her responsibilities, for all the support she has given to our administration over the years. And let me express my special gratitude to Senator Jim Jeffords from Vermont and Senator Byron Dorgan of North Dakota for their presence here and for their leadership in this cause. Will we do everything in our power to reduce the likelihood that someday somewhere nuclear weapons will fall into the hands of someone with absolutely no compunction about using them; or will we instead, send a signal to those who have nuclear weapons, or those who want them, that we will not test but that they can test now or they can test when they develop or acquire the weapons? We have a moral responsibility to future generations to answer that question correctly. And future generations will not forgive us if we fail that responsibility. We all recognize that no treaty by itself can guarantee our security, and there is always the possibility of cheating. But this treaty, like the Chemical Weapons Convention, gives us tools to strengthen our security, a global network of sensors to detect nuclear tests by others, the right to demand inspections, the means to mobilize the whole world against potential violators.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecomprehensivenucleartestbantreatyandexchangewithreporters1", "title": "Remarks on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-comprehensive-nuclear-test-ban-treaty-and-exchange-with-reporters-1", "publication_date": "07-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3681, "text": "You know, I told the folks at the coffee shop in Crawford, Texas, that Ted Kennedy was all right. I have come to admire him. You want him on your side, I can tell you that. And as a result of his hard work, we put together a good piece of legislation that has put Republicans and Democrats on the side of the schoolchildren in America. On September the 11th, my wife was heading to-was on Capitol Hill to testify in front of Senator Kennedy. And before she could go testify in front of his committee, obviously the evildoers hit America. And I want to thank him publicly, in front of his home folks, for providing such comfort to Laura during an incredibly tough time. Ironically enough, Judd Gregg was there, as well, and both those men went out of their way to put their arm around Laura and let her know all would be right. Speaking about September the 11th, I want the young folks here to know that the mission we are on to rid the world of terror is a noble and just mission. I long for peace. But we learned a terrible lesson, and that lesson is, we must rout out terror wherever it exists, in order for you and your children to grow up in a free and peaceful society. This Nation will not tire; we will not rest until we bring those who are willing to harm Americans to justice. And that is exactly what we intend to do. We have a job to do overseas, and our military is performing brilliantly. For those of you who have got relatives in the military or those of you who are in the military, thank you from the bottom of our Nation's collective heart. And we have got a job to do here at home, as well, and that is to make sure every child in America-every child-receives a good education. Senator Kennedy and I, on the way in here, were talking about the Latin School. And I want to thank the headmistress Kelley for having us here. After he had finished the litany of all the Kennedys that had gone to school here--we talked about the quality of education that the kids receive here. And the truth of the matter is, if you look at this bill that I signed this morning in Ohio, it says this is the way-this is Boston Latin all over again. This is what Boston Latin is about.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbostonlatinschoolbostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at Boston Latin School in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-boston-latin-school-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "08-01-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3682, "text": "It is about expecting high standards, understanding every child can learn, demanding the best, insisting upon hard work, rewarding success, solving failure. It is a great school, and I am grateful that I could come and herald the signing of an important piece of legislation here at this school. This is not only a testimony to Senator Ted Kennedy's hard work; it is a testimony to a fine public school. I appreciate the Governor coming, and I know the Governor is committed to quality education as well. I am honored that members of the Massachusetts congressional delegation came. Mayor, thank you for coming; it is good to see you again. I want to thank all of you for coming. I particularly want to thank the students who are here. I-you are seeing Government at its best with this piece of legislation. I know there is a lot of folks who look at Washington and say, Cannot they ever get along? All they do is call each other names. But on this piece of legislation, on this important piece of legislation, we figured out how to put our parties aside and focus on what is right for the American children. We showed the country that, if we so desire, it is possible in Washington to say the Nation matters more than our political parties matter. It took a lot of hard work, and it took the leadership of four fine Americans who are on this stage with me today. These four people decided they would rather see results than have empty rhetoric dominate the scene. These people said, Look, we disagree on some issues, but why do not we figure out where we agree and get something done. And it was in that spirit that we crafted a great piece of legislation. Big George Miller is out of California. He is-he might be considered left in Massachusetts. What do you think, Congressman? That is saying something. Before I went to Washington, I had a group of the gentlemen come down to Austin to talk about education reform, and George and I had a discussion about making sure that the systems did not simply shuffle children through, that we wanted to call a halt to what some call social promotion. I knew right then and there, when I heard his passion about focusing on each child, that there was a potential ally when it came to writing good legislation. And then Boehner from Ohio showed up. He did a fabulous job, by the way.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbostonlatinschoolbostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at Boston Latin School in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-boston-latin-school-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "08-01-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3683, "text": "I signed the bill this morning in his district to really express my gratitude and the Nation's gratitude for his leadership on shepherding this bill through the House of Representatives. Without John Boehner, without George Miller, this bill never would have made it throughout the House, and I want to thank them both from the bottom of my heart. And the truth of the matter is, the bill would not have gotten out of the Senate had not Senator Kennedy and Judd Gregg put their minds to it. It was a convenient time for people to say, Well, we'd better not move anything out of the Senate because there is a war. But Ted Kennedy and Judd Gregg went to their respective caucuses and demanded action. And as a result, the bill came to the Senate floor, passed overwhelmingly, and I had the honor of signing it this morning. I wish you could have seen the piece of legislation. And I admit, I have not read it yet. But I know the principles behind the bill, and I want to describe some of them to you. First, this bill says that we will hold people accountable for results. It says, in return for receiving Federal money, States must design accountability systems to measure-to determine whether or not children are learning to read and write and add and subtract. In return for Federal money, the State of Massachusetts or the State of Texas or any other State in the Union must develop an accountability system to let us know whether children in grades three through eight are meeting standards. Now, I have heard them say, Well, tests- we are testing too much. If you do not like to take a test, too bad, because we need to know. I read a quote from a little girl from New York the other day that touched my heart, and I hope it touches yours. She said, I do not remember taking exams. They just kept passing me along. I ended up dropping out in the seventh grade. Well, she was- she is blowing the whistle on what happens in some of our schools in America. You see, sometimes it is easy to walk into a classroom and say, Certain children cannot learn. Therefore, let us just move them through. Let us do not test them. Let us just push them out at the end. And that is wrong in America. And if they cannot , we need to correct their problems early, before it is too late. The cornerstone of reform is strong accountability measures, just like you do here in the State of Massachusetts.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbostonlatinschoolbostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at Boston Latin School in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-boston-latin-school-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "08-01-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3684, "text": "Secondly, in order for reform to mean anything, there must be consequences. Now in this bill, it says schools will be given time to correct. After posting the test scores and mailing out the report cards that show mediocrity or failure, schools will still be given a chance to correct the problems. And therefore, we provide incentives and resources to make sure that failing schools have got the opportunity to meet standards. But if they do not , the consequence is that parents must be empowered to make different choices. We must not trap children in schools that will not teach and will not change. And so, therefore, this bill says parents in failed schools can send their children to another public school or charter school or be able to get tutoring for their children in either the public or private sector. It is important to free families from failure in public education, and that is what this bill does. The third principle-it says that we trust the local people to make the right decisions for the schools. It says we trust the Governors and the school boards to design the path to excellence for every child. It says Washington has a role of providing money, and now Washington is demanding results. But Washington should not micromanage the process. And so, this bill provides a lot more flexibility for the local folks. In essence, it says the people of Boston care more about the children of Boston than people in Washington, DC. Rod Paige understands that. The reason I picked Rod to become the Secretary of Education is because he was the superintendent of schools in the Houston Independent School District. He knows what it means to run a school district. And when we implement this bill, I can assure you, Rod is going to make sure that the spirit of no child is left behind is a part of the regulations. But this bill says there- one size does not fit all when it comes to public schools. It fosters change by pushing power to the lowest level, and that is at the local school districts, which should make the teachers in this audience feel good. First of all, I want to thank all the teachers who are here. Yours is a noble profession, and thank you for taking on this tough job. But a system that devolves power says we have got to trust the teachers and principals to make the right decisions in the classrooms. And that is what this bill says. This bill also wages a battle against illiteracy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbostonlatinschoolbostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at Boston Latin School in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-boston-latin-school-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "08-01-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3685, "text": "It recognizes that spending money is important, but you need to spend money effectively in order to make a difference. We have spent a lot of money in education- a lot. And a lot of it has not made a difference. Well, one area where we are going to make a difference from this point forward in America is in reading-teaching every child to read. The numbers for inner-city kids or impoverished-kids from impoverished families-their ability to read, or the illiteracy rate-let me put it to you that way-is astounding. It is not right for America that over 60 percent of the children in the fourth grade from impoverished families cannot read. If you cannot read in the fourth grade, you are not going to read in the eighth grade. And if you cannot read in the eighth, you are not going to read in high school. And if you cannot read, you have got a tough life ahead of you. And we need to do something about it, America, and this bill does. It triples the amount of money for early reading programs, programs based upon the science of reading, not something that sounds good or feels good but something that works. There is money that says we are going to stay focused until we teach every child to read by the third grade in America. So those are the principles of a good bill. The bill is not only good for education, but it is a good go-by to show what can happen in Washington. And that is why the five of us-or the six of us, including Rod Paige-have been traveling around the Nation today, heralding the success-the joint success- the success of people from both political parties in both Houses of Congress. I know what is possible when it comes to educating children. You have seen it here in your own State, how the numbers have improved dramatically. It starts with an attitude that says public education is crucial; every child can learn; and we must set high standards. And that is what we have got to do in America, it seems like, all over the country. After 9/11, a lot of people have asked, What can I do to help? How can I make a difference in America? Well, my advice is, first, love your children like you have never loved them before. Show them that they are the most important people in the world. But a way you can help America is to mentor a child, to teach a child to read.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbostonlatinschoolbostonmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks at Boston Latin School in Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-boston-latin-school-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "08-01-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3686, "text": "I appreciate the opportunity that you have provided for me to greet the Embassy personnel and also some of the members of their families that I see down here in front and also for those that are in this room. I want to express my regret that we were unable to be able to get everybody in the same room. I was going to say to the Ambassador that we probably needed a larger Embassy. No, I think we have got to speak to Mr. Rooney. But, nevertheless, on a visit of this type that is so filled with official talks and I move from here for my last talk during this visit with President de Gaulle and then we go on to see Pope Paul in Rome and then back to Washington tonight. But we spent the morning on Vietnam. But, nevertheless, I did not want to leave Paris without expressing to all of those in this Embassy, and all of those who are associated with it in any way, my appreciation for what you have done on this visit, first. I know what a burden a visit by VIP's places upon an Embassy. I first came to Paris, I remember, 22 years ago in this same building, and then as a Congressman. I know we caused a lot of trouble. But, anyway, then I came back as a Senator in 1951, and I have been here many times since. I did not come here as a Vice President, and now I come as a President. They tell me that that is even harder harder on the staff, I mean. But I do want you to know that I realize it is hundreds of people, literally hundreds of people, that I will never be able to thank personally or by letter, or to greet personally, who worked on this visit. And I am speaking now not simply of the officers of the Embassy, the Ambassador, of course, who has been so cooperative, and Bob Blake Deputy Chief of Mission. I rather grew up with him in Whittier. He is a little after my time. I should say, I knew his parents. But, nevertheless, I want you to know that not only the officers, but everybody in all the offices as I went down the halls today, I saw girls typing out schedules, and I know that you have got to run them through the mimeograph machines and-or, no, you put them through some other kind of a machine now to get them multilithed. And that is just part of it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericanembassyparis", "title": "Remarks at the American Embassy in Paris.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-embassy-paris", "publication_date": "02-03-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3687, "text": "But the immense amount of logistical detail that is involved in a visit by a President and a Secretary of State is something that places an immense burden on the Embassy. I express appreciation for that. Beyond that, however, I want to tell you that the visit has been handled in this very brief time that we have been here with great precision. I have been trying to think of something that I could pick out as a mistake, you know, so that we could do better next time. I found on one of my schedules -I do not know who happened to prepare this, but nevertheless, the schedule said, with regard to the first dinner, the dinner that President de Gaulle was the host the second one, as you know, was in Ambassador Shriver's residence, and I was the host there but at the first dinner where he was the host, he was supposed to make a toast and I was supposed to prepare one to him. President Nixon will speak for 10 minutes and then his speech will be translated into English. I knew I had troubles in communicating, but not that much. But whether it was my French or English or whatever the case might be, that was the only thing I could find and we need to have a little humor in a trip. I think it was put in deliberately for that very purpose. Also, in this room are people who have dedicated their lives to the service of the Government of the United States, some in the Foreign Service and some in other branches of the service. You have been in this post; you have been in many others. I am sure there must be times when you wonder whether you made the right decision. There must be times when the boredom of what your job is, the failure to get the promotion that you think you should have had, the failure to have the responsibility which you think you might be capable of these are the things we all feel from time to time all of these things must run through your minds. And, also, perhaps, in the positions that you have you wonder if the country really appreciates people in Government. I can simply tell you that I, as one who has had the opportunity of traveling now to 73 countries and have seen our embassies abroad and our other missions in most of those countries, I appreciate what you are dang, both as the President of the United States and as an individual. I know, in many cases, what a sacrifice it is for you to continue in public service, as you have.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericanembassyparis", "title": "Remarks at the American Embassy in Paris.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-embassy-paris", "publication_date": "02-03-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3688, "text": "I know that many of you probably figure you could have done better economically if you had been in some other branch. But whatever the case might be, let me give you this one word of reassurance with regard to the decision you made sometime in your life to come into public service. I firmly am convinced of the fact that all of you are playing a great part in a cause that is much bigger than any of us. All of us have that privilege. And we in America can say that, and it cannot be said in all countries of the world. It can be said frankly in the free world, more in ours than in any other, not because we asked for that responsibility, but because it is ours. And as we play that great role, I want you to know that sometimes it appears that all that really matters is what a President says or what he does, or what the Ambassador says and what he does and all of those things are important or what the Secretary of State may declare in his various remarks or in the statements that he may send out around the world. But I can assure you that what the men at the top do does have an immense effect on the foreign policy of the United States and whether we have peace and freedom in the world, that the success of a policy depends upon thousands of people around, in an Embassy like this, an establishment like this, and millions around this world 3 million people, maybe 4 million, if you include military and the rest in the service of the United States. I think I can best bring that home by what Colonel Frank Borman said when I presented an award to him at the White House a few weeks ago, shortly after I was inaugurated. I congratulated him. I accept it not only for my two colleagues on the voyage to the moon, but for 400,000 Americans who, one way or another, worked on this project. that in that Apollo there are 2 million parts, and if something went wrong with one of those parts, who knows whether or not the project would have succeeded. I realize that the success of our efforts at the highest post in Government depends upon how every person in Government does his job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheamericanembassyparis", "title": "Remarks at the American Embassy in Paris.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-american-embassy-paris", "publication_date": "02-03-1969", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3704, "text": "On this day more than sixteen million young Americans are reviving the three-hundred-year-old American custom of the muster. They are obeying that first duty of free citizenship by which, from the earliest colonial times, every able-bodied citizen was subject to the call for service in the national defense. It is a day of deep and purposeful meaning in the lives of all of us. For on this day we Americans proclaim the vitality of our history, the singleness of our will and the unity of our nation. We prepare to keep the peace in this New World which free men have built for free men to live in. The United States, a nation of one hundred and thirty million people, has today only about five hundred thousand-half a million officers and men in ENTITY and National Guard. Other nations, smaller in population, have four and five and six million trained men in their armies. Our present program will train eight hundred thousand additional men this coming year and somewhat less than one million men each year thereafter. It is a program obviously of defensive preparation and of defensive preparation only. Calmly, without fear and without hysteria, but with clear determination, we are building guns and planes and tanks and ships-and all the other tools which modern defense requires. We are mobilizing our citizenship, for we are calling on men and women and property and money to join in making our defense effective. Today's registration for training and service is the keystone in the arch of our national defense. In the days when our forefathers laid the foundation of our democracy, every American family had to have its gun and know how to use it. Today we live under threats, threats of aggression from abroad, which call again for the same readiness, the same vigilance. Ours must once again be the spirit of those who were prepared to defend as they built, to defend as they worked, to defend as they worshipped. The duty of this day has been imposed upon us from without. Those who have dared to threaten the whole world with war-those who have created the name and deed of total war-have imposed upon us and upon all free peoples the necessity of preparation for total defense. But this day not only imposes a duty; it provides also an opportunity-an opportunity for united action in the cause of liberty-an opportunity for the continuing creation on this continent of a country where the people alone shall be master, where the people shall be truly free.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressregistrationday", "title": "Radio Address on Registration Day.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-registration-day", "publication_date": "16-10-1940", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3708, "text": "I want to welcome you and all your brothers and sisters and your mom; Senator Kennedy. I want to thank the Attorneys General who are here. I want to thank our current Attorney General. I want to thank the Members of the Congress who are here, the Senators and Members of the House of Representatives for coming, both Republicans and Democrats. I want to thank Administrator Perry; ladies and gentlemen. I am so very pleased to be with you in giving this building a great American name. Seventy-nine Americans have held the title of Attorney General, and 25 of them worked in this building. But in the history of this Department and in the memory of our country we hold a special place for Robert Francis Kennedy. Just out of law school at the University of Virginia, he reported here every morning to the Criminal Division. He was 26, married, the father of one, a baby girl who is now the Lieutenant Governor of the State of Maryland. Ahead of him were many more accomplishments and a lot more children. There is no doubt in my mind that he would look upon his sons and daughters and his grandkids with such incredible pride. America first saw him and heard his voice in the mid-fifties when he was minority counselor to the Senate committee investigating organized crime. There was something about him that no one could miss, an intense intelligence present, a voice that could quiet a room. As a friend has remembered him, Robert Kennedy was not a hard man, but he was a tough man. He valued bluntness and precision and truth. Those under investigation learned those qualities firsthand. In the eyes of John F. Kennedy, no man ever had a more faithful brother. During his Presidential campaign, he said, I do not know what Bobby does, but it always seems to turn out right. We are told that after the election the younger brother was not sure he wanted to join the Cabinet, and he said so to the President-elect. Robert tried to make the case explaining why he should not become Attorney General. The President-elect simply left the room and casually returned a few minutes later to say, So that is it, General. To this day, visitors to the West Wing, seeing the Rose Garden and the Colonnade, instantly think of the pictures of the two brothers together. And from this day, his birthday, everyone who enters this building or passes by will think of Robert F. Kennedy and what he still means to this country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthededicationtherobertfkennedydepartmentjusticebuilding", "title": "Remarks on the Dedication of the Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dedication-the-robert-f-kennedy-department-justice-building", "publication_date": "20-11-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3709, "text": "And few have filled their time here with so much energy or seen events of such consequence. He was at his brother's side during the 13 days in October 1962, where he was firm and discerning and calm. In this building, he set to work on what would become the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Here, he gave the orders sending 500 U.S. marshals to protect the Freedom Riders. He stood for racial desegregation. My belief does not matter. Some of you may believe the decision was wrong. With us today are some of the people who worked for our 64th Attorney General, each of whom counts it as an experience of a lifetime. They still look up to him. Time has done nothing to weaken their loyalty to the valiant and idealistic man they knew and followed. Robert Kennedy was a serious man, concerned with serious things. And he loved his friends. He was a strong man who understood weakness, a man who knew privilege but also suffering. He fought to gain power, chose to use it in the defense of the powerless. To millions who never knew him, he is still an example of kindness and courage. America today is passing through a time of incredible testing. And as we do so, we admire even more the spirit of Robert Kennedy, a spirit that tolerates no injustice and fears no evil. That is how this country sees him. But today and every November 20th, a large and loving family thinks of the dad they miss. Some of you know your way around this building because he brought you here. And as the photos displayed here make it clear, he also enjoyed one of my favorite perks of office-you get to bring your dog to work. Of all that he left behind, nothing brings Robert Kennedy more clearly to mind than his good wife. Whither thou goest, I will go, and we will be together forever. For 33 years, Ethel Kennedy has walked with grace and dignity, faithful to God and to the memory of her husband. Any tribute to Robert Kennedy must also be a tribute to Mrs. Robert Kennedy. She shares in all his achievements; she is added many of her own. Kennedy, America honors you as well. This great building, and all who work here, serve the public in the cause of justice. It now bears the name of a good and decent man, truly devoted to justice. On behalf of the people of the United States, I proudly dedicate the Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthededicationtherobertfkennedydepartmentjusticebuilding", "title": "Remarks on the Dedication of the Robert F. Kennedy Department of Justice Building", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dedication-the-robert-f-kennedy-department-justice-building", "publication_date": "20-11-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3766, "text": "Well, thank you very much and I am thrilled to be back at the historic Jupiter Inlet, I know it very well. The lighthouse, it is , my home state is called the state of Florida and it is a great state. Do you have seats? Yeah, you do sit down everybody. The sunshine state is truly one of the most beautiful places on earth. I love it. And together we will preserve its breathtaking natural splendor for generations to come. We are here today to celebrate our incredible record of natural conservation and environmental protection. Over the last four years I have been working with your both governors, your last governors, your current governor is fantastic by the way and we have been working very, very hard. We have been working very hard together to make sure everything is perfect and to recommit ourselves to preserving the awesome majesty of God's great creation. Joining us in the wonderful support effort of that mission is secretary of the interior, a man who is worked so hard in this, David Bernhardt. When he says you can do it, you do it when he says you cannot it is over with, you do not have a chance, Andrew Wheeler. And of course your governor Ron DeSantis, who is run, not only did he run a great campaign, he is a great governor. What a great job he did. Of course we will let you know on November 3rd, I will let you know if he did a good job, okay? Also, I want to introduce Lieutenant Governor, Jeanette Nunez who is been such a fantastic friend and supporter. A man who everybody loves, he is highly respected in Washington, he is a great Senator, Lindsey Graham, South Carolina. We have a lot of good ones here. We have warriors. I call them my warriors, that is what they are, and Gus, the job you have done and Matt Gaetz, Where is Matt? That is not a very good location for you, Matt, I am used to having you sitting right up here. You see what they do. They have to fight Pelosi, Schumer, they have to fight all these characters and they do very well in the fights. We want them on our site, Greg Stuby, Greg, thank you very much. And from South Carolina, state representative Nancy Mace, who is got a very important race where I think you are doing very well. I think you are doing very well from what I hear, right?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechinjupiterfloridatranscriptseptember8environmentalaccomplishments", "title": "Donald Trump Speech in Jupiter, Florida Transcript September 8: Environmental Accomplishments", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-in-jupiter-florida-transcript-september-8-environmental-accomplishments", "publication_date": "08-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3767, "text": "You got to win that one. We are behind you 1000%. You know that right? As well as mayor of Miami Dade County, Carlos Gimenez, where is Carlos? I want to thank you all for being here. My administration's proving every day that we can improve our environment while creating millions of high paying jobs. This is a really sharp contrast to the extreme, radical left that you have had to deal with and what you are doing right now is a lot better than anything you have ever been accustomed to, I will tell you that. Joe Biden's plan would destroy America's middle class while giving a free pass to the world's worst foreign polluters like China, Russia, India, and many others. They do not have to clean up their lands, but we have to clean up ours. The left's agenda is not about protecting the environment, it is about punishing America and that is true. Instead of focusing on radical ideology, my administration is focused on delivering real results and that is what we have and we right now have the cleanest air we have ever had in this country. Let us say over the last 40 years, because I assume 200 years ago was probably better. What do you think? I would say that. So I do want to preface that because the fake news is back there. When I say the cleanest air we have ever had over a 40 year period, Lindsay, is that okay? To safeguard our stunning coastal areas, I signed legislation authorizing $100 million to fight the red tide and toxic algae and to preserve the Everglades and defend Florida from catastrophic flooding. You know about the flooding. We spent a lot of money on flooding and a lot of money on hurricanes and when your governors came to me and they said, Can we have this? Can we have that? We need some more for the Panhandle, they said, We have to help the panhandle. I said, Without question and without any wait, let us go. That is what we said. You have never had it so easy in your life. He'd walk into my office, say, Sir, just one more. How much is it going to cost? We had to override the staff a couple of times. We have directed over a half, a billion dollars to fix the Herbert Hoover Dike and Lake Okeechobee, Lake Okeechobee.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechinjupiterfloridatranscriptseptember8environmentalaccomplishments", "title": "Donald Trump Speech in Jupiter, Florida Transcript September 8: Environmental Accomplishments", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-in-jupiter-florida-transcript-september-8-environmental-accomplishments", "publication_date": "08-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3768, "text": "We fixed it up good, Mr. Mayor, we did a good job. We will now compete with this project and we are way ahead, we are way ahead, about three years, I think, ahead of schedule from what the original time of completion was going to be and I am in particular happy with what we have done on Lake Okeechobee. I know it well, I know it well. Everyone said that one could not be done, Ron, you know that right? It is a big deal and it is all gotten done, including the tide is gone, will be gone, finally from all of the problems that they have had with it. We have expanded funding for the Everglades restoration by over 55% compared to four years ago and I also want to thank the ENTITY Corps of Engineers for their vital work on the C44 Reservoir and the help, they are unbelievable. One thing, when they build it, I said, You know you could do it a little bit less expensive than that. They could be two feet thick, but you know when the ENTITY Corps of Engineers do it, they do it right. That is one thing I can tell you. We are building the wall, the wall along Mexico, between Mexico and the United States. We are over 300 miles now of wall and that is a serious wall. That is a wall that is meant to last and meant to work, but that'll help revitalize the wetlands in the St. Lucie River estuary and the Indian River lagoon. We hit home with that one, huh? But today I have a very important announcement. I do not know if it is bigger than the things we just announced or the things that we have already done or we are in the process of completing. In a few moments I will sign a presidential order extending the moratorium on offshore drilling on Florida's Gulf Coast and expanding it to Florida's Atlantic coast, as well as the coasts of Georgia and South Carolina. I guess you like that one the best of all. This action follows close consultation with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, he is been unbelievable, Florida Senators Marco Rubio, and Rick Scott, they have worked so hard, as well as South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott. Lindsay liked the idea right from the beginning. I said, What do you think? It took you, how long? About two seconds to say I like it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechinjupiterfloridatranscriptseptember8environmentalaccomplishments", "title": "Donald Trump Speech in Jupiter, Florida Transcript September 8: Environmental Accomplishments", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-in-jupiter-florida-transcript-september-8-environmental-accomplishments", "publication_date": "08-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3769, "text": "The Governor of South Carolina, a great man and a really great governor, Henry McMaster and I also want to thank the governor of Georgia, Brian Kemp, he is doing a fantastic job and a Senator who from day one, he is been with me, Senator David Perdue, Georgia, and Senator Kelly Loefler and Congressman Doug Collins and South Carolina State Representative Nancy Mace. Again, I want to thank you all, incredible. Thanks to my administration's pro-American energy policies we can take this step and the next step while remaining the number one producer of oil and natural gas anywhere in the world, we are the largest producer now in the world by far. We are number one in the world and we are energy independent, which is a nice With fracking, the shale revolution and the tremendous surge in American energy production, we are showing that we can create jobs, safeguard the environment and keep energy prices low for America and low for our citizens and you see that, you also see it when you pump the gas into your car and you are paying sometimes a lot less than $2.00 Lately, right? So we are doing well and we have so much of it. I do not know, we got more than everybody, anybody ever thought possible, right? The approach of Joe Biden and the radical left is exactly the opposite. Their policies will destroy jobs, cause energy prices to double and triple and quadruple, to skyrocket beyond belief and the environment will be badly hurt. If you go by that, badly, badly hurt, it will be injured and permanently injured. And very importantly, they will take away our energy independence and they will do it quickly and they will not even know what happened to them. We are dealing with some smart customers. They know exactly what to do, and they do not like it when we are energy independent. They do not like it at all. So it is been a really amazing thing for Florida from the environmental standpoint, and I have to tell you, from the energy standpoint and from a very important level of cost. You are at a level of cost now with your electric and with so many other things caused and created by energy and fuel, the likes of which you have not seen in 30 years. As president I will defend our environment, I will defend our workers and our cherished way of life. Last month I signed the great American outdoors act, the most significant investment in our national parks in over a century, since Teddy Roosevelt.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechinjupiterfloridatranscriptseptember8environmentalaccomplishments", "title": "Donald Trump Speech in Jupiter, Florida Transcript September 8: Environmental Accomplishments", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-in-jupiter-florida-transcript-september-8-environmental-accomplishments", "publication_date": "08-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3770, "text": "You know, they came to my office, a lot of the senators that I just introduced and Ron and everybody, they came to my office they said that, This will make us and make you the number one environmental president since Teddy Roosevelt. Because I was not going to do it. I figured, you know, let us not do it. But when they said that, that was like a challenge. So I said, Well, why does it only have to go back to Teddy Roosevelt, which is over a hundred years? Why cannot we say from George Washington? They said, Well, we are not quite there yet, but one other bill like this we will be there, Lindsay, you know that right? But it is true, number one, since Teddy Roosevelt, who would've thought, ENTITY is the great environmentalist. You hear that, Ed? You hear that? I believe strongly in it. Through this legislation, we are providing nearly $10 billion for long delayed maintenance projects in our national parks and Florida has helped as much as anybody and maybe more. My administration has fully or partially cleaned up 61 EPA superfund pollution sites that were rotting all over our country. No matter how far you go back, more than any administration. Since my inauguration we have recovered more endangered or threatened species than any other administration has accomplished in its first term. Earlier this year, I announced that the United States would joined the one trillion trees initiative. We already have one billion trees pledged to be planted and it is moving very rapidly. We have opened land- As the last administration pursued its globalist agenda abroad, they were all over the place. They were everywhere but here, in our country. They were taking care of other lands, countries that you never heard of, they were taking care of and they did not do a good job there either. They neglected the fundamentals of public health right here in the United States, right here in our home. My administration is focused on ensuring crystal clean air and water. Under my administration we have seen a significant drop in air pollution since 2017, a very significant drop for the first time in nearly 30 years. We are strengthening standards to prevent vulnerable children from being exposed to lead and copper in drinking water, including in our schools. They were exposed to lead and copper in drinking water. We have done some job with that, that was an important one. And we have invested over $38 billion in drinking water infrastructure to care for our children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechinjupiterfloridatranscriptseptember8environmentalaccomplishments", "title": "Donald Trump Speech in Jupiter, Florida Transcript September 8: Environmental Accomplishments", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-in-jupiter-florida-transcript-september-8-environmental-accomplishments", "publication_date": "08-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3771, "text": "I am committed to ensuring the United States has the cleanest air and cleanest water on earth. The contrast between our vision and the radical left has never been more clear. They talk a big game and they do nothing. They talk and talk the environment, they talk and talk, nothing happens. You ever hear that? To our political opponents, environmental policy is just an excuse to advance a socialist platform that will impose trillions and trillions of dollars in new taxes and send our jobs overseas, making it impossible to open up new companies and to live less expensively. Your energy costs would be four or five, sometimes even under scenarios, 10 times more expensive. And, really, you would not even have energy. To my administration, environmental protection is a sacred obligation and so it is our duty to fight for the dreams and livelihoods of the citizens we serve and to the citizens of Florida that I know so well and that I love , this is my home. We are rapidly restoring the greatest economy in history. We created the greatest economy in the history of our country, and then we had to close it up when the China plague came in, we closed it up. We saved millions of lives. We banned highly infected China from coming in, it was highly infected. Wu Han province, we banned them. Nobody said do it, everybody said I should not do it. Biden said, Do not do it, three months later he admitted I was right. But we banned people, we would have lost hundreds of thousands more, but we would have lost millions if we did not close it up and now we open it up and we are setting records at every single level. So we are maintaining that pristine resource of beautiful, clean environment at every single community in Florida and all over the country. We will always defend the Everglades and we will always safeguard the magnificent Florida coastline. We will expand access for fishermen and sportsmen, we will uphold your right to hunt and we will protect your right to keep and bear arms, your second amendment. And I can tell you this, if Joe Biden gets in, he will have nothing to say about it. He is not, let us face it. It is gone, either obliterated to a point of being gone or gone itself, okay? You will not have a second amendment. And the pressure put on me in the last four years to make massive changes to the second amendment, which would have really rendered it worthless, Ron knows, Ron knows.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechinjupiterfloridatranscriptseptember8environmentalaccomplishments", "title": "Donald Trump Speech in Jupiter, Florida Transcript September 8: Environmental Accomplishments", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-in-jupiter-florida-transcript-september-8-environmental-accomplishments", "publication_date": "08-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3772, "text": "The pressure put on me, very few people would have been able to withstand that pressure. They would have made big, big cuts and big changes. Your second amendment will remain powerful, will remain strong, will remain with you. We will reassure our critical supply chains and we will bring back jobs in factories from China and other foreign polluters and everything we do will be guided by our love of this state, its people and its priceless natural treasures. I can tell you, I am so happy to have helped because when I was first elected, you had things that were in such bad shape and now they are fixed or being fixed at a cost of a lot of money, but they are either fixed or being fixed and soon there'll be in better condition than they were the day they were built, which was many, many decades ago. We have things that were built a long time ago that were in a state of disrepair that you would not believe. As long as I am president of the United States, we will conserve this wondrous national inheritance from Key West to Key Biscayne, from Tampa to Tallahassee, from the Pensacola, beautiful Pensacola, I love Pensacola. I think it was 97%, that is one of the reasons I like it. They say, How'd you do in Pensacola? Right here to Jupiter, which I know very well, we will preserve this glorious land for our children, for our grandchildren and for every generation of American to come. And I will now sign this order. It is an order that does so much for the state of Florida. It is an order that I am so proud to sign. I have been talking about this with Ron and with all of the people I have mentioned for a long time and I said, we want to get it done and this protects your beautiful Gulf and your beautiful ocean and it will for a long time to come. But I want to just thank everybody for being here and this is a true honor for me to sign this order.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeechinjupiterfloridatranscriptseptember8environmentalaccomplishments", "title": "Donald Trump Speech in Jupiter, Florida Transcript September 8: Environmental Accomplishments", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-in-jupiter-florida-transcript-september-8-environmental-accomplishments", "publication_date": "08-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3784, "text": "I am here in the briefing room to break some news. I have asked Tony Snow to serve as my new Press Secretary. Tony already knows most of you, and he is agreed to take the job anyway. I am confident Tony Snow will make an outstanding addition to this White House staff. I am confident he will help you do your job. My job is to make decisions, and his job is to help explain those decisions to the press corps and the American people. He understands, like I understand, that the press is vital to our democracy. As a professional journalist, Tony Snow understands the importance of the relationship between Government and those whose job it is to cover the Government. He is going to work hard to provide you with timely information about my philosophy, my priorities, and the actions we are taking to implement our agenda. He brings a long record of accomplishment to this position. He has spent a quarter of a century in the news business. print, radio, and television. He started his career in 1979 as an editorial writer for the Greensboro Record in North Carolina. He is going to-went on to write editorials for the Virginian-Pilot in Norfolk. He ran the editorial pages in both the Daily Press of Newport News and the Washington Times. He is written nationally syndicated columns for both the Detroit News and USA Today. During his career in print journalism, he is been cited for his work by the Society of Professional Journalists, the Associated Press, and Gannett. For 7 years, he served as the host of FOX News Sunday. Most recently, he reached Americans all across our country as the host of The Tony Snow Show on FOX News Radio and Weekend Live with Tony Snow on the FOX News Channel. He is not afraid to express his own opinions. For those of you who have read his columns and listened to his radio show, he sometimes has disagreed with me. I asked him about those comments, and he said, You should have heard what I said about the other guy. I like his perspective; I like the perspective he brings to this job, and I think you are going to like it too. Tony knows what it is like to work inside the White House. In 1991, he took a break from journalism to serve as Director of Speechwriting and Deputy Assistant to the President for Media Affairs. He is taught children in Kenya. He belongs to a rock band called Beats Workin'. He is a man of courage; he is a man of integrity; he loves his family a lot.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingtheappointmenttonysnowwhitehousepresssecretary", "title": "Remarks Announcing the Appointment of Tony Snow as White House Press Secretary", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-the-appointment-tony-snow-white-house-press-secretary", "publication_date": "26-04-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3785, "text": "And it is good to see you all. Hope you had a great weekend at your convention. And we are going to have a great convention coming up, and I look forward to it. But before I discuss a very historic breakthrough in our fight against the China virus, I'd like to provide an update on the recent wildfires in California and the storms in the Gulf of Mexico. Yesterday I approved a major disaster declaration for California-spoke to Governor Newsom-as they battle two of the worst wildfires in the history of their State. The Federal Government has already deployed over 26,000 first responders and personnel to battle the wildfires. We are working very closely with the Governor and very closely with a lot of great State representatives and local representatives, and we will take care of the situation. But we have 26,000 first responders already. Our hearts go out to the thousands of families who have lost their homes. As we grieve for the families of two first responders and five residents who have tragically lost their lives in a very horrific fire, one of the biggest we have ever seen. My administration is also closely monitoring Hurricane Marco and Tropical Storm Laura, which are coming in rapidly. Hurricane Marco is expected to make landfall in Louisiana tomorrow, and Tropical Storm Laura is expected to hit Louisiana 2 days later. the scope of the storms and also the fact that they come so quickly after one another. Both storms have the potential of gathering strength before they make landfall and could cause significant damage across the Gulf Coast and also in Puerto Rico. We have everybody stationed and ready to go in Puerto Rico and the Gulf Coast, and we have tremendous-and tremendous people. The Coast Guard has done a fantastic job. They do so many-they do such good work, and we want to thank our great Coast Guard. I am asking all Americans in the storm's path to follow the instructions of your State and local Governments very closely. And I have approved emergency declarations for Puerto Rico and for Louisiana. FEMA is mobilized on the ground and is ready to help. And I spoke to Governor John Bel Edwards also, of Louisiana, and I have informed him. And at his request, also, a major disaster declaration is signed and ready to go. We have everybody ready in Puerto Rico, the Gulf Coast, Louisiana, and also on the forest fires in California. So we have a great team. Unfortunately, we have some very, very powerful natural disasters.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1256", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1256", "publication_date": "23-08-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3786, "text": "On the therapeutics front, this is what I have been looking to do for a long time. Today I am pleased to make a truly historic announcement in our battle against the China virus that will save countless lives. emergency use authorization-for a treatment known as convalescent plasma. This is a powerful therapy that transfuses very, very strong antibodies from the blood of recovered patients to help treat patients battling a current infection. It is had an incredible rate of success. Today's action will dramatically expand access to this treatment. And I want to thank Dr. Hahn and Secretary Azar. I want to thank the FDA-all of the people that have been working very hard on this. It showed tremendous potential. This is the only possible-and it is only made possible because of Operation Warp Speed-that is everybody working together. We are years ahead of approvals. We would be-if we went by the speed levels of past administration, we'd be 2 years, 3 years behind where we are today, and that includes in vaccines that you will be hearing about very soon, very shortly. To deliver treatments and vaccine to save lives, we are removing unnecessary barriers and delays, not by cutting corners, but by marshaling the full power of the Federal Government. We have provided $48 million to fund the Mayo Clinic study that tested the efficacy of convalescent plasma for patients with the virus. Through this study, over 100,000 Americans have already enrolled to receive this treatment, and it has proven to reduce mortality by 35 percent. The FDA, MIT, Harvard, and Mount Sinai hospital have also found convalescent plasma to be a very effective method of fighting this horrible disease. Based on the science and the data, the FDA has made the independent determination that the treatment is safe and very effective. Recently, we provided up to $270 million to the American Red Cross and America's Blood Centers to support the collection of up to 360,000 units of plasma. In late July, we launched a nationwide campaign to ask patients to have-who have recovered-and these are patients that have been incredible, the way they have donated-but these are people recovered from the virus-to donate plasma. And today I once again urge all Americans who have recovered from the virus to go to coronavirus.gov and sign up and donate plasma today, please. The country has united so strongly behind this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1256", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1256", "publication_date": "23-08-2020", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3797, "text": "Man, it is good to be back in Pennsylvania. What beautiful weather we got here. I know the president spent some time in Erie last night, and apparently he complained about having to travel here. And then he cut the event short, poor guy. I love coming to Pennsylvania. You guys delivered for me twice and I am back here tonight to ask you to deliver the White House for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. I want to thank Mr. Philadelphia, Charlie Mack, his daughter, India Marie. Those of you who are fathers and have daughters you know how that feels when you see your daughters just shining. I know a little bit about that. And it was great to see representatives, Brendan Boyle, Mary Gay Scanlon, Governor Tom Wolf, Attorney General Josh Shapiro, Mayor Jim Kenney. Philadelphia we got 13 days. And you do not have to wait for November 3rd to cast your ballot. You have got two ways to vote right now. Number one, you can vote early in person through next Tuesday. If you have not , just go to iwillvote.com/pa and find out where you can vote early. Number two, you can vote from home with a mail-in ballot. And before you send it back, Pennsylvania's got this thing where you have got to use both envelopes. So you have got to read the directions carefully to make sure your vote counts. And if you have already voted, then you have got to help your friends and family make a plan to vote. Take them with you if you vote early, or if you vote in-person on election day, because this election requires every single one of us to do our part. And what we do these next 13 days will matter for decades to come. Now, last time I was in Philadelphia, I was at the constitution center and I was delivering a speech for the Democratic National Convention this year. And I said, during that speech, I have sat in the Oval Office with both of the men who are running for president. I explained that I never thought Donald Trump would embrace my vision or continue my policies but I did hope for the sake of the country that he might show some interest in taking the job seriously, but it has not happened. He has not shown any interest in doing the work or helping anybody but himself and his friends or treating the presidency like a reality show that he can use to get attention. And by the way, even then his TV ratings are down.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3798, "text": "So you know that upsets him. And the rest of us have had to live with the consequences of him proving himself incapable of taking the job seriously. Millions of jobs are gone. Our proud reputation around the world is in tatters. Presidents up for reelection usually ask if the country is better off than it was four years ago. I will tell you one thing, four years ago you'd be tailgating here at the Lincoln instead of watching a speech from your cars. The only people truly better off than they were four years ago are the billionaires who got his tax cuts. Right now as we speak, Trump will not even extend relief to the millions of families who are having trouble paying the rent or putting food on the table because of this pandemic. But he is been doing all right by himself. As it turns out, this was just reported in the last 48 hours. We know that he continues to do business with China because he is got a secret Chinese bank account. Listen, can you imagine if I had had a secret Chinese bank account when I was running for reelection. You think Fox News might have been a little concerned about that? They would've called me Beijing Berry. It is not a great idea to have a president who owes a bunch of money to people overseas. I mean, of the taxes Donald Trump pays, he may be sending more to foreign governments than he pays in the United States. His first year in the White House he only paid $750 in federal income tax. Listen, my first job was at a Baskin Robbins when I was 15 years old. I think I am might have paid more taxes that year working at a dispensing ice cream. How many people here pay less than that? It is just possible now that if you are living high on the hog and you only pay $750 in taxes that maybe, just maybe he might not know what working people are going through here in Pennsylvania. We cannot afford four more years of this, Philadelphia. But the good news is right now you can choose change. Right now you can vote for my friend Joe Biden and his running mate, Kamala Harris as the next president and vice president of the United States of America. You know him and he knows you. But let me, let me tell you how I came to Norman and how I came to love him. 12 years ago, when I chose Joe Biden as my vice presidential running mate, I did not know Joe all that well.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3799, "text": "We had served in the Senate together, but we were not super close. He and I came from different places. We came from different generations. But I came to admire Joe as a man who has learned early on to treat everybody he meets with dignity and respect, living by the words his parents taught him, no one's better than you Joe, but you are better than nobody. And I can tell you the presidency does not change who you are, it reveals who you are. And Joe has shown himself to be a friend of working people. For eight years, Joe was the last one in the room when I faced a big decision. He made me a better president and he is got the character and experience to make us a better country. And he and Kamala are going to be in the fight, not for themselves but for every single one of us. Well, I get that this president wants full credit for the economy he inherited and zero blame for the pandemic that he ignored. Making stuff up does not make people's lives better. You have got to have a plan. You have got to put in the work. And along with the experience to get things done, Joe Biden has concrete plans and policies that will turn our vision of a better, fairer, stronger country into a reality. We literally left this White House a pandemic playbook that would have shown them how to respond before the virus reached our shores. They probably used it to I do not know, prop up a wobbly table somewhere. Eight months into this pandemic, cases are rising again across this country. Donald Trump is not suddenly going to protect all of us. He cannot even take the basic steps to protect himself. Just last night, he complained up in eerie that the pandemic made him go back to work. I am quoting him. He was upset that the pandemic's made him go back to work. This pandemic would have been challenging for any president but this idea that somehow this White House has done anything but completely screw this up. I will give you a very specific example. Korea identified it is first case at the same time that the United States did. At the same time, their per capita death toll is just 1.3% of what ours is. In Canada, it is just 39% of what ours is.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3800, "text": "Other countries are still struggling with the pandemic but they are not doing as bad as we are because they have got a government that is actually been paying attention. And that means lives lost. And that means an economy that does not work. And just yesterday, when asked if he'd do anything differently, Trump said, Not much. Nothing you can think of that could have helped some people keep their loved ones alive? So, Joe's not going to screw up testing. He is not going to call scientists idiots. He is not going to host a super spreader event at the White House. Joe will get this pandemic under control with a plan to make testing free and widely available, to get a vaccine to every American cost free and to make sure our frontline heroes never ask other countries for their equipment they need. His plan will guarantee paid sick leave for workers and parents affected by the pandemic and make sure that the small businesses that hold our communities together and employ millions of Americans can reopen safely. Donald Trump likes to claim he built this economy but America created 1.5 million more jobs in the last three years of the Obama-Biden administration than in the first three years of the Trump-Pence administration. How you figure that? And that was before he could blame the pandemic. Now, he did inherit the longest streak of job growth in American history but just like everything else he inherited, he messed it up. The economic damage he inflicted by botching the pandemic response means he will be the first president since Herbert Hoover to actually lose jobs. Joe's got a plan to create 10 million good clean energy jobs as part of a historic $2 trillion investment to fight climate change, to secure environmental justice. And he will pay for it by rolling back that tax cut for billionaires. And Joe sees this moment not just as a chance to get back to where we were but to finally make long overdue changes so that our economy actually makes life a little easier for everybody, the waitress trying to raise her kid on her own, the student trying to figure out how to pay for next semester's classes, the shift worker who is always on the edge of getting laid off, the cancer survivor who is worried about her preexisting conditions, protections being taken away. Let me tell you something Pennsylvania. This I know to be true, Joe and Kamala will protect your healthcare and expand Medicare and make insurance more affordable for everybody.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3801, "text": "Republicans love to say right before an election that they will protect your preexisting conditions. Now, Joe and I actually protected your policies to make sure people with preexisting conditions could get health insurance and have coverage. We did it through something called the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a Obamacare. And Republicans tried to repeal or undermine it more than 60 times. And when they have been asked about, they keep on promising, We are going to have a great replacement. It is been coming in two weeks for the last 10 years. Where is this great plan to replace Obamacare? They have had 10 years to do it. They have never had one. Instead they have attacked the Affordable Care Act at every turn, driving up costs, driving up the uninsured. Now, they are trying to dismantle your care in the Supreme court as we speak as quickly as they can in the middle of a pandemic with nothing but empty promises to take its place. The idea that you would take healthcare away from people at the very moment where people need it most, what is the logic of that? Joe knows that the first job of a president is to keep us safe from all threats, foreign, domestic or microscopic. When the daily intelligence briefings flash warning signs about a virus, a president cannot ignore them. Just like when Russia puts bounties on the heads of our soldiers in Afghanistan, the commander-in-chief cannot be missing in action. I can tell you this, Joe Biden would never call the men and women of our military suckers or losers. Who does that? He understands that. And he is going to restore our standing in the world because he knows that America's true strength comes from setting an example that the world wants to follow. A nation that stands with democracy, not dictators, a nation that can mobilize and inspire others to overcome threats like climate change and terrorism and poverty and disease. And with Joe and Kamala at the helm, you are not going to have to think about the crazy things they said every day. You are not going to have to argue about them every day. You might be able to have a Thanksgiving dinner without having an argument. You will be able to go about your lives knowing that the president is not going to retweet conspiracy theories about secret cabals running the world or that maybe seals did not actually kill bin Laden. The president of the United States retweeted that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3802, "text": "We are not going to have a president that goes out of his way to insult anybody who does not support him or threaten them with jail. We would not tolerate it from a high school principal. We would not tolerate it from a coach. We would not tolerate it from a co-worker. We would not tolerate it in our family, except for maybe crazy uncle somewhere. I mean, why would we expect and accept this from the President of the United States? And why are folks making excuses for that? They embolden other people to be cruel and divisive and racist, and it frays the fabric of our society, and it affects how our children see things. And it affects the ways that our families get along. It affects how the world looks at America. And by the way, while he is doing all that, it distracts all of us from the truly destructive actions that his appointees are doing all across the government, actions that affect your lives. The Environmental Protection Agency that is supposed to protect our air and our water is right now run by an energy lobbyist that gives polluters free reign to dump unlimited poison into our air and water. The Labor Department that is supposed to protect workers and their rights, right now it is run by a corporate lobbyist who is declared war on workers, guts protections to keep essential folks safe during a pandemic, makes it easier for big corporations to shortchange them on their wages. The Interior Department, that is supposed to protect our public lands and wild spaces, our wildlife and our wilderness. And right now that is run by an oil lobbyist who is determined to sell them to the highest bidder. You have got the Education Department that is supposed to give every kid a chance, and that is run by a billionaire who guts rules designed to protect students from getting ripped off by for profit colleges and stiffs arm students looking for loan relief in the middle of an economic collapse. I mean, the person who runs Medicaid right now is doing their best to kick people off of Medicaid instead of sign them up for Medicaid. When Joe and Kamala are in charge, they are not going to surround themselves with hacks and lobbyists, but they are going to appoint qualified public servants who actually care about looking out for you, for your job, for your family, for your health, for your security, for your planet, and that more than anything is what separates them from their opponents.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3803, "text": "They actually care about every American, including the ones that do not agree with them. And they are going to fight for you every day. They care about you and they care about this democracy. They believe in a democracy. The right to vote is sacred and that we should not be making people wait in line for 10 hours to cast their ballot. They believe that no one, especially the President, is above the law. They understand that protest on behalf of social justice is not un-American. That is how this country was founded, protesting injustice. They understand we do not threaten our political opponents threatening to throw them in jail, just because we disagree with them. They understand that our ability to work together to solve big problems like a pandemic depends more than on just photo-ops. It depends on actually learning the facts and following the science and not just making stuff up whenever it is convenient. Our democracy is not going to work if the people who are supposed to be our leaders lie every day and just make things up. And we have just become numb to it. We have just become immune to it. And, look, this notion of truthfulness and democracy and citizenship, and being responsible, these are not Republican or democratic principles, they are American principles. They are what most of us grew up learning from our parents and our grandparents. They are not White or Black or Latino or Asian values, they are American values, human values, and we need to reclaim them. We have to get those values back at the center of our public life. But to do it, we have got to turn out like never before. We cannot leave any doubt in this election, because you know the President's already said, If this is even close, I am going to just make stuff up. He is already started to do it. So we cannot have any doubt. I do not care about the polls. There were a whole bunch of polls last time, did not work out, because a whole bunch of folks stayed at home and got lazy and complacent. I understand why a lot of Americans can get frustrated by government and can feel like it does not make a difference. Even supporters of mine, during my eight years, there were times where stuff we wanted to get done did not get done and people said, Well, gosh, if Obama did not get it done, then maybe it is just not going to happen. Look, government is not going to solve every problem, it is true.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3804, "text": "Every elected officials going to make some mistakes. And believe me, I have got firsthand experience with the way Republicans in Congress abused the rules to make it easy for special interest to stop progress. A president by himself cannot solve every challenge in a global economy. But if we have got Joe Biden and Kamala Harris in the White House at a House and Senate that are focused on working people, it can make a difference and get millions of people the help they need. A president by himself cannot eliminate all racial bias in our criminal justice system. But if we have got district attorneys and state's attorneys and sheriffs and police chiefs focused on equality and justice, it can make things better. In Pennsylvania, you have just got to flip nine seats in your State House, just five seats in your State Senate, to give Democrats control and new life for policies that'll make a real difference to working families right now. In the end, Pennsylvania, that is what voting's about, making things better, not making things perfect, but putting us on track so that a generation from now we can look back and say, Things got better starting now. And that is what voting's about. Voting's about using the power we have and pooling it together to get a government that is more concerned and more responsive and more focused on you and your lives and your children and your grandchildren and future generations. and future generations. And the fact that we do not get 100% of what we want right away is not a good reason not to vote. It means we have got to vote and then get some change and then vote some more and then get some more change, and then keep on voting until we get it right. And we will never come close to seeing what it would be like if everybody voted, when I hear people say, Well, I do not know, you are voting do not make a difference. We get 50, 55% of people voting. Imagine January 20th, when we swear in a president and a vice president who have a plan to get us out of this mess, who believe in science, and they have a plan to protect this planet for our kids, and who care about working Americans, and they have a plan to help you start getting ahead.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3805, "text": "And who believe in racial equality and gender equality, and believe in not discriminating against people because of their sexual orientation, and are willing to bring us closer to an America where no matter what we look like and where we come from, who we love and what our last name is, if we go out there and we work, we can make it. And we are part of an American family. All of that is possible. All of that is within our reach, if we vote. Because let me tell you something Pennsylvanians, people ask me sometimes, they say, Man, how have you been able to take these last four years, just watching all this? How do you keep your spirits up? And I tell him, I say, look for all the times, these last four years that we have seen our worst impulses revealed, we have also seen what our country can be at its best. We have seen folks of every age and background who've packed city centers and airports in town squares, just so families would not be separated. So another classroom would not get shot up, so our kids would not grow up on an uninhabitable planet. We have seen Americans more racist, joining together to declare in the face of injustice that black lives matter, no more, but no less, so that no child in this country feels the continuing sting of racism. We have seen folks, our essential workers, our healthcare workers risking their lives day in day out to save somebody else's loved ones. We have seen people volunteer and contribute to help those who are having an especially difficult time that right now. That is true in Pennsylvania, that is true all across the country. America is a good and decent place, but we have just seen so much noise and nonsense that sometimes it is hard for us to remember. Philadelphia, I am asking you to remember what this country can be. What it is like when we treat each other with respect and dignity, what it is like when our elected officials actually behave responsibly. I am asking you to believe in Joe's ability, in Kamala's ability to lead this country out of these dark times, and help us build it back better, because we cannot abandon those who are hurting right now. We cannot abandon the children who are not getting the education they need right now. We cannot abandon those protesters who inspired us. We have got to channel their activism into action, we cannot just imagine a better future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsbarackobamacampaignrallyforjoebidenkamalaharrisspeechtranscriptoctober21", "title": "Barack Obama Campaign Rally for Joe Biden & Kamala Harris Speech Transcript October 21", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/barack-obama-campaign-rally-for-joe-biden-kamala-harris-speech-transcript-october-21", "publication_date": "21-10-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3806, "text": "It was 54 years ago that our Government first established the Department of Labor in the United States. It was a confirmation of America's concern for the heart of American society--that is, the workingman and his family. Today, more Americans are working in the United States than have ever worked before. Since 1963 alone, we have added more than 6 million people to the ranks of productive labor. They are earning more, they are working under better conditions, with a greater personal dignity than ever before in all of American history. No one man or no single administration can claim credit for this. But if he is faithful to the people's trust, every President must give perpetual priority to strengthening this very vital Department, for it touches the lives of every citizen in this country. I know that every employee of the Department of Labor shares my very great satisfaction in the success of our recent efforts on behalf of the American workers. We have included more than 8 million new workers under the minimum wage act. We have opened up close to 1 million job opportunities for needy young people under the Neighborhood Youth Corps. We have helped thousands of communities all across America attack poverty. In these and in other efforts, the Department of Labor, under the brilliant leadership of Willard Wirtz, plays a major and a strategic role. We must press on to reduce unemployment. We must raise family incomes in the slums. We must wipe out discrimination because of age in employment. We must give greater self-help assistance to American Indians and migratory farmworkers whose plight continues to trouble the conscience of America. We must strengthen the system of unemployment compensation and insurance to help the jobless and their families live until they can find work. In this Department, as in all concerned with the well-being of America, there is no end to challenge and no limit to the qualifications of the people who are asked to lead it. We have come here to the East Room this afternoon to recognize two such leaders. One is the new Under Secretary of Labor, James J. Reynolds. The other is Thomas R. Donahue, who succeeds him as Assistant Secretary for Labor-Management Relations. Both of these men have most distinguished careers behind them. They both have spent their lives in preparation for the tasks that they undertake. They have demonstrated their capacity to exercise the greatest trust that is known to human affairs--and that is the public trust. America now offers them a new challenge, grateful for their willingness to accept it and confident in their ability to execute it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheswearingjamesjreynoldsundersecretaryandthomasrdonahueassistant", "title": "Remarks at the Swearing In of James J. Reynolds as Under Secretary and Thomas R. Donahue as Assistant Secretary of Labor.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-swearing-james-j-reynolds-under-secretary-and-thomas-r-donahue-assistant", "publication_date": "08-03-1967", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3821, "text": "Any good American who comes to the home of the town meeting feels that he comes to sit at the feet of Gamaliel as regards republican democratic government. And you in New England, in the country which, with the sole exception of the little republic of Switzerland, has developed to a higher degree than anywhere else the true principle of democratic republican representative government you have done more, much more than your share in leavening the whole Republic; and just as long as our people show the capacity for self-government which is made evident in towns like this, just so long we shall prosper as a whole. And when I address an audience like this, which takes part itself in all the workings of the government, I do not have to explain as I have to explain to some other audiences that the government cannot do everything. You can do a good deal through the town, but you can do more for the town than it can do for you. Some people make the mistake of thinking you can convert that, but you cannot. I am glad to be here to speak to you after coming through your library, and especially escorted out here by the veterans of the great war, and by you, Gen. Curtis Guild, my comrade of the lesser war. It is a very good thing, indeed it is an indispensable thing, to have material well-being. You have got to have that as the basis of our civilization, but if you do not build something more on top of that you will have only the foundation, and that is a bad place to live. You have got to have a superstructure, too. In addition to the material prosperity, you must have the spirit which makes that prosperity count. You must have it in peace; you must have it in war. The spirit that has made New England identified not only with self-government, but with the spread of education; the spirit that produces the school and the library; that is the spirit upon which we must build if we hope to make this great nation rise loyally both to her deeds and her opportunities. The men of thin intellects, the men who are competent to feel only intellectual emotions, are not the men who will make a great nation. You have got to have, in addition to the intellect, what counts for much more than intellect character. And in character you must have men good, and you must have them strong. Now you representatives of the great war, who are here today, you went out from '61 to '65.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnahantmassachusetts", "title": "Remarks in Nahant, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-nahant-massachusetts", "publication_date": "25-08-1902", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3822, "text": "I want to begin by offering an update on the tragedy that took place yesterday at Fort Hood. This morning I met with FBI Director Mueller and the relevant agencies to discuss their ongoing investigation into what caused one individual to turn his gun on fellow service men and women. We do not know all the answers yet, and I would caution against jumping to conclusions until we have all the facts. What we do know is that there are families, friends, and an entire nation grieving right now for the valiant men and women who came under attack yesterday in one of the worst mass shootings ever to take place on an American military base. So from now until Veterans Day, I have ordered the flags at the White House and other Federal buildings to be flown at halfstaff. This is a modest tribute to those who lost their lives even as many were preparing to risk their lives for their country. And it is also recognition of the men and women who put their lives on the line every day to protect our safety and uphold our values. We honor their service, we stand in awe of their sacrifice, and we pray for the safety of those who fight and for the families of those who have fallen. And as we continue to learn more about what happened at Fort Hood, this administration will continue to provide you updates in the coming days and weeks. Now, I would also like to announce that I just signed into law a bill that will help grow our economy, save and create new jobs, and provide relief to struggling families and businesses. The need for such a measure was made clear by the jobs report that we received this morning. Although we lost fewer jobs than we did last month, our unemployment rate climbed to over 10 percent, a sobering number that underscores the economic challenges that lie ahead. When we first came into office, our immediate goal was to stop the freefall that caused our economy to shrink at an alarming rate. We have succeeded in achieving that goal, as our economy grew last quarter for the first time in a year. But history tells us that job growth always lags behind economic growth, which is why we have to continue to pursue measures that will create new jobs. And I can promise you that I will not let up until the Americans who want to find work can find work and until all Americans can earn enough to raise their families and keep their businesses open. The bill I signed today will help folks do that while continuing to grow our economy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningtheworkerhomeownershipandbusinessassistanceact2009", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-worker-homeownership-and-business-assistance-act-2009", "publication_date": "06-11-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3823, "text": "It is a bill that extends unemployment benefits for up to 20 additional weeks, with the longest extension for the hardest hit States. Already these benefits have helped 16 million unemployed Americans, and now that I have signed this bill, an additional 700,000 Americans who are still searching for work will be able to sign up for an extension of those benefits immediately. Although the extension will help over 1 million Americans, it will not just put money into the people's pockets who are receiving the benefits. Economists tell us that when these benefits are spent on food or clothing or rent, it actually strengthens our economy and creates new jobs. Now, this bill will also cut taxes for struggling businesses, with even larger cuts for small businesses, which means that thousands of entrepreneurs will get the cash they need to avoid laying off workers or closing their doors, and will extend the tax credit for all home buyers through April of next year while strengthening it with stronger antifraud measures. The rebound in the housing market was one of the big factors that contributed to the growth of the economy last quarter and brought hundreds of thousands of families into the housing market. We want to give even more families the chance to own their own home. Now, it is important to note that the bill I signed will not add to our deficit. It builds on a Recovery Act that is already saved or created over 100-over 1 million jobs, and it will lead to even more in the weeks and months ahead. We will also build on the measure I signed today with further steps to grow our economy in the future. To that end, my economic team is looking at ideas such as additional investments in our aging roads and bridges, incentives to encourage families and businesses to make buildings more energy efficient, additional tax cuts for businesses to create jobs, additional steps to increase the flow of credit to small businesses, and an aggressive agenda to promote exports and help American manufacturers sell their products around the world. So although it will take time and it will take patience, I am confident that our economy will recover. I am confident that we are moving in the right direction.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningtheworkerhomeownershipandbusinessassistanceact2009", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-worker-homeownership-and-business-assistance-act-2009", "publication_date": "06-11-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3846, "text": "As you know, I just met with leaders of both parties to discuss a way forward in light of the severe budget cuts that start to take effect today. I told them these cuts will hurt our economy. They will cost us jobs. They fought hard to recover from the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, and we will get through this as well. Even with these cuts in place, folks all across this country will work hard to make sure that we keep the recovery going. At a time when our businesses have finally begun to get some traction-hiring new workers, bringing jobs back to America-we should not be making a series of dumb, arbitrary cuts to things that businesses depend on and workers depend on, like education and research and infrastructure and defense. And at a time when too many Americans are still looking for work, it is inexcusable. Now, what is important to understand is that not everyone will feel the pain of these cuts right away. Beginning this week, many middle class families will have their lives disrupted in significant ways. Businesses that work with the military, like the Virginia shipbuilder that I visited on Tuesday, may have to lay folks off. Communities near military bases will take a serious blow. Hundreds of thousands of Americans who serve their country-Border Patrol agents, FBI agents, civilians who work at the Pentagon-all will suffer significant pay cuts and furloughs. All of this will cause a ripple effect throughout our economy. Layoffs and pay cuts means that people have less money in their pockets, and that means that they have less money to spend at local businesses. That means lower profits. That means fewer hires. a slow grind that will intensify with each passing day. So economists are estimating that as a consequence of this sequester, that we could see growth cut by over one-half of 1 percent. It will cost about 750,000 jobs at a time when we should be growing jobs more quickly. So every time that we get a piece of economic news, over the next month, next 2 months, next 6 months, as long as the sequester is in place, we will know that that economic news could have been better if Congress had not failed to act. None of this is necessary. It is happening because a choice that Republicans in Congress have made. They have allowed these cuts to happen because they refuse to budge on closing a single wasteful loophole to help reduce the deficit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1155", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1155", "publication_date": "01-03-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3847, "text": "As recently as yesterday, they decided to protect special interest tax breaks for the well off and well connected, and they think that that is apparently more important than protecting our military or middle class families from the pain of these cuts. smart spending cuts, entitlement reform, tax reform that makes the Tax Code more fair for families and businesses without raising tax rates-all so that we can responsibly lower the deficit without laying off workers or forcing parents to scramble for childcare or slashing financial aid for college students. It is the kind of approach that I have proposed for 2 years. It is what I ran on last year. The majority of the American people agree with me in this approach, including, by the way, a majority of Republicans. We just need Republicans in Congress to catch up with their own party and their country on this. And if they did so, we could make a lot of progress. I do know that there are Republicans in Congress who privately, at least, say that they would rather close tax loopholes than let these cuts go through. I know that there are Democrats who'd rather do smart entitlement reform than let these cuts go through. In the coming days and in the coming weeks I am going to keep on reaching out to them, both individually and as groups of Senators or Members of the House and say to them, let us fix this, not just for a month or two, but for years to come. Because the greatest nation on Earth does not conduct its business in month-to-month increments or by careening from crisis to crisis. And America has got a lot more work to do. In the meantime, we cannot let political gridlock around the budget stand in the way of other areas where we can make progress. I was pleased to see that the House passed the Violence Against Women Act yesterday. That is a big win for not just women, but for families and for the American people. It is a law that is going to save lives and help more Americans live free from fear. It is something that we have been pushing on for a long time. And it is an example of how we can still get some important bipartisan legislation through this Congress even though there is still these fiscal arguments taking place. And I think there are other areas where we can make progress even with the sequester unresolved. I will continue to push for those initiatives. I am going to keep pushing for high-quality preschool for every family that wants it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference1155", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-1155", "publication_date": "01-03-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3877, "text": "President, Mr. Secretary General, my fellow delegates, to all those who dedicate themselves to this noble mission of this institution. It is my honor to speak to you for the first time as president of the United States. We meet this year in a moment of intermingled with great pain and extraordinary possibility. We have lost so much to this devastating pandemic that continues to claim lives around the world and impact so much on our existence. We are mourning more than 4.5 million people, people of every nation, from every background. Each death is an individual heartbreak, but our shared grief is a poignant reminder that our collective future will hinge on our ability to recognize our common humanity and to act together. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the clear and urgent choice that we face here at the dawning of what must be a decisive decade for our world. A decade that will quite literally determine our futures. As a global community, we are challenged by urgent and looming crises, and where in lie enormous opportunities if we can summon the will and resolve to seize these opportunities. Will we work together to save lives, defeat ENTITY everywhere and take the necessary steps to prepare ourselves for the next pandemic, for there will be another one? Or will we fail to harness the tools at our disposal as more virulent, dangerous variants take hold? Will we meet the threat of the challenging climate we are all feeling already ravaging every part of our world with extreme weather, or will we suffer the merciless march of ever worsening droughts and floods, more intense fires and hurricanes, longer heat waves and rising seas? Will we affirm and uphold the human dignity and human rights under which nations in common cause more than seven decades ago formed this institution? Will we apply and strengthen the core tenants of the international system, including the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as we seek to shape the emergence of new technologies and deter new threats. Or will we allow those universal principles to be trampled and twisted in the pursuit of naked political power? In my view, how we answer these questions in this moment, whether we choose to fight for our shared future or not, will reverberate for generations yet to come. Simply put, we stand in my view at an inflection point in history. And I am here today to share with you how the United States intends to work with partners and allies to answer these questions.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3878, "text": "And the commitment of my new administration helped lead the world toward a more peaceful, prosperous future for all people. Instead of continuing to fight the wars of the past, we are fixing our eyes on devoting our resources of the challenges that hold the keys to our collective future. Ending this pandemic, addressing the climate crisis, managing the shifts in global power dynamics, shaping the rules of the world on vital issues like trade, cyber, and emerging technologies and facing the threat of terrorism as it stands today. We have ended 20 years of conflict in Afghanistan. And as we close this period of relentless war, we are opening a new era of relentless diplomacy, of using the power of our development aid to invest in new ways of lifting people up around the world, of renewing and defending democracy, proving that no matter how challenging or how complex the problems we are going to face, government by and for the people is still the best way to deliver for all of our people. And as the United States turns our focus to the priorities and the regions of the world, like the Indo-Pacific that are most consequential today and tomorrow, we will do so with our allies and partners through cooperation and multilateral institutions like the United Nations to amplify our collective strength and speed, our progress toward dealing with these global challenges. It is the fundamental truth of the 21st century within each of our countries and as a global community, that our own success is bound up in other succeeding as well. To deliver for our own people, we must also engage deeply with the rest of the world to ensure that our own future, we must work together with other partners, our partners toward a shared future. Our security, our prosperity, and our very freedoms are interconnected in my view as never before. Over the last eight months, I prioritized rebuilding our alliances, revitalizing our partnerships, and recognizing they are essential and central to America's enduring security and prosperity. We have reaffirmed our sacred NATO Alliance to article five commitment. We are working with our allies toward a new strategic concept that will help our alliance better take on the evolving threats of today and tomorrow. We renewed our engagement with the European Union, a fundamental partner in tackling the full range of significant issues facing our world today. We elevated the quad partnership among Australia, India, Japan, and the United States to take on challenges ranging from health security, to climate, to emerging technologies.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3879, "text": "We are engaging with regional institutions from to the African Union to the Organization of American States, to focus on people's urgent needs for better health and better economic outcomes. We are back at the table in international forums, especially the United Nations to focus attention and dispar global action on shared challenges. We are reengaged at the World Health Organization and working in close partnership with Kovacs to deliver life-saving vaccines around the world. We rejoin the Paris Climate Agreement and we are running to retake a seat in the Human Rights Council next year at the UN. And as the United States seeks to rally the world action, we will lead not just through the example of our power, but God willing with the power of our example. The United States will continue to defend ourselves, our allies, and our interest against attack, including terrorist threats, as we prepare to use force, if any is necessary. US military power must be our tool of last resort. It should not be used as an answer to every problem we see around the world. Indeed, today, many of our greatest concerns cannot be solved or even addressed through the force of arms. Bombs and bullets cannot defend against ENTITY or its future variants. To fight this pandemic, we need a collective act of science and political will. We need to act now to get shots and arms as fast as possible, and expand access to oxygen, tests, treatments to save lives around the world. And for the future, we need to create a new mechanism to finance global health security that builds on our existing development assistance and a global health threat council that is armed with the tools we need to monitor and identify emerging pandemics so that we can take immediate action. Already the United States has put more than $15 billion toward the global ENTITY response. We have shipped more than 160 million doses of ENTITY vaccine to other countries. This includes 130 million doses from our own supply and the first tranches of the half a billion doses of Pfizer vaccine, we purchased to donate through COVAX. Planes carrying vaccines from the United States have already landed in 100 countries, bringing people all over the world, a little dose of hope as one American nurse termed it to me. And tomorrow at the US hosted Global ENTITY Summit, I will be announcing additional commitments as we seek to advance the fight against ENTITY and hold ourselves accountable around specific targets on three key challenges. This year has also brought widespread death and devastation from the borderless climate crisis.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3880, "text": "The extreme weather events that we have seen in every part of the world, and you all know it and feel it represent what the Secretary General has rightly called code red for humanity. And the scientists and experts are telling us that we are fast approaching a point of no return in a literal sense. To keep within our reach the vital goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, every nation needs to bring their highest possible ambitions to the table when we meet in Glasgow for COP26. In April, I announced the United States ambitious new goal under the Paris Agreement. To reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the United States by 50 to 52% below 2005 levels by 2030, as we work toward achieving the clean energy economy with net zero emissions by 2050. And my administration's working closely with our Congress to make critical investments in green infrastructure and electric vehicles will help us lock in progress at home toward our climate goals. And the best part is making these ambitious investments is not just good climate policy, it is a chance for each of our countries to invest in ourselves and our own future. It is an enormous opportunity to create good paying jobs for workers in each of our countries and to spur long-term economic growth that will improve the quality of life for all of our people. We also have to support the countries and people that will be hit the hardest and that have the fewest resources to help them adapt. In April, I announced that United States will double our public international financing to help developing nations tackle the climate crisis. And today, I am proud to announce that we will work with the Congress to double that number again, including for adaptation efforts. This will make the United States leader in public climate finance, and with our added support together with increased private capital from other donors, we will be able to meet the goal of mobilizing $100 billion to support climate action in developing nations. As we deal with these crises, we are also encountering a new era. An era of new technologies and possibilities that have potential to release and reshape every aspect of human existence. And it is up to all of us to determine whether these technologies are forced to empower people or to deepen repression. As new technologies continue to evolve, we will work together with our democratic partners to ensure that new advances in areas from biotechnology to quantum computing, 5G, artificial intelligence, and more are used to lift people up, to solve problems and advance human freedom, not to suppress dissent or target minority communities.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3881, "text": "And the United States tends to make a profound investment in research and innovation, working with countries at all stages of economic development to develop new tools and technologies to help us tackle the challenges of this second quarter of the 21st century and beyond. We are hardening our critical infrastructure against cyber attacks, disrupting ransomware networks and working to establish clear rules of the road for all nations, as it relates to cyberspace. We reserve the right to respond decisively to cyber attacks that threaten our people, our allies, or our interest. We will pursue new rules of global trade and economic growth to strive a level of playing field. So it is not artificially tipped in favor of any one country at the expense of others. And every nation has the right and opportunity to compete fairly. We will strive to ensure that basic labor rights, environmental safeguards, and intellectual property are protected, and that the benefits of globalization are shared broadly throughout all our societies. We will continue to uphold the long-standing rules and norms that have formed the guardrails of international engagement for decades that have been essential to the development of nations around the world. Bedrock commitments, like freedom of navigation, adherence to international laws and treaties, support for arms control measures to reduce the risk and enhance transparency. Our approach is firmly around it and fully consistent with the United Nation's mission and the values we have agreed to when we drafted this charter. These are commitments we all made, and that we are all bound to uphold. And as we strive to deal with these urgent challenges, whether they are long-standing or newly emerging, we must also deal with one another. All of the major powers of the world have a duty, in my view, to carefully manage their relationships. So they do not tip from responsible competition to conflict. The United States will compete and we will compete vigorously and lead with our values and our strength. We will stand up for our allies and our friends and oppose attempts by stronger countries to dominate weaker ones, whether through changes to territory by force, economic coercion or technical exploitation or disinformation, but we are not seeking, say it again, we are not seeking a new cold war or a world divided into rigid blocks. Even if we have intense disagreement in other areas, because we will all suffer the consequences of our failure, if we do not come together to address the urgent threats like ENTITY and climate change or enduring threats like nuclear proliferation. The United States remains committed for ready to preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3882, "text": "We are prepared to return to full compliance if Iran does the same. Similarly, we seek serious and sustained diplomacy to pursue the complete denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. We seek concrete progress toward an available plan with tangible commitments that would increase stability on the peninsula and in the region, as well as improve the lives of the people in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. We must also remain vigilant to the threat of terror, that terrorism poses to all our nations. We know the bitter string of terrorism. The bitter sting of terrorism is real. We have almost all experienced it. Last month, we lost 13 American heroes and almost 200 innocent Afghan civilians in a heinous terrorist attack at Kabul airport. Those who commit acts of terrorism against us will continue to find a determined enemy in the United States. The world today is not the world of 2001 though, and the United States is not the same country we were when we were attacked on 9/11, 20 years ago. Today, we are better equipped to detect, to prevent terrorist threats and we are more resilient in our ability to repel them and to respond. We know how to build effective partnerships to dismantle terrorist networks by targeting their financing and support systems, countering their propaganda, preventing their travel as well as disrupting imminent attacks. We will meet terrorist threats that arise today and the future with a full range of tools available to us, including working in cooperation with local partners so that we need not be so reliant on large scale military deployments. One of the most important ways we can effectively enhance security and reduce violence is by seeking to improve the lives of the people all over the world, who see that their governments are not serving their needs. Corruption fuels inequality, siphons off a nation's resources, spreads across borders and generates human suffering. It is nothing less than a national security threat in the 21st century. Around the world, we are increasingly seeing citizens demonstrate their discontent. Seeing the wealthy and well connected grow richer and richer, taking payoffs and bribes, operating above the law while the vast majority of the people struggle to find a job or put food on the table or to get their businesses off the ground, or simply send their children to school. People have taken to the streets in every region to demand that their governments address people's basic needs, give everyone a fair shot to succeed and protect their God-given rights.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3883, "text": "And in that chorus of voices, across languages and continents, we hear a common cry. As leaders, it is our duty to answer that call, not to silence it. The United States has committed to using our resources and our international platform to support these voices, listen to them, partner with them, to find ways to respond that advance human dignity around the world. With infrastructure that is low quality or that feeds corruption or exacerbates environmental degradation, may only end up contributing to greater challenges for countries over time. Done the right way, however, with transparent, sustainable investment in projects that respond to the country's needs and engage their local workers to maintain high labor and environmental standards, infrastructure can be a strong foundation that allows societies in low and middle income countries to grow and to prosper. That is the idea behind the Build Back Better world. And together with the private sector and our G7 partners, we aim to mobilize hundreds of billions of dollars in infrastructure investment. We will also continue to be the world's largest contributor to humanitarian assistance, bringing food, water, shelter, emergency healthcare, and other vital life-saving aid to millions of people in need. When the earthquake strikes, the typhoon rages or disaster anywhere in the world, the United States shows up, we will be ready to help. And at a time when nearly one in three people globally do not have access to adequate food, adequate food just last year, the United States is committing to rallying our partners to address immediate malnutrition and to ensure that we can sustainably feed the world for the decades to come. To that end, the United States is making a $10 billion commitment to end hunger and invest in food systems at home and abroad. Since 2000, the United States government has provided more than $140 billion to advance health and strengthen health systems. And we will continue our leadership to drive these vital investments to make people's lives better every single day, just give them a little breathing room. And as we strive to make lives better, we must work with renewed purpose to end the conflicts that are driving so much pain and hurt around the world. We must redouble our diplomacy and commit to political negotiations, not violence, as a tool of first resort, to manage tensions around the world. We must seek a future of greater peace and security for all people of the Middle East.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3884, "text": "The commitment of the United States Digital Securities, without question, are our support for an independent Jewish state is unequivocal, but I continue to believe that a two-state solution is the best way to ensure Israel's future as a Jewish democratic state, living in peace, alongside of viable sovereign and democratic Palestinian state. We are a long way from that goal at this moment, but we must never allow ourselves to give up on the possibility of progress. We cannot give up on solving raging civil conflicts, including in Ethiopia and Yemen, who are fighting between warring parties is driving famine, horrific violence, human rights violations against civilians, including an unconscionable use of rape, as a weapon of war. We will continue to work with the international community, to press for peace and bring an end to this suffering. As we pursue diplomacy across the board, the United States will champion the democratic values that go to the very heart of who we are as a nation and a people. It is stamped into our DNA as a nation and critically it is stamped into the DNA of this institution, the United States, we sometimes forget. All members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice, and peace in the world. The founding ethos of the United Nations places the rights of individuals at the center of our system, and that clarity and vision must not be ignored or misinterpreted. The United States will do our part, but we will be more successful and more impactful if all of our nations are working toward the full mission to which we are called. That is why more than 100 nations united around a shared statement, and the Security Council adopted a resolution outlining how we will support the people of Afghanistan moving forward, laying out the expectations to which we will hold the Taliban when it comes to respecting universal human rights. We all must advocate for the rights of women and girls to use their full talents, to contribute economically, politically, and socially, and pursue their dreams free of violence and intimidation, from Central America to the Middle East to Africa to Afghanistan, wherever it appears in the world. We all must call out and condemn the targeting and oppression of racial, ethnic, and religious minorities, whether it occurs in Xinjiang or northern Ethiopia or anywhere in the world. We all must defend the rights of LGBTQI individuals so they can live and love openly without fear, whether it is Chechnya or Cameroon or anywhere.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3885, "text": "As we steer our nations toward this inflection point and work to meet today's fast-moving, cross-cutting challenges, let me be clear. I am not agnostic about the future we want for the world. The future will belong to those who embrace human dignity, not trample it. The future will belong to those who unleash the potential of their people, not those who stifle it. The future will belong to those who give their people the ability to breathe free, not those who seek to suffocate their people with an iron hand. The authoritarians of the world may seek to proclaim the end of the age of democracy, but they are wrong. It lives in anti-corruption activists, human rights defenders, the journalists, the peace protesters, on the front lines of this struggle in Belarus, Burma, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, and everywhere in between. It lives in the brave women of Sudan who withstood violence and oppression to push a genocidal dictator from power and who keep working every day to defend their democratic progress. It lives in the proud Moldovans who helped deliver a landslide victory for the forces of democracy with a mandate to fight graft to build a more inclusive economy. It lives in the young people of Zambia who harnessed the power of their vote for the first time, turning out in record numbers to denounce corruption and chart a new path for their country. And while no democracy is perfect, including the United States, we will continue to struggle to live up to the highest ideals to heal our divisions, and we face down violence and insurrection. Democracy remains the best tool we have to unleash our full human potential. My fellow leaders, this is the moment where we must prove ourselves the equals of those who come before us, who with vision and values and determined faith in our collective future built our United Nations, broke the cycle of war and destruction, and laid the foundations for more than seven decades of relative peace and growing global prosperity. Now we must again come together to affirm the inherent humanity that unites us is much greater than any outward divisions or disagreements. We must choose to do more than we think we can do alone, so that we accomplish what we must together.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenungeneralassemblyspeechtranscriptclimateagendacovid19vaccines", "title": "Joe Biden UN General Assembly Speech Transcript: Climate Agenda, COVID-19 Vaccines", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-un-general-assembly-speech-transcript-climate-agenda-covid-19-vaccines", "publication_date": "21-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3906, "text": "And someplace in here are two of your Congressmen, Kirk Weldon and Don Ritter, and your former State senator, who is a candidate for the Congress, Ed Howard. Now, in case you are wondering why I have dropped in I like great teams, and I have heard that for great teams you cannot do better than the Royals, the Friars, and, of course, the Pandas. Well, now, before I start, I have a request from my roommate. Please, for your family, for your friends, for your country but most of all for yourselves just say no to drugs and alcohol. By the way, if you do not know already, maybe I could tell you where that whole idea came from those three words. It was several years ago, and Nancy was in Oakland speaking to a school class about drugs. And a little girl asked, What do we do when someone offers us drugs? And since then, there are more than 12,000 Just Say No clubs that have sprung up around the country. that you have one here one of those 12,000 Just Say No clubs? Now, you may not know it, but I have heard a lot about your schools, and I like what I have heard. I have heard, for example, about your code of values, as well as that you care about the community. I have heard many of you volunteer in the Delaware County Hospital next door and do other community work. I cannot help thinking that when a certain friend of mine talks about a Thousand Points of Light in America's sky, when he speaks of the thousands of American communities where neighbors reach out to help neighbors in need, well, one of the brightest of these points of light is a place called Upper Darby, Pennsylvania. I have also heard that you young people here in Upper Darby care about the future-about your future, about America's future and that you are preparing for it. I have heard that you have set high standards for yourselves in both your college preparatory and vocational programs and that when it comes to looking to the future you cannot beat the students at Upper Darby High, or Monsignor Bonner High, or Archbishop Prendergast High. Well, I am here today because I believe you are right to care about the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksareahighschoolstudentsandfacultyupperdarbypennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to Area High School Students and Faculty in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-area-high-school-students-and-faculty-upper-darby-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "12-10-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3907, "text": "I believe that if we have faith in Him who created us and if we are true to the values of family, work, and community that He has taught us and that have always been America's guiding stars on the seas of history, then America's future and your future hold promises bigger than the sky and more vast than the galaxies. Now, I know that many of you are not yet old enough to vote. And yet you have a stake in this year's election, and you can have a role in it, too. As you know, 8 years ago I visited this school and stood in this place as a candidate for the high office that I now hold. The students in this school then now have jobs. They are starting families, and they are establishing themselves in community and career. All we have accomplished in the last 8 years is making their lives easier, better, and more hopeful. In i year or 2 years or 8 years, you, too, will have a job and a family and big plans for the future. By making sure that your parents and friends who can vote cast their ballots, you can help make sure that America remains a land fertile with opportunity for all your dreams to blossom. That is what America is like today, and for good reason. In the last 8 years, we have set our sights once again on the enduring values of family, faith, neighborhood, opportunity, and freedom. The results have been 18 million new jobs since our expansion began, more new jobs than Europe and Japan combined have created in this same period; an unemployment rate the lowest it is been in 14 years; the greatest flowering of new businesses and new technologies in the history of the world; the longest peacetime economic expansion ever recorded; and more people at work today than ever before in the history of the United States of America. Think of what 255,000 new jobs in America last month alone means to you. When you leave school there will be work, paychecks, and a chance to make your hopes come true. America has created, on average, a quarter of a million jobs a month in the 71 months since our expansion began. And today not only are more Americans at work but a higher proportion of our labor force is employed than ever before in the history of the country. And job for job, the jobs we have created in our expansion pay better than the jobs that existed before our expansion began. Today the United States of America is the envy of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksareahighschoolstudentsandfacultyupperdarbypennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to Area High School Students and Faculty in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-area-high-school-students-and-faculty-upper-darby-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "12-10-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3908, "text": "I believe prosperity and economic growth are the products of strong values. In the last 8 years, we have worked to return America's values to all areas of American Government. We have said it is time to return to basics in education, and one of those basics is that you should be permitted to open your schoolday with a simple, silent, voluntary prayer. If Congress can open each day with a prayer, why cannot you? And you know, Congress probably needs it more than you do. We have said it is time to return to basics in reading the Constitution and to acknowledge that the Constitution does not prevent parents from receiving a tuition tax credit when they send their children to parochial schools. And in no way is it meant to deny the right to life. We have said it is time to return to basics in protecting America's neighborhoods. And that means among other things appointing judges who do not only respect the rights of criminals but also those of the victims of crime. And we have said it is time to return to the basics in protecting America itself. We have returned to the fundamental wisdom that the way to peace is not through American weakness but through American strength. Yes, we have had 8 great years. Have we done as much as we can do? You might as well ask Eagles quarterback Randall Cunningham if after his spectacular game Monday night ask him if he is gone as far as he can go. Yes, I believe that the growth that our expansion has brought America can be just the beginning. America is entering a new age that will open opportunities for you and all young Americans, opportunities that we in the older generation could not even have dreamed of when we were your age. Let me tell you about something I heard the other day. It has to do with the technological revolution that is going on all around us and that many say has already surpassed the Industrial Revolution in changing the way humanity lives in the years ahead. The heart of this revolution is a tiny silicon chip that you can hold on the tip of your finger and still see most of the finger. Today that silicon chip has the incredible computing power of a million transistors; that is, of the biggest computers of the 1960's. Yet according to one of our nation's most prominent research directors, in less than 15 years, he says the power of a billion transistors will be packed on a chip. That is the power of 20 of today's most advanced computers all in a laptop computer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksareahighschoolstudentsandfacultyupperdarbypennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to Area High School Students and Faculty in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-area-high-school-students-and-faculty-upper-darby-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "12-10-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3909, "text": "Think of what that can mean in the ability of your generation to cure disease, to make the world more productive and opportunity for all peoples more plentiful, to build a strategic defense against ballistic missiles to end forever mankind's nightmare of nuclear terror, and to pursue your dreams wherever they will take you. That is the future that awaits you. The only limits will be those of your imagination and your courage. Well, we ain't seen nothing yet. I hope as you study and work to build America's future and your own, you never forget that prosperity has a purpose a purpose that is part of His larger plan. It gives each of us the opportunity to raise a healthy family in the right way, to reach out to those who need help in our community, to dream great dreams, and to make our dreams come true. Among life's deepest truths is that all that is done for you is but an opportunity and invitation to do something for others. Bill Bennett, who recently retired as our Secretary of Education, tells of traveling around the country, visiting the 30 schools that he'd identified as exceptional models. He says he was stunned to realize that each school began each day with the Pledge of Allegiance or the Star Spangled Banner. The valuable lesson is that there is something greater than yourself that you owe allegiance to, but that is also part of you. I wish a prayer could have gone with those pledges. Love God, love family, love country, and love thy neighbor as thyself. Yes, America's prosperity is both an opportunity and a challenge, and I know that you are up to it. As part of my job, I have visited schools all over the country, and wherever I go, I find myself remembering the words of General George C. Marshall when asked why he was so confident that we would win the Second World War. We have a secret weapon, he said. And when asked about that, he said, It is just the best blankety-blank kids in the whole world. Well, as I look at you and meet young people like you all over the country, I know we still have a secret weapon, and it is the best blankety-blank kids in the world. I am dedicating myself this year to making sure that this future of hope built on opportunity and traditional values remains open to each one of you. I believe that the decisions we Americans make at the polls this year will determine whether or not that future will be bright.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksareahighschoolstudentsandfacultyupperdarbypennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to Area High School Students and Faculty in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-area-high-school-students-and-faculty-upper-darby-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "12-10-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3910, "text": "And as I said before, even if you cannot vote you still have a stake, and you can have a role by getting family and friends who can vote, to vote. An awful lot of our people who are registered, citizens and so forth, do not bother to vote. I do have a favorite. When you have to change horses in midstream, does not it make sense to switch to one who is going the same way you are? It is not a matter of personality, but of philosophy. For example, it just seems to me that for those who espouse a permissive, liberal judicial philosophy, to turn around and pose as tough on crime is the greatest disguise since monsters inhabited human bodies in the movie Aliens. Now, if you are talking to friends about getting out and voting and they are not sure they want to go to the trouble, would you ask them for me to think of what it means to be able to vote? You hold history in your hands. Earlier this year, I had the privilege of doing something I never thought an American President would be able to do. I spoke to students in Moscow, at the state university of Moscow, about the glories of freedom. Only if they are very lucky and rise high in the Communist Party will any one of them ever have the influence on the course of this country's history and world history that each American has just by walking into the voting booth. Ours is a system of three equal branches of government. Two branches, Congress and the President, are chosen by election, and the third branch, the courts, is chosen by the other two branches. When you vote for a candidate for the Senate or the House, you are voting for the direction of the country and the world as much as when you vote for President. We hear a lot about the budget deficit these days. But in fact, I have heard my name linked to it. Well, under the Constitution only the Congress can spend money. Yes, the Congress is the only one in government that can spend a dime; the President cannot spend a thing. Congress makes the budget. And if you want to see the Federal deficit fall, remember, a vote cast for a Senator or Representative is at least as important as a vote for President.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksareahighschoolstudentsandfacultyupperdarbypennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to Area High School Students and Faculty in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-area-high-school-students-and-faculty-upper-darby-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "12-10-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3911, "text": "It is very disturbing to me that America's young people, who with so many years ahead of them have a bigger stake in the future than anyone else and yet our young people of voting age so far vote in lower numbers than all the other age groups. Perhaps you have heard of Will Rogers, the great American humorist of the 1920's and '30's. Will Rogers once said that the people who are elected are no better and no worse than the people who elected them. But they are all better than people who do not vote at all. Well, I know you and your friends are better than that. So, before I go, let me ask you something. I am going to ask for a commitment now, and if you shout yes, I will take it as a promise. Remember, you can talk to family and friends you know and make sure they cast their ballots. Now, if you are not old enough to vote, that can be your way of voting by getting someone to vote who was not sure that he or she would. Go to the polls yourself and make sure those close to you vote, too. On November 8th, would you get your family and friends to go to the polls and vote? You just made my day. In the years ahead, whenever election day rolls around, I hope you will not forget the privilege and honor of being an American and the privilege you have of helping to govern this great nation, under God, with liberty and justice for all. Yes, America is truly the last, best hope of humanity, a city on a hill, a light unto the nations. I know that you know this. I know that some of you or your friends know firsthand what life without our liberties and our democracy is like and what it means to sacrifice everything to journey against all odds halfway around the world to come to America. I said at the start I have seen much to like about your schools. I have also seen what some of you who have met oppression face-to-face have written about freedom. And I like that, too. Freedom reminds me when people left their country they almost died because they wanted a better life. American freedom means to me that every country's people are living together like a family for a new life. Freedom is the right to be myself, to reach my goals. Freedom means I have the power to speak with President Reagan in the White House. Well, now, let me explain that a little bit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksareahighschoolstudentsandfacultyupperdarbypennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to Area High School Students and Faculty in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-area-high-school-students-and-faculty-upper-darby-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "12-10-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3912, "text": "I have a new hobby, and that hobby is collecting jokes that I can absolutely prove are created by the people in the Soviet Union and told among themselves. And I have collected quite a number of them. I told a couple of them to General Secretary Gorbachev, and he laughed. Well, the one I told him about has a little bit to do with what I had just said back there. One of their stories is that an American and a Russian are arguing about their two governments. And the American said, Look, in my country I can walk into the Oval Office. I can pound the President's desk and say, 'ENTITY, I do not like the way you are running our country.' And the Russian said, I can do that. And he said, Yes, I can go into the Kremlin, into the General Secretary's office, pound his desk, and say, 'Mr. General Secretary, I do not like the way President Reagan's running his country.' But now I will just mention a letter that I received, a letter from a gentleman who said something I'd never thought of before. He said, You can move to France to live, but you cannot become a Frenchman. You can move to Japan to live; you cannot become Japanese. And he went on naming several countries. But he said, Anyone from any corner of the world can come to America and become an American. I mentioned earlier in my remarks the Constitution. Every country, I think, has a constitution oh, about most of them that I know of do, including the Soviet Union. Then what is the great difference between theirs and ours? Many of them have some of the same lines in them. We, the people. Those other constitutions are documents in which the Government tells the people what their privileges are and what they can do. Our Constitution is a document in which we, the people, tell the Government what it can do. And it cannot do anything other than what is prescribed for it in that Constitution. And so, today I would just remind you, in closing, you not only have the power to speak to the President but to pick the President and the Congress and the State legislature-to determine the course of our history and to protect those liberties that have made this good and gentle land, yes, the envy of the world. And now, thank you, and God bless you all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksareahighschoolstudentsandfacultyupperdarbypennsylvania", "title": "Remarks to Area High School Students and Faculty in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-area-high-school-students-and-faculty-upper-darby-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "12-10-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3919, "text": "Good job you did Cody. Let us have some fun. I really am thrilled to be here in Midland, Texas with the extraordinary men and women of Double Eagle Energy, and what a nice welcome. Thanks to the hard working citizens like you in United States Of America this is now the number one energy superpower anywhere in the world, so congratulations. We are here today to celebrate your incredible achievements, we are also here to send a clear message to the Zealots radicals and extremists trying to shut down your and to make America subservient to foreign producers. That will not happen to this nation again. A long time to be independent, and as long as I am your president, we will never let anyone put American energy out of business, which is what they'd like to do. We will never again be relying on hostile foreign suppliers. We will defend your jobs and we will defend the Lone Star State, I love this state. We will defend Americans who found energy independence. Before going any further I want to provide you with a brief update on our battle against the China virus. Our hears are with the people of Texas. We love our people. We love our country. Statewide presentive patients testing positive has stabilized, and the number of new cases has begun to substantially decline. To protect our seniors my administration has deployed personal protective equipment and rapid point of care testing systems to every Medicare and Medicaid-certified nursing home in your state. No matter where you go they have it. This week, access hospitals are receiving 500 cases of antiviral treatment remdesivir. Under my administration's Operation Warp Speed, we are developing vaccines in record time. Earlier this week, a promising vaccine entered the final stage of clinical trials long ahead of schedule, with more following very quickly behind. We have some of the greatest companies, labs in the world doing this. Together we will end the plague from China. We will defeat the virus. I want to thank everyone at Double Eagle Energy for hosting us today, including co-founders, two great, young, smart people, Cody Campbell and John Sellers. Energy secretary Dan Brouillette, Texas says keep him, we really kept him very busy. He is out there fighting for you. I want to tell you. Representatives, and these are friends of mine and they are warriors, Jodey Arrington and Mike Conaway, thank you fellas. He is working hard and you are doing a fantastic job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeaksatmidlandoilrigtranscriptjuly29signspipelinepermits", "title": "Donald Trump Speech Transcript at Midland Oil Rig July 29: Signs Pipeline Permits", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-midland-oil-rig-transcript-july-29-signs-pipeline-permits", "publication_date": "29-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3920, "text": "Our people are working together and you are getting everything you need. Nobody did a better job than my Rick. We have so many other distinguished guests and local leaders and we just want to thank you all for being here. Under the last administration, America's energy industry was under relentless and unceasing attack, you know that. But the day I took the oath of office, we ended the war on American energy and we stopped the far left assault on American energy workers. But I have a very strong feeling you are not going to have to worry about it. If you do you are in big, big trouble. I withdrew from the one-sided, energy destroying Paris Climate Accord. It cost us billions of dollars and it would have made us a noncompetitive nation. We canceled the Obama administration's job crushing clean power plan. You know all about that. I improved the Keystone XL and the Dakota Access Pipeline immediately upon assuming office. We opened up ANWR in Alaska to energy exploration, ended the moratorium on coal leasing on federal lands and reopened public lands and offshore areas to oil and gas exploration. That is where David Bernhardt's done such a great job. We unlocked the full energy potential of Texas and New Mexico, and New Mexico, we are proud that we have been here. Since my election oil and gas production in the Permian Basin has more than doubled. Under the Trump Administration the United States has increased oil production by 3.1 million barrels per day. That is some number, never been anything like that number. For the first time in nearly 70 years, we have become a net energy exporter, and the United States is now the number one producer of oil and natural gas on the face of the earth. To ensure we maintain this dominant position long into the future, we will never lose this position, my administration is announcing today that export authorizations for American liquified natural gas can now be extended through the year 2050. Okay, 2050, that seems like a long time. At the same time, we are strongly protecting our environment. Air pollution is down significantly since I took office. While other countries are polluting the world's air and oceans, we will never cease to be a leader in protecting our natural environment and that is what is happening. People do not know that about us. We love our environment. Under my administration the United States will continue to have among the cleanest air and cleanest water anywhere on earth and that is what we have.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeaksatmidlandoilrigtranscriptjuly29signspipelinepermits", "title": "Donald Trump Speech Transcript at Midland Oil Rig July 29: Signs Pipeline Permits", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-midland-oil-rig-transcript-july-29-signs-pipeline-permits", "publication_date": "29-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3921, "text": "Thanks to our pro- American energy policies, we are also taking jobs in factories away from countries with poor environmental standards, such as China, and bringing jobs back to America, where they belong. Before the invisible enemy struck our shores, we created 800,000 new energy jobs, a third of them in Texas. After the China virus struck we implemented historic economic relief. When oil crashed, I got Saudi Arabia, Russia and others to cut nearly ten million barrels a day and got OPEC plus and Mexico to agree to the deal and hence we are okay. I will tell you, and I can tell you that I spoke with Dan and Greg and I spoke with Senator Ted Cruz, I spoke with a lot of people and we were very close to losing a very powerful, great industry, and we did a job. We did a great job all together, working together, a job like I think nobody could have done, and now we are back and now we are just going to keep expanding. We did a great job and I want to thank, frankly, Saudi Arabia. I want to thank Russia. I want to thank Mexico, and I want to thank OPEC as they call it, Plus. That is OPEC, Plus a lot of other countries. But they all came to together and they did a job for the industry and we appreciate everybody's help. This action stabilized world oil prices that had been in a free fall and saved millions of energy jobs, and frankly it saved your industry. Four months ago people were very, very concerned about that industry, and now it is just going to be a question of how fast will you put people on. Through the Paycheck Protection Program we provided over one billion dollars in emergency aid to keep Texas energy workers on the payroll. We kept them all in the payroll. We opened up 30 million barrels of space in Strategic Petroleum Reserve, allowing American companies to store surplus oil to be sold at a later time, and we filled up our 75 million barrels in the Strategic Reserve. And Dan, you have done a fantastic- In the strategic reserve and Dan you have done a fantastic job on that. I only wish he bought it when the oil was selling for zero and they paid you $37.00 in addition. You get a barrel plus $37.00, I said, Dan, why did not you make that deal? I would have loved that, but you did well. Today I am taking another bold action to support energy jobs in Texas.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeaksatmidlandoilrigtranscriptjuly29signspipelinepermits", "title": "Donald Trump Speech Transcript at Midland Oil Rig July 29: Signs Pipeline Permits", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-midland-oil-rig-transcript-july-29-signs-pipeline-permits", "publication_date": "29-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3922, "text": "In a few moments, I will sign four critical permits granting approval to vital pipeline and railway infrastructure on our nation's border. That is a big deal, this will include two permits allowing the export of Texas crude to Mexico, a giant victory for the workers of this state that you have been after for many years, right? You have been after that one for many years. I said, What do I know about it? If you want to do it, it is okay with me, and we are doing it, so that is been a long time in the making. We are joined today by some of the incredible patriots of the Texas oil and gas industry who are benefiting from America's energy boom. Josh was born and raised right here in Odessa and Midland, where is Josh? After spending a few years away at school, Josh came back home to West Texas. Josh's dad worked on the oil rigs. Josh worked on the oil rigs and he hopes his three children will work one day doing the same kind of incredible work and looking for the wonderful opportunities in American energy. You are going to have a great future. Brian Welch spent five years in the army, supporting our victory in the Gulf War. Did you make the right move, Brian? With over 25 years of experience, Brian, a senior pumper with Double Eagle Energy, do they treat you well? They better, they better, I am going to come back and see those two guys. Just like thousands of other veterans who work in this industry, Brian has made America safer with his service and now he is helping keep us secure by maintaining American energy independence which we have. To Brian and every veteran who works in the American energy sector, we salute your noble service and we thank you very much, we thank you very much, everybody, thank you. While my administration is fighting for workers like you, the radical left, have you ever heard of the radical left, Brian? You do not want to hear about them. You do not want to know about them, is fighting to abolish American energy, destroy the oil and gas industries and wipe out your jobs. Washington Democrats have embraced Representative Ocasio-Cortez's nearly $100 trillion Green New Deal disaster.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeaksatmidlandoilrigtranscriptjuly29signspipelinepermits", "title": "Donald Trump Speech Transcript at Midland Oil Rig July 29: Signs Pipeline Permits", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-midland-oil-rig-transcript-july-29-signs-pipeline-permits", "publication_date": "29-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3923, "text": "I have added the fourth word, it is a disaster, which would ban oil and gas leasing on all federal lands and by the way there would be no fracking, so let me ask you Mr. Governor, how do you think that works in Texas? No fracking, no drilling, no oil, is that okay? I do not think Biden's going to do too well in Texas. He is already written it off, it is gone. No fracking, that is part of his platform. If these far left politicians ever get into power, they will demolish not only your industry but the entire U.S. economy. Their stated agenda includes rejoining the Paris Climate Accord, spending billions and billions of dollars in order to make us non-competitive, and seeking an even higher level of restrictions mandating net zero carbon emissions which frankly is impossible, for all new homes, offices and buildings by 2030, not possible to do, and if you ever did it, it would cost so much that your home would be valueless. This would cause the cost of construction to skyrocket and effectively end the use of natural gas in homes because it would be an impossible situation. They are asking for things, just so you understand, that are impossible. I do not know, I have not checked recently, what have they done with cows? I think they might have left that one off the manifesto but it will be back. Their platform calls for mandating zero carbon emissions from power plants by 2035. Otherwise they have been very good to the industry I think. People do not take it seriously. If they got in, you will have no more energy coming out of the great state of Texas, out of New Mexico, out of anywhere. Oklahoma, North Dakota, name them. Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania does a lot. People do not realize that, a lot. It would throw Pennsylvania, Ohio, so many other places, you do not realize how big it is, they want to have no fracking, no nothing. The policies required to implement this extreme agenda would mean the death of American prosperity and the end of the American middle class. It would mean I think even worse than that. It would destroy our country. Venezuela used to be one of the richest in the world per capita and period one of the richest in the world, among the largest oil reserves.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeaksatmidlandoilrigtranscriptjuly29signspipelinepermits", "title": "Donald Trump Speech Transcript at Midland Oil Rig July 29: Signs Pipeline Permits", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-midland-oil-rig-transcript-july-29-signs-pipeline-permits", "publication_date": "29-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3924, "text": "Now they do not have water, they do not have medicine, they do not have food, you got a lot of oil, it does not matter. They do not have anything, and that can happen to us. All you have to do is look at Portland, look at the agitators, look at the anarchists in Portland and our people have done a great job in protecting our courthouse and I told my people a little while ago, if they do not solve that problem locally very soon, we are going to send in the National Guard and get it solved very quickly just like we did in Minneapolis and just like we will do in other places. They want to solve their problem, they have got a very short time to do it, but they will either solve their problem or we send in the National Guard. The U.S. energy industry would grind to a halt and every single energy producing state would be plunged into a depression. Two million jobs would vanish overnight in just the state of Texas alone, and I think the number's probably Greg a lot higher than two million. Millions more would disappear in New Mexico and Ohio and Colorado and Pennsylvania. By imposing these punishing restrictions and beyond restrictions, the Washington radical left crazy Democrats would also send countless American jobs, factories, industries to China and to other foreign polluting states. They want us to take care of our air but China does not take care of its air. In all fairness, India does not take care of its air. Russia does not take care of its air, but we do. Not on my watch it is not going to happen I can tell you that. Because as long as I am president, we will always put America first. For years and years we put other countries first. We now put America first. As we have seen in cities and towns across our nation, it is not just Texas oil that the radical Democrats want to destroy, they want to destroy our country. They are sick and you better get used to hearing it because they have some real problems. They do not love our country. In any way, shape or form, they do not love our country. There is no way of life ever in history that is been like the great American way of life. Our people love our country and our people love our anthem and they love our flag. The radical left wants to tear down everything in its way and in its place they want power for themselves, they want power. They want to uproot and demolish every American value.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeaksatmidlandoilrigtranscriptjuly29signspipelinepermits", "title": "Donald Trump Speech Transcript at Midland Oil Rig July 29: Signs Pipeline Permits", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-midland-oil-rig-transcript-july-29-signs-pipeline-permits", "publication_date": "29-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3925, "text": "They want to wipe away every trace of religion from national life. They want to indoctrinate our children, defund our police, abolish the suburbs, incite riots, and leave every city at the mercy of the radical left. By the way, I just ended the rule on suburbs. You know the suburbs, people fight all of their lives to get into the suburbs and have a beautiful home. I abandoned and took away and just rescinded the rule. It is been going on for years, I have seen conflict for years. It is been hell for suburbia. It is been hell for suburbia. We rescinded the rule three days ago, so enjoy your life, ladies and gentlemen. The proud people of Texas will never bow, kneel or surrender to the left-wing mob. You will always stand tall and strong for America. Everyone here today carries the legacy of some of the toughest, fiercest, and most determined people ever to walk the face of the earth, your ancestors. You know that. You know that generations of Texas oil workers before you gave every last bit of sweat and heart and grit that they had to build up this country. They loved our country. They loved our country so much they could not breathe. Their pride and devotion help raise up America cities, power our factories, propel our industries, sustain our families, supply our military and fuel America's rise into the strongest, wealthiest and greatest nation the world has ever known. We are now at the strongest point militarily, we have ever been due to I will tell you, Ted? He was a big leader in this. Ted Cruz, John Cornyn, and our Senate and our House approved $2.5 trillion to rebuild entirely the United States military. It is now at a point that it is the strongest it is ever been. A lot of the equipment is still coming in, brand new planes and missiles and everything you can think of. And I want to thank you, Ted. You were one of the real leaders, and John too. The two of you, I appreciate it very much. We have the greatest equipment on earth. We have equipment that I cannot even tell you about. You do not want to know about it, frankly, and hopefully we'd never have to use it. Now it is your turn to help lead our nation to even greater heights. Today we give thanks for each and every one of you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpspeaksatmidlandoilrigtranscriptjuly29signspipelinepermits", "title": "Donald Trump Speech Transcript at Midland Oil Rig July 29: Signs Pipeline Permits", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speaks-at-midland-oil-rig-transcript-july-29-signs-pipeline-permits", "publication_date": "29-07-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3926, "text": "Fifteen years ago, almost to the day, I had the pleasure of addressing the American Public Health Association. You were gathered here then as you are now, to exchange ideas and information in your professional work as official guardians of the public health. At that time, 15 years ago, I had just come from observing at first hand in Belgium and other war areas the acute problems of public health produced by violent dislocations in the normal economic processes of the life of nations. In my remarks upon that occasion I discussed some of these problems as I had observed them during that experience. Difficult as conditions were for the civil populations of all the nations in the war area, they would have been infinitely more difficult had it not been for the modern organization of protective health services and the scientific understanding of sanitary measures necessary to prevent and check such epidemics of communicable disease as had always, in earlier wars, swept over the nations. My next major contact with your body was during the Mississippi River flood in 1927. In traveling over the region affected by those floods, from the lower Ohio River Valley to the mouth of the Mississippi, and organizing the measures of the Federal Government to overcome that calamity by rescue from flood and reestablishment of a million of our people in their homes, it was obvious that sanitation and health control were imperative to prevent the outbreak of devastating epidemics. In this emergency the public health agencies and the allied groups were indispensable, and I took the liberty of mobilizing the energies of your members. They rose to the situation and by their skill and promptness Prevented a very serious loss of life. As a result of this experience in the flood area, I later called a meeting of public health officials and suggested the development of a stronger health service. Out of the conferences which were called as an outgrowth of this meeting, there evolved the idea of the most effective means of strengthening the public health service in harmony with the spirit of our American institutions. By this I mean the idea of the county health unit. That is, that every county in the United States should set up for itself, as its minimum health organization, a unit consisting of a doctor, a sanitary engineer, and a trained nurse. These units were established in 100 counties in the flood area, and the extraordinarily successful results of their work confirmed the wisdom of the plan.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheamericanpublichealthassociation", "title": "Address to the American Public Health Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-american-public-health-association", "publication_date": "24-10-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3927, "text": "The public health in these counties for 18 months after the flood was so much better than it had been in the 18 months before the disaster as to prove an object lesson in what could be done by organized public health work. By every means within my reach I have ever since promoted the idea of establishing these units in every one of our 5,000 counties in the United States. I have frequently helped the voluntary cooperating groups to raise the funds for such units by public subscription, and many times, through conferences and in other ways, have assisted in promoting legislation in the States by which State governments have supplemented these funds on the familiar basis of duplicating from the State treasury the sums raised locally by the county or municipal governments. I have gone farther than that. Although I am generally opposed to Federal subsidies to the States, yet I have regarded contagion as one interstate question and have recommended Federal contributions to such a universal service. I am in favor, as a constructive measure of public economy, of a program to be carried out on such wise lines, to reduce contagious disease with Government encouragement. If communicable diseases could be reduced by even one-third, such a reduction would repay the country more than a thousandfold its cost, by its saving of the present losses in productive time of workers and its saving of the present losses to school funds by absences from classes. That is the sheer economics of it. And even beyond that in importance, there is the well-being of the future generations of our children, the building up of safeguards around the home, and the health of the parents and of the growing family, which will contribute to the production of a healthier and more virile race and to the preservation not only of the treasures of childhood as a whole, but also to the preservation of those precious exceptional children, whose birth cannot be predicted of any class or moment and from whom comes the leadership of our democracy, to which they rise through the free channels of opportunity in our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheamericanpublichealthassociation", "title": "Address to the American Public Health Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-american-public-health-association", "publication_date": "24-10-1932", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3928, "text": "I am speaking to you this morning from the Gibbs Magnet School for International Studies in Little Rock, Arkansas. I am happy to be joined by the principal, Dr. Marjorie Bassa, members of her staff, and 30 wonderful elementary students, their parents, and other interested citizens here. This school and these people are living proof that the education reforms that were started when I was Governor of Arkansas and that are continuing now under the leadership of Governor Tucker are paying off. The young people who attend this public school are getting a head start on the 21st century. Beginning in kindergarten, they learn about other cultures. They receive foreign language training. They are already acquiring the skills that will allow them one day to compete and win in the new global economy. They come from many different racial and cultural backgrounds, but they all have a shot at the American dream. I want to spend a few moments telling you why I think education and training for all of our people is the most important thing we can do to keep the American dream alive in the 21st century. You know Washington's in the midst of a great debate today about the proper role of our National Government. On one side is the old view that big, one-size-fits-all Government can provide the answers to all of our big problems. On the other side is the view that Government is the source of all of our problems. In the real world, that is a false choice. Let us look at what started this debate. As we move toward the 21st century and the information age, jobs and incomes will depend more and more on what we know and what we can learn. That means that today, at the end of the cold war, we are able to create jobs, new businesses, new millionaires at a rapid rate, more than ever before. But at the same time, about two-thirds of our people are working hard for the same or lower wages and are quite insecure about their future. And we know we still have too many social problems we are not making enough headway on, crime and drugs, violence and family breakdown. In the real world, we have to face the fact that we have to create opportunity but deal with these problems of economic stagnation and social disintegration. And we are stuck with a Government that is too organized to meet the problems of yesterday and not enough able to meet the problems of today and tomorrow.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress324", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-324", "publication_date": "01-04-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3929, "text": "first, that creates economic opportunity-grow the middle class and shrink the under class; second, that enhances the security of the American people here at home, on our streets, in our schools, and abroad; and third, that reforms the National Government to make it smaller, less bureaucratic, to serve the interests of ordinary Americans, not special interests, to serve the future, not the past, and to demand more personal responsibility of our citizens. Fourth, and most important, we need a Government that helps our people raise their education and skill levels so they can make the most of their own lives. That is what I call the New Covenant, a partnership between Americans and their Government that offers more opportunity in return for more responsibility. Earlier this week, I convened a regional economic conference at Emory University in Atlanta with a group of economists, business and Government leaders. And working Americans discussed ways to strengthen our economy and to ensure a better future for our children. But the one thing we all agreed on was that the countries that will do the best job of developing the full capacities of all of their children and all of their adults will be the most successful in the 21st century. We all agree that higher education levels are essential if we are going to raise the incomes of working Americans, if we are going to grow the middle class and shrink the under class. That is why I and my administration have worked so hard to expand Head Start, to set world-class standards for our schools, to give parents and teachers more resources to meet those standards but also to give them more authority at the school level to decide how best to achieve excellence. We have worked to establish apprenticeship programs to prepare young people who do not go on to college to get higher paying jobs. And we have worked hard to make college loans more affordable for more students, millions of them throughout the country. By eliminating the middlemen in the college loan system, lowering the cost, and offering better repayment terms, our direct student loan program is giving more young people a chance to go to college while saving tax dollars at the same time. And we are demanding more responsibility in return. More students get loans at lower cost, but now they have to pay them back. Stricter enforcement of the student loan program has cut the cost of delinquent loans to taxpayers from $2.8 billion in 1991 to a billion dollars today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress324", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-324", "publication_date": "01-04-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3930, "text": "Because we have focused on education, for the last 2 years we have been able to cut Government spending, cut the deficit, cut hundreds of programs and over 100,000 bureaucrats from the Federal budget, and still increase our investment in education. Now, many in Congress think there is no difference in education and other spending. For example, there are proposals to reduce funding for Head Start; for public school efforts to meet the national education goals; for our national service program, Ameri- Corps, which provides scholarship money for young people who will work at minimum wage jobs in local community service projects; even proposals to reduce school lunch funding. Here at Gibbs, where students are preparing for the 21st century, close to 50 percent of the students depend upon the School Lunch Program for a nutritious meal. And all these young people, not just those who have the money to afford it, should be able to go as far as their talents will carry them. And if that means they need scholarships, student loans, and the opportunity to do community service, we ought to give it to them. Some in Congress want to cut education to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy. I want instead a middle class tax cut that helps families pay for education and training, a tax deduction for education costs after high school. Now in the past, education and training have enjoyed broad, bipartisan support. Last year, with strong support from Republicans and Democrats, Congress enacted my proposals to help students and schools meet the challenges of today and tomorrow. Educational experts said we did more for education by expanding Head Start, expanding apprenticeships, expanding college loans than any session of Congress in 30 years. Now in this new Congress, some want to cut education, and that is wrong. Gibbs Magnet School is a reflection of what we ought to be doing more of in America. I do not know what political party these children belong to, but I do know we need them all and they deserve our best efforts to give them a shot at the American dream. We must begin when they are young, training our people to succeed, preparing them for a lifetime of learning. The fight for education is the fight for the American dream. Thanks again to all those people who are here with me today, especially our children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsradioaddress324", "title": "The President's Radio Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-radio-address-324", "publication_date": "01-04-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3936, "text": "Back when I was a young mom in the 1970s, I liked to make toast for breakfast. One morning I popped a few pieces of bread in our toaster oven, got busy doing six other things, and quickly forgot about the toast. When I saw smoke pouring out of the toaster oven, I grabbed the handle and pulled out the tray -four slices of bread were on fire. Always a quick thinker, I screamed and threw the tray at the kitchen sink. Three pieces of toast hit the target, but the fourth went high- setting the little yellow curtains on fire. I screamed again, then grabbed a cereal bowl and threw it at the burning curtains. The milk doused most of the fire, and I calmed down enough to realize that throwing things was probably not my best strategy. I grabbed a towel and beat on the toaster until everything seemed quiet and I could unplug it. That may have been the year I started so many kitchen fires that Daddy gave me a fire extinguisher for Christmas. Back then, our toaster oven had an on-off switch and that was it. On was On, which meant that it was possible to leave toast under the little broiler all day and all night, until the food burned, the wiring melted, and the whole thing burst into flames. At some point, someone had the bright idea of adding a timer and automatic shutoff. This simple change made it a whole lot harder for distracted mothers, or anyone else, to leave the toaster running until it set the kitchen on fire. Thirty years later, while working on an article about how the government could protect consumers from predatory financial companies, I thought about those old toaster ovens. By then, it was all but impossible to buy a toaster that had a 1-in-5 chance of bursting into flames and burning down your house. But by the 2000s, it was possible to refinance a home with a mortgage that had a 1-in-5 chance of costing a family their home and putting them out on the street. In fact, it was not just possible; those mortgages were being sold, then bursting into flames all over the country. By 2007, the year I was writing my article, a government agency actually monitored toasters for basic safety, and if anyone tried to sell a toaster that had a tendency to burst into flames, the agency would put a stop to it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliversspeechondangersofderegulation", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Speech on Dangers of Deregulation", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-speech-on-dangers-of-deregulation", "publication_date": "05-06-2018", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3937, "text": "In fact, government regulations ensured the basic safety of pretty much every product offered for sale. But in 2007 there was no government agency that would stop the sale of exploding mortgages. After the financial crisis we fought for a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that would be a strong cop on the beat making financial products safer-we fought, and we won! That little agency has already put strong regulations in place on mortgages, student loans, and credit cards, and it has forced the big financial institutions to return $12 billion directly to people who were cheated. Today the consumer agency is under attack. The Trump Administration and an army of lobbyists are determined to rig the game in their favor, to boost their own profits - the cost to consumers be damned. But it is not just the CFPB that under attack. In agency after agency, across the federal government, powerful corporations and their Republican allies are working overtime to roll back basic rules that protect the rest of us. Giant corporations and wealthy individuals are working in the shadows to make sure that government works for them, not for the people. To hide what they are doing, big corporations and Republicans here in Washington often claim that government regulations are bad for our economy. They go on and on about how big government restricts freedom and makes it harder for businesses to succeed. That is a big, greasy baloney sandwich-a greasy baloney sandwich that has been left out in the sun too long and has started to stink. Let us talk about real freedom - freedom from being cheated by those who care about pumping up their own profits and do not care about you. Regulations are about setting rules of the road-plain and simple. Done right, strong, clear regulations protect the freedom of every American. Do not tell me that all rules do is restrict freedom. Good rules empower people to live, work, and do business freely and safely. Regulations serve three main functions. First, they provide the basic framework that permits commerce to flourish-to ensure that what we are promised is what we get. That a gallon of gas is really a gallon-and not almost a gallon. That the pills labeled as antibiotics really are antibiotics -- and they are not contaminated with mold. We get what we are promised. Second, regulations keep thieves out of our pockets. Rules are how we make it illegal to steal your purse on Main Street or your pension on Wall Street. Third, regulations level the playing field for everyone competing for our business.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliversspeechondangersofderegulation", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Speech on Dangers of Deregulation", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-speech-on-dangers-of-deregulation", "publication_date": "05-06-2018", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3938, "text": "Because of regulations, good companies that do right by their customers do not have to compete against cheaters. Competition should not be about who can hide the nastiest trick somewhere in the fine print; it should be about who offers the choices that customers like best. That is good for customers and good for upstart competitors who think they have a better product to offer. well-designed regulations allow for more freedom and more safety for each of us personally, more freedom and more opportunity for small businesses and startups, and more freedom and more security for workers who are building a future for their families, and more freedom for every business that is willing to compete straight up on the quality of its goods and services. The so-called war on regulations is not about freedom. The war on regulations is waged on behalf of giant companies that do not want to follow any rules. So let us call it what it really is - a war on public health, a war on public safety, a war on truly free and competitive markets, a war on American workers, a war on American consumers. Republicans in Washington talk about regulation like it is some kind of uncontrollable Frankenstein's monster with an independent will of its own, a beast that will chew our bones. They use the word regulation like a magic incantation, a fearsome word that can be repeated three times to ward off the evils of so-called big government. But America's history tells a very different story about regulation. More than a century ago, the Industrial Revolution began to stir, and factories sprouted up all over. Industrialization radically altered the American economy, and it generated enormous wealth. But it also wreaked havoc on workers and their families. As industrialization spread across the country, families poured in from farms to cities, only to land in workplaces that were monstrously unsafe. America's response was not to abandon the technological innovations and improvements of the industrial revolution. We did not send everyone back to the farms. Instead, we came together as a country, and, through our government, we changed public policies to adapt to a changing economy. In other words, we adjusted the laws - the regulations - to keep much of the good and get rid of much of the bad. A minimum wage. These protections set up guardrails so giant corporations could no longer exploit workers just to boost their own profits. In addition to protecting workers, America also took steps to protect our financial system.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliversspeechondangersofderegulation", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Speech on Dangers of Deregulation", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-speech-on-dangers-of-deregulation", "publication_date": "05-06-2018", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3939, "text": "From colonial times until the early 1930s, America pretty much took the economic world the way it was. Booms and busts were just the way things worked and there was not much we could do about it-sort of like the natural cycles of the moon. Sure, they took down speculators, but they also took out farmers, small business owners, employees and millions of people who got swept away by massive economic forces that they could not control. Unemployment skyrocketed, peaking at more than 20 percent. Across the country, frightening rumors caused Americans to rush to empty their bank accounts, triggering more crises. We can do better. We can use regulation to end the boom-and-bust cycles. And that is exactly what he did. For more than 50 years, those rules stayed in place-and they worked. Regulations bought us economic stability. And the financial services industry served the American people, rather than the other way around. GDP was climbing and America's middle class was getting a huge share of all that growth. We were on a roll. In the 1970s, environmental issues moved front and center, along with the safety of America's families. It may be hard to believe, but back in the '50s and '60s, big American cities were smothered with thick layers of nasty, dirty smog. People sucked down toxic chemicals on the way to work; little kids breathed in dangerous substances on school playgrounds. The factory owners that spewed their filth in the air did not care -- they did not pay the cost of their pollution. The auto manufacturers were not held responsible for the tailpipe emissions from the cars they built. But the millions who suffered asthma attacks, developed lung cancer, and died from heart disease because of dirty air paid a terrible price. During one Thanksgiving week in 1966, a severe smog crisis choked New York City, killing hundreds of people. People demanded action, but giant corporations pushed back hard. Big carmakers said that they would never be able to meet the deadlines to reduce emissions, that it would cost too much to adapt their vehicles, that they would go bankrupt. Congress passed the Clean Air Act, giving the EPA the authority to put in place strong new rules and clear deadlines to protect us. From 1970 to 2016, common air pollutants fell 73 percent. Today, the Clean Air Act saves more than 160,000 lives a year. What America has accomplished through strong, public-centered rules is an amazing story.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliversspeechondangersofderegulation", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Speech on Dangers of Deregulation", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-speech-on-dangers-of-deregulation", "publication_date": "05-06-2018", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3940, "text": "Where are the defenders of the regulators who make sure most of us do not work in factories where equipment could kill us or drive cars with defective brakes? Where are the parades and special citations for the federal employees who make sure that cancer treatments really are cancer treatments and that the air is clean enough for our babies to breathe and grow and flourish? Where are the thank-you op-eds and national holidays to celebrate that infants are no longer strangled in poorly designed baby cribs and that airplanes rarely crash? How did those regulators-and the regulations designed to help the American people-become the enemy? By the 1980s, corporate giants who did not want to follow the rules had a plan to fight back. They figured they could improve their profit margins by rolling back those rules, and the best way to do that was to control the rulemakers. So they made political contributions, then lobbied those same elected officials to leash up the regulators. It was called deregulation -but that was just a code word for let the rich guys do whatever they want. Consider what happened in the financial industry. Remember all those tough rules FDR put in place after the Great Depression, the ones that worked to make our economy safer? When Reagan began his systematic campaign of deregulation, those rules came under attack. And they stayed under attack, year after year, president after president-regardless of party. For decades, the Fed and other bank regulators looked the other way as big financial institutions found new ways to trick their customers. The result should have surprised exactly no one. After another boom, in 2008, our economy came crashing to the ground-dragging along tens of millions of Americans who lost their homes, their jobs, their savings, the very lives they had spent years to build. Thirty years of deregulation, a crash that nearly brought our economy to its knees, a recovery that has left most of America behind, and what is the Trump Administration's answer? Make this government work better and better for the richest and most powerful. Back in 2016, Candidate Trump made big promises, promises to drain the swamp, promises to fight for working people, promises to ignore lobbyists, promises to stand up to Wall Street.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliversspeechondangersofderegulation", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Speech on Dangers of Deregulation", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-speech-on-dangers-of-deregulation", "publication_date": "05-06-2018", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3941, "text": "It is clear now that those promises were just part of the scam-a scam that has paid off handsomely for Wall Street, paid off handsomely for every corporation that can hire an army of lobbyists or drop big money at a nearby Trump Hotel, paid off handsomely for every billionaire or corporate executive who has pocketed part of the $1.5 trillion dollar tax giveaway. But for American families, the big payoff still has not arrived. And there is more payoff for big corporations as the Trump Administration rolls back worker protections. And how about the important environmental protections that protect the health of our families - the ones we put in place to make sure we can drink the water and breathe the air? President Trump started by appointing Scott Pruitt to head the EPA. Corruption oozes out of his office, from wasting hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, to cutting deals to make himself rich, to doing the bidding of the highest paid lobbyists. The Clean Water Rule is designed to protect drinking water, but industry opposes the rule because it means they cannot dump chemicals in rivers or spread toxic waste on the ground where it might run into drinking water. And since industry does not like the Clean Water Rule, Scott Pruitt has come up with a plan for ending it. Three years ago, the EPA decided to ban a dangerous pesticide that puts children at risk. But right after Scott Pruitt met with the CEO of Dow Chemical, the rule was gone. The Clean Power Plan is biggest step we have taken to fight against climate change. But once Scott Pruitt met with executives from Big Coal, the EPA announced plans to end the rule. In just over a year, the Administration has worked to roll back more than 60 environmental rules, from revoking car emissions standards to undercutting efforts to limit methane gas. In the name of deregulation, Pruitt has told corporations they can boost their profits by poisoning our water, fouling our air, contaminating our food and threatening the planet we call home. All told, the Center for American Progress estimates that Pruitt's rollbacks will cost the American people about $260 billion per year. And some of those costs will be measured in hospital admissions and funeral bills. The same attitude permeates the Trump Administration. President Trump has even worked to weaken the Consumer Product Safety Commission - the agency that makes sure toasters do not explode.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliversspeechondangersofderegulation", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Speech on Dangers of Deregulation", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-speech-on-dangers-of-deregulation", "publication_date": "05-06-2018", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3942, "text": "He is nominated a new chair who has opposed safety protections for table saws, and nominated a new commissioner who defended companies that knowingly sold all-terrain vehicles that tipped over and crushed children to death. President Trump and his team have embarked on an aggressive effort to kill the rules that protect the American people from corporate predators. No, I do not think every regulation is good. Sometimes old rules need updating. And the corruption of our rulemaking process runs so deep that sometimes rules get perverted into government-sponsored protections for giant corporations instead of protection for the public. You do not have to tell me. One of the most significant regulatory rollbacks enacted by the current Congress eliminates a thicket of anti-competitive restrictions that reduce access and drive up the cost of hearing aids for millions of Americans. I know that because I wrote the bill to roll back the regulations, I worked with conservatives to advance it, and I got it signed into law by President Donald Trump. But these kinds of regulatory changes-the pro-competition, pro-consumer changes-are not what the Republicans' agenda is about. No, the Republicans are working to insulate big corporations from competition and accountability. They are making government work better and better for fewer and fewer people. This is a critical moment for our country. The Republicans control both Congress and the White House, and they are using their control to fulfill a corporate de-regulatory agenda that promotes profits for executives and investors over the safety, security and opportunity of everyone else. We cannot win until we pry our government free from the grip of the rich and the powerful. That is why, in the coming weeks, I will introduce sweeping anti-corruption legislation to clean up corporate money sloshing around Washington and make it possible for our elected government to actually work for the American people again. Ending this war on public safety and competitive markets will also take standing up and making the case, loud and clear: strong government rules matter. We cannot - we must not - accept a government that works only for a privileged few. Government remains the best tool we have to create a level playing field so everyone-white, brown, black, young, old-everyone gets a turn. Government is the best tool we have to make sure everyone-male, female, rich, poor-everyone who pitches in gets a shot at success. When we send a message that corporate profits and powerful interests cannot overpower the health, safety, and economic well-being of hardworking families, we fire a warning shot.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliversspeechondangersofderegulation", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Speech on Dangers of Deregulation", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-speech-on-dangers-of-deregulation", "publication_date": "05-06-2018", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 3943, "text": "This is a moment in which history and hope meet and move on from here as partners. Less than 1 year ago, on April 7, 1965, I asked for the creation of the Asian development plan to seek economic advance and social justice for all of Asia. I pledged the full support of the United States of America to that task. Today we have begun to redeem that pledge. The act I sign this morning authorizes the United States of America to ratify the charter of the Asian Development Bank. Seldom have nations joined together in a collective venture that is so endowed with promise. First, for the Asian leaders, who conceived and organized the bank and who are so ably represented here today by the Ambassadors from their countries. For the people of those non-Asian nations which have signed the charter, and whose Ambassadors have come this morning to bespeak again their vision and their generosity. For my great friend, a true American, Eugene Black, whose energy and tact have been as indispensable as his experience and wisdom. And to the Congress of the United States and the members of both parties who have acted to invest in this enterprise not only the resources but the faith of the 190 million people whom they represent. This act is an economic Magna Carta for the diverse lands of Asia. Its charter links 31 countries in a union against the involuntary economic servitude imposed on the people of Asia by time and circumstance and by neighbor and nature. This billion dollar bank is a symbol that the twain have met, not as Kipling predicted, at God's great Judgment Seat, but at the place of man's shared needs. It is no longer possible to be a mere observer at that place. It is not possibleand it is not rightto neglect a people's hopes because the ocean is 'vast, or their culture is alien, or their language may be strange, or their race different, or their skin another color. Asia just must no longer sit at the second table of the 20th century's concern. The economic network of this shrinking globe is too intertwined. The political order of continents is too involved with one another. The threat of common disaster is too real for all human beings to say of Asia, or any other continent, Yours . . . is another sphere. I believe that those who make that case are no less patriotic and no less sincere than those who believe that we cannot shorten the length of our reach into the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesigningtheasiandevelopmentbankact", "title": "Remarks at the Signing of the Asian Development Bank Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-signing-the-asian-development-bank-act", "publication_date": "16-03-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3944, "text": "And while I expect they will continue to make their argument of isolationism versus globalismfor we all are determined to preserve their right to speak up in this landI hope they, too, expect me to try to keep on making my case for realism. It is simply that there is no rest from the trials of freedom, there is no recalling what the pace of change has done to the map of this big world, there is no reducing our responsibilities while the challenges of progress will not permit us to name the site for our duel or the weapons that we use. It is that we cannot turn from the place of shared needs and expect either peace or progress to follow us. So today we have come here to the historic East Room of the White House and gathered at this place to start a journey together. We are taking another today by announcing that we have pledged a half of the $24 million that is needed to construct the large Mekong River project, the Nam Ngum tributary project in Laos. Seven other countries, Japan, the Netherlands, Canada, Thailand, Denmark, Australia, and New Zealand, are joining us in that effort. For the United States it is our first major commitment under our promise to expand economic and social development in Southeast Asia. The Nam Ngum project is the Mekong Committee's highest priority undertaking and, like the Asian Development Bank, it represents a major accomplishment in joint cooperation in the world. The first phase of the project will include a dam and power station with an installed capacity up to 30,000 kilowatts. Additional generators up to 120,000 kilowatts can be installed as they are needed. An international transmission line, with a link across the Mekong River, will connect the power station with the capital of Laos and northeast Thailand. This is just one example of how the fruits of technologyand the ingenuity of cooperation-can bring new life to whole new regions of the world. More, yes, much more, awaits our response. New crops and new breeds of livestock can be developed. It has been said that no statue was ever erected to the memory of a man or woman who thought it was best to let well enough alone. So it is with the nations that we represent here today. We seek no statues to our memory. We seek only one real monument, a monument with peace and progress for its base and justice for its pinnacle. Togetheryour lands and minewe will build it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesigningtheasiandevelopmentbankact", "title": "Remarks at the Signing of the Asian Development Bank Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-signing-the-asian-development-bank-act", "publication_date": "16-03-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3945, "text": "In the first place, Mr. Mayor, let me in thanking all of you for your greeting, thank especially the Mayor, the official representative of the city, for the kindness with which he has spoken. Mayor, I can hardly imagine any man able to occupy the Presidency of this people and not feeling, with all his faults, that he was indeed the servant and the representative of the people, but if it were necessary to have such feeling words like yours would supply it. My fellow citizens, coming here this afternoon I saw along the streets and here and there I see in the audience before me men who wear the button that shows that in the times that tried men's souls they proved their truth by their endeavor; they rose level to the nation's need. It always seems to me when I see such men that the lesson they taught by what they did during the war, and by the way in which when once the war was over they turned to the works of peace, is a lesson peculiarly applicable to us under the strain of the enormous and complex development of our industrial civilization. Here in Maine you combine as in but few states both the old conditions and the new. In your country districts, on your beautiful farms, on the edges of the great northern forests, among your seafaring people on the coast, you have men leading substantially the lives, under substantially the conditions that obtained in the days of our forefathers who founded this Republic; and then, again, in industrial centers like this city of which, Mr. Mayor, you are the chief executive in these centers we perceive the full play of the great forces which have brought about that marvelous material progress of which we are so proud, but which at the same time have brought us face to face with problems of wholly different type from those that we confronted in the simpler life. I might put it more strongly than that. It is impossible to devise anyone perfect solution, and one complete solution, for all the problems of our latter-day industrial civilization. But there are certain elementary truths which we tend to forget, but which nevertheless, remain operative in the biggest city, in the most feverish industrial center, just as much as on any farm in the country side. Fundamentally, through the qualities by which the success of the individual is attained, must the success of the nation be wrought, and these are the same qualities the showing of which made the foundation of this nation possible.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks in Lewiston, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "26-08-1902", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3946, "text": "The man who fought in the Civil War, fought with different weapons from those carried by Washington's Continentals at Trenton and the Brandywine, through the dark days of Valley Forge, and at the ultimate triumph of Yorktown. And now, in the warfare of today the weapons have changed again, and the tactics have changed with them, but the man behind the gun has got to be of the same old stuff, or the best gun will not save him. No improvement in firearms, no perfection of equipment, no change in tactics will avail unless back of them all lies the spirit that sent you and your fellows from '61 to '65, again and again against the Confederate lines; that sent you after defeat back again just as if you had won, and after defeat again back again, until from defeat you had wrenched the victory. The great battleships of today would have seemed veritable nightmares to Howe and Perry in 1812 and '14, and as for the guns, why in those days, in 1812, the commander of a small vessel could walk up and down the quarter-deck with an entire broadside of cartridges in one coat-tail pocket! But we won so completely in '98 and with such little effort because we had men with the spirit of 1812, with the spirit of Farragut's fleet in the Civil War, back of the guns and the ships. It is the man behind the gun, the man in the engine room, the man in the conning-tower, these are they who fundamentally govern. Of course you have got to have the weapons, but you cannot win with bows and arrows. But it is no matter how good the weapons are which you have, you must have good men to use them. And more than that, it is not only courage that counts, it is thoroughness in training. That made a big difference between Bull Run and Gettysburg. Now in our Navy and our ENTITY if we ever have to face a foreign foe, we want to train in advance, so that Gettysburg may come without Bull Run, and there must be preparedness in advance. Anyone of you who sees a great modern warship must realize that no one can learn and be trained to handle that trade in a week, any more than the ordinary unskilled laborer could learn to become a skilled machinist or a watch manufacturer in the same length of time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks in Lewiston, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "26-08-1902", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3947, "text": "Put men who mean well but who do not know, on a good ship and send them against a competent foe and you invite not merely disaster but a good deal worse disgrace. Have the men trained in advance months and years in advance. At Manila and at Santiago there were plenty of brave men amongst the Spaniards but they did not know how to shoot, and they did not know how to keep their machinery in gear, and our men did because they had taken the time in advance, because they did not expect off-hand, in one day, to solve the problem of carrying on the war. Month in and month out, year in and year out, the ship-wright, the officer, the enlisted man afloat and ashore, had done their several duties in making ready the great ships, in maneuvering with them at sea, in drilling the crews at target practice, until when the final day came we had men who could rise level to the demand upon them. Now, my fellow citizens, the same thing is substantially true in our civil life. Exactly as back of the gun stands the man behind the gun, and more important, so behind legislation, behind the best that can be done by constitutions and by laws, must stand a high average of decent citizenship, if we are to get good results in this Republic. We need good laws, good constitutions, and upright and honest administration of the laws. We need all these, just as in the navy we need good ships and guns, but they are not enough. You have to have men honestly bent on doing the best that is in them under those laws in order to get the best results. Is it a work of special genius? In the army you developed two or three or half a dozen great geniuses. You had a Grant, a Sherman, a Sheridan, with a Farragut on the sea; but the great thing is that you developed the average American citizen who had gone into the ranks and developed himself into a first-class fighting man, and he was so developed by those over him, not through genius, but by doing well all of the small things that were to be done. In any new regiment there is always a certain proportion of recruits who want to be heroes, but they do not want to go through the preliminaries they do not want to dig out kitchen sinks. Sentry duty does not appeal to them; keeping the camp police is rather repulsive. They want to win a great battle without preparing for it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks in Lewiston, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "26-08-1902", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3948, "text": "That sort of man does not make a hero. He does not even make an ordinarily good soldier. Now, in our civic life, distrust the man who thinks that if some great emotional crisis came he would rise up and reform everything, but meanwhile does not want to do his ordinary common-place duty! This is a work-a-day world, and we can get along in it only if we show the work-a-day qualities. It is a very essential thing to be able to show the other qualities. It is necessary for the nation that you shall have men eager to volunteer when some man like Cushing starts out to do a deed of daring, where death stares every man in the face, but before the Cushings can get their chance, there has got to be any amount of wearisome blockading, of standing on and off before the ports, of training the men until they can follow the Cushings. And so in our civic life, we shall never have any healthy government in any community until the citizens of that community perform their own duties of citizenship, not spasmodically or hysterically, but day by day, regularly, as they come up. Now, of course, the first business of citizen ship is that the man shall care for those dependent upon him; that the man shall be a good bread-winner; deal well by his wife and children; that the woman should be able to take care of the house and the children. I am of an archaic temperament, and I wish you all large families, by the way. And in addition to being straight at home, each man has got to be straight with his neighbors, has got to be a decent man in his ordinary work, and if he is not decent at home, if he is not a faithful loyal man in whom you can trust in the ordinary business relations, in the factory, in the shop and on the farm; if he is not that, he is not going to be a good citizen. But besides all that he has got to show certain other qualities. He has got to remember that in addition to his duties to those nearest to him, under our republican system of government he is not to be excused if he fails to do his duty to himself and his neighbors and to that representative of himself and his neighbors, the State, the government. He does not need to have any unusual grace to make himself a good citizen in this way. He has got in the first place to be honest and decent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkslewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks in Lewiston, Maine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "26-08-1902", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3963, "text": "This is your day and you have earned every minute of it. And I am thrilled to be back at Liberty University, I have been here, this is now my third time, and we love setting records, right. We always set records. We have to set records, we have no choice. It is been a little over a year since I have spoken on your beautiful campus and so much has changed. Right here, the class of 2017 dressed in cap and gown, graduating to a totally brilliant future. And here I am standing before you as President of the United States, so I am guessing - there are some people here today who thought that either one of those things, either one, would really require major help from God. And we got it. But here we are celebrating together on this very joyous occasion, and there is no place in the world I'd rather be to give my first commencement address as President than here with my wonderful friends at Liberty University. And I accepted this invitation a long time ago. I said to Jerry that I'd be there, and when I say something I mean it. I want to thank President Jerry Falwell and his incredible wife, Becky, stand up, Becky, for their kind words, their steadfast support, and their really wonderful friendship. Let me also extend our appreciation to the entire Falwell family, Trey, Sarah, Wesley, Laura, and Caroline, thank you for everything you do to make this university so exceptional, one of the truly great, great schools. Each of you should take immense pride in what you have achieved. There is another group of amazing people we want to celebrate today and they are the ones who have made this journey possible for you, and you know who that is? You are going to go out, you are going to do whatever you are going to do, some are going to make a lot of money, some are going to be even happier doing other things - they are your parents and your grandparents, do not forget them. Never, ever forget them, they are great. And especially this weekend, let us make sure we give a really extra special thanks to the moms. Do not forget our moms, because graduates, today is your day. But in all of this excitement do not forget that tomorrow is Mother's Day, right? I had a great mother, she is looking down, now but I had a great mother. I always loved Mother's Day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresslibertyuniversitylynchburgvirginia0", "title": "Donald J. Trump Commencement Address at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-liberty-university-lynchburg-virginia-0", "publication_date": "13-05-2017", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3964, "text": "We are also deeply honored to be joined by some of the nearly 6000 service members, military veterans and military spouses who are receiving their diplomas today. We are profoundly grateful to every single one of you who sacrificed to keep us safe and protect God's precious gift of freedom. It is truly a testament to this university and to the values that you embrace that your graduating class includes so many patriots who have served our country in uniform. Today you end one chapter but you are about to begin the greatest adventure of your life. Just think for a moment of how blessed you are to be here today at this great, great university, living in this amazing country, surrounded by people who you love and care about so much. Then ask yourself, with all of those blessings, and all of the blessings that you have been given, what will you give back to this country and, indeed, to the world? What imprint will you leave in the sands of history? What will future Americans say we did in our brief time right here on Earth? Did we take risks? Did we dare to defy expectations? Did we challenge accepted wisdom and take on established systems? I think I did, but we all did and we are all doing it. Or did we just go along with convention, swim downstream, so easily with the current and just give in because it was the easy way, it was the traditional way or it was the accepted way? Following your convictions means you must be willing to face criticism from those who lack the same courage to do what is right - and they know what is right, but they do not have the courage or the guts or the stamina to take it and to do it. I know that each of you will be a warrior for the truth, will be a warrior for our country, and for your family. I know that each of you will do what is right, not what is the easy way, and that you will be true to yourself, and your country, and your beliefs. In my short time in Washington I have seen firsthand how the system is broken. A small group of failed voices who think they know everything and understand everyone want to tell everybody else how to live and what to do and how to think. But you are not going to let other people tell you what you believe, especially when you know that you are right.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresslibertyuniversitylynchburgvirginia0", "title": "Donald J. Trump Commencement Address at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-liberty-university-lynchburg-virginia-0", "publication_date": "13-05-2017", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3965, "text": "And those of you graduating here today, who have given half a million hours of charity last year alone, unbelievable amount of work and charity and few universities or colleges can claim anything even close, we do not need a lecture from Washington on how to lead our lives. I am standing here looking at the next generation of American leaders. Anybody think they are going to be president, raise your hand. In your hearts are inscribed the values of service, sacrifice and devotion. Now you must go forth into the world and turn your hopes and dreams into action. America has always been the land of dreams because America is a nation of true believers. When the pilgrims landed at Plymouth they prayed. When the founders wrote the Declaration of Independence, they invoked our creator four times, because in America we do not worship government we worship God. That is why our elected officials put their hands on the Bible and say, 'So help me God,' as they take the oath of office. It is why our currency proudly declares, 'In God we trust,' and it is why we proudly proclaim that we are one nation under God every time we say the pledge of allegiance. The story of America is the story of an adventure that began with deep faith, big dreams and humble beginnings. That is also the story of Liberty University. When I think about the visionary founder of this great institution, Reverend Jerry Falwell Sr., I can only imagine how excited he would be if he could see all of this and all of you today, and how proud he would be of his son and of his family. In just two days we will mark the 10th anniversary of Reverend Falwell's passing, and I used to love watching him on television, hearing him preach, he was a very special man. He would be so proud not just at what you have achieved but of the young men and women of character that you have all become. And Jerry, I know your dad is looking down on you right now and he is proud, he is very proud, so congratulations on a great job Jerry. Reverend Falwell's life is a testament to the power of faith to change the world. The inspiring legacy that we see all around us in this great stadium - this is a beautiful stadium and it is packed. I am so happy about that. I said, 'How are you going to fill up a place like that?' In this beautiful campus and in your smiling faces but it all began with a vision.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresslibertyuniversitylynchburgvirginia0", "title": "Donald J. Trump Commencement Address at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-liberty-university-lynchburg-virginia-0", "publication_date": "13-05-2017", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3966, "text": "That vision was of a world class university for evangelical Christians. And I want to thank you, because boy did you come out and vote, those of you that are old enough, in other words your parents. No doubt many people told him his vision was impossible, and I am sure they continued to say that so long after he started, at the beginning with just 154 students, but the fact is no one has ever achieved anything significant without a chorus of critics standing on the sidelines explaining why it cannot be done. But the future belongs to the dreamers, not to the critics. the future belongs to the people who follow their heart no matter what the critics say because they truly believe in their vision. At Liberty your leaders knew from the very beginning that a strong athletic program would help this campus grow so that this school might transform more lives. That is why a crucial part of Reverend Falwell's vision for making Liberty a world-class institution was having a world-class football team much like the great teams of Notre Dame, great school, great place, in fact, Vice President Mike Pence is there today doing a fabulous job as he always does. A few years ago, the New York Times even wrote a story on the great ambitions of the Liberty Flames. That story prompted a longtime president of another school to write a letter to Jerry. It is a letter that Reverend Falwell would have been very, very pleased to read. Jerry tells me that letter now hangs in the wall in the boardroom of your great university. It came from the late Father Theodore Hesper, who was the beloved president of the university of Notre Dame 35 years ago. Like this school's founder, he was a truly kindhearted man of very, very deep faith. In the letter, Father Hesper recalled that Notre Dame's own meteoric rise from a small Midwestern school to a national football powerhouse. And then he wrote something so amazing and generous. He wrote, 'I think you are on that same trajectory now and I want to wish you all the best and encourage you from the starting and from being able to start very small and arriving in the big time.' Thanks to hard work, great faith, and incredible devotion those dreams have come true. As of February of this year, the Liberty Flames are playing in the FBS, the highest level of competition in NCAA football. I do not want to look at some of those scores here. Jerry, you sure you know what you are doing here?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresslibertyuniversitylynchburgvirginia0", "title": "Donald J. Trump Commencement Address at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-liberty-university-lynchburg-virginia-0", "publication_date": "13-05-2017", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3967, "text": "Those other players are big and fast and strong but I have a feeling you are going to do very well, right? From the most humble roots you have become a powerhouse in both education and sports. And just wait until the world hears the football teams you will be playing on your schedule starting next season. President Falwell gave me a list of some of those schools, the ones you are going to be playing 2018. Would you like me to read the names? Just came out, would you like to hear them? UMass, Virginia, Auburn - Jerry, are you sure you know what you are doing? I do not know about that James. Rutgers, Old Dominion, Brigham Young, ENTITY - I might be at that game, who am I supposed to root for? I do not know, Jerry, I am going to have to think about that one, Jerry. maybe in four or five years I will come to a game, right, you will build it up. The success of your athletic program arriving on the big stage should be a reminder to every new graduate of just what you can achieve when you start small, pursue a big vision and never, ever quit. If I give you one message to hold in your hearts today, it is this. There will be times in your life you will want to quit, you will want to go home, you will want to go home perhaps to that wonderful mother that is sitting back there watching you and say, 'Mom, I cannot do it. I cannot do it.' Go back home and tell mom, dad, I can do it, I can do it. I will do it, you are going to be successful. I have seen so many brilliant people, they gave up in life, they were totally brilliant, they were top of their class, they were the best students, they were the best of everything, they gave up. I have seen others who really did not have that talent or that ability and they are among the most successful people today in the world because they never quit and they never gave up. Never stop fighting for what you believe in and for the people who care about you. Does that sound familiar by the way? The more people tell you it is not possible, that it cannot be done, the more you should be absolutely determined to prove them wrong. Embrace that label - being an outsider is fine, embrace the label - because it is the outsiders who change the world and who make a real and lasting difference.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresslibertyuniversitylynchburgvirginia0", "title": "Donald J. Trump Commencement Address at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-liberty-university-lynchburg-virginia-0", "publication_date": "13-05-2017", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3968, "text": "The more that a broken system tells you that you are wrong, the more certain you should be that you must keep pushing ahead, you must keep pushing forward. Most importantly, you have to do what you love. You have to do what you love. I have seen so many people, they are forced through lost of reasons, sometimes including family, to go down a path that they do not want to go down, to go down a path that leads them to something that they do not love, that they do not enjoy. You have to do what you love, or you most likely will not be very successful at it. So do what you love. I want to recognize a friend who is here with us today, who can serve as an inspiration to us all. Someone who does not know the meaning of the word 'quit'. Both on the field, off the field, he is a Hall of Fame quarterback for the Buffalo Bills, really a good friend of mine, an amazing guy, Jim Kelly, where is Jim, he is here some place. Jim do you have any idea how much money you'd be making today? They'd hit Jim, it was like tackling a linebacker. They'd hit Jim, four guy, five guys that weighed 320, and he'd just keep going down the field. He was much more than a quarterback. He had tremendous heart and he knew how to win. Jim is tough, and his toughest fight of all was that he beat cancer not once but twice. And I saw him and his incredible wife as they were in a very low moment, Jill, very, very low moment, and it was amazing the way they fought. But I want to just say it is great to have you here today Jim and these people are big, big fans and if you can get a young version of Jim Kelly, you will be beating a lot of teams, Jerry. So, interestingly, though, I said 'I wonder what Jim's doing here,' his daughter Erin crosses the goal line to you and today with you so, Erin, stand up. To be, really, champions for Christ. Whether you are called to be a missionary overseas, to shepherd a church or to be a leader in your community, you are living witness of the gospel message of faith, hope and love. And I must tell you I am so proud as your president to have helped you along over the past short period of time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresslibertyuniversitylynchburgvirginia0", "title": "Donald J. Trump Commencement Address at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-liberty-university-lynchburg-virginia-0", "publication_date": "13-05-2017", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3969, "text": "I said I was going to do it, and Jerry, I did it. And a lot of people are very happy with what is taken place, especially last week, we did some very important signings, right James? America is better when people put their faith into action. As long as I am your president, no one is ever going to stop you from practicing your faith or from preaching what is in your heart. We will always stand up for the right of all Americans to pray to God and to follow his teachings. America is beginning a new chapter. Today each of you begins a new chapter as well. When your story goes from here, it will be defined by your vision, your perseverance and your grit. In this, I am reminded of another man you know very well and who has joined us here today. His name is George Rogers, Liberty University CFO and vice president for a quarter of a century. During World War II, George spent three-and-a-half years as a prisoner of war. He saw many of his fellow soldiers die during the Bataan death march. He was the victim of starvation and torture as a prisoner of war. When he was finally set free he weighed just 85 pounds and was told he would not live past the age of 40. If anyone ever had reason to quit, to give in to the bitterness and anger that we all face at some point, to lose hope in God's vision for his life, it was indeed George Rogers. But that is not what he did. He stood up for his country, he stood up for his community. He stood up for his family and he defended civilization against a tide of barbarity, the kind of barbarity we are seeing today and we have been witnessing over the last number of years and I just want to tell you as your president, we are doing very, very well in countering it, so you just hang in there. You will be hearing a lot about it next week from our generals Things are going along very, very well. Through it all, he kept his faith in God, even in the darkest depths of despair. Like so many others of his generation, George came home to a nation full of optimism and pride and began to live out the American dream. He started a family, he discovered God's plan for him and pursued that vision with all his might, pouring his passion into a tiny college in a place called Lynchburg, Virginia. Did you ever hear of that?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresslibertyuniversitylynchburgvirginia0", "title": "Donald J. Trump Commencement Address at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-liberty-university-lynchburg-virginia-0", "publication_date": "13-05-2017", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3970, "text": "We love, we love it. Do you like it? We like it, right? I flew over it a little while ago. What started as a dream with a few good friends he helped shepherd into the largest Christian university in the world. Just look at this amazing, soaring, growing campus and I have been watching it grow because I have been a friend of Liberty for a long time, now, Jerry. Thanks in great part George's financial stewardship hundreds of thousands of young hearts and souls have been enriched at Liberty and inspired by the spirit of God. George, we thank you, and we salute you, and you just stay healthy for a long time, George, thank you. Now it falls on the shoulders of each of you here today to protect the freedom that patriots like George earned with their incredible sacrifice. Fortunately you have been equipped with the tools from your time right here on this campus to make the right decisions and to serve God, family and country. As you build good lives, you will also be rebuilding our nation. You will be leaders in your communities, stewards of great institutions and defenders of liberty and you will be great mothers and fathers and grandmothers and grandfathers, loving friends and loving family members. You will build a future where we have the courage to chase our dreams no matter what the cynics and the doubters have to say. You will have the confidence to speak the hopes in your hearts and to express the love that stirs your souls. And you will have the faith to replace a broken establishment with a government that serves and protects the people. We must always remember that we share one home and one glorious destiny whether we are brown, black or white. We all bleed the same red blood of patriots. We all salute the same great American flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God. As long as you remember what you have learned here at Liberty, as long as you have pride in your beliefs, courage in your convictions and faith in your God, then you will not fail. And as long as America remains true to its values, loyal to its citizens, and devoted to its creator, then our best days are yet to come, I can promise you that. It is been a great honor for me and I want to thank you, the students. I also want to thank you, the family, for getting them there, and I want to thank and congratulate Liberty. May God bless the class of 2017.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresslibertyuniversitylynchburgvirginia0", "title": "Donald J. Trump Commencement Address at Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-liberty-university-lynchburg-virginia-0", "publication_date": "13-05-2017", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3978, "text": "Today we continue a tradition begun by President Eisenhower some 64 years ago. This gathering is a testament to the power of faith and is one of the great customs of our Nation, and I hope to be here 7 more times with you. I want very much to thank our cochairs, Senator Boozman and Senator Coons, and all of the congressional leadership they are all over the place. We have a lot of very distinguished guests. Rex Tillerson, Secretary of State. He is going to do a great job. Some people did not like Rex because he actually got along with leaders of the world. He is respected all over the world, and I think he is going to go down as one of our great, great Secretaries. We appreciate it. I do not even know if you are a Democrat or if you are a Republican, but I am appointing you for another year the hell with it. And I think it is not even my appointment, it is the Senate's appointment, but we will talk to them. I also want to thank my great friends though. She is got the voice every time I hear it, that voice is so beautiful. That everything is so beautiful about Roma, including her husband because he is a special, special friend, Mark Burnett for the wonderful introduction. I said to the agent, I am sorry. The only thing wrong I actually got on the phone and fired him myself because he said, you do not want to do it, it'll never work, it'll never, ever work. You do not want to do it. I said, listen but I really fired him after it became the number-one show. It became so successful, and he wanted a commission, and he did not want to do the show. That is what I really said. But we had tremendous success on The Apprentice. And when I ran for President, I had to leave the show. That is when I knew for sure I was doing it. And they hired a big, big movie star, Arnold Schwarzenegger, to take my place. The ratings went right down the tubes. And Mark will never, ever bet against ENTITY again. And I want to just pray for Arnold, if we can, for those ratings, okay? But we have had an amazing life together, the last 14, 15 years. I also want to thank my dear friend, Vice President Mike Pence, who has been incredible, and incredible wife Karen.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalprayerbreakfast24", "title": "Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-prayer-breakfast-24", "publication_date": "02-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3979, "text": "And every time I was in a little trouble with something, where they were questioning me, they'd say, but he picked Mike Pence so he has to know what he is doing. And it is true, he is been you know, on the scale of 0 to 10, I rate him a 12, okay? So I want to thank you. But most importantly, today I want to thank the American people. Your faith and prayers have sustained me and inspired me through some very, very tough times. All around America, I have met amazing people whose words of worship and encouragement have been a constant source of strength. What I hear most often, as I travel the country, are five words that never, ever fail to touch my heart. I am praying for you. I am praying for you, ENTITY. No one has inspired me more in my travels than the families of the United States military, men and women who have put their lives on the line every day for their country and their countrymen. I just came back yesterday from Dover Air Force Base to join the family of Chief William Ryan Owens, as America's fallen hero was returned home. Incredible family, loved him so much. He died in defense of our Nation. He gave his life in defense of our people. Our debt to him and our debt to his family is eternal and everlasting. that a man lay down his life for his friends. We will never forget the men and women who wear the uniform, believe me. From generation to generation, their vigilance has kept our liberty alive. Our freedom is won by their sacrifice, and our security has been earned with their sweat and blood and tears. God has blessed this land to give us such incredible heroes and patriots. They are very, very special, and we are going to take care of them. Our soldiers understand that what matters is not party or ideology or creed, but the bonds of loyalty that link us all together as one. America is a nation of believers. In towns all across our land, it is plain to see what we easily forget so easily we forget this that the quality of our lives is not defined by our material success, but by our spiritual success. I will tell you that. And I tell you that from somebody that has had material success and knows tremendous numbers of people with great material success, the most material success. Many of those people are very, very miserable, unhappy people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalprayerbreakfast24", "title": "Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-prayer-breakfast-24", "publication_date": "02-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3980, "text": "And I know a lot of people without that, but they have great families, they have great faith. They do not have money at least, not nearly to the extent and they are happy. Those to me are the successful people, I have to tell you. I was blessed to be raised in a churched home. My mother and father taught me that to whom much is given much is expected. I was sworn in on the very bible from which my mother would teach us as young children. And that faith lives on in my heart every single day. The people in this room come from many, many backgrounds. You represent so many religions and so many views. But we are all united by our faith in our Creator and our firm knowledge that we are all equal in His eyes. We are human beings, with souls. Our Republic was formed on the basis that freedom is not a gift from government, but that freedom is a gift from God. It was the great Thomas Jefferson who said, The God who gave us life, gave us liberty. Jefferson asked, Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Among those freedoms is the right to worship according to our own beliefs. That is why I will get rid of, and totally destroy, the Johnson Amendment and allow our representatives of faith to speak freely and without fear of retribution. I will do that. Freedom of religion is a sacred right, but it is also a right under threat all around us, and the world is under serious, serious threat in so many different ways. And I have never seen it so much and so openly as since I took the position of President. The world is in trouble, but we are going to straighten it out. That is what I do. I fix things. We are going to straighten it out. When you hear about the tough phone calls I am having, do not worry about it. We are taken advantage of by every nation in the world, virtually. acts of wanton slaughter against religious minorities, horrors on a scale that defy description. Terrorism is a fundamental threat to religious freedom. It may not be pretty for a little while. We have seen and by the way, General, as you know, James Mad Dog I should not say it in this room Mattis. Now, there is a reason they call him Mad Dog Mattis never lost a battle. He is our new Secretary of Defense, who will be working with Rex.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalprayerbreakfast24", "title": "Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-prayer-breakfast-24", "publication_date": "02-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3981, "text": "He is right now in South Korea, going to Japan, going to some other spots. And I will tell you what, I have gotten to know him really well. We have somebody who is the real deal working for us, and that is what we need. We have seen peace-loving Muslims brutalized, victimized, murdered, and oppressed by ISIS killers. We have seen threats of extermination against the Jewish people. We have seen a campaign of ISIS and genocide against Christians, where they cut off heads. Not since the Middle Ages have we seen that. We have not seen that, the cutting off of heads. Now they cut off their heads; they drown people in steel cages. Have not seen this I have not seen this. Nobody has seen this for many, many years. All nations have a moral obligation to speak out against such violence. All nations have a duty to work together to confront it and to confront it viciously, if we have to. So I want to express clearly today to the American people that my administration will do everything in its power to defend and protect religious liberty in our land. America must forever remain a tolerant society where all faiths are respected and where all of our citizens can feel safe and secure. In recent days, we have begun to take necessary action to achieve that goal. Our Nation has the most generous immigration system in the world. But these are those and there are those that would exploit that generosity to undermine the values that we hold so dear. We need security. There are those who would seek to enter our country for the purpose of spreading violence or oppressing other people based upon their faith or their lifestyle. We will not allow a beachhead of intolerance to spread in our Nation. You look all over the world, and you see what is happening. So, in the coming days, we will develop a system to help ensure that those admitted into our country fully embrace our values of religious and personal liberty and that they reject any form of oppression and discrimination. We want people to come into our Nation, but we want people to love us and to love our values, not to hate us and to hate our values. And we will be a country where all citizens can practice their beliefs without fear of hostility or fear of violence. America will succeed as long as our most vulnerable citizens and we have some that are so vulnerable have a path to success. And America will thrive as long as we continue to have faith in each other and faith in God.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalprayerbreakfast24", "title": "Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-prayer-breakfast-24", "publication_date": "02-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3982, "text": "I am pleased today to approve the Housing Act of 1964 I believe that we have a commitment to assure every American an opportunity to live in a decent home, in a safe and a decent neighborhood. This milestone measure will help us to honor that commitment. This bill carries forward our continuing efforts to eradicate slums and blight in our cities; to assure decent housing for those least able to find it--the poor, the elderly, the severely handicapped-and those in our rural areas; to help our communities grow in orderly directions and avoid future blight and assure lasting beauty. This bill does more than to continue the successful programs that we have had in operation in the past. It provides new support for greater success in the future. The plight of property owners in urban renewal areas is recognized in this measure. Provision is made so that they can rehabilitate their homes and businesses instead of having to move from the path of the bulldozers. Looking ahead, this measure assists local communities in enforcing housing codes so blight does not develop or persist in the future. It also provides for training local urban development administrators and to produce the city planners that we shall need in the future to guide in the growth that we expect. This is by no means a bill just for the cities of America alone. A key new program provides for the construction of low-cost rental housing for our farmworkers in the Nation. Nor is this bill a bill solely for the housing of those that are in unfortunate circumstances. It provides expanded benefits to builders and to lenders, and to families in good circumstances. By every standard we think this bill benefits all Americans, and if we are to continue to keep our commitments in the world, then I believe it is fundamental that we must consider keeping our commitments here at home. And that is what we are trying to do with this legislation. For our generation, courage is not confined to meeting the challenges faraway from us. Courage is also required to meet the problems and the obligations and the challenges that are nearest to us. This Congress deserves, I believe, very special commendation for the foresight and the courage that it has shown in meeting our problems here at home and in our own country, with our own people. The Urban Mass Transportation Act, the highway aid bill, the Hill-Burton extension, the many education measures all represent, together, the most constructive attack by any Congress on the challenge of keeping America fit and a fine place for our families.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponsigningthehousingact0", "title": "Remarks Upon Signing the Housing Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-signing-the-housing-act-0", "publication_date": "02-09-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3987, "text": "This marks the second time in 2 days I have been here. I promise I will not come back tomorrow and interrupt your lives. Madam Foreign Minister, to the distinguished Prime Minister of St. Kitts and others who are here who were part of that remarkable coalition that restored democracy to Haiti a year ago. Let me say I was looking out at this crowd tonight, and when my friend of 25 years, Taylor Branch, told me that this event was going to come to pass, I redid my schedule just so I could come by here and thank so many of you for what you did. I want to thank my longtime friend Bill Gray for agreeing to be pressed back into public service for the work that he did. I want to thank all the people in the United States who cared about Haiti, who wrote me letters and called me on the phone and came to see me about it and talked to me about what was at stake. Randall Robinson even went on a diet for Haiti. Jonathan Demme wrote me letters that were even more eloquent than the films that he makes. I thank you all for your concern. I want to thank our partners in the hemisphere. When the United States decided that if necessary we would use force to remove the military regime and to restore President Aristide and democracy, I was so determined that no one would think we were trying to revive any hemispheric imperialism. I have worked very hard to establish a new sense of partnership, a new sense of common bond, a new sense of common mission with all the nations of the Caribbean, of Central and South America. She is in Nicaragua as we speak, on her way to a four-nation tour of Latin America. We care deeply about how other people who share our neighborhoods feel about the United States and that they understand that we believe we have a common destiny. And so I do not think this operation ever would have worked as it should have worked had it not been for all the other countries who were willing to participate with us. Even though we had a United Nations mandate, what really made it go was all of our neighbors participating, sending their soldiers, sending their police monitors, participating, standing up for it. It made an enormous difference. I want to say a special word of thanks to all the people within our administration who supported my action. And I said, well, I do a lot of things that the polls . Two of them are here, the Deputy Secretary of State, Strobe Talbott, and Sandy Berger.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscelebrationtheanniversarytherestorationdemocracyhaiti", "title": "Remarks at a Celebration of the Anniversary of the Restoration of Democracy in Haiti", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-celebration-the-anniversary-the-restoration-democracy-haiti", "publication_date": "12-10-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 3988, "text": "And people that are not here, Tony Lake and the Vice President, were all very strongly in support of the action that our administration took. And I appreciate that very much. And finally let me say to General Fisher and to everyone who was involved first in the multinational force and then in the United Nations force, I am very proud and grateful for the performance of the United States military in Haiti. And they made this whole thing possible, and we thank you, too, sir. One of the best things that is happened to me in the last year is a few months after the restoration of President Aristide, one of the military officers who was involved in the operation and I do not want to embarrass him, so I will not say his name but I was having a rather interesting conversation with him, and he looked at me, and he said, You know, ENTITY, when you did this, I just did not know. And I was coming from a person of few words and high performance, I treasured that. I thank Brian Atwood and the work that AID is doing in Haiti. And all of you should relish this celebration for all of the work that all of you did and the contributions you made, all of the groups and the individuals. Tonight I hope you will think about what we all have to do to make sure that this extraordinary endeavor succeeds. The United States has worked hard in the last year to help to establish an electoral process which is proceeding. We have worked hard to try to establish a system of law and order which is making progress. But in the end, the Foreign Minister and all of the people in her government and President Aristide have to be able to prove that freedom and democracy can bring the benefits that we know it can bring. And Haiti was plundered for a very long time. When I went back to Haiti for the first time since my wife and I went there in December of 1975, I was literally shocked to see the deterioration of the environment, the topsoil running thin, and all of the things that had happened. We all have a lot of work to do there. And in the end, we have to make it possible for the people of Haiti who are willing to work and learn and grow to compose a life, to stabilize their families, to live out their dreams. And we have a lot more work to do there.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscelebrationtheanniversarytherestorationdemocracyhaiti", "title": "Remarks at a Celebration of the Anniversary of the Restoration of Democracy in Haiti", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-celebration-the-anniversary-the-restoration-democracy-haiti", "publication_date": "12-10-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4011, "text": "We appreciate President Trump having us into the Oval Office to talk about health care and the improvements that are being made. The President has worked and said, Bring us your best ideas. And these are members of the Republican Study Committee who have brought those good ideas and worked in a very diligent way to ultimately get to a yes on this bill with the changes that the President has asked us to make that we are going to make in the bill. And with that, I want to lead it off to the Chairman of the Republican Study Committee, Mark Walker. work requirements throughout the country, and also something what we call block grants, which allows the States to be empowered. We believe they should be able to hold the reins when it comes to managing their population. We also think this would provide more coverage for the indigent, for those sick, and for those disabled. So we are excited about it today, and that is why we have come today to celebrate the American Health Care Act and moving forward with a yes. And we had a nice meeting, and we have been talking all during the night. This did not just happen over the last 20 minutes. And we are doing some incredible things. I want everyone to know, I am a hundred percent behind this. They have not been giving it a fair press. The press is-well, as you know, in many cases, I call it the fake news. This is going to be great for people. And I also want everybody to know that all of these noes, or potential noes, are all yeses. Every single person sitting in this room is now a yes. And we made certain changes, and very, frankly, little-although the block grant is very important, because I want the States to get the money and to run their program, if they want to run it, because they can do it better than the Federal Government. They are better equipped than the Federal Government. And I watched the architect of the plan-yesterday I watched the old clip where he said the American people are stupid to have voted for it. And only because everyone knows it is on its last dying feet, the fake news is trying to say good things about it, okay? And unless we gave it massive subsidies in a year from now or 6 months from now, it is not even going to be here. So when they say, Oh, more people on the plan, there is not going to be any people on the plan.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksmeetinghealthcarereformwiththerepublicanstudycommittee", "title": "Remarks at a Meeting on Health Care Reform With the Republican Study Committee", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-meeting-health-care-reform-with-the-republican-study-committee", "publication_date": "17-03-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4012, "text": "I know that Barbara Bush is very disappointed that she could not be here with us today, but she is down in Dallas, if you have not been told already. That is the penalty of coming in this way after the meeting has started-I do not know who said what. But she is participating in a recognition ceremony for volunteers working in Operation LIFT, a literacy organization supported solely by the private sector. And yesterday, I had the pleasure in my office of meeting Sherman Swenson. He is the chief executive officer of Dalton Booksellers, and that corporation has launched a program nationwide on this very subject. I know that Barbara would be as encouraged as I am at the broad array of groups and individuals represented here today-leaders from the Congress, from education, business and industry, church and service groups, and State and local government. the elimination of adult functional illiteracy in the United States. In this decade, America faces serious challenges on many fronts-to our national security, our economic prosperity, and our ability to compete in the international marketplace. If we are to renew our economy, protect our freedom, we must sharpen the skills of every American mind and enlarge the potential of every individual American life. Unfortunately, the hidden problem of adult illiteracy holds back too many of our citizens, and as a nation, we, too, pay a price. Conservative estimates are that 23 million Americans, one in five, are functionally illiterate-a statistic that includes men and women of every race, religion, and economic status, and every region of the country. I asked Secretary Bell to explore with you the best ways and means to erase adult illiteracy from our country, and the result is this initiative that we announce today. to provide initial Federal funding for the Coalition for Literacy and support the National Ad Council in its awareness campaign; to establish a national adult literacy project identifying model literacy programs and developing and testing new programs, materials, and methods. The Department of Education will work closely with the White House Office of Private Sector Initiatives to enlist more nongovernment support. An additional $310 million has been requested for college work-study programs to include students in our effort, and I have also asked the Department to recruit literacy volunteers on college campuses. Federal employees will also be encouraged to volunteer, and the Department of Education will conduct a series of national meetings and conferences to increase awareness and promote cooperation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseceremonyannouncingtheadultliteracyinitiative", "title": "Remarks at a White House Ceremony Announcing the Adult Literacy Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-ceremony-announcing-the-adult-literacy-initiative", "publication_date": "07-09-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4013, "text": "Well, thank you all, and I say that-I think I can say that on behalf of the Vice President and myself. We are delighted to welcome all of you distinguished members from the diplomatic community, the Senators and Representatives and honored guests. And today we celebrate the passage of legislation that I have held close to my heart for a long time. I know all of us wished it could have come sooner, but as I promised when some of you were here last December, the time is short and the needs are great. Together we can be a mighty force for good. We can show the world that we conquer fear with faith, we overcome poverty with growth, and we counter violence with opportunity and freedom. And now we are making good on our promise. I am proud to stand with you for this celebration on the long-awaited first stage of implementation of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act. Ours is a collective partnership for peace, prosperity, and democracy in the Caribbean and in Central America-a partnership that is born of our shared vision that democracy is a God-given birthright and that faith, freedom, and respect for the dignity of every citizen are the mainsprings of human progress. From the very outset of our administration, we have never wavered in our long-term goal to foster true stability and democracy. And to do so, we must work together to help improve the underlying conditions for economic development. Peace and security in the Caribbean Basin are in our vital interest. When our neighbors are in trouble, their troubles inevitably become ours. What these countries need most is the opportunity to produce and export their products at fair prices. That is what the Caribbean Basin Initiative is all about. It offers them open markets in the United States and initiatives to encourage investment and growth. Far from a handout, the proposal will help these countries help themselves. Trade, not aid, will mean more jobs for them and more jobs for us. The CBI package proposed to the Congress in March of '82 was designed by the governments and private sectors of the region's countries, including those of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. a supplemental appropriation of $350 million to provide emergency balance-of-payment support, the elimination for 12 years of nearly all of the remaining tariff barriers on Caribbean Basin country exports to the United States, and tax incentives to promote new investment in the tourist industry. The $350 million supplemental .appropriation received strong bipartisan support and was approved by the Congress in September of 1982.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseceremonymarkingtheimplementationthecaribbeanbasininitiative", "title": "Remarks at a White House Ceremony Marking the Implementation of the Caribbean Basin Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-ceremony-marking-the-implementation-the-caribbean-basin-initiative", "publication_date": "05-10-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4014, "text": "These moneys have now been obligated, allowing the importation of raw materials and capital goods to help get stalled economies in the region moving again. Aid levels to the Caribbean Basin have doubled since 1980. The other CBI proposals were an innovative and unprecedented plan to integrate trade preferences, investment incentives, and other measures to encourage the economic and social development of the countries of the Caribbean Basin. We seek to help countries implement free market strategies to stimulate their exports and strengthen their economies by expanding growth. Our original proposals evolved during many months of congressional consideration and the Caribbean Basin economic recovery act was approved on July 28th. And the bill that I signed in August is true to our original intent. I am convinced that over time it will contribute significantly to the economic stability and social tranquillity of countries in the Caribbean Basin. The first element of this legislation is a 12-year, one-way, free trade arrangement for all goods produced in the Caribbean Basin except textiles, apparel, canned tuna, leather goods, shoes, and petroleum products. This marks a step our country has never taken before. It is evidence of our commitment to the economic health of our good neighbors. The second element would allow U.S. citizens attending business conventions in the Caribbean Basin and Bermuda to deduct from their income taxes the reasonable expenses incurred. The Secretary of Treasury is here. Now, these benefits will become all the more important as the vigorous expansion of our own economy brings about an increase in our imports and more and more business travel. As a footnote, you should know that we have 125 Peace Corps volunteers trained in small-scale agribusiness. They are helping small farmers increase and diversify food production for their countries' needs and for winter markets in Europe and North America. Fifty more American volunteers will receive this training within the next few weeks. I was especially gratified that support for the CBI was overwhelming and bipartisan. I offer special recognition to the many Members of Congress who strongly supported our proposals, guided them through the approval process, in particular, Congressman Dan Rostenkowski and Senator Bob Dole. You know, almost a year ago, Dan Rostenkowski took members of his Ways and Means Committee to visit five countries and meet with the Prime Ministers of more than 10 Caribbean countries. And it was on this trip that Dan coined a saying which was picked up by everyone in the Caribbean. CBI, he said, would be friends helping friends.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseceremonymarkingtheimplementationthecaribbeanbasininitiative", "title": "Remarks at a White House Ceremony Marking the Implementation of the Caribbean Basin Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-ceremony-marking-the-implementation-the-caribbean-basin-initiative", "publication_date": "05-10-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4015, "text": "In that spirit, I extend my appreciation to the governments and peoples of the Caribbean Basin countries themselves. They include the very effective spokesmen for both the region's private sectors and labor unions. I also want to express my appreciation to David Rockefeller and his associates at the Council of the Americas and Central American Action for their help in providing key business support for passage of this bill. And I pledge to you today that enactment of the landmark Caribbean Basin economic recovery act will be followed by a vigorous implementation effort on the part of this administration. Ambassador Brock will continue as Chairman of our Senior Interagency Task Force responsible for its policy and program development. I am calling on the other Cabinet members who've contributed to the CBI's development to give Ambassador Brock by January 1st their proposals on how to make the CBI the most effective means of expanding economic opportunity in the region. The formal process of designation which the Congress has given me the responsibility to carry out has been with delegations visiting with all the potential beneficiaries. Those discussions have been conducted with the kind of mutual commitment to friendship and good will which has made us all so excited about the future of the region. I am optimistic that we will be extending the benefits of the program to virtually all the beneficiaries by the first of next year. The economic and social development of the Caribbean Basin should be part of a collective effort by the international community. Even before my original announcement of the CBI, we held consultations with the Governments of Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela, as well as with our European allies and Japan. Enactment of the CBI should encourage other donor governments and appropriate international organizations to expand their assistance activities in the region. The problems of the Caribbean Basin region are deep-seated, and reducing them will be a great challenge. But we can gain strength from our shared vision. those who love and create, and those who hate and destroy. And Pope John Paul II has told us that, Only love can build. With faith, wisdom, courage, and love we can overcome injustice, hatred, and oppression and build a better life together for all of the Americas. I think back to an incident during my last trip to Central America. As I was beginning to speak in Costa Rica, suddenly I was loudly interrupted by a gentleman who was determined to make his own speech out there from the audience.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseceremonymarkingtheimplementationthecaribbeanbasininitiative", "title": "Remarks at a White House Ceremony Marking the Implementation of the Caribbean Basin Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-ceremony-marking-the-implementation-the-caribbean-basin-initiative", "publication_date": "05-10-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4016, "text": "I did not know exactly what was going on, and I turned to the President of Costa Rica, asked him, and he informed me that this was a Communist, a Marxist member of their congress, their legislature, and that he was determined to denounce us. And that is what he was doing. He was speaking in Spanish, so I did not really know what he was saying. And, finally, it reached a point that he seemed to be going on, and I was standing there, and I realized I had a microphone and he did not . So, I just overrode him and pointed out to the audience what I knew about him, what I'd been told about him, and what a tribute it was to their democracy, of which they are very proud, that he was allowed to say these things in that forum, and yet he would never be allowed to do what he was doing in any of the Communist countries. Well, the audience of more than 1,000 rose in a standing ovation. There was a lump in my throat; must have been one in his, because he sat down. I knew in my heart they were not applauding me. They were not even applauding the United States. They were applauding the principles, the ideals, and the dreams that we all share and which they, the brave Costa Rican people, have had the courage to live up to. I have to tell you a little postscript there, that later the President told me that that Communist member of the legislature was the only member of the legislature that could afford to drive a Mercedes. But if the people of the Americas are given a free choice, they will all choose to be like Costa Rica, not Castro's Cuba. Only a counterfeit revolution builds walls to keep people in and employs armies of secret police to keep them quiet. The real revolution lives in the principle that government must rest on the consent of the governed, and this spirit of democracy and freedom of opportunity is the driving force behind the Caribbean Basin Initiative. We are building together a future of new hope and more opportunity. And I pledge the best efforts of our administration to carry this positive program forward, making it worthy of the ideals and dreams that gave it birth. And now I'd like to ask Bill Brock to make a few remarks. And I thank you very much, and God bless you all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseceremonymarkingtheimplementationthecaribbeanbasininitiative", "title": "Remarks at a White House Ceremony Marking the Implementation of the Caribbean Basin Initiative", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-ceremony-marking-the-implementation-the-caribbean-basin-initiative", "publication_date": "05-10-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4027, "text": "It is good to be back in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. A couple of people I want to acknowledge. First of all, one of my favorite people, one of our finest United States Senators, give it up for Bob Casey. I think we have got in the house as well your mayor, Luke Ravenstahl. Congressman Mike Doyle is in the house. And we want to thank Sheryl Sesay and Monte Reid for the preprogram. The White Sox and the Pirates are in first place. So we may be in the World Series together. We love each other, we can root for each other until we get to the World Series. Then it is every man for himself. So I just so I want to, first of all, just say thank you to everybody for taking the time to be here. I hope everybody had a great Fourth of July. We had some folks over for a barbecue in my backyard had some fireworks. It was also Malia's birthday on the Fourth. I used to be able to convince her that all these fireworks were for her, but she no longer believes me. But she sends her love, and Michelle and Sasha and Bo all say hi. Now, some of you may know that we have been on the bus tour for the last couple of days. I have been traveling through Ohio. We came just came from Beaver, Pennsylvania. And I have had a chance to talk to folks everywhere I go, and people are aware of the fact that we are now in full campaign swing. And I know that sometimes modern campaigns are not pretty to watch, because basically, so much of it involves millions of dollars on television. Most of the ads are negative, and at a certain point, people get discouraged and start feeling like nobody in Washington's listening to what is going on to ordinary folks all across the country. But I have got to tell you, despite the cynicism and the negativism, what I am what I think about is my first race. And what What I think about is my first race. And this is when I was first running for State senate; I could not afford television commercials. And Michelle and I, we used to go door to door and pass out flyers that we had printed out in Kinko's. And we had our friends and our family members, and we'd march in Fourth of July parades. And I did not have Air Force One back then.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallypittsburghpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-pittsburgh-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "06-07-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4028, "text": "But when I think about my first race, I think about why I got into politics. And the reason I got into politics was because this country has blessed me so much. And I thought about my own family, how my grandfather fought in Patton's army in World War II while my grandmother was back home working on a bomber assembly line. And when my grandfather came back, he was able to go to college on the GI bill, and they were able to buy a home through the FHA. And then, I thought about my single mom because my dad left when I was very young and how, despite all the struggles, she was able to get a great education because that is the kind of country this was. And she was able to pass on a great education to me and my sister. And then, I think about Michelle's mom, and the fact that Michelle's mom and dad, they did not come from a wealthy family. Michelle's dad, he worked a blue-collar job at the sanitary plant in Chicago. And my mother-in-law, she stayed at home until the kids got older. And she ended up becoming a secretary, and that is what she worked at most of her life, was a secretary at a bank. So none of us came from privileged backgrounds, none of us had a lot of wealth or fame. But what we understood was that here in America, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what church you worship at, no matter what region of the country, if you were willing to work hard, if you were willing to take responsibility for your life, you could make it if you try here in the United States of America. And that basic idea, that basic bargain that says here we all deserve a fair shot and everybody should do their fair share and everybody should play by the same set of rules; that basic bargain that says if you are willing to work hard and take responsibility in your own life, then you can find a job that pays a living wage and you can save up and buy a home and you will not go bankrupt if you get sick. Maybe you can take a vacation with your family once in a while. Nothing fancy, but you can go out and go visit some of our national parks or I remember my favorite vacation when I was a kid, traveling with my mom and my grandma and my sister, and we traveled the country on Greyhound buses and railroads.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallypittsburghpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-pittsburgh-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "06-07-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4029, "text": "And once in a while, we'd rent a car not that often and stay at Howard Johnsons and did not matter how big the pool was; if there was a pool, I'd jump in. I was 11 years old, and I was excited just to go to the vending machine and get the ice bucket and get the ice. And then, the chance to retire with dignity and respect, that dream of a strong middle class, that is what America has always been about. That is what led me to get into public service. That is what led to my first campaign, was making sure that access to that middle class that growing, thriving heartbeat of America that that was available for everybody, that it was not just available for me and Michelle, but it was available for every kid all across this country. And that is what led me to run for ENTITY. And that is what is led me to ask you for a second term as ENTITY, to fight for America's middle class and everybody who is trying to get into the middle class. That idea has been getting battered a little bit over the last decade. Part of the reason I ran in 2008, part of the reason so many of you came together to work on that campaign, was we had seen a decade in which those middle class dreams were under assault. Folks were working harder, but making less. Costs of everything from health care to college to groceries to gas kept on going up, but your salaries or your wages did not . We had put two wars on a credit card, taken a surplus and turned it into a deficit, and all of it culminated in the worst financial crisis that we have seen in our lifetimes. So what we came together to do in 2008 was start this process this painstaking, laborious process to turn this country back towards those core values, to turn this country back towards our best selves and our best ideals. And we knew we would not be able to do it overnight because these problems were not created overnight. But we believed in this country, and we believed in the American people. We understood that this has never been a country of folks looking for handouts, but what they do want is a fighting chance. And so, for the last 3 years, when some folks said, let us let Detroit go bankrupt we said, no, we are betting on the American worker. We are betting on the American industries. And now GM is back at number one, and Chrysler and Ford are back.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallypittsburghpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-pittsburgh-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "06-07-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4030, "text": "And we have started to see manufacturing come back to our shores, more manufacturing jobs created than any time since the 1990s. advanced manufacturing, new technologies, and clean energy. We have seen small businesses who almost had to shutter their doors during the crisis, but sometimes, the owners did not take a salary because they wanted to keep their folks working. over 4.4 million jobs created over the last 2 1/2 years, over 500,000 manufacturing jobs. So we have been fighting back, but what we all understand is that we have got so much more to do. Too many of our friends and family members and neighbors are still out of work; too many folks still are seeing their home property values underwater. And so the question for all of you at this moment is, how will we determine our direction, not just for the next year, not just for the next 5 years, but for the next decade, the next two decades? Because this election is not just about two candidates or two parties; it is about two fundamentally different visions of where we take America. And ultimately, the way we are going to make this decision is you. There is a stalemate in Washington right now because there are two different visions of how we have to move forward, and you have got to break that stalemate. So let me just very briefly tell you what the choices are. You have got Mr. Romney and his allies in Congress. And their basic vision is one that says we are going to give $5 trillion of new tax cuts on top of the Bush tax cuts, most of them going to the wealthiest Americans. They will not be paid for, or if they are paid for, they will be paid for by slashing education funding or making college loans more expensive or eliminating support for basic science and research, the kind of work that is done right here at Carnegie Mellon or making Medicare a voucher system. So that is one part of their plan. regulations that we just put in place to make sure that Wall Street does not act recklessly and we can prevent another taxpayer-funded bailout when the financial system goes out of whack, regulations that protect our air or our water, regulations that protect consumers from being taken advantage of. The Republicans in Congress voted for this plan. It is an idea of how you might grow an economy if we had not just tried it for 10 years before I took office. We tried it, and it did not work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallypittsburghpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-pittsburgh-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "06-07-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4031, "text": "So why would we want to go backwards to the same theory that did not work before? They are banking on the notion that you do not remember what happened when they were in charge the last time they were in charge of the White House and how surpluses became deficits and how job growth was more sluggish than it is been in 50 years and how we ultimately ended up with the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Well, Pittsburgh, I want you to know I have got a different theory. I have got a different idea. It is not going to change things completely in the next day or the next week. But it moves us in a direction that is true to our traditions by building not from the top down, but from the middle class out. It is a vision that says we do not need to just bring automaking back, we can bring manufacturing back to America. We can invest in advanced manufacturing research like is being done right here at Carnegie Mellon. And we can change our Tax Code to make sure, instead of giving tax breaks to companies that are shipping jobs overseas, let us give those tax breaks to companies that are investing right here in Pittsburgh, right here in Pennsylvania, right here in the United States of America. That is my vision for the future. My vision is one that says we have got to invest in our young people so they get the best education in the world. So I want to hire new teachers, especially in math and science. We just prevented Congress from doubling student interest loan rates because of you. But we have got to do more to bring tuition down and give 2 million more Americans the chance to study at community colleges and get the job training they need for the jobs of the 21st century. And I am committed to making sure everybody gets that chance for the skills and the trainings they need to succeed. My vision says we ended the war in Iraq, as I promised, and we are winding down the war in Afghanistan. So let us take half of that money that we are saving in war and use it to pay down the deficit. Let us take the other half and do some nation-building here at home. Let us put some Americans back to work rebuilding our roads and our bridges, our schools. Let us build broadband lines and wireless networks and high-speed rail. Let us invest in the basic science and research that helped to send a man to the Moon and create the Internet. I believe in an America in which we control our own energy future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallypittsburghpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-pittsburgh-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "06-07-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4032, "text": "We are producing more oil than we have in the last 8 years; we are importing less. But we can do so much more. We have got to bet on not just an oil industry that is already profitable. We have got to bet on a clean energy industry of solar and wind that can create jobs and help our environment and free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil. And I have got a vision that believes that everybody, all families who are responsible, should be able to have the basic security of health care. If you have health insurance, the only thing that changes for you is you are more secure because insurance companies cannot drop you when you get sick. They do not have a lifetime limit where suddenly they are dumping the costs on you, even though you have been paying your premiums. We have got millions of young people who are able to stay on their parent's plan right now because of that health care law. We have got millions of seniors who are seeing cheaper prescription drugs. And if you do not have health insurance, we are going to help you get health insurance. I believe it was the right thing to do because that is part of making sure a middle class is thriving in this country, that they do not have to fear that when somebody in their family gets sick, that somehow they are going to lose everything they have worked for all those years. I make no apologies for it. That is why I am running for a second term as ENTITY. We are not going to go back to a vision that somehow thinks when a few wealthy investors do well, then everybody does well. So you know what, we need to deal with our deficit. We need to deal with our debt. And part of America's character is the understanding that government cannot solve every problem. Some folks cannot be helped if they do not want to help themselves. We have already cut a trillion dollars in spending that was not helping families succeed, and we will do some more. But you know what, we are not just going to cut and balance the budget on the backs of middle class families, asking them to pay more taxes, asking them to suddenly not get help when it comes to sending their kids to college. I think we can ask wealthiest Americans to do a little bit more. We need to have a Tax Code where secretaries are not paying a lower tax rate than their bosses.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallypittsburghpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-pittsburgh-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "06-07-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4033, "text": "And you know what, the good news is there are a lot of Americans all across the country very successful Americans who agree with me on this, because they understand the only reason they succeeded was somebody helped them. This idea that we are all in it together, that we rise or fall as one people, that theory of mine about how to grow the economy, we have tried that too. We tried it as recently as when Bill Clinton was President. And you know what, we created 23 million new jobs, and we had a surplus at the end of it instead of a deficit. And we created a whole lot of wealth and a lot of millionaires along the way. Because that formula that says we are in it together means that everybody can do well. The reason we built the Hoover Dam or the Golden Gate Bridge, the reason we sent a man to the Moon or invested in the research that resulted in the Internet, the reason we built an Interstate Highway System, we did those things not for any individual to become rich. We did it so that all of us would have a platform for success, because we understand there are some things we do better together. I continue to believe that. I think most Americans understand that. That is the reason I am running for a second term as ENTITY. Now, over the next 4 months, you are going to see more money spent than you have ever seen before, more negative ads. These guys are writing $10 million checks. And you will hear the same thing from them over and over again, because they know that their economic theory is not going to sell, so all they have got to argue is, the economy is not moving as fast as it needs to, jobs are not growing as fast as they need to, and it is all Obama's fault. Now, I guess this is a plan to win an election, but it is not a plan to create jobs. It is not a plan to grow our middle class. And you know what, I might be worried about all this money being spent if it was not for my memories of previous campaigns. That first campaign I ran, the last campaign I ran in 2008, I have been outspent before. I have had a lot of money thrown at me before.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallypittsburghpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-pittsburgh-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "06-07-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4034, "text": "But you know what I have learned, is that when the American people decide on what is right, when all of you decide on what is true, when you remember the story of your families just like the story of my families, all the struggles our parents and our grandparents and great-grandparents went through some of them maybe came over here as immigrants and started working in the mines or working in the mills, not always knowing what to expect, but understanding that there was something different about this country, looking out for one another, taking care of the community together, being responsible, having those old-fashioned, homespun values, believing that being middle class was not a matter of your bank account, it was a state of mind in terms of what you believe, that there were some things that were important and nothing was more important than looking after your family and being with your family and caring for your family when Americans come together and tap into that spirit that is best in us, all that money does not matter. You inspire each other. You inspire me. In 2008, I told you I am not a perfect man and I would not be a perfect ENTITY. But I told you I'd always tell you what I thought and I'd always tell you where I stood. And I told you I would wake up every single day fighting as hard as I knew how for you, to make your lives a little bit better, to give you more of a fighting shot to succeed and live out your dreams. And I made that promise because I saw myself in you. In your grandparents, I see my grandparents. In your children, I see Malia and Sasha. And I have kept that promise. I have kept that promise. Every morning and every night, I have thought about how we build America and how we build America's middle class and how we give everybody a fair shot and how we make sure everybody's doing their fair share and how we make sure everybody's fighting by the same rules. And if you still believe in me like I believe in you, I hope you will stand with me in 2012. Because if you do, we will finish what we started in 2008, and this economy will be moving again. And we will remind the world just why it is that the United States of America is the greatest nation on Earth. God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallypittsburghpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-pittsburgh-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "06-07-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4055, "text": "IT IS A PLEASURE to extend in behalf of the United States most cordial greetings to the delegates from 50 nations attending the World's Conference of the Young Men's Christian Association, meeting in Cleveland tonight. Your gathering is significant, because, in the long history of your association covering more than three-quarters of a century, it is the first ever to be held on the North American Continent. I would have enjoyed welcoming you in person but the demands of public service make it impossible for me to do so. Happily the radio permits me to participate from a distance in your deliberations. You have come from every country of Europe, from all the States of our country, from Canada, Asia, and Africa, from our sister republics in Latin America, stretching from Mexico and Cuba on the north to Chile and Argentina on the south, and from Australia, New Zealand, and other parts of the island world. You have drawn from all nations upon reservoirs of good will, enthusiasm, and devotion to spiritual ideals. Common possession of a great spiritual ideal and a great sense of service have brought you together from all corners of the world. You have foregathered to formulate your plans that you may, with renewed vigor, foster among the youth of all lands the development of a vital faith in spiritual life, the kindling of a more passionate sense of social obligations, and the cementing of international fellowship for service to God and mankind. You approach the problems of youth with sympathy and with confidence assured of the ultimate contributions with which they will refresh the common life of the world. You are right in the abiding confidence that the solution of all social, economic, governmental, and international problems must be guided by an idealism which finds its firm foundations in religious faith. Your interest in the activities of your association has given you an insight into public affairs and a grasp of world conditions. It has developed a leadership from within your membership that is beneficial to all nations. One of those leaders, your friend and mine, is Dr. John R. Mott. I have no need to recite to you the multitude of services he has given to the whole world by a life of complete devotion to an ideal. The accomplishments of your associations over these many years have quickened the hopes of mankind. No thoughtful person can overlook the profound truth that the ideas and ideals of Christ which you uphold not only have dominated the course of civilization since His time but are the foundations of our economic and social life today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddresstheworldsconferencetheyoungmenschristianassociation", "title": "Radio Address to the World's Conference of the Young Men's Christian Association.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-worlds-conference-the-young-mens-christian-association", "publication_date": "08-08-1931", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4056, "text": "Because of human weakness, the Golden Rule may have its daily violations, but this great principle, aimed at the common good, penetrates and profoundly modifies all the forces in the modern world in which we live. Yours is an organization devoted to safeguarding the moral and spiritual heritage of youth and to guiding it in the paths of right and joy of service. In its consummation you carry forward vast constructive programs of recreation, community service, observance and obedience to law, character building, and, above all, spiritual development. Your work has a profound unifying influence. It blends all races in its program. It welcomes to its fellowship young men of all faiths. It holds a strategic position to promote the common good not only within each nation but in international cooperation and good will. The fulfillment of these obligations is at once a challenge and an opportunity for youth itself. Recent weeks have given impressive proof of the hunger of the human spirit for a greater sense of security and a willingness to respond to a common effort to attain this goal. In drawing attention to the nationwide and worldwide problems and service of the Y.M.C.A., however, we should not lose sight of the primary object of the organization which is to serve individual men. In all the 10,000 centers where such organizations exist, hundreds of thousands of youth can testify to what the human relationship of the Y.M.C.A. has meant to them in their individual lives. Spiritual safeguards and social influences go hand in hand with the provision of physical necessities for wholesome living. They are part of the vast programs of education which must be carried on beyond the formal schooling of our people. They are powerful forces in the warfare against downward tendencies in public morals and conduct. Your organization is a great militant body enlisted in the fundamental advancement of human progress. The problems before the world were never greater than today. No small degree of responsibility rests upon you for their proper solution. I and my countrymen have confidence in you and the contribution you will make to the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddresstheworldsconferencetheyoungmenschristianassociation", "title": "Radio Address to the World's Conference of the Young Men's Christian Association.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-worlds-conference-the-young-mens-christian-association", "publication_date": "08-08-1931", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4057, "text": "As you know, last Sunday I announced my candidacy for reelection to this office. I asked for your support to help finish what we began 3 years ago getting government spending firmly under control, encouraging growth in our economy, and strengthening peace so we can provide opportunities for the liberty and happiness of our citizens today and for millions still unborn. I was not surprised that my announcement set off some pretty sharp rhetoric from the other side, but I'd like to think that with some good will and common sense Republicans and Democrats could rise above election-year politics for the good of our country. Certainly there are important areas-and three come immediately to mind-where we could and should be working together. For example, I believe there is basis for agreement on a down payment on projected budget deficits. I think we could reduce projected deficits by at least $100 billion over the next 3 years. So, frankly, I was a bit puzzled why those new converts to concern about looming deficits held back on joining a bipartisan working group. I urge them to approach the negotiations in the same spirit as we will. Let us try to put the partisan issues aside. I repeat that all issues can be on the table for discussion. But, obviously, we cannot compromise the principles of our tax program without compromising our economic recovery and America's future. I simply cannot agree to increase taxes on families already pinching pennies to pay their bills. We want to reduce the deficit, not the recovery. And it would be foolhardy, indeed, to compromise America's defense rebuilding program just as we are beginning to restore the credibility that was so recklessly squandered. Yet this does not mean that there are not areas in which to find bipartisan agreement. We could focus on the less contentious spending cuts still pending before the Congress. These could be combined with measures to close certain tax loopholes that the Treasury Department has indicated it believes worthy of support. If we focus on what we might agree on, we can get something done for the people. And the Grace commission has come up with some 2,500 recommendations for reducing wasteful government spending. We should examine them together. Uniting to promote democracy, peace, and prosperity in the troubled region of Central America is a second area where Republicans and Democrats should work together. Last July 1 appointed 12 distinguished Americans to the National Bipartisan Commission on Central America and asked former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger to serve as its Chairman.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationthebudgetdeficitcentralamericaandlebanon", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on the Budget Deficit, Central America, and Lebanon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-the-budget-deficit-central-america-and-lebanon", "publication_date": "04-02-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4058, "text": "Three weeks ago, the members of that Commission delivered to me their report on the crisis confronting our Latin neighbors. Their recommendations are the basis of legislation that I will soon present to the Congress. I should point out that the late Senator Henry Jackson first proposed the idea of the Bipartisan Commission on Central America, and he served until his death as one of its senior counselors. All his life, Scoop said what he believed and stuck to it. He believed in freedom, dignity for the individual, and a strong America. And he believed Republicans and Democrats should leave politics at the water's edge on important questions of national security. Senator Jackson's wisdom is the guiding spirit of our legislation. It offers a balance of political, economic, diplomatic, and security initiatives that can bring stability and a better life to our neighbors and ultimately greater security to our own country. This plan deserves the bipartisan support of the Congress. We have a responsibility to act. Continued support for the peace process in the Middle East is a third critical area where Republicans and Democrats must rise above politics. We are working closely with Lebanon's President Gemayel to find a political solution. Support for his government is broadening among the different groups. And just as important, our efforts to strengthen the Lebanese ENTITY and its ability to keep the peace are making sure and steady progress. Yes, the situation in Lebanon is difficult, frustrating, and dangerous. But that is no reason to turn our backs on friends and to cut and run. They can gain by waging war against innocent people. The men and women who patrol our streets here at home also face great dangers every day. But the greatest danger of all would be to yank those police officers off the streets and to leave our neighborhoods and families at the mercy of criminals. If we are to be secure in our homes and in the world, we must stand together against those who threaten us. This is a time for unity, not partisan politics. Till next week, thanks for listening, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationthebudgetdeficitcentralamericaandlebanon", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on the Budget Deficit, Central America, and Lebanon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-the-budget-deficit-central-america-and-lebanon", "publication_date": "04-02-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4069, "text": "Well, it is good to see all of you. And I have had a chance to hug you and catch up. Let me start by thanking Jim Messina and Jon Carson and all the OFA staff for the great work that they do each and every day. I have gotten a lot of compliments from a lot of you about the quality of the OFA staff, and I actually concur that they are terrific and passionate about the work that we are doing out there. I just had a chance to talk to some of the leaders from States and communities all across the country who are pounding the pavement and talking to their neighbors and talking to their friends. And the levels of enthusiasm and energy that they projected was inspiring, and it really reminds me of why what I do in the White House matters, because I got folks like that-out on the ground, out in communities every single day-that are counting on me to give voice to the incredible work that they are doing, but also the values that they represent. And I want to thank all of you. As I look around the room, I would not be President if it were not for this room. And there are a lot of people here who are new friends, but there are also some folks here who supported me way back in the day when I had no gray hair and I did not wear a tie. Somebody just showed me a picture the other day, and I looked really young. Most of this is just going to be a conversation. I want to spend time on questions and answers and dialogue and discussion. But let me just make a couple of quick comments. Number one, as I said at the State of the Union Address, I genuinely think this year can be a breakout year for America. We have now really consolidated the recovery. If you look at the statistics-8.5 million new jobs, unemployment rate the lowest it is been since before I was elected; you have got manufacturing coming back; we have made progress on energy, fuel efficiency, carbon emissions reductions; making steady progress in terms of reforming our education system-we are actually poised to make the 21st century the American century, just like the 20th century was. And Alan Solomont is over here nodding his head. Alan was representing the United States and did an outstanding job in Spain.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksorganizingforactiondinner1", "title": "Remarks at an Organizing for Action Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-organizing-for-action-dinner-1", "publication_date": "25-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4070, "text": "And one of the remarkable things that I think he will affirm is that everybody outside of the United States actually thinks that we are doing a remarkable job, that our economic growth is the envy of most of the developed world. And yet that is not always reflected in people's moods here in the States. Those of us at the very top have disproportionately benefited from productivity gains, technology, globalization. And the ladders of opportunity for folks who want to work their way into the middle class are not as robust as they used to be. And what I said in the State of the Union was that we have to be focused like a laser on building back up an opportunity society in which everybody feels like if they work hard and if they are responsible, they can get ahead. And that means more jobs; that means making sure people are trained for the jobs that are out there. It means making sure kids get a world-class education. It means that work pays and that not only are they getting a decent paycheck that can support their families, but that they have got retirement security and health care security and all the things that give them a stable platform to live their lives and make sure their kids succeed. So we are doing that. And I have also said that Congress may not be willing to break gridlock during a Presidential year. I am going to look for every opportunity to work with them. But if they are not, we are just going to go ahead and do some work. Today at the White House, we announced two more advanced manufacturing hubs, one in Detroit and one in Chicago, where we are going to take cutting-edge research that is being done on advanced metallurgy and digital technology. And consortiums of universities and businesses are coming together to bring jobs back to the United States of America, attract investment. And we did not have to do that with some legislation, although there is some legislation pending in Congress that could expand it. We did the same thing to make sure Federal contractors are paying their employees $10.10 an hour. We are doing the same thing when it comes to making sure that we have got high-speed broadband in every classroom in America. I already have a commitment that is going to mean millions of students, about 20 million students, 15,000 schools across America, are going to be wired for broadband. We are doing that in conjunction with the FCC and the private sector.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksorganizingforactiondinner1", "title": "Remarks at an Organizing for Action Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-organizing-for-action-dinner-1", "publication_date": "25-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4071, "text": "And so we are just going to keep on looking for ways in which we can realize the values that we have been fighting for, for a long time. But as all of you know because you were involved in 2008 or 2012, it does not work if we do not have folks on the ground who are speaking out on behalf of these issues and these values. Politics has become so toxic and information is so contested and people are separated from how they get news, that oftentimes to break through, what is necessary is the validation of a neighbor or a friend or a coworker or a family member. And that is where OFA comes in, because it is able to, in very concrete terms, help to generate people's energy and mobilize their interest around these issues in ways that are not abstract, but are very concrete and very specific and that reach people where they live, at the kitchen table, and at the water cooler at work. And that grassroots work that is done also then energizes me and informs the issues that we are going to try to lift up over the course of the next year. So I just want to say to all of you, what you are doing is really important, and we really appreciate it. It is often at the ground level, but it makes a difference. And one final example of that difference that is being made is when it comes to the Affordable Care Act. But as a consequence of some of the folks that have been doing this work on the ground, as of today, we have signed up more than 4 million people through the exchanges. That is 4 million people who have the security of health care, in many cases for the very first time. And that does not count the 3 million who are already able to get health insurance because they are staying on their parent's plan. That does not count the millions who have been able to sign up through Medicaid. So when you have got grassroots folks who are committed and energized like they are, it makes a difference. And whatever issues you care about, whether it is climate change or women's reproductive health or foreign policy or education or access to higher education, having folks who are willing to fight for what they believe in connected to what we do here is really powerful and important. And they could not do it without you. So I just wanted to say thank you to all of you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksorganizingforactiondinner1", "title": "Remarks at an Organizing for Action Dinner", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-organizing-for-action-dinner-1", "publication_date": "25-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4072, "text": "Thanks for coming to the White House on Champions Day, the day we honor our Nation's champs. I first want to say that, obviously, you know how to play hoops in the East as our Texas teams found out. And it seems like Minnesota is pretty good at hockey too. I now know why we have got all these Senators from New York and Minnesota and Connecticut, as well as Members of the House from those three States. I want to welcome the University of Connecticut women's basketball team back to the White House. Geno told me last time that-last time I greeted them here- that they would be back. He really did not say it that way; we will play like he said it that way-makes a better story. These ladies can flat play basketball, and they are a great credit to women's athletics and to sport. We are really glad you are here, and I am glad Diana has given me the jersey. She is-thank God I do not have to guard her. I also want to welcome the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities men's hockey team back here again as well. I appreciate Don Lucia. I want to thank the athletic director, Joel Maturi, as well for coming. It is good to see these men back. They also know how to play hockey really well. They told me they'd be back again next year. Senator Dayton was a heck of a goalie in his day, but I do not know if he could stop these guys or not. I know the State of Minnesota is proud of your accomplishments. And we are also glad that the ladies' hockey team from the University of Minnesota-Duluth is here. It is good to see Dr. Martin. She is been the coach for 4 years and has won three national championships. It sounds like to me, Dr. Martin, you'd better give her a raise. It is a State issue, of course. I also want to congratulate Syracuse for winning their first national championship. It is a great tribute to Jim Boeheim, who is a heck of a guy and a great leader of men. I know you have worked hard for this. If it was not the University of Texas, I am glad it was you. You have got some great players on your team. I am sure some of us are going to be asking Carmelo Anthony for a loan one of these days-- so keep the interest rates low. You are a great credit to the sport.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringncaawinterchampionteams", "title": "Remarks Honoring NCAA Winter Champion Teams", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-ncaa-winter-champion-teams", "publication_date": "17-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4073, "text": "I also want to welcome Mike Tirico, who is here. I know you were objective in your analysis of the of the tournament. I-one of the things I really appreciate about these days is that, when you welcome these champs, is that it reminds people of the basics of life, the need to serve something greater than yourself in life. Championship teams do not win because of a star. Championship teams win because people are willing to work together for a greater good, in this case, the team. Championship teams win because people are willing to work hard and sacrifice for something important. These are values that are really important not only in sport but in life as well. The other thing that is important about a championship team is to-for people to understand that you can be a champ on the court or on the ice as well as off the court and off the ice. I have asked Dr. Martin if she remembered what I said last year about people serving their communities in which they live. We have got girls on our team who are mentoring. One girl said she works for the Boys and Girls Club. My call to the champs is to be a champ off the playing-when you are not playing as well. You have got a chance to make a difference in somebody's life. There is always some little kid draped over the- draped over the ice, looking at the star Minnesota players, wondering what it is like to be a star. And a star is somebody who sets a good example. A star is somebody who says, I have got some God-given talents, and I want to help somebody else utilize his or her talents so they can realize the American Dream. And you have a chance as champions to set such a good example for America's young, so that the next generation of athletes will know what it means to be a champ on the court or on the rink as well as off the court and off the rink. And so I am here today to congratulate you for setting such a good example. Now that the spotlight is on you, assume responsibility. Love somebody just like you'd like to be loved yourself, and America will be a better place for it. May God bless your talents, and may God continue to bless our great country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringncaawinterchampionteams", "title": "Remarks Honoring NCAA Winter Champion Teams", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-ncaa-winter-champion-teams", "publication_date": "17-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4080, "text": "Well, first of all, let me just say that the last 3 years of my work with President Medvedev has been extremely productive. And he listed some of the achievements that has resulted from this work. The New START Treaty reduces our nuclear stockpiles in ways that can help create greater peace and security not just for our countries, but for the world and is consistent with our obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Russia's ascension into the WTO can open up trade and commerce between our two countries that can create jobs and economic growth for both Russians and Americans. And as Dmitry mentioned, we think it is going to be very important for us to address Jackson-Vanik so that American businesses can fully take advantage of an open and liberalized Russian market. It is true that there have been times where we have had to manage tensions between our countries, and that is to be expected. Obviously, there are always tensions between countries, and that is certainly true given the long history of the cold war between our two countries. But what I think we have been able to do is to ensure that rather than look backwards, we have been looking forwards. I got on a roll. Moving forward, we have got more work to do between our two countries. Dmitry identified some areas of continued friction, missile defense being an example. And what we have agreed to is to make sure that our teams, at a technical level, are in discussions about how some of these issues can be resolved. The bilateral Presidential Commission that was chaired by Foreign Minister Lavrov and Secretary of State Clinton will be working actively around a number of the trade and commercial issues, not only with respect to WTO, but how we can more vigorously expand the kind of investment and the kind of cooperation on the economic front that can benefit both Russia and the United States. On the international front, we agreed that, as two of the world's leading powers, it is absolutely critical that we communicate effectively and coordinate effectively in responding to a wide range of situations that threaten world peace and security. So, on Syria, although there had been some differences over the last several months, we both agreed that we should be supportive of Kofi Annan's efforts to try to end some of the bloodshed that is taking place within Syria and move towards a mechanism that would allow for the Syrian people ultimately to have a representative and legitimate government that serves their interest.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithpresidentdmitryanatolyevichmedvedevrussiaseoul", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With President Dmitry Anatolyevich Medvedev of Russia in Seoul", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-president-dmitry-anatolyevich-medvedev-russia-seoul", "publication_date": "26-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4081, "text": "Is not it great to be here in California together? Forty years ago the great city of Los Angeles launched John Kennedy and the New Frontier. Now Los Angeles is launching the first President of the new century, Al Gore. I come here tonight, above all, to say a heartfelt thank you. I am so proud of them. And did not she give a good talk? I thank you for supporting the New Democratic agenda that has taken our country to new heights of prosperity, peace, and progress. As always, of course, the lion's share of credit goes to the American people, who do the work, raise the kids, and dream the dreams. Are we going to keep this progress and prosperity going? But my friends, we cannot take our future for granted. We cannot take it for granted. Eight years ago, when our party met in New York, it was in a far different time for America. Our economy was in trouble. Ten million of our fellow citizens were out of work. After 12 years of Republican rule, the Federal debt had quadrupled, imposing a crushing burden on our economy and on our children. And our Government was part of the problem, not part of the solution. I saw all this in a very personal way in 1992, out there in the real America with many of you. I remember a child telling me her father broke down at the dinner table because he lost his job. I remember an older couple crying in front of me because they had to choose between filling their shopping carts and filling their prescriptions. I remember a hard-working immigrant in a hotel kitchen who said his son was not really free because it was not safe for him to play in the neighborhood park. I ran for President to change the future for those people. opportunity for all, responsibility from all, and a community of all Americans. You gave me the chance to turn those ideas and values into action after I made one of the very best decisions of my entire life, asking Al Gore to be my partner. Get rid of the deficit to reduce interest rates; invest more in our people; sell more American products abroad. We sent our plan to Congress. It passed by a single vote in both Houses. In a deadlocked Senate, Al Gore cast the tie-breaking vote. Not a single Republican supported it. Here is what their leaders said. Their leaders said our plan would increase the deficit, kill jobs, and give us a one-way ticket to recession.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticnationalconventionlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-national-convention-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "14-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4082, "text": "Time has not been kind to their predictions. Remember, our Republican friends said then they would absolutely not be held responsible for our economic policies. I hope the American people take them at their word. Today, after 7 1/2 years of hard effort, we are in the midst of the longest economic expansion in history, more than 22 million new jobs, the lowest unemployment in 30 years, the lowest female unemployment in 40 years, the lowest Hispanic- and African-American unemployment rate ever recorded, and the highest homeownership in history. Now, along the way, in 1995 we turned back the largest cuts in history in Medicare, Medicaid, education, and the environment. And just 2 years later we proved that we could find a way to balance the budget and protect our values. Today, we have gone from the largest deficits in history to the largest surpluses in history. And if, but only if, we stay on course, we can make America debt-free for the first time since Andy Jackson was President in 1835. For the first time in decades, wages are rising at all income levels. We have the lowest child poverty in 20 years, the lowest poverty rate for single mothers ever recorded. The average family's income has gone up more than $5,000, and for African-American families, even more. The number of families who own stock, in our country, has grown by 40 percent. You know, Harry Truman's old saying has never been more true, If you want to live like a Republican, you better vote for the Democrats. But our progress is about far more than economics. We are more hopeful because we are turning our schools around with higher standards, more accountability, more investment. We have doubled funding for Head Start and provided after-school and mentoring to more than a million more young people. We are putting 100,000 well-trained teachers in the early grades to lower class size. Ninety-five percent of our schools are already connected to the Internet. Reading, math, and SAT scores are up, and more students than ever are going on to college, thanks to the biggest expansion of college aid since the GI bill 50 years ago. Now, do not let anybody tell you that all children cannot learn or that our public schools cannot make the grade. We are also more hopeful because we ended welfare as we knew it. On that, we and the Republicans agreed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticnationalconventionlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-national-convention-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "14-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4083, "text": "But we Democrats also insisted on support for good parenting, so that poor children do not go hungry or lose their health care, unmarried teens stay in school, and people get the job training, child care, and transportation they need. Today, there are more than 7 1/2 million people who have moved from welfare to work, and the welfare rolls in our administration have been cut in half. We are more hopeful because of the way we cut taxes to help Americans meet the challenges of work and childrearing. This year alone our HOPE scholarship and lifelong learning tax credits will help 10 million families pay for college. Our earned-income tax credit will help 15 million families work their way into the middle class. Twenty-five million families will get a $500 child tax credit. Our empowerment zone tax credits are bringing new business and new jobs to our hardest pressed communities, from the inner cities to Appalachia to the Mississippi Delta to our Native American reservations. And the typical American family today is paying a lower share of its income in Federal income taxes than at any time during the past 35 years. We are a more hopeful because of the Family and Medical Leave Act, a bill that the previous administration vetoed. They said it would cost jobs. It is the first bill I signed, and we now have a test. Twenty-two million new jobs later, over 20 million Americans have been able to take a little time off to care for a newborn child or sick relative. That is what it means that is what it really means to be pro-family. We are more secure country because we cut crime with tougher enforcement, more than 100,000 new community police officers, a ban on assault weapons, and the Brady law, which has kept guns out of the hands of half a million felons, fugitives, and stalkers. Today, crime in America is at a 25-year low. And we are more secure because of advances in health care. We have extended the life of the Medicare Trust Fund by 26 years, added coverage for cancer screening and cutting-edge clinical trials. We are coming closer to cures for dreaded diseases. We made sure that people with disabilities could go to work without losing their health care and that people could switch jobs without losing their coverage. We dramatically improved diabetes care. We provided health coverage under the Children's Health Insurance Program to 2 million previously uninsured children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticnationalconventionlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-national-convention-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "14-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4084, "text": "And for the first time in our history, more than 90 percent of our kids have been immunized against serious childhood diseases. You can be proud of that Democratic record. We have set aside more land in the lower 48 States than any administration since Teddy Roosevelt, saving national treasures like Yellowstone, the great California redwoods, the Florida Everglades. You can grow the economy and protect the environment at the same time. Now, we are more free because we are closer today to the one America of our dreams, celebrating our diversity, affirming our common humanity, opposing all forms of bigotry, from church burnings to racial profiling to murderous hate crimes. We are fighting for employment nondiscrimination legislation and for equal pay for women. We found ways to mend, not end, affirmative action. We have given America the most diverse administration in history. It really looks like America. You know, if I could just get my administration up here, it would be just as good a picture as anything you saw a couple of weeks ago in Philadelphia the real people loving it. And we created AmeriCorps, which already has given more than 150,000 of our young people a chance to earn some money for college by serving in our communities. We are more secure, and we are more free because of our leadership in the world for peace, freedom, and prosperity, helping to end a generation of conflict in Northern Ireland, stopping the brutal ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosovo, and bringing the Middle East closer than ever to a comprehensive peace. We built stronger ties to Africa, Asia, and our Latin American and Caribbean neighbors. We brought Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic into NATO. We are working with Russia to destroy nuclear weapons and materials. We are fighting head-on the new threats and injustices of the global age, terrorism, narcotrafficking, biological and chemical warfare, the trafficking in women and young girls, and the deadly spread of ENTITY. And in the great tradition of President Jimmy Carter, who is here tonight, we are still the world's leading force for human rights around the world. The American military is the best trained, best equipped, most effective fighting force in the world. Our men and women have shown that time and again in Bosnia, in Kosovo, in Haiti, and Iraq. I can tell you that their strength, their spirit, their courage, and their commitment to freedom have never been greater.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticnationalconventionlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-national-convention-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "14-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4085, "text": "Any adversary who believes those who say otherwise is making a grave mistake. My fellow Americans, are we better off today than we were 8 years ago? Now, that is the purpose of prosperity. Since 1992, America has grown not just economically but as a community. We built our bridge to the 21st century. We crossed that bridge together. America's success was not a matter of chance; it was a matter of choice. And today, America faces another choice. It is every bit as momentous as the one we faced 8 years ago. For what a nation does with its good fortune is just as stern a test of its character, values, and judgment as how it deals with adversity. My fellow Americans, this is a big election with great consequences for every American, because the differences, the honest differences, between our candidates and their visions are so profound. We can a have good, old-fashioned election here. We should posit that our opponents are good, honorable, patriotic people, and that we have honest differences. We in America would already have, this year, a real Patients' Bill of Rights, a minimum wage increase, stronger equal pay laws for women, and middle class tax cuts for college tuition and long-term care if the Democratic Party were in the majority in Congress with Dick Gephardt as Speaker and Tom Daschle as majority leader. That has to be clear to people. But if you will give me one moment of personal privilege, I'd like to say a word about Hillary. When I first met her 30 years ago, she already had an abiding passion to help children. And she is pursued it ever since. Her very first job out of law school was with the Children's Defense Fund. Every year I was Governor she took lots of time away from her law practice to work for better schools or better children's health or jobs for parents who lived in poor areas. Then when I became President, she became a full-time advocate for her lifetime cause, and what a job she has done. She championed the family leave law, children's health insurance, increased support for foster children and adoptions. She wrote a best-selling book about caring for our children, and then she took care of them by giving all the profits to children's charities. For 30 years 30 years from the first day I met her, she has always been there for all our kids. She is always been there for our family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticnationalconventionlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-national-convention-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "14-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4086, "text": "And she will always be there for the families of New York and America. Of course, we all know that the biggest choice that the American people have to make this year is in the Presidential race. That belongs to the American people. I just want to tell all of you here in this great arena and all of the folks watching and listening at home a few things that I know about Al Gore. We have worked closely together for 8 years now, in the most challenging moments. When we faced the most difficult issues of war and peace, of whether to take on some powerful interests, he was always there. And he always told me exactly what he thought was right. But I can tell you personally, he is one strong leader. I have seen this kind of positioning and this kind of strength time and again, whether it was in how we reform welfare or in protecting the environment or in closing the digital divide or bringing jobs to rural and urban America through the empowerment zone program. The greatest champion of ordinary Americans has always been Al Gore. I will tell you something else about him. More than anybody else I have known in public life, Al Gore understands the future and how sweeping changes and scientific breakthroughs will affect ordinary Americans' lives. And I think we need somebody in the White House at the dawn of the 21st century who really understands the future. Finally, I want to say something more personal. Virtually every week for the last 7 1/2 years, until he became occupied with more important matters, Al Gore and I had lunch. And we talked about the business between us and the business of America. But we'd also often talk about our families, what our kids were doing, how school was going, what was going on in their lives. I know him. He loves his children more than life. And he has a perfectly wonderful wife who has fought against homelessness and who has done something for me and all Americans in bringing the cause of mental health into the broad sunlight of our national public life. We owe Tipper Gore our thanks. Al has picked a great partner in Joe Lieberman. Hillary and I have known Joe for 30 years, since we were in Connecticut in law school. I supported him in his first race for public office in 1970, when I learned he had been a freedom rider, going into danger to register black voters in the then-segregated South.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticnationalconventionlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-national-convention-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "14-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4087, "text": "It should not be a surprise to anyone that Al Gore picked the leader of the New Democrats to be his Vice President, because Joe Lieberman has supported all our efforts to reform welfare, reduce crime, protect the environment, protect civil rights, and a woman's right to choose and to keep this economy going all of them. And he has shown time and time again that he will work with President Gore to keep putting people and progress over partisanship. Now, it is up, frankly, to the Presidential nominee and the Vice Presidential nominee to engage in this debate and to point out the differences. But there are two issues I care a lot about, and I want to make brief comments on them, and I hope I have earned the right to make comments on them. One is the economy I know a little something about that and the other is our efforts to build one America. First, on the economy, Al Gore and Joe Lieberman will keep our prosperity going by paying down the debt, investing in education and health care, moving more people from welfare to work, and providing family tax cuts we can afford. That stands in stark contrast to the position of our Republican friends. They say we have a big projected 10-year surplus, and they want to spend every dime of it and then some on tax cuts right now. That would leave nothing for education or Medicare, prescription drugs; nothing to extend the life of Medicare and Social Security for the baby boomers; nothing in case the projected surpluses do not come in. Would you sign a binding contract today to spend all your projected income for a decade, leaving nothing for your families' basic needs, nothing for emergencies, nothing for a cushion in case you did not get the raise you thought you were going to get? Of course you would not do that, and America should not do it either. Let me say something to you that is even more important than the economy to me. When Al Gore picked Joe Lieberman, the first Jewish-American to join a national ticket, to be his partner, and he joined with our Presidential nominee, who has, along with his great mother and late father, a lifetime commitment to civil rights and equal opportunity for all, even when it was not popular down home in the South, when they did that, we had a ticket that embodies the Democratic commitment to one America. They believe in civil rights and equal opportunity for everybody. They believe in a woman's right to choose.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticnationalconventionlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-national-convention-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "14-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4088, "text": "And this may be the most important of all, they believe the folks that you are buying your soft drinks and popcorn from here at the Staples Center should have the exact same chance they do to send their kids to college and give them a good life and a good future. My fellow Americans, I am very proud of our leaders. And I want you to know that the opportunity I have had to serve as President at the dawn of a new era in human history has been an honor, a privilege, and a joy. I have done everything I knew how to do to empower the American people, to unleash their amazing optimism and imagination and hard work, to turn our country around from where it was in 1992, and to get us moving forward together. Now, what I want you to understand tonight is that the best is still out there. The best is yet to come if we make the right choices in this election year. But the choices will make all the difference. In February the American people achieved the longest economic expansion in our history. When that happened, I asked our folks at the White House when the previous longest economic expansion was. It was from 1961 through 1969. Now, I want the young people especially to listen to this. I remember this well. I graduated from high school in 1964. Our country was still very sad because of President Kennedy's death, but full of hope under the leadership of President Johnson. And I assumed then, like most Americans, that our economy was on absolutely on automatic, that nothing could derail it. I also believe then that our civil rights problems would all be solved in Congress and the courts. And in 1964, when we were enjoying the longest economic expansion in history, we never dreamed that Vietnam would so divide and wound our America. So we took it for granted. And then, before we knew it, there were riots in the streets, even here. The leaders that I adored as a young man, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, were killed. Lyndon Johnson, a President from my part of the country I admired so much for all he did for civil rights, for the elderly, and the poor, said he would not run again because our Nation was so divided. And then we had an election in 1968 that took America on a far different and more divisive course. And you know, within months after that election, the last longest economic expansion in history was, itself, history. Why am I telling you this tonight?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthedemocraticnationalconventionlosangelescalifornia", "title": "Remarks to the Democratic National Convention in Los Angeles, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-democratic-national-convention-los-angeles-california", "publication_date": "14-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4089, "text": "Welcome to the people's house as we celebrate a victory for the American economy. Last week, the United States Congress passed trade promotion authority and renewed and expanded the Andean Trade Preference Act. Trade is an important source of good jobs for our workers and a source of higher growth for our economy. Trade is an important source of earnings for our farmers and for our factories. It creates new opportunities for our entrepreneurs. Trade expands choices for America's consumers and raises living standards for our families. And now, after 8 years, America is back in the business of promoting open trade to build our prosperity and to spur economic growth. I appreciate so very much Vice President Cheney's hard work on this issue. I appreciate Colin Powell and Ann Veneman, who ably serve in my Cabinet. I want to particularly thank Don Evans, who is not with us, and Bob Zoellick, members of my Cabinet who both worked tirelessly to get the vote in the House and then in the Senate, and I appreciate Elaine Chao as well. These Cabinet Secretaries worked hard for trade. They understand the promise of trade, and I appreciate their hard work on behalf of American workers and farmers. I particularly want to thank the Members of Congress who are here with us, starting with the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, the Senator from Montana, Max Baucus. Max did fantastic work to get this trade bill through the Senate and was then able to work with Chairman Thomas. Chairman Thomas was heroic in the House. He was steadfast in his support for trade, and I appreciate his leadership on this issue. And I want to thank both Members of the United States Congress, one Democrat, one Republican, who put their country ahead of their parties to do what was right for the people of this country. You two deserve a lot of congratulations. I want to thank Senator Hatch, who was a conferee and a member of the Finance Committee. I want to thank my fellow Texan Tom DeLay, the best vote-counter in the history of the United States Congress. After all, he was able to triple the vote margin on final passage. I appreciate so very much Cal Dooley and a guy I call Jeff, William Jefferson, Congressmen from California and Louisiana, and I want to thank them for their work as well. They led the Democrats in the House of Representatives, many of whom are here today, to do what is right for our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthetradeact2002", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Trade Act of 2002", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-trade-act-2002", "publication_date": "06-08-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4090, "text": "And again, I appreciate your leadership, and I appreciate your work, and I appreciate your help. I want to thank Embajadora A-Baki from Ecuador. I want to thank you for coming. I also want to thank Carlos Alzamora from Peru and all the other ambassadors who are here. I want to appreciate you-appreciate your hard work on sending the message of trade to Members of our Congress. I want to thank you for your diligence, and I want to thank your ENTITY for their care and concern about this incredibly important initiative, not only for Americans but for workers all around the world. With trade promotion authority, the trade agreements I negotiate will have an up-or-down vote in Congress, giving other countries the confidence to negotiate with us. Five Presidents before me had this advantage, but since the authority elapsed in 1994, other nations and regions have pursued new trade agreements while America's trade policy was stuck in park. With each passing day, America has lost trading opportunities and the jobs and earnings that go with them. Starting now, America is back at the bargaining table in full force. I will use trade promotion authority aggressively to create more good jobs for American workers, more exports for American farmers, and higher living standards for American families. Free trade has a proven track record for spurring growth and advancing opportunity for our working families. Exports accounted for roughly one-quarter of all U.S. economic growth in the 1990s. Jobs in exporting plants pay wages that are up to 18 percent higher than jobs in nonexporting plants. And our two major trade agreements, NAFTA and the Uruguay Round, have created more choices and lower prices for consumers while raising standards of living for the typical American family of four by $2,000 a year. America will build on this record of success. A completely free global market for agricultural products, for example, would result in gains of as much as $13 billion a year for American farmers and consumers. In other words, trade is good for the American people, and I am going to use the trade promotion authority to bring these benefits to the American people. Free trade is also a proven strategy for building global prosperity and adding to the momentum of political freedom. Trade is an engine of economic growth. It uses the power of markets to meet the needs of the poor. In our lifetime, trade has helped lift millions of people and whole nations and entire regions out of poverty and put them on the path to prosperity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthetradeact2002", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Trade Act of 2002", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-trade-act-2002", "publication_date": "06-08-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4102, "text": "Prime Minister, today we accomplished a great deal. Tonight we celebrate the ties that bind us. Those ties begin with the discoveries of Columbus and Vespucci, whose busts adorn the Blue Room next door. When the Founders created the American Republic, they looked to Rome for inspiration. George Washington was likened to Cincinnatus, the Roman hero who abandoned his plow to rescue his country by popular demand. I might say, they were the last two people to head our countries only by popular demand. Poets and philosophers of the Roman Republic were read and rejuvenated as our new Republic looked to the past to plan our future. In the writings of ancient Roman thinkers like Cicero and Cato, America's Founders saw the promise of democratic representative government. from our architecture to words like senate and capitol. Indeed, after our Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was asked what our Founders had produced. His simple reply was, A Republic, sir, if you can keep it. Towns sprang up with the names from the ancient Mediterranean world, names like Utica, Troy, or the Vice President's hometown, Carthage. Artists portrayed America's leaders wearing togas, as the bust of George Washington in the hall demonstrates. Thankfully, that is a tradition we have left to the 19th century. In the 19th and 20th centuries, our Republic turned into a bustling nation, thanks in no small measure to Italian-Americans. Ancient Rome was replaced by young Italy in the American imagination. And democracy was given new life by heroes like Mazzini and Garibaldi. America's growing cities attracted millions of Italians, eager to build a new life in a new world. Today American Italians, or Italian-Americans, are leaders in every enterprise conducted in our Nation. And as we all know, it is impossible to walk more than a few blocks in any American city without hearing the words caffe latte. The people here in this room tonight are the link between our two countries, between two cultures that have nourished each other since America was just an idea. From our highest courts to our finest tables, from our playing fields to our silver screen, from one side of the aisle in Congress to the other, Italian-Americans have graced our Nation with their intellect, their industry, their good will, and above all, a contagious love of life. Prime Minister, you have accomplished so much in your time in office. You have presided over a string of economic successes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthestatedinnerhonoringprimeministerromanoprodiitaly", "title": "Remarks at the State Dinner Honoring Prime Minister Romano Prodi of Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-state-dinner-honoring-prime-minister-romano-prodi-italy", "publication_date": "06-05-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4111, "text": "It is good to be back with NCLR. It is good to see all of you. Right off the bat, I should thank you because I have poached quite a few of your alumni to work in my administration. They are all doing outstanding work. We have got young people right out of college in the White House. We have got the first Latina Cabinet Secretary in history, Hilda Solis. So we could not be prouder of the work that so many folks who've been engaged with La Raza before, the handiwork that they are doing with our administration. And as Janet mentioned, obviously, we are extraordinarily proud of someone who is doing outstanding work on the Supreme Court, Sonia Sotomayor. Now, recently, 100 Latino officials from across the Government met with Latino leaders from across the country at the White House. I know some of you were there. And I think all who attended would agree that we were not just paying lip service to the community. Our work together, not just that day but every day, has been more than just talk. What I told the gathering at the White House was we need your voice. Your country needs you. Our American family will only be as strong as our growing Latino community. And so we are going to take these conversations on the road and keep working with you, because for more than four decades, NCLR has fought for opportunities for Latinos from city centers to farm fields. And that fight for opportunity--the opportunity to get a decent education, the opportunity to find a good job, the opportunity to make of our lives what we will--has never been more important than it is today. And we are still climbing out of a vicious recession, and that recession hit Latino families especially hard. I do not need to tell you Latino unemployment is painfully high. The truth is, it is going to take more time. And a lot of the problems we face right now, like slow job growth and stagnant wages, these were problems that were there even before the recession hit. But that only makes our work more urgent, to get this economy going and make sure that opportunity is spreading, to make sure that everyone who wants a job can find one; and to make sure that paychecks can actually cover the bills; to make sure that families do not have to choose between buying groceries or buying medicine, that they do not have to choose between sending their kids to college or being able to retire.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalcouncillaraza0", "title": "Remarks to the National Council of La Raza", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-council-la-raza-0", "publication_date": "25-07-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4112, "text": "My number-one priority, every single day, is to figure out how we can get businesses to hire and create jobs with decent wages. And in the short term, there are some things we can do right away. I want to extend tax relief that we already put in place for middle class families to make sure that folks have more money in their paychecks. And I want to cut redtape that keeps entrepreneurs from turning new ideas into thriving businesses. I want to sign trade deals so our businesses can sell more goods made in America to the rest of the world, especially to the Americas. And the hundreds of thousands of construction workers--many of them Latino--who lost their jobs when the housing bubble burst, I want to put them back to work rebuilding our roads and our bridges and new schools and airports all across the country. These workers are ready to do it. So bipartisan proposals for all of these jobs measures would already be law if Congress would just send them to my desk, and I'd appreciate if you all would help me convince them to do it. Now, obviously, the other debate in Washington that we are having is one that is going to have a direct impact on every American. Every day, NCLR and your affiliates hear from families figuring out how to stretch every dollar a little bit further, what sacrifices they have got to make, how they are going to budget only what is truly important. So they should expect the same thing from Washington. Neither party is blameless for the decisions that led to our debt, but both parties have a responsibility to come together and solve the problem and make sure that the American people are not hurt on this issue. Because--I just want to talk about this for a second, because it has a potential impact on everybody here and all the communities you serve--if we do not address the debt that is already on our national credit card, it will leave us unable to invest in things like education, to protect vital programs. So I have already said I am willing to cut spending that we do not need by historic amounts to reduce our long-term deficit and make sure that we can invest in our children's future. I am willing to take on the rising costs of health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid to make sure they are strong and secure for future generations. But we cannot just close our deficits by cutting spending. That is the truth, and Americans understand that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalcouncillaraza0", "title": "Remarks to the National Council of La Raza", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-council-la-raza-0", "publication_date": "25-07-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4113, "text": "Because if all we all do is cut, then seniors will have to pay a lot more for their health care, and students will have to pay a lot more for college, and workers who get laid off might not have any temporary assistance or job training to get them back on their feet. And with gas prices this high, we'd have to stop much of the clean energy research that will help us free ourselves from dependence on foreign oil. Not only is it not fair if all of this is done on the backs of middle class families and poor families, it does not make sense. It may sound good to save a lot of money over the next 5 years, but not if we sacrifice our future for the next 50. And that is why people from both parties have said that the best way to take on our deficit is with a balanced approach, one where the wealthiest Americans and big corporations pay their fair share too. Before we stop funding energy research, we should ask oil companies and corporate jet owners to give up special tax breaks that other folks do not get. Before we ask college students to pay more to go to college, we should ask hedge fund managers to stop paying taxes that are lower in their--in terms of rates than their secretaries. Before we ask seniors to pay more for Medicare, we should ask people like me to give up tax breaks that we do not need and were not even asking for. So, NCLR, that is at the heart of this debate. Are we a nation that asks only the middle class and the poor to bear the burden? After they have seen their jobs disappear and their incomes decline over a decade? Are we a people who break the promises we have made to seniors or the disabled and leave them to fend for themselves? We are better than that. We are a people who look out for one another. We are a people who believe in shared sacrifice, because we know that we rise or fall as one Nation. We are a people who will do whatever it takes to make sure our children have the same chances and the same opportunities that our parents gave us--not just the same chances, better chances, than our parents gave us. And that is what NCLR is all about. That is what the Latino community is all about. When I spoke to you as a candidate for this office, I said you and I share a belief that opportunity and prosperity are not just words to be said, they are promises to be kept.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalcouncillaraza0", "title": "Remarks to the National Council of La Raza", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-council-la-raza-0", "publication_date": "25-07-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4114, "text": "Back then, we did not know the depths of the challenges that were going to lie ahead. But thanks to you, we are keeping our promises. We are keeping our promise to make sure that America remains a place where opportunity is open to all who work for it. We have cut taxes for middle class workers and small businesses and low-income families. We won credit card reform and financial reform and protections for consumers and folks who use payday lenders or send remittances home from being exploited and being ripped off. We worked to secure health care for 4 million children, including the children of legal immigrants. And we are implementing health reform for all who've been abused by insurance companies and all who fear about going broke if they get sick. And these were huge victories for the Latino community that suffers from lack of health insurance more than any other group. We are keeping our promise to give our young people every opportunity to succeed. NCLR has always organized its work around the principle that the single most important investment we can make is in our children's education and that if we let our Latino students fall behind, we will all fall behind. I believe that. So we have tied giving more money to reform. And we are working with States to improve teacher recruitment and retraining and retention. We are making sure English language learners are a priority for educators across the country. We are holding schools with high dropout rates accountable so they start delivering for our kids. We are emphasizing math and science and investing in community colleges so that all of our workers get the skills that today's companies want. And we have won new college grants for more than 100,000 Latino students. And as long as I am President, this country will always invest in its young people. These are victories for NCLR; they are victories for America. And we did it with your help. We are keeping our promises. Of course, that does not mean we do not have unfinished business. I promised you I would work tirelessly to fix our broken immigration system and make the DREAM Act a reality. And 2 months ago, I went down to the border of El Paso to reiterate--. El Paso is in the house----to reiterate my vision for an immigration system that holds true to our values and our heritage and meets our economic and security needs. In recent years, one in four high-tech startups in America--companies like Google and Intel--were founded on immigrants.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalcouncillaraza0", "title": "Remarks to the National Council of La Raza", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-council-la-raza-0", "publication_date": "25-07-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4115, "text": "These are job creators who came here to seek opportunity and now seek to share opportunity. This country has always been made stronger by our immigrants. We attract talented, dynamic, optimistic people who are continually refreshing our economy and our spirit. And you can see that in urban areas all across the country where communities that may have been hollowed out when manufacturing left or were having problems because of an aging population, suddenly, you see an influx of immigration, and you see streets that were full of boarded-up buildings, suddenly, they are vibrant with life once again. And it is immigrant populations who are providing that energy and that drive. We have a system right now that allows the best and the brightest to come study in America and then tells them to leave, set up the next great company someplace else. We have a system that tolerates immigrants and businesses that breaks the rules and punishes those that follow the rules. We have a system that separates families, and punishes innocent young people for their parents' actions by denying them the chance to earn an education or contribute to our economy or serve in our military. These are the laws on the books. Now, I swore an oath to uphold the laws on the books, but that does not mean I do not know very well the real pain and heartbreak that deportations cause. I share your concerns, and I understand them. And I promise you, we are responding to your concerns and working every day to make sure we are enforcing flawed laws in the most humane and best possible way. Now, I know some people want me to bypass Congress and change the laws on my own. But believe me, the idea of doing things on my own is very tempting. I promise you. I need a dance partner here, and the floor is empty. Five years ago, 23 Republican Senators supported comprehensive immigration reform because they knew it was the right thing to do for the economy and it was the right thing to do for America. Republicans helped write the DREAM Act because they knew it was the right thing to do for the country. Last year, we passed the DREAM Act through the House only to see it blocked by Senate Republicans. It was heartbreaking to get so close and see politics get in the way, particularly because some of the folks who walked away had previously been sponsors of this. And part of the problem is, is that the political winds have changed. That is left States to come up with patchwork versions of reform that do not solve the problem.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalcouncillaraza0", "title": "Remarks to the National Council of La Raza", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-council-la-raza-0", "publication_date": "25-07-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4116, "text": "We cannot have 50 immigration laws across the country. The Democrats and your President are with you----are with you. Remember who it is that we need to move in order to actually change the laws. Now, usually, as soon as I come out in favor of something, about half of Congress is immediately against it even if it was originally their idea. So I need you to keep building a movement for change outside of Washington, one they cannot stop, one that is greater than this community. We need a movement that bridges party lines, that unites business and labor and faith communities and law enforcement communities and all who know that America cannot continue operating with a broken immigration system. And I will be there every step of the way. I will keep up this fight, because Washington is way behind where the rest of the country knows we need to go. This is a city where compromise is becoming a dirty word, where there is more political upside in doing what is easier for reelection, what is easier for an attack ad, than what is best for the country. But, NCLR, I want you to know, when you feel frustration or you are feeling cynical, and when you hear people say we cannot solve our problems or we cannot bring about the change that we have fought so hard for, I do want you to remember everything that we have already accomplished together just in 2 years. And I want you to remember why we do this in the first place. Recently, I heard the story of a participant at this gathering that we had at the White House that I was telling you about at the top of my speech. And Marie was born to migrant farm workers in Avondale, Arizona. As a young girl, she and her brother would help their parents in the cotton fields. And I am assuming the temperatures were sort of like they have been the last couple days here in DC. And it was in those cotton fields that Marie's father would tell her, If you do not want to be working in this heat, you better stay in school. And so that is what Marie did. And because of that, because of the tireless, back-breaking work of her parents, because of their willingness to struggle and sacrifice so that one day their children would not have to, Marie became the first in her family to go to college. And interestingly, she now works at the very site where she used to pick cotton, except now city hall sits there, and Marie is the town's mayor.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalcouncillaraza0", "title": "Remarks to the National Council of La Raza", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-council-la-raza-0", "publication_date": "25-07-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4117, "text": "I think we should give it up for the men's and women's national college basketball champions, the Connecticut Huskies! Now, I have to say that, as President, one of my goals has been to eliminate waste and cut out duplicative programs to make things a little more efficient, but this might be carrying things a little too far. We have, as you might expect, some big Huskies fans here today, including some outstanding Members of Congress. I also want to recognize your university president, Susan Herbst; your athletic director, Warde Manuel; and Larry McHugh, the chairman of your board of trustees. And of course, you have got a couple of great coaches in what I called when we were meeting back there the grizzled veteran, Geno Auriemma and the new blood, Kevin Ollie, both in the house. I can make that joke now that I have got gray hair. Only once before, in 2004, has one school won both the men's and women's Division I titles. And of course, that was who? This is the women's ninth national title, more than any other women's basketball team in history. For the men, it is their fourth title in the last 16 years, which is twice as many as anybody else during that same span of time. Which makes me think, what is up with you guys? It is just a remarkable thing what these two programs have accomplished. Of course, this season the women went a perfect 40-0, won their games by an average of 34 points, so there was not a lot of suspense during their season. In a championship game billed as one of the biggest in women's basketball history, the Huskies routed the previously unbeaten Notre Dame and gave me bragging rights. It gave me bragging rights to pick them in my bracket. I mean, me and 95 percent of the country. And this marked the fifth time that UConn has finished a season as an undefeated national champion. Of course, a lot of this success belongs to Coach Geno, who has cemented his place as not only a legend in women's basketball, but one of the best coaches that we have ever seen at any level and any sport, period. So we are grateful to him. But I think Coach Auriemma would be the first to tell you that the credit goes to the players.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthencaamensandwomensbasketballchampionuniversityconnecticut", "title": "Remarks on Honoring the NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball Champion University of Connecticut Huskies", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-ncaa-mens-and-womens-basketball-champion-university-connecticut", "publication_date": "09-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4118, "text": "You have got Breanna Stewart, named the Final Four's Most Outstanding Player 2 years in a row. You have got Kaleena Mosqueda-Lewis, who overcame injury and illness during the season and came up big as she is prone to do during the tournament. You have got Stefanie Dolson and Bria Hartley, who went on to become top-10 picks in the WNBA draft. And, Stefanie, I did not forget that you challenged me to a dance-off last year. Do not think that I do not think that you are going to beat me on that. I also told you the I also appreciate that you told the world about it after the title game. I have daughters in junior high and high school, and for their sake, I will not be dancing too much while the cameras are around. Now, I also have to confess, I did not pick the men to win in my bracket. Of course, neither did anybody else, unless you went to UConn. Look at these guys, they are all raising their hand yes, I went. We were not counting on Shabazz Napier leading the way as the tournament's Most Outstanding Player and hitting big shot after big shot and locking down the perimeter defensively. The Huskies also had huge contributions from guys like Ryan Boatright, DeAndre Daniels, and Niels Giffey, who is not here because he is playing overseas. After the tournament wins over Villanova, Iowa State, Michigan State, Florida, Kentucky, UConn became the first seven-seed ever to win the title. Somebody told me we were Cinderellas, and I said, 'No, we are UConn. That is what we do, bred to cut down nets.' In fact, a sportswriter once referred to him as our future President. I do not know with a name like Kevin whether that is possible. Now, Coach Ollie is doing one other important thing. He is making sure his team hits the books as hard as they hit the boards. And this season, both the men and the women ranked among the Nation's best academically, and that is worth applauding. Both teams have also done tremendous work in the community. They have raised awareness for cancer and autism. They have volunteered at senior centers, spent time with underprivileged youth. Coach Ollie and Coach Auriemma spoke at the Pentagon last month as part of our Hoops for Troops program.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthencaamensandwomensbasketballchampionuniversityconnecticut", "title": "Remarks on Honoring the NCAA Men's and Women's Basketball Champion University of Connecticut Huskies", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-ncaa-mens-and-womens-basketball-champion-university-connecticut", "publication_date": "09-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4119, "text": "I am speaking to you today from Manitowoc, Wisconsin, where I am at an innovative company called Orion Energy Systems. A major employer had shut down this factory, moved its operations abroad, and took a lot of jobs away from this town. You are looking at part of a factory where 250 workers are building advanced clean energy systems, state-of-the-art technologies that use solar power and energy efficiency to save farms and businesses thousands of dollars on their utility bills. I am here because this business and others like it are showing us the way forward. And in the coming days, I will be shining a spotlight on innovators across America who are relying on new technologies to create new jobs and opportunities in new industries. by outinnovating, outeducating, and outbuilding our competitors. We will win the future by being the best place on Earth to do business. That is what we are called to do at this moment. And in my State of the Union, I talked about how we get there. It starts by making sure that every single child can get a good education and every American can afford college or career training, because that is what will help light the spark in the minds of innovators and ensure that our people have the skills to work for innovative companies. We also need to make sure that America can move goods and information as fast as any of our competitors, whether on the road or online, because good infrastructure helps our businesses sell their products and services faster and cheaper. We have to reform our Government and cut wasteful spending so that we eliminate what we do not need to pay for the investments we need to grow, like education and medical research. As we can see here in Manitowoc, we need to ensure that we are promoting innovation, especially in promising areas like clean energy. This is going to be key to growing our economy and helping businesses create jobs. Orion, for example, was able to open with the help of small-business loans and incentives that are creating demand for clean energy technologies like wind power and solar panels. That is why I have proposed a bigger tax credit for the research that companies do. By 2035, 80 percent of electricity should come from clean energy. This is going to help spark innovation at businesses across America. This is going to spur new products and technologies. This is going to lead to good, new jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsweeklyaddress56", "title": "Barack Obama The President's Weekly Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-weekly-address-56", "publication_date": "29-01-2011", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4120, "text": "It is always good to see some old friends and have a chance to make new ones. And it is always a pleasure to be joined by two of the most important women in my life, Nancy and Maureen. Well, it may be September, but here in Washington it is been plenty warm until just a couple of days ago. We turned this off just for this particular gathering. And these past few weeks, I guess we broke the record here for the length of a hot spell just a few days ago, before the reduction in temperature, and it reminded me when I was a kid of our minister one hot summer Sunday morning. And he said that he was going to keep his sermon short, and he didjust seven words. Well, today I will follow his example, though I may slip a few more in than seven. But I am sure you have heard of our plan to overhaul the Federal tax program. This is the most burning issue that is facing the American people, I think, in this decade. I am going to be out on the stump all fall bringing our case for tax fairness and economic growth to the American people and rallying their support. I will be in many of your States; indeed, in many of your communities. And I will be looking for your help, because it is the grassroots level that our tax proposal will find the energy, determination, and willpower needed to topple the status quo. Status quothat's Latin for the mess we are in. As State legislators, you do not need to hear about the pleadings of lobbyists, and the siren songs of special interests are heard in every legislative hall from Capitol Hill out through all the 50 States. But this time we can work for the special interests of all the American people to create a fair and equitable tax system, one which will be a double boon to the economy because it'll both close wasteful loopholes and, at the same time, cut tax rates. It is time for Americans to take their money out of tax shelters and invest the money in America's future. Every day we live with the present tax code, we are slowing down economic growth, sacrificing jobs that would have been created, unfairly burdening families, and perpetuating an unjust system that only breeds cynicism and resentment in the American people. You know, last week I spoke about tax reform at North Carolina State University. The room was electrified with their hope and energy and enthusiasm.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseluncheonforelectedrepublicanwomenofficials3", "title": "Remarks at a White House Luncheon for Elected Republican Women Officials", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-luncheon-for-elected-republican-women-officials-3", "publication_date": "13-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4121, "text": "Believe me, having served as a Governor during the time of the Vietnam riots and all, when, if I went to a campus, they'd burn down a buildingto see these young people today has just made me sureand I am glad to tell youthe 21st century's going to be in good hands. And one of our proudest accomplishments as Republicans is the way we have been able to draw more and more young people into our ranks. We have swept aside the pessimism and resignation that gripped the elected leadership of this country not too long ago, and we have opened our doors to the future. Like the American people themselves, we Republicans believe that America is still young, still vital, and still strong. What we have accomplished together goes beyond words. We have backed our words with decisive and dramatic action. Our 25-percent across-the-board tax reduction gave new life and sustenance to a spirit of optimism. An entrepreneurial renaissance is spreading across our land. A powerful economic expansion is lifting America out of the devastation of a decade of high tax policies and enabling us to build on a solid base of noninflationary growth. Here is a piece of especially good news. The Democratically controlled House Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families rated all the different tax plans that are presently floating around up there on the Hill and found that ours was by far the most profamily of all of the tax proposals. By raising the standard deduction to $4,000 for a married couple filing jointly and nearly doubling the personal exemption to $2,000, we will make it so that a family of four does not pay one penny in Federal income tax on the first $12,000 of earnings. We are also giving nonwage-earning spouses equal access to IRA's, those tax deductible savings accounts. But alongside the pension reform passed in the last Congress, this will go a long way toward alleviating poverty by allowing women the means to care for themselves in retirement years. Another report may be of special interest to you as State legislators. Our proposal to eliminate the State and local tax deduction has been getting a lot of flack from some quarters. Well, it turns out that the New York State government has a study by its own comptroller. It found that under our proposal, taxpayers in New York would save $588 million a year. If the individual taxpayers in your States benefit, your States and localities as a whole benefit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseluncheonforelectedrepublicanwomenofficials3", "title": "Remarks at a White House Luncheon for Elected Republican Women Officials", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-luncheon-for-elected-republican-women-officials-3", "publication_date": "13-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4122, "text": "There is no logic to fighting tax fairness, to fighting a plan that would increase economic growth, create more jobs, give families a much-needed break, and take the working poor off the tax rolls completely. Of course, we still have a job to do in Congress getting spending under control. In that regard, on the revenue side, I'd like it known that I could immediately deposit $1.2 billion in cash in the Treasury if Congress will support this administration's decision to sell Conrail back to the private sector, where it belongs. I was only a small boy the first time the Federal Government tried to run the railroads. That was during World War I, and it was a disaster. So, we have an offer of that amount already. We can sell, if they will only give the word. As Everett Dirksen might have said, A billion here and a billion there and pretty soon you are talking real money. Some in Congress seem to think they can proceed as usual, indiscriminately spending taxpayer dollars, and that sooner or later they will all be bailed out with a tax hike. Well, for at least 31/2 years they will not . We Republicans have always looked for the long-range solutions, and this tax plan is one of those which will be working long after we have left office. As State legislators, you know that programs closer to home are more cost-efficient, better planned, and offer more assistance. But the gluttonous Federal tax system has robbed you of the base for local programs. We must continue to move this wheel of government in the interest of what is right for America. And this is the time for which all of us have worked, the moment in which we can build a partnership between the levels of government with a growing economy to give America the momentum for the next century. And now I am going toyouknow, in the business I was always in, you wanted a tag line to get off that would be popular- appreciated. It is, we are going to have dessert now.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehouseluncheonforelectedrepublicanwomenofficials3", "title": "Remarks at a White House Luncheon for Elected Republican Women Officials", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-luncheon-for-elected-republican-women-officials-3", "publication_date": "13-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4139, "text": "I am very honored to be here on this occasion. And before I begin my formal remarks, if I could be permitted to say that I am very happy to see so many from the United States, the dependents, the wives, the children, and the rest, and I bring you the best greetings from all of your friends back home in the United States. I know that you must have been as impressed as I was, and as moved as I was, by the pageantry that we have just witnessed, of the great nations that were represented by the forces that we saw pass in review. I know, too, that you realize that that pageantry has something behind it. NATO is 21 years of age. In fact, most of the people here in this audience were born since NATO came into being. And when we consider NATO, we must realize that because of its strength and its purpose, Europe has enjoyed a generation of peace since it came into being. Now, at the present time, we live in a period of change. A period of change can be welcome. It can mean to this part of the world, to Europe, that we move from a period of confrontation to one of negotiation; that we move from a period in which Europe seems to be permanently divided by rigid blocs to a period in which the nations and the peoples of Europe join together in cooperation and communication. A period of change also, however, can be one of very great danger, because in a time of change there is turmoil; there is also the lack of confidence that comes when instability seems to be the order of the day. The great question before us in NATO and in the free world today is whether in this period of change in Europe and in the world we shall be masters of change and masters of our fate or whether we shall be the victims of change. That brings me back to this pageantry that we just saw and what it represents-what it represents not just to us from the United States, but from our friends in Europe and to our friends in Europe. What we must realize is that in a period of instability, of uncertainty, and of possible lack of confidence, that what is needed is an institution that people can believe in, an institution that is strong, an institution that is stable, that men and women can hang onto; and NATO is such an institution. It is strong, it is united, it represents the best of all of our people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalthenatosoutherncommandnaplesitaly", "title": "Remarks on Arrival at the NATO Southern Command in Naples, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-the-nato-southern-command-naples-italy", "publication_date": "30-09-1970", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4140, "text": "It has power, but it is a power that exists for the purpose of peace; and because it exists for the purpose of peace, it serves the very best ideals of all of the great peoples that are proud to be members of the NATO organization. My trip as President of the United States to this NATO Command underlines the American commitment to a Mediterranean that will not be our sea speaking of an American sea, but a sea that will belong to all people. My trip, also, to this NATO Command represents a firm American commitment to this great institution, to which the credit must be given over these past 21 years for a period of peace in this continent, in Europe, which has suffered so much from war in the past. World War I, World War II, Korea, and now Vietnam . The great goal that we have is to develop the policies that will provide the opportunity for your generation to experience that full generation of peace. But it will be possible only if the United States remains strong and firm in its commitments to its alliances and particularly strong and firm in its commitment to the great alliance of NATO, perhaps the most successful in its purpose of any alliance in the history of the world. I am proud to be here standing with our NATO allies and friends, and I say that this trip and my presence here speaks for a United States of America, united behind a great principle of strength, strength which exists for peace in Europe, and as it exists for peace in Europe which can contribute to that peace in the whole world that all of us want for ourselves and, most of all, for our children. I would like to say that I wish that our schedule permitted the time for meeting all of the people that are here. It is not quite possible because we have a meeting first with the NATO Command and then with all of our ambassadors from the Mediterranean area. But I do want you to know how very good it is to come to a country, a great, friendly country like Italy, and see so many friendly Americans right here abroad.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalthenatosoutherncommandnaplesitaly", "title": "Remarks on Arrival at the NATO Southern Command in Naples, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-the-nato-southern-command-naples-italy", "publication_date": "30-09-1970", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4151, "text": "May I thank Sheriff Larry Deens for that wonderful introduction and thank him and the other law enforcement officers who are here to back me up. We back up the law enforcement officers of this country, and we ought to continue to back up the law enforcement officers of this country that are giving their lives for us every single day. I am also proud to be here with Jim McCrery. We need him in the United States Congress. He is doing a first-class job, not just for Louisiana but for the values and the programs we hold so dear. May I thank Mayor Hazel Beard of Shreveport, delighted to be with her, and former Governor Treen, one of the great Governors of this State, an old friend of Barbara's and mine, glad to see Dave; Mayor Dement, Mayor George Dement. It is great to be here in Shreveport. Let me say to those law-and-order, sound, sensible, conservative Democrats who are with us at this rally and standing with me here, I am grateful to each and every one of you for your loyal support. I will not let you down. You know, for the last few weeks I have been traveling the length and breadth of America, stumping for the economic ideas that I believe in. We call it the Agenda for American Renewal. We must renew America, and with these economic ideas and your support, we can do just exactly that. Here are some of the fundamentals. We want to open up new markets for American products and in the process create new jobs for American workers, and that means the North American free trade agreement with Mexico. Louisiana sells a lot there now. With this trade agreement we are going to sell a lot more, and that means more jobs for the people of Louisiana. I believe that Government is too big and spends too much of your money. And he thinks, and he has already advocated big tax increases and big spending increases. Frankly, I want to see us cut those taxes and provide incentives, especially for those of you in the oil industry. Housing starts made the largest increase in the last 18 months, strong improvement in housing. Our economy is poised for a takeoff if we make the right choices in November. The answer, the way to do that is to get the President and get the Members of Congress that will give small businesses relief from taxation, from regulation, and yes, from litigation. We are suing each other too much and caring for each other too little.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalshreveportlouisiana", "title": "Remarks on Arrival in Shreveport, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-shreveport-louisiana", "publication_date": "22-09-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4152, "text": "You know, we spend up to $200 billion, $200 billion a year on lawyers and lawsuits. People are afraid to coach Little League, doctors afraid to deliver babies because they are going to get sued by some crazy lawsuit. We have got to put an end to it, and we have got to stand up against the lobbies that are keeping that from happening. When you see the young people that are here or any of the crowds across this country, I want to give our kids what they deserve, the best, the very best education in the entire world. I want every parent to have the freedom to choose the school of their choice, whether it is public, private, or religious schools. So these are just a part of what we call the agenda. These are just a part of what we call the Agenda for American Renewal. While I have been outlining these positive ideas, my opponent has chosen to focus his energies on the past. Month after month, 11 straight months, Governor Clinton has persisted in his attacks on me, unrelenting attacks, many of them very personal in nature. He is distorted the record. And this week he launched the first one in the Presidential year, the first negative campaign commercials, the first ones. So far I have kind of resisted the urge to focus heavily on his record. I am tired about the exaggerations; I am tired about the lies, and I am ready to fight back and tell the truth about his record in Arkansas. So this morning up in Springfield, Missouri, I laid out the Clinton record. I am stopping by some States that are neighbors of Arkansas, including my State of Texas and your State of Louisiana, so that we can move beyond the rhetoric and see what he is really done for the good people of Arkansas or, put it this way, what he is done to the good people of Arkansas. Look, my argument is not with them at all. They deserve better treatment than they have received from Governor Clinton. I have debated every time we have had elections, and we will probably have debates. We are not going to do it on his terms alone, but we will have debates. candidate Clinton, standing here, debating Governor Clinton and his record, standing over here. And here is what we will get.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalshreveportlouisiana", "title": "Remarks on Arrival in Shreveport, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-shreveport-louisiana", "publication_date": "22-09-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4153, "text": "Here in Louisiana I'd like to talk a moment about the struggle of importance to every parent, every teacher, every student, and that is the hard-fought battle to take back our streets from the druggies and the crackheads and the thugs that are criminals in this country. The good sheriff knows what he is talking about. Candidate Clinton likes to talk tough on crime. You will hear him criticize me about support for local law enforcement. Well, those criticisms are off the mark. The brave men and women in law enforcement, police officers, sheriffs, whatever they may be, do not need our rhetoric. They need equipment, and they need manpower, and they need the support of every law abiding citizen. Well, candidate Clinton does not acknowledge this record. But you will hear candidate Clinton make some pretty impressive claims about crime control in Arkansas. When it comes to crime, I just wish that candidate Clinton out around the country, the Doberman pinscher, would meet Governor Clinton, the chihuahua. Let me tell you what I mean. Here are the facts, and I challenge that reaction squad of his to tell me what is wrong. During the 1980, the Nation's overall crime rate actually went down, but not in Arkansas. In fact, Governor Clinton's State had the biggest increase in the overall crime rate in the entire Nation, nearly 28 percent. Arkansas violent crime rate went up more than 58 percent, one of the worst records in the entire Nation and a heck of a lot worse than where we are standing right here in Louisiana. You have done a much better job here. I do not believe Governor Clinton is committed to the issue. for prisons, 46th; for judicial and legal systems, 50th; and when it comes to per capita spending for police officers, Arkansas ranks 49th. That is not good enough for the United States of America. Here is another one, and these good law enforcement officers know what I am talking about. In Arkansas when the prison doors slam shut on a convicted criminal, he knows it will not be long before the door opens up again. As incredible as it may seem, most inmates in Arkansas serve less than one-fifth, one-fifth of their sentences behind bars. That does not happen in Louisiana. That does not happen in Louisiana. It does not happen in Texas, and it does not happen in Mississippi. When it comes to keeping criminals behind bars, Governor Clinton has the worst record in the entire Nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalshreveportlouisiana", "title": "Remarks on Arrival in Shreveport, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-shreveport-louisiana", "publication_date": "22-09-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4154, "text": "Do not let him do that to the United States of America. You know, if you play Monopoly in Little Rock, the card would read like this, Do not pass go. And then you'd turn it over and it says, Do not worry. You will be back in a minute. You will be back out in a minute. Look, contrast that with what we have been doing on the Federal record. I am very proud to talk about my record in law enforcement. Most Federal inmates serve at least 85 percent of their full sentences. Sure it costs money, but it takes a real commitment. If someone takes liberty with the law, we ought to put them behind bars, and we ought to make them stay there and stare at the ceiling for a good, long time, because, you see, I think we ought to have less sympathy for the criminal and a lot more sympathy for the victims of crime. When you look at his record on law enforcement, it is not surprising that last week the Fraternal Order of Police in Little Rock endorsed me for the President of the United States of America. That is how the police in his own backyard feel about it. So when you hear candidate Clinton's rhetoric about being tough on crime, just remember Governor Clinton's record. You know, in the White House I have found something out. You cannot be on all sides of each question. You cannot say on the one hand I am for this and on the other hand for that. When it comes to making a call on something as tough as Desert Storm, you have got to say, Here is what we are going to do. You cannot do what this Governor does, take one side of the issue one day and another side the other. You cannot be all things to all people. You know, I kind of enjoy this after 11 months of hearing them bash my brains out up there. It is wonderful to be able to stand up and say the truth about this record. He talks a good game, but his actions betray his words. And he travels the Nation making all kinds of promises. You have got a special group, call him. He will be for whatever you are for. And while he travels the Nation, Arkansas' workers' income slumps; their children's test scores slide in comparison to other States; their rivers grow more polluted. The fish light up at night over there. Their crime rises faster than every other State, and that is a fact.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarrivalshreveportlouisiana", "title": "Remarks on Arrival in Shreveport, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arrival-shreveport-louisiana", "publication_date": "22-09-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4155, "text": "Five months have gone by since I last spoke to the people of the Nation about the state of the Nation. I had hoped to be able to defer this talk until next week because, as we all know, this is Holy Week. But what I want to say to you, the people of the country, is of such immediate need and relates so closely to the lives of human beings and the prevention of human suffering that I have felt that there should be no delay. In this decision I have been strengthened by the thought that by speaking tonight there may be greater peace of mind and the hope of Easter may be more real at firesides everywhere, and that it is not inappropriate to encourage peace when so many of us are thinking of the Prince of Peace. Five years ago we faced a very serious problem of economic and social recovery. For four and a half years that recovery proceeded apace. It is only in the past seven months that it has received a visible setback. And it is only within the past two months, as we have waited patiently to see whether the forces of business itself would counteract it, that it has become apparent that government itself can no longer safely fail to take aggressive government steps to meet it. This recession has not returned us to the disasters and suffering of the beginning of 1933. Your money in the bank is safe; farmers are no longer in deep distress and have greater purchasing power; dangers of security speculation have been minimized; national income is almost 50 per cent higher than in 1932; and government has an established and accepted responsibility for relief. But I know that many of you have lost your jobs or have seen your friends or members of your families lose their jobs, and I do not propose that the government shall pretend not to see these things. I know that the effect of our present difficulties has been uneven; that they have affected some groups and some localities seriously, but that they have been scarcely felt in others. But I conceive the first duty of government is to protect the economic welfare of all the people in all sections and in all groups. I said in my message opening the last session of Congress that if private enterprise did not provide jobs this spring, government would take up the slack that I would not let the people down. We have all learned the lesson that government cannot afford to wait until it has lost the power to act. Therefore, I have sent a message of far-reaching importance to the Congress.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4156, "text": "I want to read to you tonight certain passages from that message, and to talk with you about them. overspeculation in and overproduction of practically every article or instrument used by man . . . millions of people had been put to work, but the products of their hands had exceeded the purchasing power of their pocketbooks. Under the inexorable law of supply and demand, supplies so overran demand which would pay that production was compelled to stop. I pointed out to the Congress that the national income not the Government's income, but the total of the income of all the individual citizens and families of the United States every farmer, every worker, every banker, every professional man and every person who lived on income derived from investments that national income amounted, in the year 1929, to eighty-one billion dollars. By 1932 this had fallen to thirty-eight billion dollars. Gradually, and up to a few months ago, it had risen to a total of sixty-eight billion dollars a pretty good come-back from the low point. But the very vigor of the recovery in both durable goods and consumers' goods brought into the picture early in 1937 certain highly undesirable practices, which were in large part responsible for the economic decline which began in the later months of that year. Again production outran the ability to buy. One was fear fear of war abroad, fear of inflation, fear of nationwide strikes. None of these fears has been borne out. Production in many important lines of goods outran the ability of the public to purchase them. For example, through the winter and spring of 1937 cotton factories in hundreds of cases were running on a three-shift basis, piling up cotton goods in the factory and in the hands of middle men and retailers. For example, also, automobile manufacturers not only turned out a normal increase of finished cars, but encouraged the normal increase to run into abnormal figures, using every known method to push their sales. This meant, of course, that the steel mills of the Nation ran on a twenty-four hour basis, and the tire companies and cotton factories speeded up to meet the same type of abnormally stimulated demand. The buying power of the Nation lagged behind. Thus by the autumn of 1937 the Nation again had stocks on hand which the consuming public could not buy because the purchasing power of the consuming public had not kept pace with the production. During the same period the prices of many vital products had risen faster than was warranted.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4157, "text": "In the case of many commodities the price to the consumer was raised well above the inflationary boom prices of 1929. In many lines of goods and materials, prices got so high that buyers and builders ceased to buy or to build. The economic process of getting out the raw materials, putting them through the manufacturing and finishing processes, selling them to the retailers, selling them to the consumer, and finally using them got completely out of balance. The laying off of workers came upon us last autumn and has been continuing at such a pace ever since that all of us, Government and banking and business and workers, and those faced with destitution, recognize the need for action. All of this I said to the Congress today and I repeat it to you, the people of the country tonight. I went on to point out to the Senate and the House of Representatives that all the energies of government and business must be directed to increasing the national income, to putting more people into private jobs, to giving security and a feeling of security to all people in all walks of life. I am constantly thinking of all our people unemployed and employed alike- of their human problems of food and clothing and homes and education and health and old age. You and I agree that security is our greatest need; the chance to work, the opportunity of making a reasonable profit in our business-whether it be a very small business or a larger one the possibility of selling our farm products for enough money for our families to live on decently. I know these are the things that decide the well-being of all our people. Therefore, I am determined to do all in my power to help you attain that security, and because I know that the people themselves have a deep conviction that secure prosperity of that kind cannot be a lasting one except on a basis of business fair dealing and a basis where all from top to bottom share in prosperity I repeated to the Congress today that neither it nor the Chief Executive can afford to weaken or destroy great reforms which, during the past five years, have been effected on behalf of the American people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4158, "text": "In our rehabilitation of the banking structure and of agriculture, in our provisions for adequate and cheaper credit for all types of business, in our acceptance of national responsibility for unemployment relief, in our strengthening of the credit of state and local government, in our encouragement of housing, slum clearance and home ownership, in our supervision of stock exchanges and public utility holding companies and the issuance of new securities, in our provision for social security, the electorate of America wants no backward steps taken. We have recognized the right of labor to free organization, to collective bargaining; and machinery for the handling of labor relations is now in existence. The principles are established even though we can all admit that, through the evolution of time, administration and practices can be improved. Such improvement can come about most quickly and most peacefully through sincere efforts to understand and assist on the part of labor leaders and employers alike. The never-ceasing evolution of human society will doubtless bring forth new problems which will require new adjustments. Our immediate task is to consolidate and maintain the gains achieved. In this situation there is no reason and no occasion for any American to allow his fears to be aroused or his energy and enterprise to be paralyzed by doubt or uncertainty. I came to the conclusion that the present-day problem calls for action both by the Government and by the people, that we suffer primarily from a failure of consumer demand because of lack of buying power. It is up to us to create an economic upturn. How and where can and should the Government help to start an upward spiral? I went on to propose three groups of measures and I will summarize the recommendations. First, I asked for certain appropriations which are intended to keep the Government expenditures for work relief and similar purposes during the coming fiscal year at the same rate of expenditure as at present. That includes additional money for the Works Progress Administration; additional funds for the Farm Security Administration; additional allotments for the National Youth Administration, and more money for the Civilian Conservation Corps, in order that it can maintain the existing number of camps now in operation. These appropriations, made necessary by increased unemployment, will cost about a billion and a quarter more than the estimates which I sent to the Congress on the third of January. Second, I told the Congress that the Administration proposes to make additional bank reserves available for the credit needs of the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4159, "text": "About one billion four hundred million dollars of gold now in the Treasury will be used to pay these additional expenses of the Government, and three-quarters of a billion dollars of additional credit will be made available to the banks by reducing the reserves now required by the Federal Reserve Board. These two steps, taking care of relief needs and adding to bank credits, are in our judgment insufficient by themselves to start the Nation on a sustained upward movement. Therefore, I came to the third kind of Government action which I consider to be vital. You and I cannot afford to equip ourselves with two rounds of ammunition where three rounds are necessary. If we stop at relief and credit, we may find ourselves without ammunition before the enemy is routed. If we are fully equipped with the third round of ammunition, we stand to win the battle against adversity. The third proposal is to make definite additions to the purchasing power of the Nation by providing new work over and above the continuing of the old work. Third, to add one hundred million dollars to the estimate for federal aid highways in excess of the amount I recommended in January. In recommending this program I am thinking not only of the immediate economic needs of the people of the Nation, but also of their personal liberties the most precious possession of all Americans. I am thinking of our democracy and of the recent trend in other parts of the world away from the democratic ideal. Democracy has disappeared in several other great nations-not because the people of those nations disliked democracy, but because they had grown tired of unemployment and insecurity, of seeing their children hungry while they sat helpless in the face of government confusion and government weakness through lack of leadership in government. Finally, in desperation, they chose to sacrifice liberty in the hope of getting something to eat. We in America know that our own democratic institutions can be preserved and made to work. But in order to preserve them we need to act together, to meet the problems of the Nation boldly, and to prove that the practical operation of democratic government is equal to the task of protecting the security of the people. Not only our future economic soundness but the very soundness of our democratic institutions depends on the determination of our Government to give employment to idle men. The people of America are in agreement in defending their liberties at any cost, and the first line of that defense lies in the protection of economic security. Your Government, seeking to protect democracy, must prove that Government is stronger than the forces of business depression.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4160, "text": "History proves that dictatorships do not grow out of strong and successful governments, but out of weak and helpless ones. If by democratic methods people get a government strong enough to protect them from fear and starvation, their democracy succeeds; but if they do not, they grow impatient. Therefore, the only sure bulwark of continuing liberty is a government strong enough to protect the interests of the people, and a people strong enough and well enough informed to maintain its sovereign control over its government. We are a rich Nation; we can afford to pay for security and prosperity without having to sacrifice our liberties in the bargain. In the first century of our republic we were short of capital, short of workers and short of industrial production; but we were rich in free land, free timber and free mineral wealth. The Federal Government rightly assumed the duty of promoting business and relieving depression by giving subsidies of land and other resources. Thus, from our earliest days we have had a tradition of substantial government help to our system of private enterprise. But today the government no longer has vast tracts of rich land to give away and we have discovered that we must spend large sums to conserve our land from further erosion and our forests from further depletion. The situation is also very different from the old days, because now we have plenty of capital, banks and insurance companies loaded with idle money; plenty of industrial productive capacity and several millions of workers looking for jobs. It is following tradition as well as necessity, if Government strives to put idle money and idle men to work, to increase our public wealth and to build up the health and strength of the people and to help our system of private enterprise to function. It is going to cost Something to get out of this recession this way, but the profit of getting out of it will pay for the cost several times over. Every day that a workman is unemployed, or a machine is unused, or a business organization is marking time, is a loss to the Nation. Because of idle men and idle machines this Nation lost one hundred billion dollars between 1929 and the spring of 1933. This year you, the people of this country, are making about twelve billion dollars less than last year. If you think back to the experiences of the early years of this Administration you will remember the doubts and fears expressed about the rising expenses of Government. But to the surprise of the doubters, as we proceeded to carry on the program which included Public Works and Work Relief, the country grew richer instead of poorer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4161, "text": "It is worthwhile to remember that the annual national people's income was thirty billion dollars more in 1937 than in 1932. It is true that the national debt increased sixteen billion dollars, but remember that in this increase must be included several billion dollars worth of assets which eventually will reduce that debt and that many billion dollars of permanent public improvements schools, roads, bridges, tunnels, public buildings, parks and a host of other things meet your eye in every one of the thirty one hundred counties in the United States . No doubt you will be told that the Government spending program of the past five years did not cause the increase in our national income. They will tell you that business revived because of private spending and investment. That is true in part, for the Government spent only a small part of the total. But Government spending acted as a trigger to set off private activity. That is why the total addition to our national production and national income has been so much greater than the contribution of the Government itself. I want to make it clear that we do not believe that we can get an adequate rise in national income merely by investing, lending or spending public funds. It is essential in our economy that private funds be put to work and all of us recognize that such funds are entitled to a fair profit. The Government contribution of land that we once made to business was the land of all the people. And the Government contribution of money which we now make to business ultimately comes out of the labor of all the people. It is, therefore, only sound morality, as well as a sound distribution of buying power, that the benefits of the prosperity coming from this use of the money of all the people should be distributed among all the people- at the bottom as well as at the top. Consequently I am again expressing my hope that the Congress will enact at this session a wage and hour bill putting a floor under industrial wages and a limit on working hours to ensure a better distribution of our prosperity, a better distribution of available work, and a sounder distribution of buying power. You may get all kinds of impressions in regard to the total cost of this new program, or in regard to the amount that will be added to the net national debt. Last autumn in a sincere effort to bring Government expenditures and Government income into closer balance, the Budget I worked out called for sharp decreases in Government spending. In the light of present conditions those estimates were far too low.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4162, "text": "This new program adds two billion and sixty-two million dollars to direct Treasury expenditures and another nine hundred and fifty million dollars to Government loans and the latter sum, because they are loans, will come back to the Treasury in the future. between now and July 1, 1939 fifteen months away the Treasury will have to raise less than a billion and a half dollars of new money. Such an addition to the net debt of the United States need not give concern to any citizen, for it will return to the people of the United States many times over in increased buying power and eventually in much greater Government tax receipts because of the increase in the citizen income. What I said to the Congress in the close of my message I repeat to you. Let us unanimously recognize the fact that the Federal debt, whether it be twenty-five billions or forty billions, can only be paid if the Nation obtains a vastly increased citizen income. I repeat that if this citizen income can be raised to eighty billion dollars a year the national Government and the overwhelming majority of State and local governments will be 'out of the red.' The higher the national income goes the faster shall we be able to reduce the total of Federal and state and local debts. Viewed from every angle, today's purchasing power the citizens' income of today is not sufficient to drive the economic system at higher speed. Responsibility of Government requires us at this time to supplement the normal processes and in so supplementing them to make sure that the addition is adequate. We must start again on a long steady upward incline in national income. . . . And in that process, which I believe is ready to start, let us avoid the pitfalls of the past the overproduction, the overspeculation, and indeed all the extremes which we did not succeed in avoiding in 1929. In all of this, Government cannot and should not act alone. We need more than the materials of recovery. We need a united national will. We need to recognize nationally that the demands of no group, however just, can be satisfied unless that group is prepared to share in finding a way to produce the income from which it and all other groups can be paid. You, as the Congress, I, as the ENTITY, must, by virtue of our offices, seek the national good by preserving the balance between all groups and all sections. We have at our disposal the national resources, the money, the skill of hand and head to raise our economic level our citizens' income.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4163, "text": "Our capacity is limited only by our ability to work together. The time has come to bring that will into action with every driving force at our command. And I am determined to do my share. . . . Certain positive requirements seem to me to accompany the will- if we have that will. That is the discipline of a democracy. Every patriotic citizen must say to himself or herself, that immoderate statement, appeals to prejudice, the creation of unkindness, are offenses not against an individual or individuals, but offenses against the whole population of the United States. Self-restraint implies restraint by articulate public opinion, trained to distinguish fact from falsehood, trained to believe that bitterness is never a useful instrument in public affairs. Finally I should like to say a personal word to you. I never forget that I live in a house owned by all the American people and that I have been given their trust. I constantly talk with those who come to tell me their own points of view; with those who manage the great industries and financial institutions of the country; with those who represent the farmer and the worker; and often with average citizens without high position who come to this house. And constantly I seek to look beyond the doors of the White House, beyond the officialdom of the National Capital, into the hopes and fears of men and women in their homes. I have traveled the country over many times. My friends, my enemies, my daily mail, bring to me reports of what you are thinking and hoping. I want to be sure that neither battles nor burdens of office shall ever blind me to an intimate knowledge of the way the American people want to live and the simple purposes for which they put me here. In these great problems of government I try not to forget that what really counts at the bottom of it all, is that the men and Women willing to work can have a decent job to take care of themselves and their homes and their children adequately; that the farmer, the factory worker, the storekeeper, the gas station man, the manufacturer, the merchant big and small the banker who takes pride in the help he gives to the building of his community, that all these can be sure of a reasonable profit and safety for the savings they earn not today nor tomorrow alone, but as far ahead as they can see. I can hear your unspoken wonder as to where we are headed in this troubled world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsfiresidechat15", "title": "Fireside Chat.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fireside-chat-15", "publication_date": "14-04-1938", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4164, "text": "I am sorry about the rain. I will make this brief, but I want to take a moment before I leave to comment on the outcome of the climate change negotiations that have just been completed in Japan. I am very pleased that the United States has reached a truly historic agreement with other nations of the world to take unprecedented steps to address the global problem of climate change. It reflects a commitment by our generation to act in the interests of future generations. The United States delegation, at the direction of the Vice President and with the very, very skilled leadership of Under Secretary of State Stu Eizenstat, showed the way. The momentum generated by the Vice President's visit helped to move the negotiations, and I thank him very much. I am particularly pleased that the agreement strongly reflects the commitment of the United States to use the tools of the free market to tackle this problem. It is essential that they participate in a meaningful way if we are to truly tackle this problem. But the joint implementation provisions of the agreement open the way to that result. The industrialized nations have come together and taken a strong step, and that is real progress. Finally, I cannot say enough about the extraordinary leadership of Prime Minister Hashimoto. The people of Japan should be very proud of the spirit and the work that their country's leaders did to make this historic day possible. And the agreement we made is actually, because of the way the details are worked out and what counts against the total, even though we have committed to a 7 percent reduction, it is actually closer to our original position than that indicates. We will make some reduction. We got what we wanted, which is joint implementation, emissions trading, a market-oriented approach. I wish it were a little stronger on developing nations' participation. But we opened the way, the only way we can get there, through joint implementation of projects in those countries. It is going to be possible for us to do this and grow our economy. We should be very, very proud of this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthekyotoprotocolclimatechangeandexchangewithreportersnewyorkcity", "title": "Remarks on the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change and an Exchange With Reporters in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-kyoto-protocol-climate-change-and-exchange-with-reporters-new-york-city", "publication_date": "10-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4165, "text": "Nearly 1 year ago, we made a commitment to commit not only to build a better infrastructure, but to build a better future, one rooted in opportunity, security, and prosperity for all. And thanks to all the public and private partners around this table and many more around the world, we have already begun to deliver. Together, we have initiated quality and sustainable infrastructure projects across Africa, Asia, and the Americas. And we are strengthening our shared climate security, health security, and food security and economic security. We started to engage more private investors to better de-risk and leverage additional capital. And I see at least two from the United States here that are de-risking a lot. And I am proud to announce that the United States has already mobilized more than $30 billion in investments to date. Together, we have a lot of work to do to close the infrastructure gap and for-in low- and middle-income countries. And as we begin the next year, our partnership-we need to find new ways-new ways to maximize investments-our investments. That is why, moving forward, the United States will enhance our focus on investing in key economic corridors. In practice, that means making game-changing investments in regions that could lead to positive impacts across multiple sectors in multiple countries. We have already started working with our partners to make this happen. For example, in sub-Saharan Africa, the U.S. Development Finance Corporation is looking to invest in this first railway project on the continent. The rail line would extend from the western shores of Angola to the border of the D.R.C. and Zambia, with the goal of ultimately reaching the Indian Ocean, connecting the continent east to west for the first time. This project would not only quickly promote trade and create jobs. Over time, in my view, it will strengthen supply chains, incentive-and incentivize investments in agriculture and promote food security. And it is going to enable, in my view, us to better access clean energy and digital connectivity across the entire region, creating more security, more prosperity, more opportunities for generations to come. investing in near-term solutions that pay long-term dividends. It is not only in Africa. We are starting similar work in Costa Rica, Ecuador, Indonesia, and other places I will not bore you with now. And let me close with this. climate change, food security, gender inequality, economic resilience, digital connectivity, and global security.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthepartnershipforglobalinfrastructureandinvestmentmeetinghiroshimajapan", "title": "Remarks at the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment Meeting in Hiroshima, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-partnership-for-global-infrastructure-and-investment-meeting-hiroshima-japan", "publication_date": "20-05-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4187, "text": "Gentlemen, I do know that from the schedule that I have read that you have been exposed to a great amount of material already with regard to some of our domestic programs. I know, too, that you are aware of the fact that this is the first of four regional briefings we are going to have on domestic policy, just as we previously had four on foreign policy, and perhaps we will be able to repeat these from time to time in the future as various issues develop. Now when I read your schedule, I could see that there was not much left for me to talk about, because Governor Romney, of course, covered various aspects of revenue sharing; and Secretary Hodgson covered other aspects of manpower training; Herb Stein knows all about the economy--I wish he would tell me, but he knows all about it--and, of course, John Ehrlichman, in terms of Government reorganization and the other issues, has talked to you and answered questions; and I know that Herb Klein, too, has filled you in on some aspects of it. What I would like to do is to try to put these domestic programs in this period of the seventies in a broader perspective. In order to do so, it will be necessary for me to talk about foreign policy first, not in precise details, as would be the case in a foreign policy briefing, but in more general terms, so that we can see why domestic programs of the types you have been hearing about today, programs that normally just do not make the first lead on television or a front page today in the newspapers due to the overwhelming interest in foreign policy, why that domestic policy is so important for the future. I begin with the developments in foreign policy with which you are all familiar. While it must seem at times that the more things change in foreign policy, the more they remain the same, I think that a sophisticated observer would have to agree that historians in the future will look to this period, and they will probably write that the American people--and through the American people, through their relations with other people in the world--were going through a very historic change insofar as our relations with other nations in the world were concerned. I will only say that if there was ever a new era in the field of foreign policy, we are now in the middle of it. We are on the threshold of it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4188, "text": "I think the most significant changes in American foreign policy and the most significant changes in the relations between major nations in the world are taking place now than at any period since World War II. I speak of we in terms of this Administration. We played a role, but what has happened here is that we see a number of developments coming together contemporaneously. The one that of course is first and foremost in your minds, and should be, is the war in Vietnam. There is no argument, however, among any sophisticated observers on the point that the war in Vietnam, after a long period---5 years--in which no end was in sight, in which more and more Americans went to Vietnam, and in which more and more casualties occurred in Vietnam, that now the situation is changed. Casualties are going down, and we can say confidently today that the war in Vietnam will be ended. You know the arguments, and I will not go into them now, why we cannot, in our national interest, accept the proposition of setting a deadline as far as our own withdrawal is concerned. I will only say that there is no question but that this Administration's policy is succeeding and bringing the war to an end and bringing it to an end in a way which I believe will contribute to our goal of discouraging that kind of war, that kind of aggression that brought this war on, in the future, and thereby bringing it to an end in a way that will not guarantee--we can never guarantee anything in world events--but that will give us a chance to have a more peaceful Southeast Asia, a more peaceful Pacific. Now, if we are able to accomplish this goal--and I am confident that we are accomplishing it and that we can see it now in sight--this is in itself, by itself--although by itself it is not the major development which we are presently seeing-but this by itself has enormous significance, because both World War II and the Korean war, as far as the United States was concerned, did come from the Pacific, and so did Vietnam. So a peaceful Pacific and an end to this conflict in a way that will maintain the position of confidence of the United States in the Pacific is enormously important in terms of achieving our broader goal of peace in the world. The second point, of course, that has been much in the news this past week is our relations with the Soviet Union. Here, the announcement that I made last week deliberately was brief.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4189, "text": "I will not expand on it now, because that would not be in the interest of achieving the goal that the announcement set forth. Suffice it to say that now at the highest level of the two super powers, the Soviet Union and the United States, the leaders have committed themselves to taking a first, very significant step toward limiting both defensive and offensive nuclear weapons. That commitment, having been taken publicly, thereby gives us at this period-since it was committed publicly in terms of attempting to achieve it and hoping to achieve it this year--it gives us an idea as to what could develop from now on out between the two super powers. Again, it does not guarantee that because the two super powers may agree that their mutual interest will be served by a limitation, on the one hand, on our part of defensive weapons and a limitation on the part of the Soviet Union as far as offensive weapons are concerned, that the two powers are not going to have other differences. It does not guarantee that they will agree on everything else, that they will agree on the Mideast, that they will agree on East-West relations insofar as Europe is concerned, et cetera. But the fact that this step is being taken in the field of negotiation is enormously significant simply because it has happened. The announcement is significant; the commitment on the part of the leaders is significant; but even more important, if that commitment can become a reality-and it will take hard negotiating on the part of both sides to bring that reality into being--but if that can become a reality, then the two super powers, not by rhetoric, and we have had cool rhetoric ever since this Administration came into Washington, but in deeds the two super powers will have entered into a new period of better relations. You can see what that would mean in contributing to the peace of the world, because wherever the two super powers rub against each other, whether it is in the Mideast or whether it is in the Caribbean or whether it happens to be tangentially in a place like Vietnam, where it is tangential as far as the Soviet is concerned, but nevertheless real, or whether it is where the blue chip is involved in the heart of Europe, all of this, of course, potentially carries within it the danger of conflict at the very highest level.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4190, "text": "And so making movement toward reducing or limiting arms, making this kind of step indicates and gives us at least some hope that a different relationship between the two powers will, on a step-by-step basis, develop in the years ahead. A few weeks ago you all, of course, covered in your newspapers, on your television and radio programs, the developments with regard to China, Mainland China. In a recent press conference, you may recall that I said that--when asked about what this meant--I said we must realize that what happened was significant; not simply the visit of the table tennis team, that had some significance and, of course, great interest because of its rather bizarre character as far as we were concerned. But because in the field of travel and in the field of trade, in the field of exchange of persons and in the field of trade, to put it more precisely, we see a very significant change occurring for the first time since the Government which presently is in power in Mainland China---the People's Republic of China--for the first time that Government and the Government of the United States have found two areas, exchange of persons and travel, where again, on a precise step-by-step basis, they are beginning to have a different relationship than they had previously. As I put it, what we have done really is broken the ice; now we have to test the water to see how deep it is. More steps will be taken on our part and on their part when it is to the reciprocal interest of both to do so. I do not suggest that any steps are presently being contemplated on either side. That would not be in the interest of having that come about. But I do say that the very fact that the United States and the Government on Mainland China, the People's Republic of China, have finally moved in these limited areas toward a relation of normalcy gives us hope that not immediately--not within a year, for example--but looking to the future, that 800 million Chinese will not be isolated from the rest of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4191, "text": "Let me just say parenthetically that when we think of the dangers to peace of the world, I can think of none that would quite exceed the fact that 800 million, and then perhaps in 25 years a billion, of the most capable and able people in the world would be isolated from the rest of the world, living there, not knowing the rest of the world, and with a growing and very dangerous nuclear capability. I do not suggest that the steps that we have taken have dealt with that problem conclusively up to this point, but again we have made movement and more movement will take place as we, on either side, find that it is in our best interest. We look to another area of conflict, the Mideast. Here the Secretary of State has just completed a very significant trip. It did not, and none of the reporters who went with him expected it to happen-and they, incidentally, wrote it very objectively and, it seems to me, in a highly professional way--it did not settle the differences. But when we look at that troubled area of the world, it can be said now that we have had a truce for 9 months and that is some progress. It can be seen that while the two parties are still, it seems, very, very far apart with irreconcilable difference--that is what it seems on the surface-there is still the fact of discussion going on through third parties, but nevertheless going on, which will not resolve those differences completely. And no one suggests that they may be resolved completely at any time in the future, but that may resolve them in part, again on a step-by-step basis. Now let me put all of this together in terms of what it means in foreign policy and then why our own policies in the United States in the domestic field are so important as they relate to this. Let us look to the future, what could happen. Here we must put our hopes high. As I said at Mobile earlier today, every President in this century, and I suppose every President long before this century, has spoken in terms of peace, not only for America but for the world. Woodrow Wilson, I think, honestly felt that the war that he was involved in, World War I, would be a war that would end wars.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4192, "text": "Franklin D. Roosevelt felt very strongly that World War II, particularly with the United Nations following it, could be the war that, as far as major powers were concerned, that would be the last great war. And certainly my predecessors, President Eisenhower, President Truman, President Kennedy, President Johnson, were all dedicated to that proposition, as I am. At this time I think we could say that because of these significant developments, one, the end of the American involvement in Vietnam, which we know is coming, and on a basis which, in my view, will contribute to a more peaceful rather than a less peaceful era in the Pacific. Third, a change, not as significant, as far as our relations with the Mainland Government are concerned in China, but nevertheless looking down the road, with great historical possibilities. Fourth, the situation in the Mideast that I have just referred to. With all of these developments occurring, what we in the United States may be facing and may be confronted with-and this is something I guess we would all like to be confronted with--is an era in which we could have peace for a generation. Now having said that, that will also carry with it enormous problems for this country--enormous problems because once you have peace, what do you do with it? How do you maintain it? How do you keep it? Here I think that we have to be---as opinion leaders in the South, I would commend these thoughts to you as they have been commended to me by my advisers-here we must recognize that there will be no instant peace in any part of the world. Once these different relationships occur, if they do, if progress is made with the Soviet Union, later with China, the People's Republic, in the Mideast and in Vietnam and the rest, this does not mean that as a result of these developments that the differences between nations end, that their interests will be the same, and that the need for a continued, strong American presence in the world and strong defense will have evaporated. On the contrary, we must recognize the fact that we are going to continue to have differences, very significant and deep differences with other nations in the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4193, "text": "And looking again at a very difficult and explosive part of the world, the Mideast, no matter what kind of arrangement is made there, no matter what kind of an agreement is agreed to, because of the historical differences that have existed there for centuries, there is not going to be a period when people are going to have a relationship that can be a completely comfortable one. But on the other hand, we are entering that period when there is a chance to have a live-and-let-live attitude, a settlement of differences by peaceful means, peaceful competition, so on down the road. Now, what must the United States do in this period? First, it is almost a cliche to say that we must maintain our strength. That does not mean we maintain our strength out of any sense of jingoism, but it does mean that we only reduce our strength on a mutual basis. Now there are many well-intentioned people who constantly--whether in the Senate or sometimes in columns in the press or on radio and television--suggest that the way that the United States can demonstrate its interest in disarmament, and thereby in peace, is to discontinue our ABM system, reduce our offensive capabilities in the nuclear area, and that that demonstration will lead others to do likewise. In my view, wherever you have two nations--as you have in the Soviet Union and the United States--wherever you have two nations that are competitive, whose interests are different, where both mutually reduce their forces, that contributes to peace. But where one or the other unilaterally reduces its force, and becomes very significantly weaker than the other, that enormously increases the danger of war. Therefore, the United States--and I would say the same if I were a leader of the Soviet Union--the United States does not serve the cause of peace by unilaterally reducing its forces without at the same time mutually negotiating a reduction on the part of the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union leaders, I think, understand that. That has certainly been the way they approached the problem. We understand their position. We do not expect them to reduce their forces unilaterally; we will not ours. So whether it is our forces of a conventional type in Europe or whether it is our nuclear forces, offensive or defensive, the United States, it seems to me, serves the cause of peace by maintaining its strength and reducing that strength only as others who may have different interests reduce theirs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4194, "text": "The second point that I would make is on the economic field. We enter a period when it is enormously important that the United States not lose the position of economic leadership which it presently has in the world. It is being jeopardized perhaps not so much because of our failings, although that may be partially the reason, but it is being jeopardized because the whole situation is changed, and we should be gratified in a sense that it has changed, since World War II. At the present time they are our major competitors in the world, and as they compete and as they become more efficient, the United States finds that as far as its world markets are concerned, and as far also as its markets in the United States are concerned, that Japanese competition, German, and, as Britain enters the Common Market, European competition, is going to be a continuingly more difficult problem. So let me put that in perspective, as far as our economic policy is concerned. First a strong American economy is essential if we are going to be able to maintain the military strength that we need to maintain in order to create the processes that will lead to a peaceful balance in the world, and that is what we seek. Second, it is going to be essential, in order for the United States to maintain the movement forward and upward of greater opportunity, more jobs, higher wages, a higher standard of living to which Americans have become accustomed for 190 years. It is a remarkable program of progress--a few ups and downs, depressions, recessions and the rest, but the trend line is up, and it must continue to go up or we will have problems not only abroad, we will have enormous problems at home where these rising expectations will be bitterly disappointed. So that brings us to our economy. Looking at the economy, I am sure Herb Stein has indicated to you that what we find is that there is argument at the present time not about whether the economy is moving up; there is argument--and this is fortunately a good subject to have the argument on--on how fast it is moving up. The question is whether we can have upward movement in the economy and have it with two major factors that are quite different from upward movements in some periods of growth in the past. First, it will be an upward movement without war and with a decreasing military budget.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4195, "text": "I do not suggest that that will happen now, but looking to the future, in the event that some of these relationships that I have indicated do come together, that could be the prospect in the future. But in any event, our goal is a peacetime economy, an economy without war and with the military commitment dependent upon whether we are able to work out concomitant arrangements with other competing powers in the world for mutual reduction of forces. If that happens, on the one side we are most gratified. Most Americans--all Americans would rather have their energies and their creative ability devoted to the works of peace rather than to weapons of war. On the other hand, when you consider the fact that since this Administration came into office, as a result of the winding down of the war in Vietnam, and the reduction of our forces in places like Korea and Thailand and the Philippines and in other parts of the world, as well as in the continental United States, 2.1 million Americans have been added to the labor force, let out of the Armed Forces and let out of defense plants. This has a traumatic effect--we believe temporary--but it is certainly very difficult, particularly while it goes on in the Pacific Northwest, southern California, areas like that with which you are familiar. We will survive it. We will see it through, but it means that we have got to develop within this basic economy of ours new activities that will take up that lag that the military expenditure no longer is filling. How can we have an increasing American economy, an upward movement without reigniting the fires of inflation? The easy one, of course, is wage and price controls, governmentally imposed. The difficulty is that the answer would bring on, in the opinion of most of us, it certainly could well bring on, much worse problems than it was curing. It would have some effect on unemployment. I was just looking at the figures recently and when the OPA was finally discontinued in 1945, there were 57,000 Americans that were working for OPA so we could get at the unemployment to a certain extent by moving to wage and price controls at a national basis. That is not the most significant point to mention if we do not have other problems. But turning to the problem, this means that in two respects the United States must face up to these problems.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4196, "text": "By responsible we believe that while the economy is not at full capacity, the Federal Government has a responsibility to spend more than it takes in in order to take up that capacity; that there must be a limitation on how far that goes or otherwise you have, inevitably, inflation. That is why we say that under no circumstances should a budget exceed what the economy would produce at full capacity, or full employment as some describe it. On the other hand, having said that, on simply having a limitation with regard to what the Federal Government spends, it is only part of the problem; there is the problem of monetary policy. I will not get into it except to say it must be also responsible enough to fuel the growing economy yet not so much as to reignite the fires of inflation. Here there is no reason to place blame in any quarter except simply to say that as the United States looks at its competitive position around the world, we must recognize that a wage-price spiral-in other words very significant wage increases which go far beyond increases in productivity--will inevitably have the effect not only of contributing to inflation but of pricing those particular industries out of the world market and, for that matter, out of the domestic market. The upcoming steel negotiations are a case in point. Without getting into those negotiations specifically, we simply can look at what the numbers are. Back 20 years ago, in 1950, and you have to go back only that far, Japan produced 5 million tons of steel and the United States produced 50 percent of all the steel in the world. Today Japan produces 100 million tons of steel; the United States produces only 27 percent of all the steel in the world, and within 2 years, Japan will pass the United States in steel production. That is not bad in and of itself, except to point up the fact that the American steel industry, and certainly we want a steel industry, we need a steel industry--here in this city, in Birmingham, we all understand what steel means; it is a very basic industry. If the United States is going to continue to have a strong steel industry, the wage policies and the price policies--and the productivity insofar as that is concerned and affects it--of the American industry, will have to be reexamined, because we cannot continue to have a wage push and then a price push with the United States getting a continually decreasing share of the world market.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4197, "text": "Now, a third area that we should look to, having covered both the defense area and the economic area, relates to this whole matter of the organization of government.  The American people, at the present time, feel that we need some very significant changes in government, and they are right. They are fed up with government at all levels. They think it costs too much; they think it does not work; and they think they do not have enough to say about it. All of our plans in revenue sharing, general revenue sharing, special revenue sharing, Government reorganization, are designed to get at those three nagging questions that Americans want. We are trying to make government cost less; we are trying to make it work better, and we are trying to give people who are affected by government more of a voice in what kind of government they want, how much government they want. Those who suggest that our general and special revenue sharing, or either or both, or reorganization, any of these programs, would have the effect of having Washington have a bigger voice, of course, are 180 degrees wrong; because what has happened is that as we have grown in categorical grants, with over 400 major ones at the present time, this means that the Congress, the Federal Government, passes out money, in effect, to the States and the cities, and the Governors and the mayors, et cetera, simply become clerks for the purpose of dispensing it according to whatever rules are handed down by the Federal Government. We want to change that, and as the briefers have already indicated, we think this historic change is needed. We think the people want it. It goes far beyond simply rescuing the States and cities from a fiscal crisis. It goes to the heart of the problem of government in this country, and it is something that is basically needed if our government is to meet the responsibilities that it will have to meet in this very competitive and very crucial time in the last third of this century when the quality of American government, the quality of American leadership, and the faith of the American people in their government may determine not only our future but the future of hundreds of millions of other people on this earth. That I firmly believe and that is why I consider this so important. I come now to another point that perhaps may seem somewhat--in view of the rather hard news points that I have tried to emphasize up to this time--that seem not as realistic, but which I think in the final analysis may be even more important.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4198, "text": "If the United States is to play the role that it needs to play, we need first to have military strength. We need a strong economy. We need a government that is responsive to the peoples' needs, that costs less, that works better. But we can have all these and still fail unless this country develops a new spirit. I say a new spirit. I am not speaking of any one individual or one area. I am speaking of the Nation as a whole--a new spirit of unity, a new spirit among its people of confidence in ourselves and faith in our future. Now I do not mean to suggest that-most Americans, I think most, still have confidence in this country. They believe in it. They have faith in our future. We are a confident people by nature. We are a very idealistic people by nature. We want to hear good news. We are terribly depressed by bad news. We cannot take the ups and downs as the great powers of the past have taken them and ridden them through. But at the present time, it is vitally important that this Nation attain a sense of unity which can only come from sharing our concerns about our common ideals. Let me not cover it in detail--that would take too much time--but simply to touch upon three or four points very briefly. I referred a moment ago to Woodrow Wilson's remarks when he came to Mobile in 1913, the year I was born, and he spoke of the end of imperialism. He said, American imperialism in the world, but I am sure that he believed that. We think of what has happened since that time, four wars, and America was in all of them-World War II, World War I, Korea, and then Vietnam. And then we look at those wars and what do we say to our young people about them, about all of them? We can argue about whether it was a mistake to go into any. My mother and grandmother and my grandmother on my mother's side would have said, yes, it was a mistake, because they were pacifists and they even disagreed when I was in World War II. Many others would say that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4199, "text": "But when we look at the U.S. role in the world in those four wars, whatever our mistakes may have been, we at least can be proud of the fact that we did not start any of them, we gained nothing from them and asked nothing from them in the way of domination over any other people, and third we came to the aid of people whose freedom was threatened. Now I will not go into a rather meaningless debate at this point, because we all have our views, and we are probably pretty concrete about them, about the war in which we are presently engaged. But as far as the motivation of America, why we are doing what we are doing, its motivation has no imperialistic overtones, its motivation as was the case in Korea, World War I, and World War II is to help another nation whose freedom, independence, call it what you will, is threatened and also to build a more peaceful world. That is a record that we can be proud of. Second, as far as America's strength in the world is concerned, we need not be apologetic about it. At the present time, is there any other nation in the world that you would rather have this strength? I have been to 70 countries. I talked to the leaders of countries--leaders of countries with very different philosophies. I have yet to find a leader that feared the United States of America, that feared that we would use our armed strength for the purpose of invading it, of conquest, or for any other purpose except to help them maintain their independence. We made our mistakes. We make them now, but we in America, as we play our world role, perhaps we are naive, but we are basically idealistic, we maintain our strength for purposes of peace and not for other purposes. Turning to the domestic field, we have many faults here. I spoke in Mobile of the fact that we have differences between regions, we have differences between races, we have differences between religions, we have differences between the generations today, and these differences have at times been very destructive. We must recognize that we will always have those differences. People of different races, different religions, from different backgrounds, and of different ages are not always going to agree. Must they be a drain upon us? Must they go so far that they destroy the confidence and faith of this great Nation. Two specific points that I would like to mention.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4200, "text": "I would say this in the North if I were speaking there; I say it in the South. I know the difficult problems most of you in the Southern States have had on the school desegregation problem. I went to school in the South, and so, therefore, I am more familiar with how Southerners feel about that problem than others. Also, I went to school in the North, or the West I should say, and I have nothing but utter contempt for the double hypocritical standard of Northerners who look at the South and point the finger and say, Why do not those Southerners do something about their race problem? Let us look at the facts. Oh, it is not over, there are problems-there was one in Chattanooga, I understand, the last couple days; there will be more. But look what has happened in the South. Today 38 percent of all black children in the South go to majority white schools. Today only 28 percent of all black children in the North go to majority white schools. It came about because farsighted leaders in the South, black and white, some of whom I am sure did not agree with the opinions handed down by the Supreme Court which were the law of the land, recognized as law-abiding citizens that they had the responsibility to meet that law of the land, and they had dealt with the problem--not completely, there is more yet to be done. The recent decision of the Supreme Court presents some more problems, but I am confident that over a period of time those problems will also be handled in a peaceful and orderly way for the most part. But let us look at the deeper significance of this. As I speak today in what is called the Heart of Dixie, I realize that America at this time needs to become one country. It has been North versus South versus West; Wall Street versus the country and the country versus the city and the rest. That does not mean we do not have differences and will not continue to have them, but those regional differences, it seems to me, must go. Presidents of the United States should come to Alabama and Mississippi and Georgia and Louisiana more than once, more often than every 50 years or every 100 years as the case might be, to some of the cities, and they should come because this is one nation, and we must speak as one nation, we must work as one nation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4201, "text": "Second, and here this is difficult, but we have made enormous progress, and we are going to make more. The problems of race can be and must be solved. They must be solved in an orderly way recognizing we will continue to have differences, but recognizing that unless they are solved, this destructive force, this division over an issue of this type is going to weaken this part of the country in a way that could be very, very detrimental to the national interest and weaken other parts of the country where there are also racial problems. I am suggesting that we are at a period in our country when America needs to be strong militarily, it must be strong economically, and it must be strong in its spirit, strong in its heart. I think the South traditionally has contributed to the military strength of this country. More Southerners voluntarily serve in the Armed Forces than any other part of the country. I think the New South has a greater contribution to make in terms of economic growth than perhaps any other section of the country, because the South starts from a lower base and now is moving up, not evenly, but moving up very significantly and will continue to. So, you have a great role to play in that respect. I think, too, that this part o$ the country has a very significant role to play insofar as the spirit of this country is concerned. I speak of such square things as patriotism; I speak of such things as religious faith. I also speak of such things as respect for law, even those laws that you do not like. And if this great and powerful and vibrant and dynamic part of the country can make the contribution of which it is capable, then America will have a better chance to meet the responsibility that it must meet in the world to be strong militarily, economically together with the ideological and spiritual strength which will enable us to meet our challenges. I simply close with a last thought. There is another point of view, I recognize it, I respect it, I totally disagree with it. It is that at this time America should turn away from the problems of the world and turn inward. It is a point of view which rejects new ventures, whether it is an SST or an exploration in space or whatever the case might be, because we have such terrible problems at home. It is one in which every time we see a chance for progress we consult our fears rather than our hopes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4202, "text": "And I would simply say that I am convinced that as opinion leaders in this country, you and me, we all have an obligation to see that America, after 190 years, now that we are the strongest nation in the world, still the richest, with more freedom, more opportunity here than any place in the world, that we do not, at this point, because of internal differences, differences between races, between religions, between regions, between ages, turn inward to attempt to solve those problems at the exclusion of moving forward, whether it is in playing our role in the world or exploring the unknown. I do not agree with everything General de Gaulle said, because he said many things about this country that were very uncomplimentary and other things that he may have been wrong about. But he was a great judge of the spirit of the people. That was his contribution to France. And he restored the French spirit and he said France is her true self only when she is engaged in a great enterprise. And America, in my view, will cease to be her true self when we cease to be engaged in an enterprise greater than ourselves, whether it is in playing our role in the world to bring peace with freedom wherever we can, whether it is exploring the unknown, whether it is moving forward in these problems, very difficult ones, human problems that we have between races and religions and generations in this country. I simply want to say that one of the reasons that these regional briefings, I think, are very important to me as an individual, it gives me an opportunity to meet the opinion leaders, to share with you my concerns and to tell you that I will, of course, do everything that I can to end the war that we are in, to have better relations to build a lasting peace, to keep the Nation strong militarily, to get this economy moving so that we can get at unemployment and resist the high inflation. But in this other field we desperately need your help to restore America's sense of confidence and sense of faith. As we travel over the world, much as we see, much as we may want to go again, that when we return we realize that we have had good fortune to live in this country at a time when what we do matters--matters to us, matters to the world. We must meet that challenge, and we can meet it materially.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssouthernnewsmediarepresentativesattendingbriefingdomesticpolicybirmingham", "title": "Remarks to Southern News Media Representatives Attending a Briefing on Domestic Policy in Birmingham, Alabama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-southern-news-media-representatives-attending-briefing-domestic-policy-birmingham", "publication_date": "25-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4203, "text": "I want to thank you for your kind introduction and even more for your many years of distinguished leadership for our children, our schools, our parents, and of course, for our teachers. And to all of you delegates, I want to thank you for the support you have given to our administration to help us to get here and to help us honor our commitments to the children, the teachers, and the future of America. I also want to thank you for the high honor you paid my good friend Secretary Riley by naming him your 1995 Friend of Education. I do not have to tell you that education has no better friend than Secretary Riley. I am proud to have him in my Cabinet, and I am proud to have worked with him for nearly 20 years now. He is actually doing what others say we ought to be doing. He is supporting more parental involvement. He is supporting higher standards and results-oriented programs. He is supporting accountability, but he is also supporting grassroots empowerment for teachers, for parents, and for local schools throughout this country. He is really making a difference, and he deserves the support of all Americans and all Members of Congress, without regard for their party. You know, of course, that the Vice President very much wanted to be with you today. But of course, his mother fell ill and had to have surgery yesterday. I am happy to report to you that as of this morning Mrs. Gore is doing much better. Many years ago she was the first woman lawyer in Texarkana, Arkansas, so I have always thought we have sort of had a claim on her, too. I know all of you join Hillary and me in praying for Mrs. Gore and her speedy recovery, and for her husband, Senator Gore, and for Al and Tipper and their entire family. I'd like to begin this morning by just taking a few minutes to talk about what I said when I spoke at Georgetown University a couple of hours ago. It is something I believe I should be talking about more as President. first of all, to restore the American dream and, secondly, to bring the American people together again. What I have learned from the journey we have been on for the last 2 1/2 years is that we cannot restore the American dream unless we do bring the American people together again. You and I and all Americans must talk about how we treat one another, how we reach the hard decisions we have to make during this time of profound change, how we bridge these great divides in our society.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4204, "text": "We have got to find a way to reach common ground, a new common ground that honors our diversity but recognizes our shared values and shared interests, drawing strength from both to make the very best of what we can do in America. We have to recognize that there are real reasons why Americans feel that our sense of unity and national purpose is coming apart, why they often feel frustration and anger and confusion. The challenges of this day are new and profound, as profound as any we have faced in many, many decades. For most people my age and a little younger, two great certainties organized our lives. first, the hope of middle class dreams and, second, the strength of middle class values. Today, more and more Americans are less certain of both. The middle class dream that work will be rewarded and that the future for our children will be better is fading for too many people. More than half of all of our people are working harder to earn less than they did 15 or 20 years ago. And middle class values, the values of hard work, strong families, safe streets, secure future, those things are under attack, too, as we face threats from violence, the breakdown of families, the fraying of our social fabric, the very pace and scope of changes in this technological information age, where ideas and money and information move across the globe in a fraction of a second. The question, of course, is what are we going to do about this. That is what I have been working on for 2 years, and that is the fundamental debate now going on in Washington. And we need to have that debate not just here in Washington but all over the country. We are really back to some pretty elemental principles. So they say if everybody would just get up, go to work, behave themselves, obey the law, all of our problems would be solved. Now, on one level they are obviously right. Our problems can never be solved through purely political and community means. I have said all along, we have got to demand more responsibility from America, from all Americans. Unless people are willing to take responsibility for themselves, as every teacher knows, you cannot cram information, learning, reasoning, compassion, or good citizenship into the head of someone who will not be open to it. But at the same time, let us be completely frank. It is also true that nobody in America, no one, especially me, got where he or she is today alone.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4205, "text": "We all have to play a role, individual citizens in their daily lives, people doing their part to help make their communities stronger, their neighbors safer, politicians in the way they deal with and address our problems. We have all got to do a better job. And I believe we have to recognize that one of the ways we all do more together is through the way our Government works and what it does to help our people meet the demands of change. Are these problems personal and cultural, on the one hand, or social and political, on the other? And there is a role, a partnership role, for the Government to help you do what you do and to help all Americans make the most of their own lives. Education is perhaps the best example of this. It is the work of your lives, but it is also the work of America's future. All of these concerns come together in education because school is where young people can learn the skills they need to pursue middle class dreams, especially now when knowledge is more important than ever to our future. School is also the place where middle class values taught by parents are reinforced by teachers, values like responsibility, honesty, trustworthiness, hard work, caring for one another and our natural environment, and good citizenship. Government plays an indispensable role in helping to make sure that the schools that you work in are as strong as possible, have the highest standards possible, provide as much opportunity as possible. A good education clearly is key to unlocking the promise of today's economy in the 21st century. Without it, people are at an ever-increasing risk of falling behind. Today, a male college graduate earns 80 percent more than a male who is just graduated from high school. That gap is double what it was just in 1979. That is why I have been fighting furiously since the day I took office to expand educational opportunity, to give all Americans a chance to grab the key to a prosperous future. As you know well, we have dramatically expanded Head Start. We passed Goals 2000 to set world-class standards for our schools and then to give grassroots reform power to empower, really empower teachers and principals and parents, to give them the flexibility to decide how to meet those standards and how to improve education. Our national service program, AmeriCorps, gives a helping hand with college for 20,000 people who are helping their country in grassroots programs all across America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4206, "text": "The safe and drug-free schools initiative is helping to make schools safe, places where kids can learn again and be free from fear, places where parents can trust their children to be free from crime and drugs. Our direct student loan program makes college more affordable for millions of Americans while actually cutting the cost for taxpayers. Now, there is one piece of this that is especially important for us to talk about today. As I noted before, you have just honored Dick Riley. I want to commend him for so many things, but in particular for the work the Education Department is doing to teach our children good citizenship and the values we need to stay strong. There is something that we need to remember about that Department of Education that Dick Riley is now heading and heading in the right direction. Just 18 years ago yesterday, on July 5, 1977, two sons of Minnesota, Vice President Mondale and former Vice President Hubert Humphrey, shared the same stage at another NEA convention. Now, back in 1977, you all know that education policy in America fell under the giant umbrella of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, a huge bureaucratic agency responsible for health care policy and welfare responsibility and all the educational responsibilities, whether it was keeping our classrooms up to date, ensuring our public schools had the tools they need to teach our children, maintaining high curriculum standards, giving specialneeds schools and special-needs students the support they need. All those things were all lumped into this massive bureaucracy that was Health, Education, and Welfare. That was not in the best interest of public education then. It is certainly not in the best interest of the country today when education is literally the key to our economic future, to restoring middle class dreams, and it is certainly critical to reestablishing the dominance of middle class values. At that historic meeting, Vice President Humphrey made a passionate plea, and he was a very passionate man, for something the NEA had been fighting for for over 100 years, a Cabinet-level Department of Education. America's children would have only 2 more years to wait. The bill creating the Cabinet-level Department of Education was signed by President Carter in October 1979. In the last 2 1/2 years, Secretary Riley, a former Governor who labored for 8 years to dramatically improve schools in his native South Carolina, has worked hard to make the Department of Education work better than ever. We need the Department of Education today more than ever before.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4207, "text": "And we need it even more because Dick Riley has literally reinvented it. But he is focusing on the big issues, whether it is the preschool needs of our kids, the standards and the grassroots reform we need in public schools, the need we have for school-to-work transition programs in every State in the country, the need we have for expanded and lower cost and better repayment college loans, or the need he has to cooperate with the Department of Education to give our working people the right to get the training they need the minute they become unemployed because now so many of them will have to find new jobs with higher skills. That is the record of Dick Riley; that is the record of the Department of Education; and that is why we need it. As all of you know, during this time when we have increased our investments in education, we have also cut the deficit 3 years in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was President. We are cutting it by more than a trillion dollars over 7 years. We are also cutting the bureaucracy of the National Government over a 6-year period by more than 272,000 positions to make the Federal Government the smallest it is been since President Kennedy was President. Let me tell you just how dramatic the changes have already been in 2 1/2 years. We have eliminated thousands and thousands of regulations, including regulations in the Department of Education. We have eliminated hundreds of Government programs. And the budget would be balanced today but for the interest we have to pay on just the debt run up the 12 years before I became President. We must continue to cut the deficit until we eliminate it completely and balance the budget. That is why I have proposed a plan to balance the budget in 10 years. While cutting spending to balance the budget, however, under my plan we would continue to invest in our people, especially in education. We must not sacrifice the future of our children in our zeal to save it. But let me also say to you that I know a lot of people who want to invest more money in our country question whether we actually need a balanced budget. They questioned my wisdom when I proposed a balanced budget. But let me ask you to look at the history of America. We ran deficits all during the 1970's, but we did it for good economic reasons. That was a period of stagflation, of low growth, a period when it was legitimate to stimulate the economy in a modest way by modest deficits.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4208, "text": "We never, I reemphasize, never in the history of our Republic had a permanent structural deficit until 1981. After that, a lot of the people who got the tax cuts spent them and there was no way to reach a bipartisan consensus to lower the gap in the deficit. So we quadrupled the debt of this country in 12 years. We are 219 years old, and we have quadrupled the debt in 12 years. Now, we have to change that. Look what is happened to you. Every year in the 1980's, you had to fight to hold on to the educational advances. Every year when you knew that we needed to be investing more because many parents were able to invest less in terms of money and time in their children's education, you were often disappointed because we were spending more and more and more in interest on the debt. Next year, interest on the debt will exceed the defense budget. It takes our savings. It makes us more dependent on other economies. And it leaves us less money to invest in education, in infrastructure, in technology, in the things that will grow jobs, raise incomes, increase the middle class, and shrink the under class. So what we have to do is to balance the budget and increase investment in education. That is why I made the decision to veto the rescission bill that Congress sent me earlier last month. But it is also why I gave them an alternative. I am determined to work with the new Congress to cut the deficit and ultimately to balance the budget. But that rescission bill cut investments in our future, in education, in job training, in the environment, just to fund things that have a far lower value, even though they may be popular in the short term with specific constituencies. Now that Congress has agreed to restore funding for those investments, I will be happy to sign a bill. It will cut the deficit, and that is good. But we will also have $733 million in this year alone in critical investments, including $220 million for safe and drug-free schools, $60 million to help train teachers and pay for education reforms at the grassroots level, $105 million for AmeriCorps. As we work in the coming months to balance the budget, we have to do it in the same way. You and I know it would be self-defeating to cut our investments in education.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4209, "text": "Our national security depends upon our ability to educate better, not just to spend more money but to reach more people, to perform at a higher level, to get real results. That is what our security depends upon. But do not kid yourselves, we have got a real fight on our hands. The congressional budget, which balances the budget in 7 years, cuts education severely, as Keith Geiger just said. My budget, which balances the budget in 10 years, increases education while cutting other spending. We are also able to go easier on Medicare and Medicaid, to take some real time and promote real health care reform, and to continue to invest in new technologies and research. All we have to do is take 3 more years and cut the size of that big tax cut roughly in half, maybe a little more. Now, I think 3 years is a pretty small price to pay to save millions and millions of dreams. Let me just give you a few examples of the difference 3 years will make. I want to increase Goals 2000 to about $900 million so that you will be able to work to improve 85,000 schools serving 44 million students. The congressional budget would eliminate Goals 2000, one of the principal engines of grassroots reform, something they say they support. I want to increase Title I by over $200 million in 1996 to serve 200,000 more children that year. Let me just say something about Title I and your efforts. All the time up here I hear the politicians saying we just throw money at education, and it does not get any results, and we spend more money and we do not show more results. Well, as the Secretary of Labor has pointed out, there are public investments in children and private investments in children. We pretty well kept up with our public investments, but our private investments are not keeping up. More and more of these children are being born in poverty, a higher percentage of them into difficult family circumstances and difficult neighborhood circumstances. And even those who have working parents have parents most of whom are working longer hours for less money. That means that parents have less money and less time to invest in our kids. Now, the Congress wants to freeze funding and deprive over one million children of the help that you can provide by 2002. I believe the money will make a difference because I know that you can make a difference.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4210, "text": "You cannot make all the difference for what does not happen in the family, but you ought to get a lot of credit for trying and for the difference that you do make. I want to increase the school-to-work program by 60 percent next year so 43 States can help thousands of students learn the skills they need to get and keep high-paying jobs, even when they do not go on to 4-year universities. We are the only major industrialized country that does not have a system for dealing with all of the high school graduates who do not go on to 4year schools. Now, the Congress wants to cut it to half that amount. I want to expand AmeriCorps to 50,000 people next year. Congress has proposed to eliminate it completely. Those 20,000 young people that are out there now, working with each other across the lines of race and region and religion and income are revolutionizing America at the grassroots level, solving problems, serving their communities, being good citizens, doing things that other people just give talks about, and earning money to pay for their education. We ought to keep national service, and we ought to expand it. We have reformed the college loan system to make college more affordable for up to 20 million Americans. Secretary Riley has done a masterful job, along with his staff, in administering the direct loan program, which actually increases the availability of loans, lowers the cost to students, lowers the paperwork burden to colleges and universities, and cuts the cost to the taxpayers. Now, the congressional majority wants to cut $10 billion from the student loan program by removing the interest subsidy during the time of the student's education, which will raise costs significantly for up to 7 million students. In the 1980's, the cost of a college education was the only thing that went up more rapidly than the cost of health care among the essential things that families need for the future. I do not think it is a very good idea to cut the college loan program. Under my plan, we balance the budget and increase educational investment by $40 billion in proven programs that work. The plan of the Republican majority in Congress balances the budget, but it cuts education by $36 billion, not counting the cuts in student loans. Now, I am not for a minute suggesting that balancing the budget is easy. We will have to cut spending in other domestic programs about 20 percent across the board.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4211, "text": "But the difference between my plan and the congressional plan is the difference between necessary cutbacks and unnecessary, ultimately self-defeating pain. One distinguished business analysis has said that the Republican budget cuts so much so fast that it will actually increase unemployment and bring on a recession and, therefore, delay the time when they can balance the budget. Now, we do have a responsibility to balance the budget. And I give them a lot of credit for proposing a balanced budget. But we have also got a responsibility to invest in our children and our future. We cannot restore the economy, we cannot rebuild the middle class, we cannot recapture middle class dreams or reinforce middle class values if we walk away from our common responsibilities, the education of our people. If we will just take 10 years instead of 7, if we cut taxes for the middle class and focus on childrearing and education, and do not have big tax cuts for people who do not really need it because they are well-off and doing very well in this economy, then we can balance the budget and improve education. We can do both, and that is what I want you to fight for. Our mission, your mission and mine, has got to be to build a bridge to the future that every American can cross. We have to give people the power they need to make the most of their own lives. That is what is behind this, balancing the budget and investing in education means building up America. And it is behind what I called for earlier today at Georgetown, a new common ground in which we come together to solve our problems. I want our children's generation to inherit an America with as much opportunity as the one I was brought into. The best days of America should be, can be, will be before us if we work together. If people take the kind of responsibility you have taken to make our country better, we will do better. But it is going to take a good attitude. It is going to take good citizenship. It is going to take a willingness to listen to one another to find that common ground. I have made a commitment that when I differ with the Republican Congress, I will offer an alternative. I have made a commitment that I will have more conversation and less combat, like I did with my conversation with the Speaker up in New Hampshire. I have made a commitment to try to work for the long-term interests of our country, not just for the short-term gain.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationaleducationassociation0", "title": "Remarks to the National Education Association", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-education-association-0", "publication_date": "06-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4212, "text": "It is good to be with you again. I understand you have not had much of a problem attracting speakers. I thank you for inviting me. See, it is an honor to stand with the men and women of the Veterans of Foreign Wars. The VFW is one of our Nation's finest organizations. You belong to an elite group of Americans. You belong to a group of people who have defended America overseas. You have fought in places from Normandy to Iwo Jima to Pusan to Khe Sahn to Kuwait to Somalia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Iraq. You brought security to the American people. You brought hope to millions across the world. As members of this proud organization, you are advocates for the rights of our military veterans, a model of community service, and a strong and important voice for a strong national defense. I thank you for your service. I thank you for what you have done for the United States of America. I stand before you as a wartime President. I wish I did not have to say that, but an enemy that attacked us on September the 11th, 2001, declared war on the United States of America. And war is what we are engaged in. The struggle has been called a clash of civilizations. In truth, it is a struggle for civilization. We fight for a free way of life against a new barbarism, an ideology whose followers have killed thousands on American soil and seek to kill again on even a greater scale. We fight for the possibility that decent men and women across the broader Middle East can realize their destiny and raise up societies based on freedom and justice and personal dignity. And as long as I am Commander in Chief, we will fight to win. I am confident we will prevail because we have the greatest force for human liberation the world has ever known, the men and women of the United States Armed Forces. For those of you who wear the uniform, nothing makes me more proud to say that I am your Commander in Chief. Now, I know some people doubt the universal appeal of liberty or worry that the Middle East is not ready for it. Others believe that America's presence is destabilizing and that if the United States would just leave a place like Iraq, those who kill our troops or target civilians would no longer threaten us. Today I am going to address these arguments.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4213, "text": "I am going to describe why helping the young democracies of the Middle East stand up to violent Islamic extremists is the only realistic path to a safer world for the American people. I am going to try to provide some historical perspective to show there is a precedent for the hard and necessary work we are doing and why I have such confidence in the fact that we will be successful. Before I do so, I want to thank the national commander-in-chief of the VFW and his wife Nancy. It is been a joy to work with Gary and the staff. As Gary said, We do not necessarily agree a hundred percent of the time. I remember the old Lieutenant Governor of Texas, a Democrat, and I was a Republican Governor. He said, Governor, if we agreed 100 percent of the time, one of us would not be necessary. We agree our veterans deserve the full support of the United States Government. That is why in this budget I submitted there is $87 billion for the veterans. It is the highest level of support ever for the veterans in American history. We agree that health care for our veterans is a top priority, and that is why we have increased health care spending for our veterans by 83 percent since I was sworn in as your President. We agree that a troop coming out of Iraq or Afghanistan deserves the best health care, not only as an active duty citizen but as a military guy, but as-also as a vet-eran-and you are going to get the best health care we can possibly provide. We agree our homeless vets ought to have shelter, and that is what we are providing. In other words, we agree the veterans deserve the full support of our Government, and that is what you are going to get as George W. Bush as your President. I want to thank Bob Wallace, the executive director. He spends a lot of time in the Oval Office. I am always checking the silverware drawer. He is going to be bringing in George Lisicki here soon. He is going to be the national commander-in-chief for my next year in office. And I am looking forward to working with George, and I am looking forward to working with Wallace, and I am looking forward to hearing from you . They are going to find an openminded President dedicated to doing what is right. I appreciate the fact-.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4214, "text": "I appreciate Linda Meader, the national president of the Ladies Auxiliary-she brought old Dave with her-Virginia Carman, the incoming president. I want to thank Deputy Secretary of the Veterans Affairs Gordon Mansfield for joining us today. I appreciate the United States Senator from the State of Missouri, strong supporter of the military and strong supporter of the veterans, Kit Bond. Two Members of the Congress have kindly showed up today. Congressman Emanuel Cleaver-no finer man, no more decent a fellow than Emanuel Cleaver-is with us and a great Congressman from right around the corner here, Congressman Sam Graves. Lieutenant General Jack Stultz, commanding general, U.S. ENTITY Reserve Command, is with us today. Lieutenant General Bill Caldwell, commanding general, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, is with us today as well. Thank you all for letting me come by. I want to open today's speech with a story that begins on a sunny morning, when thousands of Americans were murdered in a surprise attack and our Nation was propelled into a conflict that would take us to every corner of the globe. The enemy who attacked us despises freedom and harbors resentment at the slights he believes America and the Western nations have inflicted on his people. He fights to establish his rule over an entire region. And over time, he turns to a strategy of suicide attacks destined to create so much carnage that the American people will tire of the violence and give up the fight. If this story sounds familiar, it is, except for one thing. The enemy I have just described is not Al Qaida, and the attack is not 9/11, and the empire is not the radical caliphate envisioned by Usama bin Laden. Instead, what I have described is the war machine of Imperial Japan in the 1940s, its surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, and its attempt to impose its empire throughout East Asia. Ultimately, the United States prevailed in World War II, and we have fought two more land wars in Asia. And many in this hall were veterans of those campaigns. Yet even the most optimistic among you probably would not have foreseen that the Japanese would transform themselves into one of America's strongest and most steadfast allies, or that the South Koreans would recover from enemy invasion to raise up one of the world's most powerful economies, or that Asia would pull itself out of poverty and hopelessness as it embraced markets and freedom.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4215, "text": "The lesson from Asia's development is that the heart's desire for liberty will not be denied. Once people even get a small taste of liberty, they are not going to rest until they are free. Today's dynamic and hopeful Asia-a region that brings us countless benefits-would not have been possible without America's presence and perseverance. And it would not have been possible without the veterans in this hall today, and I thank you for your service. There are many differences between the wars we fought in the Far East and the war on terror we are fighting today. But one important similarity is, at their core, they are ideological struggles. The militarists of Japan and the Communists in Korea and Vietnam were driven by a merciless vision for the proper ordering of humanity. They killed Americans because we stood in the way of their attempt to force their ideology on others. Today, the names and places have changed, but the fundamental character of the struggle has not changed. Like our enemies in the past, the terrorists who wage war in Iraq and Afghanistan and other places seek to spread a political vision of their own, a harsh plan for life that crushes freedom, tolerance, and dissent. Like our enemies in the past, they kill Americans because we stand in their way of imposing this ideology across a vital region of the world. We are still in the early hours of the current ideological struggle, but we do know how the others ended, and that knowledge helps guide our efforts today. The ideals and interests that led America to help the Japanese turn defeat into democracy are the same that lead us to remain engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq. The defense strategy that refused to hand the South Koreans over to a totalitarian neighbor helped raise up a Asian Tiger that is the model for developing countries across the world, including the Middle East. The result of American sacrifice and perseverance in Asia is a freer, more prosperous, and stable continent, whose people want to live in peace with America, not attack America. Today, most of the nations in Asia are free, and its democracies reflect the diversity of the region. Some of these nations have constitutional monarchies, some have parliaments, and some have presidents. Their governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed, and they desire to live in peace with their neighbors. Many times in the decades that followed World War II, American policy in Asia was dismissed as hopeless and naive.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4216, "text": "And when we listen to the criticism of the difficult work that our generation is undertaking in the Middle East today, we can hear the echoes of the same arguments made about the Far East years ago. In the aftermath of Japan's surrender, many thought it naive to help the Japanese transform themselves into a democracy. Then, as now, the critics argued that some people were simply not fit for freedom. Some said Japanese culture was inherently incompatible with democracy. Joseph Grew, a former United States Ambassador to Japan who served as Harry Truman's Under Secretary of State, told the President flatly that-and I quote- democracy in Japan would never work. He was not alone in that belief. Democracy simply would not work. Other critics said that Americans were imposing their ideals on the Japanese. For example, Japan's Vice Prime Minister asserted that allowing Japanese women to vote would retard the progress of Japanese politics. It is interesting what General Mac-Arthur wrote in his memoirs. There was much criticism of my support for the enfranchisement of women. Many Americans, as well as many other so-called experts, expressed the view that Japanese women were too steeped in the tradition of subservience to their husbands to act with any degree of political independence. That is what General MacArthur observed. In the end, Japanese women were given the vote; 39 women won parliamentary seats in Japan's first free election. Today, Japan's Minister of Defense is a woman, and just last month, a record number of women were elected to Japan's Upper House. There are other critics, believe it or not, that argue that democracy could not succeed in Japan because the national religion, Shinto, was too fanatical and rooted in the Emperor. Senator Richard Russell denounced the Japanese faith and said that if we did not put the Emperor on trial, any steps we may take to create democracy are doomed to failure. The Emperor system must disappear if Japan is ever really to be democratic. Those who said Shinto was incompatible with democracy were mistaken. And fortunately, Americans and Japanese leaders recognized it at the time, because instead of suppressing the Shinto faith, American authorities worked with the Japanese to institute religious freedom for all faiths. Instead of abolishing the imperial throne, Americans and Japanese worked together to find a place for the Emperor in the democratic political system.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4217, "text": "And the result of all these steps was that every Japanese citizen gained freedom of religion, and the Emperor remained on his throne, and Japanese democracy grew stronger because it embraced a cherished part of Japanese culture. And today, in defiance of the critics and the doubters and the skeptics, Japan retains its religions and cultural traditions and stands as one of the world's greatest free societies. It is an interesting observation, one historian put it, he said, Had these erstwhile experts -he was talking about people criticizing the efforts to help Japan realize the blessings of a free society-he said, Had these erstwhile experts had their way, the very notion of inducing a democratic revolution would have died of ridicule at an early stage. A democratic Japan has brought peace and prosperity to its people. Its foreign trade and investment have helped jump-start the economies of others in the region. The alliance between our two nations is the linchpin for freedom and stability throughout the Pacific. Japan has transformed from America's enemy in the ideological struggle of the 20th century to one of America's strongest allies in the ideological struggle of the 21st century. Critics also complained when America intervened to save South Korea from Communist invasion. Then, as now, the critics argued that the war was futile, that we should never have sent our troops in, or they argued that America's intervention was divisive here at home. After the North Koreans crossed the 38th Parallel in 1950, President Harry Truman came to the defense of the South, and he found himself attacked from all sides. From the left, I.F. Stone wrote a book suggesting that the South Koreans were the real aggressors and that we had entered the war on a false pretext. From the right, Republicans vacillated. Initially, the leader of the Republican Party in the Senate endorsed Harry Truman's action, saying, I welcome the indication of a more definite policy. He went on to say, I strongly hope that having adopted it, the President may maintain it intact, then later said, It was a mistake originally to go into Korea because it meant a land war. Throughout the war, the Republicans really never had a clear position. They never could decide whether they wanted the United States to withdraw from the war in Korea or expand the war to the Chinese mainland. Others complained that our troops were not getting the support from the Government.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4218, "text": "He rejected calls to come together in a time of war on the grounds that, We will not allow the cloak of national unity to be wrapped around horrible blunders. Many in the press agreed. One columnist in the Washington Post said, The fact is that the conduct of the Korean war has been shot through with errors great and small. It is bleeding, and there is no cure for it in sight. He said that the American people could not understand why Americans are doing about 95 percent of the fighting in Korea. Many of these criticisms were offered as reasons for abandoning our commitments in Korea. And while it is true the Korean war had its share of challenges, the United States never broke its word. Today, we see the result of a sacrifice of people in this room in the stark contrast of life on the Korean Peninsula. Without Americans' intervention during the war and our willingness to stick with the South Koreans after the war, millions of South Koreans would now be living under a brutal and repressive regime. The Soviets and Chinese Communists would have learned the lesson that aggression pays. The world would be facing a more dangerous situation. Instead, South Korea is a strong, democratic ally of the United States of America. South Korean troops are serving side by side with American forces in Afghanistan and in Iraq. And America can count on the free people of South Korea to be lasting partners in the ideological struggle we are facing in the beginning of the 21st century. For those of you who served in Korea, thank you for your sacrifice, and thank you for your service. This is a complex and painful subject for many Americans. The tragedy of Vietnam is too large to be contained in one speech. So I am going to limit myself to one argument that has particular significance today. The argument that America's presence in Indochina was dangerous had a long pedigree. In 1955, long before the United States had entered the war, Graham Greene wrote a novel called The Quiet American. It was set in Saigon, and the main character was a young Government agent named Alden Pyle. He was a symbol of American purpose and patriotism and dangerous naivete. I never knew a man who had better motives for all the trouble he caused. After America entered the Vietnam war, the Graham Greene argument gathered some steam. As a matter of fact, many argued that if we pulled out, there would be no consequences for the Vietnamese people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4219, "text": "What earthly difference does it make to nomadic tribes or uneducated subsistence farmers in Vietnam or Cambodia or Laos whether they have a military dictator, a royal prince, or a socialist commissar in some distant capital that they have never seen and may never heard of? It is difficult to imagine, he said, how their lives could be anything but better with the Americans gone. Indochina Without Americans: For Most, a Better Life. In Cambodia, the Khmer Rouge began a murderous rule in which hundreds of thousands of Cambodians died by starvation and torture and execution. In Vietnam, former allies of the United States and government workers and intellectuals and businessmen were sent off to prison camps, where tens of thousands perished. Hundreds of thousands more fled the country on rickety boats, many of them going to their graves in the South China Sea. Three decades later, there is a legitimate debate about how we got into the Vietnam war and how we left. There is no debate in my mind that the veterans from Vietnam deserve the high praise of the United States of America. Whatever your position is on that debate, one unmistakable legacy of Vietnam is that the price of America's withdrawal was paid by millions of innocent citizens whose agonies would add to our vocabulary new terms like boat people, reeducation camps, and killing fields. There was another price to our withdrawal from Vietnam, and we can hear it in the words of the enemy we face in today's struggle, those who came to our soil and killed thousands of citizens on September the 11th, 2001. In an interview with a Pakistani newspaper after the 9/11 attacks, Usama bin Laden declared that the American people had risen against their Government's war in Vietnam, and they must do the same today. His number-two man, Zawahiri, has also invoked Vietnam. In a letter to Al Qaida's chief of operations in Iraq, Zawahiri pointed-and I quote-to the aftermath of the collapse of the American power in Vietnam and how they ran and left their agents. Zawahiri later returned to this theme, declaring that the Americans, quote, know better than others that there is no hope in victory. The Vietnam specter is closing every outlet. Here at home, some can argue our withdrawal from Vietnam carried no price to American credibility, but the terrorists see it differently. We must listen to the words of the enemy. We must listen to what they say. If we win it, it means your disgrace and defeat forever.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4220, "text": "Iraq is one of several fronts in the war on terror, but it is the central front. It is the central front for the enemy that attacked us and wants to attack us again, and it is the central front for the United States. If we were to abandon the Iraqi people, the terrorists would be emboldened. They would use their victory to gain new recruits. As we saw on September the 11th, a terrorist safe haven on the other side of the world can bring death and destruction to the streets of our own cities. Unlike in Vietnam, if we withdraw before the job is done, this enemy would follow us home. And that is why, for the security of the United States of America, we must defeat them overseas so we do not face them in the United States of America. Recently, two men who were on the opposite sides of the debate over the Vietnam war came together to write an article. One was a member of President Nixon's foreign policy team and the other was a fierce critic of the Nixon administration's policies. Together, they wrote that the consequences of an American defeat in Iraq would be disastrous. Defeat would produce an explosion of euphoria among all the forces of Islamic extremism, throwing the entire Middle East into even greater upheaval. Perhaps that is why so much of the current debate seeks to ignore these consequences. In Iraq, our moral obligations and our strategic interests are one. So we pursue the extremists wherever we find them, and we stand with the Iraqis at this difficult hour, because the shadow of terror will never be lifted from our world and the American people will never be safe until the people of the Middle East know the freedom that our Creator meant for all. I recognize that history cannot predict the future with absolute certainty. I understand that. But history does remind us that there are lessons applicable to our time. And we can learn something from history. In Asia, we saw freedom triumph over violent ideologies after the sacrifice of tens of thousands of American lives, and that freedom has yielded peace for generations. The American military graveyards across Europe attest to the terrible human cost in the fight against nazism. They also attest to the triumph of a continent that today is whole, free, and at peace.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4221, "text": "The advance of freedom in these lands should give us confidence that the hard work we are doing in the Middle East can have the same results we have seen in Asia and elsewhere, if we show the same perseverance and the same sense of purpose. In a world where the terrorists are willing to act on their twisted beliefs with sickening acts of barbarism, we must put faith in the timeless truths about human nature that have made us free. Across the Middle East, millions of ordinary citizens are tired of war; they are tired of dictatorship and corruption; they are tired of despair. They want societies where they are treated with dignity and respect, where their children have the hope for a better life. They want nations where their faiths are honored and they can worship in freedom. And that is why millions of Iraqis and Afghans turned out to the polls; millions turned out to the polls. And that is why their leaders have stepped forward at the risk of assassination. And that is why tens of thousands are joining the security forces of their nations. These men and women are taking great risks to build a free and peaceful Middle East, and for the sake of our own security, we must not abandon them. There is one group of people who understand the stakes, understand as well as any expert, anybody in America-those are the men and women who wear the uniform. Through nearly 6 years of war, they have performed magnificently. Day after day, hour after hour, they keep the pressure on the enemy that would do our citizens harm. They have overthrown two of the most brutal tyrannies of the world and liberated more than 50 million citizens. In Iraq, our troops are taking the fight to the extremists and radicals and murderers all throughout the country. Our troops have killed or captured an average of more than 1,500 Al Qaida terrorists and other extremists every month since January of this year. We are in the fight. Today, our troops are carrying out a surge that is helping bring former Sunni insurgents into the fight against the extremists and radicals, into the fight against Al Qaida, into the fight against the enemy that would do us harm. They are clearing out the terrorists out of population centers; they are giving families in liberated Iraqi cities a look at a decent and hopeful life. Our troops are seeing this progress that is being made on the ground.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4222, "text": "Will their elected leaders in Washington pull the rug out from under them just as they are gaining momentum and changing the dynamic on the ground in Iraq? We will support our troops, we will support our commanders, and we will give them everything they need to succeed. Despite the mistakes that have been made, despite the problems we have encountered, seeing the Iraqis through as they build their democracy is critical to keeping the American people safe from the terrorists who wants to attack us. It is critical work to lay the foundation for peace that veterans have done before you all. A free Iraq will not make decisions as quickly as the country did under the dictatorship. Many are frustrated by the pace of progress in Baghdad, and I can understand this. As I noted yesterday, the Iraqi Government is distributing oil revenues across its Provinces despite not having an oil revenue law on its books, that the Parliament has passed about 60 pieces of legislation. Prime Minister Maliki is a good guy, a good man with a difficult job, and I support him. And it is not up to the politicians in Washington, DC, to say whether he will remain in his position; that is up to the Iraqi people, who now live in a democracy and not a dictatorship. A free Iraq is not going to transform the Middle East overnight. But a free Iraq will be a massive defeat for Al Qaida, it will be an example that provides hope for millions throughout the Middle East, it will be a friend of the United States, and it is going to be an important ally in the ideological struggle of the 21st century. Will today's generation of Americans resist the allure of retreat, and will we do in the Middle East what the veterans in this room did in Asia? At the outset of the war in the Pacific, there were those who argued that freedom had seen its day and that the future belonged to the hard men in Tokyo. A year and a half before the attack on Pearl Harbor, Japan's Foreign Minister gave a hint of things to come during an interview with a New York newspaper. He said, In the battle between democracy and totalitarianism, the latter adversary will without question win and will control the world. The era of democracy is finished, the democratic system bankrupt. In fact, the war machines of Imperial Japan would be brought down, brought down by good folks who only months before had been students and farmers and bank clerks and factory hands. Some are in the room today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheveteransforeignwarsnationalconventionkansascitymissouri", "title": "Remarks at the Veterans of Foreign Wars National Convention in Kansas City, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-veterans-foreign-wars-national-convention-kansas-city-missouri", "publication_date": "22-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4223, "text": "Just one personal note, if I might. I just returned from the hospital where I saw Betty as she came from the operating room. Lukash has assured me that she came through the operation all right. Our faith will sustain us, and Betty would expect me to be here. I thank each and every one of you for your contributions to this summit. From this summit, we are going to start going up. This is not the end, but it is the beginning of a battle against inflation and waste which will not end until it is won. I have vowed and asked all of you to resolve here that we will celebrate our Nation's 200th birthday with our economy healthy and strong, with prosperity as well as peace that brings the solid realities of a great republic. Thousands and thousands of dedicated men and women have come together in this series of inflation conferences to map the strategies and the tactics of our all-out war against America's domestic enemy number one. All of you will be the Founding Fathers--if we succeed.  Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair; the rest is in the hands of God. And God helps those who help themselves. On this principle, Americans in two centuries have astonished the world and, time and time again, have confounded the pessimists and the cynics who said it could not be done. You have discussed many ideas. And as a result, I, along with other Americans, have gained a far better understanding of our economic problems. Perhaps we have caught glimpses of the political problems, and we understand those, but even in our controversies, we have all developed a super sense of direction. You have done your homework well. In the days immediately ahead, I will offer to the American people and to the Congress a program of action which will help bring balance and vitality to our economy. This program could not be formulated without your participation and without the support of millions of other Americans who have given us their ideas. Inflation must be stopped. But this Administration will respond not with words but with action and with programs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksconcludingthesummitconferenceinflation", "title": "Remarks Concluding the Summit Conference on Inflation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-concluding-the-summit-conference-inflation", "publication_date": "28-09-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4224, "text": "As your ENTITY, the only special interest I have, the only special interest I represent is the American people---housewives struggling with rising grocery prices, workers whose real purchasing power has eroded because of inflation, businessmen trying to control rising costs, families needing new homes but unable to find mortgage money to buy them, those thousands of unemployed who want work, the elderly locked into pension programs earned years ago--indeed, all 213 million Americans. I pledge to you that I will not shrink from the hard decisions needed to meet the problems facing each and every one of us. This is a critical hour in America's history. It requires that Americans once again rise above petty partisanship or factional interests in any segment of our society. The very future of our political and economic institutions, indeed our whole way of life, is literally at stake. Nations which cannot impose on themselves a disciplined management of their fiscal and monetary affairs are doomed to economic disorder and widespread inflation. Such discipline is imperative, it is urgent if we are to achieve a stable and expanding economy. The American people have repeatedly demonstrated their ability to submerge personal and group interests to the general welfare. When they know the chips are down, they are really down--and they have done it in the past, and they will do it again--they will respond as they always have. As part of the demanded discipline, I will send to the Congress a plan of action to keep Federal outlays for fiscal year 1975 at or under $300 billion. Every dollar the Federal Treasury must borrow is a dollar not available to the home buyer or the businessman trying to expand or other citizens who may be borrowers for good and sufficient reasons. A coherent national policy on energy is essential for economic stability. It must encourage prudent use of available energy. I will soon propose a national energy program aimed at assuring adequate internal supplies while reducing dependence on external sources. At this very minute, Secretaries Kissinger and Simon are exploring with their counterparts from four major industrial nations a coordinated plan to cope with a world energy crisis and world economic dislocations.   First, I have directed the consolidation by Executive order of all the Federal Government economic efforts, domestic and international, under a new Economic Policy Board. The Secretary of the Treasury, Bill Simon, will serve as Chairman of this Board and as my principal spokesman on matters of economic policy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksconcludingthesummitconferenceinflation", "title": "Remarks Concluding the Summit Conference on Inflation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-concluding-the-summit-conference-inflation", "publication_date": "28-09-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4225, "text": "I have appointed Bill Seidman, who has done so well with this conference, to serve as my Assistant for the coordination and the implementation of economic affairs and also as Executive Director of the new Economic Policy Board. In addition to Secretary Simon and Bill Seidman, I have appointed eight Cabinet officers as members of this Board. They include Henry Kissinger, Rog Morton, Earl Butz, Fred Dent, Pete Brennan, Caspar Weinberger, Jim Lynn, and Claude Brinegar. In addition, membership includes the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Roy Ash; the Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, Alan Greenspan; and the Executive Director of the Council on International Economic Policy, William Eberle. Arthur Burns, Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, will attend meetings of this Board, which will start work immediately. Second, I have established by Executive order a White House Labor-Management Committee whose counsel and recommendations will not only be sought by me but given to me man-to-man and face-to-face. Eight distinguished labor leaders and eight distinguished business executives comprise its membership. The objective of this Committee is not only to serve as advisers to me on major economic policies but to help assure effective collective bargaining, promote sound wage and price policies, develop higher standards of living, boost productivity, and establish more effective manpower policies. John T. Dunlop, a dedicated public servant and professor of economics at Harvard University, has agreed--and we are very thankful--to serve as coordinator of this Committee. Representing labor on this Committee will be President George Meany of the AFL-CIO; Secretary-Treasurer Lane Kirkland of the AFL-CIO; President I. W. Abel of the United Steel Workers of America; President Murray H. Finley of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America; President Paul Hall of the Seafarers International Union of North America; President Frank Fitzsimmons of the Teamsters International Union; and President Leonard Woodcock of the United Auto Workers; and President Arnold Miller of the United Mine Workers. Representing management on the Committee will be John Harper of the Aluminum Company of America; Reginald H. Jones of General Electric; Steve Bechtel of the Bechtel group; Richard Gerstenberg of General Motors; Rawleigh Warner of the Mobil Oil Company; Walter Wriston of the First National City Bank; Arthur Wood of Sears, Roebuck and Company; and R. Heath Larry of U.S. Steel.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksconcludingthesummitconferenceinflation", "title": "Remarks Concluding the Summit Conference on Inflation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-concluding-the-summit-conference-inflation", "publication_date": "28-09-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4226, "text": "I am proud to announce this group of 16 distinguished, outstanding American. The Council on Wage and Price Stability, recently established by Congress at my request and with my deep appreciation, is another arm I will use in the fight on inflation. I have asked Dr. Albert Rees, a distinguished economist and professor of economics at Princeton, to direct the Council's work. We are fortunate to have Dr. Rees with us. And may I express to all the people--those that I have mentioned and others that will help--their willingness to step in and help the country and 213 million people. But nobody knows better than I that councils and committees cannot win this war. The most important weapon in the fight against inflation is the spirit of the American people. This spirit is no secret weapon; it is renowned all over the world. And I call on each of you in this room, but more urgently, on each of you at home watching on television and all the other Americans across this vast land who either hear or read my words, I urge them, as I know they will, to join with all of us in a great effort to become inflation fighters and energy savers. I know all across our country the question everyone asks me is, What can I do to help? I will tell you how we can start. Right now, make a list of some 10 ways you can save energy and you can fight inflation. Little things that become habits-they do become habits--they do not really affect, in some instances, your health and happiness. They are habits that you can abandon if we are all faced with this emergency. I suggest that each person exchange your family's list with your neighbors, and I urge you and ask you to send me a copy. Some of the best ideas come from your home rather than from the White House. The success or failure of our fight against inflation rests with every individual American. Our country is above all a union, and you and I can make it a more perfect union as our fathers did. One of our delegates yesterday, Sylvia Porter, the wall-known newspaper columnist on economics, has kindly consented to help me get this voluntary citizens program organized and underway, and I thank you very, very much, Sylvia. It was dramatically pointed out here yesterday that inflation strikes our society very unevenly. Government must concern itself with those on whom the burden falls excessively. For instance, we must provide productive work for those without jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksconcludingthesummitconferenceinflation", "title": "Remarks Concluding the Summit Conference on Inflation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-concluding-the-summit-conference-inflation", "publication_date": "28-09-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4227, "text": "We must adjust our tax system to encourage savings, stimulate productivity, discourage excessive debt, and to correct inflation-caused inequities. And I can assure the American people that the executive branch and the Congress working together will effectuate and implement such a program. May I add a very special word to our distinguished foreign guests. What you heard here yesterday and today may remind each of you of the current problems of your own country's economy. The problems of people are not very different in these days wherever they live and work. The whole world suffers from inflation. I assure you the United States is seeking honest solutions that will help, not hinder, other nations' efforts to advance or to restore their economic health. I will have extensive consultations with leaders of other governments aimed at strengthening international institutions and to assure that we never again experience worldwide and interacting inflations and deflations. From the many alternative policies which we have heard here, given in good faith, listened to in good faith, we can and will fashion a coherent and consistent program. I will present my recommendations to the Nation and to the Congress within the next 10 days. Finally, you will understand my two compelling reasons for canceling all but my most essential appointments and travel plans in order to be here in Washington. I will devote every minute that I can to forge the mass of evidence and the evaluations generated by this conference into concrete action--into concrete plans and legislative proposals. A great leader of this country--of this century, I should say--in whom the unbeatable willpower of his American heritage combined with English eloquence, rallied his embattled countrymen from almost certain defeat by a blunt promise of blood, toil, tears, and sweat. I trust we can avoid blood and tears, and we will. But I do offer you plenty of toil and plenty of sweat. I will roll up my sleeves and work every bit as hard as you do, starting this weekend, until every American is enlisted as an inflation fighter and as an energy saver until this job is done. Thank you and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksconcludingthesummitconferenceinflation", "title": "Remarks Concluding the Summit Conference on Inflation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-concluding-the-summit-conference-inflation", "publication_date": "28-09-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4258, "text": "Well, it is good to see you all again. I have not thought of anything. I thought I could tell you a few things off the record. Of course, well, for instance, Steve just came in to give me a thing that just arrived about our aircraft production. I think some of us real old people remember a day when I went up to Congress and said we need for national defense fifty thousand airplanes in a year. Well, we are now up to a hundred thousand a year, and we are keeping on going keeping on making records. The two-hundred-thousandth United States-financed airplane since July 1, 1940, was accepted on May 31 of this year, a year and three days after the acceptance of the one-hundred-thousandth- which is pretty good. The first hundred thousand took 1431 days to build. The second hundred thousand took 369 days to build, approximately only a third as long. And in May, 8,851 were accepted. That was actually two percent in numbers below the March peak. But a thing that the layman does not understand, which you will understand, is that the weight, 89 million pounds, is really the controlling factor; and that was one percent over March, which is again a new high. The rest of the figures relate to different types, but just for example, just in one field of action, we have ten thousand American planes working. In another field of action, we have over five thousand American planes. Now, they are operating planes. Of course, the figures vary from day to day, but that is an awful lot of planes that we have got overseas. I have not got the figures for some of the other areas, but that is just two out of three or four different areas where we are operating planes. I hope that you are in touch with the Departments, and with Leo Crowley, about places where either there is a jam or we want more things. Now, of course, one thing we have realized, and that is that with the development of warfare we discover new things all the time- new construction. I do not suppose any one of us could have visioned three years ago the building of this vast number of landing craft, turning them out all over the place with all the things that go with landing craft. In the present operations in France, they have been badly bumped on the beaches. They sit down on top of a boulder, and the boulder comes through the bottom that sort of thing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferenceforbusinesspapereditors", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference for Business Paper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-for-business-paper-editors", "publication_date": "09-06-1944", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4259, "text": "Quite a lot of them have been damaged on the railroad rails that the Germans stuck down on the beaches; and sometimes, when they have discharged their cargo on the beach and start to back up, they find they are sitting on the sharp end of a railroad rail. But, of course, a great many of them can be salvaged, but the last three days show that we have got to speed that particular construction up even some more. We thought we had speeded it up just as fast as we possibly could. Things are going pretty well on the other side. As somebody remarked to me the other day, probably there has been more human suffering on the English Channel than any other place in the world. And on the whole, things are going along pretty well. We have been doing awfully well north of Rome, since I spoke the other day. We are about 40 miles north of Rome. We have got the important seaport of Civitavecchia. I think the greatest contribution there is always a silver lining in every cloud that war makes is teaching people geography. A lot of people in this country now know where Italy is. And of course, on the whole, I really think that we can feel encouraged, but we mustn't be overoptimistic .... Of course, we are trying to plan all we can on the reconversion of plants, which will be of interest to nearly all of you. I think the Executive end of things has done all it could. They have made various recommendations to Congress for legislation, and nothing has yet come out of the hopper. So the more that you do to encourage Congress to speed up a little on reconversion legislation, the better it is. We have done practically all that we can here. So, if you can help on that, it is all to the good. Industry has done a perfectly splendid job. And we are doing all we can to think not only about the rest of the war, but about the period after the war.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferenceforbusinesspapereditors", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference for Business Paper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-for-business-paper-editors", "publication_date": "09-06-1944", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4260, "text": "Chief justice, senators, learned counsel for the president, you will be pleased to know this is the last presentation of the evening. And as I started last night, I made reference to some good advice I got from a encouraging voice that said, Keep it up but not too long. Tonight I got some equally good advice, To be immortal, you do not need to be eternal. And I will do my best not to be eternally eternal. I do not know about you but I am exhausted. And I can only imagine how you feel, but I am also very deeply grateful for just how you have attended to these presentations and discussions over the last few days. I can tell how much consideration you have given to our point of view and the president's point of view and that is all we can ask. At the end of the day, all we can ask is that you hear us out and make the best judgment that you can consistent with your conscience and our constitution. Now, I wanted to start out tonight with where we began when we first appeared before you about a week ago, and that is with the resolution itself. With what the president is charged with in the articles and how that holds up now that you have heard the evidence from the house. Donald Trump was impeached in article one for abuse of power. And that article provides that in his conduct of the Office of President of the United States and in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the Office of President of the United States and to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States, and is in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed. Donald J. Trump has abused the powers of his presidency in that using the powers of his high office, President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 United States presidential election. President Trump solicited the interference of a foreign government, Ukraine, in the 2020 election. He did so through a scheme or course of conduct that included soliciting the government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations that would benefit his reelection, harm the election prospects of a political opponent, and influence 2020 US presidential election to his advantage. President Trump also sought to pressure the government of Ukraine to take these steps by conditioning official US government acts of significant value to Ukraine on its public announcement of the investigations. President Trump engaged in the scheme or course of conduct for corrupt purposes in pursuit of personal political benefit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4261, "text": "In doing so, President Trump used the power of the presidency in a manner that compromised the national security of the United States and undermined the integrity of the United States democratic process. He thus ignored and injured the interests of the nation. President Trump engaged in the scheme or course of conduct through the following means. President Trump acting both directly and through his agents within and outside the United States government corruptly solicited the government of Ukraine to publicly announce investigations into, A, a political opponent, Former Vice President, Joseph R. Biden Jr. A discredited theory promoted by Russia alleging that Ukraine rather than Russia interfered in the 2016 United States presidential election. With the same corrupt motives, President Trump acting both directly and through his agents within and outside the US government conditioned to official acts on the public announcements that he had requested the release of $391 million of US taxpayer funds that Congress had appropriated on a bipartisan basis for the purpose of providing vital military and security assistance to Ukraine to oppose Russian aggression and which President Trump had ordered suspended. And B, a head of state meeting at the White House, which the president of Ukraine sought to demonstrate continued United States support for the government of Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression. Faced with public revelation of his actions, President Trump ultimately released the military and security assistance to the government of Ukraine, but has persisted in openly and corruptly urging and soliciting Ukraine to undertake investigations for his personal political benefit. These actions were consistent with President Trump's previous invitations of foreign interference in US elections. In all of this, President Trump abused the powers of the presidency by ignoring and injuring national security and other vital national interests to obtain an improper personal political benefit. He also betrayed the nation by abusing his high office to enlist a foreign power in corrupting democratic elections. Wherefore, President Trump by such conduct has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to national security and the constitution if allowed to remain in office and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self governments and the rule of law. President Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States. We have met our burden. The constitution provides that the House of Representative shall have the sole power of impeachment and the president shall be removed from office on impeachment for and conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4262, "text": "In his conduct of the Office of the President, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the Office of President United States and to the best of his ability preserve, protect, and defend the constitution of the United States and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed , Donald J. Trump has directed the unprecedented categorical and indiscriminate defiance of subpoenas issued by the House of Representatives pursuant to its sole power of impeachment. President Trump has abused the powers of the presidency in a manner offensive to and subversive of the constitution in that the House of Representatives has engaged in an impeachment inquiry focused on President Trump's corrupt solicitation of the government of Ukraine to interfere in the 2020 US presidential election. As part of this impeachment inquiry, the committee's undertaking the investigation served subpoenas seeking documents and testimony deemed vital to the inquiry for various executive branch agencies and offices and current and former officials. In response without lawful cause or excuse, President Trump directed executive branch agencies, offices and officials not to comply with those subpoenas. President Trump thus interpose the powers of the presidency against the lawful subpoenas of the House of Representatives and assume to himself functions and judgements necessary to exercise the sole power of impeachment vested in the constitution in the House of Representatives. President Trump abused the powers of his high office through the following means. Directing other executive branch agencies and offices to defy lawful subpoenas and withhold the production of documents and records from the committees in response to which the Department of State, the Office of Management Budget, Department of Energy and Department of Defense refused to produce a single record or document. Direct and current and former executive branch officials not to cooperate with the committees in response to which nine administration officials defied subpoenas for testimony namely John Michael Mick Mulvaney, Robert B. Blair, John A. Eisenberg, Michael Ellis, Preston Wells Griffith, Russell T. Vought, Michael Duffey, Brian McCormack and T. Ulrich Brechbuhl. These actions were consistent with President Trump's previous efforts to undermine United States government investigations into foreign interference in US elections.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4263, "text": "Through these actions, President Trump sought to arrogate himself the right to determine the propriety scope and nature of an impeachment inquiry into his own conduct, as well as the unilateral prerogative to deny any and all information to the House of Representatives in the exercise of its sole power of impeachment. In the history of the Republic, no president has ever ordered the complete defiance of an impeachment inquiry or sought to obstruct and impede so comprehensively the ability of the House of Representatives to investigate high crimes and misdemeanors. The abuse of office serve to cover up the president's own repeated misconduct and to seize and control the power of impeachment and thus to nullify a vital safeguard vested solely in the House of Representatives. In all of this, President Trump has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as president and subversive of constitutional government to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Whereas or wherefore, President Trump by such conduct has demonstrated that he will remain a threat to the constitution if allowed to remain in office and has acted in a manner grossly incompatible with self government and the rule of law. President Trump thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States. Let me say something about this second article. The facts of the president's defiance of Congress are very simple because they were so uniform. Because they are so uncontested, but too do not mistake for a moment the fact that it was simple and easy and quick to present that course of conduct compared with a sophisticated campaign to coerce Ukraine into thinking that that second article is any less significant than the first. If there is no article two, let me tell you something, there will never be an article one. Because if you and we lack the power to investigate a president, there will never be an article one. Whether that article one is abuse of power or that article one is treason or that article one is bribery, there will never be an article one if the Congress cannot investigate an impeachable offense. If the Congress cannot because the president prevents it investigate the president's own wrongdoing, there will never be an article one because there will be no more impeachment power. As I said before, our relationship with Ukraine will survive.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4264, "text": "God willing, our relationship with Ukraine will survive and Ukraine will prosper and we will get beyond this ugly chapter of our history. But if we are to decide here that a president of the United States can simply say under article two, I can do whatever I want and I do not have to treat a coequal branch of government like it exists. I do not have to give it any more than the back of my hand. That will be an unending injury to this country. Ukraine will survive and so will we, but that will be an unending injury to this country because the balance of power that our founders set out will never be the same. If a president can simply say, I am going to fight all subpoenas, and I will tell you something else. Truism in the courts is just as true here in the Senate where they say justice delayed is justice denied. You give this president or any other the unilateral power to delay as long as he or she likes, to litigate matters for years and years in the courts and do not fool yourself into thinking it is anything less. In April, it will be a year since we subpoenaed Don McGahn and there is no sign of an end to that case. I will tell you, when it gets to the Supreme court, you might think that is the end and that is just the end of the first chapter because Don McGahn is in court saying, I am absolutely immune from testimony. Now that is been rejected by every court that is looked at it. But we will see what the Court of Appeal says and then we will see if it goes to an en banc Court of Appeals. And then we will see what the Supreme Court says. And when we prevail on the Supreme Court, you know what happens? That is not the end of the matter. It comes back to the trial court and then Well, they cannot claim absolute immunity more. So now we are going to turn to plan B, executive privilege. We are going to say we cannot and will not answer any of the questions that are really pertinent to your impeachment inquiry. And let us start out in district court and then go to the Court Appeals and then go en banc and then go to the Supreme Court. You can game the system for years. Justice delayed is justice denied and so is true about presidential accountability.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4265, "text": "So when you suggest or I suggest or anyone suggests or the White House suggest, why does not the Congress, why did not the house just exhaust their remedies as if in the constitution where it says, The house shall have the sole power of impeachment. There is an asterisk that says, After exhausting all court remedies and for seeking court in the district court and then seeking relief in the court of appeals and after that, go in the Supreme Court. Let us not kid ourselves about what that really means. What that really means is you allow the president to control the timing of his own impeachment or if it will ever be permitted to come before this body. That is the absence of an impeachment power. Article two is every bit as important as article one. No matter how egregious this president's conduct or any other, it is fundamental to the separation of powers. If you cannot have the ability to enforce an impeachment power, you might as well not put it in the constitution. Now, shortly, the president's lawyers will have a chance to make their presentation and as we will not have the ability to respond to what they say, I want to give you a little preview of what I think they are going to have in store for you so that when you do hear it, you can put it into some perspective. I expect that they will attack the process. I do not think that is any mystery, but I want to tell you both what I expect they will share it with you and what it really means. When you cut through all the chaff, what does it really mean that they are saying? So here is what I expect that they will tell you. It was the most unfair in the history of the world. Because of the house, they took depositions. How dare they take depositions? How dare they listen to Trey Gowdy? How dare they follow the Republican procedures that preceded their investigation? And they were so secret in the bunker, in the basement, as if whether it is on the ground floor of the basement of the first floor makes any difference. Those super secret depositions in which only a hundred members of Congress equivalent to the entire Senate could participate. Every Democrat, every Republican on three committees could participate. Of course, that was not enough so you had even more storm the SCIF.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4266, "text": "You know how we did it in those super secret depositions and you could look this up yourself because we released the transcripts. We got an hour. They got an hour. We got 45 minutes. They got 45 minutes. And we did that back and forth until everyone was done asking their questions. He would not allow us to ask our questions. Because we want to punish that whistle blower. Because yes, some of us in this house and in this house believe we ought to protect whistle blowers. So yes, I did not allow the outing of the whistle blower. So when they say the chairman would not allow certain questions, that is what they mean. That means that we protect people who have the courage to come forward and blow the whistle. To believe that someone who blows the whistle on misconduct of the serious nature that you now know took place is a traitor or a spy. There is only one way you can come to that conclusion. And that is if you believe you are the state and that anything that contradicts you is treason. That is the only way that you can conceive of someone who exposes wrongdoing is a trader or a spy. But that is exactly how this president views those who expose his wrongdoing because he is the state. Like any good Monarch, he is the state. And you will hear, The president was not allowed to participate in the judiciary committee. The president had the same rights in our proceedings as President Nixon and President Clinton. And one other thing that was really unfair is all the subpoenas were invalid because the house did not pass a resolution announcing its impeachment inquiry. Well, of course, as you know, the constitution says the house will have the sole power of impeachment. If we want to do it by house resolution, we can do it by house resolution. If we want to do it by house resolution, we can do it by house resolution. If we want to do it by committee, we can do it by committee. It is not the President's place to tell us how to conduct an impeachment proceeding any more than it is the President's place to tell you how you should try it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4267, "text": "When you see that eight-page diatribe from the White House council saying, We should have been able to have a resolution in the House, or, We should have been able to have this, what you should hear, what they really mean is, Donald Trump had the right to control his own impeachment proceeding, and it is an outrage that Donald Trump did not get to write the rules of his own impeachment proceeding in the House. You give a president that right, there is no impeachment power. When you hear them say that, when you hear them complain about depositions that were the same as the Republicans, or the right to participate, that was the same in Clinton and Nixon. By the way, they were not allowed to call witnesses, they said. Three of the 12 witnesses that we heard at our open hearings were the minority witness requests. You will hear those arguments, the most unfair and history. The fact is we had the same process. In those other impeachments, the majority did not surrender its subpoena power to the minority. You know what it did? It said, You can subpoena witnesses, and if the majority does not agree you can force a vote. The majority does not surrender its subpoena power. When they say the process was unfair, what they are really mean is do not look at what the President did. For God's sake, do not look at what the President did. Now, you will also hear, I think the second thing you will hear from the President's team is, Attack the managers. Exhibit A, he mocked the President. He mocked the President. He mocked the President as if he was shaking down a leader of another country, like he was an organized crime figure. He mocked the President. He said it was like the President said, 'Listen, Zelensky, because I am only going to say this seven times.' I discovered something very significant by mocking the President. That is, for a man who loves to mock others, he does not like to be mocked. Turns out, he is got a pretty thin skin. Who would've thought it? Nevermind that I said I was not using his words before I said it, and I was not using his words after I said it, and I said I was making a parody of his words. He mocked the President.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4268, "text": "Now, they will attack my other colleagues too, for things said in the heat of debate here on the floor as we were reaching the wee hours of the morning. They will attack some of my colleagues who are not even in this chamber. Maybe they will attack the squad. That is a perennial favorite with the President. If they attack the squad you should ask, What does that have to do with the price of beans? You can expect a tax on all kinds of members of the House that have nothing to do with the issues before you. When you hear those attacks you should ask yourself, Away from what do they want to distract my attention? Nine times out of 10 it will be the President's misconduct, but look for it. Attacks on the managers, attacks on other House members, attacks on the speaker, attacks on who knows what. It is all of the same ilk. Whatever you do, just do not consider the President's misconduct. You will also hear attacks on the constitution. Of course, it will not be framed as an attack on the constitution, but that is really what it represents. That is, abusive power does not violate the constitution. Presidents of United States have every right to abuse their power. Presidents have a constitutional right to abuse their power, and how dare the House of Representatives charge a president with abusing his power. Now, I am looking forward to that constitutional argument by Alan Dershowitz, because I want to know why abusing power and trust is not impeachable now, but it was a few years ago. The last time I checked, I do not think there was a significant change to the constitution between the time he said it was impeachable, and the time he is saying now that apparently it is not impeachable. I am looking forward to that argument, but I am also looking forward to Ken Starr's presentation. During the Clinton impeachment, he maintained that a president not only could, but must be impeached for obstructing justice. That Bill Clinton needed to be impeached because he lied under oath about sex, and to do so obstructed justice. You can be impeached for obstructing justice, but you cannot be impeached for obstructing Congress. The logical conclusion from that is, Ken Starr saying that Bill Clinton's mistake was in showing up under subpoena.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4269, "text": "That Bill Clinton's mistake was not saying, I am going to fight all subpoenas. That Bill Clinton's mistake was in not taking the position that under Article Two, he could do whatever he wanted. Does that really make any sense? You can be impeached for obstructing your own branch of government, but you cannot be impeached for obstructing a co-equal branch of government. That would make no sense to the framers. I have to think, over the centuries as they have watched us, they would be astonished that anyone would take that argument seriously, or could so misapprehend how this balance of power is supposed to work. I look forward to that art argument. Maybe when they make that argument they can explain to us why their position on abusive power is not even supported by their own attorney general. I hope they will answer why even their own attorney general does not agree with them. Not to mention, by the way, the constitutional law expert called by the Republicans in the House who also testified as to abuse of power, that it is impeachable. That you do not need a crime that is impeachable. Now, when you hear them make these arguments, cannot be impeached for abusing your power, this is what it really means. We cannot defend his conduct, and so we want to make it go all away without even having to think about that. You do not even need to think about what the President did, because the House charged it wrong. So, do not even consider what the President did. That is what that argument means. We cannot defend the indefensible, so we have to fall back on, even if he abused his office, even if he did all the things he is accused of, that is perfectly fine. There is nothing that can be done about it. Now, you will also hear, as part of the defense, and you heard this from Jay Sekulow, was I think the last thing he said, The whistleblower, and then he stepped back to the table. Now, I do not really know what that meant, but I suspect you will hear more of that. I would encourage you to read the whistleblower complaint again. When you read that complaint again, you will see just how remarkably accurate it is.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4270, "text": "For all the times the President is out there saying that the complaint was all wrong, It was all wrong, you read it, now that you have heard the evidence, you read it and you will see how remarkably right the whistleblower got it. Now, when that complaint was filed, it was obviously before we had our depositions, and had our hearings. All of which obviated the need for the whistleblower. In the beginning we wanted the whistleblower to come and testify, because all we knew about was the complaint. Then, we were able to hear from firsthand witnesses about what happened, and then something else happened. the President and his allies began threatening the whistleblower, and the life of the whistleblower was at risk. What was the point in exposing that whistleblower to the risk of his, or her life when we had the evidence we needed? What was the point, except retribution. Retribution, and the President wants it still. You know why the President is mad at the whistleblower? Because, but for the whistleblower, he would not have been caught, and that is an unforgivable sin. He is the State and but for the whistleblower, the President would not have been caught. For that, he is a spy and he is guilty of treason. Now, what does he add to this? You will also hear the President's defense, They hate the President. They hate the President. You should not consider the presence misconduct because they hate the President. Now, what I have said, I leave you to your own judgments about the President. I only hate what he is done to this country. I grieve for what he is done to this country. When they make the argument to you that this is only happening because they hate the President, it is just another of the myriad forms of, please do not consider what the President did. Whether you like the President, or you dislike the President is immaterial. It is all about the constitution, and his misconduct. If it meets the standard of impeachable conduct as we approved, it does not matter what you like him. It does not matter what you dislike him. What matters is whether he is a danger to the country, because he will do it again. None of us can have confidence, based on his record, that he will not do it again because he is telling us every day that he will.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4271, "text": "Now, you will hear the further defense that Biden is corrupt. This'll be another defense, because what they hope to achieve in the Senate trial is what they could not achieve through their scheme. If they could not get Ukraine to smear the Bidens, they want to use this trial to do it instead. Let us call Hunter Biden. Let us smear the Bidens. Let us succeed in the trial with what we could not do with this scheme. Now, I do not know whether Rudy Giuliani, who said he was going to present his report to some of the senators has presented his report. Maybe you will get to see what is in Rudy Giuliani's report. Maybe you will get to see some documents smearing the Bidens produced by who knows. Make no mistake about what that is about. It is about completing the object of the scheme through other means, through the means of this trial. You may hear the argument that what the President is doing when he is obstructing Congress is protecting the office for future presidents, because there is nothing more important to Donald Trump than protecting the office of the presidency for future presidents. I supposed, when he withheld military aid from Ukraine he was trying to protect future presidents. When he sought to coerce a foreign power to intervene in our election, he was doing it on behalf of future presidents, because future presidents might likewise wish to cheat in a further election. I do not think that argument goes very far, but I expect you will hear it. I expect you will hear it. You may hear an argument that the President was really concerned about corruption, and he was concerned about burden sharing. I will not spend much time on that because you have heard the evidence on that. There is no indication that this had anything to do with corruption in every, every bit of evidence that it had nothing to do with fighting corruption, or burden sharing. Indeed, nothing about the burden changed between the time he froze the aide and the time he released the aid. There was no new effort to get others to contribute more, and Europe contributes a great deal as it is. This is an after-the-fact rationalization. You probably saw the public reporting that there was an exhaustive effort after the fact to come up with a post-talk rationalization for this scheme. I would like to show you the product of that investigation, but I will need your help because it is among the documents they refuse to turn over.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4272, "text": "They will show you just what an after- the-fact invention this argument is. Now, I expect you will hear the argument, Obama did it. Obama did it. Now, that may take several different forms, but the form of Obama did it that I am referring to is, Obama also withheld aid. Honestly, I think that argument is an insult to our intelligence because the argument is, Obama withheld aid from Egypt, and he made a condition with it. Obama withheld aid from Egypt after they had a revolution, and circumstances change. You know something? He did not hide it from Congress. In fact, Congress supported it. Yes, there are times when we withhold aid for a good policy reason. The American people know the difference between right and wrong. They can recognize the difference between aid that is withheld for a malicious purpose, and aid that is held in the best interest of our national security. But, you will hear the Obama did it argument. Now, I suspect the reason they will make the argument the call was perfect is because the President insists that they do. I do not think they really want to have to make that argument. You would not either, but they have a client to represent and so they will make the argument, the call was perfect. They will also make the argument, Ukraine thinks the call was perfect. What that really means is Ukraine wants a future, Ukraine knows it is still beholden to us for aid, Ukraine still has not gotten in through the door of the White House. Ukraine knows that if they acknowledge that they were shaken down by the President of the United States, the President United States will make them pay. When you hear them say, Ukraine felt no pressure and their proof is because the Ukraine president does not want to call the President the United States a bad name, you will know why. Because they need America. They need America. The framers did not expect you to leave your common sense at the door. Now, you will also hear the defense, the President said there was no quid pro quo. I guess that is the end of the story. This is a well-known principle of criminal law, that if the defendant says he did not do it, he could not have done it. If the defendant learns that he is been caught and he says he did not do it, he could not have done it. That does not hold up in any court in the land.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4273, "text": "You also hear a variation of the argument, No harm, no foul. They got the money. They got the money, and they got the meeting even though they did not . They got the meeting on the sideline of the UN. It was kind of a drive by, but they got a meeting. A meeting on the sidelines is pretty much the same thing, right? of course it is not. Why do you think at that meeting at the United Nations, the President of Ukraine was still saying, Hey, when am I going to get to come to town? He certainly recognizes the difference, and we should too. What is more, there is every bit of harm, every bit of foul in withholding aid from an ally at war, and releasing it only when you are caught. Russia knows now about the wedge in our relations with Ukraine. The moment Russia found out about this, and I have to imagine, given how good their intel services are they did not have to wait for Politico to break the story any more than Ukraine did. The moment Ukraine learned, and Russia learned, there was harm because Ukraine knew they could not trust us, Russia knew they could take advantage of us. You get no pass when you get caught. I expect one of the defenses you will see is, they will play you certain testimony from the House where my colleagues on the other side of the aisle ask questions like, Did the President ever say he was bribing Ukraine? Did you ever see him actually bribe Ukraine? Did you hear him say that he was going to bribe Ukraine? Did you personally see this yourself? If you did not see it, if he did not lay it out for you, then it could not have happened. Two plus two does not equal four. You are not allowed to consider anything except for a televised confession by the president, and even then, do not consider it. So, I imagine you will hear some of that testimony where witnesses are asked, they work for the defense department. Well, did the president ever tell you that he was conditioning the aid? Nevermind that these are people, do not necessarily even talk to the president, but I will expect you will see some of that. As I mentioned before, you will hear the defense, we claim privilege. You cannot impeach the president over the exercise of privilege. Nevermind the fact that they never claimed privilege. They never asserted privilege. You know why they never actually invoked privilege in the house?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4274, "text": "Is because they know that if they did, they'd have to produce the documents and they'd have to show what they were redacting and they did not want to do even that. They knew the overwhelming majority of the documents and witness testimony, there was no even colorable claim of privilege. So, they did not want to even invoke it. But you will hear that you cannot be impeached for a claim of privilege they never made. So, what do all these defenses mean? What do they mean? What do they mean collectively when you add them all up? What they mean is under Article Two, the president can do whatever he wants. That is really it, stripped of all the detail and all the histrionics. What they want us to believe is the president can do whatever he wants under Article Two and there is nothing that you or the House can do about it. Robert Kennedy once said, Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential vital quality for those who seek to change the world which yields most painfully to change. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle. I have to say, when I first read that, I was not sure I agreed. Moral courage is a rarer quality than courage in battle, that just does not seem right. I was not sure I really agreed and for a democrat not to agree with a Kennedy is kind of a heresy. I am sure some of my GOP colleagues feel the same way about the Kennedy's from Louisiana. After all, what could be more brave than courage in battle? What could be more rare than courage in battle? But then, I got to visit, as I know all of you have, our service members around the world and see just how blessed we are with an abundance of heroes by the millions who have joined the service of this country. Service members who every day demonstrate the most incredible bravery. I just have the greatest respect for them, for people like Jason Crow and John McCain and Daniel Inouye and so many others who've served in this body and the other or who've never served in office. He is part of the greatest generation, left high school early to join the service. He tried to enlist in the Marine Corp and he failed the physical. So, at the end of World War II, failed the physical. Bad eyesight and flat feet, which was apparently enough to fail the physical.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4275, "text": "So, two weeks later he went to try to enlist in the ENTITY, thinking that maybe it is a different physical standard and even if it is not , maybe I will get a different examining physician. He recognized my father and he said, Were not you here two weeks ago? And he was in the ENTITY. Now the war was over and so he never left the United States. When he left the service, he went to the University of Alabama and about midway through he wanted to get on with his life and he left college and went out into the business world, something he always regretted, leaving college early. I think in many ways, he got a better education than I did. I think that I was lucky to get a good education, but I think those like Jason and others who served in the military and also went to school, got the best education, because I think there is certain things you can only learn by being in the military. Certainly, you cannot really learn, I think, about war without going to war and maybe there are things you just cannot learn about life without going to war. So, those of you that have served have the most complete education I think there is. Even so, is moral courage really more rare than that on the battlefield? Then I saw what Robert Kennedy meant by moral courage. Few, he said, are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues and the wrath of their society. Then I understood by that measure just how rare moral courage is. How many of us are willing to brave the disapproval of our fellows, the censure of our colleagues and the wrath of our society? Just as those who have served in uniform cannot fully understand, those who have not served in uniform cannot fully understand what military service means. So to there is a different kind of fraternity or sorority among those who have served in office. I always tell my constituents there are two kinds of jobs in congress and it is not Democrats and Republicans. It is those from a safe seat and those from an unsafe seat. I am sure the same is true of those from a safe state and an unsafe state. It is why I think there is a certain chemistry between members who represent those swing districts and states, because they can step into each others shoes.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4276, "text": "One of the things that we in this fellowship of office holders understand that most people do not is that real political courage does not come from disagreeing with our opponents but from disagreeing with our friends and with our own party, because it means having to stare down accusations of disloyalty and betrayal. He is a Democrat name only or she is a Republican in name only. What I said last night, if it resonated with anyone in this chamber, did not require courage. My views, as heartfelt as they are, reflect the views of my constituents. But what happens when our heartfelt views of right and wrong are in conflict with the popular opinion of our constituents? What happens when our devotion to our oaths, to our values, to our love of country, depart from the momentary passion of a large number of people back home? Those are the times that try our souls. CBS news reported last night that a Trump confidante said that GOP senators were warned, Vote against your president, vote against the president and your head will be on a pike. Vote against the president and your head will be on a pike. I have to say, when I read that, and again, I do not know if that is true, but when I read that I was struck by the irony. But I was struck by the irony of the idea when we are talking about a president who would make himself a monarch, that whoever that was would use the terminology of a penalty that was opposed by a monarch. Just this week, America lost a hero, Thomas Railsback. He passed away on Monday, the day before this trial began. Some of you may have known or even served with congressman Thomas Railsback, he was a Republican from Illinois and a second ranking member on the house judiciary committee when that committee was conducting its impeachment inquiry into President Nixon. In July of 1974 as the inquiry was coming to a close Congressman Railsback began meeting with a bipartisan group of members of the house, three other Republicans and three Democrats. Here in the Senate, they might have called them the gang of seven. They gathered and they talked and they labored over language and ultimately helped develop a bipartisan support for the articles that led a group of Republican Senators, including Barry Goldwater and Howard Baker, to tell President Nixon that he must resign.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4277, "text": "Some say that the Nixon impeachment might not have moved forward were it not for those four courageous Republicans led by Congressman Railsback and it pained the congressman because he credited Nixon with giving him his seat, with getting him elected. He did it because he said, Because seeing all the evidence, it was something we had to do because the evidence was there. One of his aids, Ray LaHood, eulogized him saying, He felt an obligation to the constitution to do what is right. Now soon, members of this body will face the most momentous of decisions. Not as I said at the outset, between guilt and innocence, but a far more foundational issue. Shall the House be able to present its case with witnesses and documents through the use of subpoenas as has been case in every impeachment trial in history? Now the president's lawyers have been their case outside of this chamber, threatening to stall these proceedings with the assertion of false claims of privilege. Having persuaded this body to postpone consideration of the witnesses and documents, they now appear to be preparing the ground to say it will be too late to consider them next week. Consider this, of the hundreds of documents that we have subpoenaed, there is no colorable claim and none has been asserted. To the degree that you can even make a claim, that claim has been waived. To the degree that even superficially a claim would attach, it does not conceal misconduct. What is more, to the degree that there were a dispute over whether a privilege applied, we have a perfectly good judge sitting behind me, empowered by the rules of this body to resolve those disputes. When the Chief Justice decides, where a narrow application of privilege ought to apply, you will still have the power to overrule him. How often do you get the chance to overrule a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court? So, let us not be fooled by the argument that it will take too long or persuaded that the trial must be over before the State of the Union. It is a matter of high crimes and misdemeanors. The American people do not agree on much, but they will not forgive being deprived of the truth and certainly not because it took a backseat to expediency. In his pamphlet of 1777, The American Crisis, Thomas Payne wrote, Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must undergo the fatigue of supporting it. Is it too much fatigue to call witnesses and have a fair trial?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4278, "text": "Are the blessings of freedom so meager that we will not endure the fatigue of a real trial with witnesses and documents. President Lincoln in his closing message to congress in December 1862 said this, Fellow citizens we cannot escape history. We of this congress and this administration will be remembered in spite of ourselves. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us the fiery trial through which we pass will light us down in honor or dishonor to the latest generation. I think he was the most interesting president in history. He may be the most interesting person in our history. This man who started out dirt poor, dirt poor like hundreds of thousands of other people at the time, he had nothing. No money, no education, he educated himself. Educate himself, but he had a brain in that head, a brilliance in that mind, that made him one of the most incredible, not just presidents, but people in history. I think he is the most interesting character in our history. I think a lot about history, as I know you do. Sometimes I think about how unforgiving history can be of our conduct. We can do a lifetimes work, draft the most wonderful legislation, help our constituents and yet we may be remembered for none of that, but for a single decision, we may be remembered, effecting the course of our country. I believe this may be one of those moments. A moment when our democracy was gravely threatened and not from without but from within. Russia too has a constitution. In Russia, they have trial by telephone. They have the same ostensible rights we do to a trial, they hear evidence and witnesses, but before the verdict is rendered, the judge picks up the telephone and calls the right person to find out how it is supposed to turn out. Is that what we have here, trial by telephone? Someone on the other end of the phone dictating what this trial should look like. The founders gave us more than words. They gave us inspiration. They may have receded into mythology but they inspire us still and more than us, they inspire the rest of the world. They inspire the rest of the world. From their prison cells in Turkey, journalists look to us. From their internment camps in China, they look to us. From their cells in Egypt, those who gathered in Tahrir Square for a better life, look to us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsadamschifffridayconcludingstatementtranscripttrumpimpeachmenttrial", "title": "Adam Schiff Friday Concluding Statement Transcript: Trump Impeachment Trial", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/adam-schiff-friday-concluding-statement-transcript-trump-impeachment-trial", "publication_date": "24-01-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Adam Schiff"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4279, "text": "White House complex-that is what they call these buildings. Makes you wonder, cannot anything in Washington ever be simple? Seeing all of you here today is a particular pleasure for me, because together you speak for some of the causes that are closest to my heart, some of the most important reasons our administration came to Washington in the first place. Some of you are law enforcement officers. Some are civilians who work for victims' rights. Some are fighting obscenity and the unspeakable evil of child pornography. Others are working to prevent drug abuse. In the past 4 or 5 months, I have heard a lot of talk-much of it, to put it most kindly, inaccurate-about our social agenda, particularly as it applies to the courts. Well, if anyone wants to know our true agenda, there is no need to go any farther than this room, because your agenda is our agenda. I do not need to tell anyone here the sad, often tragic story of years of judicial solicitation for every conceivable right of criminals and neglect for the victims of crime, of playing fast and loose with first amendment rights in a way that gave too many pornographers free rein, of fanciful constitutional arguments used to throw out long and hard police work, and of the price our nation has paid for all of this. One way, for example, that we have paid that price has been in the wider and wider availability of pornography. The sale of pornography was once said to be victimless. But common sense should have told us all along that pornography has many victims-among them, children. I read a statistic recently that, in a single day, one dial-a-porn company has received 800,000 calls. I am told that the great proportion of those calls are thought to have been made by children. Let me mention here-and I have recently sent Congress a bill that will make it easier for law enforcement officials to fight obscenity and child pornography. But incredible as it may seem, there are well-meaning people who will oppose it. The most extreme say that the first amendment protects child pornographers as they publish and distribute their products. However well-intended, that kind of extremism should not be allowed to prevail. It is not what the Constitution requires. I hope I can count on your support in getting this bill enacted into law. By the way, we could also use a boost with our criminal justice reform legislation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksadministrationsupporterschildpornographyandthesupremecourtnomination", "title": "Remarks to Administration Supporters on Child Pornography and the Supreme Court Nomination of Anthony M. Kennedy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-administration-supporters-child-pornography-and-the-supreme-court-nomination", "publication_date": "04-12-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4280, "text": "I hope I can count on your support on something else as well, and it is the principal reason that we are here today. Judge Anthony M. Kennedy. Judge Kennedy has been on my short list from the very start. A graduate of Stanford University and the Harvard Law School, he has served 12 years on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. There he won the respect of his fellow jurists and the lawyers who practice before that court. He participated in over 1,400 decisions and wrote more than 400 opinions. He earned the reputation for being a balanced and fair judge and one who is tough on crime and concerned about the victims of crime. Victims' dissatisfaction with the criminal justice system represents a failure of the system to achieve its goals. The significant criminal law decisions of the Warren Court focused on the relation of the accused to the state, and the police as an instrument of the state. Little or no thought was given to the position of the victims. Well, that is a note of compassion and realism that is too often missing in our courts. Realism runs through all his work on the bench. He argued in one dissent, for example, for a good faith exception to the exclusionary rule, and saw his position ultimately adopted by the Supreme Court. That was in a drug case, by the way. And for realism about police work, the opinion he wrote in that case sets a high standard. You do not have to read many cases involving illegal drug traffic before it becomes clear exactly what was going on at the residences described by the officer's affidavit. Whatever the merits of the exclusionary rule, its rigidities become compounded unacceptably when courts presume innocent conduct when the only commonsense explanation for it is ongoing criminal activity. Another example of his realism-last year Judge Kennedy upheld a lower court when it imposed the maximum sentence allowed by law against a child pornographer. His opinion focused on the severe psychological harm victims of child pornography endure and the great likelihood that child pornographers will, when released, commit the same crimes again. We need more realism like that on the Nation's highest court. We need Judge Kennedy on our highest court. But let me add another thought here. The Constitution itself is tough on crime; it was intended to establish justice and ensure domestic tranquility. It provides a system for discovering the truth, releasing the innocent, and punishing the guilty, not for subjecting the police to an endless guessing game about the rules.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksadministrationsupporterschildpornographyandthesupremecourtnomination", "title": "Remarks to Administration Supporters on Child Pornography and the Supreme Court Nomination of Anthony M. Kennedy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-administration-supporters-child-pornography-and-the-supreme-court-nomination", "publication_date": "04-12-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4295, "text": "And thank you for your principled leadership-both in government, where we worked together so closely, and now at the New America Foundation. I want to commend you and your colleagues here for the many contributions you make to our national security discourse-including on the challenge that brings us together today. In response to Bashar al-Assad's barbaric use of chemical weapons against the Syrian people, President Obama, after careful consideration, has decided that it is in the national security interest of the United States to conduct limited military strikes against the Syrian regime. President Obama has asked Congress for its support in this action, because in a democracy, our policies are stronger, more effective and more sustainable when they have the support of the American people and their elected leaders. Tomorrow evening, the President will address the nation and make his case for taking action. Today, I want to take this opportunity to explain why Syria's use of chemical weapons is a serious threat to our national security, and why it is in our national interest to undertake limited military action to deter future use. There is no denying what happened on August 21. 30 in the morning, while most of Damascus was still asleep, Assad's forces loaded warheads filled with deadly chemicals onto rockets and launched them into suburbs controlled or contested by opposition forces. They unleashed hellish chaos and terror on a massive scale. Innocent civilians were jolted awake, choking on poison. In the end, more than 1400 were dead-more than 400 of them children. In recent days, we have been shocked by the videos from Ghouta and other neighborhoods near Damascus. As a parent, I cannot look at those pictures-those little children laying on the ground, their eyes glassy, their bodies twitching-and not think of my own two kids. I can only imagine the agony of those parents in Damascus. Sarin targets the body's central nervous system, making every breath a struggle and causing foaming at the nose and mouth, intense nausea and uncontrollable convulsions. The death of any innocent, in Syria or around the world, is a tragedy, whether by bullet or landmine or poisonous gas. Gas plumes shift and spread without warning. The masses of people they can fell are immense. Chemical weapons, like other weapons of mass destruction, kill on a scope and scale that is entirely different from conventional weapons. There is no doubt about who is responsible for this attack.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4296, "text": "The Syrian regime possesses one of the largest stockpiles of chemical weapons in the world. Assad has been struggling to clear these very neighborhoods in Damascus and drive out the opposition, but his conventional arsenal was not working well enough or fast enough. Only the Syrian regime has the capacity to deliver chemical weapons on a scale to cause the devastation we saw in Damascus. The rockets were fired from territory controlled by the regime. The rockets landed in territory controlled or contested by the opposition. And the intelligence we have gathered reveals senior officials planning the attack and then, afterwards, plotting to cover up the evidence by destroying the area with shelling. Of course, this is not the first time that Assad has used chemical weapons in this conflict; we assess that he has used them on a small-scale multiple times since March. Whereas previous attacks each killed relatively few people, this one murdered well over a thousand in one fell swoop. Assad is lowering his threshold for use while increasing exponentially the lethality of his attacks. Assad's escalating use of chemical weapons threatens the national security of the United States. And the likelihood that, left unchecked, Assad will continue to use these weapons again and again takes the Syrian conflict to an entirely new level-by terrorizing civilians, creating even greater refugee flows, and raising the risk that deadly chemicals would spill across borders into neighboring Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, and Iraq. Obviously, the use of chemical weapons also directly threatens our closest ally in the region, Israel, where people once again have readied gas masks. Every time chemical weapons are moved, unloaded, and used on the battlefield, it raises the likelihood that these weapons will fall into the hands of terrorists active in Syria, including Assad's ally Hezbollah and al Qaeda affiliates. That prospect puts Americans at risk of chemical attacks targeted at our soldiers and diplomats in the region and even potentially our citizens at home. Equally, every attack serves to unravel the long-established commitment of nations to renounce chemical weapons use. 189 countries, representing 98 percent of the world's population, are party to the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits the development, acquisition, or use of these weapons. The United States Senate approved that convention by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority, binding America to the global consensus and affirming that we do not tolerate the use or possession of chemical weapons.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4297, "text": "So, the Assad regime's attack is not only a direct affront to that norm but also a threat to global security, including the security of the United States. Failing to respond means more and more Syrians will die from Assad's poisonous stockpiles. Failing to respond makes our allies and partners in the region tempting targets of Assad's future attacks. Failing to respond increases the risk of violence and instability as citizens across the Middle East and North Africa continue to struggle for their universal rights. Failing to respond brings us closer to the day when terrorists might gain and use chemical weapons against Americans abroad and at home. Failing to respond damages the international principle reflected in two multilateral treaties and basic human decency that such weapons must never again be used anywhere in the world. Failing to respond to the use of chemical weapons risks opening the door to other weapons of mass destruction and emboldening the madmen who would use them. We cannot allow terrorists bent on destruction, or a nuclear North Korea, or an aspiring nuclear Iran to believe for one minute that we are shying away from our determination to back up our long-standing warnings. If we begin to erode the moral outrage of gassing children in their bed, we open ourselves up to even more fearsome consequences. Moreover, failing to respond to this brazen attack could indicate that the United States is not prepared to use the full range of tools necessary to keep our nation secure. Any President, Republican or Democrat, must have recourse to all elements of American power to design and implement our national security policy - whether diplomatic, economic, or military. Rejecting the limited military action that President Obama strongly supports would raise questions around the world as to whether the United States is truly prepared to employ the full range of its power to defend our national interests. America's ability to rally coalitions and lead internationally could be undermined. Other global hotspots might flare up if belligerents believe the United States cannot be counted on to enforce the most basic and widely accepted international norms. Most disturbingly, it would send a perverse message to those who seek to use the world's worst weapons - that you can use these weapons blatantly and get away with it. Now, I know that many Americans are horrified by the images from Damascus and are concerned about the devastating broader consequences. But, while they believe the world should act, they are not sure military action is the right tool at this time. Let me address this important argument.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4298, "text": "The reason President Obama decided to pursue limited strikes is that we and others have already exhausted a host of other measures aimed at changing Assad's calculus and his willingness to use chemical weapons. So only after pursuing a wide range of non-military measures to prevent and halt chemical weapons use did President Obama conclude that a limited military strike is the right way to deter Assad from continuing to employ chemical weapons like any conventional weapon of war. The fact is, President Obama has consistently demonstrated his commitment to multilateral diplomacy. He would much prefer the backing of the United Nations Security Council to uphold the international ban against the use of chemical weapons, whether in the form of sanctions, accountability, or authorizing the use of force. Believe me, I know. I was there for all of those UN debates and negotiations on Syria. I lived it. Three times the Security Council took up resolutions to condemn lesser violence by the Syrian regime. Three times we negotiated for weeks over the most watered-down language imaginable. And three times, Russia and China doubled vetoed almost meaningless resolutions. Similarly, in the past two months, Russia has blocked two resolutions condemning the use of chemical weapons that did not even ascribe blame to any party. Russia opposed two mere press statements expressing concern about their use. A week after the August 21 gas attack, the United Kingdom presented a resolution that included a referral of war crimes in Syria to the International Criminal Court, but again the Russians opposed it, as they have every form of accountability in Syria. For all these reasons, the President has concluded that it is in our national security interest to conduct limited strikes against the Assad regime. I want to take this opportunity to address concerns now that even limited strikes could lead to even greater risk to the United States. these would be limited strikes to deter the Syrian regime from using chemical weapons and to degrade their ability to do so again. What do we mean by limited? This would not be the United States launching another war. Nor would it resemble Kosovo or Libya, which were sustained air campaigns. As the President has said, again repeatedly, this action would be deliberately limited in both time and scope. The United States has engaged in limited strikes multiple times before. Recall President Reagan conducted air strikes measured in hours against Libya in 1986. President Clinton conducted several days of cruise missile strikes against Iraq in 1998. Each has its own costs and benefits.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4299, "text": "But these previous engagements are proof that the United States is fully capable of conducting limited, defined and proportional military actions without getting enmeshed in a drawn out conflict. What do we mean by deterring and degrading the regime's chemical weapons capabilities? Strikes could target a range of potential regime capacities to manage, deliver, or develop chemical weapons. Assad would discover that, henceforth, chemical weapons offer no battlefield advantage relative to their cost to use. And, if Assad is so brazen as to use chemical weapons again, he would know that we possess the ability to further degrade his capabilities. So, in short, this would not be an open-ended intervention in the Syrian civil war. These strikes would not aim to topple Assad or, by themselves, to effect regime change. Like many, I understand the public skepticism over using military force, particularly in this part of the world. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have left many Americans wary of further military action, however limited. But what the President is proposing is fundamentally different. Unlike Iraq, we are not betting on the existence of weapons of mass destruction. In Syria, we have the undeniable proof that chemical weapons have already been unleashed with horrific results. The entire world can see the bodies. True, there are always risks that accompany the use of military force. That is why we are taking a range of responsible measures to safeguard U.S. personnel and interests in the region, as well as those of our allies and partners. In this event, we do not assess that limited military strikes will unleash a spiral of unintended, escalatory reactions in the region. Assad and his allies would be more than foolish to take on the forces of the United States or our allies. They know that President Obama, throughout his presidency, has amply demonstrated he will not hesitate to defend our nation, our citizens, and our allies against direct threats to our security. The limited strikes that the President plans are necessary and appropriate, which is why they have garnered support on both sides of the political aisle. House and Senate leaders have declared their full support. Foreign policy experts from the left, right and center have strongly endorsed such action. President Obama has asked Congress for their support as the elected representatives of the American people, because he knows that investing the legislative branch in our policy choices helps ensure the maximum potency and sustainability of U.S. policy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4300, "text": "This decision reflects the President's profound respect for the power of our democracy and his belief that the American people care to defend our most basic values and live up to our leadership in the world. And he knows, like all Americans, that we are strongest in the world when we speak clearly and stand together. At the same time, the international community increasingly recognizes that this chemical weapons attack cannot be ignored. The Arab League foreign ministers have called for deterrent and necessary measures. The Organization of Islamic Cooperation has said the regime's attack requires a decisive action. The NATO Council has met twice, and Secretary General Rasmussen has affirmed that the allies agree on the need for a firm international response to avoid chemical weapon attacks in the future. Last Friday, at the G-20 in St. Petersburg, there was unanimous agreement that chemical weapons had been used and that the international norm against their use must be upheld. We gained unequivocal public support for anticipated U.S. military action from partners in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. Australia, Canada, France, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States joined together in a strong statement declaring that the Assad regime is responsible for the attack and that those who perpetrated these crimes must be held accountable. In subsequent days, Germany, Lithuania, Latvia, Hungary, Croatia, Estonia, Denmark, Romania, and Qatar have signed on to that same statement, and we expect more countries to add their support. Over the weekend, European Union High Representative Catherine Ashton issued a statement on behalf of the European Union labeling the August 21 attack a blatant violation of international law, a war crime, and a crime against humanity and calling for a clear and strong response to ensure there is no impunity. Every day, more and more nations are coming to the same conclusion. With all the attention given to the prospect of limited military strikes against Syrian regime targets, I want to underscore that such action is by no means the sum total of our policy toward Syria. On the contrary, any such strikes would complement and reinforce our broader Syria strategy, which we continue to pursue with allies and partners. Our overarching goal is to end the underlying conflict through a negotiated, political transition in which Assad leaves power. The best way to achieve this is to keep the country and its institutions intact, but all parties have to be willing to negotiate.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4301, "text": "So ours is a multifaceted strategy that puts pressure on the regime by isolating them and denying them resources; builds up the civilian and military opposition; and secures diplomatic agreement with other key countries on the principles for transition while assisting those who need immediate relief. Thanks to the generosity of the American people, we lead the humanitarian effort to save lives, having provided the Syrian people more than $1 billion worth of food, shelter, medical assistance, clean water, and relief supplies. In fact, some of the medical supplies used to treat the victims at Ghouta came from the United States. We continue to upgrade and increase our support for moderate, vetted elements of the Syrian opposition in coordination with our international partners. We are building the capacity of local councils and helping civilian leaders to deliver essential services to those in need. We are helping the opposition better serve the needs of the Syrian people. And, we are expanding our assistance to the Supreme Military Council to strengthen its cohesion and its ability to defend against a repressive regime that kills civilians with abandon. Limited strikes that degrade Assad's capacity to use chemical weapons, and thus to kill on a horrific scale with impunity, can also shake his confidence in the viability of his relentless pursuit of a military solution. But, ultimately, the only sustainable way to end the suffering in Syria is through a negotiated political solution, starting with the creation of a representative transitional authority that organizes elections and meets the needs of the Syrian people. A ceasefire and a political solution are also, as a practical matter, the only way to eliminate completely the Syrian chemical weapons threat. That is why we continue to increase pressure on the Assad regime to come to the table and negotiate. Notably, during our discussions in St. Petersburg, we sensed more urgency among key players to bring the parties to the negotiating table to jump-start a political transition. The United States shares that sense of urgency, and our intention is to renew our push for the UN-sponsored Geneva process following any limited strikes. Just as limited strikes would complement our broader Syria policy, so too would they reinforce our broader Middle East strategy. The United States will not take sides in sectarian struggles. We cannot and will not impose our will on the democratic development of other nations. But, as President Obama has made clear, we can - and we will - stand up for certain principles in this pivotal region.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4302, "text": "We seek a Middle East where citizens can enjoy their universal rights; live in dignity, freedom and prosperity; choose their own leaders and determine their own future, free from fear, violence, and intimidation. that nations cannot unleash the world's most horrific weapons against innocent civilians, especially children. Rather, we seek a Middle East where violent extremism, terrorism and weapons of mass destruction do not threaten our allies, partners and Americans. We seek the stability of a region that is vital to the energy that helps fuel our global economy. Countering Syria's use of chemical weapons shows that the United States will act to prevent some of the worst weapons in human history from becoming the new norm. It will demonstrate that America means what we say. It will make clear to Assad and his allies-Hezbollah and Iran-that they should not test the resolve of the United States of America. This has implications for our efforts to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. we will not allow Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. With allies and partners, we continue to pursue a comprehensive strategy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, including diplomacy, pressure, and increasing sanctions. And, as the President has said, all options remain on the table. For our efforts to succeed, however, the leaders in Tehran must know that the United States means what we say. If we do not respond when Iran's close ally, Syria, uses weapons of mass destruction, what message does that send to Iran? It risks suggesting that the international community cannot muster the will to act when necessary. It risks suggesting that serious threats to regional and global stability will be left to fester. It risks suggesting that egregious violations of international norms do not have consequences. Make no mistake, the decision our nation makes in the coming days is being watched in capitals around the world, especially in Tehran and Pyongyang. They are watching to see whether the United States will stand up for the world we are trying to build for our children and future generations. And, if we fail to act, they will be emboldened to push harder for the world that only they want-a future where more of the world's most dangerous weapons fall into the most dangerous hands. That is not the Middle East or the world that we seek. On the contrary, we seek a Middle East where Israelis and Palestinians live in two states, side by side, in peace and security.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4303, "text": "Yet, Assad's indiscriminate use of chemical weapons increases the possibility that they could someday be used against Israel and Palestinians. This only heightens the sense of vulnerability many in Israel feel about the turmoil that engulfs their nation, and it might make it even harder for Israelis and Palestinians to take the risks for peace. The bottom line is that standing up to Syria's use of chemical weapons advances our broader goals in the Middle East. Conversely, by allowing Assad to act with impunity, everything else becomes even harder-from countering terrorism to defending human rights, from promoting peace to ensuring our energy security and preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. In closing, allow me to speak, not just as the President's national security advisor, but also as a parent, a mother. Time and again, we have seen what happens when the world fails to respond to horrific abuses on the scale we saw in Damascus. We have seen the even greater barbarism that can follow, whether in Srebrenica or Rwanda or Darfur. I have been to more than my share of war zones. And unlike those tragedies of earlier decades, we have the technology-on our computers and our smart phones-to see the full horrors unfold in real time. Children lined up in shrouds, their voices forever silenced. Devastated mothers and fathers kissing their children goodbye, some pulling the white sheet up tight around their beautiful faces, as if tucking them in for the last time. But where words may fail us, action must not. Every adult American, every Member of Congress, should watch those videos for themselves. Watch those videos, and imagine the months and years ahead where an emboldened Assad and those who follow his example carry out more attacks, forcing us to witness more and more such depravity. that this cannot stand. Not given the values and principles that we as Americans hold dear. As the one indispensable leader in the world, the United States of America can and must take action-carefully, responsibly, purposefully-to reduce the chances of such an outrage happening again.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksnationalsecurityadvisorsusanericethenewamericafoundation", "title": "Remarks by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice at the New America Foundation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-national-security-advisor-susan-e-rice-the-new-america-foundation", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4304, "text": "Let me first single out President Ford and say how pleased we are to have him here. the Presidential Medal of Freedom. Since the first Presidential Medal, since those first recipients were chosen by President John Kennedy in 1963, some of the world's most notable individuals have been honored. In this administration alone, the medal is awarded to war heroes like General Doolittle, Jimmy Doolittle; General Schwarzkopf; diplomats and public servants like Jim Baker and Margaret Chase Smith and Douglas Dillon; world-famous entertainers such as Lucille Ball; and just last year, a world leader of enormous consequence, former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. And each of these extraordinary individuals were pioneers in their own right, each a monument to individual achievement. I will never forget that November night 2 years ago when Lech Walesa accepted his medal right here in this room, saying that now one of the greatest dreams of his life had been fulfilled because this medal stood for the freedom of a nation and the freedom of mankind. Today we recognize 10 men and women who have enriched our Nation, whether as leaders of popular movements, as friends of the common man, or as intellectual giants. Their achievement and dedication are unparalleled in America. And their standards of excellence are just as towering as their commitment to the ideal of freedom. Author Bill Buckley is the celebrated founder of one of the largest journals of opinion in America, a preeminent intellectual in the American conservative movement and a distinguished author. Bill Buckley raised the level of political debate in this country, and our Nation is better for it. A true Renaissance man, we honor him today for a lifetime of achievement in American political and social thought. Leon has been a voice of reason throughout the latter half of this century. A vigorous proponent of equal rights for all, Reverend Sullivan founded OIC, Opportunities Industrialization Centers, one of the world's largest self-help and job training facilities. More recently, he has worked hard to develop closer ties between this country and Africa. equal rights under law. Conservationist Russell Train has devoted his life to the protection and conservation of our land and wildlife, serving both in private environmental groups and in the Federal Government. I have often referred to President Theodore Roosevelt's idea that we do not inherit the environment from our parents so much as borrow it from our children. For the legacy you are helping us leave to the children of America, sir, we thank you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthepresidentialmedalfreedomawards", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Presidential Medal of Freedom Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-presidential-medal-freedom-awards", "publication_date": "18-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4305, "text": "Baseball great Ted Williams whom I do not see sitting here -- oops, there he is over on the -- do not say anything -- is an American legend, a remarkable figure in American sports and a twice-tested war hero. At the height of his athletic career, he answered the call of patriotism, serving his country in both World War II and the Korean war -- a true champion in the eyes of many Americans. An author wrote of his retirement from baseball, And now Boston knows how England felt when it lost India. Former First Lady Betty Ford, she first inspired our Nation when, fighting her own battle against breast cancer, she drew national attention to the importance of early detection. Later, as president of the Betty Ford Center, she restored hope and dignity to those lost in the desperation of drug and alcohol dependency. Ford, your compassion and caring have shown millions the way to new lives of freedom. Former Speaker of the House Tip O'Neill is a legendary figure in American politics, blessed with the common touch like few others. Over 50 years ago, Tip entered the rough-and-tumble of Massachusetts politics and soon became the Bay State's first Democratic speaker. Throughout 40 years as a Member of Congress and a decade as Speaker of the House, Tip O'Neill built one of the most remarkable political careers of this century. Jerry, would you agree to that? He is known as the grand old man of Puerto Rico. Beloved by his people as a patron of the arts, a savvy businessman, and a public servant of the first order, Don Luis is a lifelong advocate of statehood for Puerto Rico. And sir, we honor you today as an extraordinary leader in the life of Puerto Rico. Historian and humanist Hanna Gray is a world-class educator, the first woman to serve as president of a major university, the University of Chicago. Throughout her career, Mrs. Gray has been widely regarded as an outstanding Renaissance scholar. An example for others in her profession, she continues to teach at least one class a semester. Gray, for your pursuit of the highest ideals in your profession and your commitment to excellence in American education, we salute you. Vernon Walters enlisted in the ENTITY as a private in 1941 before the outbreak of World War II. Nearly half a century later, he was our Ambassador to Germany during the fall of the Berlin Wall. In the years between, he served six Presidents as a statesman, an ambassador, and a trusted aide.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthepresidentialmedalfreedomawards", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Presidential Medal of Freedom Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-presidential-medal-freedom-awards", "publication_date": "18-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4318, "text": "THIS IS a day of some personal sadness for me. I have in my hand the resignation of Luther Hodges who is departing his post as Secretary of Commerce. Secretary Hodges is a distinguished American who has served his State and his Nation and has in his entire lifetime given to the American people the best that is in him always for the benefit of his beloved country. His stewardship of the Commerce Department was both progressive and prudent. I have accepted Secretary Hodges' resignation with deep regret because he is not only a good and wise American but he is. But the American system that produced Luther Hodges has within its gifts the capacity to produce a man to take his place. I have elected to ask the Senate to give their advice and consent to my nomination of John T. Connor of New Jersey to be Secretary of Commerce. I truly believe that John Connor is an authentic example of what the American educational and free enterprise system can create. Until yesterday he was the president of Merck & Company, one of the Nation's leading pharmaceutical firms. He was on the board of directors of General Motors and General Foods, and other leading boards. He is a leader on the Committee for Economic Development and the Business Advisory Council. He is not unacquainted with the ways of Washington. In 1942 he was the General Counsel for the Office of Scientific Research and Development, at that time headed by the distinguished American, Vannevar Bush. In 1945 he became counsel to the new Office of Naval Research, and later special assistant to the late, respected James Forrestal. In between times he served as a rugged Marine and reached the rank of captain. He graduated from Syracuse University in 1936 magna cum laude, and from Harvard Law School in 1939. I might add that he was not backward in his studies. He was elected to Phi Beta Kappa. John Connor is the kind of man I am proud to have serve in the Cabinet. He will never discard a principle nor despair of doing what is right and ought to be done. I think the credentials that he bears in his heart and in his mind are the kind of credentials that will make his Nation proud and will cause great achievements to be his legacy in the country that he has served so well and in the Nation that he loves. I now present to you Mr. Connor. I have asked the new Secretary of Commerce to meet and work with the Secretary of Labor and the voice of American labor in this country, Mr. George Meany.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstelevisedceremonymarkingthechangeleadershipthedepartmentcommerce", "title": "Remarks at a Televised Ceremony Marking the Change in Leadership at the Department of Commerce.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-televised-ceremony-marking-the-change-leadership-the-department-commerce", "publication_date": "16-12-1964", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4319, "text": "I am really glad to be here tonight with all of you, because the issues that the National Women's Law Center focuses on are deeply personal to me. Fatima told us a little bit of this story, but I really wanted to tell you why the work of the NWLC matters so much to me. I grew up in a family in Oklahoma, and we were one of those paycheck-to-paycheck families, the kind just barely hanging on to our place in the middle class. When I was growing up, the path was very different for boys and for girls in America. Little girls could do almost anything they wanted, so long as what they wanted to do was be mommies, nurses or teachers - and nothing else. I still remember, it was in second grade, when Mrs. Lee told me that I could be a teacher, and, God bless her, I said that is what I was going to do, and it changed my life. Now, all three of my older brothers - I have three much older brothers - I came along many years later. My mother always referred to me as the surprise. I was about thirty before it hit me what that meant. That is a whole different story, but all three of my older brothers went off to the military - they did not graduate from college - that was their chance to build a future, their ticket to the middle class. But if I wanted to teach, I needed a college diploma, and it is a long and complicated story, including getting married at 19 and dropping out of school - man, was I smart at 19! But here is the key on that story. I grew up back when America was building more chances - not just first chances, but second chances. And for me, that second chance was a commuter college that cost $50 a semester. I understood what it meant to get a second chance-and you better believe, once I got it, I hung on for dear life. I can still remember the first day of school as a special needs teacher. There were cheerful pictures that I'd hung on the wall. The children were all ready for a new adventure. I loved that job. I truly loved that job. But by the end of the school year, I was pretty obviously pregnant. The principal did what I think a lot of principals did back then - he wished me good luck, and he did not ask me back for the next school year, and hired someone else for the job.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliverskeynoteaddressatnwlcandrsquos45thanniversarygala", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Keynote Address at NWLC's 45th Anniversary Gala", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-keynote-address-at-nwlc-and-rsquos-45th-anniversary-gala", "publication_date": "19-10-2017", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4320, "text": "I stayed home, and I tried desperately to be a good wife and mother, but I really wanted to do something more. So, I came up with a plan to go back to school, and this time I found a law school that was nearby. I cannot describe to you how crazy the idea was of my going to law school. My mother said many, many times, very loudly, that she thought I was jeopardizing my marriage. My brothers - all three of them - just thought I was plain nuts. My then husband smiled indulgently, making it clear that he knew that I could not possibly pull this off. But I bowed my head, I pushed on. But I was determined, and so I took all the needed exams, I filled out the application; I budgeted and figured out how I could pay the $450 tuition. child care. My daughter Amelia was about to turn two, and if I wanted to go to law school, I needed child care. And I know it sounds like I was not very smart, but I had not really realized exactly how hard that was gonna be. You know, I visited all kinds of places. They cost a fortune or they smelled funny or the kids looked miserable. This went on for weeks, and it is getting to be the end of the summer, and I am starting to sweat. We were bearing down on the start of school, and I knew that if I could not get childcare worked out, my idea of going back to school was over before it started. Finally, finally, less than one week before classes were starting, I found a place that seemed nice. they only took children who were dependably potty trained. Man, I filled out that application, I said Sure. We are so on this. And I left there knowing I had five days to turn my not-quite-two-year-old into a ready-to-go, dependably potty-trained partner. And I just want to say that I am here today courtesy of three bags of M&Ms and a cooperative two-year-old who loved chocolate. I have got to say, going to law school and trying to raise a toddler was not always easy, but actually, it was a really special time. We both had backpacks, and she allowed me to believe that a life that combined the inside and the outside - family and not family - could actually work.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliverskeynoteaddressatnwlcandrsquos45thanniversarygala", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Keynote Address at NWLC's 45th Anniversary Gala", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-keynote-address-at-nwlc-and-rsquos-45th-anniversary-gala", "publication_date": "19-10-2017", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4321, "text": "Now, we made it through three years of law school and by the time I graduated from law school, I was hugely pregnant with Baby Number Two. By now, I was actually starting to think about career choices after law school, but law firms at this point were barely crossing the line to hire women, and hugely pregnant women were not on the recruitment list. Everyone smiled, no one said a word, and no one invited me back for a second interview. Eventually, I got a job teaching at a law school, and when I got that job, I was beyond excited. I was back in the classroom. This time the kids were taller, and I did not decorate the classroom with pictures of animals, but I still loved it. I loved every single minute of it. But what was going on in my life outside the classroom was not going so well. I had been teaching for just a few weeks when the babysitter quit, and from then on, I was just on the treadmill. We cycled through one child care arrangement after another and every transition sent me into a near-panic. Every time, it represented a failure. One night after I'd put both the kids to bed, my 78-year-old Aunt Bee called long-distance from Oklahoma to just see how I was doing. And in the middle of a sentence, I just started to cry. I was failing my kids, I was failing my family, I was failing my teaching. I was doing laundry at 11 o'clock at night and class preps after midnight, and I felt like I was always behind. I told Aunt Bee I was going to quit my job. It is like it just fell out of my mouth. Aunt Bee's waiting on the other end, long-distance, she waits for me to quit crying, waits for me to blow my nose and get a drink of water. Then she very matter-of-factly said, I cannot get there tomorrow, but I can come on Thursday. And she arrived with seven suitcases and a Pekingese named Buddy - and stayed for 16 years. I am a United States Senator today in part because my Aunt Bee rescued me on that Thursday in 1979. Without child care, I was a goner. And I know how lucky I was, because so many working moms do not have an Aunt Bee with a dog named Buddy who can fly in and help out.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliverskeynoteaddressatnwlcandrsquos45thanniversarygala", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Keynote Address at NWLC's 45th Anniversary Gala", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-keynote-address-at-nwlc-and-rsquos-45th-anniversary-gala", "publication_date": "19-10-2017", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4322, "text": "Now lots of things have changed since the days when I headed off to school, and a lot of things have changed since I started out as an assistant professor in law. A lot more opportunities, and we celebrate those opportunities. But we also know that there are still plenty of obstacles facing working women, especially women with young children. And the challenge of finding reliable, affordable child care is a huge boulder firmly wedged between women and a million opportunities. Tens of millions of families, ordinary, hard-working families, simply do not have enough money to make it to the end of the month. I am not talking about enough money for fancy vacations or a new pair of sneakers. I am talking about families do not have enough money for housing and food and transportation. They do not have enough money to cover health care and education. And on top of all that, they do not have enough money for the child care they need so they can go to work and try to make some more money. Over the past generation, from 1970 to 2015, wages have effectively remained flat, while the costs of all kinds of basic expenses have gone up. Housing costs have risen by 50 percent, health insurance expenses have doubled, college degree costs more than tripled, and those are all huge increases. In nearly half of all states in America, child care costs are higher than the cost of in-state public college tuition. That is a giant boulder that rolls across right in front of working women and families all across this country. And for single parents and for parents working near the bottom of the income scale, the cost of child care often stretches families' paychecks past the breaking point. Today, about two-thirds of mothers of small children have jobs. That is millions of mamas scrambling to make sure that someone is taking care of the baby while they head off to work. High child care costs limit career opportunities for those women, especially for single moms. They put economic pressures on families by making it tougher to save money for retirement or for a home. And they force families to make difficult compromises on the quality of the care that they can afford. There is a lot of research showing that high-quality early education helps kids succeed in school and helps them do better in life. It can be a powerful tool to close the achievement gap. But skyrocketing costs often mean that families have to settle for lower-quality care. For some parents, that tradeoff is really grim.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliverskeynoteaddressatnwlcandrsquos45thanniversarygala", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Keynote Address at NWLC's 45th Anniversary Gala", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-keynote-address-at-nwlc-and-rsquos-45th-anniversary-gala", "publication_date": "19-10-2017", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4323, "text": "Unlicensed care - a home where several children are parked in front of a television set all day. A relative who really is not up to the task of keeping up with a two-year-old. Families do the best they can under difficult circumstances. Or a place that is not 40 minutes from home. 00 in the morning or open late if you get caught in traffic or an emergency comes up, you know your kid is somewhere safe. About half of all Americans today live in a child care desert. And this disproportionately affects families of color and low-income families who have the most to gain if mom can get a decent job. The fact is that even as expectations and opportunities for women in the workforce have shifted in so many ways for the better, child care in America remains an enormous roadblock. Compared to the rest of the developed world, the United States significantly underinvests in child care programs. Preschool enrollment in America is much lower, and the average teacher to child ratio much higher. It is time for America to step up on this. Last month I joined with several of my Democratic colleagues in Congress to support the Child Care for Working Families Act, this has been led by Senator Patty Murray from Washington and Congressman Bobby Scott from Virginia. This legislation would create a partnership between states and the federal government to ensure that no low-income or middle-class family pays too much of their income on child care, regardless of the number of children that they have. It is a step toward making child care and early education more affordable for working families who need it most, and I just want to shout out how much we appreciate the NWLC's support of this legislation. They are the ones giving it momentum and Congress should pass it now. Can we all just be clear on that? You know me, I never come with just one ask. Half of all low-wage workers have little or no say over when they work, and an estimated 20 to 30 percent are in jobs where they can be called in to work extra hours at literally the last minute. Just think of how much of a challenge it is to plan for anything, like doctor's visits, or going back to school, a second job - or, yes, child care -without even knowing when you will be working next week. So, I have introduced the Schedules That Work Act in the Senate, to put some basic fairness into scheduling.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliverskeynoteaddressatnwlcandrsquos45thanniversarygala", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Keynote Address at NWLC's 45th Anniversary Gala", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-keynote-address-at-nwlc-and-rsquos-45th-anniversary-gala", "publication_date": "19-10-2017", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4324, "text": "Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro - the best - has introduced the legislation in the House. This is a bill that will help working families, and especially lower-wage and minimum wage workers. And again, NWLC has been right there alongside me and alongside Rosa on this bill from the very beginning, and I am very grateful for that. We are going to do this. So that is two, but I have got to have three. America has agreed that every five-year-old should have access to a neighborhood school that will provide a safe place and be there five days a week and will teach that child to read, and write, and add numbers, and take turns and not to hit their neighbors. We have got plenty of work to do to make sure that our public schools are providing real opportunities for all our children, but that is the basic goal. We have all agreed on the target. I believe that same kind of opportunity should be available to four-year-olds and three-year olds and two-year-olds and all our children - and all their families. It is a big goal, but no one builds a future without investment. Whether you and I have small children or not, we have an interest in the future of this country - and that means we have an interest, and a responsibility - to invest in America's children. We do not climb up on someone else's backs. So, this is how I see it. Until we decide, until all of us decide - men and women, married and single, black and white, old and young - that we are willing to invest more in all our children, then we cannot build a country in which women have equal opportunity to build a future. That is how I see it. I wanted to be here tonight because I believe in change, and I believe that the energy to make these changes will come from people like you, people who fight for equality every day. And most importantly, the energy will come from the many people all across this country who have joined this fight and made it part of their lives. The day after President Trump's inauguration - you all remember that day, right? Now I remember the day of the inauguration, but I remember the day after. I went to Boston Common for the Women's March. Did anybody in here go to the Women's March? So I have got to tell you, in Boston, we know how to do a Women's March.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "warrensenategovnewsroompressreleasessenatorwarrendeliverskeynoteaddressatnwlcandrsquos45thanniversarygala", "title": "Senator Warren Delivers Keynote Address at NWLC's 45th Anniversary Gala", "source": "https://www.warren.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/senator-warren-delivers-keynote-address-at-nwlc-and-rsquos-45th-anniversary-gala", "publication_date": "19-10-2017", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Elizabeth Warren"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4325, "text": "I have just returned from an interview with President Johnson, in which he talked for an hour on the process of reconstruction of rebel States. His manner was as cordial, and his conversation as free, as in 1863, when I met him daily in Nashville. His countenance is healthy-even more so than when I first knew him. I remarked that the people of the North were anxious that the process of reconstruction should be thorough, and they wished to support him in the arduous work; but their ideas were confused by the conflicting reports constantly circulated, and especially by the present position of the democratic party. It is industriously circulated in the democratic clubs that he was going over to them. Major, have you never known a man who for many years had differed from your views because you were in advance of him, claim them as his own when he came up to your standpoint? So have I, and went on: The democratic party finds its old position untenable, and is coming to ours. If it has come up to our position I am glad of it. You and I need no preparation for this conversation; we can talk freely on this subject, for the thoughts are familiar to us; we can be perfectly frank with each other. He then commenced with saying that the States are in the Union, which is whole and indivisible. Individuals tried to carry them out but did not succeed, as a man may try to cut his throat and be prevented by the bystanders, and you cannot say he cut his throat because he tried to do it. Individuals may commit treason and be punished, and a large number of individuals may constitute a rebellion and be punished as traitors. Some States tried to get out of the Union and we opposed it, honestly, because we believed it to be wrong; and we have succeeded in putting down the rebellion. The power of those persons who made the attempt has been crushed, and now we want to reconstruct the State governments, and have the power to do it. The State institutions are prostrated, laid out on the ground, and they must be taken up and adapted to the progress of events; this cannot be done in a moment. We are making very rapid progress- so rapid I sometimes cannot realize it; it appears like a dream. We must not be in too much of a hurry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgelstearnstherestorationthesouthernstatesandthestatusthe", "title": "Interview with George L. Stearns on the Restoration of the Southern States and the Status of the Negro", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-l-stearns-the-restoration-the-southern-states-and-the-status-the", "publication_date": "03-10-1865", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4326, "text": "It is better to let them reconstruct themselves than to force them to it; for if they go wrong, the power is in our hands and we can check them at any stage, to the end, and oblige them to correct their errors. We must be patient with them. I did not expect to keep out all who were excluded from the amnesty, or even a large number of them; but I intended they should sue for pardon, and so realize the enormity of the crime they had committed. You could not have broached the subject of equal suffrage, at the North, seven years ago; and we must remember that the changes at the South have been more rapid, and that they have been obliged to accept more unpalatable truth than the North has. We must give them time to digest a part; for we cannot expect such large affairs will be comprehended and digested at once. We must give them time to understand their new position. I have nothing to conceal in these matters, and have no desire or willingness to take indirect courses to obtain what we want. Our Government is a grand and lofty structure; in searching for its foundation we find it rests on the broad basis of popular rights. I am opposed to giving the States too much power, and also to a great consolidation of power in the central government If I interfered with the vote in the rebel States, to dictate that the negro shall vote, I might do the same thing for my own purposes in Pennsylvania. Our only safety lies in allowing each State to control the right of voting by its own laws, and we have the power to control the rebel States if they go wrong. If they rebel we have the army, and can control them by it, and, if necessary, by legislation also. If the general government controls the right to vote in the States, it may establish such rules as will restrict the vote to a small number of persons, and thus create a central despotism. My position here is different from what it would be if I was in Tennessee. There I should try to introduce negro suffrage gradually; first, those who had served in the army; those who could read and write, and perhaps a property qualification for others, say $200 or $250. It will not do to let the negroes have universal suffrage now, it would breed a war of races.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgelstearnstherestorationthesouthernstatesandthestatusthe", "title": "Interview with George L. Stearns on the Restoration of the Southern States and the Status of the Negro", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-l-stearns-the-restoration-the-southern-states-and-the-status-the", "publication_date": "03-10-1865", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4327, "text": "Before I say a few words about the meeting we just had, I'd like to mention some good news that came out today about our economy. Now, for the first time in 18 months, our manufacturing sector has expanded, and the statistics used to measure manufacturing output is the highest it is been in over 2 years. This means greater production of transportation equipment like cars and electronic equipment like computers and appliances, and it means these companies are starting to invest more and produce more, and it is a sign that we are on the path to economic recovery. And there is no doubt that we have a long way to go, and I and the other members of this administration will not let up until those Americans who are looking for jobs can find them. But this is another important sign that we are heading in the right direction and that the steps we have taken to bring our economy back from the brink are working. Now, we just had a good meeting about our ongoing efforts to prepare this country for the H1N1 flu virus this fall. And I want to thank John Brennan; our CDC Director, Tom Frieden; and Secretaries Sebelius, Napolitano, Duncan, and Locke for all the good work that they have been doing to get us ready today. As I said when we saw the first cases of this virus back in the spring, I do not want anybody to be alarmed, but I do want everybody to be prepared. We know that we usually get a second, larger wave of these flu viruses in the fall, and so response plans have been put in place across all levels of government. Our plans and decisions are based on the best scientific information available, and as the situation changes, we will continue to update the public. And we are also making steady progress on developing a safe and effective H1N1 flu vaccine, and we expect a flu shot program will begin soon. For all that we do in the Federal Government, however, every American has a role to play in responding to this virus. We need State and local governments on the frontlines to make antiviral medications and vaccines available and be ready to take whatever steps are necessary to support the health care system. We need hospitals and health care providers to continue preparing for an increased patient load and to take steps to protect health care workers. We need families and businesses to ensure that they have plans in place if a family member, a child, or a coworker contracts the flu and needs to stay home.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksh1n1influenzapreparednessandresponse", "title": "Remarks on H1N1 Influenza Preparedness and Response", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-h1n1-influenza-preparedness-and-response", "publication_date": "01-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4343, "text": "The neighbors and friends from across Pennsylvania, it is great to be back in the Keystone State with workers for Trump. I am so grateful y'all came out on a beautiful day, the first day of September as we start the road to victory on November 3. It really is great to be here with so many friends who've supported this president and our administration from day one. Would you join me in thanking someone who has been a fighter for this administration? He has stood strong for an agenda that made America great again in our first three years and seen this state and nation through trying time, It is also great to be here with two future members of Congress who I know are going to stand with this president and our agenda for four more years. Pennsylvania needs to send them to Washington, D.C. It really is great to be with all of you. You can take a seat if you got one, because I am here for one reason and one reason only, and that is that Pennsylvania and America need four more years of President Donald Trump in the White House. It is on, Pennsylvania. It is on and I am so excited to be back with all of you. We had a busy week last week. Did you check some of that out? I mean come Thursday night, President Trump laid out an inspiring vision, an inspiring vision for our second term, a vision of more jobs, better wages, more support for our heroes and that night the president said that voters have never faced a clearer choice. This election, as he said, will decide whether we allow a socialist agenda to demolish our cherished destiny or whether we save the American dream. Standing here in Pennsylvania, I know we are going to vote for America, we are going to vote for four more years for President Donald Trump in the White House. You know I know we are not too far from our opponent's boyhood home, but it is Trump country now. I am here because I stand with President Donald Trump. When this president stands up for faith and family and the American flag, I stand with President Donald Trump. When this president stands up to the radical left and their socialist agenda, I stand with President Donald Trump and when this president stands up for American workers and jobs, jobs, jobs, we stand with President Donald Trump. Four years ago a movement was born and judging from this crowd and everybody I saw on the way here, it looks like that movement's doing just fine in Pennsylvania.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepenceworkersfortrumpeventspeechtranscriptseptember1", "title": "Mike Pence 'Workers for Trump' Event Speech Transcript September 1", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-workers-for-trump-event-speech-transcript-september-1", "publication_date": "01-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4344, "text": "It was a movement of everyday Americans from every walk of life. Here in Pennsylvania, you believed we could be strong again. You said yes to President Donald Trump in 2016 and I know that Pennsylvania's going to say yes to four more years of President Donald Trump in 2020. Four years ago we inherited a military hollowed out by devastating budget cuts, an economy struggling to break out of the slowest recovery since the Great Depression. Terrorism was on the rise around the world and we witnessed a steady assault on our most cherished values, the freedom of religion and the right to life, and in four short years, we rebuilt our military. We restored the arsenal of democracy and we are once again giving our soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and space force the resources and support they need to defend this nation. We revived our economy. We cut taxes across the board, rolled back federal red tape, unleashed American energy, fought for free and fair trade. We stood for all of our God-given liberties, like the freedom of speech, the freedom of religion, and the unalienable right to life. This president stood for the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and we always will. We appointed conservatives, more than 200 conservatives at every level including two great Supreme Court justices and every single day, this president and this administration have stood with the men and women of law enforcement all across America. Today, the president is visiting Wisconsin to show support for the people of Kenosha who've been through a lot in the last week. He went there to show support for law enforcement for the National Guard, and President Donald Trump is in Kenosha today to make it clear that we stand for law and order in every city and every town for every American. I saw Joe Biden was in Pennsylvania yesterday. Did you see it? After months of staying silent on riots and looting and violence in the streets of our cities, Joe Biden finally came out of his basement and he actually said we have to stand against violence in every form it takes. Right after that, he criticized law enforcement and he never mentioned any of the anarchists or left wing mobs that have been sewing violence in the streets of our major cities. Joe Biden said yesterday he does not think he looks like a radical socialist with a soft spot for rioters. But men and women of Pennsylvania, you should know, yesterday Joe Biden never condemned ANTIFA. He never called on Democrat mayors to get their cities under control.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepenceworkersfortrumpeventspeechtranscriptseptember1", "title": "Mike Pence 'Workers for Trump' Event Speech Transcript September 1", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-workers-for-trump-event-speech-transcript-september-1", "publication_date": "01-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4345, "text": "He never called out his campaign staff or his running mate for raising money to bail out violent criminals. Joe Biden never even offered a plan to end the violence. For months all he is talked about is peaceful protesters as the American people have watched businesses and communities in our major cities burn. The truth is Joe Biden would double down on the policies that have led to violence in America's cities. I think you all know you will not be safe in Joe Biden's America. Now President Trump and I will always support the right of Americans to peaceful protest but rioting and looting is not peaceful protest. Burning businesses is not free speech and those who do so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  Too many heroes have died defending our freedom to see Americans strike each other down in our streets. We will have law and order on the streets of this country for every American of every race and creed and color so help us God. And I think the people of Pennsylvania know despite what the many leaders in the democratic party have to say, many voices in the media and those on the radical level, we do not have to choose between supporting law enforcement and standing with our African American neighbors to improve the quality of their lives, their education, their jobs, and safety. From the first day of this administration we have done both and we will keep supporting law enforcement and keep supporting our African American and minority communities across this land for four more years. Joe Biden says America is systemically racist and that law enforcement has an implicit bias against minorities. And when asked whether he'd support cutting funding to law enforcement Joe Biden replied, Yes, absolutely. But under President Donald Trump I will make you a promise, we will always stand with those who serve on the thin blue line of law enforcement. We are not going to defund the police not now, not ever. So, under President Trump's leadership we have stood for a stronger and safer America. We stood up for all of our liberties, we have revived our economy. And in those first three years businesses large and small created more than seven million good paying jobs including 500,000 manufacturing jobs. I have a lot in common. I always used to say back when I was governor of the hoosier state that we did two things well, we make things and we grow things but the last administration lost 200,000 manufacturing jobs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepenceworkersfortrumpeventspeechtranscriptseptember1", "title": "Mike Pence 'Workers for Trump' Event Speech Transcript September 1", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-workers-for-trump-event-speech-transcript-september-1", "publication_date": "01-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4346, "text": "The last president with his vice president Joe Biden actually said in the summer of 2016 he was asked about manufacturing jobs he says, I do not know what you are going to do to bring them back. He said, What magic wand do you have? Well, the people of Pennsylvania knew we did not need a magic wand we just needed President Donald Trump in the white house, 500,000 manufacturing jobs created in the first three years. In three short years with your support we created the greatest economy in the world. And then the Corona virus struck from China but before the first case of Corona virus spread person to person within the United States our president took the unprecedented action of suspending all travel from China. And I promise you that action saved untold American lives and it bought us invaluable time to stand up the greatest national mobilization since World War II. At the president's direction we marshaled the full resources of the federal government and the American economy. We partnered with private industry to reinvent testing. We produced billions of supplies distributed to our great doctors and nurses and hospital workers around the country. And as we speak we are developing a growing number of treatments that are saving lives across America. And even though Joe Biden said that, No miracle is coming, I have got news for you. We are on track to have the world's first safe and effective Corona virus vaccine by the end of the year. America is the land of miracles. Our hearts go out to all the families that have lost loved ones during the course of this pandemic including the more than 7,000 families here in the keystone state. Know that you have always been in our hearts and you will remain in our prayers. But thanks to the courage and compassion of the American people, the extraordinary work of our healthcare workers, we are slowing the spread, we are protecting the vulnerable, we are saving lives and we are opening up America again. In the days ahead I promise you we are going to continue to put the health of America first. As we work to bring this economy all the way back we all have a role to play but we all have a choice to make. Because of the strong foundation that President Trump and the congressmen and our allies in Washington DC helped us to pour it is amazing to think we have already seen nine million Americans go back to work in the last three months alone including more than 500,000 jobs right here in Pennsylvania.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepenceworkersfortrumpeventspeechtranscriptseptember1", "title": "Mike Pence 'Workers for Trump' Event Speech Transcript September 1", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-workers-for-trump-event-speech-transcript-september-1", "publication_date": "01-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4347, "text": "And just this morning we saw the manufacturing, the backbone of the American economy actually expanded at the highest rate since November of 2018. Men and women of Pennsylvania, because of the strong foundation on which we are standing the great American comeback is happening. But you need to ask yourself and ask your neighbors to come November 3rd. As our economy is beginning to stand back up, as we are putting millions of Americans back to work, you need to ask yourself who do you trust to rebuild this economy. A career politician who presided over the slowest recovery since the great depression or a proven leader who created the greatest economy in the world. The choice is clear to bring America all the way back we need four more years of President Donald Trump in the white house. So, we have been going through a time of testing. As I said just the other night we are soon coming to a time for choosing and on safety and security jobs and values the choice could not be more clear. I mean think about it, in the middle of a global pandemic Joe Biden wants to raise taxes by four trillion dollars. President Trump, well we cut taxes across the board for working families, businesses large and small and we are going to cut taxes again in the next four years. Joe Biden wants to bury our economy under an avalanche of red tape like his own version of the green new deal. President Trump he actually signed more laws cutting federal red tape than any president in American history and we are going to keep chopping for four more years. Joe Biden, he wants to go back to economic surrender with China. He actually said he would repeal all the tariffs that the president put into place that have been leveling the playing field for American workers. President Trump, he stood up to China. He put American jobs and American workers first and we are going to stand strong until we level the playing field once and for all. Also on trade Joe Biden voted for NAFTA, we all know what that did to this economy. But thanks to President Donald Trump NAFTA is yesterday and the USMCA is here to stay. It is a win for American jobs. The experts tell us the USMCA could create up to 600,000 new jobs including 50,000 manufacturing jobs, it is incredible. And where President Donald Trump ended the war on coal, unleashed American energy and we are now a net exporter of energy for the first time in 70 years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepenceworkersfortrumpeventspeechtranscriptseptember1", "title": "Mike Pence 'Workers for Trump' Event Speech Transcript September 1", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-workers-for-trump-event-speech-transcript-september-1", "publication_date": "01-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4348, "text": "Joe Biden and the radical left want to crush American energy, crush American energy jobs, and raise the cost of electricity for every household and business in Pennsylvania. But yesterday Joe Biden actually went to Pittsburgh and after months of campaigning on a plan to abolish fossil fuels he said, I am not He said, I am not banning fracking. In fact, he said it twice. And then he said President Trump was lying about his record. So let me set the record straight. When Joe Biden was asked last July and I quote, Would there be any place for fossil fuels, including coal and fracking in a Biden administration? Joe Biden said, quote, No, we would walk it out. Here in Pennsylvania where ending fracking would literally cost a half a million jobs by some estimates, you deserve to know, that when Joe Biden was asked whether he'd be willing to quote, Sacrifice thousands or hundreds of thousands of blue collar jobs for the sake of a radical environmental agenda, Joe Biden said, quote, The answer's yes. And this time last year he told a supporter and I quote, I guarantee, I guarantee we are going to end fossil fuels. Joe, that includes fracking. I mean, what Joe does not know is America's future depends on energy independence. So let me tell all the great workers gathered here at Workers for Trump, whatever you may hear over every day that remains between now and election day, Joe Biden and the radical left are going to try to ban fracking and abolish fossil fuels, but we are not going to let it happen. I guarantee, I guarantee with four more years of President Donald Trump in the White House, we will have more fracking, more American energy, and energy independence for generations to come. So it is been about prosperity and security, but it is also about recognizing that we have a president that knows that if you do not have a border, you do not have a nation. And Joe Biden is for open borders, sanctuary cities, free lawyers and healthcare for illegal immigrants. President Donald Trump has stood by the men and women of customs and border protection. We have made historic investments in border security, and we have already built more than 300 miles of that border wall on the Southern border of the United States. And with four more years, we are going to build it all. And finally, beyond security and safety and prosperity, it is also about values in this election.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepenceworkersfortrumpeventspeechtranscriptseptember1", "title": "Mike Pence 'Workers for Trump' Event Speech Transcript September 1", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-workers-for-trump-event-speech-transcript-september-1", "publication_date": "01-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4349, "text": "For years, Joe Biden took the position that while he supported abortion rights, he did not support using taxpayer funds to pay for abortion. But now Joe Biden supports using taxpayer dollars to pay for abortion all the way up to the moment of birth. I could not be more proud to be vice president to a president who stands without apology for the sanctity of human life. President Donald Trump is the most pro-life president in American history. And it is not just been about life, it is been about liberty, and this president has stood strong for the freedom of religion of every American of every faith, and we always will. President Donald Trump in our first year, ended the assault on the Little Sisters of the Poor and the supreme court of the United States made it permanent. Joe Biden, he actually said that he would work to reimpose the Obamacare mandates on those wonderful nuns, but we are not going to let it happen. You know, the choice in this election has never been clear. When you look at that agenda, it is clear, Joe Biden would be nothing more than a Trojan horse for an agenda of the radical left. A couple of weeks back, Joe Biden said that democracy was on the ballot, but I think you all know that our economy is on the ballot, law and order are on the ballot, but there are also things much more fundamental and foundational to our country that are on the ballot as well. I think in this election, it is not so much whether America will be more conservative or more liberal, whether it will be more republican or more democrat, more red or blue. I think the choice in this election is whether America remains America. Whether we are going to chart a course grounded in our highest ideals of freedom and free markets, the unalienable right to life and liberty, or whether we are going to change course as a nation and fundamentally transform our country and our economy into something entirely different. President Donald Trump has set our nation on a path of freedom and opportunity, and Joe Biden would set America on a path of socialism and decline. Men and women, I came to Pennsylvania today because we stand at a crossroads. Joe Biden and the Democratic Party have been overtaken by the radical left. Many of you may have described and identified yourself as democrats in the past. The truth is Democratic Party today is about higher taxes, socialized medicine, open borders, abortion on demand and cutting funding to law enforcement.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepenceworkersfortrumpeventspeechtranscriptseptember1", "title": "Mike Pence 'Workers for Trump' Event Speech Transcript September 1", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-workers-for-trump-event-speech-transcript-september-1", "publication_date": "01-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4350, "text": "It would take our nation on a path of socialism and decline. And so I say to all my fellow republicans, all our independents, and every great democrat gathered here, we need to decide right here and right now that Joe Biden is never going to be president of the United States. We are going to reelect president Donald Trump for four more years. Because for all we have done in those first three years, for all we have done through the trying days of 2020, that is just what President Donald Trump calls a good start. And with four more years, I promise you, four more years means more jobs. Four more years means more support for our troops, and it is going to take at least four more years to drain that swamp. He is a man who says what he means, and means what he says. Now I can tell you firsthand, he is never stopped fighting to keep the promises that he made to the people of Pennsylvania, now it is our turn to fight for him. So I need you to bring it. And when you get out there, have faith. Have faith that even in these divided times that every time the American people have been presented a choice between a future of more freedom or a future of less freedom, the American people choose freedom every time. Tell them I was over at the construction company, I ran into Mike. He talked for like a half hour, just like giving a summary. He said, he talked for like a half hour, just like giving a summary of everything we got done under this president, everything we have been able to do for the American people. I'd also encourage you to have that other kind of faith. It seems as you turn on the television these days, it seems like there is more that divides this country than any time in my lifetime but I will always believe, and I believe it more having traveled across this country as your vice president, that there is always be more that unites the American people than could ever divide us and chief among those things is faith. So I want to say to you, if you are inclined to bow the head and bend the knee from time to time, I encourage you to do that too. And on this one, I am not asking for support for a candidate or a cause or a party.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsmikepenceworkersfortrumpeventspeechtranscriptseptember1", "title": "Mike Pence 'Workers for Trump' Event Speech Transcript September 1", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-pence-workers-for-trump-event-speech-transcript-september-1", "publication_date": "01-09-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Mike Pence"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4363, "text": "Well, I was just sitting here thinking two things. First, when the Vice President got really warmed up- -I thought to myself, first, it will become slightly obvious to this audience that he and I come from a little further south in the United States. And then I was thinking, when he really got going, I wish I had people walking the aisles passing the plate. Anyway, the second thing I thought in the midst of this wonderful event was that I wish that I could take the Pep Band with me for the next month or two wherever I go. I want to say to Chancellor Aiken and President Stukel and Mayor McCollum, Mayor Satterthwaite, Congressman Ewing, Senator Durbin, and Senator Moseley-Braun, Secretary Riley, and Mr. Vice President, I am delighted to be here. I have spent a lot of time in Illinois in the last 7 years, and this State has been very good to me in many ways. The Vice President has been here a lot, and Hillary came and got a honorary degree and was able to speak here. And I have heard from also our families, friends what a wonderful place this is. I do not know how, with all my roaming across America, I have never lit down here before, but I am sure glad I got here today. And I thank you for making me feel so welcome. If you heard the State of the Union last night or just listened to the Vice President here today you know that-you know there is a reason we are here, because you represent, both all of you individually and this great institution, what we are trying to build for the future of America. Last night I talked about all the changes that have occurred just in the last few years. We have had one foot in the 21st century for quite some time. The generation living today has lived through more changes in more different areas in a shorter time than virtually any generation in the history of this country. And when the Vice President and I took office, we were committed to trying to make America work again, to try to fix the things that just were not working for ordinary people, and then to free us up to sort of imagine the future and take the steps that were necessary to get us to the future we want to build. How can we strengthen this country for the 21st century? What do we have to do?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversityillinoischampaignurbanaillinois", "title": "Remarks at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-illinois-champaign-urbana-illinois", "publication_date": "28-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4364, "text": "Now, I do not want to go over everything that was said, and besides that, I cannot do as well as the Vice President. He must have gotten 30 more minutes sleep than I did last night. But I want to talk to you about just two or three things that I think we should be thinking about for tomorrow. Let me begin with a bit of history, and your chancellor mentioned it earlier, or ENTITY did. Shortly before-shortly after Abraham Lincoln was elected President, Congressman Justin Morrill, from Vermont, asked his colleagues to help him create a system of land grant colleges. It was in the middle of the Civil War, and frankly, most of them thought he was nuts. You know, people were worried about the survival of the Union. But Abraham Lincoln was always worrying about other things, even in the middle of the Civil War. At night, when I work in the White House, I go to an office that I have had restored to the way it was in the mid-1800's. And I remember that that room was Abraham Lincoln's waiting room during the Civil War. And all during the Civil War, at certain appointed hours, he kept a time apart to meet with ordinary citizens. If you wanted a job in a post office in Baltimore in 1862, if you came at the appointed day, at the appointed hour, you could walk up to the room that I go into every night, and sit there, and Abraham Lincoln would see you; ENTITY would see you and listen to you tell why you wanted a post office job. And when he was asked why he did this, he said, I have to remember that people are concerned about other things, and I want this war to be over so all of us can go back to thinking about things like that. So he always thought about what life would be like when the war was over. And he was open to this. In 1862, Morrill's bill passed, and President Lincoln signed it into law. It became one of the wisest investments our Nation ever made, and the University of Illinois, here, was one of the original land grant colleges under that Morrill Act. It is played a dramatic role in helping to shape our Nation. You heard and you were cheering about all the Nobel Prize winners and all that. The Vice President pointed out that it was here that the transistor was invented; Jack Kilby, class of '47, co-invented the microchip.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversityillinoischampaignurbanaillinois", "title": "Remarks at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-illinois-champaign-urbana-illinois", "publication_date": "28-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4365, "text": "NCSA, headed by Larry Smarr, launched a billion-dollar browser industry. Illinois and other land grant colleges have literally led our way into the information age. And it all stemmed from something somebody did in 1862 that no one could have imagined would one day have led to all you see around you. I think Lincoln would have liked the Pep Band. But he could not have imagined it. So that is what we have been trying to do. And you heard the Vice President say that basically our view was-the first thing we had to do was we had to get rid of the deficit, but we had to do it in a way that would enable us to invest in our future. We had to shrink the Government, but we had to do it in a way that would allow us to be more active in the areas that were important to our future, that would help to bring us together and widen the circle of opportunity. Now, as you look ahead, I'd just like to mention three things today that I think the University can have a major impact on, two directly and one indirectly. First, we should look to the millennium to try to speed the pace of scientific and technological advances in ways that benefit all of us. So I proposed last night a huge increase in medical research, an increase in the National Science Foundation, a doubling of the National Cancer Institute, because I believe we have enormous opportunities there, and you should be a part of that. I think it is highly likely that many of you who will be having children in the next 3 or 4 years will have children that will live into the 22d century because of the work that will be done in places like the University of Illinois. The second thing that I think we should think about is we should reaffirm our commitment to the exploration of outer space. I talked a little about the international space station last night and about Senator John Glenn at 77 years old going back into space. It is so thrilling, and I know all of you are happy about that. But we are learning a lot from our work in space about how our bodies work here on Earth and about how our environment works here on Earth and how it might be better preserved. And so I ask all of you to continue to support the work we are doing there. And finally, I'd ask you to support, as the Vice President said, this next generation Internet.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversityillinoischampaignurbanaillinois", "title": "Remarks at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-illinois-champaign-urbana-illinois", "publication_date": "28-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4366, "text": "I mean, can you really believe that only 5 years ago there were just 50 webpages on the Internet; that the Internet was the private preserve of physicists 5 years ago, and now, most 8-year-olds know more about it than their parents? I mean, that gives you some sense of the speed of change. So we are trying to develop the next generation Internet, and Larry Smarr is helping us, and if it works, it will work about 1,000 times faster than the present one does. I do not know how we can absorb any more speed in information, but we have to be able to. We have to maintain public support across party lines and regional lines and age lines and race lines and all kinds of lines for investments in the future. We always have to be trying to shape the future, and we need your help to do that. Now, the second thing that I want to emphasize is that I want all of you to support the proposition that we have to make, in the years ahead, a college education as universal as a high school education is today. Now, why do I say that? Already it is perfectly clear from looking at all the census figures that any young person who has at least 2 years of college or more is highly likely to get a job with growing income prospects and high stability and the prospect of positive change in the future. Now, a young person with less than 2 years of college is highly likely to be in a job where income increases do not keep up with inflation, subject to changes which may be unstable and not positive. We have to create a network of lifetime learning. We have to, first of all, make our elementary and secondary education as excellent as our higher education is today so more people will be prepared to go to college. But then we literally-we have got to make sure that college is open to all. Now, as the Congressman said, 1997 was the best year for education in a generation, and I believe, clearly, the best year since the GI bill was passed. If you listen to all the things that were done-and I will just litanize them for you-I think you can make a compelling case that the doors of college have been opened to everybody who will work for it. 220,000 new Pell grant scholarships and the maximum amount increased; 300,000 new work-study positions; 50,000 AmeriCorps slots for people who do community service work and earn money to go to college.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversityillinoischampaignurbanaillinois", "title": "Remarks at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-illinois-champaign-urbana-illinois", "publication_date": "28-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4367, "text": "As Senator Moseley-Braun said, she cosponsored the bill to make interest on student loans tax deductible again; there are IRA's now that you can invest in and then withdraw from, tax-free, if the money is used for education. The first 2 years of college, virtually all Americans are eligible for a $1,500 tax cut to pay for tuition in the first 2 years of college, the HOPE scholarship; and then another tax credit for the 3d and 4th years of college, for graduate school, and for further job training-a lifetime learning credit. But what I want to say to you is, all of you who are here, I came here to ask, as a great university, in whatever service groups you are in, in whatever family or neighborhood or church networks you have, you need to get this message out to people who are coming on behind you. We need every child in this country to know that if he or she works hard and learns what they are supposed to learn, they can all go to college now. And we need them there for our future in the 21st century. Now, the last thing I want to ask your help on in the coming year, because we are going to have a big dialog about it, is something that all of you students probably never think about, and that is Social Security and your retirement. I do not know about you, but when I was your age, I never thought about it. The older you get, the faster time goes. I never will forget, once, a few years ago, I saw a man who was 76 years old at an airport meeting his brother, getting ready to go to his sister's funeral. And I said, What are you thinking about? He said, You know, Bill, it does not take long to live a life. I say that to say that even the young must care for the future, even the young must think about their obligations to generations yet unborn; that America must work as a seamless web of community, always doing what is best for today and tomorrow. Now, what is that got to do with Social Security? There are polls that say that young people in their twenties think it is more likely that they will see UFO's than that they will ever collect Social Security. And all of you know that the Social Security system is supposed to be in trouble. Now, what does that mean?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversityillinoischampaignurbanaillinois", "title": "Remarks at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-illinois-champaign-urbana-illinois", "publication_date": "28-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4368, "text": "It is not in trouble today; nobody today has got any problems drawing their money. In fact, today we collect more money in Social Security taxes every year, quite a bit more, than we pay out. The problem is that when the baby boomers retire-starting with me, I am the oldest of the baby boomers-people my age and down about 18 years younger, we are the largest group of Americans that have ever lived, except the group that started first grade last year-second grade, or third grade, whatever it is, something in grade school-because we have got more children in schools now, public schools, than we had during the baby boom generation for the first time. But we are going to have 18, 20, 25 years where there will be a huge number of people on Social Security in their retirement years, compared to the people who are paying in. Now, the question is, what is the best way to prepare for the retirement of the baby boomers in ways that do not either rob those people who need it of their secure retirement or impose intolerable burdens on our children, who, in turn, will be burdened in raising our grandchildren? I do not know anybody in my generation who believes that we ought to just take it out on you and put our feet up when we turn 65 and turn away from the obligations we have to contribute to the further growth and vitality of people who are younger than we are. So the question is, what is the fairest way to change this? What is best for people who are on Social Security now? What is best for the baby boomers? What is best for young people in their twenties and thirties just starting to pay into the system? What is best for the kids that are in high school now who have not even started? We are going to spend a year having forums all across the country, completely nonpartisan, trying to bring people in and debate it. And then about a year from now, I am going to convene the leaders of Congress, and we are going to try to craft historic bipartisan legislation to reform Social Security, to save it for the 21st century, to make sure it is there not just for the baby boomers but for everybody in this audience and all your children, too, so we will have a system that works, so that people who work hard and do their part will know they will have elemental retirement security and that we can do it without bankrupting the country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversityillinoischampaignurbanaillinois", "title": "Remarks at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-illinois-champaign-urbana-illinois", "publication_date": "28-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4369, "text": "I think we can do it. I know we can do it. But it is going to take your good-faith involvement-people of all ages. And since what we do may affect how you proceed throughout your entire worklife, we have got to have people involved in their twenties, in their thirties. The young people of this country have got to be involved in this debate. It will affect you as much as anybody else. But if we do it, it will be just sort of like balancing the budget. You will never do that. We spend less money on debt; we invest more money in our future; we have a stronger economy. The same thing will be true of Social Security. Once we make the adjustments necessary to fix it, the increase in confidence, the increase in savings, the increase in belief in the future of this country as we go forward together will be absolutely astonishing. And we need you to be a part of it. The last thing I want to ask about-the Vice President touched this briefly, and he knows more about it than I do-but we need young people in this country, particularly young people in our university system, to convince the rest of America that we must and we can address the challenge of climate change and global warming. Now, I can tell you, I have been working on the economics of energy efficiencies for over 20 years now in various guises. I am convinced that the technology is out there right now to do what we need to do to do our part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in factories, in power generation systems, in homes and office buildings. And we are getting very, very close in automobiles. But listen, this is your future; this is your life; this is the world your children and your grandchildren will have to live in, in the 21st century. This is crazy for us not to do this. We do not have to take the economy down; we will lift the economy up. And you have to take the lead in helping us meet this challenge. those are just four of the things that are out there. Reach out across the lines that divide us. Do not let people-do not ever let people who are divisive or pessimistic convince you that there is anything this country cannot do. I can look at you and tell you that this country can do anything we put our minds to. Thank you, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversityillinoischampaignurbanaillinois", "title": "Remarks at the University of Illinois in Champaign-Urbana, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-illinois-champaign-urbana-illinois", "publication_date": "28-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4370, "text": "We meet at the beginning of a new year, at a moment that is also a new era for our two nations and for the world. For half of this century, the Soviet Union and the United States stood locked in a nuclear standoff. For our two nations and for the world, cold war, hot words, and the constant threat of war seemed imminent, indeed, at times inevitable. The time that we might meet as friends and the time that we might meet in freedom seemed distant, indeed a dream. has set foot in a democratic Russia. to turn an adversarial relationship into one of friendship and partnership. We stand together today in this great city at the threshold of a new world of hope, a widening circle of freedom for us and for our children. This historic opportunity would simply not have been possible without our combined common effort. President, I salute you for your unwavering commitment to democratic reform and for the history you have written since the heroic day in August '91 when you climbed atop that tank to defend Russia's democratic destiny. And I also want to salute the heroism of the Russian people themselves, for it is they who will determine that Russia's democratic course is irreversible. Today, as we meet on Russian soil, home to 1,000 years of heritage and history, to a people rich in scientific and creative talent, I want to assure the Russian people on behalf of all Americans, we understand that Russia faces a difficult passage. We are with you in your struggle to strengthen and secure democratic rights, to reform your economy, to bring to every Russian city and village a new sense of hope and the prospect of a future forever free. Let me say clearly, we seek no special advantage from Russia's transformation. Yes, deep arms reductions, broader and deeper economic ties, expanded trade with Russia, all are in the interest of my country. But they are equally in the interest of the Russian people. Our future is one of mutual advantage. We seek a new relationship of trust between our military forces. They once confronted each other across Europe's great divide, and let them now come together in the cause of peace. We seek full cooperation to employ our collective capabilities to help resolve crises around the world. We seek a new cooperation between the U.S. and Russia and among all states to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentborisyeltsinrussiamoscow", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Boris Yeltsin of Russia in Moscow", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-boris-yeltsin-russia-moscow", "publication_date": "03-01-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4371, "text": "Your excellency, my fellow citizens, it is with the greatest pleasure that I find myself facing an audience in this great State. I echo the wish of the governor that it might be our privilege to stay a long time in Idaho and know something more than her fame, know her people, come in contact with her industries, and see the things that we have all so long read about and admired from a distance; but, unfortunately, it is necessary for us to go back to Washington as soon as we can, though it was a great pleasure to escape from Washington. The people of the United States do not live there, and in order to know what the people of the United States are thinking about and talking about it is necessary to come and find out for yourself. I have taken pains since I was a boy so to saturate myself in the traditions of America that I generally feel a good deal of confidence that the impulses which I find in myself are American impulses; but no matter how thoroughly American a man may be, he needs constantly to renew his touch with all parts of America and to be sure that his mind is guided, if he be in public station, by the thoughts and purposes of his fellow countrymen. It was, therefore, with the most earnest desire to get in touch with you and the rest of my fellow countrymen that I undertook this trip, for, my fellow countrymen, we are facing a decision now in which we can not afford to make a mistake. We must not let ourselves be deceived as to the gravity of that decision or as to the implications of that decision. It will mean a great deal now, but it will mean infinitely more in the future. America has to do at this moment nothing less than prove to the world whether she has meant what she said in the past. I must confess that I have been amazed that there are some men in responsible positions who are opposed to the ratification of the treaty of peace altogether. It is natural that so great a document, full of so many particular provisions, should draw criticism upon itself for this, that, or the other provision. We went into this Great War from which we have just issued with certain assurances given ourselves and given the world, and these assurances can not be fulfilled unless this treaty is adopted.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4372, "text": "We told the world and we assured ourselves that we went into this war in order to see to it that the kind of purpose represented by Germany in this war should never be permitted to be accomplished by Germany or anybody else. Do not let your thoughts dwell too constantly upon Germany. Germany attempted this outrageous thing, but Germany was not the only country that had ever entertained the purpose of subjecting the peoples of the world to its will, and when we went into this war we said that we sent our soldiers across the seas not because we thought this was an American fight in particular, but because we knew that the purpose of Germany was against liberty, and that where anybody was fighting liberty it was our duty to go into the contest. We set this Nation up with the profession that we wanted to set an example of liberty not only, but to lead the world in the paths of liberty and justice and of right; and at last, after long reflection, after long hesitation, after trying to persuade ourselves that this was a European war and nothing more, we suddenly looked our own consciences in the face and said, This is not merely a European war. This is a war which imperils the very principles for which this Government was set up, and it is our duty to lend all the force that we have, whether of men or of resources, to the resistance of these designs. And it was America never let anybody forget this it was America that saved the world, and those who propose the rejection of the treaty propose that, after having redeemed the world, we should desert the world. The settlements of this treaty can not be maintained without the concerted action of all the great Governments of the world. I asked you just now not to think exclusively about Germany, but turn your thoughts back to what it was that Germany proposed. Germany did direct her first force against France and against Belgium, but you know that it was not her purpose to remain in France, though it was part of her purpose to remain in Belgium. She was using her arms against these people so that they could not prevent what she intended elsewhere, and what she intended elsewhere was to make an open line of dominion between her and the Far East.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4373, "text": "The formula that she adopted was Bremen to Bagdad, the North Sea to Persia to crush not only little Serbia, whom she first started to crush, but all the Balkan States, get Turkey in her grasp, take all the Turkish and Arabian lands beyond, penetrate the wealthy realms of Persia, open the gates of India, and, by dominating the central trade routes of the world, dominate the world itself. That was her plan; and what does the treaty of peace do? For I want you to remember, my fellow countrymen, that this treaty is not going to stand by itself. The treaty with Austria has now been signed; it will presently be sent over, and I shall lay that before the Senate of the United States. It will be laid down along exactly the same lines as the treaty with Germany; and the lines of the treaty with Germany suggest this, that we are setting up the very States which Germany and Austria intended to dominate as independent, self-governing units. We are giving them what they never could have got with their own strength, what they could have got only by the united strength of the armies of the world . We have given them what I have called their land titles. We have said, These lands that others have tried to dominate and exploit for their own uses belong to you, and we assign them to you in fee simple. They never did belong to anybody else. It was brigandage to take them. We give them to you in fee simple. But what is the use of setting up the titles if we do not guarantee them? And that guaranty is the only guaranty against the repetition of the war we have gone through just so soon as the German nation, 60,000,000 strong, can again recover its strength and its spirit, for east of Germany lies the fertile field of intrigue and power. At this moment the only people who are dealing with the Bolshevist government in Russia are the Germans. They are fraternizing with the few who exercise control in that distracted country. They are making all their plans that the financing of Russia and the commerce of Russia and the development of Russia shall be as soon as possible in the hands of Germans; and just so soon as she can swing that great power, that is also her road to the East and to the domination of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4374, "text": "If you do not guarantee the titles that you are getting up in these treaties, you leave the whole ground fallow in which again to sow the dragon's teeth with the harvest of armed men. That, my fellow citizens, is what article 10, that you hear so much talked about in the covenant of the league of nations, does. It guarantees the land titles of the world; and if you do not guarantee the land titles of the world, there can not be the ordered society in which men can live. Off here in this beloved continent, with its great free stretches and its great free people, we have not realized the cloud of dread and terror under which the people of Europe have lived. We would rather die now than live another 50 years under the cloud that has hung over us ever since the Franco-Prussian War of 1870-71, because we have known that this force was gathering, we have known what the purpose was ultimately to be, we have known that blood and terror lay ahead of us, and we can not and will not live under that cloud any more. America, my fellow citizens, is necessary to the peace of the world. America is absolutely necessary to the peace of the world. Germany realizes that; and I want to tell you now and here I wish I could proclaim it in tones so loud that they would reach the world Germany wants us to stay out of this treaty. Not under the deception that we will turn in sympathy toward her. Not under the. delusion that we would seek in any direct or conscious way to serve Germany, but with the knowledge that the guaranties will not be sufficient without America, and that, inasmuch as Germany is out of the arrangement, it will be very useful to Germany to have America out of the arrangement. Germany knows that if America is out of the arrangement America will lose the confidence and cooperation of all the other nations in the world, and, fearing America's strength, she wants to see America alienated from the peoples from whom she has been alienated. She wants to see one great nation left out of this combination which she never would again dare face. Evidences are not lacking nay, evidences are abounding that the pro-German propaganda has started up in this country coincidently with the opposition to the adoption of this treaty. Are we going to prove the enemy of the rest of the world just when we have proved their savior?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4375, "text": "Do not let anybody delude you, my fellow citizens, with the pose of being an American. If I am a true American I will study the true interests of America. If I am a true American I will have the world vision that America has always had, drawing her blood, drawing her genius, as she has drawn her people, out of all the great constructive peoples of the world. A true American conceives America in the atmosphere and whole setting of her fortune and her destiny. And America needs the confidence of the rest of the world just as much as other nations do. America needs the cooperation of the rest of the world to release her resources, to make her markets, above all things else to link together the spirits of men who mean to redeem the race from the wrongs that it has suffered. This western country is par excellence the country of progressivism. I am not now using it with a big P. It does not make any difference whether you belong to the Progressive Party or not; you belong to the progressive thought, and I hope every intelligent man belongs to the progressive thought. It is the only thought that the world is going to tolerate. If you believe in progress, if you believe in progressive reform, if you believe in making the lot of men better, if you believe in purifying politics and enlarging the purposes of public policy, then you have got to have a world in which that will be possible; and if America does not enter with all her soul into this new world arrangement, progressives might as well go out of business, because there is going to be universal disorder, as there is now universal unrest. Do not mistake the signs of the times, my fellow countrymen, and do not think that America is immune. The poison that has spread all through that pitiful nation of Russia is spreading all through Europe. There is not a statesman in Europe who does not dread the infection of it, and just so certainly as those people are disconcerted, thrown back upon their own resources, disheartened, rendered cynical by the withdrawal of the only people in the world they trust, just so certainly there will be universal upsetting of order in Europe. And if the order of Europe is upset, do you think America is going to be quiet? Have you not been reading in the papers of the intolerable thing that has just happened in Boston?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4376, "text": "When the police of a great city walk out and leave that city to be looted they have committed an intolerable crime against civilization; and if that spirit is going to prevail, where are your programs? How can you carry a program out when every man is taking what he can get? How can you carry a program out when there is no authority upon which to base it? How can you carry a program out when every man is looking out for his own selfish interests and refuses to be bound by any law that regards the interests of the others? There will be no reform in this world for a generation if the conditions of the world are not now brought to settled order, and they can not be brought to settled order without the cooperation of America. I am not speaking with conjecture, my fellow citizens. I would be ashamed of myself if upon a theme so great as this I should seek to mislead you by overstatement of any kind. I know what I am talking about. I have spent six months amidst those disturbed peoples on the other side of the water, and I can tell you, now and here, that the only people they depend upon to bring the world to settled conditions are the people of America. A chill will go to their heart, a discouragement will come down upon them, a cynicism will take possession of them, which will make progress impossible, if we do not take part not only, but do not take part with all our might and with all our genius. Everybody who loves justice and who hopes for programs of reform must support the unqualified adoption of this treaty. I send this challenge out to the conscience of every man in America, that if he knows anything of the conditions of the world, if he knows anything of the present state of society throughout the world and really loves justice and purposes just reform, he must support the treaty with Germany. I do not want to say that and have it proved by tragedy, for if this treaty should be refused, if it should be impaired, then amidst the tragedy of the things that would follow every man would be converted to the opinion that I am now uttering, but I do not want to see that sort of conversion. I do not want to see an era of blood and of chaos to convert men to the only practical methods of justice. We are not exempt from those very subtle influences which lead to all sorts of incidental injustice.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4377, "text": "We ourselves are in danger at this present moment of minorities trying to control our affairs, and whenever a minority tries to control the affairs of the country it is fighting against the interest of the country just as much as if it were trying to upset the Government. If you think that you can afford to live in a chaotic world, then speak words of encouragement to the men who are opposing this treaty, but if you want to have your own fortunes held steady, realize that the fortunes of the world must be held steady; that if you want to keep your own boys at home after this terrible experience, you will see that boys elsewhere are kept at home. Because America is not going to refuse, when the other catastrophe comes, again to attempt to save the world, and, having given this proof once, I pray God that we may not be given occasion to prove it again! We went into this war promising every loving heart in this country who had parted with a beloved youngster that we were going to fight a war which would make that sacrifice unnecessary again, and we must redeem that promise or be of all men the most unfaithful. If I did not go on this errand through the United States, if I did not do everything that was within my power that is honorable to get this treaty adopted, and adopted without qualification, I never could look another mother in the face upon whose cheeks there were the tears of sorrowful memory with regard to the boy buried across the sea. The moral compulsion laid upon America now is a compelling compulsion, and can not be escaped. My fellow countrymen, because it is a moral issue, because it is an issue in which is mixed up every sort of interest in America, I am not in the least uneasy about the result. If you put it on the lowest levels, you can not trade with a world disordered, and if you do not trade you draw your own industries within a narrower and narrower limit. This great State, with its untold natural resources, with its great undeveloped resources, will have to stand for a long generation stagnant because there are no distant markets calling for these things. All America will have to wait a long, anxious generation through to see the normal courses of her life restored.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4378, "text": "So, if I were putting it upon the lowest conceivable basis of the amount of money we could make, I would say, We have got to assist in the restoration of order and the maintenance of order throughout the world by the maintenance of the morale of the world. That, I suspect, is what most of the opponents of the league of nations, at any rate, try to lead you to believe, that this is a league of arms. Why, my fellow citizens, it is a league to bring about the thing that America has been advocating ever since I was born. It is a league to bring it about that there shall not be war, but that there shall be substituted for it arbitration and the calm settlement of discussion. That is the heart of the league. Every member of the league, and that will mean every fighting nation in the world except Germany, agrees that it will never go to war without first having done one or the other of two things either having submitted the matter in dispute to arbitration, in which case it agrees absolutely to abide by the result, or having submitted it to consideration by the council of the league of nations, in which case it promises to lay all the documents, all the facts, in its possession before the council and to give the council six months in which to consider the matter, and, if it does not like the opinion of the council at the end of the six months, still to wait three months more before it resorts to arms. That is what America has been striving for. That is what the Congress of the United States directed me to bring about. Perhaps you do not know where; it was in an unexpected place, in the naval appropriations bill. Congress, authorizing a great building program of ships and the expenditure of vast sums of money to make our Navy one of the strongest in the world, paused a moment and declared in the midst of the appropriation bill that it was the policy of the United States to bring about disarmament and that for that purpose it was the policy of the United States to cooperate in the creation of a great international tribunal to which should be submitted questions of international difference and controversy, and it directed the President of the United States, not later than the close of this war, to call together an international conference for that purpose. It even went so far as to make an appropriation to pay the expenses for the conduct of such a conference in the city of Washington. And that is a continuing provision of the naval appropriations bill.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4379, "text": "When I came back with this covenant of the league of nations, I had fulfilled the mandate of the Congress of the United States; and now they do not like it. There is only one conceivable reason for not liking it, my fellow citizens, and to me as an American it is not a conceivable reason; that is that we should wish to do some nation some great wrong. If there is any nation in the world that can afford to submit its purposes to discussion, it is the American Nation. If I belonged to some other nations, there are some things that I know that I would not like to see submitted to the discussion of mankind, but I do not know anything in the present purposes of the United States that I would not be perfectly willing to lay upon any table of counsel in the world. In carrying out the mandate of the Congress, I was serving the age-long purpose of this great people, which purpose centers in justice and in peace. You will say, Well, why not go in with reservations? I wonder if you know what that means. If the Senate of the United States passes a resolution of ratification and says that it ratifies on condition that so and so is understood, that will have to be resubmitted to every signatory of the treaty; and what gravels me is that it will have to be submitted to the German Assembly at Weimar. That goes against my digestion. We can not honorably put anything in that treaty, which Germany has signed and ratified, with Germany's consent; whereas it is perfectly feasible, my fellow countrymen, if we put interpretations upon that treaty which its language clearly warrants, to notify the other Governments of the world that we do understand the treaty in that sense. It is perfectly feasible to do that, and perfectly honorable to do that, because, mark you, nothing can be done under this treaty through the instrumentality of the council of the league of nations except by a unanimous vote. The vote of the United States will always be necessary, and it is perfectly legitimate for the United States to notify the other Governments beforehand that its vote in the council of the league of nations will be based upon such and such an understanding of the provisions of the treaty. The treaty is not susceptible of misunderstanding.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4380, "text": "I do not object to painting the rose or refining fine gold; there is not any phrase in the covenant of the league of nations that can legitimately be said to be of doubtful meaning, but if the Congress of the United States wants to state the meaning over again in other words and say to the other nations of the world, We understand the treaty to mean what it says, I think that is a work of supererogation, but I do not see any moral objection to it. But anything that qualifies the treaty, anything that is a condition to our ratification of it, must be submitted to all the others, and we must go over this process again; this process which took six months of intensive labor, which took six months of very difficult adjustment and arrangement, which quieted jealousies, which allayed suspicions, which set aside controversies, which brought about the most extraordinary union of minds that, was ever brought about in so miscellaneous an assembly, divided by so many interests. All that must be gone over again, and in the meantime the world must wait and its unrest grow deeper, and all the pulses of life go slower, waiting to see what is going to happen, all because the United States asks the other governments of the world to accept what they have already accepted in different language. That is all that it amounts to; I means, all that the reasonable reservations amount to. Some of them amount to staying out altogether, some of them amount to a radical change of the spirit of the instrument, but I am speaking now of those which some men of high conscience and of high public purpose are seriously pressing in order that there may be no misunderstanding. You can avoid a misunderstanding without changing the document. You can avoid a misunderstanding without qualifying the terms of the document, because, as I have said and shall say again and again, America is at liberty as one of the voting members of the partnership to state how she understands the articles of copartnership. I beg that these things may sink in your thoughts, my fellow countrymen, because we are at a turning point in the fortunes of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscoeurdaleneidaho", "title": "Address at Coeur D'Alene, Idaho", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-coeur-dalene-idaho", "publication_date": "12-09-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4381, "text": "Well I do not care what Rich Little says. If you have got a stage wait, that'll fill it as good as anything. The President was referring to comedian Rich Little, who had performed an impersonation of the President at a pre-Inaugural event. You know, yesterday morning I spoke a great deal about the spirit of the American people, that America will prevail because that spirit is strong. But for Nancy and me, there are some other very special people whose spirit has made the past few days the very best of our lives. And I know that with them and they'd be the first to say hundreds and hundreds of helpers, many of you, gave of themselves to make the inaugural ceremonies outstanding. I had a little batch of phone calls to make today, and a number of them were out of the country. And you might be interested to know that one of the Prime Ministers I spoke to said that their whole nation watched our inaugural, and they said the reaction was, there will never again be one like it. That is due to Charlie and Bob and their helpers. And Mary Jane, I think, was very much a part of Bob in all of that help, full time. Now, as one who went to all the balls last night I can attest to the fact that the guests who came to Washington, in addition to not finding any dancing room- or in spite of that, they were caught up, as we were, in a time of great happiness and expectation. And those things do not happen by accident. It takes people who are devoted; it takes creative people and patient people. And I know what all of you who worked on this went through in these past few weeks. I know the kind of responsibilities you had. I know the multiple problems that descended on these two who were in charge. And let me say that there may have been many toasts raised recently, but whether we have got a glass in our hand or not, it is time to toast the inaugural committee for a job well done and for gratitude that is well deserved. And again, I know that I would have the agreement of these chairmen back here when I say there is another group connected with this, perhaps not specifically of the committee, but they could not have done it without them. And that is the group that through their generosity made possible, with their resources as well as their time, to make January 20th a very special day. It is wonderful to see you here. God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehousereceptionforthepresidentialinauguralcommittee", "title": "Remarks at a White House Reception for the Presidential Inaugural Committee", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-reception-for-the-presidential-inaugural-committee", "publication_date": "21-01-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4382, "text": "President Sweeney, it is great to see you here, to see all of you out here and all of those behind. I always knew the CWA was behind me, but when I saw so many people up here, I thought it was a literal truth today. I want to say I also believe that two gentlemen who came with me are still here, Florida representatives, our Democratic Congressman, Representative Alcee Hastings, and Attorney General Bob Butterworth. I welcome them here. I came here, first and foremost, to say a simple thank you. Thank you for what you do to make America great. Thank you for what you have done for me and the Vice President. Thank you for the help you have given us to move this country forward. You prove it. The bounty we enjoy today is in no small measure the result of your hard work, every day programming computers, manning customer service centers, electronically filing news stories, running MRI machines, laying the very cable of the information superhighway. The CWA is building the new economy of the 21st century, In that endeavor, the ENTITY-Gore administration and our allies in Congress have been your partners. Remember what it was like when I became ENTITY 6 1/2 years ago? opportunity in return for responsibility; a community of all Americans; and a Government committed to giving the American people the tools and conditions they needed to solve their problems and make the most of their own lives. That strategy was set in motion with our economic plan in 1993. In the years since, we have turned the red ink of deficits into the black ink of surpluses, lowered interest rates, and fueled an economic expansion of truly historic proportions. Meanwhile, we have nearly doubled investment in education and training; put more police on the street and taken more guns out of the hands of criminals; invested more in technology, medical research, in cleaning up the environment; passed family leave and other familyfriendly measures, including substantial tax cuts to help families pay for college and to help families raise their children. We showed, in other words, that our Democratic administration could balance the budget while honoring our values. Now, because we believe it is wrong for any child to be without access to the Internet, one of the greatest vehicles of opportunity the world has ever seen, we created our E-rate program to make sure every classroom thanks to the leadership of Vice President Gore every classroom in America can be hooked up to the Internet by the year 2000.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunicationsworkersamericaconventionmiamibeachflorida", "title": "Remarks to the Communications Workers of America Convention in Miami Beach, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-communications-workers-america-convention-miami-beach-florida", "publication_date": "13-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4383, "text": "We are well over half way there now, and I thank you for your role in that. I also want to thank Morty Bahr for serving on the advisory council on the national information infrastructure, which laid the groundwork for the E-rate program, which has brought discount after discount after discount to poor schools and libraries throughout America to make sure everybody can afford to be part of the information superhighway. Now, because we believe all Americans should have the means to upgrade their skills, we unveiled in January a new initiative to offer literacy and job training to every single working American who needs it now and who will need it in the future. And again, Morty Bahr was there with me at the unveiling, having served on our 21st century work force commission. And now, because we believe that to be secure means meeting the challenge of the aging of America by reforming Social Security and Medicare, providing more health care security, more retirement security, and strengthening our economy, we have put forward a sweeping proposal to use most of our surplus for these purposes. Today I want to talk to you in detail about the challenge of strengthening and modernizing Medicare for the 21st century. But with the baby boom retirement just ahead of us and more Americans living longer, the number of Medicare beneficiaries is simply growing faster than the number of workers paying into the system. By the year 2015, the Medicare Trust Fund will be insolvent, just as the baby boom generation begins to retire and enter the system, eventually doubling the number of Americans over 65 by the year 2030. Over the last 6 1/2 years, we have taken some important steps to strengthen Medicare. We have helped to extend the life of the Trust Fund to 2015 by fighting waste, fraud, and abuse, and taking tough action to contain costs, in 1993 and in 1997. But we must do more, not only to extend the solvency of Medicare but to ensure that its benefits keep up with the advances of modern science. No one, for example, no one would devise a Medicare program, if we were starting from scratch today, without including a prescription drug benefit. It was not as important back in 1965. Many of the drugs we now use to treat heart disease, arthritis, and other conditions did not even exist back then when Medicare was first created. When it comes to securing health care and its benefits, nobody nobody has done more than the CWA.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunicationsworkersamericaconventionmiamibeachflorida", "title": "Remarks to the Communications Workers of America Convention in Miami Beach, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-communications-workers-america-convention-miami-beach-florida", "publication_date": "13-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4384, "text": "When it comes to controlling health care costs and maintaining quality of care, no union has worked harder or more cooperatively with employers and insurers than the CWA. What you have done for your retired members, we as a nation must now do for all our senior citizens. Last month I set out a plan to secure and modernize Medicare. First and foremost, my plan would provide what every single objective expert has said Medicare must have if it is to survive: more resources to shore up its solvency. The plan would devote 15 percent of the Federal budget surplus over the next 15 years to Medicare to extend the life of the Trust Fund to 2027. Second, the plan will use the force of competition and the best practices now in the private sector to keep costs down without sacrificing quality. Third, the plan will allow Americans between the ages of 55 and 65 who do not have health insurance, on the job or in their retirement, to buy into Medicare in a way that does not compromise the solvency of the Trust Fund. This is a huge issue today, with more and more early retirees and others who do not have health insurance and simply cannot afford it in the private marketplace in the years when they may be most vulnerable. Fourth, the plan will modernize Medicare's benefits to match the advances of medical science. For example, almost every week, researchers seem to develop a new preventive screening to catch diseases in their early stages. Unfortunately, the copayments Medicare charges for these tests leads many seniors struggling to pay rent and utility bills to put off getting those tests done until it is too late. It makes no sense for Medicare to put up roadblocks to screenings and then turn around and pick up the much more expensive hospital bills the screenings might have avoided. That is why our plan will eliminate the deductible and all copayments for all preventive services. We pay for it by requiring modest copays for lab tests that are often overused and indexing the very modest part B premium. If we are going to do this right, we must help seniors to meet their greatest growing need, the need for affordable prescription drug coverage. Now, many of our friends in the other party say, Well, a lot of seniors have drug coverage today. But 15 million do not , and more are losing it every single day; and a lot of them are paying an arm and a leg for very modest coverage.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunicationsworkersamericaconventionmiamibeachflorida", "title": "Remarks to the Communications Workers of America Convention in Miami Beach, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-communications-workers-america-convention-miami-beach-florida", "publication_date": "13-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4385, "text": "For those who have good plans, they are not having any problems because our plan on this is entirely voluntary. It provides voluntary prescription drug coverage, paid for largely with resources we will save from making Medicare more competitive and innovative, plus a small fraction of the surplus that is dedicated to Medicare. This benefit will cover half of all prescription drug costs, up to $5,000, when fully phased in, with no deductible at all, and all for a modest premium that will be less than half the price the average Medigap policy costs, and will not apply will not apply to seniors up to 130 percent of the poverty line. This is a good deal for America, and we ought to do it. It is a program our seniors can afford, provided in a way the rest of America can afford. Nobody knows better the value of prescription drug coverage than union men and women who have fought hard for drug benefits more generous than those I am proposing. But retired unionists are among the fortunate few. I say again, nearly 15 million Medicare beneficiaries lack prescription drug benefits altogether. Nearly half of them are not poor; they are middle class Americans. With prescription drug prices rising, the pressure is on employers to cut back or eliminate prescription drug coverage, and it is becoming more intense. Much of that pressure is coming from competing employers who do not offer these benefits. You and your employers should not have to fight this battle by yourselves. Of course, America works best when we work together to meet our common challenges. Yesterday at the White House, I met with leaders of both parties to discuss the budget and my plan for Medicare. I was pleased that Republican leaders expressed a willingness to work together with us. But they are putting together a tax plan today that leaves no resources available from the surplus for strengthening Medicare. That is why I am asking Republican leaders, in the interest of saving Medicare, to reconsider the size of their tax cut plan. We worked very hard in putting this plan together to squeeze every penny of savings we could out of Medicare without harming the quality of care. But to extend the life of the Trust Fund for a quarter century without devoting a portion of the surplus to Medicare would mean listen to this would mean holding spending increases in Medicare to a rate that is more than 60 percent below what private insurance is expected to grow. That would severely cut both the quality and the quantity of health care available to seniors on Medicare, and that will not happen on my watch.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunicationsworkersamericaconventionmiamibeachflorida", "title": "Remarks to the Communications Workers of America Convention in Miami Beach, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-communications-workers-america-convention-miami-beach-florida", "publication_date": "13-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4386, "text": "I am pleased that there does seem to be an agreement between the Republican leaders and our Democratic leaders and myself to devote that portion of the surplus attributable to Social Security taxes just to Social Security. But it is critical that we have a so-called lockbox that actually locks in the debt reduction that we get from not spending that money and gives the benefit of that debt reduction to Social Security, so that we can extend the life of the Trust Fund, as my plan does, the Social Security Trust Fund, to 2053, adding 53 years from here to there. I will be talking more about this later, but the Social Security Trust Fund is expected to last until 2035 now. It is even more important that we devote some of these funds to Medicare right now because Medicare is expected to be insolvent almost 20 years earlier, in 2015. We, as a nation, have got some big choices to make in the next few months. We have got to decide what to do with this surplus. Did you ever think a few years ago we'd even be having this conversation? We had a $290 billion deficit when I took office; it was supposed to be up to $380 billion this year. We quadrupled the debt 4 times quadrupled the debt in 12 years. So I realize that it is tempting for a Congress to say, Well, 16 months before election, let us do what is most immediately pleasing, whether it is right for America over the long run or not. This is a big test for us, for our wisdom, for our judgment, for our concern for our people and their future. I think the right choice is to devote most of the surplus to saving Social Security and Medicare. Let me tell you and let me walk through this with you again because, under our plan, besides reforming and saving Social Security and Medicare, this plan will allow us to pay off publicly held debt to make America debt-free in 15 years for the first time since 1835. Now, what does that mean to the Government? It means when you pay your tax money, we are not spending 13, 14, or 15 cents on every dollar of your taxes just to pay interest on the debt. What does it mean to ordinary citizens right now and every year from now on? It means if America is on a path to becoming debt-free, interest rates will be lower. That means businesses can borrow at less cost. That means more new investment, more jobs, and more money for higher wages.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunicationsworkersamericaconventionmiamibeachflorida", "title": "Remarks to the Communications Workers of America Convention in Miami Beach, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-communications-workers-america-convention-miami-beach-florida", "publication_date": "13-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4387, "text": "It means average families can borrow at less cost. That means lower home mortgages, lower credit card payments, lower car payments, lower college loan payments. I am telling you, the average family will save a whole lot more under this plan looking after our future than they will under the tax cut plan offered by the other party. in education, in hiring those 100,000 teachers, in medical research, in technology, in preserving the environment, in modernizing our national defense. We will not have the money to do that. And again I say, this is a mistake because our plan has a sizable tax cut, nearly a quarter trillion dollars for middle income families to meet their crucial needs for child care, for longterm care, for saving for retirement. It provides tax cuts for building world-class schools, for developing and installing new environmental technologies, for funding the new markets initiative, which I highlighted on my tour to the poorest parts of America last week, simply to say we will give you the same tax breaks to invest in poor areas in America we give you to invest in poor areas overseas. We can save Social Security and Medicare and make Medicare better. We can make America debt-free, giving our children a stronger economy and all of you lower interest rates. We can still have a good-size tax cut, but not as large as the one the Republican leaders propose. Again I say, their plan would spend almost the entire non-Social Security portion of the surplus on tax cuts. It would not extend the solvency of Medicare by a single day. Depending on how they do it, it might not extend the solvency of Social Security by a single day. It would force drastic cuts in education, research and technology, defense, and the environment. It would mean not paying off the debt and leaving us and our children more vulnerable to higher interest rates, a higher level of Government spending for interest payments alone, higher taxes in years to come, a weaker economy, itself more vulnerable to the kind of global financial turmoil we have all seen in the last couple of years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunicationsworkersamericaconventionmiamibeachflorida", "title": "Remarks to the Communications Workers of America Convention in Miami Beach, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-communications-workers-america-convention-miami-beach-florida", "publication_date": "13-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4388, "text": "an America debt-free, with Social Security intact and Medicare even better, and a substantial tax cut; or a return to the spend now, pay later approach that will not save and strengthen Medicare, may or may not lengthen the life of Social Security, will certainly cut education and other vital programs, and again I say, over the long run, will be far more costly to every person in this room and every working family in the entire United States. I believe we all want Republicans and Democrats and independents the strongest possible America for our children. I am encouraged by the tone and the substance of the meeting I had yesterday with the leaders of Congress in both parties. So I ask again the Republican leaders in Congress, for the sake of saving Medicare and strengthening our future, to reduce the size of your tax cut and join us in putting first things first. If we would sit down at the table like responsible family members and figure out how much it would cost us to meet our current obligations to education, defense, and other things, what we have to do to save Social Security and Medicare, not just for the baby boom generation but for their children and grandchildren who otherwise will be spending money they need to get along, to pay for education, to pay for the future on their parents, then we could figure out how much is left over for the tax cut. That is what I have tried to do, because I think it is the right thing for America. To my fellow Americans who may think that this is just one of those Washington debates, and one side makes their side sound good and the other side makes their side sound so good, and it is all just a bunch of politics, all I can offer is the record of the last 6 1/2 years. Think about it; with your help, we have nearly 19 million new jobs, the longest peacetime expansion in history, the lowest crime rate in 26 years, the lowest welfare rolls in 30 years, the highest homeownership in history, the lowest minority unemployment rates ever recorded. We have declining rates of teen pregnancy, smoking, and drug abuse. We have cleaner air, cleaner water, and safer food. We have got 90 percent of our children immunized against serious childhood illnesses for the first time. We have had 100,000 young people working in our communities in AmeriCorps, making America better and earning their way to college.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunicationsworkersamericaconventionmiamibeachflorida", "title": "Remarks to the Communications Workers of America Convention in Miami Beach, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-communications-workers-america-convention-miami-beach-florida", "publication_date": "13-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4389, "text": "The record indicates that when we say something is good for America's future, it probably is good for America's future. That is why we are trying to pass this Patients' Bill of Rights they are debating up there today. Think how you would feel that is what I asked the Senators to do today think how you would feel if it was your child, your wife, your husband, and the question was, your doctor says you need to see a specialist and your HMO accountant says you do not . Should you have to hassle it out for 3 months? Think how you would feel if God forbid you got hurt in an accident outside this convention hall and the ambulance had to drive you past two or three hospitals until they finally got to one covered by your HMO. Depending on what kind of injury you had, it could just be much more painful or terribly devastating. Think how you would feel if your small employer changed health care providers in the middle of your wife's pregnancy or in the middle of the husband's chemotherapy treatment, and they said, I am sorry; I know this is traumatic. I know you are 6 months pregnant and you have had a terrible pregnancy, but here is a new doctor for you. I know your life is on the line and you have got great confidence in this doctor supervising your chemotherapy treatment, but here is a new doctor for you. I just try to think about what is right for the American people. Oh, they will tell you how much it costs up there. But we put in the Patients' Bill of Rights for the Federal employees; its cost, less than a buck a month a policy to comply with. The Congressional Budget Office says that, at the most, it would cost $2 a month a policy. Do not you think it is worth $24 a year to know that when you need to see a specialist, you can see one? So that is what we are trying to do with our proposal to modernize schools, to finish hiring 100,000 teachers, to put even more police on the street, and take even more guns out of the hands of more criminals; and that is what we are trying to do by shining the light of enterprise and opportunity at America's poorest communities; and most of all, that is what we are trying to do with our plan to save Social Security and Medicare, provide that prescription drug benefit, and make America debt-free.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunicationsworkersamericaconventionmiamibeachflorida", "title": "Remarks to the Communications Workers of America Convention in Miami Beach, Florida", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-communications-workers-america-convention-miami-beach-florida", "publication_date": "13-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4390, "text": "First of all, I want to thank all the previous speakers for saying everything that needs to be said; I am free to say whatever I like. I am deeply indebted, as all of you know, to this city and this State for many things, the most important of which is clearly the First Lady, who asked me to be remembered to all of you tonight. I have a picture on my wall in my office of Hillary and me on St. Patrick's Day in 1992 in Chicago that was the night of the primaries in Illinois and Michigan, the night we knew that unless the wheel completely ran off, I would probably become the nominee of our party. And from that day and before to this, no place has been better to us and to the Vice President and to our whole team than the city of Chicago and the State of Illinois. And I am profoundly grateful to all of you, and I thank you for it. I also want to say a word of appreciation to Steve Grossman, who has done a magnificent job. I thank Congressman Rangel, who has to put on his uniform every day. He is now in the most severe combat he is been in since the Korean war, I think, with the Republicans in the House, but he holds up his end right well. And I thank you, Charles. I am proud of you in every way. I want to thank Secretary Daley, who will soon get over being 50. It is all a matter of perspective, you know. I want to thank Mayor Daley for his leadership here and his support and friendship. I thank Senator Durbin for many things and for being so courageous in his leadership to protect our children against the dangers of tobacco, to keep our streets and our communities safe, and many other things. I want to say a little more about Carol Moseley-Braun in a moment. I want to thank Reverend Jesse Jackson for being a good friend of my family in personal as well as political ways, and for doing a superb job for our country as our Special Envoy to Africa, a very important part of America's future. Now, you heard all the politics. I would like to talk a little bit about specifically about Illinois and how if fits into the larger picture of America and our future. I ran for President because I honestly believed our country was not doing what was necessary to prepare for a new century, a new millennium, a completely new way of living and working and relating to each other and the rest of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinnerchicagoillinois", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "10-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4391, "text": "And I think that what we have sought to do is best captured in the theme the First Lady picked for our Millennium Project, the things we are doing over the next 2 1/2 years to celebrate the coming of a new century and a new millennium. The theme is Honoring the past; imagining the future. to offer new ideas based on our oldest values; to deepen the meaning of our freedom; to widen the circle of opportunity; to build the bonds of our Union stronger; to help America be the strongest force for peace and freedom and prosperity in the world; to give our children all our children the best chance to live out their dreams any generation of children has ever known. That is what we have worked on doing. They spark ideas. They spark the human spirit. They motivate people to act. But in the end, you have to turn the words into action. And I would like to just give you one example. The lion's share of credit for the economic statistics the Vice President reeled off belongs to the American people, to their hard work, their ingenuity, their good citizenship. But the policies of this administration have plainly played a role in giving people the tools to do what has been done and creating the conditions for success. If it had not been for Carol Moseley-Braun or Glenn Poshard or Charlie Rangel or Al Gore, the economic plan in 1993 which drove interest rates down, drove the deficit down, got investment up, expanded our commitment to promote economic opportunity in the inner cities, including in Chicago would not have passed, because it passed by one vote in both Houses, because every single member of the other party voted against it. And I want to tell you that I am proud to be a member of my party and proud to be an ardent supporter of the reelection of Senator Carol Moseley-Braun and the election of Glenn Poshard. There is I was told today when I came into Chicago that Congressman Poshard's opponent has an ad on attacking him for voting for our 1993 economic plan, claiming it was a big tax increase, neglecting to point out that income taxes were raised on about two-tenths of a percent of the American people, that 5 times as many people in Illinois got a tax cut as got a tax increase working families who need it the most and that that bill lowered the deficit 92 percent before the bipartisan balanced budget agreement passed and, therefore, was the single most important vote to the economic recovery America enjoys today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinnerchicagoillinois", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "10-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4392, "text": "I think Glenn Poshard should thank his opponent for advertising for him. It is a good difference between Republicans and Democrats. They are still trying to mischaracterize the bill that brought America back. And I hope you will send a message on election day, by reelecting Carol Moseley-Braun and electing Glenn Poshard, that Illinois likes this economy and will support people who brought it about. We have the lowest crime rate in 25 years. The crime bill of 1994 played a major role in that, with 100,000 police on the street and grants to communities like Chicago not just to punish people but to give our young people something to say yes to, so that more communities could have more programs like your afterschool programs here and your summer school programs here. And most of the members, not all but most of the members of the other party voted against it. Carol Moseley-Braun and Glenn Poshard voted for it. And so, if you like the fact that Chicago has all these new police officers under the crime bill and you like what has been done here to make the streets safer, I think you should show that you like it when words are turned into action by voting to reelect Carol Moseley-Braun and to elect Glenn Poshard. I think these are the kinds of things that you have to say to people. Now, as the Vice President said, we have to decide what we are going to do with the good times we have. We are sobered and humbled when our friends in Asia, who once we thought would never have any economic problems again, have their own struggles. We are heartbroken at what has happened in Africa to our Embassies, the tragic loss of life of American public servants and the more than 200 Africans who have died now and thousands wounded because some terrorist criminal wanted to hurt America. But this reminds us that freedom is a precious thing, prosperity is a wonderful thing, but in a dynamic world they bring responsibilities. And this election year should not be about negative 30-second ads, or all the mean things they have said about me or the rest of you, or any mean thing we can say back to them. It really ought to be about what do we do now. We have been given the gift of this moment of prosperity, which gives us confidence and energy. What do we do with it? What have you done in the times in your life when you thought everything was hunkydory?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinnerchicagoillinois", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "10-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4393, "text": "After things have been tough and they were tough for America for a long time the natural thing to do is to sort of say, Man, I have been working like crazy. That was really, in fairness, the import behind the quote by the Speaker that the Vice President read, We do not really have to do anything. We just have to avoid another shutdown and get out of town. And things are so good, and we have got more money than the Democrats do. We will be fine in the election. We will worry about all of this tomorrow. And that is playing into what is often the dominant feeling in human nature. I suggest to you it would be a mistake for us to have that attitude today as a nation and that instead we ought to say, Hey, we may not get a time this good again for a while. Let us take this time to think about the big, long-term challenges this country faced, and let us go on and face them and deal with them now. If we cannot do it now, when will we ever have a better time? And that is what we ought to be thinking about now. So I will tell you what I think they are, in no particular order you may have different rank order. They have been alluded to already, but let me just tell you because this is why it is important to have people in the positions of Congressmen and Senators who will make good decisions about this. One of the biggest challenges this country is going to face every advanced country is going to face it is when all the baby boomers retire. I know; I am the oldest of the baby boomers. I am the oldest man my age in America now. Because we are the biggest group of Americans ever to live, until this group of kids that just started school last year, when we retire, at present rates of retirement, birth rates, and immigration rates, for the first time since Social Security came in there will only be about two people working for every one person eligible for Social Security. The system we have, that has literally on its own lifted half of our elderly people out of poverty, is unsustainable as it is. But it has done a lot of good for the elderly, for the disabled, for children whose parents die when they are still children. So one of the things that we have to do and we ought to do it early next year we ought to stop fooling around with it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinnerchicagoillinois", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "10-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4394, "text": "We should reform Social Security to preserve its best characteristics and make sure it will survive into the 21st century. You have to decide, who do you think you want to do that? And do not you want somebody that will come in there and keep the very best of the system but have the courage to tell you what changes have to be made now? The same thing is true of Medicare. We have to do that. That is why I have said, Let us do not spend any of this surplus on a spending program or a tax cut that I like, even something I would dearly love to do. Let us do not do that until we know we have done what is necessary to save Social Security for the 21st century. It is popular to say, I want to give you a tax cut, or I am going to give you a new program, and we are going to have a surplus, and it is projected to be such and such. Well, let me tell you, we will not even have the surplus until October 1st. And we have been waiting for 29 years to get out of the red. I'd just kind of like to look at the black ink for just a few months before we go squander this money that we do not even have yet. And I think down deep inside you and every other responsible person in Illinois, Republican, Democrat, or independent, knows that is the right thing to do. So go out and say, we ought to save Social Security first, and you are for that. I think everybody in America knows we have got the best system of higher education in the world. And one of my proudest achievements as President is that, working with the Congress, we have opened the doors wider than ever before with the HOPE scholarships, the Pell grants, the work-study grants, letting people deduct the interest on their student loans, all of the things that we have done. No one believes we have got the best elementary and secondary education in the world for all our children yet. No one believes that, because it is not true. But we need it. And I have given this Congress an agenda for smaller classes in the early grades and more teachers and modernized schools, whether we are repairing old schools or building new ones, and connecting all the classrooms to the Internet and providing for better trained teachers and raising standards and trying to support things like the mayor's reforms here in Chicago, including more afterschool programs and more summer school programs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinnerchicagoillinois", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "10-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4395, "text": "And that school construction and repair initiative would not be a part of my program if it were not for Carol Moseley-Braun. And it ought to pass, and if you reelect her, you will send a loud message to Washington that you believe it ought to. We just glanced over the Patients' Bill of Rights today. You know, there are 160 million Americans in managed care. And when Hillary and I told the American people we had to find a way, because managed care was growing, to allow people to be in managed care to control costs, but we ought to make health care affordable and available and quality for all Americans, we were attacked by our adversaries, saying we wanted to have the Government take over health care. I will tell you something interesting. When they attacked me for that, 40 cents on the dollar of health care dollars came from public sources. Because employers cannot afford to buy health insurance, so they do not cover their employees, and more and more people even in the work force are eligible for Government-funded programs today. But 160 million Americans in Medicare our Patients' Bill of Rights is the next big item on the health care agenda. Because we think that it is a good thing to manage health care costs and control them, but you ought to be able to go to an emergency room if you get hurt, without having to lay there on the gurney. How would you feel if somebody in your family were in a car wreck, lying in an emergency room on a gurney, and you are trying to call the insurance company to get authorization? We believe if somebody needs a specialist, they ought to be able to get a specialist. And if the doctor believes that, he ought to be free to say so. That is what we believe. We believe if a woman is 6 months pregnant and her employer changes insurance carriers, she ought not to have to give up her obstetrician before the baby's born. Or if somebody is taking chemotherapy and they are 80 percent of the way through and the same thing happens, they ought to be able to stay with their oncologist until the treatment is over. That is what this Patients' Bill of Rights is about. It is about common sense, balancing of the need to control costs on the one hand with the need never to forget that the health care of the American people comes first. We are for that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinnerchicagoillinois", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "10-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4396, "text": "We have a few a very few Republicans who are helping, and God bless them, including the physician representing the State of Iowa in the House of Representatives, a brave man, Congressman Ganske. But the leadership of the other party is against this, and what they would do would make it weaker. We believe, with all this stuff being computerized, you ought to have more privacy in your medical records, not less. And I think most of you think that. That is what the Patients' Bill of Rights is about. Carol Moseley-Braun is for it; the leadership of the other party is against it. On that ground alone you should make sure she gets reelected. This is a big battle for how you and your families and your children will live in the 21st century. I could go right down the list with the environment; with the need for us to build one America working together; with the need to provide more economic opportunity in inner cities, isolated rural areas where there has been no opportunity; and with the need for America to fulfill its responsibilities. The Vice President made the remarks about the International Monetary Fund and the U.N. You know, Reverend Jackson and I and the First Lady and a big delegation, we just went to Africa not very long ago. Believe it or not, several of those African economies are growing at 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 percent a year. They want to buy our products. An investment there today will pay our children many times over in return tomorrow. All over the world, people still look to us to take the lead to stand against the kind of terrorism that we experienced just a few days ago; to stand against the kind of racial and ethnic and religious hatreds that we see in places like Bosnia, that are the part of the process of peace in the Middle East and Northern Ireland. And if we want to be a source of peace and freedom and prosperity all around the world, then we have to have people who will say in Congress, I realize it is not free. I am prepared to invest in it and go home to my hometown in the heartland of America and say it is important. You know why it is important in Illinois? How many people do you believe, if you went down to the central part of this State and said, Do you know what the IMF is? could give you an answer? Or, It is the International Monetary Fund; do you know what it does?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksunity98dinnerchicagoillinois", "title": "Remarks at a Unity '98 Dinner in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-unity-98-dinner-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "10-08-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4409, "text": "5 months ago, I visited Athens, the first visit by Prime Minister to Greece in more than a generation. Today, in welcoming Prime Minister Mitsotakis to the White House, our two countries reaffirm the value of close contact to address common concern. Prime Minister, in the past 3 years, we have witnessed a world transformed, and your continent has been right at the center of change. terrorism, international drug trade, ethnic conflict. peaceful, prosperous, and free. The U.S. continues to be as concerned as we have been in the past with Greece's security and the sanctity of its borders. We continue to help Greece strengthen its defenses. And we support the progress your nation has made toward economic reform, liberalizing trade and investment. The longstanding conflict in Cyprus, and Yugoslavia's fratricidal civil war. Let me start with Yugoslavia. Who can fail to be moved by these heartrending images, carnage and suffering on a scale that recalls the horrors of the Second World War rather than the hopes of the new era we have now entered. The U.S. supports the European Community's efforts, the EC's efforts, including economic sanctions, to stop the fighting. We remain convinced that a negotiated settlement, helped along by the United Nations and the interested international community, is possible, necessary, and certainly long overdue. In the case of Cyprus, I again offer the good offices of the United States to overcome a source of bitter conflict between two of our valued allies. We continue to hope for an international high-level meeting on Cyprus as early as possible in 1992. With good-faith negotiations, and the continued efforts of the United Nations Secretary-General, we can make progress in producing a settlement acceptable to all parties. Not only the millions who trace their own ancestry to your country, but, as relative newcomers now in our third century of democracy, as a people who revere Greece as the birthplace of democracy more than two millennia ago. It is been a very special pleasure having this opportunity to meet with you again, to have you and your able team here in Washington, DC today, and to wish Greece on behalf of all Americans every blessings for the new year.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingdiscussionswithprimeministerconstantinosmitsotakisgreece", "title": "Remarks Following Discussions With Prime Minister Constantinos Mitsotakis of Greece", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-discussions-with-prime-minister-constantinos-mitsotakis-greece", "publication_date": "12-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4450, "text": "Hillary and I are delighted to welcome all of you here today, including our Acting Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Togo West; the National Security Adviser, Sandy Berger; Senator Robb and Congressman Evans; Deputy Secretary of Defense Hamre; Secretary Dalton; General Shelton and other members of the Joint Chiefs; General McCaffrey; Deputy Secretary Gober; Mr. Bucha, the president of the Medal of Honor Society, and General Foley and other recipients of the Medal of Honor who are here. To all the commanders of our veterans service organizations and proud members of the United States Marine Corps and former marines, to the friends and the large and wonderful family of General Day and Mrs. Day, we welcome you. I thank Captain Pucciarelli for the fine invocation. He is not devoid of a sense of humor; before we came out here, he said he was going out to offer the exorcism. To those who lived through World War II and those who grew up in the years that followed, few memories inspire more awe and horror than the battle for Okinawa. In the greatest conflict the world has ever known, our forces fought no engagement more bitter or more bloody. In 82 days of fighting, America suffered more than 12,000 dead in this final epic battle, the most costly one during the entire Pacific war. At the very heart of this crucible was the fight for a hill called Sugar Loaf, the key to breaking the enemy's line across the south of the island, some of the grimmest combat our forces had ever seen. The marines on Sugar Loaf faced a hail of artillery, mortars, and grenades. They were raked by constant machinegun fire. Time and again, our men would claw their way uphill only to be repulsed by the enemy. Progress was measured by the yard. On May 14th, 1945, a 19-year-old corporal named Jim Day led several other marines to a shell crater on the slope of Sugar Loaf. What happened then surpasses our powers of imagination. On the first day in that isolated hole, Corporal Day and those with him fought off an advance by scores of enemy soldiers. That night he helped to repel three more assaults, as those with him fell dead or injured. Braving heavy fire, he escorted four wounded comrades, one by one, to safety. But he would not stay in safety. Instead, he returned to his position to continue the fight. As one of his fellow marines later reported, the corporal was everywhere.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthecongressionalmedalhonormajorgeneraljamesldayusmcretired", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Congressional Medal of Honor to Major General James L. Day, USMC (Retired)", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-congressional-medal-honor-major-general-james-l-day-usmc-retired", "publication_date": "20-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4451, "text": "He would run from one spot to another trying to get more fire on the enemy. When the next day broke, Corporal Day kept on fighting, alone but for one wounded fellow marine. Through assault after assault and into his second night, he fought on. Burned by white phosphorus and wounded by shrapnel, he continued to fire his weapon and hold his ground. He hauled ammunition from a disabled vehicle back to his shellhole and fought and fought, one assault after another, one day, then the next. The battle on Sugar Loaf decimated two Marine regiments. But when Corporal Jim Day was finally relieved after 3 days of continuous fighting, virtually alone, he had stood his ground. And the enemy dead around his foxhole numbered more than 100. His heroism played a crucial part in America's victory at Sugar Loaf. And that success opened the way to the capture of Okinawa and the ultimate triumph of the forces of freedom in the Pacific. Now, for this extraordinary valor, we recognize James L. Day as one of the bravest of the brave. In words that echo from the peaks of American military history, he has distinguished himself, at the risk of his life, above and beyond the call of duty. As Commander in Chief, I am proud to award General Day our Nation's highest military honor, the Medal of Honor. the name Jim Day belongs in the rolls of the Corps' greatest heroes, alongside Dan Daly, Smedley Butler, Joe Foss, and John Basilone. General, your achievements leave us all in awe. In particular, it is hard to know whether we should be conferring on you a Medal of Honor for bravery or for modesty. Let me tell you the story of how we happen to be here today, over 50 years later. Although the battle for Okinawa was still raging when his battlefield commanders nominated young Corporal Day for this decoration, so many died in the fighting and so many reports were lost in the battle, the paperwork simply never went forward in 1945. General Day later said that awards were not on their minds in those days. As he put it, We just had a job to do, and we wanted to get the job done. Years later, when veterans of Sugar Loaf wanted to restart the process, Jim Day forbade them from doing so. Then a general, he felt that seeking such an honor would set a bad example for those he commanded.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspresentingthecongressionalmedalhonormajorgeneraljamesldayusmcretired", "title": "Remarks on Presenting the Congressional Medal of Honor to Major General James L. Day, USMC (Retired)", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-presenting-the-congressional-medal-honor-major-general-james-l-day-usmc-retired", "publication_date": "20-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4452, "text": "I want to thank each of you, as ENTITY did, for this wonderful welcome and for the privilege of coming back to Maine again. When Senator Muskie talked about the last speech he made in this park, he told me that that evening while he was waiting on Senator Kennedy to come here that you people waited almost 4 hours in almost zero weather. And although I was not here, I am grateful and understanding of the loyalty and the appreciation you had for that great man whom I succeeded and for whom this park was named. We have tried to carry forward his program, put it on the statute books, and execute it as he would have had us do. The last 2 days we have traveled throughout the northeastern part of the United States and New England and we have talked about the problems of our people. We talked about pollution in Lake Erie in Buffalo yesterday. We talked about the problems of our cities where 75 percent of all of our people are going to be living in just a matter of a few years, in Syracuse. Last evening we dedicated a Hill-Burton hospital and talked about medical care, and the treatment of our bodies, and what we are going to do to save lives, and how we got rid of polio, and how we are going to get rid of cancer, and how we are going to stop heart disease--one of the greatest killers in this country. This morning we talked to the young people over at the University of Rhode Island about their rights, about civil rights, about constitutional rights. But we also talked about the responsibilities that go with those rights and the understanding that goes with them. Later in the day we were at New Hampshire, and we talked about the thing that is on most of your minds--our men in Vietnam, and how we can bring peace to the world and bring honor to ourselves. I am going to talk about another subject here in Lewiston tonight, because I am so happy to be back in Maine. Today, Congressman Hathaway, Senator Muskie, Governor Reed, Senator Smith, Senator Pell, Senator Mansfield, Senator McIntyre, Senator Aiken, Senator Prouty, Governor Volpe, Governor King, and a number of other public officials have been with me. But we have not been talking party matters. We have been talking people matters; problems of people. We do not want to just talk about problems all the time. We want to talk about our successes, too. And I am going to do that tonight.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthejohnfkennedymemorialparklewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-john-f-kennedy-memorial-park-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "20-08-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4453, "text": "Two years ago I stood on the steps of the city hall in Portland and I quoted from a message that Governor Joshua Chamberlain once sent to the Maine legislature. A government has something more to do than govern and levy taxes to pay the Governor .... Government must also encourage good, point out improvements, open roads of prosperity, and infuse life into all the right enterprises. I promised the citizens of Maine that night that we would try to follow that course if we were selected for this place of leadership. And I have come back tonight to report that we have lived up to that promise. Your Government--and I think it is very important that each of you always remembers this is your Government, not my Government-this is your Government and it has been infusing life into one right enterprise after another. And I think there is no better example of this than the promising new Maine project that we call the Dickey hydroelectric project. We are going to put more than $300 million into this project, and every single one of those dollars will be a good, sound investment in the future of a stable Maine and in the future of all America. Milton Semer of Auburn and Hal Pachios, my Associate Press Secretary, from Portland. But we were talking the other evening and one of them said, You know, Mr. President, so many people have been listening so long to the old voices that constantly talk about big government, that they have not caught up with the fact the United States is a very big country. Our population increased by more than 2 million people alone just last year. Half a century from now we will have over 400 million Americans. So we cannot have a stagecoach government in the era of orbiting astronauts. Government has to keep up with the times, and it has to stay ahead of the problems. I came here tonight to pledge to you good people--who are Americans first, but select the best government you know how--I came here to pledge you that as long as I lead this country we are going to keep up and catch up. But I came here to say something else. It is not the responsibility of the leaders of the Congress--some of whom are here with us this evening--alone. It cannot be done in Washington alone. It has to be the goal of every man and woman, every boy and girl. Every one of you has to pitch in and improve the corner of the country that you live in.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthejohnfkennedymemorialparklewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-john-f-kennedy-memorial-park-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "20-08-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4454, "text": "We can pass laws to bring justice to all our people, whatever their color. We can spend money for housing, education, and training. But until we have a domestic good-neighbor policy on every block, in every city, on every roadway, there is going to be racial strife in America. We can start new programs to try to clean up the ghettoes of our cities, but until the people who live in our suburbs are color blind, there will continue to be discrimination in America. We can establish training programs for young people who need a second chance, but until law-abiding citizens give them their second chance, there is going to be delinquency in America. So if I could write just one letter to every American citizen tonight, I would make it brief, but I would try to make it directly to the point. My fellow American, democracy depends on whether you are willing to conduct yourself as if the destiny of many others were in your hands, as if the future and the character of our Nation were to be decided by what you are and by what you do. Live every day with the knowledge that America is the sum total of all the decisions that you and people like you are making this very hour. I would write that letter because I believe that what America needs more than it needs anything else right now is a strong dose of self-discipline. We need it to carry through and to support our men who are in the rice paddies of Vietnam tonight. We need it to bring racial peace and social justice to all our citizens in the United States. We need it to bring education to the mind and health to the bodies of all of our boys and girls in this country tonight. And we need it to maintain the strong economy that gives all of our people good jobs at good wages tonight. Because never forget that no matter how many harassing, frustrating problems you may have, the strong economy is the underpinning of America's material strength. Let me illustrate what I mean. People are talking a lot about inflation this election year. These same people used to talk a lot about unidentified flying objects. Where did it come from? I do not know the answers. But I do think that we should try to put the problem of inflation into perspective--and not just in terms of the early 1930's when prices were very low but few people had many dollars to buy much with.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthejohnfkennedymemorialparklewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-john-f-kennedy-memorial-park-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "20-08-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4455, "text": "I mean the perspective that comes from looking at both sides of the prosperity coin --looking at the rising prices without forgetting the rising standard of living. We talk a lot about it these days--and we are doing a lot about it. There is want and there is some hunger--there is more of each than any of us would like to have. But I think most of you people that I am looking at here tonight in Lewiston, like most of my fellow Americans that I have seen in over 25 States, are tonight enjoying the best standard of living that you have ever known. Now it may be in the 1930's some of you were doing better. It may be in the 1940's some of you were doing better. It may be in the 1950's some of you were doing better. But I think the majority of us are doing better now than we have ever done before. They have gone up 10 percent since 1961. During that same time, though, wages have gone up, too. They have gone up not 10 percent as the prices have, but the wages have gone up 17 percent and most of you can buy more tonight than you could with your paycheck 6 years ago. In 1966 the average wage--I try to make this as understandable as I can--the average wage of a factory worker will buy twice as much in the retail stores as it would when I came to Washington in 1931. I want to repeat that because I want all of you to listen to it. In 1966, the year of our Lord tonight, the average wage of a factory worker will buy twice as much at retail as it would when I first came to Washington in 1931. You could buy more bread, and more butter, and more milk, and more molasses, and more bacon with one hour of your earnings last year than you could in 1960. And that is also true of steaks, and potatoes, and tomatoes, and liver--if you ever eat it. It is a fact that Americans are eating better food at a lower real cost than they have ever eaten before. After you get through paying your taxes--to all the Presidents and Governors and I do not know whether Senators and Congressmen think they have anything to do with it or not--but after you get through paying your taxes, your family is spending 18 percent of its income on food, 18 percent tonight, this year, compared to 26 percent of its income that it was paying 20 years ago.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthejohnfkennedymemorialparklewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-john-f-kennedy-memorial-park-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "20-08-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4456, "text": "We are going to do our best to have stabilization, but they have gone up and they will go up some more--but so has your standard of living gone up. We have a goal, we have an objective, we have a future for America. We want to leave this world better than we found it. We have advantages that our fathers and our grandfathers did not have. And we want our children to have things that we do not have ourselves. So, prices have gone up and your standard of living has gone up, too. I hope you will keep that in perspective. You know, I think that may have been what President Franklin Roosevelt's friend meant when he saw President Roosevelt during the 1940 campaign. You remember President Roosevelt asked him how he was voting. And his friend said, Republican. Is the third term bothering you? It is just that I voted Republican the first time you ran --this fellow lived in Maine, not in Lewiston, but in Maine-- and I voted Republican the second time you ran --that was 1936, you know-- Now this is not to say that we should or we will ignore the threat that is made to our stabilization program and that comes with inflation. I want you to know that, as your President, every day that I open my office I am going to be concerned about rising prices and will try to do as much as I intelligently can about them. But I am as deeply concerned with finding the right way to deal with inflation. And that brings me back to my central point. This morning at the University of Rhode Island I said along with rights we have responsibilities. self-discipline. The ideal way to keep the economy healthy without inflation is restraint--restraint on the part of those whose decisions have a real impact on prices. And I am looking into a lot of faces of people who make decisions that can probably have more impact on prices than I can. For 2 years now I have urged business and labor in many, many conferences I have had at the White House to bargain responsibly to reach decisions that will not trigger inflation. And I am proud to report to you that many businessmen and many labor leaders have responded with restraint and with self-discipline to their President's pleas. I am sad to report to you that not all of them have, and as a result we are faced tonight with a real danger to the prosperity which you have enjoyed for 6 consecutive years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthejohnfkennedymemorialparklewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-john-f-kennedy-memorial-park-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "20-08-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4457, "text": "I would like for all Americans to know, those who can hear it and those who can read, unless there is restraint now, unless there is voluntary self-discipline by management and labor, then your Government will be compelled by sheer necessity to act in order to protect all of the people. For in a democracy, the interest of all the people is, and should be, always overriding. And it is Government's duty and it is your president's duty, and he will exercise that duty by trying to reason-- come reason together --to protect that interest. But if, after we reason and after we appeal for self-discipline, after we ask for restraint, there are still general excesses, then I pledge you tonight we are going to protect your interests. Now that sums up about all I have to say on the inflation problem. This will end my speaking for this week--at least this Saturday. I have told you the general subjects we have discussed. I just want to conclude by talking about one that we have not discussed. We have been talking about problems. But I want to talk about successes. I want to talk about the day in America when we have 76 million people working, working full 40-hour weeks, some of them drawing good overtime, working at an average factory wage in excess of $112 per week-the highest in the history of this Nation-more people working, getting more pay, than at any time in the history of this Nation. We have the best education and health programs that any government has ever inaugurated. Our citizens are eating more. They are wearing more. Their children are going to better schools. They are driving better automobiles and more of them--some people even have two. They are living in better homes, although all of them do not have good homes. And except for our problems in Vietnam, we have so much to be thankful for. So when you go home tonight after having listened to those whose principal job all day has been complaining, to those who got up on the wrong side of the bed and have been martyrs all day long, feeling that nobody loved them and they had been mistreated, just think about what other country you would like to trade your citizenship in for. Just think about what other flag in the world represents as much to you as that one does.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthejohnfkennedymemorialparklewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-john-f-kennedy-memorial-park-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "20-08-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4458, "text": "Just think of what boy and girl that you know who has more constitutional rights, more liberty, more freedom, more educational opportunity, more care of their body and their health, more opportunity for recreation, more opportunity to make individual decisions and be independent of everybody than you have here in America. I think the average American does not ask much, does not expect much, does not have to have much. He wants a church where he can worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience. He wants a home where he and his wife can raise their family in comfort. He wants a job where he can earn enough to meet his responsibilities as a parent. He wants to be able to provide health care for his growing family and security for his old age. And he may want to go to a park or a seashore once in a while, or even a movie, or to sit and listen to television. But outside of that, that is about all he asks for. And most of us have that and we ought to be thankful for it. So if I could leave one thought with you, finally. I have gotten great strength from visiting with you and looking into your faces and giving you my views. I have learned something from you, too, you people in the five States that I have visited. I can go back and listen to the complainers-if there be any in Washington--the commentators, I can hear their individual viewpoints. But I will have enough strength to make my judgments and my decisions, because every man that is ever been President of the United States wants to make the right decision. Their great problem is knowing what is right because most of the decisions that come to a President are balanced just like this. The easy ones are settled by the Congressmen, the Senators, and Governors. Last week or the week before, when we settled the airlines strike the first time, before the machinists had had their vote on it and had a chance to express themselves, I picked up some of the leading journals of this country which really have a good deal of information on a good many subjects. One of the editorials said that I was a dictator, and I had arrogance of power, and I twisted arms, and I had brought about an agreement. That made me sad, because I do not like for people to say ugly things about me and I do not want to be a dictator. And then, the next day they did not ratify the contract.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthejohnfkennedymemorialparklewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-john-f-kennedy-memorial-park-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "20-08-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4459, "text": "They turned it down and a week went by. Some of the writers had to ride a train from New York to Florida instead of being able to go by airplane. So then they said, not that he was a dictator, but they said, Why does not he show some leadership? So then I was talking to Ed Muskie about it. I said, I am between the devil and the deep blue sea. I do not want to be a dictator; I do want to have some leadership. Now how do I go about it? He said it reminded him of the story about the fellow and the donkey. He said, A man was walking along with a donkey. Someone said, 'Why would a man want to lead a donkey? Why does not he ride it?' Said he got on the donkey and the little boy he had with him was walking along beside him. Someone said, 'Why did that old, big man get on a donkey and let that little boy walk?' So the fellow said, 'OK,' and put the little boy on the donkey. As they went on down the road a little bit, one of these complainers saw the little donkey coming along with the man and the boy both on it and they said, 'Why do those two big men ride that poor little donkey?' Why do not - they carry the donkey?' Now dissent, different viewpoints, different objectives are the strength of America. We do not all see everything alike or we would all belong to the same church, we would all wear the same clothes, we would all drive the same automobile, and we would all want the Same Wife. It is this difference and this right to express it that makes this the most powerful, the most wealthy, the most stable nation in all the world. But while we are exercising all these rights we have, all these liberties we cherish, all these privileges that we claim, let us not ever lose completely our perspective. Let us not start feeling so sorry for ourselves that we fail to be thankful and that we fail to realize really how many blessings we have.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthejohnfkennedymemorialparklewistonmaine", "title": "Remarks at the John F. Kennedy Memorial Park, Lewiston, Maine.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-john-f-kennedy-memorial-park-lewiston-maine", "publication_date": "20-08-1966", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4471, "text": "Alexander, my good friend Congressman Ralph Metcalfe, Reverend Martin, distinguished graduates which I am now proud partner with you your honored parents and friends, ladies and gentlemen. I am distinctly honored by the action taken by Dr. Alexander, and I will forever remember the opportunity to be an associate with all of you in the class of July 1975, and I thank you very much. It is perfectly obvious that I am delighted with your invitation and the opportunity to be here at the commencement exercises of beautiful Chicago University. You know, that is what I admire so much about Dr. Alexander. He not only tells it like it is but also like it better be. Even during this very brief visit with all of you today, I can see that this graduating class has, excluding myself, talent, vision, ambition, and a sense of humor as well. I asked one of the graduating students here today, What inspired your school symbol, that symbol you have of a black hand and a white hand clasped together. Does it symbolize the brotherhood of learning? He said, No, ENTITY. The clasped hands have an entirely different meaning. After a big rainstorm, that is a black student and a white student helping each other to get from the university center to their classes. I was so deeply moved by the more than 5,000 signatures on the petition inviting me that no rainstorm could have kept me away. I was impressed not only by the great number of signatures but also by the Chicago State University success story. CSU serves the urban needs of a great city. Not long ago, CSU came under heavy attack, but you effectively answered the challenge. Today, CSU is graduating a first-rate and hopeful class of 1975. You can today share a justifiable pride; so can the city of Chicago, the State of Illinois, and the entire United States. I know of the sacrifices of your husbands and wives, your parents, your grandparents, yes, even your great grandparents. Some of your guests here today were denied even the opportunity to complete high school, but none can stand taller in American achievement than they do for the inspiring and encouragement that they have given to today's graduates. You have learned the greatest history lesson that the United States of America can teach. You have learned to nourish hope, to sustain belief in a better life for the next generation, to work toward that goal, and now, to experience the proof that the American dream is possible for all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresschicagostateuniversity", "title": "Commencement Address at Chicago State University.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-chicago-state-university", "publication_date": "12-07-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4472, "text": "You have made your loved ones proud; you have made Chicago State University proud. You have made me proud to be President of a nation where graduates like you strive against heavy odds for self-betterment, for equal opportunity, for constructive change, and for excellence; where graduates build on abilities rather than cop out on disabilities; where graduates believe in themselves and in the contribution they can make to their community; and where graduates provide a living demonstration of how we are going to turn around the problems of our great cities. Chicago State University is a showcase of what can be done by people with determination. You have shown how white and black hands can unite to build a multiracial institution. You have shown academic achievement. And you have responded to the real needs of the community that you serve. Most of today's graduates had to work full or part time on outside jobs, and if I might, I would like to share a personal experience. As a freshman at the University of Michigan, I worked as a busboy in the nurses' cafeteria at the university hospital. I also waited on tables in the interns' dining room. I will say, parenthetically, I liked the first job better. But let me add very quickly that even during the Great Depression it was much easier for me. I was not the victim of racial prejudice nor of a deprived environment. So, I cannot honestly say that my experiences were the same as that of those who are struggling today in Chicago and elsewhere in an effort to make it. But I do say that my own personal experience leads me to care about and to identify with every upward-bound individual in this great Nation. I defy anyone to put down the greatest fraternity of them all the college graduates who learned something about life by dirtying their hands. I am deeply concerned about the unemployment of this recession and those now employed beneath the level of their capacities. A nation that deprives anyone of equal opportunity is itself deprived. A nation that cannot create the conditions for human dignity for all is itself lacking a measure of humanity and dignity. The dignity of the individual is based ultimately on a sense of pride. It does not come from government programs that take over the individual's life and reduce the person to a case file and a claim number. Real aid to the individual is aid that helps the individual to help himself or herself. Federal assistance that helps people achieve higher education and higher qualification is fully justified, because that is the aim and that is the objective.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresschicagostateuniversity", "title": "Commencement Address at Chicago State University.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-chicago-state-university", "publication_date": "12-07-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4473, "text": "I am told that one of your graduates here today receiving a degree in education is a 45-year-old woman who worked as a teacher's aide. With nine children one severely handicapped it was obviously not easy. But her perseverance is typical of this entire graduating class. So is the spirit of your Vietnam veterans and others who caught up to win degrees today. The Federal Government can provide financial aid to education, but it cannot give individuals the determination that you have displayed in earning your degrees. As President, I am deeply concerned about the attitude of government toward individuals. But I am also concerned about the attitude of individuals toward the national community and toward themselves in terms of personal self-respect. I cannot and I do not say that we are all in the same boat. Some people, unfortunately, are outside the boat, so to speak, struggling in stormy waters. We, the fortunate, are in the boat and can throw out for illustrative purposes, I say a life preserver. But those in the water must not just hang on indefinitely to their life preservers, but must swim toward rescue . Real assistance is to help people to help themselves. We cannot do everything for everybody, but there is room for all who try to make it. Many of the problems, for example, of cities remain unsolved. And I should say with great emphasis, I am dedicated to turning around the trend of deterioration and despair, of crime and unemployment, of pollution and bad housing, and of drugs and premature death. But I am also dedicated to the conviction that local problems must, in the final analysis, be solved by local people. Frankly, that is why I came to Chicago today to meet you. We in Washington can learn a great deal from you. Many of you have overcome a deprived environment and economic limitations. You succeeded because you are rich in human capacities and have the love of families who care. This auditorium is filled with individual success stories. I do not see any reason whatsoever to worry about the class of 1975 at CSU. But I am concerned about the future of some other young Americans who are today neither in school nor working at jobs. Tragically, they are on the streets. Some have lost hope and motivation to the extent that they no longer are even looking for work or education. Some, tragically, have police records. Society has begun to think of them as records and public enemies rather than as human beings in trouble.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresschicagostateuniversity", "title": "Commencement Address at Chicago State University.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-chicago-state-university", "publication_date": "12-07-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4474, "text": "Some are sick with addiction to drugs because they are so empty inside, so devoid of hope that they fill themselves with artificial illusions of contentment. So, I challenge today's graduates to use your new skills to help the people who are not in this hall today. I challenge the graduates in education to teach young people how to read and how to write. I challenge the graduates in the liberal arts to stimulate the mind and to inspire the spirit. I challenge the graduates in corrections and law enforcement to counsel and to motivate individuals from the path or paths of destruction of themselves and others. I challenge the business and administration graduates to conceive of new jobs that are more interesting, challenging, and rewarding. I challenge all graduates to set an example that gives hope to the millions who have not yet made it. You have demonstrated by your own achievements and accomplishments that your determination can make a significant difference. You might have been part of the problem, but now you are part of the pride, and I congratulate you. CSU has shown that a new tradition can emerge from problem areas. Your president, Dr. Alexander, made CSU a school that demands performance of its students. I agree with the CSU philosophy. You kill pride if students are passed merely because they come from disadvantaged backgrounds. You sacrifice for an education, and consequently, you are entitled to a fair chance to learn. CSU is not a school where the student can coast blithefully through for 4 years and emerge with a degree but without competence. The pursuit of excellence makes more valid the diplomas you are receiving today. It is a service to the university, to. the students, and to the community. You welcomed the challenge, and you made the grade. A united America requires opportunities for all citizens and the cooperation of all races and all groups in our society. That is why I draw such encouragement from the achievements of this graduating class, and I am delighted to be a part of it even though I am not sure I earned it. You are the individuals who will provide new energy, new ideas, and new leadership to help resolve the plight of the cities. If I can go once more to the days when I was going through high school and college, there was a poem by a Victorian Englishman that was a favorite of commencement orators at that time. Frankly, I heard it recited so many times that I think I still may know it by heart.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentscommencementaddresschicagostateuniversity", "title": "Commencement Address at Chicago State University.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/commencement-address-chicago-state-university", "publication_date": "12-07-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4475, "text": "At the very beginning, let me apologize for being late. We have had just unbelievable crowds beginning in Keene and running all the way across the State, west to east. I just appreciate, beyond any words that I can express, my gratitude for your patience, your understanding, and your warm and hospitable reaction to our coming in at this time. This trip to New Hampshire has been a great lift, and it has been a lift because I am convinced that the people of New Hampshire are interested in having their election decided by them and not by the politicians in Washington, D.C. It was my privilege to come to your State Capitol in April and to urge at that time that the right answer was by the people and the wrong answer was by the politicians in the Nation's Capital. You have that opportunity now. You have probably the greatest opportunity to make a decisive decision next Tuesday. I am proud to be here on behalf of a friend of mine, Louis Wyman, but I am equally proud to be in the great State of New Hampshire because I am here representing, along with others, a unified party, a party that is working together on behalf of Louis Wyman's election. Governor Thomson, last night Governor Reagan, earlier today and he may be here now Senator Norris Cotton, Congressman Jim Cleveland was with us all I am trying to say is we have presented a unified front because we think it is a crucial election. I am delighted to see Ruth Griffin here who so ably represents your area, and she, like all of us, is standing steadfast on behalf of Louis Wyman. Let me ask you or tell you, if I might, why we stand together. Why are we interested in the election of Louis Wyman? Louis Wyman believes in a strong national defense with the ENTITY, the Navy, the Air Force, and the Marines first and not second best, and that is important to the maintenance of peace throughout the world. Secondly, related to that, you have got a great naval installation here in Portsmouth one that is very significant from the national security point of view, one that is a very vital part of the economy of this part of New Hampshire. Let me speak very strongly that Louis Wyman in 1964 and again in 1972 almost single-handedly kept the Portsmouth Navy Yard open so we could have that' facility here defending or helping to defend the peace throughout the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksportsmouthnewhampshire0", "title": "Remarks in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-portsmouth-new-hampshire-0", "publication_date": "11-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4476, "text": "Let me add, you elect Louis and he will have an opportunity to continue that strong support for this great navy installation which is such an integral part of our national security forces. I do not have to tell all of you in New Hampshire that Louis, by actions, by words, is working hard to keep control of government at the local level. He knows and I know that we cannot run the city of Portsmouth nearly as well from Washington as your elected officials can do it right here in Portsmouth. So, if you want local control with locally elected officials and the backup given to Lou that is necessary, then you ought to elect Louis Wyman on next Tuesday. I would like to conclude a wonderful day, and it started early and it is ending late, but it has been an inspiration to me to meet so many old friends, to make so many new acquaintances. Fortunately, a long time ago I used to come to New Hampshire then to vacation and ski, and I met some wonderful people who have been my friends over the years, and the characteristics of those people I have found in my opportunity to see others in New Hampshire today are independence, dedicated, with great conviction. You have the kind of characteristics which I think are reflected in Louis Wyman. If you want an independent guy, a man of dedication with deep convictions, I urge you to make that extra step to get to the polls on Tuesday. All of you have close friends who you would stand up for, who you would urge to be appointed or elected. Louis Wyman is that kind of a friend of mine. I am here spending this wonderful day because I want to go the last mile supporting a person who I respected as a legislator, who I admire as a person, who I know will do the job best for the State of New Hampshire, and I know will help me the most as we face the critical, crucial problems of energy, the economy, jobs, inflation, and all the other things. Louis, I want to urge you to make the maximum effort, and I want your literal thousands of friends here in New Hampshire to join in supporting me in supporting you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksportsmouthnewhampshire0", "title": "Remarks in Portsmouth, New Hampshire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-portsmouth-new-hampshire-0", "publication_date": "11-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4483, "text": "Laura and I are pleased to have you all here, and we are so honored to be a part of this annual tradition. We especially welcome the 2003 Kennedy Center honorees and their family and their friends. Every year, the Kennedy Center pays tribute to five outstanding artists. Each group of honorees is an interesting mix. This year, for example, we have a director whose best films are known to all. We have an actress who has created characters we all remember, who, I am told, still does a mighty good Tarzan yell. And the three musicians with us are among the most recognized in the world. They are not known to have performed together but the sight of all three on the same stage is a picture to remember. The Kennedy Center Honors recognize great contributions to American culture. Each of the honorees is here because of their hard effort and superior performance through an entire career. Only one honoree was born in Texas. That person is Carol Burnett, who spent her early years in San Antonio. Young Carol went off into the world, and the world took a liking to her from the start. She is today one of the most recognized and warmly regarded entertainers in America. For her first performance in acting class at UCLA, the teacher gave Carol Burnett a D- . But Carol found, as have I that one bad grade or two is not the end of the road. By the end of her freshman year, she was named Most Outstanding Newcomer. Within a few years, she became a star on Broadway and a television favorite on the Winchell-Mahoney Show and the Garry Moore Show. In the sixties and seventies, Carol's own variety show ran 11 years and received more than 20 Emmys. Every week, Carol performed one of the most difficult feats in all of show business, playing it straight with Tim Conway. To this day, millions of Americans can instantly recall sketches and characters from the Carol Burnett Show. Whether she was playing Eunice or the Scrub Woman or Starlett O'Hara in Went With The Wind viewers could always sense the person behind the character, the sweetness, the sincerity, and the wonderful spirit of Carol Burnett. Through the years in such performances as Same Time Next Year, Carol has also shown the depth and range of her talent. In her good life, she has been a beloved entertainer, a devoted mom, and a faithful friend. She is a cheerful and graceful presence in American life, and America honors Carol Burnett.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthekennedycenterhonorsreception8", "title": "Remarks at the Kennedy Center Honors Reception", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-kennedy-center-honors-reception-8", "publication_date": "07-12-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4484, "text": "All great performances in front of a camera involve an artistic vision behind the camera, and few have spent more years at the top of the directing profession than Mike Nichols. His name on a production signifies quality, intelligence, and high artistic standards. His credits include some of the most memorable films of the last two generations. The Graduate was a hit movie and a triumph that has held up over time. The best directors are always extending themselves, and Mike Nichols has turned his gifts to films as varied as Catch-22, Who is Afraid of Virginia Woolf? and Working Girl. He is equally respected for his career on Broadway, first as a performer, then as director of the original Odd Couple and Barefoot in the Park. The medal Mike Nichols wears this evening is the latest in a collection of other well-deserved honors, including the Oscar, the Emmy, the Tony, and the Grammy. A movie critic once said that Mike Nichols' greatest talent may be his ability to bring out the best in performers, and that is another reason why Mike Nichols is among the finest. I have been in love with movies all my life. Directing them is like getting to marry this girl you followed around for years and years. I do not know how long he followed around Diane Sawyer but she is here to share in this very proud moment. And Mike's parents, who brought their little boy to America from Nazi Germany, would also be proud of their son. And tonight we are really proud to honor this fine man, Mike Nichols. During this evening's reception, we will hear music from the Marine Band. I suspect that these fine musicians are thrilled to be in the presence of one of the greatest violinists of his age or any other. As it happens, Laura and I were guests in this very room when Itzhak Perlman performed for President and Mrs. Reagan. That audience, like every audience to hear this man, was captivated by his music and charmed by his presence. According to a review of a recent concert in Minneapolis, Perlman maintained an intimate rapport with the audience. For instance, he kept them updated on the score of the World Series between pieces. He was clearly having fun, and so was his audience. The sound of a violin first called to him over the radio when he was just 3 years old. The Perlmans gave their boy a toy fiddle. He soon exhausted the possibilities of that instrument.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthekennedycenterhonorsreception8", "title": "Remarks at the Kennedy Center Honors Reception", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-kennedy-center-honors-reception-8", "publication_date": "07-12-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4485, "text": "Armed with a real violin, he was onstage with orchestras in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and by the age 10 had given his first solo recital. America first came to know him 3 years later, when in 1958 he played Flight of the Bumblebee on the Ed Sullivan show. From that day to this, Itzhak Perlman has had a unique hold on the respect and affection of all who love classical music. He has played with every major orchestra in the world. He is collected more than a dozen Grammys, enthralled listeners with a repertoire stretching from baroque to contemporary, and touched millions of filmgoers with the pure and haunting solos in Schindler's List. Critics have written of Perlman's technical mastery, the rich tone and faultless intonation. And all who have seen him play are struck by the apparent ease with which he plays the most demanding of instruments. This good soul has been given a singular talent, and in sharing it he has brought much beauty into the world. For that, we are all honored to be in the presence of Maestro Itzhak Perlman. Speaking of soul James Butane Brown is in the house. Of course, he goes by other titles. Some men are too cool to only have one nickname. James Brown has been called Mr. Dynamite, Soul Brother Number One, and of course, The Godfather of Soul. Many names fit him, but there is no one else like him. And in a career of more than 50 years, he has earned the reputation as a live performer with no equal and as an institution of rock and roll. He grew up in Georgia, knowing many of the toils and struggles of an earlier time. He worked hard and took his own path. He received guidance along the way from many sources, from his Aunt Honey, who raised him, to the first preachers and gospel musicians he heard. He joined a band that called itself The Famous Flames. It took only a short while before the name was changed, by general agreement, to James Brown and the Famous Flames. I Feel Good, Please, Please, Please, Papa's Got a Brand New Bag, Living in America. Since he first achieved fame in the 1950s, James has posted 98 entries on Billboard's Top 40 R&B Singles Chart, more than any other performer. Bonnie Raitt has described James Brown's place in music history this way, You could not even list how many people have been influenced by him.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthekennedycenterhonorsreception8", "title": "Remarks at the Kennedy Center Honors Reception", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-kennedy-center-honors-reception-8", "publication_date": "07-12-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4486, "text": "In the Mount Rushmore of musical figures, he definitely would be on it. Of course, on that Mount Rushmore of music, the sculptor would have to pay particular attention to the hair. James is the first to tell you that the look is important to his success. Here is what he says, Hair is the first thing, and teeth are the second. Hair and teeth, a man got these two things, he is got it all. Along with the look, this man is blessed with incredible talent, undeniable stage presence, and the discipline of a true professional. He is still on the road and living it up-living up to that other nickname, the hardest working man in show business. We are delighted to welcome our final honoree to the White House. Loretta Lynn even mentioned the White House in one of her songs. The White House social season should be glittering and gay, but here in Topeka the rain is a-falling, the faucet is a-dripping, and the kids are a-bawling -- one of them a-toddling, and one is a-crawling, and one's on the way. Many of Loretta Lynn's songs are about the challenges, the dreams, and the joys of everyday life. She is known them all, and she has sung about them with style and feeling. More than four decades after she first sang at the Grand Ole Opry, there is no better known voice in country music and no lady more admired than Loretta Lynn. Her song and the film Coal Miner's Daughter tell a true story that began in Butcher Hollow, Kentucky. Loretta grew up believing, in her words, that from the Holler down to the mine was the whole world. Her world changed when she met a soldier named Mooney Lynn. He made a strong impression on people. See, Mooney was the kind of man who wore a cowboy hat with a label inside that said, Like hell it is yours. But as Loretta remembers, I was not scared of Mooney. I was scared because I had never seen a car before. They married and moved away and were living in the State of Washington when Mooney got an idea. He knew that the voice singing lullabies to their children was better than any he had ever heard from a jukebox or in a saloon. And just maybe if Loretta cut a record, radio stations might play it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthekennedycenterhonorsreception8", "title": "Remarks at the Kennedy Center Honors Reception", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-kennedy-center-honors-reception-8", "publication_date": "07-12-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4500, "text": "My subject today is the conversation around abortion. It is a sensitive topic that deserves our attention. It is one that too many politicians either demagogue or hide from. I will not demagogue or hide from it. I am here to speak about it directly and openly. I will not address every possible question or angle. Rather, I aim to start a constructive conversation about where we go from here in our divided country. Abortion is a deeply personal topic for both women and men. The issue should be addressed with sensitivity and respect, not judgment and hate. Most people have a story that has brought them to their views about abortion. It could be a trauma that a family member or friend endured. It could be our concerns for our daughters and their future. I am unapologetic and unhesitant about it. Not because the Republican Party tells me to be. My husband was adopted, and I am reminded of that blessing every day. Michael's birth parents lived in poverty. His father was an alcoholic and in and out of prison. His mother suffered a traumatic brain injury. When he was just a few years old, Michael and his siblings were taken from their home. Later, they were put in foster care. It was a rough experience for him. Thankfully, when he was four, a loving family adopted Michael and his younger sister. It changed their lives. Adoption literally saved them. Every day is a blessing because someone gave him life. Every day is a blessing because a family loved and raised him under difficult circumstances. The world is better because of Michael Haley. He is a combat veteran who served our country in war. He continues to help adoption and at-risk youth causes because he wants to help others who were born in his situation. I often think about what would have happened if Michael had not been so blessed if his biological mother had chosen a different path. My husband is reason number one that I stand for life. Every day I get to spend with the love of my life reminds me that I am blessed that someone saved his life. The second reason is that Michael and I struggled to have children of our own. I had many challenges as a teenager into my college years. I went through numerous surgeries. But what happened so easily for many of my friends was not my path. We went through countless sessions of fertility treatments. Every day I wake up and see or speak to my two children I feel blessed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeliveringpolicyspeechabortionarlingtonvirginia", "title": "Nikki Haley Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-delivering-policy-speech-abortion-arlington-virginia", "publication_date": "25-04-2023", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Nikki Haley"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4501, "text": "I will never forget the day she was born and then seeing her walk down the wedding aisle with her dad. I felt what countless parents feel. I believe every life is a blessing from God. My heart hurts when someone decides not to go through with a pregnancy. My record on abortion is long and clear. As a state legislator, I voted for every pro-life bill that came before me. We made it easier for women to get ultrasounds. We required a 24-hour wait before abortions. As Governor, we passed the Born Alive Infant Protection Act, protecting babies born during botched abortions. I signed a law protecting unborn babies from the moment they can feel pain. We also launched initiatives that paired thousands of vulnerable first-time moms with nurses who had specialized training in maternal and child health. I kept up the fight as ambassador to the United Nations. My goal as president will be the same as when I was Governor and Ambassador. I want to save as many lives and help as many moms as possible. This mission has become more urgent in the past year. With the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision, we entered a new era. It is really a return to the way this issue was decided in our country for nearly two centuries. Until 1973, abortion was not a federal issue. Many had restrictive laws. Some had more permissive laws. Yes, the issue was controversial, but the citizens of each state reached a consensus that reflected their values. Then, in 1973, the Supreme Court changed that. It declared the entire nation must follow one standard. And that standard was among the most liberal in the world. State-level consensus was replaced with a national mandate that much of the country found deeply offensive. Last year, the Court returned power to the American people. We are now free to forge consensus once again. In the past year, we have started to see what that looks like. Some states have passed laws protecting life. I commend them for it. Other states have doubled down on abortion. Different people in different places are taking different paths. That is what the founders of our country envisioned. It is the reality of living in a democracy. But it is equally true that in a democracy, things can change. Tomorrow can be better than today. And I believe we will make even more progress in the cause of life. That is the challenge we face as pro-life advocates - to move America toward life.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeliveringpolicyspeechabortionarlingtonvirginia", "title": "Nikki Haley Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-delivering-policy-speech-abortion-arlington-virginia", "publication_date": "25-04-2023", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Nikki Haley"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4502, "text": "I said I want to save as many lives and help as many moms as possible. To do that at the federal level, the next president must find national consensus. That might sound strange to many people. Under Roe, consensus was replaced by demonization. most in the media promote demonization. They stoke division pitting Americans against each other. No one talks about finding consensus. Everyone goes to the barricades and attacks the other side. They have turned a sensitive issue that has long divided people into a kind of gotcha bidding war. How many weeks are you for? How many exceptions are you for? But these questions miss the point if the goal is saving as many lives as possible. You do not save any lives if you cannot enact your position into law. And you cannot do that unless you find consensus. Just like I have my story, I respect everyone who has their story. I do not judge someone who is pro-choice any more than I want them to judge me for being pro-life. Today, each state is finding its own consensus, as they should. As a practical matter, you only achieve consensus when you have a House majority, a 60-vote Senate majority, and a president who are all in alignment. We are nowhere close to reaching that point. Today, there are around 45 pro-life senators, depending on how you count them. But it has not happened in over a hundred years, and it is unlikely to happen soon. We have to face this reality. The pro-life laws that have passed in strongly Republican states will not be approved at the federal level. That is just a fact, notwithstanding what the Democrat fearmongers say. They say Republicans are about to ban all abortions nationwide and send women to prison. These wildly false claims, amplified by a sympathetic media, are not designed to do anything other than score political points. They know as well as anyone that no Republican president will have the ability to ban abortion nationwide, just as no Democratic president can override the laws of all fifty states. But that does not mean we cannot save as many lives as possible. I do believe there is a federal role on abortion. Whether we can save more lives nationally depends entirely on doing what no one has done to date - finding consensus. That is what I will strive to do. In fact, I believe common ground already exists. There is broad public agreement that babies born during a failed abortion deserve to live.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeliveringpolicyspeechabortionarlingtonvirginia", "title": "Nikki Haley Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-delivering-policy-speech-abortion-arlington-virginia", "publication_date": "25-04-2023", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Nikki Haley"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4503, "text": "They need medical care and the full protection of the law, just like every other baby. There is broad public agreement that we should never pressure moms into having an abortion. They should get support to carry their baby to term. They should be able to get information from pregnancy resource centers - and especially about adoption. We must do better when it comes to adoption, to make it easier for adoptive parents, and to avoid children growing up in a government system with too little love. We can broadly agree that pro-life doctors and nurses should never be forced to violate their beliefs. The right of conscience matters just as much as the right to life. Surely, we can all agree that abortion up until the time of birth is a bridge too far. Only seven countries on earth allow elective late-term abortions. We are talking brutal regimes like Communist China and North Korea. And we can all agree that women who get abortions should not be jailed. A few have even called for the death penalty. Those are just some areas where national consensus is already within reach. There are others too, and we should do the hard work to find them through heartfelt dialogue. Conflict makes for good fundraising copy and scary TV ads. Consensus does not get a lot of ratings or clicks. I would remind those on the Left who demonize anyone who is pro-life, that it was not too long ago when President Bill Clinton said he wanted abortion to be safe, legal, and rare. Many want legal abortion anytime, for any reason, at any stage of pregnancy, in every state and town in America. Some radical activists are even lighting pregnancy resource centers on fire. These are not the voices of consensus. They are acts of division and hatred. President Biden has done nothing to discourage it. In fact, he promotes it. It is more partisanship of the worst kind. We should call out the extremism of the Left. We do not need a president who endangers lives while dividing our country even more. We need a president who unites Americans and brings out the best in them, even on the toughest of subjects. That will be my approach as president. I believe in conversation. I believe in compassion. I believe in empathy, not anger. We are not just talking about policy here. We are talking about people. That is often lost in this debate, on the left and the right. But it is front of mind for me.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeliveringpolicyspeechabortionarlingtonvirginia", "title": "Nikki Haley Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-delivering-policy-speech-abortion-arlington-virginia", "publication_date": "25-04-2023", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Nikki Haley"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4504, "text": "I acknowledge the humanity of both the unborn baby and the pregnant mom. Some days, you are so sick you cannot get out of bed. You worry if you are really up for raising a baby. And you know you are going to need a lot of help. That is what I felt during my pregnancies. Many women have it much harder. I desperately wanted a child. I had a loving family eager to help out. Some are single with no one to help - with no idea how to raise a baby while keeping a job. I had a friend who was raped. I know the anguish she went through worrying that she would have an unwanted pregnancy. It was an anguish I would not wish on anyone. We cannot ignore the fears those women face. I will never downplay these difficulties as I fight for life. And I will not demonize those who disagree with me. We cannot give into outrage culture and accuse our opponents of being evil. If we want to protect more moms and save more babies, we need more Americans to join with us. We must persuade people and find consensus, not push them further away. I know we can do it. I have done it before. Eight years ago, when I was governor, I encountered the most difficult challenge of my life. A sick and twisted young man walked into Mother Emanuel Church, in Charleston. He joined a bible study of African Americans, sat and prayed with them for over an hour, then opened fire. He murdered nine amazing souls. He openly said he did it because of the color of their skin. In the awful days that followed, photos emerged of the killer posing with the Confederate Flag. Amid our grief, a massive debate broke out. It centered on the Confederate Flag that flew on the grounds of the South Carolina statehouse. Our state had been bitterly divided on the flag for decades. On one side were those who wanted to tear it down. On the other side were those who wanted to keep the flag. Both were united in sadness over the Mother Emanuel murders. But they were divided about what the flag meant, and what taking it down would mean. People wondered if South Carolina would break out in violence and destruction like what we had recently seen in Ferguson, Missouri and other places. In that fraught moment, I gave a speech.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeliveringpolicyspeechabortionarlingtonvirginia", "title": "Nikki Haley Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-delivering-policy-speech-abortion-arlington-virginia", "publication_date": "25-04-2023", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Nikki Haley"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4505, "text": "For many people in our state, the flag stands for traditions that are noble - traditions of history, of heritage and of ancestry At the same time, for many others in South Carolina, the flag is a deeply offensive symbol of a brutally oppressive past. As a state, we can survive, as we have done, while still being home to both of those viewpoints. We do not need to declare a winner and loser. And so, I said, it was time to remove the Confederate Flag from the statehouse grounds. It was a highly emotional issue in our state. And removal required a two-thirds vote in both our State House and Senate. But several days later, large, diverse, and bipartisan majorities in our state legislature voted to bring down the flag. We found consensus on a very tough issue. Republicans and Democrats worked together and made progress by talking to each other like human beings. We saw past our differences, and united to move forward, as one state and one people. What was true then, with the flag, can be true now, with abortion. This should not be about picking sides, scoring points, or stoking outrage. It is about saving babies and supporting moms. I am fighting for all of them, and I will work with anyone to do that. I have faith we can make progress. I have faith we can save more lives, and give every baby, mother, and family the best shot at the best life. Our national history should give us hope. Time and again, the American people have confronted great wrongs, and worked hard to convince their fellow citizens to make them right. They spent the better part of a century striving to end our original sin of slavery. It took them even longer to secure the support of their fellow citizens for women's right to vote. Their tireless work showed America that segregation was wrong, and equality was right. Think about the progress we are already making in the restoration of the right to life. Fifty years ago, a court forced unlimited abortion on an unwilling nation. Millions of Americans responded - not with rage, but with resolve. They reminded our fellow citizens about the humanity of the unborn child and the needs of pregnant mothers. Now that power has been restored to the people. Let us treat it as the important and deeply personal issue it is. Let us discuss it in ways that allow Americans to show love for one another, not judgment or contempt.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksdeliveringpolicyspeechabortionarlingtonvirginia", "title": "Nikki Haley Remarks Delivering a Policy Speech on Abortion in Arlington, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-delivering-policy-speech-abortion-arlington-virginia", "publication_date": "25-04-2023", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Nikki Haley"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 4506, "text": "I once learned in a public-speaking class that you should never open your remarks with an apology. But, then, how can I explain to you that I am sorry I was late and have kept you waiting here? I will tell you how that happened here if some of the fellows behind me will not get mad. They had a meeting scheduled also with a delegation from the Congress, and I have found out that every time that happens I am late from then on. We are gathered to draw attention to the plight of the long-suffering Baltic people and to affirm to the world that we do not recognize their subjugation as a permanent condition. The Soviet occupation of Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania is a living reminder of the cynical agreement between Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany that precipitated the Second World War. The Soviets would like the world to forget this dark chapter of history, but it is something the Baltic people and freedom-loving people everywhere will always remember. The Soviet Union invaded these small but proud countries in 1940. And then, in June of 1941-only days before Hitler turned on his partners in the Kremlin-the Soviets arrested tens of thousands, executed many, and began a mass deportation to Siberia. At the end of the war, the horror continued as hundreds of thousands were sent to the Gulag. Today, it is no coincidence that a large percentage of people living in these occupied countries are not of Baltic descent. The Soviets have tried their best to Russify the Baltic peoples, as they have with so many of the other oppressed nationalities within the Soviet empire. The worship of God, once at the heart of Baltic culture, has been brutally suppressed. Any legitimate attempt at independence from Moscow has been suppressed. Any tangible effort to preserve their national identity has been denied. But the Soviets have never broken their spirit. Underground publications flourish, and ad hoc committees and groups defend religious and national rights as guaranteed by the Helsinki accords. It seems ironic that those responsible for the repression I have been describing are now proposing what they call an atom-free Baltic, a Nordic nuclear-free zone, especially since unidentified submarines have repeatedly violated the territorial waters of Norway and neutral Sweden. This kind of conduct does not lend itself to a spirit of trust. As a matter of fact, the curious thing is, if you really stop to think about it, their description of a nuclear-free zone is that there will not be nuclear weapons in that zone.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswhitehousereceptionforbalticamericans", "title": "Remarks at a White House Reception for Baltic Americans", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-white-house-reception-for-baltic-americans", "publication_date": "13-06-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4507, "text": "Thank you very much, Governor Jay Rockefeller, who is destined, I believe, because of the deep appreciation of the West Virginia people for what he is and what he has been and what he will do, to be the next Governor of your great State. And I look forward to working with him during the next 4 years. And I am also grateful to Jennings Randolph, a man who sets a standard for public service that is an inspiration to us all. As Wendell Ford and Carl Perkins and Nick Joe Rahall and all of us who've served in Washington together know, most of the new ideas that come forward for us to address have already been understood and proposed by Jennings Randolph, because he has his heart close to the people of this Nation. And when there is a real need for better housing, better transportation, better use of coal, better life for the working families of this Nation, Jennings Randolph seems to have a special sensitivity to understand that need and to lead the rest of us in meeting those needs for all. I am grateful, too, to have a chance to come here to meet with people from Ohio, particularly Kentucky, because they are represented here by a great Governor and also by a great Senator. And Carl Perkins, a Congressman from across the river, is one of my greatest friends of all. Let me say that I have spent the last few days thinking about the upcoming debate tomorrow night. As Wendell Ford pointed out, my opponent is not out campaigning among the people; he is trying to decide what role he is going to play in the debate tomorrow night. The problem that I have had in preparing myself for the debate is, which Ronald Reagan am I going to face tomorrow evening on television? Because as the election has progressed and as we get closer and closer to the voting time, he has flip-flopped on almost every conceivable issue depending upon what audience happens to be listening to him at the particular time. He is been strongly against, even prayed against, aid for New York City, but lately he is been in New York, telling them how much he loves New York. He was against many things for which he now professes to support. Not too long ago, as a matter of fact this October, to the automobile workers in the Chrysler plant, he was telling them how proud he was that the Federal Government, with the help of the people on this stage, had helped Chrysler stay solvent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentswaynecountywestvirginiaremarksrallywitharearesidents", "title": "Wayne County, West Virginia Remarks at a Rally With Area Residents.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/wayne-county-west-virginia-remarks-rally-with-area-residents", "publication_date": "27-10-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4508, "text": "But that contrasts with the Ronald Reagan of last October, who said he did not see anything wrong with Chrysler going bankrupt. I do not know if I will be debating the Ronald Reagan who now professes to be for safety and health of workers, or one who replied not long ago when somebody said that OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, ought to be abolished, who stood there and said, Amen. I do not know if I will be debating a man of this election campaign who now professes to be for improving the social security system, or one who on at least four different occasions has suggested making social security voluntary, a proposal that would mean the end of a strong and viable social security system. I do not know if I am running against a man who opposed selling grain to the Soviet Union last year, or the one who declined this year to support the grain embargo after the Soviets had invaded Afghanistan. I do not know if I am debating a Ronald Reagan who now professes to be for working families, but who is against labor law reform, who is against the Davis-Bacon Act, who said about the minimum wage that it is caused more misery and more unemployment than anything since the Great Depression, and who said just this year again that the primary cause of unemployment was the minimum wage. I do not know if I am debating against a man who now professes to be for working families who are temporarily unemployed, or one who said not too long ago that unemployment compensation was just a prepaid vacation for freeloaders. I do not know if I am debating a man who lately professes to be almost in the image of Franklin Roosevelt, or one who a little earlier said that the foundation for the New Deal was fascism. I may be having difficulty predicting what Governor Reagan will be saying in this debate, but we all know which Ronald Reagan would sit in the Oval Office if the Republicans win this election. It will be the same Ronald Reagan who said just a few weeks ago that he has not changed his position in the last 20 years, the Ronald Reagan who worked to kill Medicare, who opposes national health insurance, who rejects a decade of progress in nuclear arms control, who wants to scrap the synthetic fuels program, which will take coal from this region and convert it into synthetic fuel, that is the key to breaking the OPEC stranglehold which they formerly had on us.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentswaynecountywestvirginiaremarksrallywitharearesidents", "title": "Wayne County, West Virginia Remarks at a Rally With Area Residents.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/wayne-county-west-virginia-remarks-rally-with-area-residents", "publication_date": "27-10-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4509, "text": "There is one thing in this election that is certain, though, and I want you to listen very carefully to this, because you have got a good voting record in this area. Republicans always campaign like Democrats. You have heard them. They quote Franklin D. Roosevelt; they quote Harry Truman; they quote John Kennedy; they quote Lyndon Johnson. Have you ever heard a Republican candidate for ENTITY quoting a Republican Speaker? But when they get in the Ova Office, they are just like all the Republican Speakers that have caused hardship and trial and tribulation and forgotten the working families of this country, but they try to mislead you the last few days before the election. Republicans will govern like Republicans. Do not you forget it on election day. I want to say just a word about coal. I am proud to have been able in my administration, working with your Democratic Governors, United States Senators, the Members of Congress, to do more for the coal industry than ever before in the history of this country. We will produce more coal in 1980 than has ever before been produced in the United States of America. We will exceed 800 million tons for the first time, and the trend is in the right direction. This is the first year in our history in which more than 50 percent of all our Nation's electricity has been produced from coal. Our exports of coal to foreign countries will set an alltime record this year. And we could load millions more tons of coal on ships to be sold overseas if we just had the transportation system and the port loading facilities available for this new demand for coal that is been brought about by the policies of our administration. In the near future, as you know, you will have an exciting, new, bright life ahead of you as we begin to produce synthetic liquids and gaseous fuels from your coal. We can triple-triple-United States coal production in the next 15 years if we keep Democrats in office to help you. That is where we need your help. As you know, over the past several weeks, since the Congress has finally passed our new energy policy into law, we have begun to move on our new synthetic fuels program. We have signed historic agreements to help finance and to guarantee the construction of synthetic facilities, including the SRC-1 program in Kentucky and the SRC-2 plant in West Virginia.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentswaynecountywestvirginiaremarksrallywitharearesidents", "title": "Wayne County, West Virginia Remarks at a Rally With Area Residents.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/wayne-county-west-virginia-remarks-rally-with-area-residents", "publication_date": "27-10-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4510, "text": "These major plants will be the forerunner of others in this Nation and will show why 75 percent of the $88 billion in windfall profits tax will go to produce synthetic fuels out of coal. If we are ever to achieve our goal for energy security, do not let anyone try to convince .you that the best way to produce and' use more American coal is to lower air quality standards or water quality standards. What these men on the platform and I have done, working with Sam Church, ENTITY of the United Mine Workers, is to try to make sure that all the projected increases that I have described to you, all of them, include maintaining the quality of our environment. We do not have to make people choose between jobs and prosperity on one hand and good health and a beautiful America on the other. We can burn coal, let it be the bright new vision of an independent policy in the future, and still keep our air clean and our water clean and our land productive. Do not let anyone mislead you about that, because the best way to turn people against coal is for them to think that we have to lower those standards for air and water quality. Last week the Environmental Protection Agency extended a plan in Ohio which will allow greater use of coal. This plan sets limits on average emissions over a 30-day period, rather than a daily average. And this will continue on into 1982. This would allow much greater use of Ohio coal. Also last week the EPA and Armco Steel Company reached agreement on an innovative approach to control air pollution of the Armco plant in Middletown, Ohio. Instead of controlling each individual source, it limits the total pollution emitted from an imaginary bubble over the entire plant. This allows the company to concentrate its cleanup efforts on sources that are the least costly to control. The result is more pollution control per dollar spent. This is the first practical application of this new principle. And now other steel companies throughout the Nation can do the same, reducing pollution control costs and thus raising capital or money to modernize their facilities and to put more people to work. Just last Friday we announced a grant to finance a coke production plant in Canova, West Virginia. This would not only mean new jobs at the plant when it is finished, but 300 construction jobs and 1,500 miners will go to work now in West Virginia, in Virginia, and in Kentucky.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentswaynecountywestvirginiaremarksrallywitharearesidents", "title": "Wayne County, West Virginia Remarks at a Rally With Area Residents.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/wayne-county-west-virginia-remarks-rally-with-area-residents", "publication_date": "27-10-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4511, "text": "The first is, this is the third time I have been here, and every time I come, when I go back to the White House, I feel like I am in reasonably nice public housing. The second thing is that I want Dianne Feinstein to be reelected so badly that I have spoken at two of her fundraisers, but this is the first one where she is showed up. You know, Hollywood discovers stars all the time, and now America is beginning to discover Dianne Feinstein. You can clap for that. She is sort of replacing Tommy Lasorda as the person people think of when they think of California. You know, before I started running for President, that is what I thought of in California. I'd see Tommy Lasorda getting smaller and smaller and smaller on television, saying he'd shrunk himself with that Slim-Fast. That is what we are trying to pour into the Federal budget. Now the deficit is down; the Dodgers are in first place. I have asked Lasorda to take over the lobbying for health care reform. I do not know before we get to Dianne's main event we will have to watch this primary with Bill Dannemeyer and Michael Huffington, who spent $5 1/2 million of his own money in the last election. And now he is spent $2 million to go on television to review Bill Bennett's book. I do not know how she can hope to meet and defeat a person who is foursquare for virtue. But I want to say a little more about that in a moment. I think Dianne Feinstein works for virtue and embodies virtue, and I hope she will be returned on that basis. I want to say something serious, if I might. This is a, actually, kind of tough day for me to give a speech. I had the opportunity, as Senator Feinstein said, to go with her and Senator Boxer and others to the Inland Empire today to talk about how we could revitalize San Bernardino after the Norton Air Force Base closure and what is being done there, which is truly astonishing, and then to go to UCLA and speak to some wonderful young people at their convocation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraiserforsenatordiannefeinsteinbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fundraiser-for-senator-dianne-feinstein-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "20-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4512, "text": "But this is a sad day for Hillary and for me because Jackie Kennedy Onassis passed away last night, and she was not only a great symbol of courage and grace and dignity for our country, but she was a real friend of ours and a special friend of my wife and very kind to our wonderful daughter. And like many of you, when I heard last night that she had lost her fight, my mind began to race over the last 30 years, back to how it was then, back to how it is now, back and forth, what happened in between. One thing that Jackie and John Kennedy surely did was to make us all believe that somehow together we could make a difference, that what we did mattered, that our role as citizens was important, and that if we gave ourselves to public service, that was the sign of good judgment and compassion. In other words, we lived in a time then when there was much less cynicism and pessimism and skepticism and in which public discourse was a thing of honor, not a shouting match bent on destruction and division and distraction. I honestly believe that our ability to bring this country into the 21st century as strong as it needs to be and as united as it needs to be depends perhaps more than anything else on our uncommon strength of purpose which we have mustered in times past, this time to muster on our own state of mind, to fight against all the forces that seek to drag us down and pit us against one another, and to somehow elevate our sense of common purpose. It is not easy, and there are lots of folks who hope it will not happen for all kinds of reasons. But if you think about this race in which Dianne Feinstein is involved, it is an example of what we plainly have to do. I will never forget last fall when she was fighting for the assault weapons ban. And she called and she said, Now, you said you were for this, Mr. President, and I want you to help me. And I said, Well, Dianne, we are probably not going to win, but I will work like crazy for it. So, she gave me my list to call, and call I did. And then, that incredibly sensitive Senator on the other side of the issue said that she needed to become a little more familiar with firearms and their deadly characteristics. You all remember what she said in return.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraiserforsenatordiannefeinsteinbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fundraiser-for-senator-dianne-feinstein-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "20-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4513, "text": "She recalled how she became the mayor of San Francisco, how she tried to find the pulse of her slain colleague, how she had been trained in the shooting of a firearm when she had terrorist attacks, with a bomb in her house when her husband was dying, when her windows were shot out. Well, I do not know if that other guy's made a speech on the floor of the Senate since then. But I do know that speech had something to do not only with the passage of the assault weapons ban but with changing the tone and tenor of the debate in the United States Senate over an issue of immense national importance. When we were trying to get the assault weapons bill passed in the Housesame song, second verseCharles Schumer, a wonderful Congressman from Brooklyn, had carried this bill and had been defeated by 70 votes in 1991. Some significant changes were made in the bill; it was clarified and tightened up a bit. And we even did something that had never been done before, we listed several hundred purely hunting and sporting weapons that were protected under this law. And Senator Feinstein went to work and Chuck Schumer went to work. And so Chuck called me, and he said, Well, Mr. President, we really need your help. And I said, I'd be happy to lose in this cause, but do not be too sure that we cannot make it. But I wish I could tell you all the stories that produced that 216-to-214 vote victory. One of the clearer reasons was that a conservative Republican from Illinois who is very much respected among his party members, Henry Hyde, was undecided when Dianne Feinstein sent him a big, fat briefing book which included a list of the assault weapons shootings in Illinois since 1991. Henry Hyde stunned the entire Congress by announcing that he had changed his position, he was going to vote for the ban. And he credited Dianne Feinstein for providing him with convincing information. First one, then another person would announce for the bill. A Congressman from Michigan in a hunting area, who had never in 20 years in Congress, never cast one vote against the NRA , Two Democrats from difficult constituencies, one of whom was an ex-police officer, changed their vote walking down the aisle to cast their ballot, people knowing they were putting their careers at risk because they grew weary of the shouting and pushing and the division and the rhetoric and they wished something to happen.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraiserforsenatordiannefeinsteinbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fundraiser-for-senator-dianne-feinstein-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "20-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4514, "text": "And in doing that, they ennobled the whole public enterprise again. They made us all believe that, yes, we can, together, make a difference. I ran for President, as I told those young people at UCLA today, because I thought my generation did not finish its work for America, because I did not want to see my daughter grow up to be part of the first generation of Americans to do worse than their parents in a country that was coming apart when it ought to be coming together, because I always felt that we could restore the purpose of America and the promise of America if we committed ourselves together to create opportunity, to insist upon responsibility from our citizens, and to reestablish the common bonds of community in this country. You know, she is been criticized lately on the television for voting for our economic plan last year. Let me tell you why that was such a tough vote. It was such a tough vote because in Washington for so long we had heard nothing but hot air rhetoric instead of reality about what it took to get the deficit down. One is to raise taxes; the other is to cut spending; the third is to grow the economy. We did all three with that economic program. We will have, when the Congress passes this year's budget, 3 years of deficit reduction in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was President of the United States of America. At the end of 5 years, we will have reduced the size of the Federal Government to a point where it is below 2 million people for the first time since John Kennedy was President. And all the savings will be put into a trust fund to pay for the crime bill to make our streets safer. That is what we have been doing in Washington. Yes, Senator Feinstein voted for the bill, and so did Senator Boxer. And I guess you could say if either one of them had not , we would not have had it. a lot of rhetoric, no reduction in the deficit, no reduction in interest rates, no growth in the economy. But people would still be able to make speeches. You have to decide whether you want real progress and tough decisions made or more of what you had before. It was not very good for the California economy, and we are beginning to turn that around. You know, one of the things we have to decide is what standard we are going to require in our public discourse.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraiserforsenatordiannefeinsteinbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fundraiser-for-senator-dianne-feinstein-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "20-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4515, "text": "I know when I see an advertisement running against a Senator like Dianne Feinstein, saying that this program was just a tax billwell, let me tell you, You need to know that 100 percent of that money, 100 percent of it, went to bringing the deficit down. You also need to know that 2 million of your fellow citizens actually got an income tax cut, 15 percent of the Californians. Because they are low-wage workers with children who are hovering just above the poverty line, and we want to encourage them to stay in the work force instead of going on welfare. Ninety percent of the small businesses in this country qualified for tax cuts under the bill. California was helped by the capital gains tax for investments in new enterprises, by the research and experimentation tax credit, bynow because your college costs have gone upthe availability of lower cost college loans with longer repayment terms. That is what was in that economic program that Dianne Feinstein voted for that had the most deficit reduction in history. I do not think it is fair to characterize it as a tax bill, and I do not think it furthers the public debate. All it does is further the present state of high rhetoric and division. I made a remark a few moments ago about the publicity about Bill Bennett's book. Some of you probably have not read it, but it basically quotes other people on virtues. You cannot run a democracy without an addiction to truth and to fairness. What Dianne Feinstein deserves is truth and fairness. If she gets it, she will be overwhelmingly reelected. Senator Feinstein talked a little about breaking gridlock. That is one of the things I was hired to do. It took 7 years to pass the Family and Medical Leave Act, 7 years to pass the Brady bill, 5 years to get a crime bill. That is how long it takes to get things done in Washington. It is taken us about a year to 15 months to get a lot of these things done. We are turning these things around. I'd also like to say that Dianne Feinstein is one of the most effective lobbyists of anybody in Congress. I said todaylobbying the President, that isI said today when she and Barbara Boxer come after me at the same time, it is sort of like Mutt and Jeff, you know. And it is likeI feel almost as if they have got this gigantic fingernail file that they are putting on my head and rubbing it, you know.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraiserforsenatordiannefeinsteinbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fundraiser-for-senator-dianne-feinstein-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "20-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4516, "text": "I mean, Just Say Yes, that is what they want me to do. You do not know how I have suffered from this. It is literally true that no Member of the Senate has called me more persuasively, more frequently for projects that would create jobs, deal with the crime problem, or deal with the immigration problem in a responsible way than Dianne Feinstein, nobody in the Congress. She is helped me to change the whole approach of the national bureaucracy on defense conversion and base closings so that we can turn closed bases into economic oases for the 21st century. She has helped me to pass a crime bill that has not just this assault weapons ban but a bill to provide 100,000 more police officers for our streets, not only to catch criminals but to keep crime from happening by working with the children and the neighbors and the people in the community; that has not only tougher punishment with the three strikes and you are out law but also more prevention to give our kids something to say yes to and a chance to turn away from a life of violence and to turn away from resolving their differences in a destructive way toward finding constructive ways of dealing with problems and frustrations and anger. This is a very important piece of legislation. You heard Sally talk about the California Desert Protection Act. That also has been bottled up for 7 years. And after she came to the Senate, it passed 69 to 29. You wonder what it was doing for the last 7 years. On this immigration issue, you are going to hear a lot about it during this campaign, and you will probably hear the incumbent Governor putting a lot of pressure on me to do more. I do not mind that. I do not think the States have been treated fairly who have had large immigration problems, not just California, but Florida and New York and New Jersey and other States. But I will tell you this, in the last year we got more money for California in education, health care, and border patrol officers dealing with the cost of immigration than had been the case in the previous 4 years. We are moving in the right direction, thanks to the fact that Dianne Feinstein has taken a responsible, constructive approach, not just a rhetorical, pressure-oriented approach. She is doing something that makes sense, that will actually make a dent in this problem. And she ought to be rewarded for it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraiserforsenatordiannefeinsteinbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fundraiser-for-senator-dianne-feinstein-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "20-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4517, "text": "So I say to you, this Senator, in a remarkably short period of time, has established herself as a national leader on the economy, on crime, on the environment, on immigration. That is an amazing record in no more time than she is been there. And she is had the courage to challenge her colleagues and her President to produce, to lower our guards, to trust each other, to talk through these problems. One of the things that I felt very strongly, having been a Governor, was something I know Dianne felt, having been a mayor, and that is that most of our problems that we face now as a country and as a people, do not fall easily within the past labels of partisanship. You know, I will just tell you a story that just tore my heart out. Last week I was on my way to what I thought would be a wonderful day in Indianapolis to dedicate a site for a statue honoring Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy on the site where Robert Kennedy spoke in Indianapolis on April 4, 1968, the night Martin Luther King was killed. And some of you may remember that magnificent speech which calmed the crowds in Indianapolis and made it one of the major cities in America where there was not a riot after Dr. King's assassination. And Ethel Kennedy went with me, and two of Martin Luther King's sons went with me. And they had just come back from South Africa. And it is a wonderful thing, this statue's going to be made out of metal melted down from guns turned in by gun buy-back programs sponsored by the Indiana Pacers. And I picked up my notes and read yet another story of another human tragedy. A 13-year-old boy in Greenbelt, Maryland, right outside Washington, had just won a scholarship to a prestigious school, standing on a street corner waiting for a bus, shot dead when he got caught in the crossfire between two groups of warring youngsters, neither of whom knew him or gave a rip about him. He just happened to be in the way.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraiserforsenatordiannefeinsteinbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fundraiser-for-senator-dianne-feinstein-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "20-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4518, "text": "Now, when I hear that story, or when I get yet another letter from somebody telling me they can never change jobs because they have got a child with a terrible illness and their preexisting condition will not allow any other employer to give them health insurance, or when somebody talks to me like they did in San Bernardino today about whether there are going to be enough jobs for their children there after the base closings, it just seems to me that those are the things that our public discourse ought to be concentrated on. When I looked at those kids at UCLA today, that is what I thought. You know, in this country todayit's going to be a great test for Willie Brown with his new talk showmost peopleI'm serious, I am serioushe's a delightful man with a wonderful personality, he will pull it off. But the truth is that most people who talk sense and try to bring out the best in folks today are not great commercial successes. If you want to immediately become a popular culture figure, just bad-mouth somebody; they will give you a talk show. You think about it. We have to fight against that. If you think about what the Kennedys meant to us a generation ago, they were able to do that because we had inside a willingness, a willing heart, a listening ear, a willingness to be summoned to higher purposes, a willingness to believe that we could come together, a willingness to believe that we could make a difference. You all still have that here. You can feel it here tonight. Those kids at UCLA62 percent of the student body now minority students, they are in the majority, just as they will be in many States within a very few yearsyou could feel it there. What we owe to our country is to change the heart of the country. We just simply cannot be, with all these challenges before us, all of which, by the way, can be met with sufficient effort and thought and constancy, we cannot afford to be divided, diverted, distracted. We have to stop shouting at each other and start talking with each other. And we surely have to make a beginning by retaining in public life those people who have devoted themselves to actually doing something that makes a difference. You will rarely find anybody who has served in the United States Senate for 6 or 12 years who has been involved in so many things that make a difference as has Dianne Feinstein in her very short tenure there.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfundraiserforsenatordiannefeinsteinbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at a Fundraiser for Senator Dianne Feinstein in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-fundraiser-for-senator-dianne-feinstein-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "20-05-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4519, "text": "We welcome all of you to this room tonight to honor the President of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Dwight Eisenhower, whose husband was President of the United States when the Congo was born--she came from Gettysburg and wanted to be here for this dinner tonight--and Justice Thurgood Marshall, who has had a very difficult time over these last few months in the hospital, but who has fully recovered and who attends his first White House dinner since that time. We are very happy to have him here. President, since I came into office over 18 months ago, you are the youngest head of state to be honored in this room, and you represent the youngest nation. But though you are a young man and you come from a young nation, there are things we can learn from you. Tomorrow I have a meeting scheduled with my Cabinet on the budget. I find in studying your administration that you not only have a balanced budget but a favorable balance of trade, and I'd like to know your secret before our meeting with the Cabinet. This morning when I welcomed you on the South Lawn, I told our Americans listening on television that the Congo was a good investment. I would like to tell this very special group in this room why I consider the Democratic Republic of the Congo a good investment. I could say it was a good investment because it is one of the richest countries in the world in terms of natural resources. But it has far more than that. It has, also, people who are able to develop that wealth if given the chance to do so. In my visit to your country in 1967, I was impressed, of course, by my meeting with you and other government leaders. But I was impressed, too, when I visited a shipyard and the university and a factory and walked over the streets of Kinshasa, and I saw the people, working hard, strong, vigorous, vital and very proud-proud of their country, and with great dignity. And when we combine rich natural resources with a strong, vigorous people, and a leader who is able to provide the stability and the vision for progress for that country, then that country is a good investment, a good investment for its own people or for others who may desire to participate in its growth. I am sure that as we look back over the 10 years of the history of this country, we think of how time has capsuled in this century.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandpresidentmobututhedemocraticrepublicthecongo", "title": "Toasts of the President and President Mobutu of the Democratic Republic of the Congo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-president-mobutu-the-democratic-republic-the-congo", "publication_date": "04-08-1970", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4520, "text": "We think of the fact, as we sit in this room with the great picture of Abraham Lincoln, the portrait, overlooking the room, that a war between our States occurred 100 years ago, and 100 years, virtually, after we were founded. In 10 years the Congo was born, survived a civil war, and now is a strong, effective, and progressive leader in the exciting new continent, the new Continent of Africa. An enormous amount of the credit for that development goes to its leaders and particularly to our honored guest tonight. I know that all Americans, as they think of the Congo, know that the ENTITY has often referred to his country as being the heart of Africa. I think all of us at this table tonight would speak from our hearts to the heart of Africa when we raise our glasses to the health of the ENTITY of the Congo and Mrs. Mobutu. President Mobutu responded in French. President, Mrs. Nixon, ladies and gentlemen, distinguished guests: I followed very closely your brilliant presentation, Mr. President. And now I should like to express on behalf of my wife and my delegation and in the name of my people-what I should like to say here tonight, Mr. ENTITY, publicly, is, first of all, all our thanks to your country for everything that you have done for my country for more than the last 10 years. This morning in response to your kind words of welcome, and at the State Department in response to Secretary Rogers' toast, I said this very forcefully, that in coming here I was bringing the message of gratitude and friendship to the American people, and I said to Secretary Rogers that we have a saying in the Congo that it is in adversity that you know your friends. My country, beset with problems and difficulties from 1960 to 1965, my country had added a word to the international vocabulary. But fortunately, the American people, with all its succeeding ENTITYs since ENTITY Kennedy, ENTITY Johnson, and yourself, Mr. ENTITY, was never discouraged and continued to follow the same consistent line of confidence in my country and today we witness the crowning moment of this task of confidence. The Congo, thanks to your Government and to the people of the United States, stands up and is an object, if not of envy, of pride for all its friends and particularly for the United States.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandpresidentmobututhedemocraticrepublicthecongo", "title": "Toasts of the President and President Mobutu of the Democratic Republic of the Congo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-president-mobutu-the-democratic-republic-the-congo", "publication_date": "04-08-1970", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4521, "text": "I should like to say that my official visit here has as its central purpose to say thank you with all our hearts for all you have done and for all you will be doing to assist us in our economic and financial recovery in the heart of Africa. Since I have had the opportunity to speak here tonight, I must express publicly that we are setting an excellent example of cooperation between an industrialized country and a developing country. We are the living demonstration in concrete terms--the relations between the United States and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are a demonstration of what has happened because you have helped us, and we are showing proof that this aid was not wasted, that we have used diligently the aid given to us for our recovery, for our march towards progress. I am sure, Mr. ENTITY, that your voice will be heard by the Americans to whom you have said that the Congo is a good investment. This means for American investors, particularly of the private sector, that our recovery has been effective; that we have political stability, order, peace, and calm in the Congo; that the Congolese people is cured from its growing pains; that a people without a leader has become a people with discipline, work, and creative energy. You have helped us launch the Zaire operation 1 which has succeeded. Our country, which was the sick child of Africa, now sets an example for all the countries of the developing world of what can happen with will, with determination, and this is a marvelous example we can show to the whole world. ENTITY, you were speaking of what the American investors value most. What they want in a young country is the stability, and that we have; resources, and that we have also. But even more than our investment code which guarantees these investments, there is the fact that neither in our philosophical doctrine nor in our economic concept is there room for the concept of nationalization. We respect private ownership and we see great profits to be derived from this policy. Confusion in the early stages of our history was taken advantage of to make people believe, and to make particularly American investors believe, that we would nationalize, but this is not true. There is the unfortunate case of Union Miniere, 2 which is often cited. I do not want to go into past history, but Bossuet has said, The past can set an example for what we should do in the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandpresidentmobututhedemocraticrepublicthecongo", "title": "Toasts of the President and President Mobutu of the Democratic Republic of the Congo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-president-mobutu-the-democratic-republic-the-congo", "publication_date": "04-08-1970", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4533, "text": "I really appreciate the chance to come to the Limerick Generating Station. I am glad to see it in action. More importantly, I was glad to see the people working here, glad to meet them, glad to get to know them. I appreciate their strong dedication to safety. I appreciate their dedication to the consumers you serve. This plant serves 2 million homes in the area, and it does so in a way that does not require us to pollute the air. It is a perfect example of how we can grow our economy and protect our environment at the same time. I thank John Rowe for introducing me, and thanks for coming over from Chicago. I want to thank Chris Crane. I want to thank Ron DeGregorio. I want to thank the mayor, Sharon Valentine-Thomas, of the Borough of Pottstown. I want to thank all the folks from the local government sorry about clogging the neighborhoods coming through, but thanks. I want to talk about how the United States of America can continue to be the economic leader of the world. First of all, I think it is important that we are the economic leader of the world, because when you are the leader, it helps the folks who live in your country. See, it matters if we are on the cutting edge of change. It matters to people working every day in America if we are creating strong economic growth. Today, we are creating strong economic growth. I mean, this economy of ours is moving forward with a full head of steam fifth year in a row of uninterrupted growth Our economy grew faster than any other major industrialized nation in the world. We added 5.2 million new jobs since August of 2003. A productive society will yield a higher standard of living for our people. Hourly compensation grew at an annual rate of 5.7 percent in the first quarter of this year. Our workers are taking bigger home bigger paychecks. The standard of living is on the rise. After-tax income is up. And the fundamental question is, can you keep them that way, see? And there is a lot of competition in the world that creates some uncertainty and anxiety amongst our people. And the temptation for some is to say, Well, we cannot compete anymore so let us protect ourselves and let us withdraw; let us become isolationists. I think that would be a wrong approach by our country. See, we ought not to fear the future; we ought to shape the future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4534, "text": "We ought to be confident in our ability to be able to compete and to remain the most innovative country in the world. First, if we want to be the economic leader in the world so our people can prosper, we need to keep taxes low. We need to be able to be a society that says, you get to earn more of that which you earn. As you might recall, we went through a pretty tough time in this country over the past 5 years. We had a recession, corporate scandals, a stock market correction, a attack on our country. We went to war to defend ourselves; we have had high energy prices; and we had natural disasters. And yet this economy of ours is strong. And I believe the reason why is, is because of the tax cuts we passed in Washington, DC. We believe that if you have more money in your pocket to save, spend, or invest, the economy grows. And so one way to make sure that we are the economic leader in the world is to make sure the tax cuts we passed are permanent. Now, people say, Well, if you make the tax cuts permanent, you cannot balance the budget. I have been there long enough to be able to give you an accurate report. Do not believe it when they say they are going to raise your taxes to balance the budget. They are going to raise your taxes and figure out new ways to spend the money. The best way to balance the budget is to keep progrowth economic policies in place. And, by the way, last year, because our economy was growing, we generated $100 billion more for the Treasury than we thought. And this year, because of the economy growing strong, we are generating better rates than we did last year. And so the best way to balance the budget is to keep growing the economy so we collect more tax revenues and be wise about spending your money. See, in Washington, everything sounds good there; every program sounds fantastic. But Government, in order to be wise about spending your money, has got to learn to set priorities. So long as we have a soldier in harm's way, he or she will have what it takes to achieve victory and secure America. We are on our way to cutting the deficit in half by 2009. Congress is now debating a supplemental bill. It is money to help fund our troops in Iraq, as well as helping the victims in Katrina.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4535, "text": "And I have made it very clear that I intend to participate with them in keeping the spending down. And if they exceed the $92.2 billion request, plus monies for avian flu, I am going to veto the bill. See, that is one way you keep fiscal discipline in Washington, DC. We will be competitive if we keep taxes low and be wise about how we spend your money. We will be competitive, by the way, if we are smart about improving education for our people. See, this is a global economy, whether people like it or not. And the jobs of the 21st century will be either here in America or wherever the workforce is trained to fill those jobs. And therefore, it is important for us to make sure we educate our children early and emphasize math and science so our kids have got the skills necessary to fill those jobs. We changed how we view public education in Washington. We passed the No Child Left Behind Act, see. Are you meeting objectives, for example? If you set a goal, are you meeting those goals? How about every child learning to read at grade level by the third grade? That did not seem like an unrealistic goal to me. As a matter of fact, it was a necessary goal. And then we said to the States, you measure. We are going to get you some money, but you measure to show us whether or not we are meeting the goal. And if you are not meeting the goal, figure out why. See, you cannot solve a problem unless you diagnose the problem. And so the No Child Left Behind Act basically says, we are going to diagnose problems early and solve them, before it is too late. This business about shuffling kids through the school through our schools, based upon age, did not work. And so the No Child Left Behind Act says, we are going to measure early, and we are going to help children who have fallen behind in reading early, and then we are going to extend that to math. See, one of the interesting things is because we measure, we know that we are doing fine in math in the eighth grade. But children get to high school relative to other countries, we are not doing fine in math. And we better do something about it now if we want to be the economic leader of the world. So we have got a plan to, one, make sure the same standards applied to reading for early grades are applied to math.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4536, "text": "If we measure in the eighth grade or ninth grade and you are falling behind, you are going to get extra help. I bet I am looking at some folks out here who took AP when they were in high school. AP means high standards. But we do not have enough teachers around the country to teach AP, so we have got a plan to train 70,000 Advanced Placement teachers to keep raising those standards. We want to have 30,000 adjunct professors in our classrooms in high school and junior sometimes it is not cool to be involved with science and yet it is cool. And we need people who are on the frontlines of science explaining that. I went to a school in Maryland the other day, and there was a NASA scientist there, explaining to junior high kids why the sciences matter and why it is fun to be in science. We are going to make sure our Pell grants which, by the way, have expanded by a million kids since I have been the President continue to have incentives in there for children to take rigorous academics coming out of high school and the first 2 years of college, and then if they maintain a 3.0 average or are taking math, science, or critical language, there is an additional $4,000 on top of their Pell grant. In other words, this is an effort to make sure that we have a workforce that can compete in a global economy so we remain the economic leader of the world. I want to talk about energy, see. If we do not get it right in energy, we can have the most educated workforce in the world, but we are not going to be able to compete. We can have the lowest taxes in the world, the least regulations, the fewest lawsuits, but if we have not done something about our energy situation, we are not going to be able to compete in the world. And so that is why I have come to this important powerplant, to talk about how the United States can have a diversified energy policy that makes us less dependent on foreign sources of oil and more dependent on renewable sources of energy. Now, one of the things I want to start off by telling the telling you all, and I hope others are listening, is that over the past 30 years, our economy has grown three times faster than our energy consumption. In other words, we are becoming more technologically advanced. And during that same period of time, we created more than 55 million jobs while cutting air pollution by 50 percent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4537, "text": "So what I believe the American people should understand is that we can put policies in place that encourage economic growth so you have got a better standard of living and, at the same time, become less dependent on energy from overseas and protect the environment. So what do we need to do? Well, the first thing we got to do is understand that we have got to change our driving habits over time. You have seen the price of gasoline going up. One of the reasons why your price of gasoline is going up is because demand for oil is increasing in places like India and China, and the supply for oil is not meeting that demand. And the key ingredient for gasoline is crude oil. So when the Chinese economy is growing or the Indian economy is growing, and that demand is going up, so is your price at the pump. One way to make sure the price at the pump does not go up as global demand increases for hydrocarbons is to figure out how to drive our cars with different kinds of fuels, such as ethanol. One of the really interesting developments that is taking place now in America is the use of corn-based ethanol pretty cool deal, is not it, for the President to be able to say, you know, we are growing a lot of corn and we are less dependent on foreign sources of oil. It is coming particularly in the Midwest right now, there is a lot of ethanol pumps and plants being developed there to manufacture ethanol from corn. We have got to do more, though, if we are going to become less dependent on foreign sources of oil, when it comes to ethanol. And so we are spending a lot of your money to develop technologies that will enable us to be able to manufacture ethanol from wood chips or switchgrass. I said, Well, it is grass that looks like a switch that grows in dry country. In other words, there is all kinds of opportunities to manufacture ethanol, and we are exploring ways to do so. America has always been on the leading edge of technology and research and development, and here is an area where we have got to stay on the leading edge of change. Another way to help reduce our use of gasoline is through hybrid vehicles. They are coming; they are coming on the market. As a matter of fact, the energy bill I signed actually will pay you give you a tax credit if you buy a hybrid. We are trying to stimulate demand through the Tax Code. It makes sense.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4538, "text": "But there is going to be an additional breakthrough or additional breakthroughs when it comes to hybrid vehicles, starting with the development of a battery that will enable you to drive your first 40 miles on electricity. And the Federal Government is very much involved in this research. We are spending your money, again, on research to help fund breakthroughs for battery technologies that will enable you to drive a plug-in hybrid battery. And, oh, by the way, on ethanol, just one thing I forgot to tell you is that there are 5 million flex-fuel vehicles on the road today. Flex-fuel means you can either have gasoline or ethanol or a combination of the two. You have probably got one and you do not even know it. The technology the barrier to change is not the automobile; it is the ability to make the fuel in quantities economic quantities so we can get them to you at the pump. And same with hybrid batteries; they are coming. Hybrid, plug-in hybrid vehicles with new batteries, they are coming your way. And one of the reasons why is because the Government has entered into research partnerships with the private sector to accelerate these technologies, all aimed at making us less dependent on oil. A third way to help this country remain an economic leader when it comes to the cars you drive is hydrogen. We spend about a over a billion dollars of research to bring hydrogen to the marketplace. One fellow reminded me, wisely, it costs it takes quite a bit of power to make hydrogen. An interesting way to make hydrogen on an economic basis would be through nuclear power, see. But we are spending money and time and effort, all aimed at making sure that the automobiles of the future will require less crude oil. And we are close to some significant breakthroughs. It is going to take time to move away from the hydrocarbon economy to the hydrogen economy, and in the meantime, it seems like it makes sense to me to do something about the refinery capacity of the United States. Like, if you are worried about the price of gasoline you do not like it when your price got over $3 and I do not blame you you might want to ask the question, how come the Government is not working hard to expand refinery capacity so that there is more gasoline? If you have more gasoline on the market relative to demand, guess what it takes the pressure off price. We have not built a new refinery in the United States since the 1970s. You are kind of used to that here in this industry.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4539, "text": "And so we got to cut through all that business. If we are serious about helping our consumers and getting more gasoline to the market, we got to have regulatory relief. I suggested to Congress that we put new refineries on abandoned military facilities. It seemed to make sense to me. And so we need to be wise about these policies so that we can say to the American people, we are on our way out of the hydrocarbon era. But in the meantime, let us be thoughtful of the consumers here in the United States. We are also going to need a lot of electricity in the future. Electricity demand is projected to increase by nearly 50 percent over the next 25 years. And we better be wise about how we implement a strategy to meet that demand; otherwise, we are not going to be the economic leader; otherwise, our people are not going to be having the good jobs that we want them to have; otherwise, your children and my children, our grandchildren are not going to have the bright, hopeful America that we want for them. coal it is about 50 percent; nuclear power about 20 percent; natural gas 18 percent; and then other renewable sources like hydroelectric, solar, and wind power. We got about 240 years at current rates of consumption. It is a valuable asset for the United States. The problem is, coal is not when you burn it, it is not clean. It does not meet our standards. It is not it does not enable us to say, you can grow your economy and, at the same time, protect the environment like we want. And so we are developing clean coal technology. We are spending over $2 billion in a 10-year period to be able to say to the American people that we are using the money wisely to determine whether or not we can have zero-emissions coal-fired powerplants. It is in our interests that we do that. It makes sense. About 2012, under the FutureGen Initiative, we think we will build the first powerplant to run on coal and remove virtually all pollutants. By the way, we can explore for natural gas in environmentally friendly ways. And we ought to be exploring for natural gas in the ANWR, as well as off the gulf coast of the United States. by the way, natural gas, as you know, is not just used for power. It is used for fertilizers, a variety of uses.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4540, "text": "You can liquefy natural gas; you can put it in a ship, and you can send it long distances and still have an economic product. And they are building liquefied production facilities. And they put them on these ships but we do not have any places to off-load it in the United States. We got some, but not enough. If we are really interested in diversifying our energy sources and making sure the American people have got enough energy to watch this economy grow, we have got to have LNG sites to offload the gas from abroad. And so what we have done is, I signed a new bill, energy bill, that clarifies Federal authority to license new sites, that reduces the bureaucratic obstacles to opening up the terminals and streamlines the development. It is in your interest that we enable liquefied natural gas to come into our country so that we can help take the burden off some of the pricing pressures that we are inevitably going to feel with demand going up and not enough electricity supply. Thirdly, about 6 percent of the continental U.S. is highly suitable for the construction of wind turbines. And this is a really interesting opportunity for the country they ought to put one big one in Washington, DC. They say the experts tell me that this area alone has the potential to supply up to 20 percent of our Nation's electricity. I do not know if it is true or not, but it is certainly worth trying to find out, in order to make sure this country has got a bright future. And so we got $44 million for wind energy research. And the goal is to expand the use and lower the cost of wind turbine technology. In other words, we are constantly researching and looking. I do not know if you know this or not, but the Federal Government does spend money on research in a variety of fronts, and it should. And I intend to double the basic the budget for basic research over the next 10 years. The iPod like, I like to ride my mountain bike and plug in the iPod. The technology for the iPod came as a result of Federal research. The Internet came about because of defense money research. So we are spending money on research. The reason I keep repeating that is not only is it going to help us diversify our energy sources and make us competitive in the world, but it also helps make sure America is always on the leading edge of technological change.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4541, "text": "Solar energy the dream in solar energy is to develop technology so that someday your house is like a little generating plant, and if you do not use the power, you feed it back into the grid. It is possible, but it is not going to be possible if we do not spend money on research and development. So we are spending $150 million to combine Government money with private research money in solar technologies to see if we cannot help foster technologies that will be able to capture the sun, feed it into your house, generate enough electricity, and if you have got a little excess, feed it back into the grid. Finally, I want to talk about nuclear power a subject you all are very familiar with. It is a really important way to meet our goals, which is to have abundant, affordable, clean, and safe sources of energy. In other words, you have nuclear powerplants, you can say, we have got an abundant amount of electricity. And once you get the plant up and running, the operating costs of these plants are significantly lower than other forms of electricity plants, which means the energy is affordable. As I mentioned, nuclear power it is the second leading source of electricity here. We have 100 nuclear powerplants that operate in 31 States. Now, we have not built one in a long period of time. People in our country are rightly concerned about greenhouse gases and the environment, and I can understand why; I am too. As a matter of fact, I try to tell people, let us quit the debate about whether greenhouse gases are caused by mankind or by natural causes; let us just focus on technologies that deal with the issue. Nuclear power will help us deal with the issue of greenhouse gases. Without nuclear energy, carbon dioxide emissions would have been 28 percent greater in the electricity industry in 2004. Without nuclear power, we would have had an additional 700 million tons a year of carbon dioxide, and that is nearly equal to the annual emissions from 136 million passenger cars. Nuclear power helps us protect the environment. It is safe because of advances in science and engineering and plant design. It is safe because the workers and managers of our nuclear powerplants are incredibly skilled people who know what they are doing. For the sake of economic security and national security, the United States of America must aggressively move forward with the construction of nuclear power-plants. Interestingly enough, France has built 58 plants since the 1970s and now gets 78 percent of its electricity from nuclear power.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4542, "text": "The United States has not ordered a plant since the 1970s, and yet France has not only ordered them, they built 58 plants. And 78 percent of their electricity comes from nuclear power. They worry about it, but they do not have to worry about it to the extent that we do. China has 9 nuclear plants in operation, and they got plan to build 40 more over the next two decades. They understand that in order to be an aggressive nation, an economic nation that is flourishing so their people can benefit, they better do something about their sources of electricity. They see it. India I just came from India they are going to build some nuclear powerplants. To maintain our economic leadership, we got to do it again. First, in the energy bill I signed in 2005, there are loan guarantees, production tax credits, Federal risk insurance for the builders of new plants. In other words, we said, this is an industry that had not got much going since the seventies. It is highly risky because of the regulations to try to build a plant. People do not know this, but you get yourself a design for a nuclear powerplant; you start spending money for plans and engineering plans and everything; you get building; and all of the sudden, somebody can shut you down. And that makes it awfully difficult to take risk, if a lawsuit can cause you to spend enormous sums of money and have no productive use of the money spent. And so we got together with the Congress and said, Well, how what can we do to create incentives to show the industry that we are serious about moving forward? Well, one is loan guarantees, and that gives investors confidence that this Government is committed to the construction of nuclear powerplants. Secondly is production tax credits, and those credits will reward investments in the latest advanced nuclear power generation. In other words, there is incentives loan guarantee is an incentive, tax credits are incentives, Federal risk insurance. What the Federal risk insurance says is offered for the first six new powerplant nuclear powerplants. And the insurance helps protect builders of the plants against lawsuits or bureaucratic obstacles and other delays beyond their control. We have got what is called the Nuclear Power 2010 Initiative, which is a $1.1 billion partnership between the Federal Government and the industry to facilitate new plant orders. In other words, I have said, we need more nuclear powerplants, and here is a strategy to get them going, see. Here is a way to say to the industry, we are serious about this.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4543, "text": "This time last year, only two companies were seeking to build nuclear powerplants. Now 16 companies have expressed an interest in new construction, and they are considering as many as 25 new plants, trying to get these plants construction started by the end of this decade. I want it to be said that this generation of folks had the foresight necessary to diversify our or to continue to diversify electricity supply and recognize that nuclear power is safe, and we did something about it. We just did not mark our time. We actually did something about it so a generation of Americans coming up will be able to have a better America. I understand the issue of waste, and we have got to do something about it. We have got to be wise about nuclear waste. I am a believer that Yucca Mountain is a scientifically sound place to send the waste, and I would hope that the United States Congress would recognize that as well. I also recognize that we can do something on a reprocessing front. And so I got our administration to commit to the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. Under the partnership, America is going to work with nations that have already got an advanced civilian nuclear energy program, such as France and Japan and Russia, and we are going to use new technologies that effectively and safely recycle spent nuclear fuel. In other words, we are coming together to say, how can we do a better job of reprocessing and recycling fuel? And the reason that is important, at least for our fellow citizens to understand, is it will reduce the amount of the toxicity of the fuel and reduce the amount we have to store. To me, it is a smart way to combine with others to reduce storage requirements for nuclear waste by up to 90 percent. It is a good way to work with other nations that are spending money on research and development as well. It is a way to, kind of, leverage up an investment. We are going to I have asked Congress to spend $250 million on this partnership. I hope they follow through with it. It is a necessary expenditure of money to make sure that the nuclear power industry can move forward with confidence, and the American people move forward with confidence as well. And so here are some ideas not only ideas; this is what we are doing; this has gone from idea to action. What I am telling you is, is that I understand the need to get off oil. I understand the need to work on renewable sources of energy.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksenergypottstownpennsylvania", "title": "Remarks on Energy in Pottstown, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-energy-pottstown-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "24-05-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4547, "text": "I want to thank Sylvia Ulmer, the principal of George W. Bush Elementary School, for welcoming me. It is such an honor, Sylvia and Jack, thank you, sir it is such an honor to have a school named after me. When I pulled in the parking lot and I saw George W. Bush Elementary, I could not think of a higher tribute to a person, and I thank you all and the citizens of this community for this honor and tribute. Frankly, I was a little emotional when I pulled in I want to thank the teachers and the faculty here. I cannot wait to tell Laura that I went into the Laura Bush Library and saw teachers working hard to teach kids how to read. You know, being at this school reminds us, we have a special responsibility to protect our children. One of the most important jobs of those involved with schools and government is to make sure that children are safe. And Laura and I were saddened and deeply concerned, like a lot of other citizens around the country, about the school shootings that took place in Pennsylvania and Colorado and Wisconsin. We grieve with the parents, and we share the concerns of those who worry about safety in schools. Yesterday I instructed Attorney General Gonzales and Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings to convene a meeting next Tuesday, a meeting of leading experts and stakeholders, to determine how best the Federal Government can help States and local governments improve school safety. Our schoolchildren should never fear their safety when then enter to a classroom. And, of course, the superintendent and principal know that. We also had a reminder of the need for people in positions of responsibility to uphold that responsibility when it comes to children, in the case of Congressman Mark Foley. I was dismayed and shocked to learn about Congressman Foley's unacceptable behavior. I was disgusted by the revelations and disappointed that he would violate the trust of the citizens who placed him in office. Families have every right to expect that when they send their children to be a congressional page in Washington, that those children will be safe. We have every right as citizens to expect people who hold higher office behave responsibly in that office. I fully support Speaker Hastert's call for an investigation by law enforcement into this matter. This investigation should be thorough, and any violations of the law should be prosecuted. Now, I know Denny Hastert; I meet with him a lot. He is a father, teacher, coach, who cares about the children of this country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksgeorgewbushelementaryschoolstockton", "title": "Remarks at George W. Bush Elementary School in Stockton", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-george-w-bush-elementary-school-stockton", "publication_date": "03-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4553, "text": "I do not have to tell anyone viewing this program that our country, and in fact the world of facing an unprecedented series of crises. We are dealing with the coronavirus, which is spreading throughout this country and throughout the world. We are dealing with a growing economic meltdown, which will impact tens of millions of workers in this country. We are dealing with a political crisis as well. And I think the main point to be made tonight is that in this moment of crisis, it is imperative that we stand together, understand that right now throughout this country, there are so many of our people wondering, what is going to happen to me tomorrow in my own city? What happens to all the people who lose their jobs? What happens to the people who tonight are worried that they may have the coronavirus but do not have the resources to get the tests they need or the treatment that they need. And what I wanted to do tonight along with you is to talk about a series of proposals that we all working on right now and will introduce to the democratic leadership as to how we can best go forward. And in this unprecedented moment this will require an unprecedented amount of money and my own guess is that we will be spending at least $2 trillion in funding to prevent deaths, job losses, and to avoid an economic catastrophe. So let me just go over some of the issues and we will be posting these ideas tomorrow up on our website, berniesanders.com. And this is what I would like because we certainly do not know it all we want to hear from you, not only your ideas about how we can best go forward, talk about your experiences. So please communicate with us so we can get the best understanding possible about what is going on in our country and how together we can come up with some effective remedies. Let me start off with the basics and that is obviously from my perspective and I know from all of your perspectives. We need to make certain that everybody in our country who needs to go to a doctor can get the healthcare they need regardless of their income. It is something that should have happened in our country many, many years ago. But in the midst of this crisis, what I believe we must do is empower Medicare to cover all medical bills during this emergency. Now, this is not Medicare for all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesanderscoronavirusspeechtranscriptonprimarynightmarch17", "title": "Bernie Sanders Coronavirus Speech Transcript on Primary Night March 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-coronavirus-speech-transcript-on-primary-night-march-17", "publication_date": "17-03-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4554, "text": "We cannot pass that right now, but what this does say is that if you are uninsured, if you are under insured, if you have high deductibles, if you have high copayments, if you have out of pocket expenses, Medicare will cover those expenses so that everybody, regardless of their healthcare needs, and I am not just talking about the coronavirus, but their health care needs in the midst of this crisis, will get all the healthcare that they need. That is what we should be doing in this moment of crisis. We need to make sure furthermore, that as we go forward, we are effectively prepared to deal with the healthcare crisis that we are facing and that means that we need to make sure that the hospitals have all of the ICU units and the ventilators that are needed to respond to this crisis. What the fear is as you know, is that there will be a surge of patients coming into the hospitals and that we will not have the equipment that we need to deal with that crisis. Now, in my view, I mean, frankly, it is incomprehensible why in the wealthiest country on earth, we are not better prepared, but be that as it may, in my view right now, the federal government must work aggressively with the private sector to make certain that this equipment is available to hospitals and the rest of the medical community. In other words, federal government must take the responsibility of working with the private sector and saying, you know what, this is a major priority. And during this crisis, in addition, of course, we need to mobilize medical residents, people in medical school, retired medical professionals and other medical personnel to help us deal with this crisis. One of the great fears that we are facing right now is that doctors themselves and nurses themselves will become ill. And if our frontline defense in the medical profession is injured, is made sick, is not able to treat the American people, that is only going to make a very difficult situation even worse. We must massively increase the availability of test kits, test kits for coronavirus and the speed at which the tests are processed. We must look to successful coronavirus testing models in other countries and throughout our own country and implement best practices here. And right now there are communities and states all over this country that do not have the test kits. It is taking too long to get the results. We have got to aggressively address that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesanderscoronavirusspeechtranscriptonprimarynightmarch17", "title": "Bernie Sanders Coronavirus Speech Transcript on Primary Night March 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-coronavirus-speech-transcript-on-primary-night-march-17", "publication_date": "17-03-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4555, "text": "In my view, we need to use existing emergency authority under the Defense Production Act to dramatically scale up production in the United States of critical supplies such as masks, ventilators, and protective equipment that our healthcare workers need. It is again, quite unbelievable, but we have a short supply of masks, and if the doctors and nurses do not have the masks that they need, it is going to be very difficult for them to provide the care that patients require. We need to utilize the national guard, the ENTITY Corps of Engineers and other military resources to deal with this crisis. Today our armed forces must be immediately activated to build mobile hospitals and testing facilities, assist providers reopen hospitals that have been shut down and expand our healthcare capacity in underserved areas. One of the ongoing crisis is that our healthcare system faces in many parts of this country under the best of times, people cannot find a doctor or a hospital 200 miles away from them. That is not acceptable and we have to address that reality in the midst of this crisis today. We need to dramatically expand community health centers, which provide primary care, dental care and mental health care, as well as low cost prescription drugs to nearly 30 million Americans, including some of the poorest and most vulnerable. We have a primary healthcare system which is in very, very bad shape. Even people who have insurance having a hard time in many cases finding the doctors that they need. So expanding community health centers will be a significant step forward in making sure that there are locations where people can get the testing they need, get the treatment that they need, get the healthcare that they need in general. And while we are making sure that all of our people have the healthcare that they need, we must also respond to the growing economic crisis that this pandemic is causing. That means that we must make sure that everyone who has a job right now receives the paychecks that they need and does not lose their income. As we speak right now, think about the millions of workers who are being laid off in the tourism industry, in the fast food industry, in the restaurant industry, in the transportation industry. These are folks who do not have a lot of money as all of you know, some 40% of the people in this country cannot afford a $400 emergency. So people are sitting out there and they are saying, My God, what am I going to do? How do I take care of my families?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesanderscoronavirusspeechtranscriptonprimarynightmarch17", "title": "Bernie Sanders Coronavirus Speech Transcript on Primary Night March 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-coronavirus-speech-transcript-on-primary-night-march-17", "publication_date": "17-03-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4556, "text": "And that has got, got to be the major, major economic priority that we address. How do we take care of the working families of this country who are negatively impacted by this crisis? Small and medium size businesses, especially those in severely impacted industries such as restaurants, bars, and local retail need immediate relief. We must tell these businesses who are being forced to lay off, in some cases their entire staff or possibly even shut down through no fault of their own, that we will not allow them to go out of business. The federal government will work with affected businesses to provide direct payroll costs for small and medium-sized businesses to keep workers employed until this crisis has passed. In other words, bottom line here, most important point is workers need to continue to get a paycheck even when their businesses are shut down. Further, we need to provide a direct emergency $2,000 cash payment to every household in America every month for the duration of the crisis to provide them with the assistance they need to pay their bills and take care of their families. Now we are throwing out a lot of ideas and when you deal with the United States Congress, you do not get everything that you want. There will be picking and choosing here and there, but I think it is important for us tonight to discuss the various options that they have. And one of those options is to make sure that people at least getting $2,000 a month check to take care of their basic needs. And importantly, we must make certain that the government is getting this money into the hands of working families and the most vulnerable as quickly as possible. In other words, we do not want some kind of bureaucratic arrangement. We were talking about this for weeks and months and people do not get the help that they need. We must provide emergency unemployment assistance to anyone who loses their job through no fault of their own. Under the proposal that I am working on, everyone who loses a job must qualify for unemployment compensation at 100% of their prior salary with a cap of $75,000 a year. In addition, those who depend on tips, waiters and waitresses and others, gig workers, domestic workers, freelancers, and independent contractors must also qualify for unemployment insurance to make up for the income that they lose during this crisis. I think as many of you know, unemployment compensation does not cover every worker in America. We have got to deal with that right now. It does not matter what work you are doing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesanderscoronavirusspeechtranscriptonprimarynightmarch17", "title": "Bernie Sanders Coronavirus Speech Transcript on Primary Night March 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-coronavirus-speech-transcript-on-primary-night-march-17", "publication_date": "17-03-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4557, "text": "If you lose your job, you need unemployment. Further, we need to make certain that seem as people with disabilities and families with children have access to decent quality food. That means expanding the Meals on Wheels program, the school meals program and food stamps so that no one goes hungry during this crisis and everyone who cannot leave that home can receive nutritious meals delivered directly to where they live. In other words, that is as basic as you can get in America during this crisis, people must not go hungry. We must place an immediate moratorium on evictions, on foreclosures and utility shutoffs and suspend payment on mortgage loans for primary residences and utility bills. In other words, it would be unacceptable that people could lose their homes, lose their apartments, see electricity or gas shutoffs during this crisis, so they must be a moratorium in those areas. Furthermore, we must restore utility services to any customers who have had the utilities shut off. Unbelievably in America right now, you have got a whole lot of folks who literally do not have running water in their homes because they have not been able to pay their water bill, they may not have electricity and that has got to be dealt with right now. We must also provide funding for states and localities to provide rental assistance for the duration of this crisis. In addition, we need to waive all student loan payments for the duration of the emergency. Longterm as I think all of you know, it is my view that we must cancel all student debt and make public colleges and universities and trade schools tuition free, and that is the view that I have held for a long time. But right now at the very least, we must make sure that nobody is obliged to pay their student loan right now. Furthermore, we must ensure that the homeless survivors of domestic violence and college students quarantined off campus are able to receive the shelter, the healthcare, and the nutrition they need and connect those individuals with social services to ensure nobody is left behind. We must also utilize empty hotel beds and other vacant properties to ensure that everyone in this country is safely housed during this crisis. We cannot forget that right now, tonight, there are some 500,000 people who are homeless, some in emergency shelters, some who are sleeping out on the street. Our job is to make sure that everyone is safely housed during this crisis.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesanderscoronavirusspeechtranscriptonprimarynightmarch17", "title": "Bernie Sanders Coronavirus Speech Transcript on Primary Night March 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-coronavirus-speech-transcript-on-primary-night-march-17", "publication_date": "17-03-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4558, "text": "Further, we must protect farmers by suspending all farm service agency loan payments to protect farmers during this crisis, extend crop insurance and emergency loans to all affected farmers, extend rural development loans, and expand the emergency food assistance program to help alleviate hunger throughout the country and support our farmers during this crisis. We already have a major, major crisis in terms of family-based agriculture in America. Thousands and thousands of family farmers are losing their farms, we have got to stop that process right now during this emergency. Finally, we must make sure that our response to this health and economic crisis is not another moneymaking opportunity for corporate America and for Wall Street. Let me underline that. We must make certain that this health and economic crisis is not another moneymaking opportunity for corporate America and for Wall Street. We need to establish an oversight agency to ensure that no one is profiting off of the economic pain and suffering of our people in the midst of this crisis. Any emergency credit extensions or loans to insolvent companies or industries as a result of this crisis must come with strict protections and benefits for workers, for unions and for customers not no strings attached handouts for large corporations and their executives. During this crisis, we will ban stock buy backs and bonuses for executives. We will put conditions on this financial assistance to make certain that any corporation in America that benefits from emergency aid does not lay off workers, pays workers a livable wage and does not rip off consumers. We must make sure that companies they get bailouts are required to sell equity to the government and put workers on their board of directors. We need to prevent price gouging by pharmaceutical companies. This is not an opportunity for some drug companies to make a fortune by charging an outrageous price for the medicine that people need in order to stay alive. Further all prescription drugs that are developed with taxpayer dollars must be sold at a reasonable price. The pharmaceutical industry must be told in no uncertain terms that the medicines that they manufacture for this crisis will be sold at cost. This is not the time for profiteering or price gouging. So we have covered a lot of territory tonight and this is what I would very much appreciate where I'd appreciate getting your help. Once again, this is an outline of proposals that I will be introducing to the Senate leadership and working with the Democratic leadership to implement. But it is important for me to hear your comments. We will have this outline up tomorrow in a little bit clearer way on our website, berniesanders.com.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsberniesanderscoronavirusspeechtranscriptonprimarynightmarch17", "title": "Bernie Sanders Coronavirus Speech Transcript on Primary Night March 17", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/bernie-sanders-coronavirus-speech-transcript-on-primary-night-march-17", "publication_date": "17-03-2020", "crawling_date": "03-07-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4572, "text": "Jack, I hope you were not embarrassed by that uniform with the World War I helmet. The way I look at it, you are almost old enough now to run for ENTITY. But, as I say, Jack, do not let the uniform upset you, because, you know, we enlisted in the reserves at about the same time, and believe me, you should have seen my uniform I was in the horse cavalry, which brings up an important point. You know, ladies and gentlemen, I recently disclosed that the real reason I ran for ENTITY was to bring back the horse cavalry. And when I took office some people told me I was now the most powerful man in the world. So, now that you are retiring, Jack, maybe you can tell me why every time I have brought up the horse cavalry in the Oval Office, you and Cap would just smile and nod and say, Yes, Mr. ENTITY, and nothing would happen. Ladies and gentlemen, we are here today to honor and thank Jack Vessey for his years of service and devotion to America. four-star general, Vice Chief of Staff of the United States ENTITY, and ultimately Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and all of this after receiving a battlefield commission. I know Jack was proud of every rank and command he held; in each he performed with skill, competence, and devotion to duty. And yet for Jack Vessey, I suspect the title of which he was proudest was the first one he every held during his 46 count them 46 years of military service, the one he earned the day he joined the Minnesota National Guard, the title that said, Jack Vessey, soldier. as a battlefield hero you have heard today about North Africa, Monte Cassino, Anzio, and that grim night with the 2d Battalion in Vietnam; he will be remembered as a man of patriotism and deep religious belief, an officer who brought character and credit to every billet he ever held; as a military leader who always spoke his mind to civilian authority, respectfully but candidly; as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff who presided over the restoration of America's military strength and power at a moment critical to the fate of freedom and his country's security. In all these things, he bore the marks of greatness.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfarewellceremonyforgeneraljohnwvesseyjrchairmanthejointchiefsstaff", "title": "Remarks at a Farewell Ceremony for General John W. Vessey, Jr., Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-farewell-ceremony-for-general-john-w-vessey-jr-chairman-the-joint-chiefs-staff", "publication_date": "30-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4573, "text": "But there is one accomplishment that is not there in Jack Vessey's personnel file, yet it is an accomplishment that made the difference in the lives of so many GI's over so many years in so many places around the globe. Jack Vessey always remembered the soldiers in the ranks; he understood those soldiers are the backbone of any army. He noticed them, spoke to them, looked out for them. Jack Vessey never forgot what it was like to be an enlisted man, to be just a GI. Mark J. Neal, of Las Cruces, New Mexico, remembers. In January of 1975, he was a private at Fort Carson, a member of the drill team there. He said recently that after one drill team event, he was in his residence doing dishes before the volunteer army, way back when Jack and I enlisted, it seems to me they had another name for doing dishes. Anyway, Mark Neal was told the commanding general wanted to see him. He was scared, of course, but he found his meeting and friendly chat with the general something he would always remember. After that, Mark Neal followed General Vessey's career. This short meeting made a lasting impression on me. It was amazing to me that you even knew I was on the premises... even more amazing that you would want to meet me. That moment of thoughtfulness for a lonely enlisted man back at Fort Carson proved the truth of your reputation as a real soldier's general. There were many Mark Neals in Jack Vessey's career, and Jack Vessey made their lives a little easier, a little less lonely. And he made them a little prouder to wear their country's uniform and defend freedom. Jack, in the 5 years or so that I have been doing events like this, I have learned something about people like you. A career like yours, combining as it does heroism, patriotism, competence, wisdom, and kindness, does not need elaboration from commanders in chief or President; it speaks enough all by itself. But what I can do today is thank you. On behalf of your friends here today who've had the honor of working with you and on behalf of some others who could not be here all your fellow Americans, if they had the chance to be here, they would express their gratitude to you for making their lives and the lives of their children safer and more secure.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfarewellceremonyforgeneraljohnwvesseyjrchairmanthejointchiefsstaff", "title": "Remarks at a Farewell Ceremony for General John W. Vessey, Jr., Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-farewell-ceremony-for-general-john-w-vessey-jr-chairman-the-joint-chiefs-staff", "publication_date": "30-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4574, "text": "Last summer, I got a letter from a woman named Elizabeth Paredes from Tucson, Arizona. Elizabeth is the mom of a 3-year-old boy and an assistant manager at a sandwich shop. She earns about $2,000 a month, and she routinely works some 50 hours a week, sometimes even more. But because of outdated overtime regulations, she does not have to be paid a dime of overtime. It is not easy work and requires a lot of time away from my son at times, I find not worth it. Things like the 40-hour workweek and overtime are two of the most basic pillars of a middle class life. But for all the changes we have seen in our economy, our overtime rules have only been updated once since the 1970s just once. In fact, 40 years ago, more than 60 percent of workers were eligible for overtime based on their salaries. But today, that number is down to 7 percent. Only 7 percent of full-time salaried workers are eligible for overtime based on their income. That is why this week, my administration took a step to help more workers get the overtime pay they have earned. The Department of Labor finalized a rule to extend overtime protections to 4.2 million more Americans. It is a move that will boost wages for working Americans by $12 billion over the next 10 years. We are more than doubling the overtime salary threshold. And what that means is, most salaried workers who earn less than about $47,500 a year will qualify for overtime. Or their employers can choose to give them a raise so that they earn more than $47,500. Or if employers do not want to raise wages, they can let them go home after 40 hours and see their families or train for new jobs. Any way you slice it, it is a win for working families. And we are making sure that every 3 years, there will be an automatic update to this threshold so that working families will not fall through the cracks for decades at a time ever again. This is the single biggest step I can take through executive action to raise wages for the American people. It means that millions of hard-working Americans like Elizabeth will either get paid for working more than 40 hours, or they will get more time with their families. We still have more work to do to make sure this economy works for everybody, not just those at the top.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsweeklyaddress195", "title": "The President's Weekly Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-weekly-address-195", "publication_date": "21-05-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4594, "text": "I am very grateful to have this second .major meeting on how we can save energy in our Nation by the concerted effort of leaders like yourselves and those who are eager, I believe, as patriotic citizens to increase our Nation's security through reducing our dependence, unwarranted and excessive dependence, on imported oil. Today we have formed a council for energy efficiency, and we have the panel members here, the award winners, whom we will recognize in a few minutes, and community leaders, and I want to thank all of you for being present. As you know, millions of our citizens now recognize vividly, as they did not perhaps just 12 months ago, how vital it is for each one of us to join in reducing imports. one is to eliminate the waste of energy, which has never been an integral part of Americans' lives; and secondly, to produce more energy ourselves. The cheapest, most efficient approach between those two, obviously, is to reduce our own consumption of energy, which I believe we can do, as has been proved by many of you already, without reducing the quality of our own lives. For the past 3 1/2 years I and many of you here, all the members of my own administration, almost every Member of the Congress, has fought for and has finally achieved the basic framework of a comprehensive energy policy for our country, something that we have never had before and something which is already paying rich dividends for us. We now import, the first half of this year, almost 15 percent less oil than we did the same 6 months in 1979. That is a remarkable achievement, particularly in view of the fact that in the years preceding this year we had had a steady upward trend in the amount of oil that we had bought from overseas. We have still not reached our goals. And as you know, by 1990 we have set as a goal for ourselves a slashing in half of the actual amount that we import and a reduction by more than two-thirds of the amount that we would have imported had we not put into effect these conservation measures. We have today, this day, imported about 1 1/2 million less barrels than we did an equivalent day 12 months ago. This is a very fine achievement, thanks to many of you. We have still got much to do, and we have made good progress already. We have got two basic approaches, as you well know from the briefing you have had and from the discussion today.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremonyannouncethenationalenergyefficiencyprogramssecondphaseandpresent", "title": "Remarks at a Ceremony To Announce the National Energy Efficiency Program's Second Phase and Present Transportation Efficiency Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremony-announce-the-national-energy-efficiency-programs-second-phase-and-present", "publication_date": "22-07-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4595, "text": "One is in the area of transportation, and we will recognize some that have achieved superior performance already. And we also are launching, with as effective a program as possible throughout our Nation, a means by which we conserve energy within individual homes. And we think that each home, on the average, can save 25 percent of the energy it has been consuming. This can be done through tax credits to encourage the weatherization of homes, the installation of devices like thermostats, that are timed by day, to prevent excessive air conditioning or heating loads when they are not needed, because somebody might be absent-minded and not change the thermostat when they could have changed it, and of course, the installation of solar heating devices of all kinds. We have received from the transportation industry about 190 different specific commitments derived from the previous meeting that we have had here. The homes will be the second achievement and a third one that we are working for is in the field of agriculture. I have been a farmer almost all my life, except when I have been in government service. All of my people before me for many generations have been full-time farmers, and I know from practical experience that, in my earlier days, we had much less dependence upon bought fuels for the heating or drying of crops and for cultivation and, as any farm agent knows and as any superior farmer knows, minimum tillage can be an advantage and not a disadvantage. And the sun-drying of our crops, instead of using imported oil or natural gas or butane, can be a very efficient way to do an equally superior job. We anticipate that if the farmers can save only 5 percent of the energy they use compared to a year ago and if homeowners can reduce, by an amount that I have already described, that we can cut our oil imports at a $32 per barrel price by roughly $20 billion each year. We have, finally, a need to expand the public awareness of what can be done. A lot of people have feared energy conservation because it is new to them, and they have assumed, incorrectly, that to save energy in their own lives, in their homes, on their farms, in their businesses, in their transportation, would cause them to lead an inferior quality of life compared to what they had been using, to which they had been accustomed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksceremonyannouncethenationalenergyefficiencyprogramssecondphaseandpresent", "title": "Remarks at a Ceremony To Announce the National Energy Efficiency Program's Second Phase and Present Transportation Efficiency Awards", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-ceremony-announce-the-national-energy-efficiency-programs-second-phase-and-present", "publication_date": "22-07-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4618, "text": "I am glad you all could join us today for this job forum here at the White House. government, labor, academia, nonprofits, and businesses of all sizes. And I know that your unions or universities or cities or companies do not run themselves, so I appreciate that you have taken the time to be here today. the continuing plight of millions of Americans who are still out of work. Sometimes in this town, we talk about these things in clinical and academic ways. With 1 in 10 Americans out of work and millions more underemployed, not having enough hours to support themselves, this is a struggle that cuts deep, and it touches people across this Nation. Every day, I meet people or I hear from people who talk about sending out resume after resume, and they have been on the job hunt for a year or a year and a half and still cannot find anything and are desperate. They have not just lost the paycheck they need to live; they are losing the sense of dignity and identity that comes from having a job. I hear from businessowners who face the heartbreak of having to lay off longtime employees or shutting their doors altogether, in some cases businesses that they have taken years to build, in some cases businesses that they inherited from their parents or their grandparents. And I see communities devastated by lost jobs and devastated by the fear that those jobs are never coming back. Now, as Joe mentioned, it is true that we have seen a significant turnaround in the economy overall since the beginning of the year. Our economy was in a freefall. Our financial system was on the verge of collapse. We were losing 700,000 jobs per month. And it was clear then that our first order of business was to keep a recession from slipping into a depression, from preventing financial meltdown and getting the economy growing again, because we knew that without economic growth, there would be little to nothing we could do to stem job losses. And we knew that trying to create jobs in an economy based on inflated home prices and maxed-out credit cards and overleveraged banks was akin to building a house on sand. So we implemented plans to stabilize the financial system and revive lending to families and businesses. We passed the Recovery Act, which stopped our freefall and help spur the growth that we have seen. Today, our economy is growing again for the first time in a year and at the fastest pace that we have seen in 2 years, and productivity is surging. Companies are reporting profits.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheopeningsessionthejobsandeconomicgrowthforum", "title": "Remarks at the Opening Session of the Jobs and Economic Growth Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-opening-session-the-jobs-and-economic-growth-forum", "publication_date": "03-12-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4619, "text": "But despite the progress we have made, many businesses are still skittish about hiring. Some are still digging themselves out of the losses they incurred over the past year. Many have figured out how to squeeze more productivity out of fewer workers, and that cost-cutting has become embedded in their operations and in their culture. That may result in good profits, but it is not translating into hiring. How do we get businesses to start hiring again? How do we get ourselves to the point where more people are working and more people are spending and you start seeing a virtuous cycle and the recovery starts to feed on itself? Now, we knew from the outset of this recession-particularly a recession of this severity and a recession that is spurred on by financial crisis rather than as a consequence of the business cycle-that it would take time for job growth to catch up with economic growth. We all understood that. That is always been the case with recessions. But we cannot hang back and hope for the best when we have seen the kinds of job losses that we have seen over the last year I am not interested in taking a wait-and-see approach when it comes to creating jobs. What I am interested in is taking action right now to help businesses create jobs-right now, in the near term. And that is why we made more credit available to small banks that provide loans to small businesses. That is why we provided tax relief to help small businesses stay afloat and proposed raising SBA loan limits to help them expand. That is why we created the Cash for Clunkers program and made sure the Recovery Act included investments that would start saving and creating jobs this year, as Joe mentioned, as many as 1.6 * so far is estimated, according to the most recent analysis. And that is why I have been working continuously with my economic advisers as well as congressional leaders and others on new job creation ideas. And I will be speaking in greater detail about several ideas that have already surfaced early next week. While I believe that government has a critical role in creating the conditions for economic growth, ultimately, true economic recovery is only going to come from the private sector. We do not have enough public dollars to fill the hole of private dollars that was created as a consequence of the crisis.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheopeningsessionthejobsandeconomicgrowthforum", "title": "Remarks at the Opening Session of the Jobs and Economic Growth Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-opening-session-the-jobs-and-economic-growth-forum", "publication_date": "03-12-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4620, "text": "It is only when the private sector starts to reinvest again, only when our businesses start hiring again and people start spending again and families start seeing improvement in their own lives again that we are going to have the kind of economy that we want. That is the measure of a real economic recovery. So that is why we have invited all of you here today. Many of you run businesses yourselves. Each of you is an expert on some aspect of job creation. Collectively, your views span the spectrum. We have looking for fresh perspectives and new ideas. I want to hear about what unions and universities can do to better support and prepare our workers, not just for the jobs of today, but for the jobs 5 years from now and 10 years from now and 50 years from now. I want to hear about what mayors and community leaders can do to bring new investment to our cities and towns and help recovery dollars get to where they need to go as quickly as possible. I want to hear from CEOs about what is holding back business investment and how we can increase confidence and spur hiring. And if there are things that we are doing here in Washington that are inhibiting you, then we want to know about it. And I want to continue this conversation outside of Washington, which is why I will be meeting with some of the small-business owners that you saw in the video, in Allentown, Pennsylvania, tomorrow to get their ideas. It is also why we have asked State and local officials and community organizations to hold their own jobs forums over the next week or so and to report back with the ideas and recommendations that result. I am open to every demonstrably good idea, and I want to take every responsible step to accelerate job creation. We also, though, have to face the fact that our resources are limited. When we walked in, there was an enormous fiscal gap between the money that is going out and the money coming in. The recession has made that worse because of fewer tax receipts and more demands made on government for things like unemployment insurance. So we cannot make any ill-considered decisions right now, even with the best of intentions. We will need to look beyond the old standbys and fallbacks and come up with the best ideas that give us the biggest bang for the buck. So I need everybody here to bring their A-game here today. I am going to be asking some tough questions. I will be listening for some good answers.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheopeningsessionthejobsandeconomicgrowthforum", "title": "Remarks at the Opening Session of the Jobs and Economic Growth Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-opening-session-the-jobs-and-economic-growth-forum", "publication_date": "03-12-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4621, "text": "Laura and I are welcome-are proud to welcome and honored to welcome our friend Prime Minister Koizumi back to the White House. Japan and the United States have built a strong alliance and a close friendship. Decades ago, our two fathers looked across the Pacific and saw adversaries, uncertainty, and war. Today, their sons look across that same ocean and see friends and opportunity and peace. The friendship between our two nations is based on common values. These values include democracy, free enterprise, and a deep and abiding respect for human rights. These values have created a better life for both our peoples, a firm alliance between our two nations, and a common approach to our engagement with the world. These values are under attack by terrorist networks that bring death and destruction to all who oppose their hateful ideology, so the United States and Japan are working together to defend our shared values and win the war on terror. Japanese naval vessels have refueled hundreds of coalition ships as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. Japan is now the third largest donor nation for reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan. In Iraq, Japanese Self-Defense Forces have helped improve the lives of citizens in a key Iraqi Province that will soon return to Iraqi control. And Japan continues to provide critical airlift support to coalition forces in Iraq. The people of Japan can be proud of the contribution their Self-Defense Forces have made in the war on terror, and Americans are proud to serve alongside such courageous allies. Japan and the United States are cooperating to address other threats to our security. Our two nations are working together through the six-party talks, insisting that North Korea meet its pledge to abandon all nuclear weapons and its existing nuclear programs. Japan and the United States are also founding members of the Proliferation Security Initiative that is working to keep dangerous weapons from rogue states and terrorist groups. And our two nations are repositioning our forces to counter the emerging threats of the 21st century. As we meet threats to our security, we are also working together to improve the lives of our people and address common challenges. Our two economies are the largest in the world, and we are working to expand trade and investment opportunities for both our peoples. Japan and the United States are working together for a successful conclusion to the Doha negotiations, which would add to the prosperity of our nations and help lift millions in the developing world out of poverty. With prosperity comes responsibility.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswelcomingceremonyforprimeministerjunichirokoizumijapan", "title": "Remarks at a Welcoming Ceremony for Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-welcoming-ceremony-for-prime-minister-junichiro-koizumi-japan", "publication_date": "29-06-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4622, "text": "We are here to congratulate Mary Peters on becoming our Nation's 15th Secretary of Transportation. Mary is a dedicated public servant, an experienced leader, and one of our Nation's most innovative thinker on transportation issues. Mary brings more than two decades of knowledge and skill to her new post. She also brings to her position the love and support of her friends and her family. I want to thank her family for being here, especially Mary's husband, Terry. I appreciate my Chief of Staff, Josh Bolten, who is here to administer the oath. Presidents cannot administer the oath so I tapped my man, Josh. I want to thank Maria Cino, who is the Deputy Secretary, Acting Secretary. I thank you for your service and your friendship. I appreciate my friend Secretary Norm Mineta. I got some other stuff to say about you here in a minute. I do want to thank Rodney Slater for joining us, former Secretary of Transportation, as well as Jim Burnley. I am proud you are here, and I know Secretary Peters appreciates it as well. The job of Secretary of Transportation is one of the most important in our Federal Government. The American people rely on the Department of Transportation to maintain a safe, reliable, and efficient transportation system. And the future of our growing economy and changing infrastructure depend on the decisions made by the Secretary that will be put into action by this Department. The Secretary of Transportation also plays an important role in our Nation's coordinated efforts to guard against terrorist threats to our aircraft, seaports, and infrastructure. For the past 6 years, these responsibilities have been carried out by Norm Mineta, who served our country with distinction, integrity, and dedication. Norm is our Nation's longest serving Secretary of Transportation, and he served at a time of great consequence for our country. I remember after the attacks of September the 11th, when Norm led the successful effort to bring tens of thousands of passengers aboard commercial aircraft to safe landings. He grounded quite a few planes, including the ones my mom and dad were on. They have always thanked you for that, Norm. After Hurricane Katrina, Norm and his team helped quickly repair and reopen the majorarea's major highways, airports, seaports, and pipelines. He offered incentive-based contracts and used other innovative ideas, and as a result, the Department of Transportation was to get critical infrastructure in place faster than usual.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksswearingceremonyformaryepeterssecretarytransportation", "title": "Remarks at a Swearing-In Ceremony for Mary E. Peters as Secretary of Transportation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-swearing-ceremony-for-mary-e-peters-secretary-transportation", "publication_date": "17-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4623, "text": "I want to thank you for your leadership, Norm, and I want to thank you for your lifetime of service to our country, and I wish you all the very best. And I want to remind you, Maria made you look pretty good while you were in office. Mary Peters is the right person to succeed Norm as the Secretary of Transportation. She worked for several years with Secretary Mineta, and she understands the fine legacy she has to live up to. She also knows firsthand the skills and dedication of the men and women who work here at the Department of Transportation. She understands that to maintain our Nation's competitiveness and to sustain our growing economy, we need a Secretary who can see the challenges and be willing to confront them. Mary Peters will provide strong leadership. She has spent a lifetime working on transportation issues in both the private and public sectors. Most recently, she has served as senior executive for transportation policy at a major engineering firm. For 4 years before that, she led the Federal Highway Administration. Before coming to Washington, she served in the Arizona Department of Transportation. For more than 15 years, she rose through the ranks to become director in 1998. At both the State and Federal level, Mary Peters has worked to improve safety and security on roads and bridges. She is worked to reduce traffic congestion and modernize America's transportation infrastructure. As Secretary of Transportation, Mary will work closely with Federal, State, and local leaders to ensure that America has a state-of-the-art transportation system so that we can meet the needs of our growing economy. In her new position, she will face important challenges. Next year, she will lead the Department's efforts to reauthorize our Nation's aviation programs. Our Nation is outgrowing our aviation capacity. More people are flying every year, and so we must modernize our airports and our air traffic control. We also face the challenges of reducing congestion in our surface and maritime transportation systems. To accomplish these tasks, America needs creative thinking and innovative solutions, and I believe Mary Peters will provide them. As Mary works to build a better transportation system, she will be a careful steward of the people's money. She brings to her new position a reputation for fiscal discipline and integrity. As head of the Federal Highway Administration, Mary introduced better fiscal oversight and accountability. She improved management for the largest transportation projects. She worked closely with her department's inspector general to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksswearingceremonyformaryepeterssecretarytransportation", "title": "Remarks at a Swearing-In Ceremony for Mary E. Peters as Secretary of Transportation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-swearing-ceremony-for-mary-e-peters-secretary-transportation", "publication_date": "17-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4636, "text": "To all of you, to our distinguished guests, to all Ticos and all the people of Central America, let me say, Es realmente un nuevo dia. Less than a decade ago, much of the Americas was still dominated by civil war, repression, and hopeless poverty. Today, we celebrate the advance of peace, growing prosperity, and freedom across our hemisphere. And we honor the remarkable men and women of Central America who helped to lead the way. When the history of our region and our time is written, it will record your courage and your strength in ending four decades of conflict, braving the threat of bombs and bullets to cast ballots, embracing the challenge of economic reform, and opening the door to a new era of partnership among all our nations. President Figueres, in that epic struggle, Costa Rica, this nation of brothers, has been a wise leader and set a powerful example. Waging peace as tenaciously as others have waged war, Costa Rica has shown that a country does not need an army to be strong. We thank Costa Rica and its leaders for building a vibrant democracy that takes care of its citizens and shoulders its responsibilities in the world. Three years ago, our hemisphere's 34 democracies met in Miami at the historic Summit of the Americas to secure the hard-won gains our nations have made and to make them work for all our people. Today in San Jose, in the first summit between the leaders of the United States, Central America, and the Dominican Republic in almost three decades, we stand before you united in our course, determined to advance together to help the daily lives of our people in better jobs, safer streets, cleaner air, brighter hopes for our children and their future. We are here to help our economies grow and to grow closer by opening our markets, protecting our workers, and sharing more fairly the benefits of prosperity. We are here to give all our people the tools to succeed in the global economy by making good education the birthright of every citizen of every country here. We are here to strengthen our democracies by standing against the criminals, the drug traffickers, the smugglers who exploit open borders to threaten open societies. And we are here to protect our future by launching new efforts to prevent pollution and protect our precious natural environment. When President Kennedy came to Costa Rica more than three decades ago, he said, Every generation of the Americas has shaped new goals for democracy to suit the demands of a new age.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecentralamericansummitwelcomingceremonysanjose", "title": "Remarks at the Central American Summit Welcoming Ceremony in San Jose", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-central-american-summit-welcoming-ceremony-san-jose", "publication_date": "08-05-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4645, "text": "I have reviewed the present fiscal situation with Secretary Mellon and Under Secretary Mills this morning, and I can state that there is no ground now for the anticipation that we shall not be able to continue the tax reductions over the next year. The indications of decreasing revenues and increasing expenses shown in the first 6 weeks quite properly furnishes a basis for calculations, but there are some administrative factors that have not been taken into account. The customs are temporarily lower because of anticipation of imports in advance of the passage of the tariff bill. Furthermore, we have been expediting the expenditure on construction work with view to giving maximum employment during the first 9 months of the fiscal year, in order that we might give the most work during the period of maximum unemployment. Further than that, these calculations take no account of the foreign debt payments which are likely to be very helpful this year. And they did not take into account the reduction in expenditure as the result of the drive we are making for the postponement--an actual reduction or economy--of such things as are not necessary at the present time. The reports of which are not in from all of the departments but so far as they have been received they indicate a probable cut of about $75 million in expenditure. One has to bear in mind in reducing the expenditure that about $2,200 million out of the $4,200 million of estimated expenditure this year is in respect to fixed charges for interest and debt redemption, pensions, et cetera. So that the field which we have to work in for economies is less than one-half of the total national expenditure. Out of that there is about $400 million of construction in one department or another, which we have been increasing rather than decreasing as a matter of employment, so that the field for revising expenditure for emergency is more limited on this occasion than most any other. I have an announcement to make for you, and that is that Mr. Henry p. Fletcher will be Chairman of the new Tariff Commission. He will take office at the expiration of the present commission, on September 16th. As you know, Mr. Fletcher has been in the Foreign Service of the Government for somewhere about 18 or 20 years. He has had to deal with economic and tariff matters in great numbers of aspects during this whole period. We will give you a little statement on his life and career, which I will not bother to read to you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference732", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-732", "publication_date": "22-08-1930", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4661, "text": "I am honored to have the privilege of welcoming Your Imperial Majesties to this dinner this evening. It permits me to, in a small way, in a symbolic gesture, to reciprocate the wonderful hospitality so graciously extended to me this week. It has been a period of enlightenment for me, and I will take home an inspiring impression of the possibilities available for an even greater friendship, greater cooperation, and interdependence of our two nations. America is now approaching its national Bicentennial. Tonight, I would like to recall another meaningful event that took place 114 years ago, on May 14, 1860. That was the day when the first diplomatic mission ever sent by Japan to another nation arrived in Washington, D.C., our National Capital. I am very pleased, Your Majesties, to present on this evening to all of our distinguished guests a token of the durability of American-Japanese friendship. It is a medal bearing the likeness of President Buchanan, who had the honor of welcoming the Japanese delegation to the historic East Room of the White House. Since that occasion, the American Government has never ceased to look to the East as well as to the West. Our visitors then regarded us as Americans, as strange creatures, and observed us in every detail. It was with equal fascination that we viewed our Japanese visitors. We learned from each other then, and we are continuing to learn today. The most important lesson that I have learned during this visit corresponds with a brilliant insight of one of the Japanese envoys on the first mission to the United States. The occasion was a visit to the New York home of the widow of Commodore Perry. The time has come when no nation may remain isolated and refuse to take part in the affairs of the rest of the world. The links between our two nations can serve as a model for a world increasingly aware of the need for greater international cooperation. Accordingly, in recalling that first .Japanese delegation to Washington, I pledge that my Government will not isolate itself from the world or from Japan. On behalf of the Nation that I am privileged to represent, to lead, I reaffirm the spirit of friendship that endures between us. I reaffirm my determination to see that warm relationship continues and grows. Your Majesties, in that spirit and with a heart filled with faith in the future and appreciation of our guests, I offer a toast to the health and to the well-being of Your Imperial Majesties.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoastdinnerhonoringtheemperorandempressjapan", "title": "Toast at a Dinner Honoring the Emperor and Empress of Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toast-dinner-honoring-the-emperor-and-empress-japan", "publication_date": "20-11-1974", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4682, "text": "I will speak about them in a few moments. Lee Iacocca, chairman of the Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation, honored guests, and ladies and gentlemen, on this date in 1886, President Grover Cleveland stood on an island in New York Harbor to dedicate a statue entitled Liberty Enlightening the World. Ninety-nine years later, the statue is known by a more familiar affectionate name, the Statue of Liberty or simply Miss Liberty. She is cherished across America, and the torch that she bears is recognized throughout the world as a symbol of human freedom. The Statue of Liberty was conceived and created by the French sculptor Frederic Bartholdi. Legend has it that as he worked, he modeled the statue's face-that face of utter calm and nobility-on the features of his own mother. Completed, the statue rose more than 150 feet and was constructed of 200,000 pounds of hand-hammered copper sheathing hung on an iron frame engineered by Gustav Eiffel, who later designed the Eiffel Tower. On July 4th, 1884, the statue was presented to the American Ambassador to France. Built using funds donated by the French people, she was then dismantled and shipped to the United States. Then, she was rebuilt using funds donated by the American people, including money raised by schoolchildren. Ever since, she is stood on her island in that great harbor lighting the way to freedom. Between 1892 and 1954, nearly 17 million immigrants to the New World passed through the Ellis Island checkpoint. Most immigrants moved through the checkpoint in a few hours to begin their new lives in America and freedom. And I like to picture the scene as a boatload of immigrants leaving Ellis Island for New York, they pass Miss Liberty and crowd the rails to gaze. Someone on board knows English, he reads and translates the inscription that the statue bears, words that have proclaimed the meaning of America for millions of immigrants, for shiploads of returning soldiers in two great wars, for every family that has ever visited that glorious statue. I lift my lamp beside the Golden Door. Well, many of those immigrants remain at the rails until Miss Liberty is lost in the fog. It would be no surprise if some shed tears of joy. In recent years, it became all too apparent that Ellis Island and Miss Liberty, herself, were being ravaged by the passing of decades. Nearly half of all Americans can trace their ancestry to someone who passed through the Ellis Island checkpoint.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthebilldesignatingthecentennialyearlibertytheunitedstates", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Bill Designating the Centennial Year of Liberty in the United States", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-bill-designating-the-centennial-year-liberty-the-united-states", "publication_date": "28-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4683, "text": "But that island, which should be a proud memorial to our forbearers, had instead become a sad and ramshackled place. Miss Liberty, for her part, had been badly corroded by decades of salt air; her iron supports had weakened; in places, she'd become pocked with jagged, rusty holes. Well, then, in 1982 the Statue of Liberty-Ellis Island Foundation was formed to restore Miss Liberty and rebuild Ellis Island, and to do so with private funds. This effort has become one of the largest private sector initiatives in American history. Across America, everyone is lending a hand; major corporations are making contributions; small businesses are helping out. And I am pleased to say that just as schoolchildren helped raise the money to build her pedestal and install Miss Liberty back in the 1880's, today, a century later, they are holding bake sales and car washes to see to it that she gets the restoration she needs. Let me give you just three of many stirring examples. Michael Haverly, of Indianapolis, Indiana, has raised over $5,000 for the statue by going door to door with an appeal to help Miss Liberty. Well, I am proud to be in Michael's company here in the Rose Garden today. And then, there is Amy Nessler, of West Deptford Township, New Jersey, who brought a jar of 365 pennies into her first-grade class to help raise money for the Statue of Liberty. The pennies had been collected 15 years earlier by Amy's mother, who, day by day, put one into a jar to mark the time that her fianc was in Vietnam. And now, after all these years, they felt it was only appropriate to give these special coins to Lady Liberty, who symbolizes what Amy's dad fought for freedom. Well, I am very happy that Amy, her mother, and father are here with us today. When Donna's hometown learned that she was losing her sight to an incurable eye disease, they pitched in to raise money to send her and her family to visit the Statue of Liberty. However, Donna, in the spirit of generosity, donated part of this contribution to the Liberty Restoration Project. And, Donna, you are a fine example to us all. So far, this private sector initiative has raised more than $170 million, well on its way to its goal of 230 million.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigningthebilldesignatingthecentennialyearlibertytheunitedstates", "title": "Remarks on Signing the Bill Designating the Centennial Year of Liberty in the United States", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-bill-designating-the-centennial-year-liberty-the-united-states", "publication_date": "28-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4684, "text": "And I am delighted to be back here in New Jersey. I wish he were still Governor of this State. While we are talking about good whoops got a Democratic bee here. Let me just say at the beginning that New Jersey needs Bob Franks and Al Palermo in Washington. We have got to clean House. You know, this week on your TV screens you saw a spectacle of intense competition, breathtaking battle of wits and courage, a spine-tingling fight to the finish. I am talking about the Pirates-Braves game, of course. It ain't over until the last batter swings. And we are going to win this election. We are going to surprise the pundits what is this bee here? surprise the pundits, annoy the media, and hit a home run on November 3d. Our ideas are better for America. My opponents, sorry opponents, pathetic, try to tell you that America is in decline, and we are not in decline. Our companies and our workers are still more productive than any other in the entire world. You know, if we'd have listened to this nuclear You know, we have led the United States through a very difficult global transition, and I am very proud that the world is safer for our kids. The fear of nuclear war is less. We have kept our economy afloat when many of those European economies are drowning, and the Europeans would trade with us in one minute. We have kept inflation down. We have kept interest rates down. And I am proud of our leadership. more Government, more regulation, and more taxes; more Government, more regulation, and more taxes. We must not let Clinton do this to our country. Let me tell you about Governor Clinton's program. In June, Governor Clinton promised $150 billion in new taxes, plus $220 billion in new spending. I thought that would satisfy his appetite, but that is just an hors d'oeuvre, because ever since then Bill Clinton has made new promises, $1 billion in new Government spending every single day. Who is going to pay Bill's bill? Of course, Governor Clinton says he is only going to tax the rich. But everybody out there with $22,000 in income better be ready, because he is going to sock it to the working people in this country. He will go after the cab drivers and the teachers and the nurses and the middle class. Higher taxes do not create new jobs. They destroy that.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityedisonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks to the Community in Edison, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-edison-new-jersey", "publication_date": "16-10-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4685, "text": "You have seen it when their man, Governor Florio, was elected. Governor Florio has too much taxes. That Florio-Clinton combination, they kicked half a million jobs out of New Jersey. When Governor Kean was here, we were building jobs. But I have a very different agenda, a plan to control the growth of mandatory spending and get the taxes down so we can create good jobs, create them. We are going to win the new economic competition. Our Agenda for American Renewal includes the steps that we must take to create good jobs today and build a stronger America, and some of these ideas are being tried. But working with a new Congress, we are going to put this entire agenda into effect and get America moving, get rid of these Democrats from Congress and get them moving. One way to do it is to tear down barriers to free and fair trade so that we can create good jobs for American workers. In the past 3 years, our exports to Japan have increased 12 times faster than our imports from Japan. Whether you shop in Tokyo or Trenton, chances are that the goods do not say Made in Japan or Made in Germany, they say Made in the United States of America. Today in New Jersey one out of every six jobs is tied into foreign trade. And the average export-related job pays 17 percent more than the traditional job. So if we want the sons and daughters of steel workers to have good jobs, we have got to fight for free and fair trade. We have already got a great new trade agreement one that Governor Clinton has waffled on. He waffles on everything. He is on one side and then the other. We have got a good trade agreement, and I am going to fight for more trade agreements. Just as we once used our military alliances to win the cold war, we will use our economic alliances to win the new business war. I wish these draft dodgers would shut up so I can finish my speech. You see these guys. You see, I am glad we have led in foreign policy, because now we will use those alliances that have made the world more peaceful to bring more prosperity to the workers right here in America. I also want to do for the country what Governor Kean has tried to do when he was Governor here, change our schools. Make our education system better for all. I am proud of what we have done already. We have educational standards nationally for the first time in the history of this country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityedisonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks to the Community in Edison, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-edison-new-jersey", "publication_date": "16-10-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4686, "text": "We want to let the parents choose the schools, public, private, or religious. Every parent should be able to choose his children's schools. You know, I believe that small business is the backbone of our economy creating two out of every three new jobs. Bill Clinton wants to slap a tax on small business. I say if we really want to help small business, let us give them relief from taxation, regulation, and litigation. Now, let me mention just another subject the New Jerseyans know about, and that is auto insurance. At the root of many of our problems is a legal system that is out of control. I want to do something about these crazy lawsuits. Governor Clinton and the trial lawyers do not want to do anything about it. You know, 15 percent of American companies report that they have laid off workers because of high premiums from liability insurance. Experts estimate that over $20 billion of our health care costs come from doctors and nurses doing unnecessary tests because they are afraid that a lawyer is going to sue them, and auto insurance costs continue to rise, as New Jerseyans know better than almost anyone. Thousands of people enter frivolous lawsuits for pain and suffering. But the lion's share of the benefits goes not to people who are injured but to the trial lawyers. I say we must reform our malpractice laws and our product liability laws. When Congress comes back, I am going to introduce a new proposal to allow all Americans to opt out of the so-called pain and suffering standard. You know, this reform allows States to go even further than New Jersey's landmark insurance reforms. But anyway, this proposal will save American drivers 20 to 30 billion dollars in insurance premiums every year. So these are part of our Agenda for American Renewal. But the election is a lot more about other things, the best economic plan. It is about another virtue, and it is called trust. Who do you trust to be President of the United States? You know, I have got to tell you, I enjoyed last night's debate, and I am grateful to have a chance to have Americans compare my views with my opponents'. But it is difficult to debate Clinton because he comes down on every side of every issue. You cannot do that as President of the United States. You have got to make a decision. You cannot be popular to every group. And yes, he ought to tell the truth.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityedisonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks to the Community in Edison, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-edison-new-jersey", "publication_date": "16-10-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4687, "text": "Look, a lot of being President is about respect for that office and about telling the truth and serving your country. You are all familiar with Governor Clinton's various stories on what he did to evade the draft. He still has not leveled with the American people. He still has not told the truth. Last night you heard Governor Clinton state that he was absolutely against allowing parents to use tax dollars to send their kids to private or religious schools. But he used to be for the idea. I am strongly for it. He said he was interested, and now he is against it. Let us limit the terms of Members of Congress. Just this morning in the Los Angeles Times, there is an article suggesting that Governor Clinton is already preparing yet another economic program, with billions of dollars more in new spending. But his advisers will not spell it out until after the election. A pattern of deception is not right for the Oval Office. You cannot be leader of the world, you cannot be leader of this country if you have a pattern of deception. You know, last night Governor Clinton said he was not interested in my character. He said, I quote, I want to change the character of the Presidency. Well, let me tell you something. You cannot separate the character of the President from the character of the Presidency. You cannot be one kind of man and another kind of President. I have had to make some tough decisions in that Oval Office. I hope this does not happen, but the next President who may have to send our young men, women in harm's way. And the next President will have to stand up to the special interests and that big-spending Congress. In the White House you cannot make everybody happy, and you have to level with the American people. He is not capable of doing that. So my problem is this pattern of deception. We cannot have this pattern of deception brought into the Oval Office. I believe you cannot lead the American people by misleading the American people. Now, you know, we have had Presidents from the South and from the North; Presidents who were rich, Presidents who were poor. But rich or poor, southern or northern, you must have integrity. And that is what it takes to lead this great land. Who do you trust? Who do you believe? Who do you trust to be in the Oval Office? You know, last night in that debate I asked the American people to imagine what would happen if a crisis occurred that could affect you and your family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecommunityedisonnewjersey", "title": "Remarks to the Community in Edison, New Jersey", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-community-edison-new-jersey", "publication_date": "16-10-1992", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4697, "text": "I want to thank Betsy DeVos for her leadership and for her friendship and for her kind words. I appreciate all she is done for the children of this great State of Michigan. I want to thank you all for coming tonight. You see, you are laying the groundwork for what will be a great victory in November of 2004. I want you to know that I am going to count on you during the course of the election. I am going to count on you to energize the grassroots, to talk to your neighbors, to put signs in the yard, to mail the letters, and to remind people that our message is one that is hopeful and optimistic for every citizen who lives in this country. But the political season will come in its own time. Right now I am focused on the people's business in Washington, DC. We have a lot on the agenda, and I will continue to work hard to earn the confidence of all America by keeping this Nation secure and strong and prosperous and free. My only regret tonight is that Laura is not with me. I know, you drew the short straw. She is a fabulous First Lady, a great wife, and I love her dearly. I want to thank all those who helped. I want to thank Michael Kojaian and the entire team who has put together this fantastic fundraiser. I appreciate so very much my very close friend Mercer Reynolds, who is the national finance chairman for this campaign. I want to thank Terri Lynn Land, who is the secretary of state, and Michael Cox, the State attorney general, for being here tonight. I particularly want to thank Eric Childress, the student from the Cornerstone School. I visited the Cornerstone in May of 2000. I saw the good works of the teachers there and the administrators, all the hard work that goes to prepare the students for success in high school and beyond. I appreciate so very much the high standards set in that school. And I want to thank Eric for coming. But most of all, I want to thank you all for your friendship and your support. It means an awful lot. You know, in the last 2 1/2 years, our Nation has acted decisively to confront great challenges. I came to this office to solve problems, not to pass them on to future Presidents and future generations. I came to seize opportunities instead of letting them slip away, and we are meeting the tests of our time. Terrorists declared war on the United States of America, and war is what they got.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushcheneyreceptiondearbornmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Cheney Reception in Dearborn, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-cheney-reception-dearborn-michigan", "publication_date": "24-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4698, "text": "We have captured or killed many key leaders of Al Qaida, and the rest of them know we are on their trail. In Afghanistan and in Iraq, we gave ultimatums to terror regimes. Those regimes chose defiance, and those regimes are no more. Fifty million people-50 million people in those two countries once lived under tyranny, and now they live in freedom. Two-and-a-half years ago, our military was not receiving the resources it needed, and morale was beginning to suffer. We increased the defense budget to prepare for the threats of a new era. And today, no one in the world can question the skill and the strength and the spirit of the United States military. Two-and-a-half years ago, we inherited an economy in recession. Then the attacks on our country came. We had scandals in corporate America and war-all affected the people's confidence. We passed up new laws to hold corporate criminals to account. And to get the economy going again, we have twice led the Congress in-to pass historic tax relief on behalf of the American people. We know this, that when people have more money in their pockets, when they have more take-home pay to spend, to save, or to invest, the whole economy grows and people are more likely to find a job. I understand whose money we spend in Washington, DC. We are returning more money to people to help them raise their families. We are reducing taxes on dividends and capital gains to encourage investment. We are giving small businesses incentives to expand and to hire new people. With all these actions, we are laying the foundations for greater prosperity and more jobs across America, so that every single person in this country has a chance to realize the great American Dream. So I called for and Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act. With a solid bipartisan majority, we delivered the most dramatic education reform in a generation. We bring high standards and strong accountability measures to every public school in America. We believe that every child can learn the basics of reading and math, and we expect every school to teach the basics of reading and math. We are challenging the soft bigotry of low expectations. The days of excuse-making are over. We expect results in every single classroom across America, so that not one single child is left behind. We reorganized the Government and created the Department of Homeland Security to safeguard our borders and ports and to protect the American people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushcheneyreceptiondearbornmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Cheney Reception in Dearborn, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-cheney-reception-dearborn-michigan", "publication_date": "24-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4699, "text": "We passed trade promotion authority to open up new markets for America's entrepreneurs and manufacturers and farmers and ranchers. We passed a budget agreement that is helping to maintain much needed spending discipline in Washington, DC. On issue after issue, this administration has acted on principle, has kept its word, and has made progress for the American people. The United States Congress has shared in these great achievements. I appreciate the leadership of Speaker Hastert and Leader Frist. I will continue to work with Members of the Congress to change the tone in Washington, DC, by focusing on the people's business and by focusing on results. That is the kind of person I have attracted to my administration. I have put together a fantastic team of great Americans to serve the American people. We have had no finer Vice President than Dick Cheney. Mother may have a different opinion. In 2 1/2 years, we have come far, but our work is only beginning. I have set great goals worthy of this great Nation. First, America is committed to expanding the realm of freedom and peace, not only for our own security but for the benefit of the world. And second, in our own country, we must work for a society of prosperity and compassion, so that every citizen has a chance to work and succeed and to realize the promise of our country. It is clear that the future of freedom and peace depends on the actions of America. We welcome this charge of history, and we are keeping it. Our war on terror continues. The enemies of freedom are not idle, and neither are we. This country will not rest; we will not tire; we will not stop until this danger to civilization is removed. Yet our national interest involves more than eliminating aggressive threats to our security. Our greatest security comes from the advance of human liberty because free nations do not support terror, free nations do not attack their neighbors, free nations do not threaten the world with weapons of mass terror. Americans believe that freedom is the deepest need and hope of every human heart. And we believe that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. America also understands that unprecedented influence brings tremendous responsibilities. We have duties in the world. And when we see disease and starvation and hopeless poverty, we will not turn away. On the continent of Africa, America is now committed to bringing the healing power of medicine to millions of men and women and children now suffering with ENTITY. This great land is leading the world in the incredibly important work of human rescue.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushcheneyreceptiondearbornmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Cheney Reception in Dearborn, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-cheney-reception-dearborn-michigan", "publication_date": "24-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4700, "text": "We face challenges at home, and our actions prove that we are equal to those challenges. I will continue to work on our economy until everybody who wants to work and who cannot find a job today will be able to find a job. We have a duty to keep our commitment to America's seniors by strengthening and modernizing Medicare. Recently, the Congress took historic action to improve the lives of older Americans. For the first time since the creation of Medicare, the House and the Senate have passed reforms to increase the choices for our seniors and to provide coverage for prescription drugs. It is now time for both Houses to come together and to get a good bill to my desk as soon as possible. For the sake of our health care system, we need to cut down on frivolous lawsuits which increase the cost of medicine. People who have been harmed by a bad doc deserve their day in court. Yet the system should not reward lawyers who are fishing for rich settlements. Because frivolous lawsuits drive up the cost of health care, they affect the Federal budget. Medical liability reform is a national issue that requires a national response. No one has ever been healed by a frivolous lawsuit. I have a responsibility as President to make sure the judicial system runs well. And I have met that duty. I have nominated superb men and women for the Federal courts, people who interpret the law, not legislate from the bench. Yet some Members of the United States Senate are trying to keep my nominees off the bench by blocking up-or-down votes. Here in Michigan, for example, I have nominated four outstanding individuals to serve on the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Yet all four have been waiting more than a year for a vote. These kinds of delays create judicial vacancies that harm our legal system. Every judicial nominee deserves a fair hearing and an up-or-down vote on the Senate floor. It is time for some of the Members of the United States Senate to stop playing politics with American justice. The Congress needs to pass a comprehensive energy plan. Our Nation must promote energy efficiency and conservation and develop cleaner technologies to help us explore for more energy in an environmentally friendly way. Yet, for the sake of our economic security and for the sake of our national security, we must be less dependent on foreign sources of energy. I will continue to advance our agenda of compassionate conservatism, applying the best and most innovative ideas to the task of helping our fellow citizens in need.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushcheneyreceptiondearbornmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Cheney Reception in Dearborn, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-cheney-reception-dearborn-michigan", "publication_date": "24-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4701, "text": "There is still millions of men and women who want to end their dependence on Government and become independent through hard work. We must build on the success of welfare reform to bring work and dignity into the lives of more of our fellow citizens. Congress should complete the Citizen Service Act so more Americans can serve their communities and their country. And both Houses should reach agreement on my Faith-Based Initiative to support the armies of compassion that are mentoring our children, that are caring for the homeless, and that are offering hope to the addicted. A compassionate society must promote opportunity for all, including the independence and dignity that come from ownership. This administration will constantly strive to promote an ownership society in America. We want more citizens owning their own home. We want our citizens owning and controlling their health care plans. We want our citizens owning and controlling their retirement plans. We want more people to own their own small business, because I understand that when people own something, they own a stake in the future of this great country. In a compassionate society, people respect one another and take responsibility for the decisions they make. We are changing the culture of America from one that has said, If it feels good, do it, and If you have got a problem, blame somebody else --to a culture in which each of us understands that we are responsible for the decisions we make in life. If you are fortunate enough to be a mother or a father, you are responsible for loving your child. If you are concerned about the quality of the education in the community in which you live, you are responsible for doing something about it. If you are a CEO in America, you have the responsibility to tell the truth to your shareholders and your employees. And in the new responsibility society, each of us is responsible for loving our neighbor just like we'd like to be loved ourself. We can see the culture of service and responsibility growing around us. I started the USA Freedom Corps to encourage Americans to extend a compassionate hand to a neighbor in need, and the response has been great. I also know that our faith-based programs and our charities are strong and vibrant all across America. We have neighborhood healers who are performing miracles on a daily basis by helping people change their hearts and their lives. Policemen and firefighters and people who wear our Nation's uniform are reminding us what it means to sacrifice for something greater than yourself. Once again, the children of America believe in heroes, because they see them every day.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksbushcheneyreceptiondearbornmichigan", "title": "Remarks at a Bush-Cheney Reception in Dearborn, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-bush-cheney-reception-dearborn-michigan", "publication_date": "24-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4702, "text": "And thank you so much, Haben, for that amazing introduction and for working to make sure that students with disabilities get a world-class education, just like you have. So on a sunny day 25 years ago-I do not know if it was as hot as it is today--President George H.W. Bush stood on the South Lawn and declared a new American independence day. With today's signing of the landmark Americans Disabilities Act, he said, every man, woman, and child with a disability can now pass through once-closed doors into a bright new era of equality, freedom, and independence. Twenty-five years later, we come together to celebrate that groundbreaking law and all that the law has made possible. Thanks to the ADA, the places that comprise our shared American life-schools, workplaces, movie theaters, courthouses, buses, baseball stadiums, national parks-they truly belong to everyone. Millions of Americans with disabilities have had the chance to develop their talents and make their unique contributions to the world. And thanks to them, America is stronger and more vibrant; it is a better country because of the ADA. That is what this law has achieved. So today we honor those who made the ADA the law of the land, many of whom are here today. Tom Harkin--Tom Harkin is in the back there, and he-Tom delivered speeches in sign language on the Senate floor in favor of this law, in part inspired by his brother Frank. A war hero whose combat-related disability informed the way he advocated for all Americans with disabilities. Tony Coelho--told he could not become a priest because of his epilepsy, so he became a Congressman instead--and helped to pass the ADA so fewer Americans would find the word no being an obstacle to their dreams In the 1970s, Judy Heumann helped lead the longest sit-in at a Federal building in U.S. history, in support of disability rights. Today, she is at the State Department, advocating for people with disabilities worldwide. She and all the others I mentioned deserve America's thanks for their tireless efforts. I want to thank some of the activists who are here, folks like Ricardo Thornton and Tia Nelis. In 1999, the Supreme Court ruled that institutionalizing people with disabilities-isolating them, keeping them apart from the rest of the community-is not just wrong, it is illegal.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthe25thanniversarytheamericanswithdisabilitiesact", "title": "Remarks on the 25th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-25th-anniversary-the-americans-with-disabilities-act", "publication_date": "20-07-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4703, "text": "And I am proud of what my administration has done to ensure that people with disabilities are treated like the valuable members of the communities that they are. And I want to thank all the Members of Congress and members of my administration who are here today, including our outstanding Secretary of Labor, Tom Perez, and the White House's fantastic new Disability Community Liaison, Maria Town is here. Now, days like today are a celebration of our history. But they are also a chance to rededicate ourselves to the future, to address the injustices that still linger, to remove the barriers that remain. The ADA offered millions of people the opportunity to earn a living and help support their families. But we all know too many people with disabilities are still unemployed, even though they can work, even though they want to work, even though they have so much to contribute. In some cases, it is a lack of access to skills training. In some cases, it is an employer that cannot see all that these candidates for a job have to offer. Maybe sometimes, people doubt their own self-worth after experiencing a lifetime of discouragement and expectations that were too low. Our country cannot let all that incredible talent go to waste. A few years ago, I issued an Executive order requiring the Federal Government to hire more Americans with disabilities. And in part because of that Executive order, today, more people with disabilities are working with us than at any point in the last 30 years. Some of these folks are some of my closest colleagues and have been incredible leaders on behalf of the administration on a whole host of issues, and I am grateful for their contributions every single day. And we have strengthened the rules for Federal contractors to make sure they have plans in place for hiring people with disabilities. I am hoping more employers follow suit, because Americans with disabilities can do the job, and they are hungry for the chance, and they will make you proud if you give them the chance. The ADA also made our more-made our Government more responsive to Americans with disabilities. But we have still got more to do to live up to our responsibilities. My administration created the first office within FEMA dedicated to disability, so that when disaster strikes, we are prepared to help everybody, including those with physical or mental conditions requiring extra help. And we created the first Special Adviser for International Disability Rights at the State Department, because this is not just about American rights, it is about human rights, and that is something our Nation has to stand for.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthe25thanniversarytheamericanswithdisabilitiesact", "title": "Remarks on the 25th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-25th-anniversary-the-americans-with-disabilities-act", "publication_date": "20-07-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4704, "text": "So we have still got to do more to make sure that people with disabilities are paid fairly for their labor, to make sure they are safe in their homes and their communities, to make sure they have access to technology, including high-speed Internet, that allows for their full participation in this 21st-century economy. We have still got to do more to make sure that children with disabilities get every opportunity to learn and acquire the skills and the sense of self-worth that will last a lifetime. And we need Republicans and Democrats in Congress to make sure we have a budget that lets us keep that promise and keep that commitment. So I do not have to tell you, this fight is not over. But we are building a stronger foundation. And thanks to generations of Americans who fought for better laws, who demanded better treatment, who in-by just being good and decent people and effective workers and working hard every day and treating others with respect and asking the same in return, folks have overcome ignorance and indifference and made our country better. I am thinking of folks like Hamza Jaka, who is here from Wisconsin with his mom. He gloated that he is a Packers fan--and they have been beating the Bears a lot lately. But Hamza has cerebral palsy. As he puts it, people always assume his condition must limit him. His disability has given him unique experiences and a sense of purpose that he cherishes. He traveled to Syria to meet other young people with disabilities, and together, they created a comic book featuring a Muslim superhero who uses a wheelchair called the Silver Scorpion. This fall, he is starting law school, where he is going to learn how to be an even more effective advocate. And then you have got somebody like Leah Katz-Hernandez. Leah is one of my favorites. She is-her smiling face is one of the first things that people see when they come into the White House. We call her ROTUS. And ROTUS is the first deaf American to hold that job. She is poised, she is talented, and as she puts it, a lot of her accomplishments may not have been possible without the ADA. And just on a very practical level, this law meant she could ask for sign language interpretation on job interviews, very straight forward. But without this law and without enforcement of the law, those things do not happen. On a deeper level, the fact that the ADA was passed a few years after Leah was born opened possibilities to her that previous generations did not always have.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthe25thanniversarytheamericanswithdisabilitiesact", "title": "Remarks on the 25th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-25th-anniversary-the-americans-with-disabilities-act", "publication_date": "20-07-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4705, "text": "She says that, thanks to this law, I grew up knowing I was equal, not subhuman. And I have told this story before, but whenever I think about the ADA, I think about my father-in-law Fraser Robinson, who was diagnosed with multiple sclerosis in his early thirties. By the time I knew him, he needed crutches to get around. He was holding down a job and raising a family at a time where the ADA had not yet been passed. He never missed a day at work. He had to wake up an hour earlier than everybody else just to put on his shirt, just to get dressed, just to get down to the job, but he was never going to be late. If he went to his son's basketball games, he and the family would have to get there 45 minutes early because he did not want to interrupt people as he climbed one stair at a time on crutches so that he could cheer on his son. Same thing if he went to Michelle's dance receptions. And just through the power of his example, he opened a lot of people's eyes, including mine, to some of the obstacles that folks with disabilities faced and how important it is that the rest of us do our part to remove those obstacles. And just an aside on this, for a long time, he would not get a motorized wheelchair because he had gotten this disability at a time when they were not available and it was expensive and they were not wealthy and insurance did not always cover it. And it just gave you a sense of-Michelle and I would talk sometimes about how much more he could have done, how much more he could have seen. As wonderful as a dad as he was and as wonderful as a coworker as he was, he was very cautious about what he could and could not do, not because he could not do it, but because he did not want to inconvenience his family and he did not want to be seen as somehow holding things up. And that is what, even for folks who had amazing will, was the nature of having a disability before this law was passed. It was also constraining how people thought about what they should or should not do. That is why it is so important for us to remember what this law means. That is what today is all about. We have got to tear down barriers externally, but we also have to tear down barriers internally.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthe25thanniversarytheamericanswithdisabilitiesact", "title": "Remarks on the 25th Anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-25th-anniversary-the-americans-with-disabilities-act", "publication_date": "20-07-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4706, "text": "I welcome you all here, those who have been introduced and distinguished Members of Congress and military leaders, veterans, others who are in the audience. Today I am announcing the normalization of diplomatic relationships with Vietnam. From the beginning of this administration, any improvement in relationships between America and Vietnam has depended upon making progress on the issue of Americans who were missing in action or held as prisoners of war. Last year, I lifted the trade embargo on Vietnam in response to their cooperation and to enhance our efforts to secure the remains of lost Americans and to determine the fate of those whose remains have not been found. In 17 months, Hanoi has taken important steps to help us resolve many cases. Twenty-nine families have received the remains of their loved ones and at last have been able to give them a proper burial. Hanoi has delivered to us hundreds of pages of documents shedding light on what happened to Americans in Vietnam. And Hanoi has stepped up its cooperation with Laos, where many Americans were lost. We have reduced the number of socalled discrepancy cases, in which we have had reason to believe that Americans were still alive after they were lost, to 55. And we will continue to work to resolve more cases. Hundreds of dedicated men and women are working on all these cases, often under extreme hardship and real danger in the mountains and jungles of Indochina. On behalf of all Americans, I want to thank them. And I want to pay a special tribute to General John Vessey, who has worked so tirelessly on this issue for ENTITY Reagan and Bush and for our administration. He has made a great difference to a great many families. And we as a nation are grateful for his dedication and for his service. I also want to thank the ENTITY delegation, led by Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs Hershel Gober, Winston Lord, James Wold, who have helped us to make so much progress on this issue. And I am especially grateful to the leaders of the families and the veterans organizations who have worked with the delegation and maintained their extraordinary commitment to finding the answers we seek. Never before in the history of warfare has such an extensive effort been made to resolve the fate of soldiers who did not return. Let me emphasize, normalization of our relations with Vietnam is not the end of our effort. We will keep working until we get all the answers we can. Normalization of relations is the next appropriate step. With this new relationship we will be able to make more progress.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingthenormalizationdiplomaticrelationswithvietnam", "title": "Remarks Announcing the Normalization of Diplomatic Relations With Vietnam", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-the-normalization-diplomatic-relations-with-vietnam", "publication_date": "11-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4707, "text": "To that end, I will send another delegation to Vietnam this year. And Vietnam has pledged it will continue to help us find answers. We will hold them to that pledge. By helping to bring Vietnam into the community of nations, normalization also serves our interest in working for a free and peaceful Vietnam in a stable and peaceful Asia. We will begin to normalize our trade relations with Vietnam, whose economy is now liberalizing and integrating into the economy of the Asia-Pacific region. Our policy will be to implement the appropriate United States Government programs to develop trade with Vietnam consistent with U.S. law. As you know, many of these programs require certifications regarding human rights and labor rights before they can proceed. We have already begun discussing human rights issues with Vietnam, especially issues regarding religious freedom. Now we can expand and strengthen that dialog. The Secretary of State will go to Vietnam in August where he will discuss all of these issues, beginning with our POW and MIA concerns. I believe normalization and increased contact between Americans and Vietnamese will advance the cause of freedom in Vietnam, just as it did in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. I strongly believe that engaging the Vietnamese on the broad economic front of economic reform and the broad front of democratic reform will help to honor the sacrifice of those who fought for freedom's sake in Vietnam. I am proud to be joined in this view by distinguished veterans of the Vietnam war. They served their country bravely. They are of different parties. A generation ago they had different judgments about the war which divided us so deeply. But today they are of a single mind. They agree that the time has come for America to move forward on Vietnam. All Americans should be grateful especially that Senators John McCain, John Kerry, Bob Kerrey, Chuck Robb, and Representative Pete Peterson, along with other Vietnam veterans in the Congress, including Senator Harkin, Congressman Kolbe, and Congressman Gilchrest, who just left, and others who are out here in the audience have kept up their passionate interest in Vietnam but were able to move beyond the haunting and painful past toward finding common ground for the future. Today they and many other veterans support the normalization of relations, giving the opportunity to Vietnam to fully join the community of nations and being true to what they fought for so many years ago. Whatever we may think about the political decisions of the Vietnam era, the brave Americans who fought and died there had noble motives. They fought for the freedom and the independence of the Vietnamese people.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksannouncingthenormalizationdiplomaticrelationswithvietnam", "title": "Remarks Announcing the Normalization of Diplomatic Relations With Vietnam", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-announcing-the-normalization-diplomatic-relations-with-vietnam", "publication_date": "11-07-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4719, "text": "Oh, it is good to be back in Michigan! It is good to be back at Wayne State! my friend Carl Levin, Debbie Stabenow, John Conyers, Sandy Levin. We have got the dean of the House, John Dingell; the next Representative from Michigan's 12th, Debbie Dingell. We have got a full house. Three days until you get to choose a new Governor and a new Senator. And here is what you have got to do until then. If you came to this rally, I know you also are going to go vote or are I do not worry about you. I need you to grab a friend. I need you to get some classmates. I need you to get some coworkers. I need you to knock on some doors and make some phone calls. I need you to visit iwillvote.com, find your polling place. Take everybody you know to cast their ballots for Gary Peters and Mark Schauer. Let me tell you why. I love you too. But I want to tell you why you need to vote. This country has made real progress since the worst economic crisis of our lifetimes. Over the past 4 years, we have seen American businesses create more than 10 million new jobs. Over the past 6 months, our economy has grown at the fastest pace in more than 10 years. I do not have to tell you the auto industry that was on the brink of collapse is back on its feet, making better cars than ever, right here in Michigan. It is a testament to the grit and the resilience of American workers. We have got some leaders here who stick up for working folks every single day. We got Mary Kay Henry from SEIU. We have got Lily Eskelsen Garcia from the NEA. We have got Dennis Williams from the UAW. We have got some labor leaders here who know what it means to fight for working families. And because of the strength and resilience of the American worker, the auto industry has come back. We have seen progress on almost every economic measure. But we are here tonight because we know we have got more work to do. As fast as we have been moving, we know we'd be moving faster if a lot more of our politicians lived by the same values of hard work and responsibility that the ordinary people they represent take with them every single day when they go to the job. And over the next week, you have got a chance to make that happen.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallyforsenatorialcandidategarycpetersandgubernatorialcandidate", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally for Senatorial Candidate Gary C. Peters and Gubernatorial Candidate Mark H. Schauer in Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-for-senatorial-candidate-gary-c-peters-and-gubernatorial-candidate", "publication_date": "01-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4720, "text": "You have the chance to choose leaders that do not put political ideology first, that do not put just winning an election first, they put you first. And you could not have a better example than Mark and Gary. You could not have a better example of the kind of leaders you want. I mean, look at these two guys. They have spent their entire lives in Michigan. Mark ran a nonprofit that helped unemployed workers get back on their feet. Gary helped folks save for college and retirement as a financial planner. Then he served in the Navy Reserve. to fight for hard-working families like yours, because your story is their story. They were not born with a silver spoon in their mouths. They know what it is like to struggle. They know what it is like to have to work hard and piece together a budget and save. And they know what it is like when their parents or grandparents make sacrifices for them. And since they have taken office, they have led. They led to clean up the Great Lakes. They helped to cut taxes for Michigan's small businesses and invest in new, high-tech manufacturing. They fought to give Michigan's minimum wage workers the raise they deserve. When the chips were down and our most iconic industry was on the line, they said, we should not walk away. If the auto industry went down, communities across this State and Midwest would have gone down too. So Mark and Gary placed their bet on Michigan. They placed their bet on American workers, making American products. And thanks to the grit and ingenuity and pride of American workers, that bet that they made paid off in a big way. Now, some of the folks who figured we should have thrown in the towel 6 years ago are the same folks who are asking you for your vote next week. They have got a lot of nerve. They have got a lot of nerve. If they are not there for you when you need them I think you should vote for Mark and Gary instead. That is what I think. Because you know they had your backs, and now we have got to get theirs. And that is what this election is all about, Michigan. When you step into that voting booth, you are making a choice not just about candidates or parties. You are making a choice about two different visions of what America is about. Who is on your side? Who is going to fight for you? Who is going to fight for your future? They love their country. They love their family.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallyforsenatorialcandidategarycpetersandgubernatorialcandidate", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally for Senatorial Candidate Gary C. Peters and Gubernatorial Candidate Mark H. Schauer in Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-for-senatorial-candidate-gary-c-peters-and-gubernatorial-candidate", "publication_date": "01-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4721, "text": "No, but I mean what I say here. Listen, I mean what I say. They love this country. But they have got bad ideas. And I always try to explain, look, I have got members of my family who I love and have bad ideas. I still love them, I just would not put them in charge. You all have got somebody in your family like that. You are going to have them over for Thanksgiving, but you do not want to put them in charge. More tax breaks for folks at the top, less investment in education, looser rules on big banks and credit card companies and polluters, a thinner safety net for folks when they fall on hard times. You know what, we have tried those things. I mean, it would be one thing if we had not tried them. But when you have done it again and again, and each time the middle class has a tougher time, and the folks at the top are doing better and better, I do not know why we would think it would work differently this time. They are not changing their tune either. Every time the Republican Party leaders in Washington had to take a stand this year on policies that would help the middle class, their answer was no. They said no to raising the minimum wage. They said no to fair pay legislation to make sure women get paid the same as men for doing the same job. They said no to helping young people refinance their student loans. They actually voted for rules that would make it more expensive for students when they take out student loans. The only thing they voted yes on was another massive tax cut for millionaires. And it is the clearest display of whose side they are on. The same Washington Republicans who blocked a $2.85-an-hour raise for some of the hardest working people in America the folks who clean up your bedpans, the folks that make up and take care of seniors they made clear that they are not going to do that. One of the first things they do is change the rules to jam tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans through. They are not going to raise the minimum wage. Their leadership said tax cuts for those at the top are even more pressing now than they were 30 years ago. That is what they said. When one of George W. Bush's economic advisers took a look at how many jobs their agenda would create, he said, not many. They do not have an agenda for the middle class.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallyforsenatorialcandidategarycpetersandgubernatorialcandidate", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally for Senatorial Candidate Gary C. Peters and Gubernatorial Candidate Mark H. Schauer in Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-for-senatorial-candidate-gary-c-peters-and-gubernatorial-candidate", "publication_date": "01-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4722, "text": "They do not have an agenda for Detroit. They do not have an agenda for Michigan. At a time when nearly all the gains of this recovery are flowing to the top 1 percent, cutting taxes for those same folks does not make any sense. It is the wrong vision for the future. But the good news is Mark and Gary have a different vision, a vision rooted in the conviction that in America, prosperity does not trickle down from the top, it comes up from folks who are working every single day, middle class folks, folks trying to work hard to get into the middle class. That is what we believe as Democrats. That is what we believe here in Michigan. We believe in an economy that grows for the many, not the few. Mark and Gary are not running to give tax breaks to folks who do not need them. He is running to build economies Michigan's economy from the middle class out. They know that the ideas to create jobs, they are not Democrat or Republican, but they have got to work. And they know that education, for example, is not just the key to economic growth, it is the surest path into the middle class. They are not going to slash investments in schools or make it harder for students to go to college. They are going to make it easier for students to go to college and make sure teachers are respected and make sure we got early childhood education for our kids. That is what they are going to run on. We believe that in America, public servants should work for the people they represent. Instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on frivolous lawsuits or ideological crusades, Mark and Gary will spend their time protecting ordinary citizens, making your lives better. looking out for you. Let me tell you something else that Mark and Gary believe in. They do not think, if you are working full time in this country you should be raising your family in poverty. They are not backed by special interests who think that the minimum wage is something we should get rid of, they are running because they think we should champion the efforts of folks who work hard, but still have trouble paying the bills at the end of the month. That is what they believe. That is what they are going to fight for. And if you believe that too, you have got to vote. Mark and Gary believe that the economy is stronger when women are full participants in our economy. I already told you Republicans said no to a national fair pay law.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallyforsenatorialcandidategarycpetersandgubernatorialcandidate", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally for Senatorial Candidate Gary C. Peters and Gubernatorial Candidate Mark H. Schauer in Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-for-senatorial-candidate-gary-c-peters-and-gubernatorial-candidate", "publication_date": "01-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4723, "text": "One of the Republicans running for national office, he said I am quoting here he said, You could argue that money is more important for men. Now, I do not know what woman he talked to. He did not talk to you. Did he talk to you? I know he did not talk to Michelle. See, if you are going to strengthen the 21st-century economy, you have got to be in the 21st century. You have got to understand that women now make up an increasing part of the workforce. They are bringing home more of the bacon. And just like Gary talked about, we have got to make sure that women control their own health care choices. You know, it is funny, if you ask a Republican in Congress if they believe in climate change, they say, Well, uh, I am not a scientist. I am not a scientist that is what they say. But when it comes to a woman's right to choose, suddenly, they are a doctor. They have got to update their attitudes. I like that show. But it is set in the sixties. We are now in the 21st century. And we have got to understand that in America, when women succeed, America succeeds. I get that. But I want you to feel a sense of urgency these last 3 days. The biggest corporations do not need another champion. The wealthiest Americans do not need another champion. Opportunity for a few is not what Michigan is about. Opportunity for all is what built the middle class in this country. If you want something better, you have got to vote for it. You have got to work for it. If you believe working families need a tax break, not millionaires, you have got to vote for it. If you think we should invest in our children's schools and give teachers more support and get early childhood education in place so young people get a good start in life, and young people going to college are not burdened with tens of thousands of dollars' worth of debt, you have got to vote for it. You have got to fight for it. If you think that folks who work hard should get an honest day's pay for an honest day's work, you have got to vote for it. You know, I tell you, we give away our power all the time. Some of you know I started as a community organizer. And when I talked to folks in the community, the first thing I'd say is, why do you give away your power?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallyforsenatorialcandidategarycpetersandgubernatorialcandidate", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally for Senatorial Candidate Gary C. Peters and Gubernatorial Candidate Mark H. Schauer in Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-for-senatorial-candidate-gary-c-peters-and-gubernatorial-candidate", "publication_date": "01-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4724, "text": "And they'd say, what do you mean? You sit at home and complain. But complaining and not voting, that means you are just giving away your power. That means you are you are giving away your precious right to help determine the course of your Nation. So look, Michigan, you have had my back twice. You have had my back twice. I love this State. In recent years, Michigan has led the Nation in the number of voters who vote for President, but then stay home during the midterms. According to one estimate, you have got 900,000 folks in Michigan who voted in 2008 and then did not vote in 2010 900,000. I do not know what is going on with those folks. Their vote could decide whether 28 million American workers get the raise they deserve, whether American families continue to benefit from new health care coverage. Pretty soon, they are not going to call it Obamacare anymore. Your vote will decide the course that Michigan takes from here. So Gary needs your vote, Mark needs your vote, I need your vote. But I also need you to go out there and get involved in these closing days. Talk to one of the organizers who are in the room. Grab somebody you know, get them to vote for Mark. Get them to vote for Gary. Do not let somebody else choose your future for you. The hardest thing in politics is changing the status quo. When you got a lot of people in power, they care about just keeping power, they do not care about helping you. They count on you thinking you cannot make a difference. And every day, they are sending you a message that you do not count. Despite all the cynicism, America is making progress. Despite the unyielding opposition of folks on the other side, there are workers who have jobs today who did not have them before. There are auto plants who've got shifts that were not there before. There are families who have health insurance who did not have it before. There are students who are going to college who could not afford it before. There are troops who've been coming home from Afghanistan who were not home before. There are the best cars in America and in the world rolling off assembly lines right here in Michigan, right here in the United States, that were not coming off those assembly lines before. Do not let them tell you that your vote does not matter. Cynicism did not put a man on the Moon.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkscampaignrallyforsenatorialcandidategarycpetersandgubernatorialcandidate", "title": "Remarks at a Campaign Rally for Senatorial Candidate Gary C. Peters and Gubernatorial Candidate Mark H. Schauer in Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-campaign-rally-for-senatorial-candidate-gary-c-peters-and-gubernatorial-candidate", "publication_date": "01-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4727, "text": "I have known Margaret, as she said, a long time, and I am very proud of the job she is doing. She knows what she is talking about when it comes to the schools in America, and she and I are going to work to make sure that every child gets an excellent education. I want to thank the good folks here at Falkener for inviting ENTITY to come. As you can tell, it is not an easy thing-to host ENTITY. It is like, the entourage is pretty big, a lot of security. I have come because I appreciate the example you set. One of the things I like to do is to herald excellence. So the first thing I want to say is, congratulations to the principal and the teachers and the parents for working hard to make this a fantastically interesting place for our children to go to school. I want to thank-you know, they say to me, What do you want from the schools? I do not know if you recognize this, but we just had six Nobel Prize winners recently announced-America had six Nobel-all of whom went to public schools in America. And my hope as I travel through the halls of these schools-like this one-I am meeting Nobel Prize winners of the future. It is a noble aspiration for all of us to aim for. And so I want to thank you for letting me come. I am going to talk about No Child Left Behind. I think you are about to find out I am a passionate advocate of this important law, because I know it can save children's lives and I know it can help us meet a national objective, and that is, every child getting a good education in every school throughout the country. I bring greetings from Laura. She is actually in El Paso, Texas, today-I think she is in El Paso, Texas, today-I am confident-I think that is what she told me- where a new school out there is opening up the Laura Bush Library. And well deserved, I want you to know, because she has a great passion for making sure that every child can read. So I bring, as best I can, her passion here to this important school. I am proud to be here with Senator Richard Burr from the great State of North Carolina. I appreciate Virginia Foxx, the Congresswoman, who joined us as well. You might remember, I was ENTITY of a State.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4728, "text": "And I used to say, education is to a State what national defense is to the Federal Government. And so I took my role as ENTITY and being involved in public school-just like Guy Hunt did- we overlapped as Governors, and we prioritized public education. And so I spent a lot of time with schools in Texas, and I learned one thing, that these little centers of excellence always depended upon having an aggressive principal, a principal who is willing to set high standards and not allow for mediocrity to set in. So, Amy, I want to thank you for your leadership and thank you for your hospitality. I met Josette Hamrick, who is the teacher of the year. I congratulate you, Josette, for setting a good example. I also have recently gone to Mary Helen Parson's third grade school-third grade class. And Tom Ned -Tom Niedziela-he is a-both of whom are dedicated teachers. And so I want to say something about teaching. It is a necessary profession for this country. And for those of you who are teachers, I congratulate you and thank you for serving our country. I oftentimes say to people that are asking me about-do you have any recommendations for what I should be doing, and my answer is, teach. And to parents I say, remember, you are the child's first teacher. As a matter of fact, schools succeed when a parent understands that teaching begins at home, and it makes the job of the classroom teacher so much easier. But I want to thank the teachers who are here, and thank you for setting a good example. I want to thank the school board members who are here. I told the head of the school board and the other man on the school board, I said, It is a pretty tough job to be on the school board. One fellow said, Do you want to switch jobs? Local control of schools is important in order to achieve educational excellence, and I am going to talk a little about that in a minute. I also landed today and met a lady named Michelle Gilmore. Michelle volunteers as a mentor. If you are concerned about the future of North Carolina or concerned about the future of our country and you want to make a difference, become a mentor. It is amazing what happens when an adult takes time out of her life, in this case, to say to a child, I care about you, and I want to help.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4729, "text": "The true strength of the United States of America lies in the hearts and souls of our citizens. And the amazing thing about our country is that there are millions of acts of kindness that take place on a daily basis, and it has not required one government law. And the reason I mention Michelle and the reason I welcomed her to Air Force One is because I want to, one, thank you as an individual, and remind people that you can serve America by loving a neighbor just like you'd like to be loved yourself. I like the fact that this-we are at a school named for a civil rights pioneer. I happen to believe reading is a modern-day civil right, that if you cannot read, you cannot realize the great promise of the United States of America. That is what I believe. And so I have come to this school because I believe schools should set high standards and insist upon results, like teaching a child to read. I do not think it is too much to ask in schools around the United States of America. I know what happens when a child cannot read at grade level. I know the despondency that can be caused if a child is just simply shuffled through a school. In other words, it is a school that-I equate that with educational entrepreneurship. It means people are willing to try things differently. This school is one that, interestingly enough, has got a international baccalaureate program inherent in its curriculum. And that is important because international baccalaureate programs are programs that set high standards for children in later years. So in other words, it is kind of a pre-international baccalaureate experience, all aimed at making sure that a child who goes from here has a chance to even have a greater skill level than anticipated. So it is interesting to be in a school that is a magnet school, that has got a pre-international baccalaureate program. We support magnet schools at the Federal level. First, let me just tell you my theory. Most education needs to be funded at the State and local level. I believe that is the proper role between the Federal Government and the State government. And yet there are incentive programs that come out of Washington; Title I money, for example, is an incentive program. We also have put money in our budget for magnet schools. As a matter of fact, the budget next year I have asked for has got about $100 million for magnet schools. I think magnet schools are interesting concepts to-that the local folks ought to decide to use.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4730, "text": "I am a-also understand, and I hope you do-I know those of you involved with public schools understand that we are now living in a global economy. North Carolina understands that about as much as any State. What happens abroad affects the lives of our students in the near future. If a child in China gets a good engineering degree and a child in America does not , it means China is likely to be more competitive in the 21st century. In other words, we have got to get education right not only because it is a national responsibility but because we are in a global world. Whether we like it or not, there is competition for jobs of the future that are going to-that will take place. And therefore, it is important that we make sure that our children get a solid foundation early in order-so that our country can be competitive, as well as our children. Now, let me talk about No Child Left Behind, because I am really here to make clear to people in Congress, not only who are here but around the country, that the reauthorization of this important bill is going to be a top priority of mine. And it is not only just the reauthorization, it is the strengthening of the bill, and not the weakening of the bill. I readily concede that is a rare occurrence in Washington, DC, but nevertheless, Republicans and Democrats came together to get this important piece of legislation passed. It said, We will spend more money at the Federal level, but in return, we expect results. It seems like a simple concept, but nevertheless, it was not inherent in the education programs out of the Federal Government. As a matter of fact, in many schools around the country, that is the way it was. You know, I remember, one time, going to a school in Houston, Texas, and I said to the teacher, How is everything? It was a shock to ENTITY. It should be a shock to everybody when you hear a teacher say, my kids cannot read by the time they get to high school. The point was made to me-and this is when Margaret and I started working on this concept of measurement-that if you do not measure, you do not know. And the only way to prevent kids from just getting shuffled through schools-until the point where the high school teacher says they cannot read-is to measure early. And so part of the No Child Left Behind Act says, We expect results, and you measure.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4731, "text": "I believe in local control of schools. I do not believe the Federal Government should be telling the people in North Carolina how to run their schools. I do not think the Federal Government ought to design the test; the people of North Carolina should design the accountability tests. Look, I understand kids-I understand the debate; you know, They are teaching the test. No, you are teaching a child to read so they can pass a comprehensive test. And if they cannot pass a comprehensive test, something is fundamentally wrong. No, what you do is you teach so that the accountability system-when you do test, a child is proficient. Active schools, schools that are meeting excellence are those that find problems early and solve the problems early, before it is too late. That is why I am at this school. This school sets high standards. And by the way, if you set low standards, guess what happens in schools? You get bad results. If you walk into a classroom full of the hard to educate and not have high standards, the hard to educate remains hard to educate. Set high standards; use curriculum that works; you can determine what works by measuring whether or not students are meeting certain standards; and correct problems early, before it is too late. That is what No Child Left Behind is all about. You know, the first year this school was tested under No Child Left Behind, it did not meet standards; like, it just was not good enough. This school decided to do something about it. See, they recognized they had a problem, and so they used Federal funding to pay for new laboratories, teacher collaboration, research on what was going right and what was going wrong. There is a new focus on results; there was frequent testing; they set up a Saturday Academy for children with low test scores that needed extra help. Four years ago, about 46 percent of third graders at this school were reading at grade level. That is okay if you are a parent of one of the 46 percent. It is not okay if you are a parent of one of the 54 percent. And the principal and the teachers understood there was a problem, and they took steps to change the status quo. And today, 76 percent are reading at grade level. That is what No Child Left Behind does.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4732, "text": "It cannot do the teaching; it cannot be the leader; but it can help people who care deeply about the lives of a child-the life of a child to succeed, to recognize problems, address the problem, correct the problem, and teach a child to read. And that is what is -that is why I am at Falkener. This is a school that has gone from mediocre to excellent, because they have used the tools of the No Child Left Behind Act. In the fifth grade, about 68 percent of the students were reading at grade level 4 years ago; today, 88 percent of the students are reading at grade level. I cannot thank you enough for taking advantage of a law that really was living up to its name- no child being left behind. She said, Falkener has greatly benefited from this legislation. Our test scores tell our story of success. I met Tom Ned-you call him Ned, right?-Niedziela. He focused on reading comprehension and vocabulary, and his class made the largest reading gains in the fourth grade. One girl whose first language is Spanish-see, if the child's first language is Spanish, that child generally is what we call hard to educate. Inner-city kids tend to be labeled hard to educate, so all that mattered in the past was, if you are 10, you are supposed to be here, and if you are 11, you are supposed to be there. It is unacceptable for this country, by the way. That type of attitude is unacceptable. This child started the year reading at the second grade level. Thanks to Mr. Ned, she now reads at the sixth grade level. I met her.  He said, I told them, if you want to be good at something, you have got to practice. If you want to play football, you have to go to football practice. I want to thank Mr. Ned; I want to thank the students. We see the results in No Child Left Behind across the State of North Carolina. I do not know if you know this or not, but your State has been an innovative State. Your State has been one that has not shied away from accountability. In other words, you did not use excuses about testing. Your State was the first in the Nation to establish an accountability system and one of the first to have the testing plans approved under No Child Left Behind. In other words, your State led.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4733, "text": "And I congratulate the State leaders and those involved with education for being bold on behalf of the children of your State. The percentage of fourth graders with basic math skills rose 10 points between 2000 and 2005. The percentage of eighth graders with basic math skills rose about six points between 2000 and 2005. African American fourth and eighth graders in North Carolina achieved some of the highest math scores in the Nation. It is got to make you feel good to hear African American kids are scoring some of the highest tests in the Nation. Can you imagine if the President came and said, By the way, your kids are scoring the lowest scores in the Nation ? I suspect you'd want to be doing something about that. In other words, we are measuring-each State measures, and you are able to norm to determine how States do relative to each other. In reading, 9-year-olds have made the largest gains in the past 5 years than at any point in the previous 28 years. In math, 9-year-olds and 13-year-olds earned the highest scores in the history of the test. We have an achievement gap in America that is-that I do not like and you should not like. It is the difference between reading of African American students and Latino students and White students. The gap is closing, and that is incredibly important for the United States of America, to see that achievement gap close. Inherent in No Child Left Behind are some interesting reforms. First, if we find a child falling behind early, there is extra Federal money to help that child. For the first time, the Federal Government has said, Not only do we want you to measure, but when we find a child falling behind, there is extra money to be used in either the private or public sector. See, measuring encourages parental involvement. If you measure and a parent finds out that his or her child is not succeeding, most parents are going to say, Do something about it. And what the Federal Government has said, Here is some extra money to help you, to get tutoring, to get you back up to grade level. If a school continues to fail-in other words, a school does not make progress- I believe parents ought to be liberated from that school district if they so choose and go to another public school. In other words, there has to be a consequence at some point in time for a school that will not -is not teaching and will not change, if you expect there to be concrete results.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4734, "text": "This school started off with low scores, set high standards, and has achieved the objective. I suspect not many parents, even if they could, would want to leave, because you are meeting-you are doing the job. There are schools around the country that are not doing the job, and that is unacceptable to society. It ought to be unacceptable to school boards and parents and teachers. In DC, we started something interesting. We said that if the school fails, continue to-if there is persistent failure, that a child ought to be able to go to not only a public school but a private school. We work with the mayor to enhance-it is an interesting opportunity-said, if you fail, and the school will not change, then the DC came up with a scholarship that said this scholarship could be redeemed at a public school or a Catholic school, for example. There is a debate going on about whether we ought to reauthorize the No Child Left Behind Act. I think you can get a sense for where I am coming from. Not only do I think we ought to reauthorize it, I think we ought to strengthen it. I think it would be a huge mistake for the United States Congress not to reauthorize this important piece of legislation. And the reason I say that is that it is working. In other words, there is just more than words there; we have achieved concrete results. For example, we ought to make sure that scores are tested early, particularly for big districts, so that people understand what the results are. Oftentimes in-I do not know how many big districts, Margaret-but I have heard complaints from school districts where the test scores get posted for the parents after the school year begins, which is like-it does not work. So the bureaucracy, frankly, has got to be a little more facile in getting the results out, and Margaret understands that. I think we ought to continue doing what we call the Teacher Incentive Fund. It allows States and school districts to reward teachers who demonstrate results for their students. If this school board decides they want to provide incentives for teachers based upon results, the Federal Government will provide money to help you do that. I like the idea. You may not like it, and that is fine. You got elected a school board member; I did not . But nevertheless, I do believe we ought to make sure that school boards and school districts have the option.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4735, "text": "I also think there ought to be incentives for teachers who make the decision to teach in some of the needier school districts, tougher schools-to provide an incentive. We have got a program I am going to work with Congress on to encourage math and science professionals to come into classrooms. And the reason why is, in order for us to be competitive in the future, our students have got to be proficient in math and the sciences, and we have to have more emphasis on math and science. And there is no better way to encourage a child to take math and science than to have a professional come in the class. We call them adjunct professors. Margaret and I, one time, went over to a school in Maryland, and there were some people from NASA there, two science guys from NASA that could talk the language of science. Some pretty cool guys that were there, but they were saying to eighth grade kids, Science is interesting for you. Sometimes it takes somebody in the field to be able to lend practical knowledge to convince children to continue to focus on science and math and engineering. I talked to you about how to make sure parents get better information. I do believe we ought to fund a national opportunity scholarship program to make sure parents have choices-particularly poor parents have choices beyond just public school choice. I am worried about high school, and I think the new law ought to focus a lot on high school. Four out of every-one out of every four ninth graders in America does not graduate from high school on time. If we live in a global world that is highly competitive, our kids have got to get out of high school, and they got to head to community college or college, if we are going to be competitive. And so we need to bring the same standards to our high schools that we have brought thus far to elementary and junior high schools. If it is okay to test in the third grade, it ought to be okay to test in high school to determine whether or not curricula works, whether or not teaching methodology is working, and whether or not our children are learning. Again, I told you about the international baccalaureate program. It feeds into another way for us to enhance the competitiveness of this country, and that is to encourage AP programs-Advanced Placement programs-throughout classrooms all across America. One of the bottlenecks is- a bottleneck is the number of teachers that are capable of teaching AP.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkswaldocfalkenerelementaryschoolgreensboronorthcarolina", "title": "Remarks at Waldo C. Falkener Elementary School in Greensboro, North Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-waldo-c-falkener-elementary-school-greensboro-north-carolina", "publication_date": "18-10-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4736, "text": "I thank you for the greeting that you have extended to me. I wish to say a word of special acknowledgment to the men of the Grand ENTITY, to the representatives of the pioneers, to the men who proved their loyalty in the supreme test from '61 to '65, and to the pioneers who showed the same qualities in winning this great West that you of the Civil War showed in your feat. I also wish to say how pleased I am to have had as my escort the men of the Naval Militia. The one thing on which this country must forever be a unit is the navy. We must have a first-class navy. A nation like ours, with the unique position of fronting at once on the Atlantic and the Pacific, a nation forced by the mere fact of destiny to play a great, a mighty, a masterful part in the world, cannot afford to neglect its navy, cannot afford to fail to insist upon the building up of the navy. We must go on with the task as we have begun it. We have a good navy now. We must make it an even better one in the future. We must have an ample supply of the most formidable type of fighting ships; we must have those ships practiced; we must see that not only are our warships the best in the world, but that the men who handle them, the men in the gun turrets, the men in the engine rooms, the men in the conning towers, are also the best of their kind. I am about to visit the grove of the great trees. I wish to congratulate you people of California, people of this region, and to congratulate all the country on what you have done in preserving these great trees. Cut down one of these giants and you cannot fill its place. The ages were their architects and we owe it to ourselves and to our children's children to preserve them. Nothing has pleased me more here in California than to see how thoroughly awake you are to preserve the monuments of the past, human and natural. I am glad to see the way in which the old mission buildings are being preserved. This great, wonderful, new State, this State which is itself an empire, situated on the greatest of oceans, should keep alive the sense of historic continuity of its past, and should as one step towards that end preserve the ancient historic landmarks within its limits.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresssantacruzcalifornia", "title": "Address at Santa Cruz, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-santa-cruz-california", "publication_date": "11-05-1903", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Theodore Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4737, "text": "The other day, I was talking about education with some folks in the backyard of an Albuquerque home, and someone asked a question that is stayed with me. He asked, If we do not have homes to go to, what good is an education? It was a heartfelt question, one that could be asked by anyone who is lost a home or a job in this recession. Because if you are out of work or facing foreclosure, all that really matters is a new job. All that really matters is a roof over your head. All that really matters is getting back on your feet. That is why I am fighting each and every day to jump-start job creation in the private sector, to help our small-business owners grow and hire, to rebuild our economy so it lifts up a middle class that is been battered for so long. But even as we focus on doing all that, even as we focus on speeding up our economic recovery, we also know that when it comes to jobs, opportunity, and prosperity in the 21st century, nothing is more important than the quality of your education. At a time when most of the new jobs being created will require some kind of higher education, when countries that outeducate us today will outcompete us tomorrow, giving our kids the best education possible is an economic imperative. That is why, from the start of my administration, we have been fighting to offer every child in this country a world-class education, from the cradle to the classroom, from college through a career. Earlier this week, I announced a new Skills for America's Future initiative that will help community colleges and employers match what is taught in the classroom with what is needed in the private sector, so we can connect students looking for jobs with businesses looking to hire. We are eliminating tens of billions of dollars in wasteful subsidies for banks to administer student loans and using that money to make college more affordable for millions of students. And we have launched a Race to the Top in our States to make sure our students, all of them, are graduating from high school ready for college, so we can meet our goal of graduating a higher proportion of students from college than any other country in the world by 2020. And yet if Republicans in Congress had their way, we'd have had a harder time meeting that goal. We'd have had a harder time offering our kids the best education possible, because they'd have us cut education by 20 percent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsweeklyaddress68", "title": "The President's Weekly Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-weekly-address-68", "publication_date": "09-10-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4758, "text": "And, Moose, when I was young and read ing about George Gipp, I never thought I'd come back as the Gipper. I brought with me Dick Lyng, our Secretary of Agriculture and Notre Dame's representative in the Cabinet, and the five not the four horsemen from Congress South Bend's own Jack Hiler, our quarterback in this effort. Joe McDade, Dan Lungren, Dave Martin, and Ben Blaz. It is a pleasure to visit once again the home of the Fighting Irish. With St. Patrick's Day coming up and after seeing those film clips, it brings to mind another deathbed scene. You know, apparently the town rogue of one small Irish hamlet lay on his deathbed as the priest prepared for the atonement. Do you renounce the devil? Do you renounce him and all his works? the priest asked. And the rogue opened one eye and said, Father, this is no time for making enemies. I have said this before, but I want you to know the first time I ever saw Notre Dame was when I came here as a sports announcer, 2 years out of college, to broadcast a football game. You won, or I would not have mentioned it. And then, of course, I was here with Pat O'Brien and a whole host of Hollywood stars for the world premier of Knute Rockne. Now, let me explain, I may be saying the name differently, but when we made the picture we were told, and Bonnie upheld it to us, that it was Knute not Knute. So, you will have to get used to me saying it that way. All American how I had wanted to make that movie and play the part of George Gipp. It had a great entrance, an action middle, and a death scene right out of the opera. But it was more than that. I know that to many of you today Rockne is a revered name, a symbol of greatness and, yes, a face now on a postage stamp. But my generation, well, we actually knew the legend as it happened. We saw it unfold, and we felt it was saying something important about us as a people and a nation. And there was little room for skepticism or cynicism; we knew the legend was based on fact. I would like to interject here, if I could, that it is difficult to stand before you and make you understand how great that legend was at that time.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4759, "text": "It is not just a memory here and of those who knew him, but throughout this nation he was a living legend. Millions of Americans just automatically rooted for him on Saturday afternoon and rooted, therefore, for Notre Dame. Now, of course, the Rockne legend stood for fair play and honor, but you know, it was thoroughly American in another way. It placed a value on devastating quickness and agility and on confounding the opposition with good old American cleverness. that on or off the field, it is faith that makes the difference, it is faith that makes great things happen. And believe me, it took faith and a lot of it for an unknown actor to think that he could get the part of George Gipp. I was under contract to Warner Brothers, but I had been all over the studio talking about my idea for a story. Having come from sports announcing to the movies, I said I thought that the movies ought to make the life story of Knute Rockne. And then one day I picked up the Daily Variety and read where Warner Brothers was announcing that they were making the life story of Knute Rockne and were starting to cast the film. Well, all I'd ever wanted was to play the Gipper if they some day made the film. And I approached Pat O'Brien, who was going to play Rockne he'd been my choice and he told me bluntly that I talked too much and that is where Warner's got the idea. And I told him what my ambition was, and he said, Well, they are looking for a name actor. But Pat did intervene with the head of the studio, the top producer, Hal Wallis. Hal was, to put it mildly, unimpressed with my credentials. He started by telling me I did not look big enough for the part. Well, I was not very polite, because I told him, You are producing the picture, and you do not know that George Gipp weighed 5 pounds less than I weigh right now. He walked with a kind of a slouch and almost a limp. He looked like a football player only when he was on the field. And then I went home, because some cameramen had told me that the fellas in the front office, they only knew what they saw on film. And I dug down in the trunk and came up with my own pictures of myself playing football in college and brought them back and showed them to Hal Wallis .", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4760, "text": "Well, he finally let me do a test for the part, and Pat O'Brien, knowing of my nervousness and desire, graciously agreed to be a part of it and play in the scene with me. Well, of course, I had an advantage. I had known George Gipp's story for years, and the lines were straight from Knute Rockne's diary. And the test scene was one that said something about what Rockne liked to see in his players. You saw that scene where he was told to get into uniform. And Rockne told him to carry the ball, and Gipp just looked back at Rockne and cocked an eyebrow and said, How far? Well; I mentioned all this because, as I say, Knute liked spirit in his ball players. Grantland Rice tells us that once when he was working with the four backfield stars who became known as the Four Horsemen the fellow named Jimmy Crowley just could not get it right. Now, you know, I never tell ethnic jokes anymore unless they are about the Irish. But in view of the spirit of this occasion, maybe I can be permitted some leeway. Rockne, who, by the way, was Norwegian, was commonly called the Swede. He finally got exasperated after Crowley muffed a play and hollered, What is dumber than a dumb Irishman? And without missing a beat, Crowley shot right back, A smart Swede. And you know, not too long ago I was questioned about the George Gipp story. And this interviewer had really done his research. In fact, he'd even gone back and talked to my old football coach, Ralph McKenzie, at Eureka College, who was 91 years old, and asked him about my football career. Well, now, I have been through a lot of interviews, but believe me, I tensed up at hearing that. And apparently Mac described me as eager, aggressive, better on defense, overall an average football player but an outstanding talker. Well, anyway, I was asked whether I knew that George Gipp was no angel, that he played in some pool games and card games in his time. And of course, that was true, and I said so. But it was also true of George Gipp and it is legitimately part of the legend that he used his winnings from those games to buy food for destitute families and to help other students pay their way through Notre Dame.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4761, "text": "And the reason he got so sick and later died from pneumonia was because he had promised a former teammate who had become a high school coach that he would give his students some pointers. Author James Cox tells us it was during that training session in Chicago that an icy wind blew in across Lake Michigan and the Gipper first felt the ache and sore throat that would lead to the illness that would take his life. You see, there were no miracle drugs in those days. And a promising young life was ended, but the point is, George Gipp could not forget a friend. And I have always thought that it was no mere coincidence that the legend of George Gipp and Knute Rockne emerged from this great institution of higher learning not simply because of its academic excellence but because it stands among the winds of subjectivity for lasting values and principles that are the heart of our civilization and on which all human progress is built Notre Dame not only educates its students in the development of honesty, courage, and all the other things we call character. Sportsmanship means fair play. It means having a little respect for the other fellow's point of view. It means a real application of the Golden Rule. And I know a fine example of this is the charitable care 80 of you students give the handicapped children at the Logan Center. This and other acts of good will say much about your generation. There are those who suggest the 1980's have been characterized by greed. I think our detractors are looking in the wrong places. If they want to see the goodness and love of life of this generation, the commitment to decency and a better future, let them come here to Notre Dame. It is a place where the Golden Rule, the legend of Rockne, and the idea of religious faith still live. Rockne stressed character. He knew, instinctively, the relationship between the physical and moral. That is as true of nations as it is of people. Short-term survival may depend on the knowledge of nuclear physicists and the performance of supersonic aircraft, but long-term survival depends alone on the character of man. Rockne believed in competition, yet he did not rely on brute force for winning the victory. Instead, he is remembered as the man who brought ingenuity, speed, and agility into this most American of sports. May I interrupt myself here for a second and tell you something else about him?", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4762, "text": "As a sports announcer, I was told by many of the great coaches in this land whose teams had played against Notre Dame teams under Rockne that one of their hardest problems when playing Notre Dame was that their team worshiped Rockne that they were fans of his, and that when they came out in the field the first thing they looked for was where was this great, great coach. Rockne, you see, was a man of vision. And that is how he came by his reputation as someone larger than life and a miracle man. Because of his tremendous success in sports, it is easy to forget that he was something else as well, something not too many people knew about him. He was also a man of science, having taught chemistry here at Notre Dame for 4 years. I must believe that he would not be at all surprised at the enormous advances that have taken place over the five decades since his death. Much has been said about the technological revolution in which we are living. Every time we turn around, it seems to be staring us in the face. Typewriters are being replaced in corporate offices throughout the country by highly efficient word processors. With the almost universal proliferation of copy machines, carbon paper has almost gone the way of the buggy whip. The American workplace, in recent years, has undergone a dramatic transformation. Just in the last 5 years, manufacturing productivity of our working people has increased 4.7 percent annually. I have seen it in the many companies that I have visited all across this nation, and I have heard it from the working people themselves. And do not let all the gloom and doomers tell you any different. I happen to have always believed in the American people. Given the proper tools and a level playing ground, our workers can outproduce and outcompete anyone, anywhere. It is a far different picture than the agonizing sight of a decade ago, when many were counting out American workers and American industry. We were told that Americans would no longer go the extra mile, no longer had the drive to excel; that our country was in decline and that we, as a people, should lower our expectations. Well, today we see an America ready to compete, anxious to compete. In fact, our workers are so productive that foreign companies are opening plants in the United States, sometimes to manufacture products for export to other countries. Our industrial base, contrary to a totally false yet widespread impression, is strong and, in fact, is growing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4763, "text": "We have added almost 300,000 manufacturing jobs in the last 6 months, and that trend is continuing. There are over 19 million manufacturing jobs today, about the same as the last 20 years, while manufacturing output is up almost 40 percent over the last 5 years. In short, American industry is lean and mean and ready to meet the competition head on. I predict that as this year progresses we will see American manufacturing reemerge as the leading force in the world marketplace. Exports will, in fact, race ahead and lead our domestic economy. What is propelling our country forward? that fundamental element of the American character that no tyranny and few of our competitors can ever hope to match. Knute Rockne knew and appreciated it the creative genius and omnipresent optimism of our people. We had faith in them these last 7 years, and they did the rest. That is why, instead of giving up, we set our sights high. We did not raise taxes, drain the investment pool, and tell our working people and business leaders to hunker down and prepare for the worst, to lower their expectations. We asked them to dream great dreams, to reach for the stars. We left resources in the private sector that others would have drained into the bureaucracy. The heavy investment made in our economy during the early part of this decade is paying off now, in a big way. The only limit on our realization of tomorrow will be our doubts of today. We have done it by keeping our eyes on the future, by setting our sights on what can be done rather than on complaining about how much there is to do. We have done it by viewing every problem as an opportunity. Technology and commitment can overcome any challenge. The individual investment made in companies, large and small; the retraining of our work force to handle the jobs in this technological age; the search for new ideas and innovative approaches; the modernization of older industries and investment in the new; energy, creativity, and, yes, hard work on a massive scale throughout our country, from the bottom up this is the foundation of our prosperity and the impetus for national progress. Our program has been to foster innovation and to keep our country in the forefront of change. And that is why last year we committed ourselves to building the world's largest particle accelerator, superconducting super-collider to maintain our leadership in high-energy physics research and America's scientific and technological competitiveness.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4764, "text": "That is why we are developing a space plane that by the end of the century will take off from a runway, but once at high altitude will rocket into near space and zip to its destination at 10 and even 20 times the speed of sound. And that is why I am proposing to Congress in my fiscal year '89 budget a new Thomas A. Edison prize program, offering monetary awards to any American who can develop workable, ground-breaking technologies that could improve our quality of life. And that is why scientists right here at Notre Dame are blazing trails in superconductivity research, finding ways so that this breakthrough technology can be put to use for the betterment of all mankind. Because someday, because of research being done here, transcontinental railroads will slide heavy cargoes on a magnetic cushion, cheaply and quickly across the country. Perhaps our energy costs will drop below anything we could have imagined a decade ago. Rockne exemplified the American spirit of never giving up. And that is also why this year we will see the return of the American space shuttle, symbolic of America's tenacity. And I cannot help but believe that the heroes of the Challenger will be cheering along with the rest of us when the United States reclaims its rightful leadership role in leading the conquest of this, the last frontier. Technology in these last decades has reshaped our lives. It is opened vast opportunity for the common man and has brought all of mankind into one community. Today worldwide communications and transportation have linked productive citizens of every free land. Through advances in medicine, our people are living longer, and the quality of their later years has been vastly improved. I like to remind people that I have already lived some 23 years longer than the average life expectancy when I was born. That is a source of frustration to a number of people. And you know there are always those who say the problem's too big, it cannot be helped, let us prepare for the worst. But a few years ago, we heard that about the drug problem here in America. But a few people, including my roommate, Nancy- said it was time for action, not gloom and doom. And the statistics are starting to show what her commitment and the commitment of millions of others has accomplished. Not only did a recent survey of high school seniors show that one-third fewer seniors acknowledged current use of cocaine in 1987 than the year before, but almost all the students said it was wrong to even try a drug like cocaine.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4765, "text": "We still have a long way to go, and when Nancy and I see stories saying just that in the newspaper, we welcome them. It is the beginning of victory. your very best. And that means a drug free generation. And may I challenge you? Why not make your generation the one that said, once and for all, no more drugs in the United States of America or the world? Excellence too is returning to our schools. that values are an essential part of educational excellence. Throughout the Nation, parents and teachers are gaining greater control over local curriculums, emphasizing basics and making their children's education a priority in all of our lives. And they are right to do so, because all of the wonderful gains I have talked about so far, especially those gains built on the growth of technology, depend on young Americans who know how to think, calculate, write, and communicate. Now, there are those who see a dark side to our technological progress. Yes, they admit our well-being has been enhanced in so many ways. Technological advances now are making it more likely, for example, that our natural resources will be spared as long-haul telephone lines and electrical cable give way to the satellite transmissions and computer chips. I spoke to the young people of Europe not long ago via our WORLDNET system and reminded them that only a short time ago such a transmission would have required thousands of tons of copper wire and other resources. Instead, our talk was transmitted quickly, cheaply, efficiently, almost miraculously from our continent to theirs, via satellite. Yet it is pointed out that, regretfully, as man has advanced into this new age, so has his capability to kill and destroy; and it is no longer just those in uniform who are victimized. In World War I, more than 8 million military personnel lost their lives and over 12 million civilians died. During the Second World War, almost 20 million in uniform lost their lives; however, there were about 14 million civilians killed. And if there is ever another such conflagration, a Third World War, hundreds of millions will lose their lives. And it is estimated that 90 percent of the casualties will be civilian. When I was in college, I remember a debate in one of my classes. This was back in the days when the bomber was just being recognized as the potent weapon that it later became in the post-World War I days.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4766, "text": "Our class debated whether or not Americans-people who, to our way of thinking, stood for high moral standards would ever drop bombs from an airplane on a city. The others felt bombing civilians would always be beyond the pale of decency, totally unacceptable human conduct, no matter how heinous the enemy. Well, a decade later, few, if any, who had been in that room objected to our country's wholesale bombing of cities. Civilization's standards of morality had changed. The thought of killing more and more people, noncombatants, became more and more acceptable. Well, today, technology is pointing toward a way out of this dilemma. It is given us the promise of basing our security in the future on protection rather than the threat of retaliation. SDI offers a chance to reverse not only the nuclear arms buildup but also to reverse the trend that in effect has put a lower and lower value on human life. Technology offers you young people who debate in today's classroom an option that threatens no one and offers a shield rather than ever sharper, more deadly swords. It offers you young people a chance to raise the moral standards of mankind. When I came here in 1981 for one of the first major addresses of my Presidency, I acknowledged the difficulties we faced in the world, not only the threat of nuclear war but also totalitarian expansion around the world, especially in places like Afghanistan. the spiritual values of our civilization and the essential decency and optimism of our peoples. We would transcend communism, that the era of the nuclear threat and totalitarian darkness would someday be put behind us, that we would look again with all the people of the Earth to the bright, sunlit uplands of world peace, world prosperity, and yes, world freedom. How much has changed since those days. And as we look back at 7 years of peace as well as progress in arms reductions and the hope of a Soviet exit from Afghanistan, we can be pleased that the inner strength of our nation and our civilization is increasingly apparent with every day that passes. And that inner strength is what Notre Dame and the legend of Rockne are all about. You know, so much is said about Rockne's influence on his ballplayers, but actually he liked to talk about their influence on him. In his autobiography, he described his inability to sleep one night before a big game.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4767, "text": "So, he was up early in the lobby and saw 2 of his boys come down the stairs and go out, and then others came and followed them. And though he had a pretty good idea of what was going on, he decided to follow along. They did not realize it, he said in his diary, but these youngsters were making a powerful impression on me. And he said, When I saw them walking up to the Communion rail to receive and realized the hours of sleep they had sacrificed, I understood what a powerful ally their religion was to them in their work on the football field. And after Rockne found here at Notre Dame his own religious faith, a friend of his at the University of Maryland asked him if he minded telling him about it. Why should I mind telling you? You know all this hurry and battling we are going through is just an expression of our inner selves striving for something else. The way I look at it is that we are all here to try and find, each in his own way, the best road to our ultimate goal. I believe I have found my way, and I shall travel it to the end. And when they found him in the Kansas cornfield where the plane had gone down, they also found next to him a prayer book and at his fingertips the rosary of Notre Dame, the rosary of Our Lady. Knute Rockne did more spiritual good than a thousand preachers. His career was a sermon in right living. Yes, we have seen more change in the last 50 years, since Knute Rockne was with us, than in all the other epics of history combined. You are the beneficiaries of this, and it is you who'll continue the struggle and carry mankind to greater and greater heights. As Americans, as free people, you must stand firm, even when it is uncomfortable for you to do so. There will also be times of despair, times when all those around you are ready to give up. It is then I want you to remember our meeting today. And some time when the team is up against it and the breaks are beating the boys, tell them to go out there with all they have got and win just one for the Gipper. I do not know where I will be then, but I will know about it, and I will be happy. Good luck in the years ahead, and God bless you all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunveilingtheknuterocknecommemorativestamptheuniversitynotredame", "title": "Remarks at the Unveiling of the Knute Rockne Commemorative Stamp at the University of Notre Dame in Indiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-unveiling-the-knute-rockne-commemorative-stamp-the-university-notre-dame", "publication_date": "09-03-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4777, "text": "Today, as part of an international coalition of some 60 nations, including Arab countries, our men and women in uniform continue the fight against ISIL in Iraq and in Syria. More than 2,000 coalition airstrikes have pounded these terrorists. We are disrupting their command and control and supply lines, making it harder for them to move. We are destroying their fighting positions, their tanks, their vehicles, their barracks, their training camps, and the oil and gas facilities and infrastructure that fund their operations. We are taking out their commanders, their fighters, and their leaders. In Iraq, local forces have largely held the line and, in some places, have pushed ISIL back. In Syria, ISIL failed in its major push to take the town of Kobani, losing countless fighters in the process, fighters who will never again threaten innocent civilians. And we have seen reports of sinking morale among ISIL fighters as they realize the futility of their cause. Now, make no mistake, this is a difficult mission, and it will remain difficult for some time. It is going to take time to dislodge these terrorists, especially from urban areas. But our coalition is on the offensive, ISIL is on the defensive, and ISIL is going to lose. Its barbaric murders of so many people, including American hostages, are a desperate and revolting attempt to strike fear in the hearts of people it can never possibly win over by its ideas or its ideology, because it offers nothing but misery and death and destruction. With our allies and partners, we are going to degrade and ultimately destroy this terrorist group. And when I announced our strategy against ISIL in September, I said that we are strongest as a nation when the President and Congress work together. Today my administration submitted a draft resolution to Congress to authorize the use of force against ISIL. I want to be very clear about what it does and what it does not do. This resolution reflects our core objective to destroy ISIL. a systemic and sustained campaign of airstrikes against ISIL in Iraq and Syria; support and training for local forces on the ground, including the moderate Syrian opposition; preventing ISIL attacks in the region and beyond, including by foreign terrorist fighters who try to threaten our countries; regional and international support for an inclusive Iraqi Government that unites the Iraqi people and strengthens Iraqi forces against ISIL; humanitarian assistance for the innocent civilians of Iraq and Syria, who are suffering so terribly under ISIL's reign of horror .", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksproposedlegislationsubmittedthecongressauthorizetheusemilitaryforce", "title": "Remarks on Proposed Legislation Submitted to the Congress To Authorize the Use of Military Force Against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) Terrorist Organization", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-proposed-legislation-submitted-the-congress-authorize-the-use-military-force", "publication_date": "11-02-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4778, "text": "I want to thank Vice President Biden, Secretaries Kerry and Hagel, and General Marty Dempsey for their leadership in advancing our strategy. Even as we meet this challenge in Iraq and Syria, we all agree that one of our weapons against terrorists like ISIL-a critical part of our strategy-is the values we live here at home. One of the best antidotes to the hateful ideologies that try to recruit and radicalize people to violent extremism is our own example as diverse and tolerant societies that welcome the contributions of all people, including people of all faiths. The resolution we have submitted today does not call for the deployment of U.S. ground combat forces to Iraq or Syria. It is not the authorization of another ground war, like Afghanistan or Iraq. The 2,600 American troops in Iraq today largely serve on bases, and yes, they face the risks that come with service in any dangerous environment. But they do not have a combat mission. They are focused on training Iraqi forces, including Kurdish forces. As I have said before, I am convinced that the United States should not get dragged back into another prolonged ground war in the Middle East. That is not in our national security interest, and it is not necessary for us to defeat ISIL. Local forces on the ground who know their countries best are best positioned to take the ground fight to ISIL, and that is what they are doing. At the same time, this resolution strikes the necessary balance by giving us the flexibility we need for unforeseen circumstances. For example, if we had actionable intelligence about a gathering of ISIL leaders, and our partners did not have the capacity to get them, I would be prepared to order our Special Forces to take action, because I will not allow these terrorists to have a safe haven. So we need flexibility, but we also have to be careful and deliberate. As Commander in Chief, I will only send our troops into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary for our national security. Finally, this resolution repeals the 2002 authorization of force for the invasion of Iraq and limits this new authorization to 3 years. I do not believe America's interests are served by endless war or by remaining on a perpetual war footing. As a nation, we need to ask the difficult and necessary questions about when, why, and how we use military force.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksproposedlegislationsubmittedthecongressauthorizetheusemilitaryforce", "title": "Remarks on Proposed Legislation Submitted to the Congress To Authorize the Use of Military Force Against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) Terrorist Organization", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-proposed-legislation-submitted-the-congress-authorize-the-use-military-force", "publication_date": "11-02-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4783, "text": "Well, it is wonderful to see all of you here today. First of all, give Nicole an outstanding round of applause for the great job that she did. It is wonderful to be here at Applied Materials. I want to thank Mike and everybody who helped out hosting us and a wonderful tour of the facility. Rick was showing me some of your clean rooms where you are building the equipment that makes the chips that is basically powering that is basically powering everything that you guys are taking pictures with right now. now, this is just magic. I do not know how they do it. Somebody was explaining to me that I guess one of the wafers was being cleaned, and he said, this would be the equivalent it was Alex who told me this; Alex is around here somewhere-the equivalent of, if you were mowing the South Lawn, but every blade of grass was exactly cut at the same height within a single human hair. That sounds pretty precise to me. And if that is , by the way, the precision that you operate on, if that is how you define a clean room, then Sasha and Malia are going to have to step up their game at home. I want to thank your Mayor, Lee Leffingwell, and-who is doing a great job. Lee is doing outstanding work every day and helping to bring the Austin community together. The Mayor of San Antonio in the house, my friend Julian Castro is here. a thriving, rising middle class and a dynamic, cutting-edge economy. And I see three things that we need to focus on to do it. Number one, we have got to make America a magnet for good jobs. Number two, we have got to help people earn the skills they need to do those jobs. Number three, we have got to make sure people's hard work is rewarded so that they can make a decent living doing those jobs. And if you watch the news sometimes, you may think that there is just doom and gloom out there. But the truth is, there is incredible stuff going on all across America and right here in Austin that I think can be good models for the rest of America to follow. This morning I visited Manor New Tech High School where students are learning high-tech skills that companies like Applied are looking for right now. They are getting excited, working with math and science and technology and engineering. And it is a hands-on high school, where subjects are integrated and kids are building things and conducting experiments at very early ages.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksappliedmaterialsincaustintexas", "title": "Remarks at Applied Materials, Inc., in Austin, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-applied-materials-inc-austin-texas", "publication_date": "09-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4784, "text": "And it is sparking their imagination in ways that may lead them to start up the next Applied or come here and work at Applied. And then I joined a few local families for lunch to talk about how we can make sure that hard work pays off with wages you can live on and raise a family, with health care that you can count on and the chance to put away some money for retirement. And we also had good barbecue which is necessary for economic growth. And then I came to Applied Materials to talk about what we can do to make America a magnet for new jobs in manufacturing. And after shedding jobs for a decade, our manufacturers have added now about 500,000 new manufacturing jobs over the past 3 years. Caterpillar is bringing jobs back from Japan, and Ford is bringing jobs back from Mexico. And after placing plants in other countries like China, Intel is opening its most advanced plant right here at home. This year, Apple started making Macs in America again. So there are some good trend lines there, but we have got to do everything we can to strengthen that trend. We have got to do everything we can to help the kind of high-tech manufacturing that you are doing right here at Applied. And we want to make sure it takes root here in Austin and all across the country. And that means, first of all, creating more centers of high-tech manufacturing. Last year, we launched our first manufacturing innovation institute in Youngstown, Ohio, to develop new technologies and equip workers with the skills required to master 3-D printing techniques. And in my State of the Union Address, I called on Congress to set up 15 more of these manufacturing hubs all across America, and I said that my administration was going to go ahead and move forward with three new hubs on our own, even without congressional action. Well, today we are launching a competition for those hubs. We are looking for businesses and universities that are willing to partner together to help their region help turn their region into global centers of high-tech jobs. Because we want the next revolution in manufacturing to be made in America. We are going to do that. The truth is, over the past couple decades, too many communities have been hit hard when plants closed down and jobs dried up. Nobody knows that better than folks here at Applied.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksappliedmaterialsincaustintexas", "title": "Remarks at Applied Materials, Inc., in Austin, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-applied-materials-inc-austin-texas", "publication_date": "09-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4785, "text": "I was talking to somebody who is after showing me the wafer and some chips, and then they showed me a smartphone, they pointed to the smartphone, and they said, 40 years ago, there'd be about $3 billion just trying to get this much computing power in this little thing, except it would fill up a whole room. And even as we are working to reverse the trend of communities that have been hard hit with old manufacturing leaving, we have got to propose partnerships with local leaders in manufacturing communities to help attract new investment in the infrastructure and the research that will attract new jobs and new businesses so that communities that have been knocked down can get back up and get back on their feet. And we should help our workers get the training they need to compete for the industries of tomorrow. No job in America should go unfilled just because we do not have anybody with the right skills. Now, some of your colleagues that I met, some of them have advanced degrees. Some of them came to apply basically right out of high school. But all of you, whether it was in some cases through a university education, in some cases the military, in some cases just on-the-job training, all of you have specialized skills that are exactly what we need to continue to grow our economy. But we have got a whole bunch of folks out there who do not have those skills, either because the education system failed them or because their skills have been rendered obsolete. I want to make sure that we are training 2 million Americans at our community colleges for skills that will lead directly to a job. We and that is also why we have got to make sure that college is affordable and people are not burdened by a mountain of debt so that they can continue to upgrade their skills as well. Now, if we want to manufacture the best products, we have also got to invest in and cultivate the best ideas. Innovation, ingenuity, that is the constant of the American economy. That is one of the constants of our character. It is what keeps America on the cutting edge. And just before I came here, I visited the Capital Factory, which, as some of you know, is a place that helps startups take off. And everywhere you turn, somebody has got a new idea. They are taking risks. There was a young woman who is in a wheelchair and physically disabled, but is just incredibly inspired to make sure that she is not in any way confined by that situation.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksappliedmaterialsincaustintexas", "title": "Remarks at Applied Materials, Inc., in Austin, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-applied-materials-inc-austin-texas", "publication_date": "09-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4786, "text": "And she is basically designed and is now manufacturing a car that people in wheelchairs can just drive their wheelchair right into the car and start driving. And then you had a young man who had a 3-D camera it was about this big and basically from filming either a static image or in the round, can basically download that immediately and create a 3-D image and then use that for 3-D manufacturing 3-D printing and manufacturing. And what currently costs about $80,000, costs about $3,000 the technology that he is developed. So they are doing amazing stuff. And one of the things we are doing to fuel more inventiveness like this to fuel more private sector innovation and discoveryis to make the vast amounts of America's data open and easy to access for the first time in history So talented entrepreneurs are doing some pretty amazing stuff with data that is already being collected by Government. So over at the Capital Factory, I met with folks behind the startup called Stormpulse, which uses Government data on weather to help businesses anticipate disruptions in service. And then you have got a Virginia company called Opower, that is used Government data on trends in energy use to save its customers $200 million on their energy bills. There is an app called iTriage, founded by a pair of ER doctors that uses data from the Department of Health and Human Services to help users understand medical symptoms and find local doctors and health care providers. And that is going to help launch more startups. It is going to help launch more businesses. Some of them undoubtedly will be using this data powered by chips that essentially started right here at Applied Materials. It is going to help more entrepreneurs come up with products and services that we have not even imagined yet. This kind of innovation and ingenuity has the potential to transform the way we do almost everything. One-third of jobs in Austin are now supported by the tech sector. And we should do all that we can to encourage this kind of innovation economy all across America, in ways that produce new jobs and new opportunities for the middle class. And we are poised for a time of progress if we are willing to seize it. Not even 5 years after the worst economic crisis in our lifetimes, our jobs market and our housing market are steadily healing. Our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in decades. The American auto industry has made a comeback; it is thriving.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksappliedmaterialsincaustintexas", "title": "Remarks at Applied Materials, Inc., in Austin, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-applied-materials-inc-austin-texas", "publication_date": "09-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4787, "text": "But we have got to keep on moving forward, and we have got to make sure that Washington is not administering self-inflicted wounds when we are making progress. So Mike and I were talking about the fact that if we can reform our tax system to eliminate some of these loopholes, potentially, we could lower some rates. Basic research, you will hear people talk about how government is not going to do anything for us. Well, we all understand that the private sector powers and drives our economy. On the other hand, most of the private sector right now has a lot of trouble financing basic research. And that basic research is the foundation for everything that is done at this company, and everything that is done for most of your customers. And we cannot afford to fall behind when it comes to basic research. So there is some key things that we can do that should not be ideological. They are not Democratic ideas or Republican ideas or Independent ideas, they are just good ideas that allow the government to help create the foundation, the platform, the environment in which companies like Applied Materials can thrive. And that is what we have got to constantly champion. And when you are talking to your Members of Congress or you are talking to elected officials, you have got to remind them we do not want government to do everything for us, but it is got a role to play on infrastructure, basic research, making sure that we have got a fair a tax system that is fair, making sure that we have got some basic stability in our budget so people are not always guessing what is going to happen around the corner. Back in 1967, when Applied Materials was just getting off the ground, there were five employees. They worked out of this small industrial unit in California. And I suppose they had a clean room in there, but I do not know what it looked like. But what they lacked in size, they made up with ingenuity and imagination and risk-taking. And over the years, as you grew to become a leader in high-tech manufacturing, that ingenuity never faltered. Whether you have been with this company for decades as I know some of you have or just for a year, you are all focused on the future. Every day, you are pushing the limits of technology a little bit further. And you are not alone, because somewhere over at the Capital Factory, there is an entrepreneur mapping out a new product on a whiteboard that may be the next big thing.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksappliedmaterialsincaustintexas", "title": "Remarks at Applied Materials, Inc., in Austin, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-applied-materials-inc-austin-texas", "publication_date": "09-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4793, "text": "It is a very great privilege and pleasure for me to be here with you today, but before I begin I have two questions. Is it true that the tent over there is filled with good old German beer? What are we doing out here? I asked one soldier if he drank a lot of beer, and he said, Of course not, sir. The only trouble is, then he tried to blow the foam off his sauerkraut. But every one of you is entitled to all the beer, the sauerkraut, and anything else provided today. After your 2 hard months of intensive field training at Grafenwoehr, you deserve this picnic. As your Commander in Chief, I am now issuing orders that tomorrow, Monday, all members of this brigade who participated in the maneuvers will be given an extra day off. I am very, very proud to be here with the tankers, infantry, and artillery of one of the largest and most powerful combat brigades in Europe. And I am also just as pleased to be here with your wonderful families. Let me say a very special word of commendation to our German partnership units. I thank you for the cooperation you are extending to the United States and our forces. Together you have developed outstanding skills and qualities that make first-rate fighting men. I am pleased that you are learning from each other, and I am also very pleased to meet your charming wives. I deeply appreciate the very high standards of performance and morale of our NATO forces as represented by the Germans and Americans here today, and I thank the Federal Republic and the State of Hesse for the warm, warm hospitality extended to me and to all Americans who are stationed here. It is most rewarding to see firsthand this evidence of our two countries cooperating within NATO and for the common defense. It is you, together with the other forces of the Alliance, who are making our collective security a reality. As we pursue peace together, I am aware that not all of the problems in Europe and the world have been solved. And I am convinced that under present circumstances, the best guarantee for peace is a very, very strong defense. As President, speaking here in the presence of our allies, I affirm today that I will not allow our Armed Forces to be weakened under any circumstances. You deserve the best. You deserve the very best equipment and you deserve the strongest support of the citizens that you defend.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspicnickirchgoensfederalrepublicgermany", "title": "Remarks at a Picnic at Kirchgoens, Federal Republic of Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-picnic-kirchgoens-federal-republic-germany", "publication_date": "27-07-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4794, "text": "President, our distinguished guests, Your Excellencies I wish to express on behalf of all of us who are the guests of you, Mr. President, and your Government, our appreciation for the words you have spoken and for the welcome you have given us. We were particularly touched by the welcome we had as we drove through the streets of this very old, but very unique city, one that I am sure will be an attraction for tourists all over the world. What particularly impressed us was not simply the numbers, which certainly were very great when we consider the size of this city, but as the President said, it is sometimes possible to order people to come out. It is not possible to order them to smile. We feel that when we come to this area, with the great capital city of Guadalajara, that we come in a sense to the heart of Mexico. The music, the dance, all of the other art, that is to many of us related to Guadalajara, reminds us of how much this State means to Mexico and to the world. President, I am sure that all the members of my party would agree that of the many countries in the world which we have visited and Mrs. Nixon and I have now visited over 60 countries officially and unofficially we have never had entertainment, dance, music, and song which could surpass what we heard here which came from Guadalajara and from this State. President, we know, too, how much effort went into the arrangements for this visit, the flags along the street, and we noted particularly the little donkeys along the street on either side of the road. There are some who believe that a trip by the President to a foreign country might have political overtones, as we approach an election. Your welcoming us with a few donkeys shows that this is a completely bipartisan trip. I can assure you, Mr. President, in that spirit, speaking both officially and speaking on behalf of the people of the United States, that I bring from the heart of America, from people of my party, of the other party, from all Americans, their deep affection, their respect for this great country with which we share a border of 2,000 miles. We deeply regret that Senora Diaz Ordaz could not be with us, but we remember our meeting a year ago, and we are so delighted that your daughter could be with us here today. I would naturally expect that she, being your daughter, would have very great political sensitivity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandpresidentgustavodiazordazmexicoluncheonhonoringpresident", "title": "Toasts of the President and President Gustavo Diaz Ordaz of Mexico at a Luncheon Honoring President Nixon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-president-gustavo-diaz-ordaz-mexico-luncheon-honoring-president", "publication_date": "20-08-1970", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4795, "text": "But I had it brought home to me when I showed her the delightful and unique place card, which I had at my place, and I asked her what it was, whether it was a donkey or a horse. I understand from Foreign Minister Carrillo Flores that all effort was made, of course, to be sure that there were no partisan overtones in this fact. He said a call was made to the American Embassy to see if there could be some proper balance, and the American Embassy could not furnish any elephants for the line of route. President, these facetious references to our political battles in the United States allow me to emphasize again the point that I have mentioned earlier. We in our country are deeply grateful for the friendship that we have had with not only this nation as a government but the people of Mexico. The thousands of Americans who each year come to Mexico come back with a very warm place in their hearts for this country and its people, just as my wife and I have had such a place in our hearts since we were here 30 years ago. And the opportunity that we have had, and will have now, on two occasions within the space of a year, to talk about matters in which we have a mutual interest and work them out in a friendly way is one that should always characterize the relations between the United States and Mexico. The relations between our two Governments are friendly, but those relations are even more friendly, Mr. President, because the personal relations between the two men who serve as President of our two countries are friendly on a personal basis. President, as you near the end of your term, I think you should be very gratified by the crowds that were on the streets today. As I heard them shout your name, as I saw them smile, as I saw their affection, I realized that the people of Mexico were trying to tell me, as well as you, that they had been fortunate to have as their leader, as President of this country for 6 years, one of the great men of this hemisphere. President, in the last 6 years I think it can be said that never have the relations between the United States and Mexico been more close, more cooperative, more friendly with mutual respect. And for that reason, I think it is most appropriate that all of us rise and raise our glasses to the continuation of friendship and respect and cooperation between these two great countries in the Northern Hemisphere and to the health of the President of Mexico and Senora Diaz Ordaz.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstoaststhepresidentandpresidentgustavodiazordazmexicoluncheonhonoringpresident", "title": "Toasts of the President and President Gustavo Diaz Ordaz of Mexico at a Luncheon Honoring President Nixon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/toasts-the-president-and-president-gustavo-diaz-ordaz-mexico-luncheon-honoring-president", "publication_date": "20-08-1970", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4812, "text": "Bruce is a polite guy I thought what he was going to say, It is about time you showed up. See, I see this as a moment of opportunity. I have come to celebrate the heroism of the civil rights movement and the accomplishments of the NAACP. a nation united, committed to destroying discrimination and extending to every American the full blessings the full blessings of liberty and opportunity. It is important to me. It is important to our Nation. I come from a family committed to civil rights. My faith tells me that we are all children of God, equally loved, equally cherished, equally entitled to the rights He grants us all. For nearly 200 years, our Nation failed the test of extending the blessings of liberty to African Americans. Slavery was legal for nearly 100 years and discrimination legal in many places for nearly 100 years more. Taken together, the record placed a stain on America's founding, a stain that we have not yet wiped clean. When people talk about America's Founders, they mention the likes of Washington and Jefferson and Franklin and Adams. men and women and children who did not come to America of their free will but in chains. These founders literally helped build our country. They chopped the wood; they built the homes; they tilled the fields; and they reaped the harvest. They raised the children of others even though their own children had been ripped away and sold to strangers. These founders were denied the most basic birthright, and that is freedom. Yet through captivity and oppression, they kept the faith. They carved a great nation out of the wilderness, and later, their descendants led a people out of the wilderness of bigotry. Nearly 200 years into our history as a nation, America experienced a second founding, the civil rights movement. Some of those leaders are here. These second founders, led by the likes of Thurgood Marshall and Martin Luther King, Jr., believed in the constitutional guarantees of liberty and equality. They trusted fellow Americans to join them in doing the right thing. boarding a bus; walking along the road; showing up peacefully at courthouses; or joining in prayer and song. Despite the sheriff's dogs and the jailer's scorn and the hangman's noose and the assassin's bullets, they prevailed. I do not know if you remember, 3 weeks ago, I went to Memphis, Tennessee.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4813, "text": "A lot of people focused on the fact that my friend, the Prime Minister of Japan, was an Elvis fan, because we went to Graceland. But we also went to another stop, a stop Reverend Jesse Jackson knows all too well, a painful moment in his life and in the life of our Nation, reflected in the Lorraine Motel. By the way, if you have not been there, you ought to go. Among the people greeting me there was Dr. Benjamin Hooks. It is good to see you again, sir. He led me out onto the balcony of Room 306. I remember, Dr. Hooks pointed to the window that was still half-cracked. You know what I am talking about, Jesse. It was a powerful reminder of the hardships this Nation has been through, the struggle for decency. I was honored that Dr. Hooks took time to visit with me. He talked about the hardships of the movement. We must work as one. We want a united America that is one Nation under God, where every man and child and woman is valued and treated with dignity. We want a hopeful America where the prosperity and opportunities of our great land reach into every block of every neighborhood. We want an America that is constantly renewing itself, where citizens rise above political differences to heal old wounds, to build the bonds of brotherhood, and to move us ever closer to the founding promise of liberty and justice for all. Nearly 100 years after the NAACP's birth, America remains an unfolding story of freedom, and all of us have an obligation to play our part. I want to thank your chairman, Julian Bond, for his introduction. I asked him for a few pointers on how to give a speech. I want to thank Roslyn Brock, the vice chairman of the board, as well. I thank all the board members, all the participants, all the Members of the United States Congress for joining us today as well. I congratulate Bruce Gordon on his strong leadership. I have gotten to know him. See, shortly after he was elected, he came by the Oval Office. He does not mince words. It is clear what is on his mind. I am pleased to say that I have I am an admirer of Bruce Gordon, and we have got a good working relationship. I do not know if that helps you or hurts you. I admire the man. We have had frank discussions, starting with Katrina. We talked about the challenges facing the African American community after that storm.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4814, "text": "We talked about the response of the Federal Government. And most importantly, we talked about the way forward. We talked about what we can do, working together, to move forward. And as a result of that first meeting, we found areas where we share common purpose, and we have resolved to work together in practical ways. But I do want to work with him, and that is what I am here to talk to you about. And so we have been working together in helping the citizens along the gulf coast recover from one of the worst natural disasters in our Nation's history. You know, when we met, I told Bruce that I would work with the Congress to make sure we dedicated enough money to help the folks. He kind of looked at me like sure he is heard these political promises before. It is not the first time that he had heard somebody say, Well, we will work together to see if we cannot get enough money. And I suspect he might have thought, Well, he is just trying to get me out of the Oval Office. But I meant what I said, and I want to thank the United States Congress for joining with the administration. We have committed over $110 billion to help the people in the gulf coast. That is money to go to build new homes, good schools. Bruce and I talked a lot about how do we make sure the contracting that goes on down there in the gulf coast goes to minority-owned businesses. The road to recovery is long and difficult, but we will continue to work together to implement the strategy that Bruce and I worked on, along with people other people like Donna Brazile and other leaders. We have got a plan, and we have got a commitment. And the commitment is not only to work together, but it is a commitment to the people of the gulf coast of the United States to see to it that their lives are better and brighter than before the storm. We also worked together to ensure that African Americans can take advantage of the new Medicare drug benefit. Look, I understand that we had a political disagreement on the bill. I know that. But I worked with the Congress to make sure that the days of seniors having to choose between food and medicine is over. And that is the case of this new Medicare benefit. The Federal Government pays over 95 percent of the cost for our Nation's poorest seniors to get this new drug benefit. And I want to thank the NAACP for recognizing that it is important to help our seniors sign up for this benefit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4815, "text": "We put politics aside. We said, the day is over of arguing about the bill; let us make sure people receive the benefits of this bill. Bruce Gordon has shown leadership on this important issue, and I want to thank you for that. We will work together, and as we do so, you must understand, I understand that racism still lingers in America. It is a lot easier to change a law than to change a human heart. And I understand that many African Americans distrust my political party. I consider it a tragedy that the party of Abraham Lincoln let go of its historic ties with the African American community. For too long, my party wrote off the African American vote, and many African Americans wrote off the Republican Party. That history has prevented us from working together when we agree on great goals. That is not good for our country. That is what I have come to share with you. We have put the interests of the country above political party. I want to change the relationship. The America we seek should be bigger than politics. And today I am going to talk about some areas where I believe we can work together to reduce the obstacles for opportunity for all our citizens. And that starts, by the way, with education. We want an excellent education for every child. I can remember being the Governor of Texas I do not know if there is any Texans here or not. I remember going to a ninth grade class when I was the Governor. It was in a neighborhood that is a low-income neighborhood there in Houston. And I asked the ninth grade teacher, I said, How is it going? The man looked me in the eye and said, My students cannot read. I decided to do something about it when I was the Governor, and I decided to do something about that when I became the President. See, we must challenge a system that simply shuffles children through grade to grade without determining whether they can read, write, and add and subtract. We need to challenge the soft bigotry of low expectations. If you have low expectations, you are going to get lousy results. We must not tolerate a system that gives up on people. So I came to Washington and I worked with Democrats and Republicans to pass the No Child Left Behind Act. It says that the Federal Government will spend more money on education in primary and secondary schools and we have increased the budgets by 40 percent. It also says, and in return for additional help, you must measure.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4816, "text": "And so why do you ask that? Why do you say that in return for increased money, you need to measure? And the reason why is because in order to solve a problem, you have got to diagnose the problem. Measuring results can tell us whether or not teaching methodology is sound. Measuring results can enable us to figure out which children are falling behind early. You know, one of the interesting things about the No Child Left Behind Act, it says that when we find a child falling behind early, there will be extra money for tutoring, extra money for help. The whole purpose is to make sure people are at the starting line. The whole purpose is to make sure that the teacher that told me that, My children cannot read, no longer happens in the ninth grade. There is an achievement gap in America that is wrong for America, an achievement gap that says we are not fulfilling the promise. One of the barriers to opportunity, one of the obstacles to success is the fact that too many of our children are not reading at grade level. And we know that because we measure, and we are doing something about it. Measuring allows parents to see how the school that their child is going to is doing. It lets the parents determine whether or not they should be satisfied with the education their child is getting. I strongly believe that parental involvement is important for our school systems. And I believe and I strongly believe a parent knows what is best for his or her child. That is what I believe. And therefore, when we find schools that are not teaching and will not change, our parents should have a different option. If you want quality education, you have got to trust the parents. You know, an amazing thing about our society today is wealthier white families have got the capacity to defeat mediocrity by moving. That is not the case for lower-income families. And so therefore, I strongly believe in charter schools and public school choice. I believe in opportunity scholarships to be able to enable parents to move their child out of a school that is not teaching, for the benefit of the United States of America. I also understand that we have got to do more for primary more than just primary and secondary education. I am proud to report that working with the United States Congress, the number of low-income Americans receiving Pell grants has increased by about a million Americans since I have become the President. Pell grants are an important part of educational excellence and opportunity.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4817, "text": "We are expanding money for our community college system. I met my pledge to increase funding for Historically Black Universities by 30 percent. A decent education is the gateway to a life of opportunity. And I look forward to working with the NAACP to enhance educational excellence all across the United States of America. Second, I hope we can work together in an America where more people become owners, own something, something that they can call their own. From our Nation's earliest days, ownership has been at the heart of our country. Unfortunately, for most of our history, African Americans were excluded from the dream. That is the reality of our past. Most of your forefathers did not come to this land seeking a better life; most came in chains as the property of other people. Today, their children and grandchildren now have an opportunity to own their own property, and good policies will encourage that. And that is what we ought to work together on. For most Americans, ownership begins with owning your own home. Owning a home is to give something they can leave behind to their children. See, one of the concerns I have is that because of the past, there has not been enough assets that a family can pass on from one generation to the next. And we have got to address that problem. And a good way to do so is through homeownership. Today, nearly half of African Americans own their own homes, and that is good for America. That is good for our country, but they have still got to do more. So we working to do our part with helping people afford a downpayment and closing costs, helping families who are in rental assistance to become homeowners, helping people understand the fine print when it comes to mortgage documents. One of the things I want to work with the NAACP on is to encourage more people to be able to open the front door of the place where they live and say, Welcome to my home; welcome to my piece of property. I also want to work to home-ownership in other areas. We want to see more African Americans own their own businesses, and that is why we have increased loans to African American businesses by 40 percent. We are taking steps to make it easier for African American businesses to compete for Federal contracts. We are working to expand help to have African American workers own a piece of their own retirement. You know, one of my friends is Bob Johnson, founder of BET. He believes strongly in ownership.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4818, "text": "He believes strongly, for example, that the death tax will prevent future African American entrepreneurs from being able to pass their assets from one generation to the next. He and I also understand that the investor class should not be just confined to the old definition of the investor class. You know, an amazing experience when I went to Canton, Mississippi, I asked the workers there, who were mainly African American workers, I said, How many of you have your own 401? That means they own their own assets. They manage their own money. It is a system that says, we want you to have assets that you can leave from one generation to the next. Asset accumulation is an important part of removing the barriers for opportunity. I think it is really important, and I want to work with Bruce, if possible. The Federal Government should encourage ownership in the Government pension program, to give people a chance to own an asset, something they can call their own. Ownership is vital to making sure this country extends its hope to every neighborhood in the United States of America. And I look forward to working with the NAACP to encourage ownership in America. I want to work with you to make sure America's communities are strong. I have got a friend named Tony Evans. Some of you may know Tony, from Dallas, Texas. He was one time giving a sermon, and I heard him speak, and I want to share with you what it was. He said he told a story about the man who had a crack on one of the walls in his home. So he got the plasterer to come by, and the guy plastered the wall. Got another plasterer in; put the plaster on the wall; and it reappeared again. He finally called a wise fellow over. The man explained what the problem was with the cracks on the wall. He said, look, in order to solve the cracks on the wall, you have to fix the foundation. What I want to do is work with the NAACP to help fix the foundations of our society. We want strong families. We want to help people who need help. We want to help the addicted; we want to help the homeless; we want to help those who are trying to reenter society after having been incarcerated. That is what we want to do. Government can hand out money and we do but it cannot put hope in a person's heart or a sense of purpose in a person's life. That is why I strongly support institutions of faith and community service all around our country.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4819, "text": "I believe in the neighborhood helpers and healers. We have provided more than $5 billion to faith-based groups that are running the soup kitchens and sheltering the homeless and healing the addicted and helping people reenter our society, people who are providing compassionate care and love. Organizations of faith exist to love a neighbor like they'd like to be loved themselves. And I believe it is important for Government to not only welcome but to encourage faith-based programs to help solve the intractable problems of our society. And this Faith-Based Initiative is being challenged in the courts. They claim that they fight the initiative in the name of civil liberties, yet they do not seem to realize that the organizations they are trying to prevent from accessing Federal money are the same ones that helped win the struggle of civil rights. I believe if an organization gets good results and helps people turn their lives around, it deserves support of Government. We should not discriminate based upon religion. We ought to welcome religious institutions into helping solve and save America, one soul and one heart at a time. Finally, you and I seek America that commits its wealth and expertise to helping those who suffer from terrible disease. We believe that every person in the world bears the image of our Maker and is an individual of matchless value. And when we see the scourge of ENTITY/ENTITY ravaging communities at home and abroad, we must not avert our eyes. Today, more than a million of our fellow Americans live with ENTITY, and more than half of all ENTITY cases arise in the African American community. This disease is spreading fastest among African American women. And one of the reasons the disease is spreading so quickly is many do not realize they have the virus. And so we are going to lead a nationwide effort and I want to work with the NAACP on this effort to deliver rapid ENTITY/ENTITY ENTITY tests to millions of our fellow citizens. Congress needs to reform and reauthorize the Ryan White Act and provide funding to States so we can end the waiting lists for ENTITY medications in this country. To whom much is given, much is required. This Nation is a blessed nation, and when we look at ENTITY/ENTITY on the continent of Africa, we have not turned away. We believe it is our Nation's responsibility to help those who suffer from this pandemic. We are leading the world when it comes to providing medications and help.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4820, "text": "Today, more than 40 million people around the world are living with ENTITY/ENTITY; 26 million of those live in sub-Sahara Africa, including 2 million children under the age of 15. We are calling people together. We pledged $15 billion to provide medicine and help. We launched the Emergency Plan for ENTITY Relief. Before this ENTITY emergency plan was passed, only 50,000 people in sub-Sahara Africa were getting medicine. Today, that number has grown to more than 560,000 people, and more are getting help every day. By working together, we can turn the tide of this struggle against ENTITY/ENTITY and bring new hope to millions of people. These goals I have outlined are worthy of our Nation. In the century since the NAACP was founded, our Nation has grown more prosperous and more powerful. The history of America is one of constant renewal, and each generation has a responsibility to write a new chapter in the unfinished story of freedom. That story began with the founding promise of equality and justice and freedom for all men. And that promise has brought hope and inspiration to all peoples across the world. Yet our founding was also imperfect because the human beings that made our founding were imperfect. Many of the same Founders who signed their names to a parchment declaring that all men are created equal permitted whole categories of human beings to be excluded from these words. The future of our founding, to live up to its own words, opened a wound that has persisted to today. In the 19th century, the wound resulted in a civil war. In the 20th century, it denied African Americans the vote in many parts of our country. And at the beginnings of the 21st century, the wound is not fully healed and whole communities . To heal this wound for good, we must continue to work for a new founding that redeems the promise of our Declaration and guarantees the birthright of every citizen. For many African Americans this new founding began with the civil rights movement and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. A generation of Americans that has grown up in the last few decades may not appreciate what this act has meant. Condi Rice understands what this act has meant. See, she tells me of her father's long struggle to register to vote, and the pride that came when he finally claimed his full rights as an American citizen to cast his first ballot. She shared that story with me. Yet that right was not fully guaranteed until President Lyndon Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthenationalassociationfortheadvancementcoloredpeopleannualconvention", "title": "Remarks at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Annual Convention", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-national-association-for-the-advancement-colored-people-annual-convention", "publication_date": "20-07-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4825, "text": "Nixon and I are very honored to be here deep in the heart of Texas. I can say that the heart of America, today at this moment, is in the heart of Texas as this distinguished company so well illustrates. It is here to pay tribute to the life of a man, and the life of his wife as well, who has given 40 years of service to this State and to this Nation. The entire Nation is indebted to you, President Johnson, and to this great university, the University of Texas, to all who have had a hand in assembling and establishing this extraordinary treasury of insights into a critical period of this Nation's history. And on behalf of all the people of the United States, I am honored and privileged to accept it for America. The American people have reason to be doubly grateful to you today, first for your long period of service to the Nation, and now for this collection that can take the scholars of future generations behind the scenes of that service, as you have indicated in your remarks. One of the first rules of statecraft is that we can successfully chart the future only if we can understand the past. Libraries such as this can be among our best keys to that understanding. With its more than 31 million documents, this contains more items by far than any other Presidential library yet established; and through its connection with a great university, it promises both to enrich the university and to be enriched by the university. Often I am asked what it feels like to sit in the President's Oval Office--to know, in President Truman's famous phrase, that the buck stops here, and to experience the weight of history that hangs over that office. Just a few minutes ago, as President Johnson was throwing me -showing me through the library--I am coming back later when I have more time --we visited what I think may prove to be the most exciting and popular room in the whole library for the visitor, a replica of the Oval Office. As we were there in that office, furnished as it was during the period that he served as President, I reflected, as I am sure he did, once again on the answer to that question. President Johnson sometimes used to comment, in speaking about the Presidency, that the problem is not doing what is right; the problem is knowing what is right.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthededicationthelyndonbainesjohnsonlibraryaustintexas", "title": "Remarks at the Dedication of the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library in Austin, Texas.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dedication-the-lyndon-baines-johnson-library-austin-texas", "publication_date": "22-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4826, "text": "Sitting in the Oval Office in Washington the other day, I found myself reflecting on its shape--on the fact that it is built as an oval, without corners, and with walls that might be said to have no sides or an infinite number of sides--and on the fact that there is a certain parallel with the shape of that office and the Presidency itself. For ENTITY of the United States cannot approach a question from one side or the other; on each issue that comes to the Oval Office there normally are an infinite number of sides and of competing considerations to be resolved or chosen among. This reflects the fact, of course, that the easy questions are not the ones that come to the President; those are decided at other levels. The ones that he must decide are the ones on which there are disagreements, even among members of his own administration who share his own goals but who have different perspectives or different judgments about the best way to achieve those goals. They deal not simply with right versus wrong but with varying degrees of right and wrong, with various balances of legitimate but competing interests, and with varying judgments about how best to accomplish what is right. And so the study of the Presidency is a study, in the final analysis, of the difficult decision, the close question. But I have found that the more deeply I study the Presidency, the more firm I become in my faith that throughout our history, the basic high principle of those who have been called upon to govern has been one of the great sustaining strengths of America. I believe this has been true because the office inhabits the man, just as the man inhabits the office. No one holds that office without a profound sense of obligation-to the country, to the world, and to the future. that each one who has been President has recognized, in his turn, that he is the one who must speak for all the people of America. A man of one region must speak for all regions. A man of one party must strive to see how problems look from the other party's point of view. A man who has crusaded for a cause recognizes that he has a responsibility to those of the opposite view, as well as to those who may agree with him. One of the most scholarly men ever to sit in the Senate of the United States was Albert Beveridge of Indiana. Partisanship, he said, should only be a method of patriotism. He who is a partisan merely for the sake of spoils is a buccaneer.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthededicationthelyndonbainesjohnsonlibraryaustintexas", "title": "Remarks at the Dedication of the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library in Austin, Texas.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dedication-the-lyndon-baines-johnson-library-austin-texas", "publication_date": "22-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4827, "text": "He who is a partisan merely for the sake of a party name is a ghost of the past among living events. He who is merely the partisan of an ordinary organization is only a pebble in the sling of a boss. But he who is the partisan of principle is a prince of citizenship. A partisan of principle--that is what our political system is all about; that is what transforms ordinary disputes into those great debates that illumine for years to come the issues confronting the Nation, in which men of principle test their principles and the Nation achieves a deeper understanding of itself. It also is what holds us together on those great questions on which our unity has kept us free. Every President has to be a leader of his party--and our party system is essential to our democratic system. But more and more in today's world, the times require that a President, and indeed all of us who help lead the Nation, go beyond party to be partisans of principle. For increasingly we confront great concerns that go beyond partisan considerations and partisan differences--concerns that reach to the security of our Nation, to our hopes for peace in the world, to realizing the American dream here at home in our lives and those of our children--on these great goals we must all be partisans of principle. It has been my privilege, during a quarter-century of public service, to know many partisans of principle. I think today especially of those times during the Eisenhower Administration, when I was Vice President and Lyndon Johnson was the Majority Leader of the United States Senate. He was a vigorous leader of his party. But I knew, and President Eisenhower often told me, and he knew, that whenever the great issues of national security were concerned, he would always be a partisan of principle, not a partisan of party. And so it is in that same spirit that we are gathered here today to dedicate this library, in doing so, to pay tribute to President Johnson--and to dedicate ourselves to the proposition, as Senator Albert Beveridge so eloquently put it so long ago, that the partisan of principle is a prince of citizenship.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthededicationthelyndonbainesjohnsonlibraryaustintexas", "title": "Remarks at the Dedication of the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library in Austin, Texas.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-dedication-the-lyndon-baines-johnson-library-austin-texas", "publication_date": "22-05-1971", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Richard Nixon"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4828, "text": "From time to time I find that it is one of my pleasant duties to meet with groups who are convening here in the National Capital for some public-spirited service. It has been my privilege to extend to them a welcome on the part of the Administration and the National Government. In none of these cases have I felt greater satisfaction than I do this afternoon. By his or her presence here, each person attending this meeting shows their support for several things in which I passionately believe. One of them is support for the Constitution of the United States which, written in the recognition that all people are the children of God, made no distinction among them by reason of inconsequential factors over which they themselves had no control. I believe those of us who preach so loudly about constitutional government advance our cause as we meticulously observe that particular factor or foundation of that great Document. Another thing I have preached, as have many others, is against the theory that there can be any second-class citizen. I believe as long as we allow conditions to exist that make for second-class citizens, we are making of ourselves less than first-class citizens. In other words, I believe the only way to protect my own rights is to protect the rights of others. Everything that the Constitution accords to me, I must defend for others--or else finally there will be nobody left to defend me. And now I want to tell you a little bit of a story that just happened the day before yesterday. I was down at Annapolis, and I inspected a Marine Guard. As I went around, I noticed there were several Negroes occupying different positions in this Guard. One of them had on the chevrons of a non-commissioned officer. I talked with the commanding officer of this group. I said, Now here occurs one of those things that was always advanced as an argument when we were working for the cause of eliminating segregation in the armed services--it was said that white men would not willingly serve under a Negro superior. I must tell you that this man, when it came to the making of non-commissioned officers, could not pass the rigid mental examination we gave. But his personality was so fine, his qualities of leadership so evident, his character and reputation in the company so great that we had to make special arrangements so that it was unnecessary for him to pass completely the mental examination.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheunitednegrocollegefundluncheon", "title": "Remarks at the United Negro College Fund Luncheon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-united-negro-college-fund-luncheon", "publication_date": "19-05-1953", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Dwight D. Eisenhower"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4841, "text": "We have an expression we used to have an expression when I served in the Senate Senator Van Hollen they said when they wanted to make some statement that was personal, they'd say, A point of personal privilege. You know, when you were talking about being a waterman, working on the water my family is originally from Baltimore, came in the early 1800s. And the entire Biden family worked in the water were watermen until probably 1906, -7, or -8. And my father was raised here in Baltimore. They do not say Baltimore. They say Bawltamer. And so, you know, although they never worked at the port, they did work in the bay and along here. So, you know, this has been this is one the oldest ports in the country continuously running and one of the best ports in the country. I appreciate it very much. And I want to thank Governor Hogan for being here and members of the delegation. I want start off with one of my best buddies and, I think, one of the most effective people in the United States Senate, Chris Van Hollen. Do not if you need something, go to him, man. And a guy who I knew him when he was a kid. He does not remember me. I am getting so old; I knew his dad, Senator Sarbanes. You got a first-rate delegation. And so, I want to thank them for being here today and thank them for all the help in getting the members of the House and getting the legislation passed. It is going to make a big difference. We are the only country in the world we underestimate ourselves; we are sort of down on ourselves the last 10 years or so we are the only country in the world, as a matter of history, that every crisis we have faced we have come out better on the other side. We not only beat it not a joke, think about it we have come out better than we were before we went into the crisis. And the economic and political, as well as the health crisis we found with ENTITY I was determined, when we got elected, we got to build it back better than it was. We are in competition to determine whether or not we can still remain the most powerful economic force in the world. And so, today, I am here to talk about one of the most pressing economic concerns of the American people and it is real.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "whitehousegovbriefingroomspeechesremarks20211110remarksbypresidentbidenonthebipartisaninfrastructuredeal2", "title": "Remarks by President Biden on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal", "source": "https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/11/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-2/", "publication_date": "10-11-2021", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4842, "text": "getting prices down, number one; number two, making sure our stores are fully stocked; and number three, getting a lot of people back to work while tracking and tackling these two above challenges I mentioned. Tell us the Ameri- the American people, in the midst of an economic crisis, that recovery is showing strong results, but not to them. Everything from a gallon of gas to loaf of bread costs more. We still face challenges, and we have to tackle them. We have to tackle them head on. And on the good side, we are seeing the highest growth rate in decades, the fastest decrease in unemployment at this point ever since 1950. But we are we got problems too. Many people remain unsettled about the economy, and we all know why. They see higher prices. They go to the store online, or they cannot or they go to the store go online and they cannot find what they always want and when they want it. And we are tracking these issues and trying to figure out how to tackle them head on. My administration, with the help of the folks on my left over here, is has a plan to finish the job at getting us back to normal from the pandemic and having a stronger economy than we have ever had before. Let me explain the part that the ports play and why they are so critically important. Infrastructure week has finally arrived. How many times did you hear over the last five years Infrastructure week is coming? The House of Representatives passed my Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill. Along with another plan that I am advancing, this bill is going to reduce the cost of goods to consumers and businesses, and get people back to work, helping us build an economy from the bottom up and the middle out that where everybody is better off. You know, I am tired of this trickle-down economy stuff. I come from Delaware just across the line up here and, you know, we have more corporations in Delaware than every other nation in the state combined. And so, I understand big business. The fact of the matter is, it is time they start paying their fair share. The fact is, you have 55 corporations last year that, in fact, made $40 billion did not pay a single penny in taxes. Nobody is going to nobody is going to pay more if you make less than 400 grand, you are not going to pay anything more in taxes at all.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "whitehousegovbriefingroomspeechesremarks20211110remarksbypresidentbidenonthebipartisaninfrastructuredeal2", "title": "Remarks by President Biden on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal", "source": "https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/11/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-2/", "publication_date": "10-11-2021", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4843, "text": "And so, look, this is a once-in-a-generation investment to create good-paying jobs, modernize our infrastructure, turn the climate crisis into an opportunity. We are dealing with climate think jobs. Because that is how you beat the climate crisis. Put us on a path to win the economic competition of the 21st century we face with China and the rest of the world. China is outspending us on research and development. And China is outspending all these these other countries are as well. I am going to create good-paying union jobs union. Not good jo- not 12 dollars an hour, not 15 dollars an hour 45 bucks an hour and up with good benefits so you can raise a family on and build the middle class out. And jobs that cannot be outsourced; they cannot outsource these jobs. And I am going to transform our transportation system with the most significant investment in passenger rail in the past 50 years; in roads and bridges the most significant investment in 70 years; and investments in public transit that we have done over the period. You know, it is going to it is going to modernize our ports with $17 billion in investment $17 billion in investment. We are going to reduce congestion. We are going to address repair and maintenance backlogs, deploy state-of-the-art technologies, and make our ports cleaner and more efficient. And we are going to do the same with our airports and freight rail. We are going to create jobs replacing lead water pipes that are here in Maryland, as well as every other state in the union, that are poisoning our kids and others. We are going to make high-speed Internet affordable and available to everywhere in America. Those of you who have kids in school when we we have been going to this hybrid thing some in class, some out of class how many times if you haven- if you do not live in an area where you have high-speed Internet you can afford, how many times have you driven your kids to the parking lot of McDonald's and sat there going off the McDonald's Internet so you could hear? So, folks, we are going to build the first-ever national network of electric vehicle charging stations all across the country. IBEW is going to put in 500,000 charging stations across the country. That is in the Recovery Act excuse me that is in the Build Back Better Bill, which is not going to raise taxes one single cent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "whitehousegovbriefingroomspeechesremarks20211110remarksbypresidentbidenonthebipartisaninfrastructuredeal2", "title": "Remarks by President Biden on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal", "source": "https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/11/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-2/", "publication_date": "10-11-2021", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4844, "text": "Totally paid for by making taxes work for people who make over 400 grand and just do their fair share. I am going to get America off the sidelines on manufacturing the manufacturing of solar panels, wind turbines, batteries to store energy and power the electric vehicles from school buses to automobiles. We are also going to make historic investments in environmental cleanup and remediation, rebuilding resilience against superstorms and droughts and wildfires and hurricanes. I traveled all over the country this year. You know, there is nine- literally, $99 billion in losses because of storms this year. Did you ever think you'd see you'd go out more wildfires in the West than the entire and lost land lost, homes lost burned to the ground I have flown over in Marine One than the entire state of New Jersey, from the Cape all the way to New York. That is how much we have lost in America so far so far. And according to the economic experts, this bill is going to ease inflationary pressures, lowering the cost to working families. Seventeen excuse me yeah, 17 Nobel laureates in economics wrote a letter to me about 10 days ago saying this is going to affect bring inflation down, not up. Best of all, the vast majority of these jobs are going to create that we are going to create do not require a college degree do not require it. This is the ultimate blue-collar blueprint to rebuild America. I am not waiting to sign a bill to start improving the flow of goods from ships to shelves. Yesterday, I announced a port of a port plan of action. It lays out concrete steps for my administration to take over the next three months to invest in our ports and to relieve bottlenecks. This builds on the progress we have already made. Last month, I reached a deal with two of the largest ports in America the Port of Los Angeles and Long Beach. And I met with you guys, with the longshoremen there, and we worked out a deal between the port owners and the longshoremen to move toward operating those two ports. Forty percent of everything in the Pacific comes through those two ports. So they all agreed they are going to go 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Last week, the number of container ships in the docks for more than nine days fell by over 20 percent.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "whitehousegovbriefingroomspeechesremarks20211110remarksbypresidentbidenonthebipartisaninfrastructuredeal2", "title": "Remarks by President Biden on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal", "source": "https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/11/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-2/", "publication_date": "10-11-2021", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4845, "text": "And now we are announcing steps to improve ports on the East Coast to provide support for the Port of Savannah, the fourth-largest container port in the country, to help reduce congestion. With our help, they now have the funds they need to set up five new inland port sites in Georgia and North Carolina so goods can get closer to their final destination more quickly. And other ports across the country will have the resources they need to make these kinds of immediate investments as well. The challenge we need to meet here, and that my plan is going to help address, has to do with the supply chain. You hear a lot about the supply chains in the news, but, frankly, not a lot of people are clear or have a clear understanding, whether they have a PhD or they did not go to school, about how a supply chain works. It is easy to talk about it, but what is the impact on the economy, let alone how to fix it? And as long as goods and materials are getting where they need to go on time, there is usually no need to worry about the supply chains. But when global disruptions hit, like a pandemic, they can hit supply chains particularly hard. ENTITY has stretched global supply chains like never before. And suddenly, when you go to order a pair of sneakers or a bicycle or Christmas presents for the family, you are met with higher prices and long delays, or they say they just do not have any at all. And the reason for that, last year, was has a lot to do with most companies make their product how they make their products today. raw materials plus labor, assembly, shipping everything it takes to create the finished product. Even products as simple as a pencil can have to use wood from Brazil, graphite from India before it comes together at a factory in the United States to get a pencil. So if, all of a sudden, you got a ENTITY crisis in Brazil, you cannot get the product maybe because the plant shuts down. Products like smartphones often bring together parts from France, Italy; chips from the Netherlands; touchscreens from New York State; camera components from Japan a supply chain that crosses dozens of countries. That is just the nature of a modern economy the world economy. But global supply chains have helped dramatically bring down the price we pay for things we buy. But they have also made us much more reliant on what happens in other parts of the world.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "whitehousegovbriefingroomspeechesremarks20211110remarksbypresidentbidenonthebipartisaninfrastructuredeal2", "title": "Remarks by President Biden on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal", "source": "https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/11/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-2/", "publication_date": "10-11-2021", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4846, "text": "So if a factory in Malaysia shuts down due to a ENTITY outbreak which they have it causes a ripple effect that can slow down auto manufacturing in Detroit. They cannot get the computer chips they need. If a climate disaster closes a port in China, it can delay shipment of furniture or clothing, reduce worldwide supply, and driving up prices here in America. People have more money now because of the first major piece of legislation I passed. You all got checks for $1,400. You got checks for a whole range of things. If you are a mom and you have kids under the age of 7, you are getting 300 bucks a month, and if it is over over 7 to 17, you are getting $360 a month like wealthy people used to when they'd get back tax returns. It changes people's lives. But what happens if there is nothing to buy and you got more money? You compete for getting it there. It creates a real problem. So, on the one hand, we are facing new disruptions to our supplies. But at the same time, we are also experiencing higher demand for goods because wages are up, as well as as well as people have money in the bank. And because of the strength of our economic recovery, American families have been able to buy more products. They are not going out to dinner and lunch and going to the local bars because of ENTITY. So what are they doing? They are staying home, they are ordering online, and they are buying product. Well, with more people with money buying product and less product to buy, what happens? The supply chain is the reason, and the answer is you guys and I will get to that in a minute but what happens? So, we got nearly 20 percent more goods coming into the country than we did before the pandemic struck. In 19 day- excuse me ENTITY has changed the way we spend our time and our money. That is because people have a little more breathing room than they did last year, and that is a good thing. But it also means we got a higher demand for goods at the same time we are facing disruptions in the supplies to make those goods. There is a reci- this is a recipe for delays and for higher prices, and people are feeling it. They are feeling it. Did you ever think you'd be paying this much for a gallon of gas? In some parts of California, they are paying $4.50 a gallon.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "whitehousegovbriefingroomspeechesremarks20211110remarksbypresidentbidenonthebipartisaninfrastructuredeal2", "title": "Remarks by President Biden on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal", "source": "https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/11/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-2/", "publication_date": "10-11-2021", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4847, "text": "That is why it is so important that we do everything in our power to stabilize the supply chain. Yesterday, I spoke with the CEOs personally spoke with the CEOs of the major retailers Walmart, Target and the leading freight movers FedEx and UPS. They assured me that the shelves will be stocked in stores this holiday because they signed on to 24/7 as well. They signed on to 24/7. And they provide more avenues they are getting more of their containers off the ports quicker than ever before. Because a lot of stuff on the ports, it was sitting around, staying there. Because it no longer is the product they need at this moment. And it does not cost them anything to leave them sitting at the port, rather than in their warehouses. Part of the reason why is because my Port Envoy, John Porcari who was the Secretary of Transportation here for two governors John has worked with the operators, the shippers shipping companies and unions and retailers to speed commerce so they can get products to stores and to your doors, and to get the shelves fully stocked this holiday season. railroads, ocean liners, labor, state and local governments. And now we passed the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill the deal it is only going to accelerate. Infrastructure infrastructure used to be rated, in the United States, as the best in the world when I got to the Congress. But today, according to the World Economic Forum, you know where we rank in infrastructure? Twelve countries in the world have more modern, efficient infrastructure than the United States of America. By investing in our roads, our bridges, our ports, and so much else, this bill is going to make it easier for companies to get goods to market more quickly. Here in Baltimore, you have got a port that is older than America itself, and it is been operating for 315 years. By the way, you got any Marines here any former Marines? Well, if you are here as a Marine, happy birthday. They deserve some applause. Look, this port is connected to the nation's oldest rail line, the B&O Railroad, which which in turn relies on the tunnels that are about 126 years old, those tunnels. The tunnel has become a major bottleneck to the port. Now, the Port of Baltimore will be getting a $125 million grant to upgrade that tunnel so freight trains can come double-stacked through that tunnel double-stacked with with these cars with containers on top of them.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "whitehousegovbriefingroomspeechesremarks20211110remarksbypresidentbidenonthebipartisaninfrastructuredeal2", "title": "Remarks by President Biden on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal", "source": "https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/11/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-2/", "publication_date": "10-11-2021", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4848, "text": "They move out a hell of a lot more quickly if they are going if they are imports going out, but if they are exports going across the ocean. That means, in addition to more good jobs being filled, more products on shelves delivered faster and lower prices. It is about taking a long-term view of our economy to deliver lower costs, more jobs, and ensure our shelves are stocked with product. pandemics, weather extremes, cyberattacks, or whatever else comes our way. You know it. We need companies throughout the supply chain to create and support good-paying jobs for people that are that they can grow in, build skills in, join a union, make a decent living. That is when disruption hits so when disruption hits, companies can quickly adapt because they are invested in their workers, their skills, their training, and a strong foundation of what when I always think unions and my family, I think of dignity and respect. dignity and respect. When I got elected, I said we are going to I get to spend quote, unquote $600 billion of your money making everything from aircraft carriers to balloons. So much of it has been going out and getting foreign contractors to do it. Well, this administration has been doing we set new rules to strengthen our domestic supply chains with a new Made in America office within the White House. Never again should our country be left unable to produce critical goods because we do not have access to the materials we need. Never again should we have to rely on one company or one country, particularly when the country does not share our values. We are in a competition for the 21st century and who is going to own it. America still has the most productive workers in the world and the most innovative minds in the world. We risk losing our edge if we do not step up now. It represents the biggest investment in ports in American history. And for American families, it means products moving faster and less expensively from factory floor, through the supply chain, to your home. With the bill we passed last week and the steps we are taking to reduce bottlenecks at home and abroad, we are set to make significant progress. We are already in the midst of a historic economic recovery. And thanks to those steps we are taking, very soon we are going to see the supply chain start catching up with demand. So not only will we see more record-breaking job growth, we will see lower prices and faster deliveries as well.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "whitehousegovbriefingroomspeechesremarks20211110remarksbypresidentbidenonthebipartisaninfrastructuredeal2", "title": "Remarks by President Biden on the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal", "source": "https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2021/11/10/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal-2/", "publication_date": "10-11-2021", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4889, "text": "And, Joe, I never had a doubt. Joe had an operation on his shoulder. I just want you to know it was not because of anything we did. He is in great shape. Were it not for you, your wife telling you to endorse me, I would not be standing here. You know, while they could not be here, I especially want to thank Nancy Pelosi, who was instrumental in this law, and Vice President Harris for her incredible work she did. And I am about to sign the Inflation Reduction Act into law, one of the most significant laws in our history. With this law, the American people won, and the special interests lost. We are in a session of-for a while, people doubted whether any of that was going to happen. But we are in a season of substance. as Jim said, a once-in-a-century pandemic, devastating joblessness, clear and present threats to democracy and the rule of law, doubts about America's future itself. Instead, we are delivering results for the American people. And today-today-offers further proof that the soul of America is vibrant, the future of America is bright, and the promise of America is real and just beginning. It is about delivering progress and prosperity to American families. It is about showing the American and-the American people that democracy still works in America-notwithstanding all the talk of its demise-not just for the privileged few, but for all of us. You know, I swore an oath of office to you and to God to faithfully execute the duties of this sacred office. To me, the critical duty-the critical duty-of the Presidency is to defend what is best about America. Defend what is best about America. To pursue justice, to ensure fairness, and to deliver results that create possibilities, possibilities that all of us-all of us-can live a life of consequence and prosperity in a nation that is safe and secure. You know, Presidents should be judged not only by our words, but by our deeds; not by our rhetoric, but by our actions; not by our promise, but by reality. And today is part of an extraordinary story that is being written by this administration and our brave allies in the Congress. This law-this law that I am about to sign-finally delivers on a promise that Washington has made for decades to the American people. I got here as a 29-year-old kid.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationcombatinflationpromotecleanenergyproductionandreduce", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation To Combat Inflation, Promote Clean Energy Production, and Reduce Prescription Drug Costs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-combat-inflation-promote-clean-energy-production-and-reduce", "publication_date": "16-08-2022", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4890, "text": "We were promising to make sure that Medicare would have the power to negotiate lower drug prices back then-back then-prescription drug prices. We are giving Medicare the power to negotiate those prices now, on some drugs. This means seniors are going to pay less for their prescription drugs while we are changing circumstances for people on Medicare by putting a cap-a cap of a maximum of $2,000 a year on their prescription drug costs, no matter what the reason for those prescriptions are. That means if you are on Medicare, you will never have to pay more than $2,000 a year, no matter how many prescriptions you have, whether it is for cancer or any other disease. And you all know it because a lot of you come from families that need this. This is a Godsend to many families and so, so long overdue. The Inflation Reduction Act locks in place lower health care premiums for millions of families who get their coverage under the Affordable Care Act. Last year, a family of four saved on average $2,400 through the American Rescue Plan that I signed into law that the Congress voted in place. In the years ahead, thanks to the Inflation Reduction Act, 13 million people are going to continue to save an average of $800 a year on health insurance. The Inflation Reduction Act invests $369 billion to take the most aggressive action ever-ever, ever, ever-in confronting the climate crisis and strengthening our economic-our energy security. It is going to offer working families thousands of dollars in savings by providing them rebates to buy new and efficient appliances, weatherize their homes, get tax credit for purchasing heat pumps and rooftop solar, electric stoves, ovens, dryers. It gives consumers a tax credit to buy electric vehicles or fuel cell vehicles, new or used. And it gives them a credit-a tax credit of up to $7,500 if those vehicles were made in America. American auto companies, along with American labor, are committing their treasure and their talent-billions of dollars in investment-to make electric vehicles and battery and electric charging stations all across America, made in America. All of it made in America. solar factories in the Midwest and the South, wind farms across the Plains and off our shores, clean hydrogen projects and more, all across America, every part of America.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationcombatinflationpromotecleanenergyproductionandreduce", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation To Combat Inflation, Promote Clean Energy Production, and Reduce Prescription Drug Costs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-combat-inflation-promote-clean-energy-production-and-reduce", "publication_date": "16-08-2022", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4891, "text": "This bill is the biggest step forward on climate ever-ever-and it is going to allow us to boldly take additional steps toward meeting all of my climate goals, the ones we set out when we ran. It includes ensuring that we create clean energy opportunities in frontline and fence-line communities that have been smothered-smothered-by the legacy of pollution, and fight environmental injustice that is been going on for so long. In addition to cutting the deficit by $350 billion last year, in my first year in office, and cutting it $1.7 trillion this year, this fiscal year, we are going to cut the deficit-I point out-by another $300 billion with the Inflation Reduction Act over the next decade. We are cutting deficits to fight inflation by having the wealthy and big corporations finally begin to pay part of their fair share. Big corporations will now pay a minimum 15-percent tax instead of us-5-55 of them got away with paying zero dollars in Federal income tax on $40 billion in profit. No one-let me emphasize: no one-earning less than $400,000 a year will pay a penny more in Federal taxes. Folks, the Inflation Reduction Act does so many things that, for so many years, so many of us have fought to make happen. In this historic moment, Democrats sided with the American people, and every single Republican in the Congress sided with the special interests in this vote-every single one. In fact, the big truck-big drug companies spent nearly $100 million to defeat this bill. Every single Republican in Congress voted against this bill. Every single Republican in Congress voted against lowering prescription drug prices, against lowering health care costs, against a fairer tax system. Every single Republican-every single one-voted against tackling the climate crisis, against lowering our energy costs, against creating good-paying jobs. We can protect the already powerful or show the courage to build a future where everybody has an even shot. That is what I believe in. Today, too often we confuse noise with substance. Too often we confuse setbacks with defeat. Too often we hand the biggest microphone to the critics and the cynics who delight in declaring failure while those committed to making real progress do the hard work of governing. Making progress in this country is a-as big and complicated as ours clearly is not easy. But with unwavering conviction, commitment, and patience, progress does come.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkssigninglegislationcombatinflationpromotecleanenergyproductionandreduce", "title": "Remarks on Signing Legislation To Combat Inflation, Promote Clean Energy Production, and Reduce Prescription Drug Costs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-legislation-combat-inflation-promote-clean-energy-production-and-reduce", "publication_date": "16-08-2022", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4892, "text": "It is nice to meet personally with a group with whom I spend about 10 hours a day. The music that you make not only pleases ENTITY , but I think it extends the beneficial impact of American life throughout the world. As you well know, because you have achieved this high standard of accomplishment, the American sound recording industry has indeed been innovative, dynamic, pleasant, profitable, and- -I was just trying to see which one of those adjectives appealed to you most. But for people who have the talent to both create and produce sound recordings, I want to express my thanks to you as ENTITY. I have got a lot of friends in this room. You have been my friends when the Jimmy Carter performance was on the top of the chart and also when it was on the bottom. And I thank you for it very much. I understand that she is going to be honored tonight with your top award for cultural music performer. In this very room, not too long ago, she not only thrilled a very wonderful audience but she gave me a good dancing lesson, and I enjoyed being with her. And I have just walked over here with Chet Atkins. I have been a fan of his for 20 years or more, and I still listen to his music often. 30 to say that his performance there not only was an inspiration to her personally, and his friendship was very important to her, but the whole audience that heard him play his guitar were electrified, as usual. You are not surprised at that. I might say this is not the first time he has had an interrelationship with the Carter family. He started out with them, or they with him, a long time ago in Nashville, I do want to say that Chet Atkins, who is practically a classical performer-we had Andres Segovia play in this room a couple of Sundays ago-and Chet, also represent the highest kind of personal artistic achievement-Beverly Sills, who has made opera come to life for many people with her personal beauty and her acting talent as well as her lovely voice-represent the gamut of offerings that you have made available to us in this great country and also throughout the world. And I am deeply indebted to you personally and want to express, on behalf of more than 200 million Americans, our thanks for what you mean to us. I believe that you know how close I feel to many of you personally.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsrecordingindustryassociationamericaremarkswhitehousereception", "title": "Jimmy Carter Recording Industry Association of America Remarks at a White House Reception.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/recording-industry-association-america-remarks-white-house-reception", "publication_date": "20-03-1979", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4893, "text": "Laura and I are thrilled to be with you. We have just come from Texas. I spent this morning in San Antonio with some small-business owners. They were rightly concerned about our economy and their ability to get credit. They were wondering about a man they know who believes strongly in free markets and wondering why I promoted a significant piece of legislation to deal with what I believe and others believe is a significant problem, and that is the inability of credit to move as freely as we want. And I told them, if I thought that the problem would be contained only to Wall Street, I would have taken a particular point of view, but I told them I was concerned about them-just like I am concerned about you-and therefore proposed with the Congress a big rescue plan to deal with a big problem. I believe that this plan will work over time. I signed the bill on Friday. It is going to take time for the Treasury Department to put a plan in place that will not waste your money and that will achieve the objective. I believe in the long run this economy is going to be just fine. It is a resilient economy; it is a productive economy with good workers. This is a reminder that we have been through tough times before, and we are going to come through this just fine. And so I am telling my fellow citizens, like the three people I had coffee with there in San Antonio, that this plan is big for a reason. And the plan is going to take time to implement. And I-in the meantime, I told them to keep selling their products and working hard. So I want to thank you for giving me a chance to come and talk about judges, but before I did so I wanted to share with you my morning. And I am sure you hear the same thing; people are just wondering, are these banks going to freeze up? And my answer is, we got a plan to deal with it. And we got a plan to deal with judges too. It is something I have been implementing for 712 years. And so today I want to thank Peter and Chip Miller-happens to be the president of the Cincinnati lawyers chapter of the mighty Federalist Society; Fred Finks, the president of Ashland University; Gene Meyer, the president of the Federalist Society, for giving me a chance to come and talk about the judiciary. I appreciate Ed Meese, former Attorney General, for joining us; Paul Clement.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecincinnatichapterthefederalistsocietycincinnatiohio", "title": "Remarks to the Cincinnati Chapter of the Federalist Society in Cincinnati, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-cincinnati-chapter-the-federalist-society-cincinnati-ohio", "publication_date": "06-10-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4894, "text": "I understand there are members of the Federalist Society who are viewing this program from afar, over the Internet. So we welcome you via the wonders of modern technology. Before Oliver Wendell Holmes took his seat on the Supreme Court, he met a supporter who wished him well in his new duties. The supporter expressed satisfaction that Holmes would be going to Washington to administer justice. I am going there to administer the law. to apply the laws as written and not to advance their own agendas. He knew that it was up to elected officials, not appointed judges, to represent the popular will. Our Founders gave the judicial branch enormous power. It is the only branch of Government whose officers are unelected. That means judges on the Federal bench must exercise their power prudently, cautiously, or some might even say, conservatively. And that means that the selection and confirmation of good judges should be a high priority for every citizen. We have seen the profound impact that judges can have on the daily lives of every citizen. We saw the power of judges in 2002, when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional because it contained the words under God. We saw the power of judges in the Kelo decision, a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court that ruled that governments could seize people's homes for private development. The government decided the seizure was for the greater good. We saw the power of judges in Boumediene v. Bush. There, a 5-4 majority rejected the carefully crafted procedures Congress established for detainees held at Guantanamo Bay in response to a prior Supreme Court decision. And for the first time, the Court awarded foreign terrorists held overseas legal rights previously reserved for American citizens. Recently we have also seen the important role of judges in the rulings of a very different 5-4 majority. We saw this last year, when five members of the Supreme Court upheld a law banning the grisly practice of partial-birth abortion. We saw it again this June, when that same slender majority stood up for the plain meaning of our Constitution and upheld the rights of citizens under the Second Amendment. Judges matter. And that means the selection of good judges should be a priority for all of us. I appreciate that many people listening today and here in this room have worked hard to recruit more Americans to this cause. This work is in all our interests, but the truth of the matter is, the belief in judicial restraint is shared by the vast majority of American citizens.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecincinnatichapterthefederalistsocietycincinnatiohio", "title": "Remarks to the Cincinnati Chapter of the Federalist Society in Cincinnati, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-cincinnati-chapter-the-federalist-society-cincinnati-ohio", "publication_date": "06-10-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4895, "text": "A lot has happened since 2000, yet I can still remember the heated debate over the kinds of judges Presidents should appoint. One group said that judges ought to look at the Constitution as a document that grows with our country and our history. This concept of a living Constitution gives unelected judges wide latitude in creating new laws and policies without accountability to the people. And then there was another side, which I happened to be a part of, that said we needed judges who believed that the Constitution means what it says. When asked if I had any idea in mind of the kinds of judges I would appoint, I clearly remember saying, I do. Judge Scalia recently gave an interview on the TV show 60 Minutes. I do not know if you are supposed to call it a TV show, kind of newsworthy show. He talked about the schoolchildren who visit the Supreme Court and proudly recite what they had been taught about the living Constitution. Judge Scalia noted that he usually had the sad duty of telling the children that the Constitution was never alive. He believed, as I do and many in this hall believe, that the Constitution is not a living document, it is an enduring document, and good judges know the difference. And I made a promise to the American people during the campaign that if I was fortunate enough to be elected, my administration would seek out judicial nominees who follow that philosophy. We would search from a diverse array of candidates and nominate those who met the highest standards of competence. We would not impose any litmus tests concerning particular issues or cases. Instead, we would seek judges who would faithfully interpret the Constitution and not use the courts to invent laws or dictate social policy. And with your support, we have kept that pledge. I have appointed more than one-third of all the judges now sitting on the Federal bench, and these men and women are jurists of the highest caliber, with an abiding belief in the sanctity of our Constitution. The judicial philosophy that I brought to Washington, DC, is demonstrated most clearly by the-some of the judges I have named to the bench-matter of fact, all the judges I have named to the bench. One of them is the son of an Italian American-schoolteachers from Trenton, New Jersey. He graduated from Princeton and Yale Law. He worked in Ronald Reagan's Justice Department, was the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, and served as a distinguished circuit court judge.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecincinnatichapterthefederalistsocietycincinnatiohio", "title": "Remarks to the Cincinnati Chapter of the Federalist Society in Cincinnati, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-cincinnati-chapter-the-federalist-society-cincinnati-ohio", "publication_date": "06-10-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4896, "text": "When I announced his nomination, this good man was hailed by Democrats and Republicans alike for his keen mind and impeccable credentials. And America is well served by the 110th Justice of the United States Supreme Court, Samuel A. Alito. And serving with Justice Alito on the High Court is the former captain of a high school football team who worked summers in the steel mill to help pay for college. He received his bachelor's degree from Harvard in just 3 years and was managing editor of the Harvard Law Review. He later clerked for William H. Rehnquist, the man he would replace as Chief Justice. Judges are like umpires. Umpires do not make the rules, they apply them. Nobody ever went to a ball game to see the umpire. I was very proud to nominate for the Supreme Court a really decent man and a man of good judgment, and that would be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts. Chief Justice Roberts was so obviously well qualified that he received overwhelming support from Members of the Senate, including many Senators generally considered to be well left of center. Unfortunately, the broad, bipartisan, and timely support for Chief Justice Roberts has increasingly become the exception. Over the years, the advice and consent clause of our Constitution has been subjected to serious abuse. Members of the Senate seem to embrace the advice part; it is the consent part that seems to be the problem. Perhaps the best demonstration of this problem is the story of Miguel Estrada. Miguel was one of my first nominees to the courts, and he had an inspiring personal history. He was an immigrant from Latin America who came to the United States with little knowledge of English. He came to live the dream. He studied hard, and he worked hard, and he made his way to Columbia Law School and then Harvard Law School. He prosecuted crimes in the U.S. attorney's office in New York, and he served in the Justice Department under President Bill Clinton. When Miguel Estrada was nominated for a seat on the DC Circuit Court, he received a unanimous well-qualified rating from the American Bar Association. Yet for more than 2 years, he awaited a simple up-or-down vote in the United States Senate; he never got one. For the first time in history, the Senate used a filibuster to block a nominee to the Court of Appeals.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecincinnatichapterthefederalistsocietycincinnatiohio", "title": "Remarks to the Cincinnati Chapter of the Federalist Society in Cincinnati, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-cincinnati-chapter-the-federalist-society-cincinnati-ohio", "publication_date": "06-10-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4897, "text": "This fine American endured years of delay; he had his character unfairly attacked and ultimately withdrew his name from consideration, all because a minority of Senators thought they would not like his rulings on the bench and worried that a ENTITY might one day elevate him to the Supreme Court. He deserved a more dignified treatment from the United States Senate. And the American people deserve better behavior from those they send to represent them in Washington, DC. Many other well-qualified nominees have endured uncertainty and withering attacks on their character simply because they have accepted the call to public service. Those waiting in limbo include Peter Keisler for the DC Circuit Court, Rod Rosenstein for the Fourth Circuit, and dozens of other nominees to district and circuit courts across this country. Some of these nominees waiting for a simple up-or-down vote would fill court vacancies that have been designated judicial emergencies. While these vacancies remain unfulfilled-unfilled, legal disputes are left unresolved, the backlog of cases grows larger, and the rule of law is delayed for millions of Americans. The broken confirmation process has other consequences that Americans never see. Lawyers approached about being nominated will often politely decline because of the uncertainty and delay and ruthlessness that now characterizes the confirmation process. Some worry about the impact a nomination might have on their children, who would hear their dad or mom's name dragged through the political mud. This situation is unacceptable, and it is bad for our country. A judicial nomination should be a moment of pride for nominees and their families, not the beginning of an ugly battle. And the confirmation process should befit the greatest democracy in the world and not look like a bad episode of Survivor. It is clear we need to improve the process for confirming qualified judicial nominees. But there are a few things that the American people expect us to agree on. First, the American people expect nominees and their families to be treated with dignity. Nominees should not have to wait years for the up-or-down vote that the Senate owes them. The American people expect their elected officials to do the job of screening judicial nominees. We should not cede to any one legal association the exclusive power to veto a nominee before he or she can make their case to Members of the Senate. The American people expect the nomination process to be as free of partisanship as possible and for Senators to rise above tricks and gimmicks designed to thwart nominees.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecincinnatichapterthefederalistsocietycincinnatiohio", "title": "Remarks to the Cincinnati Chapter of the Federalist Society in Cincinnati, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-cincinnati-chapter-the-federalist-society-cincinnati-ohio", "publication_date": "06-10-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4898, "text": "As you know, we have just had a meeting where we have addressed a number of issues, which I will be describing. First of all, I would like to welcome once again President-the President of the United States to the Palace of the Moncloa, President Barack Obama. I have thanked him, and I would like to thank him once again for coming before the end of his term. No U.S. President had visited Spain for 15 years last time-the last visit we had was 15 years ago. So I would like to thank him particularly. I did it earlier, and I'd like to do it formally. On behalf of all Spaniards, I would like to thank him for maintaining his visit after the serious events that have taken place in his country. And I have expressed our sympathy and our affection for-to all the American people. I have also explained the-this country's situation at this time, especially from an economic standpoint. The President of the United States knows how the situation has evolved in our economy. He showed interest for our country's economy. When the crisis started in 2007, 2008, and when I was already President of the Government in 2012, we went through very difficult times, and now we see that those times have been overcome in spite of some pending issues. Spain is no longer in a recession. Spain is growing; it is the economy which is growing fastest in the EU. In 2015, we had very positive figures, as you know. And 2016 is also positive for the time being, and we hope things will continue like that. We have overcome imbalances. And the Spanish economy has bright prospects if it continues-we continue to have an economic policy to keep public accounts under control and if we continue to undertake structural reforms. We have also spoken about the elections in Spain, the process that has concluded with the 26 June elections. And I told President Obama that I will do everything possible to form a Government as soon as possible. I think that having had to rerun the elections for the first time in the history of Spain was bad news, but having to have a third election would be very negative, and it would affect the economy and also our credibility in Spain and outside . We have also discussed issues on the European Union. We have talked about Brexit. Spain's position in the negotiations with the U.K. will be constructive. I think that is what is reasonable and what makes sense.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithprimeministermarianorajoybreyspainandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy Brey of Spain and an Exchange With Reporters in Madrid, Spain", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-prime-minister-mariano-rajoy-brey-spain-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "10-07-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4899, "text": "We have also talked about the refugee crisis and the immigration problems and immigration for economic reasons. Obviously, we have a position, and our position is that problems need to be resolved at the point of origin, and we think that they should be resolved soon-the issue of Libya, the issue of Syria-because that will help us greatly. And I have also told President Obama about what I am doing at the EU so the EU gets involved in resolving problems at the point of origin. A young person who has no prospects in his or her country-who has no prospects to live in his country, who cannot have a dignified life-will do anything he can to leave his or her country and find something elsewhere. So problems need to be resolved at the point of origin, and countries need to be helped. And we have to do it together with the European Union. We have also talked about NATO relations. We have talked about Rota, Morn. And I think things have been done properly with the consensus of most of Spanish society. And that is very good for Spain, and it is also very good for the United States and for all of us who defend democracy, freedom, human rights, and security for people. Bilateral relations at this time are wonderful from all perspectives. The United States is the top investor in Spain-foreign investor. Lastly, we have also addressed the situation in Cuba. We are optimistic for the future. And in Colombia, we wish lots of luck to President Santos because he is deploying great efforts. And we have also talked about Venezuela and the need to normalize the situation. So we have addressed issues which are very important for Spain and for the United States. And I would like to conclude by saying, anyone who wants to hear me, that President Obama is a good friend of Spain's and a good friend of Spaniards. He is honest and a person that we have cooperated with very pleasantly. We would be very pleased if he came back to Spain. Well, let me begin by thanking Prime Minister Rajoy and his team and the Spanish people for welcoming us. It has been an extraordinarily gracious and warm welcome, particularly given the tough situation that we have had at home and my need to rearrange my schedule. I was hoping for a longer stay, but I thought that it was important to make sure that, while I was still President, I visited such an important friend and ally.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithprimeministermarianorajoybreyspainandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy Brey of Spain and an Exchange With Reporters in Madrid, Spain", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-prime-minister-mariano-rajoy-brey-spain-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "10-07-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4900, "text": "Because the relationship between us is a bond of friendship; it is an alliance relationship. We have shared economic and security interests. And we have shared values and ideals as two democracies. And the United States, given the size of its Spanish-speaking population or persons with Hispanic heritage, I think, feel a special connection to Spain. We-I thought the Prime Minister summarized our conversations well. We meet here at a difficult, challenging time for Europe and for the world. We have a world that is integrating rapidly and presents enormous opportunities. But if our institutional arrangements do not ensure inclusion, if we do not coordinate effectively on economic and security issues, then it can present great dangers, both in terms of our own people feeling as if they are left-being left behind, as well as people from other countries fleeing bad situations, wanting to come here, or engaging in conflicts that create safe havens for terrorism and present future challenges to us. The good news is, is that the relationship between the United States and Spain is extremely strong and we have been able to work together on a whole range of these issues. I am confident that taking the approach that Spain has suggested on the Brexit negotiations, that that can be managed in a way that does not have an adverse impact on economic growth and opportunity for all of Europe, including the U.K., and will not have an adverse effect on the global economy. I want to congratulate the Prime Minister and the Spanish people for the economic progress that is been made over the last several years. It has been a difficult journey, but many of the changes that were taken are starting to bear fruit. And we still have more work to do, all of us, in improving the prospects for young people who are unemployed and creating more innovation and productivity and growth in our economies and making sure that those economies are broad based. So we discussed how we can do that on both sides of the Atlantic. We just both came from the NATO meeting in Warsaw, and I want to thank the people of Spain and Spanish Armed Forces for the outstanding leadership that they provide on a whole spectrum of NATO initiatives, whether it is heading up one of NATO's new joint task forces, the incredible contribution that is provided by the Rota and Morn facilities and the hospitality shown to our forces, the work that the EU and NATO together are doing in the Mediterranean and the Aegean Sea. On all these issues, Spain has been a critical contributor.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithprimeministermarianorajoybreyspainandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy Brey of Spain and an Exchange With Reporters in Madrid, Spain", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-prime-minister-mariano-rajoy-brey-spain-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "10-07-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4901, "text": "And Spain's men and women in uniform do an outstanding job. As Prime Minister mentioned, we also are working together in some very difficult places, like the Middle East. And the contributions that Spain is making to training Iraqi military and police so that they can consolidate the gains that we are making against ISIL have been critically important, and we appreciate that very much as well. Outside of Europe and the Middle East, we also discussed Latin America, where we have a shared interest, given Spain's roots and strong relationships throughout the Spanish-speaking world and given the fact that what happens in the southern half of our hemisphere has a huge impact on us. We agree that Cuba offers the potential of new prosperity and new freedom if managed correctly, the process of normalization between the United States and Cuba. Our hope is, is that although it will not happen overnight, that it provides new opportunity for the people of Cuba. Peace in Colombia has been elusive for decades. And the fact that President Santos has been able to initiate these changes and forge a tentative, but very important peace deal, I think, promises greater prosperity and security for all the Colombian people. We are jointly concerned about the situation in Venezuela. And our hope is, is that we can find a way in which all sides can come together, stabilize the Government, and stabilize the economy. And we want to be helpful, although, obviously, we cannot dictate the outcomes in Venezuela. Let me just conclude by saying that I definitely will come back as an ex-President, because Spain is beautiful. But-and I want to thank the extraordinary hospitality that is been shown to Michelle and my daughters when they have traveled here. They love it as well. So I think, as your children get older, they do not always want to spend time with you. But if you tell them, we will take you to Spain- -then it is a good way to bribe them and force them to spend time with you. But as President of the United States, in my formal role, I want to express the warmth, the gratitude, the friendship that the American people feel towards the Spanish people. We share values. We share ideals. We believe in democracy. We believe in rule of law. We believe in the dignity of all people. And our work together across the international stage is hugely important. So I hope that I am setting a precedent so that it will not be another 15 years before the next U.S. President comes here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithprimeministermarianorajoybreyspainandexchangewith", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy Brey of Spain and an Exchange With Reporters in Madrid, Spain", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-prime-minister-mariano-rajoy-brey-spain-and-exchange-with", "publication_date": "10-07-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4904, "text": "It is a pleasure to welcome once again President Pea Nieto, as well as his delegation. It is appropriate that our first meeting of the year is with one of our closest allies, neighbors, and friends. Obviously, the bonds between Mexico and the United States are long and deep, not only because of the economic ties and strategic ties between our two countries, but most importantly, because of the people-to-people and cultural ties between our people between our two countries. And this meeting has given us an opportunity to continue to find ways to deepen those bonds. We have discussed something that is uppermost on the minds of most Mexicans and Americans, and that is, creating economic growth and jobs and prosperity. I have congratulated President Pea Nieto on some of his structural reforms that I think will unleash even further the enormous potential of the Mexican economy. And we also have discussed how we can continue to work on issues like clean energy, scientific and educational exchanges, improving cross-border commerce, and continue to strengthen the kinds of mutual investment and trade that creates jobs both in Mexico and the United States. We also discussed the issues of security. And obviously, we have been following here in the United States some of the tragic events surrounding the students whose lives were lost. And President Pea Nieto was able to describe to me the reform program that he is initiated around these issues. Our commitment is to be a friend and supporter of Mexico in its efforts to eliminate the scourge of violence and the drug cartels that are responsible for so much tragedy inside of Mexico. And we want to be a good partner in that process, recognizing that ultimately, it will be up to Mexico and its law enforcement to carry out the key decisions that need to be made. I described to President Pea Nieto our efforts to fix our broken immigration system here in the United States and to strengthen our borders as well. I very much appreciate Mexico's efforts in addressing the unaccompanied children who we saw spiking during the summer. In part because of strong efforts by Mexico, including at its southern border, we have seen those numbers reduced back to much more manageable levels. But one of the things that we both agreed on is our continued need to work with Central American governments so that we can address some of the social and economic challenges there that led to that spike in unaccompanied children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithpresidentenriquepenanietomexico", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With President Enrique Pea Nieto of Mexico", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-president-enrique-pena-nieto-mexico", "publication_date": "06-01-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4913, "text": "In recent weeks, we have been consulting with our allies and friends on the imposition of sanctions against North Korea because of its refusal to permit full inspections of its nuclear program. Today there are reports that the North Koreans, in discussions with President Carter, may have offered new steps to resolve the international community's concerns, saying that International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors and monitoring equipment would be left in place and that North Korea desires to replace its present nuclear program with a new light water reactor technology that is more resistant to nuclear proliferation. If North Korea means by this, also, that it is willing to freeze its nuclear program while talks take place, this could be a promising development. As we review these reports today and in the days ahead, I want to take a moment to explain the extent of our interests and the steps we are taking to protect them. Our Nation clearly has vital interests on the Korean Peninsula. Four decades after the conflict there that claimed hundreds of thousands of South Korean and American lives, South Korea continues to face a threat of a million troops, most of them massed near its border. America's commitment to South Korea, our treaty ally, our trading partner, our fellow democracy, is unshakable. We have some 37,000 American troops in Korea to maintain that commitment, and their safety is of vital importance to us. We also have an interest in preserving the stability of the Asian-Pacific region. And we have a compelling interest in preserving the integrity of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and to prevent the spread of global nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. a nonnuclear Korean Peninsula and a strong international nonproliferation regime. We have made serious and extensive efforts to resolve the North Korean issue through negotiations and have given North Korea many opportunities to return to compliance with its own nonproliferation commitments, made first 9 years ago when North Korea signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and in 1991, when North Korea agreed with South Korea to pursue a non-nuclear Korean Peninsula. We have made clear that these negotiations could continue, but only if North Korea cooperated with the International Atomic Energy Agency and did not deepen its violation of international nuclear safeguards. If today's developments mean that North Korea is genuinely and verifiably prepared to freeze its nuclear program while talks go on-and we hope that is the case-then we would be willing to resume highlevel talks. In the meantime, we will pursue our consultations on sanctions at the United Nations.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksandexchangewithreportersnorthkorea0", "title": "Remarks and an Exchange With Reporters on North Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-and-exchange-with-reporters-north-korea-0", "publication_date": "16-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4914, "text": "It was 30 years ago when President Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act of 1935 and made it the law of the land. At that time he said, and I want to quote his words, we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age. That very simple statement still expresses the purposes of this wonderful program, though the social security system has grown vastly larger since 1935. Today, as we meet here, more than an million Americans find social security benefit checks in their mailboxes each month. This represents more than $1 1/3 billion a month, more than $16 billion a year, providing a much more secure life for our citizens and contributing a great deal of economic soundness to our economic system. Millions of other Americans at their jobs each day are building up future benefits and looking forward to the day when they will qualify. Franklin Roosevelt called the original Social Security Act, and I quote, a cornerstone in a structure which is being built but is by no means complete. That is true today as it was 30 years ago when President Roosevelt stated it. We are working steadily with the enlightened Members of the Senate and the Congress and the Cabinet here with me this morning to build and to strengthen the social security system. Legislation has already passed the House of Representatives--it is now pending in the Senate--which will provide increased monthly benefits to retired persons, to widows, to orphans, and to the disabled. This year, for the first time, health insurance protection for persons of 65 and over will become a part of America's social security system. I believe that most Americans are looking forward with me to the day when these great measures are signed into law. In this country we all believe that every man wants dignity and a decent life, and not a dole. We believe that every man wants a fair chance, and not charity. We believe that older Americans have earned and deserve peace of mind, not pain and panic, when misfortune strikes. The social security system, and the historic legislation that is now pending in the Senate, are our testaments to those beliefs. So, Mr. Kappel, it gives me a great deal of pleasure to meet with you today and to present to you the 20-millionth recipient of social security benefits, your first social security check.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksuponpresentingsocialsecuritycheckthe20millionthbeneficiary", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Remarks Upon Presenting a Social Security Check to the 20-Millionth Beneficiary.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-upon-presenting-social-security-check-the-20-millionth-beneficiary", "publication_date": "05-05-1965", "crawling_date": "08-07-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B. Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4915, "text": "I have accepted this occasion for a frank statement of what I consider the dominant issue before the American people. Its solution is more vital to the preservation of our institutions than any other question before us. That is the enforcement and obedience to the laws of the United States, both Federal and State. I ask only that you weigh this for yourselves, and if my position is right, that you support it not to support me but to support something infinitely more precious--the one force that holds our civilization together law. And I wish to discuss it as law, not as to the merits or demerits of a particular law but all law, Federal and State, for ours is a government of laws made by the people themselves. A surprising number of our people, otherwise of responsibility in the community, have drifted into the extraordinary notion that laws are made for those who choose to obey them. And in addition, our law enforcement machinery is suffering from many infirmities arising out of its technicalities, its circumlocutions, its involved procedures, and too often, I regret, from inefficient and delinquent officials. We are reaping the harvest of these defects. More than 9,000 human beings are lawlessly killed every year in the United States. Less than one-sixth of these slayers are convicted, and but a scandalously small percentage are adequately punished. Twenty times as many people in proportion to population are lawlessly killed in the United States as in Great Britain. In many of our great cities murder can apparently be committed with impunity. At least 50 times as many robberies in proportion to population are committed in the United States as in Great Britain, and 3 times as many burglaries. Even in such premeditated crimes as embezzlement and forgery our record stands no comparison with stable nations. No part of the country, rural or urban, is immune. Life and property are relatively more unsafe than in any other civilized country in the world. In spite of all this we have reason to pride ourselves on our institutions and the high moral instincts of the great majority of our people. No one will assert that such crimes would be committed if we had even a normal respect for law and if the laws of our country were properly enforced.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpresslawenforcementandrespectforthelaw", "title": "Address to the Associated Press: Law Enforcement and Respect for the Law.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-law-enforcement-and-respect-for-the-law", "publication_date": "22-04-1929", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4916, "text": "In order to dispel certain illusions in the public mind on this subject, let me say at once that while violations of law have been increased by inclusion of crimes under the 18th amendment and by the vast sums that are poured into the hands of the criminal classes by the patronage of illicit liquor by otherwise responsible citizens, yet this is but one segment of our problem. I have purposely cited the extent of murder, burglary, robbery, forgery, and embezzlement, for but a small percentage of these can be attributed to the 18th amendment. In fact, of the total number of convictions for felony last year, less than 8 percent came from that source. It is, therefore, but a sector of the invasion of lawlessness. What we are facing today is something far larger and more fundamental-the possibility that respect for law as law is fading from the sensibilities of our people. Whatever the value of any law may be, the enforcement of that law written in plain terms upon our statute books is not, in my mind, a debatable question. Law should be observed and must be enforced until it is repealed by the proper processes of our democracy. The duty to enforce the laws rests upon every public official and the duty to obey it rests upon every citizen. No individual has the right to determine what law shall be obeyed and what law shall not be enforced. If a law is wrong, its rigid enforcement is the surest guaranty of its repeal. If it is right, its enforcement is the quickest method of compelling respect for it. I have seen statements published within a few days encouraging citizens to defy a law because that particular journal did not approve of the law itself. I leave comment on such an attitude to any citizen with a sense of responsibility to his country. There is no citizen who would approve of the President of the United States assuming any other attitude. It may be said by some that the larger responsibility for the enforcement of laws against crime rests with State and local authorities and it does not concern the Federal Government. But it does concern the President of the United States, both as a citizen and as the one upon whom rests the primary responsibility of leadership for the establishment of standards of law enforcement in this country. Respect for law and obedience to law does not distinguish between Federal and State laws--it is a common conscience.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpresslawenforcementandrespectforthelaw", "title": "Address to the Associated Press: Law Enforcement and Respect for the Law.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-law-enforcement-and-respect-for-the-law", "publication_date": "22-04-1929", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4917, "text": "After all, the processes of criminal-law enforcement are simply methods of instilling respect and fear into the minds of those who have not the intelligence and moral instinct to obey the law as a matter of conscience. The real problem is to awaken this consciousness, this moral sense, and if necessary to segregate such degenerate minds where they can do no future harm. to investigate our existing agencies of enforcement and to reorganize our system of enforcement in such manner as to eliminate its weaknesses. It is the purpose of the Federal administration systematically to strengthen its law enforcement agencies week by week, month by month, year by year, not by dramatic displays and violent attacks in order to make headlines, not by violating the law itself through misuse of the law in its enforcement, but by steady pressure, steady weeding out of all incapable and negligent officials no matter what their status; by encouragement, promotion, and recognition for those who do their duty; and by the most rigid scrutiny of the records and attitudes of all persons suggested for appointment to official posts in our entire law enforcement machinery. That is administration for which my colleagues and I are fully responsible so far as the human material which can be assembled for the task will permit. Furthermore, I wish to determine and, as far as possible, remove the scores of inherent defects in our present system that defeat the most devoted officials. Every student of our law enforcement mechanism knows full well that it is in need of vigorous reorganization; that its procedure unduly favors the criminal; that our judiciary needs to be strengthened; that the method of assembling our juries needs revision; that justice must be more swift and sure. In our desire to be merciful the pendulum has swung in favor of the prisoner and far away from the protection of society. The sympathetic mind of the American people in its overconcern about those who are in difficulties has swung too far from the family of the murdered to the family of the murderer. With a view to enlisting public understanding, public support, accurate determination of the facts, and constructive conclusions, I have proposed to establish a national commission to study and report upon the whole of our problems involved in criminal-law enforcement. That proposal has met with gratifying support, and I am sure it will have the cooperation of the bar associations and crime commissions in our various States in the widespread effort now being made by them. I do not propose to be hasty in the selection of this commission.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpresslawenforcementandrespectforthelaw", "title": "Address to the Associated Press: Law Enforcement and Respect for the Law.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-law-enforcement-and-respect-for-the-law", "publication_date": "22-04-1929", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4918, "text": "I want time and advice, in order that I may select high-minded men, impartial in their judgment, skilled in the science of the law and our judicial system, clear in their conception of our institutions. Such a commission can perform the greatest of service to our generation. This is the basic question of the understanding, the ideals, the relationship of the individual citizen to the law itself. It is in this field that the press plays a dominant part. It is almost final in its potency to arouse the interest and consciousness of our people. It can destroy their finer sensibilities or it can invigorate them. I am well aware that the great majority of our important journals day by day give support to these high ideals. I wonder, sometimes, however, if perhaps a little more support to our laws could not be given in one direction. If, instead of the glamor of romance and heroism which our American imaginative minds too frequently throw around those who break the law, we would invest with a little romance and heroism those thousands of our officers who are endeavoring to enforce the law, it would itself decrease crime. Praise and respect for those who properly enforce the laws and daily condemnation of those who defy the laws would help. Perhaps a little better proportioned balance of news concerning those criminals who are convicted and punished would serve to instill the fear of the law. I need not repeat that absolute freedom of the press to discuss public questions is a foundation stone of American liberty. I put the question, however, to every individual conscience, whether flippancy is a useful or even legitimate device in such discussions. Its effect is as misleading and as distorting of public conscience as deliberate misrepresentation. Not clarification, but confusion of issues arises from it. Our people for many years have been intensely absorbed in business, in the astonishing upbuilding of a great country, and we have attempted to specialize in our occupations, to strive to achieve in our own specialities and to respect competency of others in theirs. Unconsciously, we have carried this psychology into our state of mind toward government. We tend to regard the making of laws and their administration as a function of a group of specialists in government whom we hired for this purpose and whom we call public servants. After hiring them it is our purpose casually to review their actions, to accept those which we approved, and to reject the rest.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpresslawenforcementandrespectforthelaw", "title": "Address to the Associated Press: Law Enforcement and Respect for the Law.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-law-enforcement-and-respect-for-the-law", "publication_date": "22-04-1929", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4919, "text": "This attitude of mind is destructive government is predicated upon the fact will take his part in the creation of law, of self-government, for self-government is predicated on the fact that every responsible citizen will take his part in the creation of law, obedience to law, and the selection of officials and methods for its enforcement. Finally, I wish to again reiterate that the problem of law enforcement is not alone a function or business of government. If law can be upheld only by enforcement officers, then our scheme of government is at an end. Every citizen has a personal duty in it--the duty to order his own actions, to so weigh the effect of his example, that his conduct shall be a positive force in his community with respect to the law. I have no criticism to make of the American press. I greatly admire its independence and its courage. I sometimes feel that it could give more emphasis to one phase or another of our national problem, but I realize the difficulties under which it operates. I am wondering whether the time has not come, however, to realize that we are confronted with a national necessity of the first degree, that we are not suffering from an ephemeral crime wave but from a subsidence of our foundations. Possibly the time is at hand for the press to systematically demand and support the reorganization of our law enforcement machinery--Federal, State, and local--so that crime may be reduced, and on the other hand to demand that our citizens shall awake to the fundamental consciousness of democracy which is that the laws are theirs and that every responsible member of a democracy has the primary duty to obey the law. It is unnecessary for me to argue the fact that the very essence of freedom is obedience to law; that liberty itself has but one foundation, and that is in the law. Let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father, and to tear the character of his own and his children's liberty. Let reverence for the laws be breathed by every American mother to the lisping babe that prattles on her lap. Let it be taught in the schools, in seminaries, in colleges. Let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in the legislative halls, and enforced in courts of justice.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresstheassociatedpresslawenforcementandrespectforthelaw", "title": "Address to the Associated Press: Law Enforcement and Respect for the Law.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-the-associated-press-law-enforcement-and-respect-for-the-law", "publication_date": "22-04-1929", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Herbert Hoover"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4920, "text": "One of the great stories of this decade, a story that goes too often unremarked, involves the movement toward democracy in this, our own Western Hemisphere. Less than 50 percent of the people of Latin America lived in democracies when our administration took office. Today that percentage is more than 90. Latin America's extraordinary effort to create a democratic order is the most stunning and moving political fact of recent years. Yet in the face of this broad and sweeping movement toward human freedom, one country has gone in the opposite direction, away from freedom and toward oppression. Since the Communist Sandinista regime of Nicaragua took power in 1979, its political opposition has been subjected to constant harassment. Freedom of the press was replaced by state censorship. Communist control of the economy has produced hyperinflation and a standard of living that is now nothing short of desperate. Some 250,000 Nicaraguans, over 10 percent of the entire population, have fled the country. For the Communist regime has placed Nicaragua within the Soviet orbit, embarked upon a massive military buildup, and already begun to send arms and guerrillas into neighboring countries. First, El Salvador, then Guatemala, Honduras, Costa Rica-the Communist Sandinistas have sought to extend violence throughout all of Central America. It could be only a matter of time before serious unrest and instability reached Mexico. Were that to happen, the decade of the nineties could open with hundreds of thousands of refugees streaming toward our own southern borders. Yet people in Central America have themselves moved to prevent this threat from becoming a reality. First among these are the Nicaraguan freedom fighters. These brave men and women have given up ordinary life to endure the hardship of living in the countryside-virtually always on the move-to fight for freedom in their own country. There was a time when the freedom fighters, with few supplies, little medical support, and dwindling ammunition, were forced to retreat. But in recent months, in large measure because we in the United States have stood with them, the freedom fighters have begun to win major victories, placing intense pressure upon the Communist Sandinista regime to reform. Outside Communist Nicaragua, the democratic leaders of neighboring Central American countries have worked together to develop a peace plan for the region. Among its provisions, the peace plan calls for all the countries of Central America, including Nicaragua, to respect civil liberties, including freedom of the press and freedom to hold elections.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationaidthenicaraguandemocraticresistance0", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on Aid to the Nicaraguan Democratic Resistance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-aid-the-nicaraguan-democratic-resistance-0", "publication_date": "30-01-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4921, "text": "This is a very special time of year for us, a time for family reunions and for celebrating together the blessings of God and the promises He has given us. From Thanksgiving to Hanukkah, which our Jewish community is now celebrating, to Christmas in 3 weeks' time, this is a season of hope and of love. Certainly one of the greatest blessings for people everywhere is the family itself. The American Family Institute recently dedicated its book of essays, The Family in the Modern World, to Maria Victoria Walesa, daughter of Danuta and Lech Walesa, to whose christening came 7,000 Poles expressing their belief that the family remains the foundation of freedom. And, of course, they are right. It is in the family where we learn to think for ourselves, care for others, and acquire the values of self-reliance, integrity, responsibility, and compassion. Families stand at the center of society, so building our future must begin by preserving family values. namely, that bigger government is the greatest force for fairness and progress. But this so-called solution has given most of us a bad case of financial indigestion. How can families survive when big government's powers to tax, inflate, and regulate absorb their wealth, usurp their rights, and crush their spirit? It now takes $85,000 to raise a child to age 18, and family incomes have not kept up. During the 1970's real wages actually declined over 2 percent. In 1948 the tax on the average two-child family was just $9. As economic and social pressures have increased, the bonds that bind families together have come under strain. For example, three times as many families are headed by single parents today as in 1960. Many single parents make heroic sacrifices and deserve all our support. But there is no question that many well-intentioned Great Society-type programs contributed to family breakups, welfare dependency, and a large increase in births out of wedlock. In the 1970's the number of single mothers rose from 8 to 13 percent among whites and from 31 to a tragic 47 percent among blacks. Too often their children grow up poor, malnourished, and lacking in motivation. It is a path to social and health problems, low school performance, unemployment, and delinquency. If we strengthen families, we will help reduce poverty and the whole range of other social problems.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationtheamericanfamily", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on the American Family", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-the-american-family", "publication_date": "03-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4922, "text": "We can begin by reducing the economic burdens of inflation and taxes, and we are doing this. Since 1980 inflation has been chopped by three-fourths. Taxes have been cut for every family that earns a living, and we have increased the tax credit for child care. Yesterday we learned that our growing economy reduced unemployment to 8.2 percent last month. The payroll employment figure went up by 370,000 jobs. At the same time, new policies are helping our neediest families move from dependence to independence. Our new job training law will train over a million needy and unemployed Americans each year for productive jobs. ENTITY should add that our enterprise zones proposal would stimulate new businesses, bringing jobs and hope to some of the most destitute areas of the country. The Senate has adopted this proposal. But after 2 years of delay, the House Democratic leadership only recently agreed to hold its first hearing on the legislation. And come January, we expect action. We are moving forward on many other fronts. We have made prevention of drug abuse among youth a top priority. We will soon announce a national missing children's center to help find and rescue children who've been abducted and exploited. We are working with States and local communities to increase the adoption of special-needs children. More children with permanent homes mean fewer children with permanent problems. We are also stiffening the enforcement of child support from absent parents. And we are trying hard to improve education through more discipline, a return to the basics, and through reforms like tuition tax credits to help hard-working parents. In coming months, we will propose new ways to help families stay together, remain independent, and cope with the pressures of modern life. A cornerstone of our efforts must be assisting families to support themselves. As Franklin Roosevelt said almost 50 years ago, Self-help and self-control are the essence of the American tradition. In Washington everyone looks out for special interest groups. And with your help, we will continue looking out for their interests. Till next week, thanks for listening, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioaddressthenationtheamericanfamily", "title": "Radio Address to the Nation on the American Family", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-address-the-nation-the-american-family", "publication_date": "03-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4937, "text": "rebuilding our economy so that, once again, hard work pays off, responsibility is rewarded, and anyone, regardless of who they are or where they come from, can make it if they try. Now, to get there, the most important thing we need to do is to get more Americans back to work. And over the past 3 years, we have made steady progress. We just learned that our economy added 212,000 private sector jobs in December. After losing more than 8 million jobs in the recession, we have added more than 3 million private sector jobs over the past 22 months. And we are starting 2012 with manufacturing on the rise and the American auto industry on the mend. We are heading in the right direction, and we are not going to let up. On Wednesday, the White House will host a forum called Insourcing American Jobs. We will hear from business leaders who are bringing jobs back home and see how we can help other businesses follow their lead. Because this is a make-or-break moment for the middle class and all those working to get there. We have got to keep at it. We have got to keep creating jobs. And we have got to keep rebuilding our economy so that everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same rules. We cannot go back to the days when the financial system was stacking the deck against ordinary Americans. To me, that is not an option, not after all we have been through. That is why I appointed Richard Cordray as our Nation's new consumer watchdog this week. to look out for you. Every day, his sole mission is to protect consumers from potential abuses by the financial industry and to make sure that you have got all the transparent information you need to make the important financial decisions in your lives. I nominated Richard for this job last summer. And yet Republicans in the Senate kept blocking his confirmation, not because they objected to him, but because they wanted to weaken his agency. That made no sense. Every day we waited was a day you and consumers all across the country were at greater financial risk. So this year, I am going to keep doing whatever it takes to move this economy forward and to make sure that middle class families regain the security they have lost over the past decade. That is my New Year's resolution to all of you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsweeklyaddress8", "title": "Barack Obama The President's Weekly Address", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-weekly-address-8", "publication_date": "07-01-2012", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4948, "text": "It is a great honor to be back in Ohio. Today I come bringing a special visitor, un amigo de mio y tambien un amigo de los Estados Unidos. It is an honor to bring a good friend of mine and a friend of our country, President Vicente Fox, to Ohio. I have the honor of introducing him. But before I do so, I wanted to introduce him to Ohio. It is a State full of decent and compassionate and hard-working people-Toledo. Not all the wisdom exists in Washington, DC. And it was my honor that the President had accepted not only the invitation for the first state dinner I had as your President but agreed to travel with me to the heartland. So I want to thank you all for a warm welcome. I want to thank so very much the leadership of the University of Toledo and the students who are here, the faculty that have made this event possible. It is a thrill to be traveling with members of the United States congressional delegation, some of whom do what I tell them to do some of whom are a little hard to persuade, but all of whom love America and all of whom bring honor to the office they hold. I am very proud to be traveling with one of my Cabinet Secretaries, a man who is doing a fabulous job at HUD. When he was a young boy, his mother and daddy put him on a boat-I guess it was an airplane-to come to America from Cuba. They were not ever sure whether they would see him again. They were sure, however, they were sending him to a place that loved freedom, a place where you can be anything you want to be in America. Today, this good man is in the Cabinet. It shows what a wonderful country we have and shows what a great man Mel Martinez is. We have got distinguished members from the Mexican delegation traveling with us. We have got Ambassadors traveling with us. And we have even got the Treasurer of the United States traveling with us. My friend Rosario Marin is now the Treasurer of this great country. We just had a really good visit in Washington. It was a commitment to friendship. Good foreign policy says you want your neighborhood to be peaceful and prosperous; a good foreign policy starts with being friends with your neighbors. We are friends with our neighbors to the North, and we are very good friends with our neighbors to the South, the Mexicanos.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversitytoledotoledo", "title": "Remarks at the University of Toledo in Toledo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-toledo-toledo", "publication_date": "06-09-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4949, "text": "Friends hold each other with respect- treat each other with respect and hold each other in high esteem. And the speaker I am going to introduce is a man I hold in high esteem. Friends are willing to have honest dialog. And we have had a series of honest dialogs over the last 24 hours, had a frank discussion, but this is not our first discussion. We have been discussing common opportunities and common problems for months. And as a result, our relationship has never been better and never been stronger. I know there are some in this world and our country who want to build walls between Mexico and the United States. Fearful people build walls; confident people tear them down. And I am confident that a strong relationship-and I am confident that good neighbors and a strong relationship is in our Nation's best interests. I have seen it firsthand. Trade between Mexico and the United States has grown to a quarter of a trillion dollars. That means jobs in the United States, and as importantly, that means jobs in Mexico. I cannot tell you how hopeful trade is and how important it is. It is not only important for job-seeking Americans; it is incredibly important for Mexico to grow and to prosper, to develop a middle class for people in Mexico to be able to find work close to home. Oh, I know there is a lot of talk about Mexican laborers coming to the United States. Family values do not stop at the Rio Bravo. There are mothers and dads in Mexico who love their children just as much as mothers and dads in America do. And if there are a mother or dad who cannot find work, worried about food on the table, they are going to come and find work in America. And what we want to do is to have a trading relationship that encourages job creation in America but job creation in Mexico as well. We want Mexico to grow a middle class so the citizens of Mexico can find work to feed their families just like the citizens of America can find work to feed their families. We are talking about migration issues. It is a complex subject, but one that this country of ours must confront and have an open dialog about. And we have made good progress on that important issue. I want to tell you, President Fox is doing everything in his power to fight crime and drugs, and we are cooperating with him. But I also want to remind my fellow Americans, it is important to fight the supply of drugs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversitytoledotoledo", "title": "Remarks at the University of Toledo in Toledo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-toledo-toledo", "publication_date": "06-09-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4950, "text": "But we have an obligation inside this country to fight to reduce the demand for drugs as well. Do not use drugs; make the right choices in life. We are working hard on environmental issues on our border. But our fellow citizens must understand that there is more than just economics that is important or crime-fighting that is important in our relationship with Mexico. We share values with Mexico. They are common values, values that unite people, whether they live in the United States or whether they live in Mexico. Faith, the strong value of faith exists in our country. As a matter of fact, I think it is the strength of America in many ways, and it exists in Mexico as well. The love of family-it is incredibly important for the future of our country. It is a strong value in the Mexican culture. America is known for our ability to work hard. Think about the Mexican worker who walks 500 miles across a desert to find work. We share that very important value of people willing to roll up their sleeves and work hard. No, we have got incredibly important relationship. It starts with leaders being willing to have open dialog. We have got something in common, by the way, that you probably have not thought about. President Fox's grandfather was raised in Cincinnati, Ohio. My grandfather was raised in Columbus, Ohio. I guess you could kind of say we are Ohioans, except it is kind of hard to tell by our accents. Not only do we share background; we share love for our respective countries. The first trip I took to foreign soil was to Guanajuato, Mexico, to visit President Fox on his ranch. By the way, I kind of like going to mine on occasion, too. And this is a man deeply committed to his country. He loves the people of Mexico. And I hope by now there is no question that I love the people of America as well. President Fox and I share the desire to do what we think is right for our countries. I think both of us are tired of the policy driven by polls and focus groups. I do not need a poll and focus group to tell me what to think and where to go, and neither does he. We both are doing in office what we said we would do. I told the people, by the way, that if they gave me the chance to be the President, the first thing I would do is remember whose taxpayers' money we are talking about when we are talking about budgets.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkstheuniversitytoledotoledo", "title": "Remarks at the University of Toledo in Toledo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-university-toledo-toledo", "publication_date": "06-09-2001", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4961, "text": "I have gladly accepted the invitation to say a few words on this program launching the annual Roll Call of the American Red Cross. I join in this appeal because ENTITY of the United States also is ENTITY of the American Red Cross. Moreover, I believe with heart and soul that all of us Americans should do everything we can to support an organization of such vital importance to our people. Knowledge of our individual responsibility toward the national and international services of the Red Cross is always essential to the success of these ministrations of mercy. We should bear in mind that, during the Roll Call, the Red Cross does not ask us to make a mere donation. It invites us to join and to take our place in the legion of men and women of good will who make the Red Cross one of our strongest shields against forces of destruction-whether activated by nature or man. We must realize that regardless of race, creed, or color, the Red Cross deeply matters to us, as individuals, in a world darkened by conflict and misery. The Red Cross stands upon a remarkable record of service to humanity. Founded in 1881 and chartered by Congress in 1905 as our national voluntary relief agency, the American Red Cross has played a conspicuous part in relieving the distress which has followed every national disaster. The growth of its services to the nation has been in direct proportion to the growing confidence of the American people in its ability to respond swiftly and competently to emergency situations. The Red Cross this year is being called upon to meet an unusual number of appeals for aid from every quarter. Because our Red Cross is a member of the large family of Red Cross societies which, in time of war, join with the neutral International Red Cross in Geneva in the alleviation of suffering caused by war, the conflict in Europe has brought added responsibilities to our national organization. We of this fortunate country are already doing much, in the name of humanity, on behalf of the unfortunate victims of this unhappy conflict. I am sure you would not want it otherwise, and when the time comes for the Red Cross to ask your help to continue this work I am confident of your sympathetic response. Equally important, however, is the year-in and year-out battle of our Red Cross to preserve life and health here at home. The psychology of hate and destruction, so rampant today, makes it too easy to forget that while war is not a human necessity, neither are the preventable deaths which harm a nation at peace.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsradioappealfortheredcross", "title": "Radio Appeal for the Red Cross.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/radio-appeal-for-the-red-cross", "publication_date": "11-11-1939", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4972, "text": "Well, I just want to welcome the Amir of Qatar and thank him and the people of his country for the friendship that they have shown towards the United States. Qatar has been a center of innovation. We have seen enormous progress within the country on everything ranging from education to health care. And I think His Highness has shown extraordinary leadership over the last many years in helping to guide his country. Obviously, Qatar is also an important country in the region and has an influence that extends beyond its relatively small population. And so we had an opportunity to discuss a whole range of issues that directly relate to U.S. interests and U.S. security, but more importantly, the security of the entire world. We had a conversation about the situation in Syria. And obviously, we have been cooperating closely with Qatar and other countries in seeking to bring about an end to the slaughter that is taking place there-the removal of President Assad, who has shown himself to have no regard for his own people-and to strengthen an opposition that can bring about a democratic Syria that represents all people and respects their rights regardless of their ethnicity or their religious affiliations And I am very pleased that we are going to be continuing to work in the coming months to try to further support the Syrian opposition, and we will be closely coordinating our strategies to bring about a more peaceful resolution to the Syrian crisis. We also had an opportunity to discuss the situation in Egypt, where we both very much want to see success on the part of Egyptian democracy. And both of our countries are committed to trying to encourage not only progress in this new democracy, but also economic progress that can translate into actual prosperity for the people there. a secure Israel side-by-side with a sovereign Palestinian state. And we exchanged ideas about how we can advance those negotiations, and I have shared the importance of providing support to President Abbas and the Palestinian Authority so that they can be in position to have fruitful negotiations with the Israelis that can bring about, in a timely fashion, a two-state solution. And I had an opportunity to thank the Amir for the strong support that his country has provided to our efforts in Afghanistan, including the efforts that he has personally been involved with in getting a dialogue between the Afghan Government and the Taliban that might potentially result in some sort of political reconciliation. These are all very difficult issues, and neither of us are under any illusions that they will be solved overnight.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksfollowingmeetingwithamirhamadbinkhalifaalthaniqatar0", "title": "Remarks Following a Meeting With Amir Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani of Qatar", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-following-meeting-with-amir-hamad-bin-khalifa-al-thani-qatar-0", "publication_date": "23-04-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4990, "text": "I am really glad to see you. I bring you greetings from Hillary and our all-grown-up daughter, who are otherwise occupied in New York today. And she is doing very well, and I am proud of her. I think she is going to win on Tuesday. I want to talk today about today and tomorrow. I do want to thank people that are up here on this stage for their friendship. I thank Mark Pryor for taking on this campaign and for getting involved in public life in our State, carrying on his great family tradition while his daddy becomes an ivy league egghead. You notice, I was the only one who was dumb enough to do that before I ran for office; David waited until afterward. I want to thank Vic Snyder, who has been a great friend and supporter of mine in Congress and a great Representative for this district. It is been my honor to vote for him every time he is been on the ballot. I want to thank James Lee Witt and Rodney Slater. They have represented our State so well in the Cabinet. They have represented our country. They have done superb jobs, and I am very proud of them. We have a few other Arkansans in the crowd. I cannot see everybody because the lights are real bright. But I saw Ken Smith and Jim Bob Baker out there. They have also done very well by our administration and there may be others. But I am really-and Janis Kearney, I think, is here, who-she keeps up with what I do every day, and some day when I want to write my memoirs, I will be able to read what Janis said I did. And so when you read the book, it may be what she said instead of me, because I cannot remember anything anymore. But I want to thank all the people who are here. I want to thank Carroll Willis who has been down here working and who has been at the Democratic Party all these years and has done such a great job. And I want to thank my buddy Dale Bumpers. I finally got over being mad at him for leaving the Senate. You know, Dale and Dave and I could not quite calibrate our respective schedules and biological clocks so we could go out together. But I sort of envision a remake of the Three Amigos movie, where we just get on horses and ride out of Washington and thank hallelujah we survived it all. Look, I want to talk about this election a little bit.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4991, "text": "The people in this room could carry this State for Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, if you want to bad enough. And I just want to say a few things. I appreciate what is been said, but our public life is always about tomorrow. And yet, yesterday is an indicator of tomorrow. As near as I can see, the case that the other guys are making is, Well, the economy is better; crime is down; welfare is down; the environment is better; education is improving; more people than ever are going on to college; we have got a decline in the number of people without health insurance for the first time in 12 years. So what we need to do is bag all those policies and do something entirely different. And among other things, now that we have got this surplus, I am going to give it all back to you right now, and then some. And I do not think people understand that. Because, as Vic would say, they run these ads on prescription drugs, and I will say more about that and the Patients' Bill of Rights and all that. Because they know that they have got a lot at stake in this election. They know there are big differences, and they know that the voters understand what the differences are and what the consequences are, that Al Gore and Joe Lieberman will be elected and the Democrats will win the House and the Senate. And it is a lot easier to muddy things up than it is to clarify them. Plus which, I think a lot of people kind of have forgotten what it was like 8 years ago. And sometimes it is harder to make a good decision in good times than it is in bad times. There are younger voters that will be voting in this Presidential election that do not even remember what it was like 8 years ago; even if they tried to think about it, they would have no memory of it. So here is what I would like you to say to people for the next 3 days. The people in this room can carry this State for Al Gore if you want to bad enough. And this State could literally determine the outcome of the election. There are about 15 to 20 States that are literally within 3 points one way or the other. And no one knows what is going to happen, but what will happen is, the people that want it bad enough will win.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4992, "text": "Now, you know they want it bad enough because they do not like what we have done on issues where the majority of the people agree with us, and you know that they will show up because they have been out a long time. Here is what I would like you to say to people. First of all, the Republicans believe that former President Reagan is the source of all wisdom. He said you should decide whether to continue the party in office based on whether you are better off today than you were 8 years ago. So, by the Reagan test, Al Gore wins. But the real issue is, do you want to continue this prosperity and extend it to people and places that have been left behind? And the previous speakers talked about it a little bit, but I want you to think about it. People ask me all the time, they come up to me, and every time I go someplace in the country, they say, Oh, Mr. President, you have had such a nice, good 8 years, and you have had such a good economy; what great, new idea that you and Bob Rubin and Lloyd Bentsen bring to economic policy in Washington? And I always answer with one word, Arithmetic. You know, and I'd normally tell them I was from Arkansas and I had to be Governor 12 years, and I always found arithmetic was good-I did not need algebra, calculus, trigonometry-arithmetic. And what getting rid of the deficit did was to drive interest rates down, make it cheaper for people to borrow in the private sector. It ballooned the stock market, increased investment in business. It created over 22 million new jobs. And we did it in a way-this is the most important thing to me-it was good for everybody. Poverty went down; average income went above $40,000 for the first time in the history of the country. But it starts with arithmetic. Now, you can argue that Governor Bush and Al Gore have different tax plans and which one is better. Most people in Arkansas would be better off under the Gore plan in the short run, because it is more tilted toward middle class working people. Let us just look at the cost. And you can certainly argue about the Social Security plan, about whether it is good or bad to privatize Social Security. Let us forget about that for just a minute. That sounds like a lot of money-just say 2.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4993, "text": "I do not think it will be that big, by the way, because this Congress put a lot of pork-barrel spending in to get themselves reelected, which I do not think they will be successful in doing, and I certainly hope not. Now, the Republican tax cut costs 1.3, but because you are not paying down the debt as much, it has extra interest costs. Now, they have admitted that their privatization of Social Security plan costs a trillion dollars. And as the Vice President said, you cannot spend the same money twice; you cannot give the same money to young people to put in the stock market and then give it to those of us who are over 50, when our Social Security checks are due. So that is another trillion that has to come out of the surplus. And then they promise to spend some money, about half a trillion dollars-that is .5. 1.6 plus 1 plus .5 is 3.1, and 3.1 is bigger than 2. Now, I am telling you, this is not rocket science. You get by all the romance and all the rhetoric, somebody up there has got to have arithmetic. We brought arithmetic back to Washington. The Republicans forgot about arithmetic for 12 years. They quadrupled the debt, and they want to go right back to the same economic policy they had before. And it is higher interest rates, which means trouble for all of you. Do you know, the average-the first-people in America who are paying on a $100,000 mortgage today are saving $2,000 every single year in lower interest rates because we got rid of the deficit. It is estimated that Al Gore's plan will keep interest rates one percent lower for a decade. Because he pays off the debt. Three hundred and ninety billion dollars in lower home mortgages, $30 billion in lower car payments, $15 billion in lower college loan payments, lower credit card payments; lower business loans, which means more businesses, more jobs, higher income and a bigger stock market. That is how the rich get richer, and the rest of us do, too. Now, I am telling you, you cannot go back to deficits without having higher interest rates and hurting ordinary people and weakening the overall economy. So you have just got to tell people this. they say, it is your money-which of course it is, the whole deal is yours. That is what the election is about.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4994, "text": "So things are going along so well, they say, let us just take it all now. And here is the Vice President, that they criticize for telling people what they want to hear, and he said, Uh-uh, we are going to first pay down the debt. Then we are going to take what is left, and we are going to invest in education, health care, and the environment and give the American people a tax cut we can afford, for child care, long-term care, the cost of college tuition, and retirement savings. That is what we are going to do. But why are intelligent and very wealthy people like Bob Rubin still for Al Gore? Because they know they are better off with lower interest rates and working people having jobs and consuming and keeping this economy going. Now, you can explain that to people. Anybody can understand that. You cannot have a tax cut this big, a Social Security privatization program this big, and promise to spend this kind of money when there is not that much money. And the Gore/Lieberman plan is to pay down the debt, invest in the education of our children, in health care, in the environment, in national security, the things we have to have, and give the people a tax cut we can afford. And you have just got to ask people, Do you remember where we were 8 years ago? Do you want to build on this prosperity and extend it to others, or do you want to reverse it and go back to the previous economic program? It is not like we do not have a test here. We tried it our way for 8 years; before that, we tried it their way for 12 years. You can say that, and people will understand what you are saying. And I think it is worth pointing out that there were specific, serious policies of this administration that contributed to that. The crime rate is at a 26-year low. Because we have got 100,000 police on the street; we are putting another 50,000 on the street. The Brady bill kept guns out of a half million felons and stalkers, and no matter what our friends at the NRA say, there has not been a single hunter miss a day in the deer woods or a single sport shooter miss an event in Arkansas, not one, not one single day. It is just all a bunch of hogwash. The air is cleaner, the water is cleaner, 43 million more Americans breathing clean air.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4995, "text": "We have safer drinking water, safer food, 90 percent of our kids immunized for the first time. And we have set aside more land for permanent preservation than any administration since Theodore Roosevelt almost 100 years ago. I remember their guy was saying all the time, you know, You had 8 years; you did not do anything on health care. When we took office, Al and I, Medicare was supposed to go broke last year-broke, out of money, kaput, busted. It is now good for 25 more years. And we have added preventive care for prostate cancer and for breast cancer. We have revolutionized care for diabetes. The American Diabetes Association said what we did was the most important thing since the development of insulin. We have got the number of people without health insurance going down for the first time in 12 years, because of the Children's Health Insurance Program we insisted be in the Balanced Budget Act. Now, there is a difference here, and I will come to that. What does Gore say? Pass a real Patients' Bill of Rights; pass a Medicare prescription drug program that all our seniors can afford to buy into. Give all our kids health insurance and insure as many of the working parents as we can afford to insure. So every now and then-usually the facts have no impact on them. I almost admire that about them. Never mind the facts, they know what their line is, and they just say it. But they have kind of quit saying that. The dropout rate is down; the high school graduation is up; the college-going rate is at an all-time high, thanks in part to the biggest expansion in college aid in 50 years. The math, the reading, and the science scores are up; there has been a 300 percent increase in the last 3 years in African-American and Hispanic kids taking advanced placement tests. We have 800,000 kids now in after-school programs that were not there before we took office. We have got, thanks to the leadership of our Education Secretary, Dick Riley, all but one State have academic standards now against which they measure their kids and systems for identifying failing schools and turn them around. Yes, the work is done by the schools, and yes, most of the money comes from the States. But the way we have spent this money has made a significant contribution to the continuing improvement of education in America. So what is their answer to that? It is not like you do not have a choice here.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4996, "text": "On crime they have committed to repeal the 100,000 police program. They say never mind the fact we have got the lowest crime rate in 26 years, the Federal Government has got no business doing that. Al Gore, he wants to put 50,000 more police on the street and keep going until America is the safest big country in the world. On the environment, Al Gore wants to build on what we have done, and he will do even better because the economy is stronger. They want to repeal my order setting aside 40 million roadless acres in the national forests and to weaken the clean air standards. If you want to do that, you should vote for them, if you really believe that I have hurt the economy so bad. But if I was trying to hurt the economy with the environmental policies I have, I have done a poor job of it. I made a pure mess of that if I was trying to mess the economy up with my environmental policy. On health care, they are against the Patients' Bill of Rights, against the Medicare drug program, against our program to expand coverage. Oh, yes, they run these ads, and they say, We are for a Patients' Bill of Rights, too. We are for as much of a Patients' Bill of Rights as the HMO lobby in Washington will let us be for -which means it is a bill of suggestions, because if you get hurt, you cannot sue. On the Medicare drugs, they say, We are for Medicare drugs, too. What they do not say is, We are for as broad a plan as the big drug companies will let us be for -so they do not lose their monopoly position. And who cares if they leave half the seniors out who needs these drugs. You need to tell people this. They have a choice. But if they want every senior in this country to have access to medicine, if they want a real Patients' Bill of Rights, if they want to keep improving the environment as we grow the economy, if they believe that we ought to be making, for example, fuel out of farm products and biomass-let me just tell you, the reason ethanol never caught on, even though we had a plant in Arkansas way back in 1980, is that it takes 7 gallons of gasoline to make 8 gallons of ethanol. But the Department of Agriculture is funding research that I believe will bear fruit in the next couple of years.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4997, "text": "And when it happens they will crack the chemical mystery, and it will be just like when you turn crude oil into gasoline. Then you will be able to make 8 gallons of ethanol, and you will not even have to use corn-you can use rice hulls; you can use hay; you can use any kind of biomass fuel with one gallon of gasoline. And when that happens, we will all be going around getting 500 miles a gallon. Now, Al Gore will fund that and push that, and they will not . But you talk about something that could revolutionize life for America's farmers, change everything in rural America and in rural Arkansas, that is it. So that is what Gore wants to do. They think we can drill our way out of the energy problem we have got. And in education, they want to repeal our commitment to put 100,000 teachers in the classroom. They say the Federal Government should not be doing that. All I know is that when we passed class size standards in Arkansas in the early grades, the achievement of our children went up, and it is happening all over America. We have the biggest number of kids in the history of our country, and we need more teachers in those schools. So you have got a choice. If you want to take down the 100,000 police and take down the 100,000 teachers and not have a real Patients' Bill of Rights and not have a Medicare prescription drug program that helps all of our people and not have a tax deduction for the cost of college tuition and weaken the environmental standards, you have got a choice. But if you kind of like having safer streets and a cleaner environment and knowing your National Government is supporting school reforms that work and helping more people get access to health care while we grow the economy, you have got to vote for Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, and you need to tell the American people that. We have got these two big questions. Do you want to build on the prosperity and keep it going; do you want to build on the social progress and keep it going? And the third thing I'd like to say is this- and James Lee said this; it really meant a lot to me. You know, I have watched Rodney and James Lee for the last 20 years, and now they are maybe the two most popular people in the Cabinet. You know, James Lee is from Yell County; Rodney is from Lee County.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4998, "text": "And I think, you know, one of the reasons that they do so well is they came from little towns, and they learned to talk to people instead of talking governmentese, and they understand human nature. And here is James Lee Witt up here giving you a civil rights speech about how he has changed FEMA. But what he proved is that FEMA could be both competent and reflective of America. And the truth is, the more reflective of America it got, the more competent it got. You know, I tried to make every American, even when they and, on many occasions, I am sure you, disagreed with some particular decision I made, I tried to make people feel at home with the White House, to know that I was pulling for ordinary Americans, that everybody-everybody-in this country interests counted, with the White House, with the Cabinet, with the decisions that were made. And I think it is really important that we keep moving forward to build one America. That is why I am for this hate crimes legislation and for employment nondiscrimination. That is why I am for stronger equal pay laws for women. That is why I think it is important that the Supreme Court continue to protect civil rights and human rights. This is a big deal in this election. They are against the hate crimes legislation. They are even against our attempts to strengthen the equal pay laws for women. And most people believe the only issue at stake in the Supreme Court is a woman's right to choose. That is at stake, by the way, and it will certainly change depending on whether Al Gore wins or loses this election. You can go to the bank on that, because there will be at least two appointments in the next 4 years. But something that could have a more profound effect on America is that there is already a majority of 5-4 on that Court, that is determined to limit the ability of our National Government to protect and advance the civil rights and basic public health, safety, and welfare of the United States of America. Already, they have invalidated a provision of the Brady law because it required local folks to help us check criminal backgrounds. They invalidated a provision of the Violence Against Women Act-the Violence Against Women Act-because it required local government to do something to support our enforcement of that. And in the last couple of weeks, they invalidated an anti-ENTITYdiscrimination law. Now, these are bills we even got the Republicans in Washington to vote for.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 4999, "text": "The Supreme Court is to the right of the Republican Congress-already. You have got to think about this, and you have got to talk to people about this. Now, it ought to be a happy election because nobody has to say anything bad about anybody else. Near as I can see, the Vice President has never one time questioned the character or the integrity of his opponents. I wish I could say the same thing for them about him. The only problem is, people are fixing to go to the polls, and there is still not absolute clarity about what the choice is, what the consequences are to real people and their families. And look, this is a-I do not know if we will have another election in my lifetime where we have got so much prosperity, so much social progress, the absence of crisis at home, the absence of threats to our security abroad. And I just want to echo one or two things that Dale Bumpers said. First, let me say a word about Joe Lieberman. I have known him for 30 years. I met him when he was running for State senate, and I went to law school, in Connecticut. More than anybody else in the Congress, I think he clearly understands the approach that we brought to the country in 1992, whether you call it the New Democratic approach or the DLC approach or whatever. Basically, it was the idea that we would stop making false choices in Washington and try to unify our country. We could bring the deficit down and increase investment in education. We could be for a clean environment and for a growing economy. But you have got to be disciplined to do that. And he understands as well as anybody that the real appeal of our opponents in this election is, It is your money; let us just take it all now. And they want to talk about spending all this surplus right now. You may have won $10 million. If you went out and spent the 10 million, you should vote for Bush and Cheney. If not, you should vote for Gore and Lieberman. And what Dale said about the Vice President is absolutely right. But let me say, I think I know something about economic policy. And I hope I have learned something about decisionmaking and about the world at large. It matters whether you know about these issues.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5000, "text": "A lot of reasons that these things have piled up, these good, positive changes, is that every day we had all these folks in the White House and all these folks in the Cabinet and Al Gore and I, we were working. We treated this like a job. We showed up, and we worked like crazy for 8 years. I got the gray hair to prove it. We worked at it. But it also matters what kind of experience you have. John Kennedy said the Presidency was preeminently a place of decisionmaking. Al Gore makes good decisions. When he had to come off the campaign trail a few days ago-we had all that trouble in the Middle East-and we were sitting in this room and for about 30 minutes he was asking questions from the various members of our national security team, I thought to myself, I would feel absolutely comfortable under any circumstances, with any crisis in the world, knowing that this man had to make the call. And that is a big deal, because it is still a world with real challenges out there. And you know as well as I do that if everybody understood the differences and the positions like I just explained them to you today, we'd win. Do you have any doubt of that? Okay, so I will say again, you can win this election in Arkansas for Al Gore and Joe Lieberman if you want to bad enough. And you just think about what we have got. We have got a chance, as Dale said, that at least in my lifetime we have never had, and we may not have it again in our lifetime, to literally build the future of our dreams for our kids. Do you want to keep this prosperity going and extend it to the people who have been left behind? Do you want to build on the progress of the last 8 years? Do you want to keep doing it as one America, keep bringing people together? Do you want to vote for somebody who is experienced and solid and proven, who will work hard, who knows a lot, who understands the future? You just have one choice. You have got 2 days to make it clear. You will be proud you did for the rest of your life. Thank you, and God bless you.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksarkansascivicleadersluncheonlittlerockarkansas", "title": "Remarks at an Arkansas Civic Leaders Luncheon in Little Rock, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-arkansas-civic-leaders-luncheon-little-rock-arkansas", "publication_date": "05-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5011, "text": "I have sought this opportunity to address you because it is clearly my duty to call your attention to the present cost of living and to urge upon you with all the persuasive force of which I am capable the legislative measures which would be most effective in controlling it and bringing it down. The prices the people of this country are paying for everything that it is necessary for them to use in order to live are not justified by a shortage in supply, either present or prospective, and are in many cases artificially and deliberately created by vicious practises which ought immediately be checked by law. They constitute a burden upon us which is the more unbearable because we know that it is wilfully imposed by those who have the power and that it can by vigorous public action be greatly lightened and made to square with the actual conditions of supply and demand. Some of the methods by which these' prices are produced are already illegal, some of them criminal, and those who employ them will be energetically proceeded against ; but others have not yet been brought under the law, and should be dealt with at once by legislation. I need not recite the particulars of this critical matter, the prices demanded and paid at the sources of supply, at the factory, in the food markets, at the shops, in the restaurants and hotels, alike in the city and in the village. They are familiar to you. They are the talk of every domestic circle and of every group of casual acquaintances even. of familiar knowledge, also, that a process has set in which is likely, unless something is done, to push prices and rents and the whole cost of living higher and yet higher, in a vicious cycle to which there is no logical or natural end. With the increase in the prices of the necessaries of life come demands for increase in wages demands which are justified if there be no other means of enabling men to live. Upon the increase of wages there follows close an increase in the price of the products whose producers have been accorded the increase not a proportionate increase, for the manufacturer does not content himself with that but an increase considerably greater that the added wage cost and for which the added wage cost is oftentimes hardly more than an excuse. The laborers who do not get an increase in pay when they demand it are likely to strike, and the strike only makes matters worse.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5012, "text": "It checks production, it affects the railways, it prevents distribution and strips the markets, so that there is presently nothing to buy, and there is another excessive addition to prices resulting from the scarcity. These are facts and forces with which we have become only too familiar; but we are not justified because of our familiarity with them, or because of any hasty and shallow conclusion that they are natural and inevitable, in sitting inactively by and letting them work their fatal results if there is anything that we can do to check, correct, or reverse them. I have sought this opportunity to inform the Congress what the Executive is doing by way of remedy and control, and to suggest where effective legal remedies are lacking and may be supplied. We must, I think, frankly admit that there is no complete immediate remedy to be had from legislation and executive action. The free processes of supply and demand will not operate of themselves, and no legislative or Executive action can force them into full and natural operation until there is peace. All the world is waiting with what unnerving fears and haunting doubts who can adequately say? waiting to know when it comes a peace in which each nation shall make shift for itself as it can, or a peace buttressed 'and supported by the will and concert of the nations that have the purpose and the power to do and to enforce what is right. Politically, economically, socially, the world is on the operating table, and it has not been possible to administer any anaesthetic. It even watches the capital operation upon which it knows that its hope of healthful life depends. It cannot think its business out or make plans or give intelligent and provident direction to its affairs while in such a case. There can be no confidence in industry, no calculable basis for credits, no confident buying or systematic selling, no certain prospect of employment, no normal restoration of business, no hopeful attempt at reconstruction or the proper reassembling of the dislocated elements of enterprise until peace has been established and, so far as may be, guaranteed.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5013, "text": "Our national life has no doubt been less radically disturbed and dismembered than the national life of other peoples whom the war more directly affected, with all its terrible ravaging and destructive force, but it has been, nevertheless, profoundly affected and disarranged, and our industries, our credits, our productive capacity, our economic processes are inextricably interwoven with those of other nations and peoples most intimately of all with the nations and peoples upon whom the chief burden and confusion of the war fell and who are now most dependent upon the cooperative action of the world. We are just now shipping more goods out of our ports to foreign markets than we ever shipped before not foodstuffs merely, but stuffs and materials of every sort ; but this is no index of what our foreign sales will continue to be or of the effect the volume of our exports will have on supplies and prices. It is impossible yet to predict how far or how long foreign purchasers will be able to find the money or the credit to pay for or sustain such purchases on such a scale; how soon or to what extent foreign manufacturers can resume their former production, foreign farmers get their accustomed crops from their own fields, foreign mines resume their former output, foreign merchants set up again their old machinery of trade with the ends of the earth. All these things must remain uncertain until peace is established and the nations of the world have concerted the methods by which normal life and industry are to be restored. All that we shall do, in the meantime, to restrain profiteering and put the life of our people upon a tolerable footing will be makeshift and provisional. There can be no settled conditions here or elsewhere until the treaty of peace is out of the way and the work of liquidating the war has become the chief concern of our Government and of other Governments of the world. Until then business will inevitably remain speculative, and sway now this way and again that, with heavy losses or heavy gains, as it may chance, and. the consumer must take care of both the gains and the losses. There can be no peace prices so long as our whole financial and economic system is on a war basis. Europe will not, cannot, recoup her capital or put her restless, distracted peoples to work until she knows exactly where she stands in respect of peace; and what we will do is for her the chief question upon which her quietude of mind and confidence of purpose depend.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5014, "text": "While there is any possibility that the peace terms may be changed or may be held long in abeyance or may not be enforced because of divisions of opinion among the powers associated against Germany, it is idle to look for permanent relief. But what we can do we should do, and should do at once. And there is a great deal that we can do, provisional though it be. Wheat shipments and credits to facilitate the purchase of our wheat can and will be limited and controlled in such a way as not to raise, but rather to lower, the price of flour here. The Government has the power, within certain limits, to regulate that. We cannot deny wheat to foreign peoples who are in dire need of it, and we do not wish to do so; but, fortunately, though the wheat crop is not what we hoped it would be, it is abundant, if handled with provident care. The price of wheat is lower in the United States than in Europe, and can with proper management be kept so. By way of immediate relief, surplus stocks of both food and clothing in the hands of the Government will be sold, and, of course, sold at prices at which there is no profit. And by way of a more permanent correction of prices, surplus stocks in private hands will be drawn out of storage and put upon the market. Fortunately, under the terms of the Food Control act the hoarding of foodstuffs can be checked and prevented; and they will be, with the greatest energy. Foodstuffs can be drawn out of storage and sold by legal action, which the Department of Justice will institute wherever necessary; but so soon as the situation is systematically dealt with, it is not likely that the courts will often have to be resorted to. Much of the accumulating of stocks has no doubt been due to the sort of speculation which always results from an uncertainty. Great surpluses were accumulated because it was impossible to foresee what the market would disclose and dealers were determined to be ready for whatever might happen, as well as eager to reap the full advantage of rising prices. They will now see the disadvantage, as well as the danger, of holding off from the new process of distribution. Some very interesting and significant facts with regard to stocks on hand and the rise of prices in the face of abundance have been disclosed by, the inquiries of the Department of Agriculture, the Department of Labor, and the Federal Trade Commission.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5015, "text": "They seem to justify the statement that in the case of many necessary commodities effective means have been found to prevent the normal operation of the law of supply and demand. In the combined total of a number of the most important foods in dry and cold storage the excess is quite 19 per cent. The supply of fresh eggs on hand in June of this year, for example, was greater by nearly Jo per cent than the supply on hand at the same time last year, and yet the wholesale price was 40 cents a dozen as against 3o cents a year ago. The stock of frozen fowls had increased more than 298 per cent., and yet the price had risen also from 34 1/2 cents per pound to 37 1/2 cents. The supply of creamery butter had increased 129 per cent., and the price from 41 to 53 cents per pound. The supply of salt beef had been augumented 3 per cent., and the price had gone up from $34 a barrel to $36 a barrel. Canned corn had increased in stock nearly 92 per cent., and had remained substantially the same in price. In a few foodstuffs the prices had declined, but in nothing like the proportion in which the supply had increased. For example, the stock of canned tomatoes had increased 102 per cent., and yet the price had declined only 25 cents per dozen cans. In some cases there had been the usual result of an increase of price following a decrease of supply, but in almost every instance the increase of price had been disproportionate to the decrease in stock. The Attorney General has been making a careful study of the situation as a whole and of the laws that can be applied to better it, and is convinced that, under the stimulation and temptation of exceptional circumstances, combinations of producers and combinations of traders have been formed for the control of supplies and of prices which are clearly in restraint of trade, and against these, prosecutions will be promptly instituted and actively pushed which will in all likelihood have a prompt corrective effect. There is reason to believe that the prices of leather, of coal, of lumber, and of textiles have been materially affected by forms of concert and cooperation among the producers and marketers of these and other universally necessary commodities which it will be possible to redress. No watchful or energetic effort will be spared to accomplish this necessary result. I trust that there will not be many cases in which prosecution will be necessary.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5016, "text": "Public action will no doubt cause many who have perhaps unwittingly adopted illegal methods to abandon them promptly and of their own motion. And publicity can accomplish a great deal. The purchaser can often take care of himself if he knows the facts and influences he is dealing with; and purchasers are not disinclined to do anything, either singly or collectively, that may be necessary for their selfprotection. with information regarding the actual supply of particular commodities that is in existence and available, and with regard to supplies which are in existence but not available because of hoarding, and with regard to the methods of price fixing which are being used by dealers in certain foodstuffs and other necessaries. There can be little doubt that retailers are in part sometimes in large part responsible for exorbitant prices; and it is quite practicable for the Government through the agencies I have mentioned to supply the public with full information as 'to the prices at which retailers buy and as to the cost of transportation they pay, in order that it may be known just what margin of profit they, are demanding. Opinion and concerted action on the part of purchasers can probably do the rest. That is, these agencies may perform this indispensable service provided the Congress will supply them with the necessary funds to prosecute their inquiries and keep their price lists up to date. Hitherto the appropriation committee of the Houses have not always, I fear, seen the full value of these inquiries, and the departments and commissions have been very much straitened for means to render this service. That adequate funds be provided by appropriation for this purpose, and provided as promptly as possible, is one of the means of greatly ameliorating the present distressing conditions of livelihood that I have come to urge, in this attempt to concert with you the best ways to serve the country in this emergency. It is one of the absolutely necessary means, underlying many others, and can be supplied at once. There are many perfectly legitimate methods by which the Government can exercise restraint and guidance. Let me urge, in the first place, that the present Food Control Act should be extended, both as to the period of time during which it shall remain in operation and as to the commodities to which it shall apply.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5017, "text": "Its provisions against hoarding should be made to apply not only to food, but also to feedstuffs, to fuel, to clothing, and to many other commodities which are indispensably necessaries of life. As it stands now, it is limited in operation to the period of the war and becomes inoperative upon the formal, proclamation of peace. But I should judge that it was clearly within the constitutional power of the Congress to make similar permanent provisions and regulations with regard to all goods destined for interstate commerce, and to exclude them from interstate shipment if the requirements of law are not complied with. The abuses that have grown up in the manipulation of prices by the withholding of foodstuffs and other necessaries of life cannot otherwise be effectively prevented. May I not call attention to the fact, also, that, although, the present act prohibits profiteering, the prohibition is accompanied by no penalty? It is clearly in the public interest that a penalty should be provided which will be persuasive. To the same end I earnestly recommend, in the second place, that the Congress pass a law regulating cold storage as it is regulated, for example, by the laws of the state of New Jersey, which limit the time during which goods may be kept in storage, prescribe the methods of disposing of them if kept beyond the permitted period, and require that goods released from storage shall in all cases bear the date of their receipt. It would materially add to the serviceability of the law, for the purpose we now have in view, if it were also prescribed that all goods released from storage for interstate shipment should have plainly marked upon each package the selling or market price at which they went in storage. By this means the purchaser would always be able to learn what profits stood between him and the producer or the wholesale dealer. It would serve as a useful example to the other communities of the country, as well as greatly relieve local distress, if the Congress were to regulate all such matters very fully for the District of Columbia, where its legislative authority is without limit. I would also recommend that it be required that all goods destined for interstate commerce should in every case, where their form or package makes it possible, be plainly marked with the price at which they left the hands of the producer. Such a requirement would bear a close analogy to certain provisions of the Pure Food Act, by which it is required that certain detailed information be given on the labels of packages of food and drugs.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5018, "text": "And it does not seem to me that we can confine ourselves to detailed measures of this kind, if .it is indeed our purpose to assume national control of the processes of distribution. I take it for granted that that is our purpose and our duty. We need not hesitate to handle a national question in a national way. We should go beyond the measures I have suggested. We should formulate a law requiring a Federal license of all corporations engaged in interstate commerce and embodying in the license, or in the conditions under which it is to be issued, specific regulations designed to secure competitive selling and prevent unconscionable profits in the method of marketing. Such a law would afford a welcome opportunity to effect other much needed reforms in the' business of interstate shipment and in the methods of corporations which are engaged in it ; but for the moment I confine my recommendations to the object immediately in hand, which is to lower the cost of living. May I not add that there is a bill now pending before Congress which, if passed, would do much to stop speculation and to prevent the fraudulent methods of promotion by which our people are annually fleeced of many millions of hard earned money? I refer to the measure proposed by the Capital Issues Committee for the control of security issues. It is a measure formulated by men who know the actual conditions of business, and its adoption would serve a great and beneficent purpose. We are dealing, gentlemen of the Congress, I need hardly say, with, very critical and very difficult matters. We should go forward with confidence along the road we see, but we shall also seek to comprehend the whole of the scene amidst which we act. There is no ground for some of the fearful forecasts I hear uttered about me, but the condition of the world is unquestionably very grave and we should face it comprehendingly. The situation of our own country is exceptionally fortunate. We of all peoples can afford to keep our heads and to determine upon moderate sensible courses, of action which will insure us against the passions and distempers which are working such deep unhappiness for some of the distressed nations on the other side of the sea. But we may be involved in their distresses unless we help, and help with energy and intelligence. The world must pay for the appalling destruction wrought by the Great War, and we are part of the world. We must pay our share. For five years now the industry of all Europe has been slack and disordered.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5019, "text": "The normal crops have not been produced; the normal quantity of manufactured goods has not been turned out. Not until there are the usual crops and the usual production of manufactured goods on the other side of the Atlantic can Europe return to the former conditions; and it was upon the former conditions, not the present, that our economic relations with Europe were built up. We must face the fact that unless we help Europe to get back to her normal life and production a chaos will ensue there which will inevitably be communicated to this country. For the present, it is manifest, we must quicken, not slacken, our own production. Upon our steadfastness and selfpossession depend the affairs of nations everywhere. It is in this supreme crisis the crisis for all mankind that America must prove her mettle. In the presence of a world confused, distracted, she must show herself selfpossessed, selfcontained, capable of sober and effective action. She saved Europe by her action in arms; she must now save it by her action in peace. In saving Europe she will save herself, as she did upon the battlefields of the war. The calmness and capacity with which she deals with and masters the problems of peace will be the final test and proof of her place among the peoples of the world. And, if only in our own interest, we must help the people overseas. We must keep her going or thousands of our shops and scores of our mines must close. There is no such thing as letting her go to ruin without ourselves sharing in the disaster. In such circumstances, face to face with such tests, passion must be discarded. Passion and a disregard for the rights of others have no place in the counsels of a free people. We need light, not heat, in these solemn times of selfexamination and saving action. The world has just' destroyed the arbitrary force of a military junta. It will live under no other. All that is arbitrary and coercive is in the discard. Those who seek to employ it only prepare their own destruction. We cannot hastily and overnight revolutionize all the processes of our economic life. These are days of deep excitement and of extravagant speech; but with us these are things of the surface. Everyone who is in real touch with the silent masses of our great people knows that the old strong fibre and steady selfcontrol are still there, firm against violence or any distempered action that would throw their affairs into confusion.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5020, "text": "I am serenely confident that they will readily find themselves, no matter what the circumstances, and that they will address themselves to the tasks of peace with the same devotion and the same stalwart preference for what is right that they displayed to the admiration of the whole world in the midst of war. And I entertain another confident hope. I have spoken today chiefly of measures of imperative regulation and legal compulsion, of prosecutions and the sharp correction of selfish processes; and these no doubt are necessary. But there are other forces that we may count on besides those resident in the Department of Justice. We have just fully awakened to what has been going on and to the influences, many of them very selfish and sinister, that have been producing high prices and imposing an intolerable burden on the mass of our people. To have brought it all into the open will accomplish the greater part of the result we seek. I appeal with entire confidence to our producers, our middlemen, and our merchants to deal fairly with the people. It is their opportunity to show that they comprehend, that they intend to act justly, and that they have the public interest sincerely at heart. And I have no doubt that housekeepers all over the country and every one who buys the things he daily stands in need of will presently exercise a greater vigilance, a more thoughtful economy, a more discriminating care as to the market in which he buys or the merchant with whom he trades than he has hitherto exercised. I believe, too, that the more extreme leaders of organized labor will presently yield to a sober second thought and, like the great mass of their associates, think and act like true Americans. They will see that strikes undertaken at this critical time are certain to make matters worse, not better worse for them and for everybody else. The worst thing, the most fatal thing, that can be done now is to stop or interrupt production or to interfere with the distribution of goods by the railways and the shipping of the country. We are all involved in the distressing results of the high cost of living, and we must unite, not divide, to correct it.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsaddresscongressthehighcostliving", "title": "Address to Congress On the High Cost of Living", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-congress-the-high-cost-living", "publication_date": "08-08-1919", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Woodrow Wilson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5026, "text": "Let me say, first of all, I thank you for that. And I was thinking when I was watching David Mixner make those remarks that 30 years ago, when I let him sleep on my floor when we were much younger men in England, and I did not charge him a nickel for it I never dreamed that either of us would be in this place tonight doing these things. David's life has taken a lot of twists and turns since then. He is had his ups and his downs like all the rest of us. But I can tell you something, when I met him when he was young, I thought I had never met a person whose heart burned with the fire of social justice so strongly. He has never forgotten the roots of his childhood. He has never forgotten not only the pain that he and other gay and lesbian Americans have endured; he also cares for other people who are dispossessed and downtrodden and underrepresented and often forgotten. And tonight I was watching him, and he introduced his wonderful sister who has also been a friend of mine for nearly 30 years now and I was thinking how fortunate we are in this country at this time, with all the things we have had to do, to have had his energy, his heart, his devotion, his passion. It was 8 years ago that he and Scott Hitt and a few other ANGLE members met with me this week 8 years ago, here. Then in May of '92 we had a big event out here, and some of you were there. And I told you that I had a vision of America, and you were part of it, that we were all part of the same community. Well, tonight I thank you for helping to make that happen. I thank my good friend Governor Gray Davis for the leadership he has given in California. I thank our leader in the House of Representatives, who when David made that crack about the Canterbury Tales and how we are known by our traveling companions it kind of made me feel sorry for Dick Gephardt. You talk about a guy that gets up and goes to work every day under adverse conditions and continues to do the right thing, he does. We just may need five more in the company to make it a much better trip. I want to thank Bill Melamed, Skip Paul, Gwen Baba, Roberta Bennett for putting this together. Sean Maloney, Karen Tramontano, Minyon Moore, Fred Hochberg, Richard Socarides, Marsha Scott.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksaccessnowforgayandlesbianequalitydinnerbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at an Access Now for Gay and Lesbian Equality Dinner in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-access-now-for-gay-and-lesbian-equality-dinner-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "02-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5027, "text": "And I want to thank Scott Hitt, especially, who is been the Chair of the ENTITY council. He is having his last meeting as Chair on Monday, and he is been magnificent, and we ought to give him a big hand. I'd also like to thank the Gay Men's Chorus. I was back there feverishly trying to write down all those lines. I want to call Hillary and give her those best lines tonight. You know, I am trying to remember them all. If someone would furnish me with the lyrics of that song, I would be eternally grateful. You know, I'd like to put what brought us all here tonight just for a minute. I know a lot of other people are going to speak and have a lot of great things to say, but I would like to put this in, just for a moment, in the context of history and the larger context of our future, and how the fight for equal rights and equal opportunity and full participation to build one America fits in with all the other things we should be doing as a country, and how what we are at home will determine what we can do around the world in the new millennium. When I ran for President in 1992, most Americans felt things were pretty dismal in this country. The economy was in bad shape; the society was divided; all the social indicators crime, welfare, and other things were going in the wrong direction. Politics was, as we all remember from the convention they had back then on the other side, a matter of division, you know, just drive a wedge in society and make sure your wedge is bigger than their wedge; you get more votes, you win; and if everybody is all torn up and upset, who cares, you are in power. And over and over and over again, things in Washington were sort of repeating themselves like a broken record. And I felt that we could do better with a unifying vision. That is why I set out a vision of America, and you were part of it. But I also had a vision that we could build an economy that was good for working people and employers. I believed we could build a country where we could grow the economy and make the environment better, not worse.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksaccessnowforgayandlesbianequalitydinnerbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at an Access Now for Gay and Lesbian Equality Dinner in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-access-now-for-gay-and-lesbian-equality-dinner-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "02-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5028, "text": "I have always believed that the real purpose of life and growth is to try and figure out how to develop these unifying visions and to move closer to them and to break down all these funny walls we have to put up in our minds to organize life into little boxes so we can figure out how to get from here to there. And, you know, in '92, the American people just sort of took a chance on me and Al Gore. I mean, it was an argument we made and there was no evidence for it because the other crowd had been in so long. We just made an argument. A month after we had that meeting out here in May of '92, I won the California primary. And the headline the next day was that the exit poll showed that all the people that voted for me really wanted Ross Perot to be President. And I was in third place. And then he and President Bush got in a fight about who messed up whose daughter's wedding or something. You remember that? I mean, it was an amazing and I thought to myself, people do not have jobs; they are being foreclosed on; why are you guys fighting about this? The wedding went off without a hitch. What is this about? And somehow the American people decided to give me a chance, decided to give Al and Hillary and Tipper and all the people that came in the administration a chance. I guess what I'd like to say tonight, first of all not with arrogance, but with humility is that we now know that there is evidence that we are right and that pulling things together and moving forward actually works. We have the lowest unemployment in 29 years, the lowest welfare rolls in 32 years, the lowest poverty rates in 20 years, the lowest crime rates in 26 years, the first back-to-back budget surpluses in 42 years, the highest homeownership in history, the longest peacetime expansion in history. And you have to 15 million Americans took leave under the family leave law. And when it was vetoed in the previous administration, they said, Oh, well, we have got to veto this bill because if we let people take time off from work when their babies are born or their parents are sick, why, it will ruin the small business economy. And every year, we have set a new record for new small businesses in America. Ninety percent of our kids are immunized against serious diseases for the first time, our young children.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksaccessnowforgayandlesbianequalitydinnerbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at an Access Now for Gay and Lesbian Equality Dinner in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-access-now-for-gay-and-lesbian-equality-dinner-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "02-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5029, "text": "We are giving 5 million more of them health insurance. A hundred thousand young people served in AmericCorps. And along the way, we gave America the most diverse, truly representative government by far in the history of America. That included you and everybody else. What I want to say to you is, this is not an argument anymore. We have evidence. And so you should be of good cheer. And when you look ahead to these elections in 2000, you should be absolutely sure that anybody who is not with you knows they are doing it in the face of the evidence. And because what really bothers me about what is going on in Washington now, it is like there are all these people out there making decisions in the congressional majority as if the last 6 1/2 years just did not happen. And that bothers me. So I say to you, when they say, looking at the Vice President and our party, Well, America needs a change, I agree with that. America always needs a change. We have got a lot more to do on your agenda. America needs a change. You mark my words, the world is changing so fast in how we work and live and relate to each other and folks around the globe, that the world will change. And are we going to use this unprecedented moment, the chance of a lifetime to say, okay, what are our big challenges out there, and seize them? Or are we going to do what got us into so much trouble in the first place? And I want to try to put the things that you are thinking about now into that context. What are the really big challenges facing America that affect you, too? One, the aging of America I hate it because I am doing it. But I am the oldest of the baby boomers. The number of people over 65 will double in the next 30 years; there will be two people working for every one person retired and drawing Social Security. Now, we have never been in a position, until now, in my lifetime, to deal with that challenge. But we now have the ability to run the life of Social Security out 50 years, to add more than a decade to the life of Medicare, to cover prescription drugs for elderly people threequarters of them cannot afford quality prescription drugs today and to do it in a way that all of you who are younger than that should rejoice about.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksaccessnowforgayandlesbianequalitydinnerbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at an Access Now for Gay and Lesbian Equality Dinner in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-access-now-for-gay-and-lesbian-equality-dinner-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "02-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5030, "text": "Because I can tell you those of us in the baby boom generation are plagued by the notion that our retirement will be so expensive for our country that it will burden our children and our ability to give our grandchildren the childhoods they deserve. But we can fix it now. So I gave them a plan to do it. we have got the largest and most diverse group of children in our school in history. We never had over 53 million children in schools, and they come from more different backgrounds than ever before. And that will be a godsend to 21st century America if, but only if, they all have a world-class education. And I think they are entitled to it. So I gave Congress a plan to build and modernize 6,000 schools and hire 100,000 teachers for smaller classes; make sure all the kids had computers in their classrooms; make sure we stopped social promotion, but had after-school programs for the kids who needed it; and more of these charter schools that California has led the way in bringing to our children. Funny thing, maybe Mr. Gephardt will talk about this later, but one of the most interesting things is last year, right before the election in '98, they got religion on this education program. And they supported this big downpayment on our plan for 100,000 teachers, and we funded 30,000 of those teachers. And you had those real liberals, like Mr. Armey going home. This is serious business; ask Dick. We have made a big downpayment on 100,000 teachers; we are going to put 30,000 teachers out there, and this is a great Republican program because there is no bureaucracy in it. We just give it to the schools, and they hire the teachers. They thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread before the election. They have just voted not only to refuse to fund any more of those but to no longer earmark the money for the 30,000. I am worried about the families of our country. I am worried about all these working people. How are they going to have the child care they need? How are they going to have the health care they need? Why do not we pass the Patients' Bill of Rights that protects working people? There is a difference between the two parties on that, and I think it is important.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksaccessnowforgayandlesbianequalitydinnerbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at an Access Now for Gay and Lesbian Equality Dinner in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-access-now-for-gay-and-lesbian-equality-dinner-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "02-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5031, "text": "We are finally going to get a chance we have been working for 2 years finally going to get a chance to vote on the Patients' Bill of Rights in the House next week. I am very worried about this fabulous economy, because we have left some people behind. Yes, we have got the lowest poverty rate in 20 years, but there are still people in places that have not felt this recovery. If you come from a lot of you come from other places, the Mississippi Delta, Appalachia, the Indian reservations, many of the inner cities. So I want to do some things that I think will change all that. I want to, first of all, give Americans with money the same incentives to invest in poor areas in America we give them to invest in poor areas around the world. I hope in the near future we will be able to make access to the Internet as universal as telephone access is. It will have a huge impact on the economy. Last night I was in northern California, and I was with some people who work with eBay. A lot of you probably buy things on eBay. And I learned that over and above the employees of that company, there are now over 20,000 people, including a lot of people that used to be on welfare, who actually make a living buying and selling things, trading on eBay, over 20,000 people. Well, I am telling you, that means nothing at the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota, where the unemployment rate is 73 percent. And we ought not to quit until every American has the chance to participate in our prosperity if he or she is willing to work. I want you to keep a checklist in your mind, and when I get to the end, ask yourself what is all this about, what is it got to do with you as Americans? This is part of being part of America. I think we need to do more, not less, for the environment. The Vice President has this livability agenda to deal with, using all kinds of computer technology to alleviate traffic congestion, to buy more green space in urban areas. We are trying to lead the world toward recognizing that this global warming is real, but that you do not have to end your economic growth, because now there are technologies available to allow us to grow the economy as we reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. There are people in the other party who believe that this is some sort of subversive plot to wreck America's economic future.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksaccessnowforgayandlesbianequalitydinnerbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at an Access Now for Gay and Lesbian Equality Dinner in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-access-now-for-gay-and-lesbian-equality-dinner-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "02-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5032, "text": "Not very long ago, I came out here and went to San Bernardino, to the Inland Empire, and we announced a housing development for low income working people in which the developers pledged, by the use of energy conservation technologies, to cut the utility bills of these low income working people by 40 percent. And I just got a report that the average reduction is 60 percent. That is good for the economy. That is not bad for the economy, and it is good for the environment. Let me just mention a couple of other things. I am very concerned that America, even though we have got the lowest crime rate in 26 years, is still a pretty dangerous country compared to other countries. We should be the safest big country in the world. We welcome all kinds of people. Why are not we the safest country in the world? Because we have not taken reasonable steps, not enough of them, to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children. And because, frankly, even though we have put 100,000 more police on the street in community policing, we have still got neighborhoods that do not have enough coverage. put 50,000 more police officers out there to prevent crime in the highest crime areas of the country and to deal with guns and so forth. I have tried, from Bosnia to Kosovo to the Middle East to Northern Ireland, to stand up for the idea that people ought not to be murdered or moved wholesale because of their race or their religion. We have worked to support other countries and to build the capacity in Africa to prevent future Rwandas, because people ought not to be murdered because of what tribe they are in. And you can define tribe however you want. We are about to start a great debate on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, to end nuclear testing, something that Dwight Eisenhower and John Kennedy wanted us to do years ago. We are finally going to have a chance to do it. In so many of these areas, there are partisan differences which surprise me. And let me come back to you. Why are we for the hate crimes legislation? Why are we for ENDA? Because if we cannot build one America, it is going to be very hard to have a unifying force that will deal with every other one of these issues. And that is what I want you to think about.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksaccessnowforgayandlesbianequalitydinnerbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at an Access Now for Gay and Lesbian Equality Dinner in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-access-now-for-gay-and-lesbian-equality-dinner-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "02-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5033, "text": "Do not you think that it is interesting that here we are on the verge of this new millennium with all these absolutely breathtaking technological breakthroughs that people who are technologically challenged, like me, can hardly keep up with? I mean, is not it amazing to you that we have modernity is bursting out all over in the form of high technology. And yet, the world's largest problem and America's largest problem, that you can see when those kids got shot at that Jewish school and that Filipino postalworker was murdered here; that you could see when that guy who said he belonged to a church that did not believe in God but did believe in white supremacy killed all those people of color and wounded others in Illinois and Indiana; that you could see when Matthew Shepard was murdered and James Byrd was torn apart; and that you can see in the tribal slaughters of Rwanda, and the persecution of the Kosovar Albanians or the Bosnian Muslims or the fights in Northern Ireland or the continued agonies of the Middle East here we are on the verge of this great modern world, where we can make movies with virtual reality now, and virtual reality seems sometimes more real than what is real, and the biggest problem we have got is the primitive, ageold fear and hatred and dehumanization of the other people who are not like us. And so I say I am nearly done; I just want to say this I am going to do everything I can, every day that I have, to remind people of that, that we have to be one America. We can have honest differences over issues, but we cannot have honest differences about whether we share a common humanity. And we cannot be under the illusion that either material prosperity or technological breakthroughs alone can purge the darkness in our hearts. I believe with all my heart that we can find a way to marry prosperity and peace and humanity. But we must have a unifying vision. I want to say, again, I am grateful to people who have worked in my administration who have made me more alive to the concerns of your community, not only those who themselves are gay and lesbian, but others, beginning with my Vice President, who has been terrific on all of that in ways you will never know. But people are still scared of people who are not like them. And other people are scared of themselves, and they are afraid they will not count unless they have got somebody to look down on.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksaccessnowforgayandlesbianequalitydinnerbeverlyhillscalifornia", "title": "Remarks at an Access Now for Gay and Lesbian Equality Dinner in Beverly Hills, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-access-now-for-gay-and-lesbian-equality-dinner-beverly-hills-california", "publication_date": "02-10-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5037, "text": "I thought for a minute you were going to say I was your favorite rabbi, but. I appreciate you giving me a chance to come. I too want to thank Mr. Saban for his vision and for sponsoring this forum. I am honored to be with you. Justice Breyer, I am pleased to see you yet again. I thank Ambassador Indyk. Minister Mofaz, it is good to see you, sir, and I appreciate you being here for this forum. I want to thank the Members of Congress who have joined us, members of the diplomatic corps, and of course, the distinguished guests. The Saban Forum is one of the world's premier venues for discussion on the Middle East. I thank you for the debates you provoke and the differences you have made. And I am honored to be with you. Over the past 8 years, I have had the privilege to see the Middle East up close. I have stood on the shores of the Sea of Galilee, and I have hiked the cliffs of Masada. I have enjoyed dinner in the desert of Abu Dhabi and prayed at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem. I have looked into the eyes of courageous elected leaders from Iraq, Lebanon, Israel, and the Palestinian Territories. I have been convinced that no region is more fundamental to the security of America or the peace in the world than the Middle East. a Middle East where our friends are strengthened and the extremists are discredited, where economies are open and prosperity is widespread, and where all people enjoy the life of liberty that is the universal gift of an Almighty God. From our earliest days as a nation, the Middle East has played a central role in American foreign policy. One of America's first military engagements as an independent nation was with the Barbary pirates. One of our first consulates was in Tangiers. Some of the most fateful choices made by American Presidents have involved the Middle East, including President Truman's decision to recognize Israel 60 years ago this past May. In the decades that followed that brave choice, American policy in the Middle East was shaped by the realities of the cold war. Together with strong allies in the Middle East, we faced down and defeated the threat of communism to the region. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the primary threat to America and the region became violent religious extremism.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesabanforum", "title": "Remarks at the Saban Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-saban-forum", "publication_date": "05-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 5038, "text": "Through painful experience, it became clear that the old approach of promoting stability is unsuited to this new danger, and that the pursuit of security at the expense of liberty would leave us with neither one. Across the Middle East, many who sought a voice in the future of their countries found the only places open to dissent were radical mosques. Many turned to terror as a source of empowerment. And as the new century dawned, the violent currents swirling beneath the Middle East began to surface. In the Holy Land, the dashed expectations resulting from the collapse of the Camp David peace talks had given way to the second intifada. Palestinian suicide bombers struck with horrific frequency and lethality. They murdered innocent Israelis at a pizza parlor or aboard buses or in the middle of a Passover Seder. Israeli Defense Forces responded with large-scale operations. And in 2001, more than 500 Israelis and Palestinians were killed. Politically, the Palestinian Authority was led by a terrorist who stole from his people and walked away from peace. In Israel, Ariel Sharon was elected to fight terror and pursue a greater Israel policy that allowed for no territorial concessions. Neither side could envision a return to negotiations or the realistic possibility of a two-state solution. Elsewhere in the Middle East, Saddam Hussein had begun his third decade as the dictator of Iraq, a reign that included invading two neighbors, developing and using weapons of mass destruction, attempting to exterminate Marsh Arabs and many Kurds, paying the families of suicide bombers, systematically violating U.N. resolutions, and firing routinely at British and U.S. aircraft patrolling a no-fly zone. Syria continued its occupation of Lebanon, with some 30,000 troops on Lebanese soil. Libya sponsored terror and pursued weapons of mass destruction. And in Iran, the prospect for of reform was fading, the regime's sponsorship of terror continued, and its pursuit of nuclear weapons was largely unchecked. Throughout the region, suffering and stagnation were rampant. The Arab Human Development Report revealed a bleak picture of high unemployment, poor education, high mortality rates for mothers, and almost no investment in technology. Above all, the Middle East suffered a deep deficit in freedom. Most people had no choice and no voice in choosing their leaders. Women enjoyed few rights, and there was little conversation about democratic change. Against this backdrop, the terrorist movement was growing in strength and in ambition.", "label": "monologic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthesabanforum", "title": "Remarks at the Saban Forum", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-saban-forum", "publication_date": "05-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 12, "text": "As we end July, it is the most deadly month for U.S. troops since the war began in 2001. It almost feels like a slippery slope. If I did not think that it was important for our national security to finish the job in Afghanistan, then I would pull them all out today, because I have to sign letters to these family members when a loved one is lost. We now have a strategy that can work. We have got one of our best generals in Dave Petraeus on the ground. I have been very clear that we are going to move forward on a process of training Afghans so that they can provide for their own security and that, by the middle of next year, by 2011, we are going to start thinning out our troops and giving Afghans more responsibility. I will tell you that I have not met a single young man or woman who is in uniform right now who is served in Afghanistan who does not think that that is an important mission. Why is this economy now not growing the way people in the country would want it to grow? So that means that if you are in a deeper hole, it is going to take longer to come back. When we have lost as many jobs as we have, when you have seen as much hardship, people losing values in their homes and their 401Ks, et cetera, people have every right to be scared, to be angry, to be frustrated. And I took this job because I was convinced that I could solve these problems, not just short term, but long term. And I do not expect the American people to be satisfied when we are only half of the way back. We have got to make sure that we deal with the long-term unemployment that is out there, which is a huge problem. A federal judge backed up your opinion of the Arizona immigration law. The mission of controlling our immigration process is absolutely correct. And that is why my administration's actually put more resources on the border to the point where we now have more of everything -- border patrols, more overflights, and, you know, more immigration agents. You name it, we have got more of them on the borders. And we want to work with Arizona. I understand the frustration of the people of Arizona.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithharrysmithcbsearlyshow", "title": "Interview With Harry Smith on CBS' Early Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-harry-smith-cbs-early-show", "publication_date": "30-07-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 13, "text": "I really just wanted to say that I think we had a good trip, and I am sorry I put you through so much. And I appreciate how much work was done on it. I thought we might just talk for a few minutes about it, kind of in a wrap-up fashion. But before we do, I wanted to say that after I got back on the plane, I called Prime Minister Rabin and ENTITY Mubarak to report on my meeting with Asad, and I attempted to call but was unsuccessful in reaching King Fahd I am going to talk to him probably tomorrow morning just to tell them what had gone on in the meeting and what the statement was and get their sense of what was going to happen. Rabin had watched it live. Rabin had watched it live. I think he did, but we had kind of a staticy connection, so I could not be sure. But everybody seemed to be pretty positive about it. Anyway, looking back over the trip, I can say without any hesitation that it certainly met all of our objectives when we went on the trip. And I think there were basically three big elements to it. The first was the prospect of really uniting Europe for the first time since nations have been on the landscape there. I am very encouraged by the initial reaction to the Partnership For Peace. Russia, Ukraine expressed an interest. We have now heard some interest from Romania. So I am feeling quite good about that. Even the Swiss said they wanted to think about whether there was some way they could support it even if they did not join, given their historic neutrality. I feel very good about it. The second important thing, of course, was the nuclear breakthrough, the agreement with Ukraine following the agreement that had been reached earlier in the year with Belarus and Kazakhstan, not having our nuclear weapons targeted at anybody, not having their nuclear weapons targeted at us. And we also had some important discussions with the Russians about going in and making sure that START I is completely ratified and implemented and that START II is ratified and implemented and that we keep thinking about what further steps there ought to be. So this was a very good meeting trip in that respect. And then the third aspect of the trip was the whole movement toward not only uniting Europe economically and politically but kind of getting growth back into the system. I met with the leaders of the European Union.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 14, "text": "We talked about how to implement the GATT agreement, how to follow up on it, how important it was to get the growth rates up in Europe again, how important it was to open new markets to Eastern Europe and the states of the former Soviet Union. And then, of course, I talked about economics in Prague and then spent a lot of time dealing with it in Russia. And I must say, even though they have had a really tough time, I think they are on the verge of having some good things happen economically. For all the criticism of the pace of reform in Russia, one of the little-known facts about it is that in terms of privatizing companies, Russia's actually running ahead of the pace of the other former Communist economies. There is some other problems they have to deal with, their inflation problems and just having a legal framework that will attract more investment, but I feel quite good about that. Just from my experience in Moscow, I really think that while there are, as you would imagine, uncertainties among the people there because of all the hardships and the difficulty of sort of visualizing the future, I think there is a lot of emotion to the idea that the people ought to rule the country. I did not get much sense in anybody that they wanted a more authoritarian government. I think they like the fact that the voters are in the driver's seat, even though they are still trying to come to grips with exactly what that means and how to translate it into policies. So I would say on grounds of building a united Europe in terms of security, where all the neighbors agree to respect one another's borders, moving to continually reduce the nuclear threat to the world, and supporting economic and political reform in Europe and the former Communist countries, this was a very, very successful trip. And that is before we did the Middle East thing today. I went to this meeting hoping that we could get a signal from ENTITY Asad that was clear and unmistakable that he was ready to make a complete peace. Today was the first time he had ever explicitly said he wanted an end to the hostilities with Israel, willing to make peace with Israel as opposed to saying something like peace in the Middle East, and that peace to him meant normal peaceful relations, which is a general term that encompasses trade, tourism and travel, and embassies. That sends a very clear signal now back to the Israelis.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 15, "text": "And he said something that everybody wanted to hear in the Middle East, which is that he wanted Lebanon to be an independent country with a peace with Israel. So I was quite pleased with that. So from now on, the question of the differences between Syria and the United States, which we spent about an hour on today, spent a significant portion of our meeting on it, because I thought it was important that neither one of us be under any illusions about the differences that are still there and because I think it is important in this peace negotiation that we both have absolute credibility with each other. So we thought we had to spend some time on it. We agreed to try to get beyond sort of a general and accusatory level by letting the Secretary of State and the Foreign Minister of Syria develop a process to specifically identify these things that trouble the United States so much and to give them a chance to specifically identify things about our policy toward them or the Middle East in general that trouble them and to try to set in motion a process for working through it. Because every report I have gotten over the years of the encounters and you know, Asad's spent a lot of time talking to Westerners because of the Middle East issue things always stop, in my judgment, at a level that is too general, where people are charging and countercharging and there is no real effort to lay the kind of factual basis that has to be laid if you are going to really argue that people should change their policies. So I feel pretty good about it. Were you satisfied, sir, that there was no Syrian involvement or complicity in the Pan Am 103 bombing? First I raised that, and he raised it again. I can tell you that we have absolutely no evidence of it and that he flatly denied it. And he reminded us and me that a Syrian was killed on Pan Am 103 who was the only son of a woman from his home area. And he said it was a he characterized it as a cruel and senseless thing had no point, killing all those students. If you ever have any evidence that any Syrian is involved, you just let me know, and we will take the appropriate action. Back on Russia, when were you told about that Mr. Gaydar was going to resign? Who told you that, and how serious do you think it is? Yeltsin told me that here is how he characterized it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 16, "text": "I was not quite sure exactly how to he told me that he thought there was a strong possibility that Gaydar would decide that he needed to devote all of his time to leading the party that he took into the Duma and building his political strength both in the Parliament and out in the country and that he was concerned about building it up politically and making it effective in the Duma. He said the reason, you see you say when I am trying to remember. I think it was sometime during the first day as opposed to the second day's conversations that he said it. What are your impressions of Asad? Let me answer the question. He also went out of his way to tell me, though, he said, We are not going to reverse our reform course, and we do not want to slow it down, but we do want to cushion the impact of it better. We want to have a better sense of how it affects people. And he said, We also want to try to demonstrate the successes more clearly. We want to be able to show people that this has been done. And in that connection and you know what he asked? He was very pleased with a lot of the initiatives that I told him we worked on, like we were working to get the G-7 to make sure that the countries that buy oil from Russia, for example, that buy energy from Russia, could pay for it in a timely fashion so they can use that money to help them build their country. That is a big deal to them. He was interested in getting his next IMF money in a timely fashion. He was interested in making sure that the accumulated debt, once he is making payments on it, can be rescheduled. In other words, he did not want to slow down reform. He wanted to make it work better, and he wanted to make sure that they had some strategies for cushioning the impact on ordinary people. He also said that he would keep a team that was reform oriented, and it would be a good, competent team. Gaydar left the government once before, and the reforms did not stop. So the only thing I encouraged him to do was, I said, You proved you are committed to democracy. You have stayed with this reform. You have still got some tough decisions to make. I told him, I said, I contacted the G-7 before I came up here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 17, "text": "We want to help cushion the impact of reform, and we want to help make sure the people of Russia know what you are doing to help the economy. And if you are going to keep on the reform path, it'll be easier for us to do that, because then we will be able to make sure that the IMF and the World Bank support you as well as these individual countries. You know he is in some the political situation over there is not free of difficulty. I mean, you just only have to look at the makeup of the lower House of the Parliament to draw that conclusion. But I think he will try to hang in there, mostly because if you look at the go-slower approach, you look at Ukraine and you see they are in worse shape than Russia. And one of the things and let me just say that this is something I did not even talk about on the trip but one of the things I want to spend a lot more time doing when I get back, and have our people try to be helpful on, is trying to dissect what we mean by reform, because there are at least three big elements to it. There is the privatization of government-owned companies, which Russia is doing very, very well, better than anybody else. There is the management of fiscal and monetary policy, which means you have got to keep inflation down at a reasonable level to get private investment, which means you cannot just keep on printing money to pay for subsidies in a dying industry. They are having trouble with that, although they are doing better than they were last year. Then the third area is making sure you have got the infrastructure, if I can use that much-maligned word, that will attract investment from outside the country and will permit the markets to work. That means you have got to have a system of laws relating to private property, contracts, bankruptcy, clear, unambiguous taxation laws, that sort of stuff. If you look at Czechoslovakia, which is the most I mean, the Czech Republic, which is the most successful of the former Communist countries, they are behind Russia on privatization but ahead on the infrastructure.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 18, "text": "So the one thing that I think we need to focus on is now that they have got a constitutional democracy, and all of them, even the ones who want to slow down reform, want more investment, which is interesting they all want more investment, even the ones that think, Well, reform has gone too fast they might be for the first time in a real position now to write some of the laws in such a way that will attract a lot more investment. For example, if you want to make an energy investment in Russia, you may not care what the rate of privatization of small companies is, but you do want to know if you put the money in there and who you are investing with, is your investment good, what do you do in case of breach of contract, what are your tax obligations if you make money? Just clear, simple, straightforward stuff that we take for granted, that I think they now have to do a little more work on. How concerned was Yeltsin about the rise of ultranationalist sentiment? And did you give him any counsel on how to alleviate those feelings of humiliation? Well, let me see how I should answer that. I do not want to talk in great detail about our conversation, because I think he should be able to answer that. I do not want to read his mind for you. I think that he believes that the more the voters know about some of the positions taken by the ultranationalists, including Zhirinovsky, the more likely they will be to pull away from them. And he believes that the promises which were made by the ultranationalists could not reasonably be expected to be kept. So I think that his view is that what he needs to do is try to do the best he can with his job, turn things around, show some successes, and that that is the best way to dampen them down. One thing I did say to him was that just following the campaign from afar, as we all did, that the ultranationalists seemed in some ways in some ways the Communists did, too to lay too much of an uncontested claim to the feelings of national pride. That is, the reformers, we all know, did not run in a coherent bloc and did not present a coherent message. And as the Democrats know in the United States I kicked him on purpose because he is talked about this it is sort of like the problems that the Democrats had for the last 20 years winning the Presidency.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 19, "text": "You could say, here is a problem and here is my four-point solution to the problem, but if all you get is the good government vote, that is never going to be a majority, especially when people are hurting. So the only counsel I gave him was that Yeltsin cut through all the traditional barriers when he stood up on that tank, or even earlier when he became Gorbachev's successor. He embodied the change and the pride of Russia. You saw the pride of Russia and the change in a person. And by his actions he did that. And what I suggested to him was that his group, they needed to find spokespersons, and they needed to find ways of saying what they were about that also says, We are pro-worker, we are pro-family, we are anticrime, and we are for bringing the pride of this nation back. And our plan will make the . Because I think to be fair to them, their task has been so daunting that they would naturally become absorbed in the overwhelming burdens of just doing the details of it. These other guys were never in government, you know; they had the freedom of just going out and making speeches. And the only thing I cautioned to Yeltsin, I said, Look, I saw the Democrats in America get killed for years because they go out there and they talk about problem X, Y, and Z and have a four-point program for every one. And they might be right, but if it did not resonate with a larger concern to the voters, it could never be translated into a national mandate. And I think we had a great conversation about it, and I think he was interested in it, because he understands that that is how he got to be ENTITY in the first place, change and pride. But in the last election, keep in mind, he put all of his prestige and effort into passing the Constitution. So a lot of people voted for Boris Yeltsin and his constitution and also voted for the Communist candidate, the agrarian candidate, Zhirinovsky and his crowd. And he needs to win the overlap. He cannot let them win the overlap if he is going to govern the country and move it forward. He is very smart and very tough and has a very clear view of what he thinks has happened in the Middle East in the last 25 years and what he thinks ought to happen.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 20, "text": "On the other hand, I think that he has reached the conclusion that it is in the interest of his people, his administration, and his legacy to make a meaningful and lasting peace. I believe that. Well, he said, first of all, that he thought that he agreed with me that there ought to be a peace in Lebanon agreement that operated and was developed in parallel with the Syrian track and that the end of it ought to be a fully independent Lebanon, an accord consistent with the Taif accords, which then therefore, the inevitable answer is yes. Did he ask you, if there was peace between Israel and Syria, we would follow through on our commitment to commit U.S. troops to the Golan Heights in order to keep the peace? He did not ask it just like that. He said that there needed to be mutual security guarantees, that Israel's security was not all that was at stake, that Damascus was closer to the Golan than Tel Aviv or Jerusalem, and that artillery would go up the hill quite nicely. That is what he said. He said, We are not talking about rifles here. He said, Rifles all the advantage goes to the people on top of the Golan. When you are talking about artillery, it is a mixed bag. He did not breach that. What he said was that both sides would need security assurances. We would be willing to commit our troops if there was a serious peace agreement? What I said to him and what our country has said repeatedly for years now is that, obviously, if both sides made an agreement and both sides wanted this, we would have to give it serious consideration; that is something I would have to talk to the Congress about, do other things, that I could not make any kind of commitment, particularly in the absence of an expressed decision by Israel and Syria, but we would certainly give it consideration. You certainly think you pushed the momentum on this. We have pushed it forward. It is clearly the biggest step forward since September 13th. Maybe in some ways a bigger one because we all knew on September 13th that in the end the only way to hold this thing together was to get the rest of it done. Did you bring up the issue of the Syrian control of Hezbollah and other terrorist groups that are operating through Syrian-controlled Lebanon in attacks upon Israel? I brought up Hezbollah, the Jibril group, and the PKK specifically, as I said in my press conference that I did.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 21, "text": "And he gave his view that he is stated many times. He stated his position; I restated mine. I said, Look, we are not going to resolve this today, but that we cannot have normal relations between the two of us, as opposed to what is going on in the Middle East, until they are resolved. And so I suggested that we give the Secretary of State and the Syrian Foreign Minister the opportunity to develop a mechanism to try to honestly and openly deal with these issues and let us bring our concerns in real specificity to them, let them respond, and see if we can work through it. What will be the thing that you truly remember, sentimentally, emotionally, spiritually? Well, the sentimental highlight was walking across the bridge in Prague for the first time in 24 years with Havel with this enormous sense of pride I had at the freedom that he had brought to the country and what I remembered from all the young people when I was there in Czechoslovakia 24 years ago, how deeply anti-Communist they were 24 years ago, how desperately they wanted to be free. And just walking across the bridge with me, this guy who had gone to prison for his beliefs and who so completely represented the best of his culture, you know, was the ENTITY of the country. And then we walked across the bridge, and then had dinner in that little pub with the couple that I stayed with 24 years ago. The emotional highlight was going into that cathedral that has just been resanctified that Stalin tore down and turned into a public restroom and being invited by the priest to light a candle for my mother. I still think we have got to I would not call it a disappointment because to be disappointed it has to fall short of your expectations but I think we have got some work to do within NATO in defining this whole area of out-of-area missions. Is NATO going to have a military mission beyond protecting the security of its members and the Partnership For Peace? I am more convinced than I was when I went there that the Partnership For Peace is the right idea at this time and that we are giving Europe a chance to have a different history than its past, and it is enormously significant. But we do not have the NATO NATO was never organized or set up for out-of-area missions. They have done a terrific job with the airlift. I talked to some of our personnel today in Switzerland who were working with the airlift. They have done a great job with the mechanics of the embargo.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 22, "text": "It was never conceived that NATO would use force in any way, even in a very limited way, outside guaranteeing the security of its members. And I just think that, not only in terms of Bosnia but just generally, that whole thing has to really be thought through. Did you expect it to take off, the whole question of partnership, like it did? And, two, who thought of the idea first? Was this an NSC saying we have got to go there with something positive? The answer to the first question is, I did not know what to expect. But it is taken off; it is exceeded my expectations. And I knew that I had to work through in my own mind, sort of; it was one of those things that the more I thought about it, the stronger I felt about it. It is not something, as you all know, that just knocks you off your feet once you hear about it; we all know that. But the more I thought about it, the stronger I felt about it. And I think what is happened was there began to be a consensus in Europe that this was what made sense; that we had to try for a better future, not just a better division than we had before the cold war but a future without division; and that if we could do it in a way that would permit us if circumstances turned against that dream to still do the responsible thing by those that clearly were part of the West that wanted to be part of it, then we ought to do it. Tony would have to answer the other question in terms of the label and all that, but it was an American idea. We started by consulting all the allies; we realized that there were a whole range of reasons for reservations for immediately expanding membership. And then there were some who had some question about whether NATO had any role at all. And we talked through what our objectives were independent of NATO. What would you like to have happen in Europe in 10 years? And then all of our folks went back together and came back with that idea. I have no idea who thought of it, who labeled it or who I got it through the NSC and State and Defense. We all talked it through before I got there, because it was essentially a military training and planning concept. And I am sure somebody knows the answer to your question, but I do not .", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "16-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 28, "text": "You are about to travel to Lima, Peru, again. You are going to the APEC. And this is your last trip as ENTITY How would you like to remember both trip and APEC? I will first of all, I remember Peru fondly from my last visit in 2002, and I am looking forward to going back. I think it will be said, when people analyze the relationship between the United States and Peru, that during my time in office and the time of President Toledo and Garcia, we worked hard to put a good relationship in place. And so, on the one hand, I will be able to go and confirm the importance of the bilateral relationship, and then I will go to a very important meeting. And APEC is an important meeting this time, particularly given the financial situation in the world. APEC comes right after the economic summit we had here in America. So it means that it has the chance to embrace the principles, but it also has a chance for countries that did not participate in the summit here in Washington to express their views. So I am looking forward to it. ENTITY, you built a relationship with Peru because you have a close friendship with President Toledo with former President Toledo, which held the negotiations in favor of FTA Si. Now we have President Garcia in Peru, and elected President Obama in your country. Do you think this new situation is going to change the relationships between the two countries? First of all, President Garcia is muy amable. And so I anticipate and believe that bilateral relations with Peru and the United States will continue to be vibrant and strong and respectful. It is important for the American President and I know President Obama will be this way is to respect the leaders, the culture, and the people of the different countries. Let us talk about Latin America, ENTITY. Sometimes it is said that at the beginning of your administration you were very interested in building up a strong relationship with Latin America, but 9/11 changed the priorities for the United States. I understand that. I mean, a lot of my well, you know, when I was on TV, for example, after 9/11, I was talking about securing the United States and the war on terror. And so I am certain a lot of people in the neighborhood, Central and South America, said, Well, he is only focused on the Middle East; he does not really seem to care about us. I have been to your country twice.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithraultolaamericatv", "title": "Interview With Raul Tola of America TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-raul-tola-america-tv", "publication_date": "20-11-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 29, "text": "And secondly, more important than trips, though, is policy. Free trade agreements with nations in the region are important for development. Social justice programs focusing on health and education for citizens in the region are indicate our desire to help improve the human condition; the Millennium Challenge Account for countries in the region. So in other words, the record speaks about our deep desire to be good neighbors and to have friends. But some pundits said that the lack of policies in foreign affairs gears through Latin America empowered some political tyrants, like President Chavez. No, I strongly disagree with that. I can understand pundits. There is a lot of pundits everywhere, but I believe that our policies have obviously set a different example of what is available for people. I mean, ours is a country that believes strongly in social justice. We believe good societies must have educated people. And finally, ours is a country that promoted free and fair trade, which is the best way to help nations develop their economies. I mean, in other words, you are a Peruvian farmer, you'd like to be selling into U.S. markets, and because it is a big market. But also, it gives you an option to sell into U.S. markets. And that is the best way to help people make a living. And we have obviously, there is a philosophical difference of opinion. And the only thing the United States tries to do is to show the human side of the philosophy that most leaders embrace, which is freedom, free markets, free trade, and social justice. ENTITY, elected President Obama said that at the very first day of his administration, he will withdraw troops from Iraq in a period of 18 months. It also is obvious that we are all in a middle of a huge global financial crisis. Do you think that this marks the end of an era which started with president Reagan and highlighted the United States hegemony with both military and economically? It is going to be important for whoever the ENTITY is, whether it be obviously, ENTITY-elect Obama, but ENTITYs following that the United States builds close alliances and friendships. That is exactly what this administration does. I mean, the classic case is with Peru. We have worked hard to have a good, strong, bilateral relations. And the ENTITY-elect is going to be facing difficult decisions. My job, as the sitting ENTITY, is to help him as he transitions into the job.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithraultolaamericatv", "title": "Interview With Raul Tola of America TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-raul-tola-america-tv", "publication_date": "20-11-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 30, "text": "We are very appreciative, as always, of this opportunity to be with you, and we know it is a very tight day, so were going to dispense with any formalities and get right with it. We have here a representation of Hearst Washington personnel and a representation of our editors from around the country. Unfortunately, time and room would not accommodate all, but we appreciate the group that is here. As a first question, ENTITY, I know that you are very carefully avoiding talking about a very major victory despite the fact that I am sure you are confident of one. But my question has to do with, assuming that election and assuming it to be of significant proportions, what is your number one priority for a new administration? Well, it has a few parts to it. If there is a new administration-I mean, mine, for me. That is what I meant, too. If there is, I want to continue with what we called a new beginning back when we started this last 4 years-the economic recovery that we have had. And I want to continue on the road that we started in the international scene, which is aimed at peace. Everyone seems to have overlooked in this campaign the fact that when we set out to rebuild our defenses, we said there was a second track of equal importance, and that was to engage the Soviet Union in legitimate talks to reduce weapons, particularly the strategic weapons. And while they have walked away from the table at this time, I cannot believe they are going to stay away. I think its in their own interest to join us at that table again. But the program that we started, which was based on the tax cuts to provide an incentive to get the economy growing again, the reducing of, first, the increase in Federal spending, which was at a rate of about 17 percent and is down around 6 percent now, to continue getting that down. And we have almost 2,500 recommendations by the Grace commission that we have a task force working on-we have implemented some already that we have been able to do administratively; others would require legislation-but to put those in place. And I-you know, I have a memory of-we did that in California with the State and when the State was in a situation akin to what the present government of the United States has been.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 31, "text": "And we found that the advice that we got and the program that was put forward by all those volunteers-leaders, business leaders throughout the State-well, the same thing has happened here, only we have had 10 times as many at the Federal level, which is fitting, because California is only about one-tenth the population of the Nation-recommendations that are simply based on putting modern business practices to work for government. So, this is what we are going to do. ENTITY, we want to save your time, here. When you came into office, let us say you had 10 problems. I would say that you have certainly gone a way to solve them, if not solve at least half of them. Employment and lower taxes and-well, you know what they are, the things that you have done well. On a scale of one to five, of the remaining things, where would you put the deficit? They have put a lot of stress on it, and you hear some people stress it. What do you think about it? I could not say it was unimportant, because for 30 years, out on the mashed-potato circuit, and long before I ever thought I'd be in public life, I'd been complaining about the deficit. But for 50 years, the group and the philosophy that has dominated our government for most of that time has continued to tell us it does not mean anything and that-well, my opponent right now in the campaign, if you look at his past, he upheld the deficits when he was a part of government. He said they stimulated the economy; they worked against having too much unemployment. He even advocated once doubling the deficit. But I also am not going to panic in believing that the deficit right now-when you see the growth of the economy, when you see the way unemployment has gone down even while the deficits are going up. They talk about interest rates. Well, interest rates were coming down at their steepest drop at the same time that the deficit was going up. But I believe that you get at that deficit by bringing government, as I say, back into government's proper functions and running it in an efficient manner so that it is not running away out there beyond your revenues, and at the same time, practicing things like the tax policies that have brought about the growth. And we look at that and how did it happen.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 32, "text": "And it has come about partly, some, because we never did get all we wanted in cuts, but mainly in the growth of the economy, the improved receipts, even with the cut in the tax rate, the amount of revenues are up. And we just-we have to continue on that path and do more of it so it comes down faster than 20 billion a year. You have resisted repealing the indexing and the third year of the tax cut. Would you consider those as possible remedies if the deficit did not come down as fast as you would like? I would have to say-and, of course, you know, I always get in trouble with this, because no matter how I try to hedge it and say I am talking about if-a real hypothetical if and a thing that I do not believe is going to happen. But I do not see anything where tax rates, increasing tax rates and the threat they are to economic growth-where that can be looked at as a legitimate solution. In the 5 years before we came here, taxes doubled in this country, and we had $318 billion worth of deficits. So, I think that there were two things about the sudden increase in the level of deficits. It is been built-in over these 50 years in the Government, where the Congress would sit there and did not have to increase the amount. It was already in law that it would increase. The second half of it was the recession that we went into. Well, that had started in 1979. And when you hit bottom in that, you have got unemployed to take care of, and that increases government expenses. And you have lost the revenues that government was once getting from those people when they were employed. ENTITY, you have a vision of the future in which the American people could be defended against offensive nuclear weapons. Critics contend that if we develop an antimissile system, the Soviets will strive to catch up, and there'll be another costly arms race. To avoid that, to relieve the concern of our allies that the superpowers may control the skies, would you be willing to consider having all of the existing nuclear weapons powers-that is, our allies, China, and Russia-participate with us in joint research and development of a defense system that could conceivably save mankind from a nuclear holocaust?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 33, "text": "Well, I have not suggested such a thing as that, but I know that it was my decision here and around this table with the Joint Chiefs of Staff-the nuclear missile is the only weapon in the history of man that has never automatically created a defensive weapon against it. And I said, certainly, there must be a better answer than a deterrent, which is all we have now-granted, it is worked for 40 years-in which we say, if you do it to us, our strike against you will be more than you can afford. But it seems to me much more practical if you could find something that kills weapons instead of kills people. In other words, we are sitting here-if you really analyze it, we are saying that someday, if the Soviets attacked-and we always say that, because I do not think there is anyone in America or there is ever been an administration in this country that has ever contemplated that we would make war-start a war, make war on them. We look-and I told this to Mr. Gromyko-that we look at them as the threat to us. And we think in terms of deterrence. But that deterrence is based on that someone would sit here where I am now sitting and have to give the order that slaughtered millions of people on the other side. So, we were all in agreement that it was worth us starting out to find if we could find a weapon that could intercept those missiles, and intercept them thoroughly enough, not just like having antiaircraft guns. Some of the bombers always get through. And this was why on the debate the other night I said I could see-whether it is me here or someone else-I could see if we were successful and came up, with all of our technology-and there is no one in the world who can match it-with such a weapon, then I could see saying to the Soviet Union, telling them, and saying, Now, will you sit down with us and do the practical thing, which is to get rid of those weapons? Because we can prove to you that they will not work anymore. We have got a Department of Defense without a defense. We have got a Department of Defense without a defense. ENTITY, the Kissinger commission, as you know, on Central America, said there were two basic underpinnings of the permanent state of unrest in that part of the world and that the Communists are sure to exploit.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 34, "text": "And one of these was the high population growth rate, which it said-triple population in something like 30 years. And the other one was the decline in commodity prices and the continuing instability of commodity prices. Beyond trying to put into place such free-market elements as can be put into place in the region to address those questions, what specifically would your administration in the next 4 years do to address both problems; namely, the high growth of population in Central America, and the instability in commodity prices? Well now, we are talking Central America? Well, here again, I believe that that bipartisan Kissinger commission gave us a very workable program. Three-fourths of that program was aimed at the social reforms and economic reforms that are needed in so many parts of Latin America, particularly now, in this instance in Central America; and one-fourth to help them with their security so that-such as El Salvador, where they are trying as desperately as they are to have a democracy, and to have an improved living for their people. You have got to protect them from the guerrilla forces, or provide them with the means of protecting themselves, is what we are doing, while they institute these reforms. But it is akin to our Caribbean initiative. What we have to do is not just go there with aid-which has been too much of our practice in the past. What we have to do is restore their economies, or restore-I do not think they have ever had good ones-give them a basic economy in which they can become self-sustaining and where they can, by their own efforts, begin to improve the quality of living for their people. Yes, the poverty down there is what makes them subject to subversion from outside-the kind that Cuba exports and the Soviet Union. And most of their revolutions in the past have simply exchanged one set of rulers for another set of rulers. So, we are very serious about that plan, and we want to proceed with it. But it will be aimed at helping them. In the Caribbean plan, it grew out of a thing that we just started kind of, you might say, ad hoc, with the Caribbean, and that was-I called some people in New York who've always been willing to participate in public affairs, and people of means in industry and so-forth, about looking at the Caribbean for investment-to meet some of their problems by private investment in those areas. And they did a great deal of this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 35, "text": "And from that we then came forth with the Caribbean initiative plan. Now, this other is similar to that-but for Central America-and we want it implemented, we want to go forward. The difficulty that is holding you back is the violence that is going on. But I think this is the answer-they have got to-and then, well, the other adjunct to that, the birth rate-we have been helping all over the world with information on family planning and so forth, trying to help other countries where they have this problem, which, once again, they can do it themselves. ENTITY, I have a question about your age. We have heard rumors about various problems that you have based on your age. We heard some very clever one-liners during the debate that I thought were some of the high points of the debate, as a matter of fact; but without resorting to one-liners, do you see age as an issue? And are you willing, at any point in the next 4 years, to undergo any kind of competency testing or anything like that? How do you feel on that issue of age? Let us put it this way I think an issue of health is important. And I have been ready, and will continue to be ready anytime, to hand over any medical records. Having had a father-in-law who was a noted surgeon and a president of the American College of Surgeons-Loyal Davis-he was the one that started Nancy and myself on annual physical checkups. And we are going to continue those and make them available. I'd be the first one-if my health were a factor-that I could not fulfill the requirements. But some of the things that have been bruted about are just not true. I have not had any more tendency to drop off to sleep in a dull meeting- since I have been in this job than I used to have sometimes when I was in college listening to a dull lecture. Physiologically, all the doctors that examine me-even the strangers-tell me that physiologically I am a lot younger than my years. Now, if that ever changes, then that would be, as I say, a matter of health. And I would not want to be sitting in a rocking chair while things were going on around me that I could not participate in. ENTITY, I'd like to pick up on Harry's question for a minute and get back to Central America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 36, "text": "Even your harshest critics, at this date, going into the election, are conceding that your policy in Central America is working. Duarte has turned out to be a courageous leader for pluralism. Even in Nicaragua, where Commandante Ortega will undoubtedly be reelected, there is a resurgence of interest on the part of the people that is notable, through the efforts of Arturo Cruz and others, toward pluralism. And the atmosphere seems to be shifting dramatically, in large, due to your efforts. Would you envision-or do you envision circumstances, therefore, in your second term, where it might be possible that you might open negotiations and seek for a renewal of friendship with Cuba? Might Cuba be to you what China was to Richard Nixon? I have to tell you that early in my administration we thought that we were hearing some signals from there-that that was wanted. And we did make a move, and nothing came of it. I recall that. It would take them, or him-he is still in charge-it would take him being willing to divorce his marriage partner, the Soviet Union. And I have long dreamed of what it would be like to indicate to him that rejoining the family of the Americas could probably offer him far more, and his people far more, than he is getting in this partnership with the Soviet Union. No, we will not close the door to that-just as in Central America now, with Nicaragua. We have had a man meeting the Nicaraguan Government representatives and talking what is needed-we are not-this whole thing-let us make it plain, and this involves the contras, too-it is not overthrow of a government. It is getting that revolutionary government to return to the principles of revolution that it enunciated when it was fighting the revolution, which was democracy, human rights, free press, free labor unions, and so forth. Now, the election is not going to mean anything, because, as we all know, he is made it impossible-even if somebody in one of those splinter parties lets his name go on the ballot-we know that it is not a legitimate election. It reminds me of the little joke about the Kremlin. There was a break-in in the Kremlin one night, and someone stole next year's election results. That is what we are seeing down there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 37, "text": "But, yes, I do not know, when they are that indoctrinated and they do not change or give up very easily, I think that what we are seeing is a government very similar to that of the Soviet Union, where they are not about to make any changes that are going to eliminate their hold on all the power. And one thing out of this election-the very fact that men like Cruz will not run, I think, has brought out into the open how much dissatisfaction there is among the people of Nicaragua with the present regime. But, yes, if there is -we will keep watching for any hints or signs from Castro's Cuba, because that is one of the great tragedies of all time. ENTITY, the last couple of days Mr. Mondale has been advocating that something he would do would quickly move towards direct sea and airlift to relieve the starvation situation in northern Africa. Do you see any opportunity whereby the U.S. will be able to-despite the Marxist regime there-that we can do something about aiding more directly in that situation? We have been the single biggest contributor to Ethiopia-$19 billion last year, but we have upped that to $45 billion this year. We have -the total for Africa is about $173 billion dollars. The problem I do not think has to do with-that they are Marxists so much, as just the inability of their bureaucracy to function. Much of the food that we have sent there is still sitting on the docks. And we are working all the time, and holding meetings-our people with theirs-on trying to get them to assign more vehicles for transportation of this food and to get it moving better. We have done some of our help through some of the groups like Catholic Aid that do seem to be able to get to certain areas with this help. I talked on the phone the other day to Mother Theresa. She has four locations where her nuns are there-in Ethiopia-and talks of the people that are coming there, and they just cannot get the food. And I have called our aid group here and put them in touch with her about the location of those, and where-how we can do this. But we are working every minute trying to break this logjam. We have provided gasoline for their planes; we have done things of that kind. So, that is what has to be broken-is just-they do not have the infrastructure; they are not distributing what they are getting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 38, "text": "ENTITY, would you assess the impact of Geraldine Ferraro, first, in this election, and secondly, on the future of politics? Well now, I-first of all, from the standpoint of a woman being a candidate-high time. I wonder, though, if it cannot be called a great breaking point, because if you look at-well, in our own administration, here, the positions, the gains that have been made in our country. I think it was inevitable that we are going to see, and see a Presidential candidate. I think the problem was here that in the selection, it was someone who had not gone out and-well, for example, suppose there had been a woman candidate for the Presidency in their primaries and contesting, and then would be a logical choice, having presented herself before the whole electorate for the nominee as the Presidency-to say that is who I want to be my running mate. This kind of was reaching out, and I think it looked to too many people as if they were simply reaching just for that reason. The other way it would be-say, here is a woman that came up to the place where she is accepted in the eyes of the people as being under consideration for the top spot. You cannot look at a Margaret Thatcher and a Golda Meir and, for that matter, an Indira Gandhi and say, why should we be so different. But we have made such gains. I think part of them-the Supreme Court now-I think the Cabinet members that we have here. I think right now there are an awful lot of people in this country that would be ready to mark the ballot if Jeane Kirkpatrick ran for anything. She has become so respected and so popular throughout the country. But you do not think that Geraldine Ferraro had hit quite that mark. I do not think it hit quite that hard because of the factors that I just mentioned here. First of all, it was not that big a move. It was-to an extent, it was a logical thing that is going to happen and-whether this was the time or not. I guess what I am saying is that that movement must be based not just purely on the sex of the candidate, but must be based, also, on the qualifications of the candidate. ENTITY, we have had a long tradition in this country of diplomats not getting involved in politics.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 39, "text": "And yet more than 20 Ambassadors appointed by you, including personal friends, have come out for Senator Helms, not for Senator Percy or not for other Republicans. Does not that bother you? Well, I am not going to let myself be bothered by it. I was as surprised as anyone. I did not know anything like that was going on or how it came about. Traditionally, I do not know whether-I have never looked it up to see whether there was any politically appointed Ambassador before that ever participated in a campaign or not. We know that traditionally the Secretary of State does not , and the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General. Other Cabinet members have always been accepted as legitimate campaigners. But there is no restriction, actually, or anything legally that binds them from doing such a thing. Well, I think the thing that I guess I am getting at, the question that Mary Ann Dolan was raising about Central America and so Senator Helms- We do not have time. If we are going to do one final, ENTITY, we have all been judging you and your opponent as the campaign has gone. Why do not you take a moment and judge us? What issues, if any, have not been articulated clearly to the American public during this campaign? I will tell you one. I said it in the debate the other night. I never said, and I never ever thought, and I would have thought anybody was crazy who did think that you could turn a nuclear missile around and call it back. I was talking about the submarines and the airplanes. And the funny thing is, since my opponent rushed forth with a quote from the press conference where that subject was discussed, I have had more people-and I have seen more letters to the editor in papers on campaigning around the country that are saying, well, it is perfectly apparent seeing that he was talking about the submarines and the airplanes, not the nuclear missiles. And the thing I have also wondered-and maybe you want to ask some of your people about this-that took place at a press conference, the whole discussion and so forth, and what I was talking about as to why we wanted to begin the START talks on the ground-based missiles first. If anyone there had thought that I was talking about turning missiles around, why was not there a question? Why did not they say, Do you mean that you think you can recall the missiles?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheditorsthehearstcorporation", "title": "Interview With Editors of the Hearst Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-editors-the-hearst-corporation", "publication_date": "30-10-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 42, "text": "I am looking forward to my trip. This is the seventh APEC summit that I have been to. I find them to be important for the United States in the following ways. One, it is an opportunity to stress the importance that we place upon basic values, basic value of liberty, basic value of open markets in order to enhance prosperity. It is a chance to remind people that we are linked together. It is an interesting setting, when you have people from different cultures, different languages come together for a common purpose. It is also a chance for me to remind our country how important it is to have constructive ties in Asia. Asia is a place where we have spilt a lot of blood in the past, and now it is a place of peace. Asia is a place where the United States was engaged militarily, and now we are engaged culturally and socially and economically in a way that is constructive for our peoples. It will be an opportunity for-remind me that it is possible for enemies to be allies and for enemies to be friends. It is a lesson for a lot of us to think about when we think about the Middle East, that forms of government matter and hopeful societies yield peace. I am looking forward to the discussions about trade. The first priority for trade for me at the meeting will be on Doha. I am a firm believer in free trade. I believe the Doha round is the best opportunity for us to accomplish a couple of objectives. One is to fight off protectionism and trade freely, and secondly is to help eliminate poverty. This will be an opportunity for the leaders of the APEC summit to express their desire to see the Doha round succeed. We will take the lead in that, along with other nations. There is also an opportunity for us to start talking about a free trade agreement of the Pacific region. And I am looking forward to having that dialog, begin the dialog. It would just be kind of an interesting opportunity to have the dialog on this aspect of our strategic partnership there and to move forward. We have got a lot of-we have got some free trade agreements with people, and that will be at the table. Opportunity for me to continue to talk about the struggle between radicalism and reasonableness, between extremism and people that want to live in peace. I happen to believe-I am sure you have heard me say this-that we are in a major ideological struggle-a struggle we will win, by the way.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 43, "text": "But it is going to require resolve and dedication. And this will be an opportunity for me to remind our friends at the table that this is the call of our time and that we have an opportunity to write a hopeful chapter here in the beginning of the 21st century and to thank people around the table for understanding this is the call of the time, because there is been a lot of constructive engagement and good work, all aimed at protecting ourselves from short-term attack-in the short term from attack and recognizing that changing conditions of life in the long term will enable us to live in peace. And finally, I am looking forward to reminding people that I take the climate change issue seriously; that we recognize that there needs to be international-an international accord to get people at the table who are the major emitters to set a goal. Step one to solving a problem is to set the goal on what we ought to achieve. If you want somebody to be a part of the problem-a part of the solution, you need to let them be a part of defining what the goal ought to be. So many of the people at the APEC table are going to come to the major economy conference that-those of us who are emitters will be there, including China, which will be at the table. I do not want to single China out, but China has got a major role to play. Any agreement without China is not going to be an effective agreement. So my strategy has been to get China at the table. We will further the dialog. John Howard has got some very interesting ways to further the dialog in a constructive way, particularly talking about energy usage. So we will be looking forward to his leadership on the issue. When I told him I was looking forward to coming, we discussed this issue. He is concerned about greenhouse gases. And so he will take the lead here at the conference, and the United States will play a constructive role. We have got a big agenda. It is my second trip to Australia. I remind people that Australia-parts of Australia reminds me of Texas--and there is no higher compliment. I think on behalf of all of us, I can say thank you very much for this opportunity today. As you have just analyzed, ENTITY, obviously Iraq and the Middle East, the war on terror is an overarching policy issue for the Bush administration. Nonetheless, there has been a perception in the region that this has distracted Washington from engagement in Asia.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 44, "text": "Some people are calling this the Pacific century. You are cutting short your trip to Sydney because of the Iraq issue. I am just wondering, do you think that is warranted, that criticism, and do you see China, for instance, playing the role-the driver in the Pacific century, not the U.S.? No, it is interesting, first of all, this administration has got good bilateral relations with Japan, good bilateral relations with China, good bilateral relations with Korea. Our relationship with the ASEAN countries are as strong as America has ever been, and of course our ties with Australia are tight, really tight. And the reason I say that is, is that this just does not happen without work. And I have worked hard to develop bilateral relations in such a way that we can achieve strategic objectives. I believe the relations with the United States and the Asian-Pacific region have never been better, and as a result, we are addressing problems and creating opportunities. One problem, of course, is North Korea. When I came into office, the world was expecting the United States to solve the North Korea issue alone. To me-and the North Korean leader had basically not honored the bilateral agreement that had been struck, and therefore, felt like we needed to put this issue in a position in which others were speaking besides the United States-and have started the six-party talks. Five countries were convinced to come to the table on one side to convince the North Korean leader to give up his nuclear weapons ambitions. That would not have happened without engagement and good, solid relations. Another issue obviously is our bilateral relations with China. It is the same-you are in a little different position in that you have got a nice trade surplus with China. We have got a trade deficit with China. And it is important for us to have a-given the complexity of our relationship, that we have got a strategic relationship that allows for engagement and for us to help deal with a major trade deficit, for example, and/or product safety or a SARS outbreak. Secretary Paulson-I empowered Secretary Paulson to develop this special working relationship with China. And it requires a lot of engagement. It requires engagement at the top, with President Hu Jintao, who I respect, as well as people in my Cabinet. For those who argue that, they really have not -frankly have not followed how engaged we have been. Is China an issue for the world?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 45, "text": "But I do not view it as a negative issue; I view it as an opportunity to work with a-one of the really significantly growing economies in the world. First, I view that a growing middle class in China is good for U.S. exporters. It provides opportunity. And it is -by the way, it is not only good for U.S. exports; it is good for Australian exporters, and it is good for Japanese exporters, and it is good for Singaporean, Malaysian. Anybody who is making a product somebody wants, it is just a good opportunity. And so as a part of our engagement with China, we have worked with Hu Jintao to convince him to help convert his economy from one of savers to one of consumers, which means-and by the way, that takes a lot of effort and work to get in a position where you can even make those kind of constructive suggestions-which means the development of a pension system or health care, so that people do not feel like they have to hoard their money to save for a rainy day, but in fact, there is some kind of safety net that is predictable, which then would convert a Chinese person who is beginning to realize better income into a consumer. And then all of a sudden, you have got consumers, which provide opportunity. Huge economic opportunity-you see China as the big grower of the economy in the Asia Pacific? No, I see the United States as the big driver for trade. At APEC, people ought to be wondering whether or not George Bush is going to keep taxes low to make sure our economy continues to grow, because we are a significant trading partner. I view China as an opportunity. I think the United States is going to drive a lot of the trade. That is why we conducted-now, having said that, I think China will provide opportunity for Australian producers, but we also provide the same opportunity. I do not view it as a zero-sum game, let me put it to you that way. I view it as an-I view-all of us contribute, so long as the world does not slip into protectionism. And part of the reason one goes to APEC is to promote trade and opportunity. And how do you plan to win the hearts and win the markets in the world, including in Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia? Well, I think, first of all, we have a complex relationship with China. The United States strongly supports markets.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 46, "text": "On the other hand, we also support open societies, transparency, where people are allowed to express themselves in a free society. I believe in freedom of religion. I believe in basic freedoms. So our relationship with China is, on the one hand, we welcome trading opportunities. And what makes the relationship even more complex is, at the same time, we believe in human rights and human dignity. And we worked with the Chinese leadership to promote human rights and human dignity. So it is not-it is hard to define the relationship in kind of a simple, one-sentence structure. As I told you, I view China as a positive opportunity. I like him; I like to talk to him. We can share issues together. And he can say to me, What are your problems? In other words, we have got a personal relationship. And that is the way I try to do with all leaders because the best diplomacy is when you can sit down with somebody one on one and speak candidly about issues and problems. See, that is what leaders do. You see problems and you anticipate problems and work together to accomplish something. I have also got a very good relationship with your leader. And so bilateral relations-first of all, in the Muslim world, it is very important for people to understand that the war on terror is not a war against Muslims; it is a war against murderers. I do not believe religious people, truly religious people kill the innocent. And therefore, it is important for leaders and countries to work together to prevent the murder of the innocent and, at the same time, make sure that we respect-America, in my case, respects religion, values the right for people to worship, and, in the case of Islam, values Islam as an important part of the international scene in the world we live in. Yes, well, I am better for it. I have a question on North Korea. Is it possible that North Korea will give up nuclear weapons program by the end of your term? And to help achieve it, are you ready to remove North Korea from the State Sponsors of Terrorism list, even without the resolution of Japanese abductee issue? As to the first part of your question, I certainly hope that North Korea honors its agreements. They-in September of 2006, they made a substantial agreement to disclose and dismantle all aspects of a nuclear weapons program. And here we are in 2007, nearly 2 years later, where we are still reminding them of that agreement.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 47, "text": "On the other hand, a lot has happened in the last couple of months that would lead me to believe that we are on- we are making progress. And we will continue to push toward the full disclosure and dismantlement. Secondly, we have-different aspects of our relationship are on the table, but it is performance based. In other words, we expect people to honor their agreements. Finally, as I assured Prime Minister Abe, that we are not going to forget the abductee issue. He and the Japanese people are very concerned that once certain aspects of the agreement are achieved, that we will forget the fact that Japanese citizens have been abducted. ENTITY. I will never forget the meeting I had with the mother-it is very important for your readers to know that that had a deep impression on me- the mother whose daughter was abducted by North Koreans. I cannot imagine what that would mean. I guess I can imagine what it would mean; I just cannot understand, fully understand the pain that she felt-still feels. And I will never forget her coming to the Oval Office with the picture of that little girl, picture of her daughter who got abducted. She sat right there in the Oval Office. And my point to you is, is that I am not going to forget the mother or forget the fact. And so we will work with the-continue to work with the Japanese to make it clear to the North Koreans that we also expect there to be resolution to this issue. In other words, I understand, as well as I possibly can, the emotion that people attach to this issue. But now that I am over 60, it is not that old. It is all in your mind. Sir, your administration has indicated interest to appoint a special envoy to the Organization of Islamic Conference, or the OIC. Have you identified the person? And what will he or she do to bridge relations with the Islamic countries in the Muslim world, in light of the war in Iraq and in light of the detention of extremists from Muslim countries? First of all, we have not identified the person yet. We are working toward that end. As a matter of fact, I spoke to the Secretary of State about this this morning, coincidentally enough. Anyway, we are working the issue. Secondly, the reason why I suggested- or announced that we are going to do this is because I am concerned about the perceptions in the Muslim world that the United States views the war on terror as a war against a particular religion.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 48, "text": "And I just explained to you that this is a war of extremists and radicals, ideologues driven by a vision that is not-that hijacks religion in order to justify their position. And any chance we have to dispel false notion and to reinforce the realities is helpful to the United States and frankly others as well. And so that is the reason to name the envoy. It also is a clear signal that we respect nations and that we treat the Islamic world seriously. And you can do that all different kinds of ways. It is another moment for people to see the seriousness of intent. In terms of-murder is murder, and murder to achieve political objectives is-needs to be stopped. People murdered Americans to achieve a political objective. There is a debate in our country whether that is true or not. I have made up my mind. I believe it is absolutely fundamentally true because I am listening to what the enemy says, the enemy of freedom, what they are saying. They say, We want a caliphate, we want to spread our vision. It took a military action, by the way, to liberate people from that vision in Afghanistan. This was not an attack on Islam; this was an attack for liberty. Think about a society in which you two could not function in what you are doing because of your gender. Because the vision of these people-who murder the innocent, by the way, to achieve their vision-is that women are not equal. And it just so happened that, given the way the world is today, that that kind of ideologue provided safe haven for people who plotted and killed people in our country. One, I am not going to stand for it; I am going to protect America, just like any other leader would protect their own country. And two, one way to achieve long-term peace is to help people realize forms of government that give hope. And so whether it be in Afghanistan and Iraq, we are helping people realize the blessings of freedom. Freedom yields peace. Forms of government matter. And so the ambassador to the OIC or the President or any other representative of America will be expressing this deep desire to work together to achieve peace. ENTITY, what do you think you have achieved with regards to U.S. ties with Asia during your time in office? In other words, we are making progress. The first step was to get people to the table, to remind people that it is just not the United States with responsibility.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 49, "text": "The purpose of the-getting all five of us to the table is so that if North Korea tried to say, Well, I am really-I said I was going to do it, but I am not going to do it, then there is somebody else also saying, And here are the consequences. And now it is beginning to work because they are verifiably beginning to shut down the reactor. And so we have got more to do. Unfinished is kind of a loaded word, in a way. But I am not-we are not in control of- we are in control of putting the process in place and making sure it is consequential if somebody does not go forward. But it is the leader of North Korea who gets to the make the decision. I have made my choice. Let me reiterate a little bit of what I said earlier. The definition of successful foreign policy is to be in a position to work with others to solve problems. And this administration has worked hard to be in a position to convince others to work together to solve problems. I have just outlined some of the problems, some of the problems-whether or not trade is open and people are treated fairly. One classic example of this is intellectual property rights. I know that is a deep concern to your Government, just like it is to all our governments, that if you are trading with a country, you want to make sure that those intellectual property rights are treated respectfully. And in some societies, it is difficult. And therefore, we have to be in a position to work collaboratively and bilaterally to convince countries that in order to be a part of the international world, you have to honor contract. And one contract is, you do not steal somebody else's intellectual property. But nevertheless, those kind of relationships exist now; we are able to have those kind of dialogs. There is been a lot of cooperation on the security front in remarkable ways since I have been President. The leadership of your country knows full well the dangers of extremism prevailing and have been very strong in working, for example, on the Proliferation Security Initiative. This is an initiative where many APEC nations have agreed to help find and stop the shipment of materiels which could end up in the hands of extremists and radicals that could harm us. And it took a while to get this relationship in place. But it is a relationship that is necessary to help prevent weapons of mass destruction from being moved.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 50, "text": "And here is a classic case of a successful collaborative effort. The biggest danger we have, it seems like to me, is isolationism and protectionism becoming prevalent philosophies. One of the things that this administration has done in working with our friends is to work hard to explain to people the beneficial nature of trading together. And therefore-and that is manifested, by the way, in, for example, the free trade agreement with Australia, which was not a given. And there were some difficulties to overcome in Australia and in the United States, but nevertheless, we got it done. And entering into free trade agreements with other nations, such as Singapore, has been good ways of making sure that we codify the benefits of open trading relationships. And so there is been a lot of progress made, and the North Korean issue is the issue that we are spending a lot of time on and, hopefully, we can get completed. Just to the domestic scene, we have got Federal elections, as you know, coming up in Australia. Last time around, you had some comments with regards to the then opposition leader's policies on Iraq. You described his policy of withdrawal from Iraq as disastrous. You have a one-on-one meeting with the opposition leader, Kevin Rudd; he is ahead in the polls. He is also got a policy in Iraq which talks about withdrawal, albeit with caveats. I am just wondering, what is your view of the opposition leader, Kevin Rudd? What will you discuss in the meeting? And what do you make of his Iraq policy? Yes, first of all, I think it makes sense for me to reach out to leading political figures when I go to other countries. And so I am looking forward to this meeting. I do not know much about him, frankly. Obviously, I have not -maybe I met him; I do not remember meeting him. When I spoke to the Parliament-- I am going to remind him that, one, the stakes in Iraq are very high for peace; that the liberation of a country-that country was important for peace; and that a democracy-Iraqi-style democracy in the heart of the Middle East is part of winning this ideological struggle. So the first thing I am going to do is explain to him my views about this-the world in which we live. And I will remind him that, as far as I am concerned, that leaving Iraq before the job is done will cause an enemy that attacked us before to become emboldened.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 51, "text": "And as John Abizaid put it, to think the enemy will stay there and not follow us here is- in other words, we leave before the job is done, they will follow us home. That-I will remind him that the best way to conduct policy is based upon conditions on the ground; that success is important; that conditions ought to be driving troop deployments. And that is how-I will tell him how-what I would hope all our coalition partners would view the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan. Having said that, I do appreciate very much the fact that the Australians have sacrificed and have served. And I am looking forward to seeing some Australian troops with Prime Minister Howard to thank them and, as importantly, thank their families for joining America and a lot of other countries in the great cause of liberation and peace. It is going to be an interesting trip, and what is interesting about these trips is that the time around the table with leaders is important, but also the time sitting down with individuals is important as well. It is a good opportunity to conduct foreign policy. And as I told you, a lot of foreign policy, for me, is the capacity to just look at somebody in the eye and tell them what I think and listen to what they think. It is finding that common ground, if possible, to solve problems. And sometimes you can solve problems by anticipating them and putting the conditions in place so that they will not arise in the first place. And sometimes they just show up, and you better be in a position to deal with them. Can I just clarify something? Rudd is-his theater-he is talked about the importance of Afghanistan, talking about withdrawing our troops from Iraq. That he is determined to-he has determined that the issue on Afghanistan- to keep troops in Afghanistan. I view both Iraq and Afghanistan as theaters of the same war against radicals and extremists and look forward to sharing my views with Mr. Rudd, of course, and continue our discussions, strategic discussions with John Howard. My next question would touch on Indonesian cleric Abu Bakar Ba'asyir. As you might know, since he was released from jail, has been exercising activities like any other citizens, including recently-last weekend he inaugurated a long march participated by about 1,000 of his followers, in connection with that commemoration, or welcoming the Ramadan, Islamic fasting month. Actually, how close has your Government monitored the activities of Abu Bakar Ba'asyir?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 52, "text": "First of all, I did not know he led a parade of a thousand people. So that may answer your first question. I am sure our Embassy is aware of the activities that take place in your country. I mean, you are a free country where people are allowed to express themselves in the public square, which is a sign of a healthy society. I am concerned, however, about anybody who preaches violence and extremism and radicalism in a world in which innocent people just get simply murdered for ideological purposes. There were some terrible murders in your country, as you know, just like in mine, and I am confident that by far the vast majority-all of Indonesia rejects that kind of behavior. Innocent people were killed in Bali for no other reason than they just happened to be vacationing and because somebody wanted to send a political message because they are involved with this ideological struggle. And those of us who want there to be peace have got to reject this kind of behavior. And so your Government is a government of law; your Government will conduct itself according to your laws. But anybody who preaches that kind of violence in the name of what I would call a dark political vision needs to be taken seriously. My next question is about the U.S.-Japan relationship and the war on terror. The opposition party in Japan is threatening to cut the extension of Japanese participation in the antiterrorism operations in the Indian Ocean. Are you concerned about that? And will you be-will you raise this issue when you will meet Prime Minister Abe in Australia? First of all, Japan has been a positive contributor to dealing with the extremists in this ideological war. And I thank the Japanese Government and the people of Japan for their contributions. And I would hope that they would continue to maintain this-their positive influence. And of course, my conversations with Prime Minister Abe, whom I respect a great deal, will center on the war on terror, as well as a lot of other key issues. Japan has played a significant role in many of the things we have discussed here, like Proliferation Security Initiative, six-party talks. They have been a constructive partner in peace, and I will-we will talk about all aspects of our relationship. ENTITY, tomorrow, August 31st, Malaysia celebrates its 50th-- Fiftieth-make sure my congratulatory remarks get in your article. Bush Congratulates Malaysia. Do you think that is what it will say?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 53, "text": "It also marks the 50th relations between the U.S. and Malaysia-- So what are your outlook and hopes for U.S.-Malaysia relations, and especially with Malaysia being the 10th largest trading partner? First of all, I do believe we ought to have-take this notion of trade and have meaningful discussions with a potential free trade agreement with Malaysia. Secondly, I respect Prime Minister Badawi, admire his leadership. When his wife died, I tried to call him early just to let him know I cared about him. I will congratulate him. Do not put that in the article, that you had to tell me that. You can put it in there if you want. I will be glad to-I am going to congratulate him. You did congratulate him. I am going to congratulate him again. I will double the congratulations. That is right; I did write him a note. Did I call him or write him a note? You wrote him a note. Anyway, Malaysia is an interesting example of how a free society can deal with movements that could conceivably change and alter the nature of the free society. And I respect the way the Prime Minister has used freedom and used the openness of society to kind of deal with frustration. I mean, all societies have frustrated people. And the question is, will the outlet of that frustration lead to violence or lead to peace? And Malaysia is an example of a country where frustrations have been channeled in a constructive way. And therefore, he is a leader, as far as I am concerned, and a very constructive force for Southeast Asia. By the way, I am going to meet with the ASEAN leaders, which is an important meeting as well. It is an opportunity for the United States to stay very much engaged with ASEAN. I unfortunately will not be there for the 60th, but look forward to having an event that would kind of recognize the importance of ASEAN as far as the United States is concerned. So this is a side meeting with the ASEAN leaders after APEC meeting, sir? I try to do that every time. So they will have somebody like-I will sit down and meet with the ASEAN nations as well. The other thing that is interesting about Malaysia is, they are going to be one of the leaders on alternative fuels. I believe that it is in our interests that we develop the technologies necessary to deal with energy dependence as well as greenhouse gases.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 54, "text": "Back to the climate changes-the way-if you are truly interested in dealing with greenhouse gases, people need to focus on the development of technologies that will enable us to, on the one hand, grow our economies, on the other hand, be good stewards of the environment. Just for the record-and this probably will not be a headline, although I have tried to make it one a lot-when it comes time to climate change, there is one major industrialized nation that actually grew its economy and reduced greenhouse gases; that would be the United States of America- that actually had greenhouse gases go down and the economy go up. So something is working here, and it is technologies, use of technologies. And so I am going to be reminding people about-that we can come up with a strategy that does not impoverish our people and, at the same time, takes advantage of technologies. And we are going to need to share some technologies with newly emerging economies in order to achieve this objective. Anyway, I forgot to make that point. I am not making the point to you, as you can tell. That is why I am kind of looking over your shoulder. There appears to be a perception in Southeast Asia that this administration has neglected the region. How do you plan to convince them otherwise when you meet in APEC? Well, I-do you want to ask another question, because I already answered it. I will be glad to answer it again- which is, we have got strong bilateral-first of all, the number of trips I have taken- I have gone to every APEC meeting. I have spent a lot of time with leaders both here and in your respective countries-that we have got relations to a point where we can work together to solve common problems. PSI is one such example of a strategy we have implemented to deal with the realities of the world. And so it is -the truth of the matter is, I spend a lot of time working on Asian matters. And all I will ask you to do is look at the results of the individual relationships and the ability to put processes in place to deal with the threats we live in and the capacity to work together to solve problems and to create opportunities. And to me, that is a sign of a healthy, robust relationship with an important part of the world.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media-0", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 55, "text": "We begin on a Tuesday morning with the disaster in the Gulf, now in its 50th day, and our exclusive interview with ENTITY, We sat down on Monday before his commencement speech at a high school in Kalamazoo, Michigan. And I began by asking ENTITY if the oil spill in the Gulf has made this the toughest point in his ENTITY to date. This is tough, no doubt about it, because, you know, when you watch television or you go down to the Gulf and you see birds covered in oil and you talk to fishermen who are on the verge of tears big, tough guys, but, you know, their livelihoods are being smothered by this oil that is coming into the estuaries and marshes it gets you frustrated. Do you feel at this stage, 50 days or so into this, that your administration has been damaged by this oil spill? First of all, I am not concerned about my politics right now. What I am concerned about is what is happening down in the Gulf. And I guarantee you, the folks in the Gulf have been damaged by this oil spill. And livelihoods are at stake. This is the largest federal response to an environmental disaster in history. From day one, we understood that this was going to be a major disaster. We have put unprecedented resources to deal with it. Then why do you think there is so much frustration aimed not only at BP right now but at your administration? There are people who are starting to wonder out loud if the oil spill in the Gulf could be could do to you what Katrina did to President Bush or even what the Iran hostage situation did to Carter. You know, I have to tell you, some of this is just the nature of the 24-hour news cycle. You have got a camera showing oil spilling out in the Gulf, and people are understandably frustrated and they are upset, and they have every right to be. But here is what I can say, that we have responded with unprecedented resources. And when you look at what most of the critics say, Matt, and you ask them, Well, specifically what is it that the administration could or should have done differently that would have an impact on whether or not oil was hitting the shore? you are met with silence. And the fact of the matter is there has not been an idea that is mentioned out there by any of the critics that we have not evaluated. And if it was going to work, we would have done it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstoday", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer on NBC's Today", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today", "publication_date": "07-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 56, "text": "But it happened under my watch that you still had these oil rigs out there that we thought could deal with this kind of situation and they have not been able to deal with it. I spoke to Rear Admiral Mary Landry of the Coast Guard who was speaking on behalf of the administration. And I asked her I said, We are seeing an oil slick in the water. Where is that coming from? And she said, There is no evidence that that is coming from this wellhead. That is residual oil coming from the rig itself. A day later, she echoed those same comments. Was the administration misled, in your opinion? Were you relying too much on information from BP? And from the start, did BP try to downplay the situation? Initially the thinking was that, in fact, the rig had sunk but the blowout preventers had shut down the well, because that is what they were supposed to do. As soon as people understood that the blowout preventers were not working, that the valves that were supposed to shut down in the event of a blowout like this had not functioned properly, then I think people understood right then that this was going to be a significant emergency. Have you spoken directly to Tony Hayward, the CEO of BP? I have not spoken to him directly, and here is the reason, because my experience is when you talk to a guy like a BP CEO, he is going to say all the right things to me. I am not interested in words. I am interested in actions. And we are communicating to him every single day exactly what we expect of him and what we expect of that administration. In all due respect, that feels strange to me; that here we have got the CEO of a company that is responsible for the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history, and I think I am just curious why you did not pick up you would not pick up the phone and in some ways just give him a piece of your mind. Well, the look, this has sort of been this has been the main critique of the administration is giving a piece of my mind to these guys. I would love to just shout and holler, because I am thinking about this day in and day out. But my main job is to solve the problem. To solve the problem, you have to have a reliable partner. Let me read you some of the things that Mr. Hayward has said over the course of this disaster. He said, The Gulf of Mexico is a big ocean.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstoday", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer on NBC's Today", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today", "publication_date": "07-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 57, "text": "The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume. The environmental impact of this disaster is likely to be very, very modest. I'd like my life back.  The family members of those 11 people who died on the rig and the people whose lives are going to be changed for years want their lives back too. He does not work for you. But if he did, would you want him out? He would not be working for me after any of those statements. First of all, we are going to have to find out why this thing went in the first place. And the fact of the matter is that there is going to be a thorough review. And I do not want to prejudge it, but the initial reports indicate that there may be situations in which not only human error was involved, but you also saw some corner cutting in terms of safety, and that BP is a multibillion-dollar corporation. It is talking about paying $10.5 billion in dividends just for this quarter. We are going to have to make sure that not only do they shut down the cap, we are not only going to have to make sure that any deepwater drilling process that is out there is, in fact, fail-safe and oil companies know what they are doing, but we also have to make sure that every single person who is been affected by this is properly compensated and made whole. Can BP do that? Can they do all that? They can afford it. If I start seeing BP nickel and diming folks down there, then they are going to have to answer to us. We have heard time and time again throughout this crisis, as BP has tried and failed with all their fixes, that this technology is untested at this depth. And it just raises a question. If this is where we are drilling for oil, at 4,000 and 5,000 feet under the surface of the ocean, where is the oversight in that? Why are they allowed to drill there if the worst-case-scenario methods to prevent disaster are untested at that depth? It does not help to test them at 100 feet. When it comes to how we were operating in overseeing and taking the word of the oil industry generally, not just BP in terms of the fail-safe nature of what they could do, I think we have to completely review that. And that is why I have assigned this bipartisan commission.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstoday", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer on NBC's Today", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today", "publication_date": "07-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 58, "text": "I want them to report back to me, because you obviously cannot take the word of oil companies when they say they have got a bunch of redundancy and backup plans, when something like this happens and it turns out they have no idea what they are doing. So even as the oil is spewing into the Gulf, would you consider halting all drilling below a certain depth right now? Well, keep in mind what is happening. On new drilling. The production wells that are already pumping oil, those do not seem to be the problem. The problem has to do with actually drilling and starting a new well. So we have put a moratorium on new wells. Shallow wells are not a problem because the risers essentially come up above the water. So if something like this happened in a shallow-water well, then folks would just get up on the platform and they would start fixing it and it would be shut down fairly quickly. that we can actually handle a crisis like this. Have you allowed yourself to even imagine what the Gulf region will look like if oil continues to spew until August, what it will smell like, what the economic situation will be like down there? And here is what I will say. There are going to be marshes, for example, where the oil goes in and the sea life that is there is decimated for a season, maybe two. But potentially we can preserve those estuaries and those marshes so that three years from now things have come back; things have bounced back. Critics are now talking about your style, which is the first time I have heard that in a long time. Right. that this is not the time to meet with experts and advisers. This is a time to spend more time in the Gulf and -- I never thought I'd say this to a ENTITY but kick some butt. And here is what I am going to push back hard on this, because I think that this is just an idea that got in folks' heads and the media has run with it. I was down there a month ago, before most of these talking heads were even paying attention to the Gulf. A month ago I was meeting with fishermen down there standing in the rain talking about what a potential crisis this could be. And I do not sit around just talking to experts because this is a college seminar. We talk to these folks because they potentially have the best answers so I know whose ass to kick, right?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstoday", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer on NBC's Today", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today", "publication_date": "07-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 59, "text": "Most of the decisions that I make on a day-to-day basis, I make because I have gathered the best information possible in very difficult situations, and my job is to figure out how can I move the federal government, the private sector, all the various players who are involved, to perform some very, very difficult tasks? And I do not always have time to perform for the benefit of the cable shows. What I do have is dedication and commitment to make sure that the people who are actually being affected by this are going to get the best possible service from me. And as long as I am ENTITY, that is the approach that I am going to take to this job. to have you give the commencement address. Why'd you pick Kalamazoo Central? This school is a great example of what is possible when you have got a public school, it is not in a wealthy community, it is diverse, and yet, because the community decided to invest by guaranteeing college tuition for any graduate here, you have got teachers and a principal who are dedicated and are willing to think out of the box, so they are not just bound by It is not in my contract, but they are doing all kinds of extra stuff. You are not going to find a more friendly audience than you are going to have when you give this speech tonight. I watched their enthusiasm when they met you a few minutes ago. Your job is to inspire them What are you going to say to them? Well, I have to say, first of all, high-school audiences are the toughest, right, because Well, you know, when you are a teenager, you think you know more than just about anybody. But my main message to these kids is, number one, internalize a sense of excellence. You know, I think most of these kids have had a lot of support, telling them, Do well. But as soon as you get out of here, nobody's telling you, and you have got to want that on your own. The second thing I am going to tell them is, No excuses. And one of the things I am going to remind them is that guy, you know, shagged a lot of grounders to end up being the captain of the Yankees. And then the third one is I also want kids to internalize the lesson of their community here, which is give back.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstoday", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer on NBC's Today", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today", "publication_date": "07-06-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 60, "text": "We are in the White House in Washington, DC, the residence of the head of the American Government. This is the place where the Presidents of the United States do their work. ENTITY is receiving us in order to give an interview for Soviet television. And since our time is very limited, I think that we will get down to questions right away. This will be your first trip to our country. What feelings are you traveling to the Soviet Union with, and what do you anticipate from this upcoming summit meeting? Well, this will be the fourth meeting between the General Secretary and myself. I am obviously looking forward to the trip for one reason, because I have never been there. And I am looking forward to seeing your country-well, as much as possible with the meetings that will be going on. And we have discussed in the previous meetings with your General Secretary such matters as arms reductions, and we have been successful on the one treaty. such things as rescue-at-sea agreements, fisheries agreements, things of that kind in which we have made great progress. At Geneva, in Reykjavik, in Washington, you and Mr. Gorbachev took steps which have great significance. Thanks to that, the threat of war has been reduced and cooperation has increased between our countries, despite the different social systems we have. What kind of opinion do you have about future prospects for movement in this same direction? Well, I have to be optimistic about it. I have read Perestroika cover to cover, and the goals that were outlined there for your own country and by your present leader were such that I think it would reduce some of the differences between us further and make it possible for future leaders of our countries to eliminate-well, what I called for in our first meeting in Geneva, when just the General Secretary and I were talking to each other, I pointed out that we did not mistrust each other because we were armed, we are armed because we mistrust each other, and that we had a unique opportunity, the two of us, to go to work not just to try and reduce arms but to reduce the causes of the mistrust. And I think we have carried on in that manner in the succeeding meetings. the power-muscle power, so to speak, or the power of reason? What is more important in today's world?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 61, "text": "But I think that can be achieved more quickly if we show our mutual desire for a peaceful world by eliminating some of the most horrendous of the weapons, such as the nuclear weapons. A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought. Well, I would think that once-I think the weapons that are the most destabilizing are the nuclear weapons, the idea in the minds of people that once those weapons are fired devastation is going to follow and there is no way to halt them. They are more destabilizing than the people's concern about weapons that we are familiar with-airplanes, battleships, things of this kind, artillery. But then if we continue to work out our differences and a better understanding, then I think we engage in the reduction of conventional weapons. ENTITY, since we have already touched on the question of nuclear weapons, I would not like to seem pessimistic, but I get the impression that in Moscow there will hardly be an opportunity to sign a treaty about 50-percent reductions of strategic nuclear weapons while observing the ABM treaty. Still, despite that, what are your attitudes about the prospects of concluding such a very, very important treaty for the world? Well, I still think it can be concluded, but it would be, I think, overly optimistic, with the time limitations, to believe that it could be ready for signature as the INF treaty was here in the previous meeting. It would be nice if we could have achieved a signing ceremony there on this visit, but this treaty is far more technical and complicated than the treaty we did sign. And so, the experts on both sides who have been working on this in Geneva have not been able to make the progress that was made in the earlier treaty. And I think that perhaps we can advance it in our conversations, discussion, in Moscow on this. But we must-the idea is to continue until we have the treaty that is correct, and not simply try to meet a date and sign a treaty that might not be all that we would desire. I do not think either of us have gone this far with the idea that it was not a good idea. ENTITY, I'd like to ask you a sort of personal question. Could you, in the beginning of your Presidency, when you just came into the Oval Office, could you have imagined the possibility of your upcoming visit to Moscow?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 62, "text": "Probably not, because very frankly, I have to say I think there is a difference between this General Secretary and other leaders of your country that I had met with in the past. I do not think they had any dreams of perestroika. And yet, I felt that we had to exist in the world together. Our systems are different, we are going to be competitive in a number of ways, and that'll continue, but we can be competitive without being hostile to the point of conflict with each other. And I think this is what we are aiming at. And no, I could not have foreseen your present leader. Well, new times bear new leaders, bring about new leaders. So, we can conclude that you think that your successor will continue stabilizing Soviet-American relations, that there will not be a pause in the dialog between our countries? Well, if the next President is the President I would like to see there, the present Vice President, I know he would continue on this track. But I think that our people want this. I have had a visit, just the other day, here in the White House with 78 young teenagers, and half of them were from the Soviet Union and half were students of ours. They had been holding a conference in Finland, then in Moscow, and now here in the United States. And you looked out at those young people and you could not say, well, those are Russians and those are Americans. You just saw young people who had learned to know each other, exchange ideas, get acquainted. And I found myself saying to them, if all the young people of the world could get to know each other, there'd never be another war. ENTITY, I cannot help but ask you a question which is very interesting to Soviet people, many ordinary people in our country. You, in your speeches, many times have quoted the works of Lenin; you have made reference to his works; you quoted him about expansionistic aims of Soviet Communists. Soviet specialists, insofar as I know, in the U.S. press and people who work in the Library of Congress have studied all of the compositions of Lenin's, and they have not found one similar quotation or anything that is even close to some of those quotations. So, I would like to ask you what works of Lenin did you read, and where were those quotations that you used taken from?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 63, "text": "But I am old enough to have had a great interest in the Soviet Union, and I know that in the things I studied in college, when I was getting my own degree in economics and sociology, that the declarations of Karl Marx, for example, that Karl Marx said your system, communism, could only succeed when the whole world had become Communist. Now, as I say, I cannot recall all of the sources from which I gleaned this, and maybe some things have been interpreted differently as in modern versions, but I know that Lenin expounded on that and said that that must be the goal. But I also know-and this did not require reading Lenin-that every leader, every General Secretary but the present one had, in appearances before the Soviet Congress, reiterated their allegiance to that Marxian theory that the goal was a one-world Communist state. This man has not said that. So, I was not making anything up; these were the things we were told. For example, here in our government, we knew that Lenin had expressed a part of the plan that involved Latin America and so forth. And the one line that sounded very ominous to us was when he said that the last bastion of capitalism, the United States, would not have to be taken; it would fall into their outstretched hand like overripe fruit. I'd like to say that, as it says in the Bible, everybody wants to go to paradise, but nobody is proposing to do that-anything for us or to hurry up the process. Everything has to go by in its own time; that is our point of view. Well, would not you think, though, that these two systems obviously were competitive in the world with each other in the economic situation-industry and so forth, the difference between private ownership and government ownership of the sources of material, industry and so forth, agriculture-well, would not you think that it would make the most sense to compete legitimately, as business firms compete with each other, and see which does the better job? Without question, when we talk about the fact that we think that sooner or later that the world is going to come to socialism, we are just talking about a historic process. Every country has to decide for itself. And we think that capitalist countries and socialist countries have to coexist peacefully on our very small planet and to cooperate with each other. Well, yes, we believe that also.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 64, "text": "But there was a time when, as I say, we were faced with declarations of the need to take over and expand. And on the part of, in this instance, of the communist philosophy, I think, as I have said earlier here, just this normal competition and find out which system is best. And then we have this one thing in which possibly we differ. And that is that we believe the people of a country have the right to determine what form of government they will have. You have a constitution; we have a constitution. The difference between our two constitutions is very simple; it is contained in three words. Both of the constitutions announce things for the people's benefit and so forth. Your constitution says, these are the privileges, rights that the government provides for the people. Our constitution says, we the people will allow the government to do the following things. And the government can do nothing that is not prescribed by the people in that constitution. And so, where we run into conflicts sometimes in countries where there is a stirring and a division in trying to determine a government, our view is, the people must have the right to say this is the government we want. It must not be imposed on them. ENTITY, in that connection I'd like to say that democracy is, of course, a great goal for all peoples. But if you take a specific situation now-social opinion in the United States, the polls and Congress and so forth-Congress is against actions that are being taken in Nicaragua. And despite that, the administration is acting in a somewhat different fashion, despite some of the opinions expressed in Congress. Of course, you must remember that each Congressman is elected only by a district-his congressional district. This is the only job in our country that is elected by all of the people. And the responsibility that the people have laid on this office in the Constitution is that the President is responsible for our national security, and that is a duty he cannot shirk. And so, he is the final word as to what is essential to that national security. You were going to say something. Yes, I wanted to say, going back to our conversation about coexistence-the coexistence of capitalist and socialist governments-I wanted to remind you that Lenin, our first leader-it was his idea to have peaceful coexistence. But I'd like to talk about another question. the human rights question.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 65, "text": "As a rule, you talk about the human rights situations in other countries. I'd like today to ask you-you, as ENTITY of the United States, as a citizen of the United States-are you satisfied with the situation concerning human rights in your own country? Individuals are going to have prejudice and so forth. But we have laws in our country that make it law-breaking to implement those prejudices and to try to do things unjustly to other people. You have to remember one great difference about our country. A man put it to me in a letter once. And that is that you could leave here and go to France to live, but you could not become a Frenchman; or you could go to live in Germany or Turkey or-name any country-you could not become one of them; this is the only country in the world in which anyone from any corner of the world can come here and become an American, because that is our history. We came from every corner of the world. If you meet with a group of Americans-if we went around this room for the Americans present and asked them their background, their ancestry and so forth, you'd have quite a collection. As a matter of fact, my own background, going back to grandparents and great-grandparents, covers four different countries-but here in this melting pot. So, the result is that the people that came here came not only with the desire for freedom, but they also brought with them many of the prejudices that existed because of national differences between various countries. People may have and do have-there are people who have a prejudice against someone of another faith, someone of another background or race. But if they do anything to hurt that person because of that prejudice, the law takes care of them. I think that in terms of human rights, lately, a lot has been said. Therefore, I'd like to ask you a question and return to your upcoming visit to Moscow. ENTITY, I do not want to try and pry any secrets out of you, but could we find out what you are taking to Moscow in your diplomatic briefcase, so to speak, and what you hope to bring back from there? Well, as I said earlier, the same things that we have talked about before and tried to come together in a meeting of the minds-basically, those four major areas. Yes, that is what we will talk about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 66, "text": "Now, I recognize that one country cannot dictate to another as to how they must run their own affairs, and maybe some of the things that we will talk about are things that I believe maybe we could be-based on our own experience-be helpful; for example, among human rights. I was quite interested recently when the General Secretary, meeting with the leaders of your Orthodox Church, lessened some of the restrictions that government had imposed on the practice of that religion. Well, I have wondered if a further expansion of that-you see, our country came into being because people were being denied, in other countries, the right to worship God as they saw fit. And so, they left those countries and came to this new land as pioneers in order to worship. Well, I have just wondered if there is not a field there in your own country for more openness and the allowing of people to practice religion in the ways they chose. And here we call it separation of church and state. The government cannot deny people the right to worship, but by the same token, the churches cannot impose on government their beliefs. I think that really the question of human rights deserves lots of discussion. In that connection, I'd like to ask you, recently in Washington-I read about this in the U.S. press-General Stroessner was here in the United States. He is a dictator from Paraguay. When you meet with the Soviet leaders-or met with them in Geneva and Reykjavik and Washington, you always touched on the question of human rights. Do you talk about that question with General Stroessner, with the leaders of Chile, South Korea, South Africa? In your conversations, do you discuss with them the question of human rights? Oh, yes, there is no question but that we believe in our getting along with these other countries, that this is an issue, for one reason, because of the background of all of our people. Government is influenced by public opinion. We are supposed-as you mentioned earlier, we are supposed to do in the Congress and here in this office basically what-meet the needs of the people, what the people want. And so, when we are seeking to be neighbors and friends of another country and that country is jailing people for just their expression of political difference or wanting to practice religion and things of that kind-we have a great many people whose heritage is in those countries.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 67, "text": "And you have to remember that even though we are all Americans-a man does not give up love for his mother because he is taken a wife. And so, the people in our country all still feel a kind of heritage and relationship with the countries of their ancestry, or maybe their own if they are new immigrants who are here in the country. One out of eight of our people have our background in your area. And those people can rise up and oppose us in some agreement that we may want to make of friendship if they feel that the country of their ancestry is being unfair in denying what they consider a human right. Now, maybe your country, you do not place that much importance on public opinion, but here in our system, it is the very basis of our system. And so, we can get along and make treaties much better with each other as governments if our people are not rebellious about something that your government is doing to what they consider their ancestry. Soon you will be in Moscow, and I think that you will have the opportunity to get acquainted with the influence of public opinion in the U.S.S.R. and about freedom of religion in the U.S.S.R. Excuse me, I'd like-our time is sort of running out, and in conclusion, I'd like to ask you a personal question, ENTITY. The majority of Presidents in this country, when they left office, write memoirs. Are you getting ready to write your memoirs when you leave office, and if so, when are we going to get a chance to read your memoirs? Well, I have been thinking very seriously about writing a book. In view of the fact that several people who have left government have written some books, I think maybe I better straighten out the record and tell things as they really are. People, not government, voluntarily provide money and funds and build what is called a Presidential library and museum, and this is happening with me. There is a group in the country; they have raised the millions of dollars. In California will be built this structure. Now, in that building will be the millions of papers from this administration. They will be open; scholars can come and study them and research and so forth. And there will be also many things that will be of interest to the people-memorabilia that we have accumulated here. And this has happened with all the Presidents in the recent years. So there, too, will be a record that is open for public view.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 68, "text": "But I will probably get around to writing a book. I do not look forward to it. I wrote a book once and found it was quite a chore. Since time is up, more or less, I'd like to thank you for this interview, and I'd like to wish you huge success in your upcoming mission. May I just say one thing also-in going to your country, and I would relish the opportunity, if I could, to say a few words here-that is never discussed very much. I have a great admiration for the women of the Soviet Union, particularly in the Russian area. From the outside looking in, they seem to be a great bulwark of strength and solidity in the maintaining of the home and the things that they stand for-the standing in lines to bring home what is necessary for the family and all of that. And I just wonder if they are getting the credit within your country that I think they deserve. They deserve it. They do not just stand in lines, but the majority of them work together with men. They teach, they take care of children, they work in administrative posts, and so forth And I hope that with your own eyes you will be able to see all of that when you come to our country. Well, you have said it better than I did, but, yes, I recognize all of those things and just wondered if they get the recognition they deserve within their country. Well, I am pleased, and I welcome you and enjoyed it very much. And I appreciate greatly the opportunity to speak to your people. They were telling us all the time that we should finish up, but I guess we ran over our schedule. Tell ENTITY there is an interpretation coming through, so I guess you understood what I said. But I want to say to you that this interview will be broadcast on the eve of your arrival-I think the 27th of May. I have the impression that you will be able to see it, because the 27th, I think, you are going to be in Helsinki, and you can see Soviet television in Finland very well. And it is going to be on one of our channels. There are going to be about 200 million Soviets that will see this interview, and it will be broadcast all over Eastern Europe, as well. So, everything that you said will reach all the Soviet people, and I think it will be a good beginning for your visit to the Soviet Union. I appreciate this very much.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsoviettelevisionjournalistsvalentinzorinandboriskalyagin", "title": "Interview With Soviet Television Journalists Valentin Zorin and Boris Kalyagin", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-soviet-television-journalists-valentin-zorin-and-boris-kalyagin", "publication_date": "20-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 69, "text": "Let me start off by talking about my speech yesterday. The purpose of the speech is to remind our allies and those who are wondering as to whether or not the United States is firmly committed to democracy that we are. I strongly believe that we are in a war with a group of ideologues and that we can eventually win this war by promoting an alternative ideology. And so the speech yesterday was to speak clearly to people around the world that the United States is committed to this freedom agenda, that there is a realistic reason why we promote freedom, that it is for our own security. There is a moral imperative to promote freedom, and that is to recognize that there are people who live in societies that are still repressive and that free nations have an obligation to work to secure their liberty. I made it very clear that democracy takes time, that it takes different forms in different places, but nevertheless, there are underlying principles which are essential to free societies. I pointed out that freedom has made great progress over 20 years. The reason I did that was, one, to express my optimism about the future. But, two, make it clear that things-the freedom agenda just does not bloom overnight; it takes hard work. And then, as you know, I went around the world and talked about different spots around the world. And I think it is very important for the G-8-nations in the G-8 to recognize the power of liberty to transform societies. And so I will be talking, of course, about that here. I think it is important for nations that are free to recognize they have an obligation to help others. I was moved by the people I met. It was just very heartwarming to meet with heroic souls that do have the capacity, with proper support, of changing their societies and, therefore, changing the world. It is always important for the American President to keep setting an agenda based upon values. And those of you who followed me know full well that I believe that liberty has transformed Europe, liberty has transformed the Far East, and I believe liberty can transform the Middle East. And I am determined to advance that cause. One, it is going to be very important for us to continue to discuss climate change in a way that actually accomplishes an objective, which is the reduction of greenhouse gases over time and the advancement of technologies, which will yield to better environmental policy as well as energy security.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 70, "text": "The United States can serve as a bridge between some nations who believe that now is the time to come up with a set goal, as well as a-I said, the remedy, and those who are reluctant to participate in the dialog. So I laid out an agenda that can move the process forward within the framework of the United Nations, that, in essence, says that we will be setting a goal at the end of 2008-that we being the major emitters-within the framework of the U.N. In other words, this will fold into the U.N. framework. And that enables us to get China and India at the table to discuss how we can all move forward together. Secondly, in my speech, I said we will come up with our own policies to meet an interim goal for our country as well as a national goal-or international goal for the rest of the world. And I will be talking to Angela about that at lunch. I think it fits into her desires to see the process move forward. One of the concerns was, is that there would not be a constructive result of this meeting that basically announced that there should be a post-Kyoto framework. And we will achieve that objective here at the G-8 because we will have set a post-Kyoto framework. I also hope we spend an equal amount of time on ENTITY/ ENTITY on the continent of Africa or reducing malaria on the continent of Africa or helping feed the hungry. So it is a-and finally, it is going to be important for us to continue to discuss vital cooperation on fighting extremists and radicals who still pose a threat to our respective nations. The temptation is to sit back and say, well, maybe they are not dangerous anymore because they have not launched an attack on our respective homelands. They are dangerous, they do want to attack, and the best way to deal with it is to work closely together. Anyway, I am looking forward to this. I think some of you came with me- nice and relaxing. Can we ask some questions? That is all I wanted to tell you. I feel so good about life, I am not going to answer questions. What kind of military response would the United States take if Russia retargeted its missiles on Europe, as President Putin has threatened? There needs to be no military response because we are not at war with Russia.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 71, "text": "You know, my first meeting with Vladimir Putin, I told him, I said, What we need to do is get the cold war behind us and work constructively on how to deal with the threats of the 21st century. Russia is not a threat; nor is the missile defense we are proposing a threat to Russia. So I am going to talk to Vladimir about that. I have already talked to him about it once on the telephone. I sent Bob Gates to talk to him. And we will have a good dialog about how we can constructively work together to deal with-modernize our capacity to deal with the threat to the-the true threats. Russia is not going to attack Europe. The missile defense system is not aimed at Russia. As a matter of fact, I believe it would be in Russia's interest to participate with us, and have made that offer and will continue to make the offer. Do you take that threat seriously, though? I do not think Vladimir Putin intends to attack Russia-I mean, Europe. So I will talk to him about it, but it is -if he is saying, The missile defense system is a threat to us, our-the need, therefore, is to make clear there is not. By the way, a missile defense system that is deployed in Europe can handle one or two rocket launchers. It cannot handle a multiple-launch regime. Russia has got an inventory that could overpower any missile defense system. The practicality is, is that this aimed at a country like Iran, if they ended up with a nuclear weapon, so that they could not blackmail the free world. What do you make of his motivation for all-- I have not had a chance to talk to him about it. Right, and say, this is just some sort of misunderstanding that he does not -you do not see any political purpose behind what he is doing? I have not had a chance to visit with him about that. As you know, I have got a visit here, and then I will visit with him in Maine. Do you think it might be an effort to obtain bargaining chips for negotiating over other issues, like Kosovo? I talked to him about Kosovo the other day, and I do not recall missile defense coming up. In other words, it was not a quid pro quo. So, he is got deep concerns about Kosovo, and so do we. It is an issue that we are just going to have to continue to work with him on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 72, "text": "We believe we ought to move the Ahtisaari plan forward through the United Nations, and he is got reservations about it. Garry Kasparov, who you met with yesterday, has said that Russia is now a police state, and he said the West should stop giving Putin democratic credentials. I think there are-as I said yesterday, society has advanced a long way from the old Soviet era. It is interesting you would ask the question. Do you think he is trying to position himself at home? Thereby meaning that he is concerned about public opinion, which is a sign that there is a- when public opinion influences leadership, it is an indication that there is involvement of the people. I think what you are referring to is the upcoming elections. Is he trying to say something about the upcoming elections? I frankly have not talked to him about that aspect. But if, in fact, he is concerned about the upcoming elections, it does say something about the state of the political scene in Russia. And as I said yesterday, we have got a friendship with Russia, and there is a lot of common interest in Russia. But I expressed concerns about what were Western expectations and what has now happened inside Russia, for example, rule of law or some press decisions he is made. I have had these discussions with Vladimir frankly over my time as President. I remember our meeting in Slovakia. It was a good, frank discussion about decisions he is made, and he asked me about decisions I made. Now, the fundamental question is, does it make sense to have relations with Russia? Do we agree on everything? And that is why I call it a complex relationship. China has got a-we have got an economic interest in China. We have got interest with China in working with North Korea, just like we have with Russia. And yet we disagree with China's reluctance to advance the democratic process. On the issue of climate change, are you frustrated at always being portrayed as the odd man out? And what do you make of the portrayals of the U.S. trying to upstage Merkel with your climate announcement last week? Well, Angela Merkel and I have had a lot of discussions about this issue. And as I told you, she was interested in whether or not there should be a- whether or not we agree there ought to be a post-Kyoto framework. And my announcement clearly said there should be one and that the United States will be directly involved in developing that framework.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 73, "text": "I have got a very substantial record when it comes to advancing technologies to make the air cleaner in the United States. We have actually had a reduction of greenhouse gases and-in spite of the fact that our economy grew. In other words, it is hard to reduce greenhouse gases in the face of economic growth, but we were able to do so. We have laid out a substantial initiative when it comes to tailpipe emissions, and that is the reduction of our usage of gasoline by 20 percent over a 10-year period. So I am looking forward to telling people exactly what we have done here in the United States. Will you give any ground on the two-degree target that she wants? No, I talked about what I am for-remember? I said I am for sitting together with the nations, to sit down and discuss a way forward. I think when people really look at what I have said, they say, well, that is an interesting way to bridge the difference between what China has said, for example, and what others in Europe have said. And in order for there to be-first of all, you are not going to have greenhouse gas emissions that mean anything unless all nations, all emitters are at the table. And if China is not a part of the process, we all can make major strides, and yet there will not be a reduction until China and India are participants. And what I have said, is, here is a way to get China and India at the table. Can I go back to your democracy speech? Did you like it? I loved it. I will say it anywhere. What did he say? I will say it anywhere. That may be taking it too far. How do you square your commitment to democracy and as a priority for your foreign policy with what we are seeing in Pakistan now, major ally in the war on terror, but also a place where a core leadership of Al Qaida has found some sanctuary in tribal areas. The Government has been taking a repressive attitude toward a free press; it is got into this conflict with the judiciary, firing the chief justice. Have you had conversations with Musharraf about democracy in his country? Do you want to see free and fair elections in Pakistan? I do, and said that in Pakistan the time I was there, standing right next to President Musharraf.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 74, "text": "And we do discuss democracy, as well as routing out foreigners in his country who are an equal threat, a threat to America and a threat to him. It is a very-Pakistan is an important ally in this war against these extremists. As you mentioned, there are some in his country, and I am convinced that he would like to rout them out. But it is not easy territory in which to rout people out. We have had some successes inside Pakistan, thanks to his leadership. And in terms of the democracy issues, he is going to have to deal with it. And the interesting question is, is the issue about uniform, and he addressed that at the last-only time I have been in Pakistan. He said he would seriously consider-I do not want to put words-you will have to pull up the press conference. But if you think democracy is the best way to confront radicals and terrorists, should not we be pushing hard for democracy to really get established in Pakistan? Well, democracy is-it is a lot more established in Pakistan than some of the other nations I mentioned. And what you are seeing is a lot of posturing about the election process, and it is not perfect. Neither was our democracy perfect for 100 years when we enslaved people. And so it is -we do push for democracy. We push in the context of the reality on the ground as well. I mentioned Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is a close ally in the war on terror. His Majesty has done and his services have done the world a service, a good service by bringing people to justice. And he is also making some incremental reforms. He will go at a pace slower than some would like to see; nevertheless, he is moving. We live in a world where people expect things to happen overnight, and that is just not the way it works. I think it is going to be important for whoever is President to take a long-term view of the ability of democracies to progress and, therefore, change. I mentioned South Korea as an example of what I am talking about. I am sure-I suspect that if a President were having this conversation with a press corps in the sixties and seventies, they'd say, well, we are for democracy; therefore, how come you are not? How come it had not happened yet in South Korea? And yet it did eventually happen in South Korea.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 75, "text": "The process and progress move at different paces and different places, and the role of the United States is to help encourage them along, while at the same time achieving certain national objectives. It just so happens that the key national objective in the beginning of the 21st century is to make sure we do not get attacked again and innocent people get murdered. And so we can do both. We can say that in the long run, the best way to secure your society is through liberty. In the short run, let us work collaboratively to protect ourselves. Can I go back on missile shields for a second? Vladimir Putin says that you are building a shield for weapons that do not exist now-- Does not he have a point? Do you see why he might be suspicious of that? I mean, if somebody pops up with a weapon and says, Hands up, people will say, well, how come we did not have a shield? And so it is -I think we need to do both. I think we need to protect ourselves of what might happen and then work collaboratively to make sure it does not happen. If there is a misunderstanding between President Putin saying that this is a threat towards Russia and the U.S. saying it is not, what is more important, pushing the system through or maintaining a solid, good relationship with Russia, especially since he is leaving office? I think it is important to make sure we have a system to protect ourselves against the threats of the 21st century, the true threats. And that would be the threat of rogue regimes using a weapon of mass destruction to either blackmail and/or attack allies and friends, cells moving through our societies with the intent upon killing, radical forces undermining young democracies. Those are the threats, and therefore, we need to address them. And I will continue to work with President Putin-Vladimir Putin-to explain to him that this is not aimed at him. And there is all kinds of ways you can do that. One is total transparency between our militaries and scientists-military people and scientists, which I am more than happy to do. Do you see this as hurting the relationship between you and President Putin? We have had issues before. I think if you look at the history of our relationship, there is been some moments where we have agreed and moments where we disagreed. That is just the way-that is what happens when you have got nations that are influential. And we have had our disagreements with different allies, had disagreements with France over", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 76, "text": "We have had disagreements with other nations, but that does not mean they are not friends, or that does not mean we cannot work with them. Are you at all concerned, though, that this current state of the relationship between you and President Putin might have some implications for the outcome with regard to Iran? You have sort of relied on his-- Well, we have been working very closely with Russia on Iran, and I do not think that this-first of all, my comments yesterday were very realistic in the sense that said, we are friends; we have got a complex relationship; we can work together, but we have had some disagreements. I just do not see how-why that, those kinds of statements are going to prevent the United States and Russia from working closely together on key issues like Iran or proliferation, areas where we can get along. You mentioned Kosovo. No question, he does not agree with our position. And so we have got to work together and see if we cannot understand each other on a lot of issues. But it is an interesting question about, well, should not you just scrap the system? And the answer is, is that the system exists in the first place to deal with threats. Can I ask about Darfur? Have you expressed your frustration with why the international community has not been moving on Darfur? You obviously introduced sanctions. Would you be prepared to see a no-fly zone over Darfur to have some direct interaction? We would consider that. And, yes, I have expressed my frustrations. You would consider it in what context? Look, I want to see other people helping Darfur and-by joining us and sending clearer and stronger messages to President Bashir. It-because there are still people suffering, and yet the U.N. process is moving at a snail's pace. As you know, I gave this speech at the Holocaust Museum and caveated it because the Secretary-General asked for a reasonable period of time to see if he could not get the process moving. That is why I gave my speech. And I do not know if you noticed, but Sudan is now headed to peacekeeping at the U.N. Sir, will you pardon Scooter Libby? And the second in charge is Iran. I cannot give you all the tactics on it yet, but I understand the principle and said so in my speech that we would consider such.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 77, "text": "Listen, that was a sad day for-yesterday was a very sad day for Scooter and his family. But there is an ongoing process, and it would not be appropriate for me to discuss it until the process has run its course. Do you think it says something about you and Vice President Cheney, that you continue to embrace a man who has been convicted and sentenced? No, it is a sad day for him, and my heart goes out to his family. And it would not be appropriate for me to discuss the case until after the legal remedies have run its course. Well, there is a lot of speculation that you are going to pardon-- You seemed to have carefully calibrated your response to some of the comments that you made-- Well, I think what you ought to do-look, I would suggest going back and looking at a series of my responses. And I think in terms-if you want to really figure out how I conduct relations with Russia, it would be helpful for you-if you are interested in writing a genuinely-I know you are-an indepth piece about how I have conducted relations with Russia to look at different comments I have made relative to different moments of drama or moments of discord or moments of agreement. It is an important relationship because when we work together, we can solve problems. You asked why- I have not had a chance to talk to him about it. The insinuation was that he is doing this for internal political reasons. I cannot make that the case, and it would be unfair for me to put words in his mouth, and so therefore, I will not . I have also said it is important for there to be a personal relationship between me and President Putin so that we can have frank discussions in a way that enables us to more likely deal with the problems we face. That is why I will visit with him here, and that is why I am looking forward to welcoming him to my dad's house in Kennebunkport. It is an opportunity to continue to have a serious dialog with serious players in trying to keep the peace. And-but that does not necessarily lend itself to speculation that somehow the relationship between me and ENTITY is not a positive relationship. It is a positive, and I am going to work to keep it that way. There are some who say we should not have any relations with Russia. I strongly disagree with that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 78, "text": "I think it is important for us to maintain relations with Russia and-on a variety of fronts, whether it be- you know, look, I want him to join the WTO for a reason. I believe it is -I think if trade increases between Russia and the United States, it is important to have some structure and ways to resolve the inevitable disagreements that will arise. And that is what happens not only with a nation like Russia; that is what happens all the time in Europe. And that is one of the things that the WTO provides. You talked about the need to prevent extremists from getting their hands on oil in the Middle East or anywhere else. How would you characterize how Vladimir Putin manages his country's energy resources? Well, first of all, he is- he has got the opportunity to really develop the greatest asset of Russia, and that is her brainpower. He is inherited a very difficult situation in Russia. The demographics indicate that it will be a shrinking society for a variety of reasons. One, it is health care system is good in parts of the country and not so good in other parts. They have got a needle issue; they have got ENTITY/ENTITY issues. They have got a series of issues that he knows he has to deal with. They have got an old pensioner system. So that cashflow from oil will enable him to modernize his society, and he is making steps to do that. Secondly, it is a-obviously, it creates tensions with Europe. His being a sole source of natural gas for certain countries creates a degree of tension, and that is why the European Union and Russia are continuing to work through their issues. The fundamental question is, will he make enough investment in his oil infrastructure to take advantage of these cashflows and, at the same time, make an investment inside his country? And he believes he is committed, enhancing human capital. It looks like it has grown substantially in the past. This country, again, is certainly not perfect in the eyes of many Americans. On the other hand, if you consider where it is come from, it has made substantial progress toward a freer society in the sense that there is a middle class that is growing and will eventually make more demands. Now, having said that, there is been-as I said yesterday, there is been some backtracking. We had expectations, and those expectations were not met. Can I ask about Iraq?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 79, "text": "The idea of the surge seemed to be to buy some time for the political leaders in Iraq to make progress on reconciliation. Have you seen any real, meaningful progress on that front? It is -it had not been the closure on certain issues, but they are working hard to get it there. Is that-I mean, they have been talking about that for a long time. It does not seem that they-the increased security operations have moved them to speed-- Well, I think on certain fronts, they have made progress. They have got a budget that is now moved out. They have got a-I know they are working on an oil law. They are working on different-discussing whether or not they have Provincial elections, and we hope they get-hope these issues come to fruition. But you are right, that is what the surge is intended to do, plus provide enough time for these Iraqi forces to step in, prevent the sectarian violence from spilling out of the capital. And it frustrates the Iraqi people, and it should frighten the American people that Al Qaida is active in Iraq looking for a safe haven from which to launch further attacks. And they are the primary-they are the ones primarily responsible for these EID and suicide bombers. Can I go back to Brendan's question for a second? I guess my question is, are you concerned that Russia's enormous energy wealth is going to kind of create a situation where its leaders are vulnerable to the arrogance of power? In other words, they have got an immense amount of wealth concentrated in their hands, and inevitably that tends to make people act in aggressive ways, does not it? I think what-one reason why I promote rule of law throughout the world is to make sure that that very scenario does not accelerate. A second initiative that we all have got to take is to diversify away from hydrocarbons, and that is what will eventually yield to national security and economic security for countries that are dependent upon hydrocarbons from other places, such as ourself. You know, there is-there are mechanisms in place to basically enable nations to protect themselves; the EU is a mechanism. If you noticed, there is constant jockeying here in Europe with Russia about security. No question, some nations are concerned about their supplies of gas being used for political purposes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 80, "text": "And therefore, all of us need to work collaboratively to convince nations not to do that, whether it be Russia or any other nation that is supplying hydrocarbons to the world. You have heard me say, we import oil from places that do not necessarily like us. Oil is fungible, by the way. And therefore, it is in our interest, just like it is in the interest of other countries, to diversify. And that is really going to be the interesting challenge here as we move forward in this 21st century. One of the dividends of diversification through new technologies is better environmental quality. And that is why this issue is-it is got a real poignancy, as far as I am concerned. One, I know we can be better stewards of the environment. But also, at the same time, it ends up making us less dependent on crude oil from overseas, in our case. It is coming, and the question is, how do you stimulate new technologies? What is the most effective way to get technologies to the market that will enable the world to control greenhouse gases, for example? And that is really where the-see, once you get people to agree to a goal, then the next question that needs to be answered is, how best to achieve that goal? We have taken the lead in achieving that goal by spending billions of dollars on new technologies. We have got new technologies being advanced in cellulosic ethanol. That will help nations once that becomes able to compete in the market. But nevertheless, it is -will have the beneficial effect of enabling people to drive without the use of gasoline. Clean coal technologies are going to be a really important part of a strategy to deal with what will be an international goal. And so the question is, how best to stimulate that type of investment? And that is an important discussion to have here at the G-8. It is also an important discussion to have at home. Therefore, let us build a missile defense system. And, yes, we are going to work to stop him. That is why we are constantly working through diplomatic channels to continue to apply pressure. And I mentioned the other day, I think we need to go back to the U.N. Security Council. You mentioned South Korea earlier. Do you think South Korea could be a model for Iraq? I think that-first of all, the situation inside South Korea is different-or was different than it is in IraENTITY", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspoolheiligendammgermany", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool in Heiligendamm, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool-heiligendamm-germany", "publication_date": "06-06-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 81, "text": "ENTITY, this has been a bitter, nasty campaign season across the country in which Republicans have made you the issue of local races in commercials linking you directly to the local Democrats. While many Democrats have held open arms to campaign with you, some have kept their distance. Well, they have worked hard on this for a long time. The Republicans tend to be a Presidential party, and they are unfortunately now very extremist, very negative, and that is what they have tried to do. First of all, the American people see that I am keeping the commitments I made to them in 1992. In 21 months, we have moved the country forward. We are making the Government work for ordinary Americans with things like family leave and college loans. We have reduced the debt. We have reduced the size of the Federal Government. We have got more jobs coming into this economy. The world is safer and more prosperous than it was when I took office. People are feeling that, and I do not believe they are going to buy these Republican promises in this contract, this $1 trillion worth of hot check promises to go back to the 1980's and trickle-down economics. I also would point out, ENTITY, you know, there is beginning to be some division within the Republican ranks. People are recoiling; good Republicans are recoiling from this extremism and this negativism. That is why former First Lady Nancy Reagan hit Oliver North and, of course, Mayor Giuliani supporting Governor Cuomo I think a very statesman-like decision Mayor Riordan out in Los Angeles supporting Senator Feinstein, Mrs. Heinz in Pennsylvania attacking the Republican candidate for Senator up there. There are a lot of good Republicans who do not like what has been happening in our country, and they do not like seeing the Republican Party being so negative, so bitterly partisan, and so extremist. So I think we have got a chance in the last 8 days to get a real vote for the future and not a vote for the past. ENTITY, you touched upon a couple of topics that I want to get to, but just yesterday you were campaigning for Democrats in Pittsburgh, and we are told that you are headed to New York once again to campaign Thursday for Mario Cuomo. How do you explain him being in the tough battle against George Pataki? Well, I think, first of all, he has been Governor.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdominiccarternewyork1televisionnewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Dominic Carter of New York 1 Television, New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dominic-carter-new-york-1-television-new-york-city", "publication_date": "01-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 82, "text": "ENTITY, considering the violent and abrupt manner of your succession to the Presidency, I think everyone agrees that the transition has gone remarkably smoothly. Did this just happen, or did you start to plan these things, say, in those first few hours in Air Force One as you flew back from Dallas? Well, we had a lot of help in the planning, Mr. Lawrence. A lot of thoughts went through my mind, as I left the hospital, and on the way to Air Force One, and while we were waiting for Judge Hughes and Mrs. Kennedy to come aboard. I was sure that the whole Nation had been shaken and the world would be in doubt. As I rode back, I recognized that our first great problem was to assure the world that there would be continuity in transition, that our constitutional system would work. I realized the importance of uniting our people at home and asking them to carry forward with the program, so I immediately planned to have the bipartisan leaders come to the White House upon my arrival. I asked the members of the Cabinet who were then in town, the Director of the National Security Council and Mr. McNamara and others to meet me at Andrews.1 And I appealed to all of those men to work with me on the transition and to try to so conduct ourselves as to assure the rest of the world that we did have continuity and assure the people of this country that we expected them to unite. Very shortly thereafter, President Eisenhower came down and spent some time with me exploring the problems that he expected to arise confronting a new President. President Truman came in and gave me his counsel, and we started off with the help and plans of a good many people and substantially well organized. I do not know how well the Government did its part of the transition, but the people's part was well done. The first priority was to try to display to the world that we could have continuity and transition, that the program of President Kennedy would be carried on, that there was no need for them to be disturbed and fearful that our constitutional system had been endangered. To demonstrate to the people of this country that although their leader had fallen, and we had a new President, that we must have unity and we must close ranks, and we must work together for the good of all America and the world. Well, did you have any concern about the international posture that you must adopt so that, one, all of our allies would be reassured, and our potential enemies would not get any wrong ideas?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 83, "text": "And I spent the first full week meeting with more than 9 representatives from the nations of the world, and trying to explain to them our constitutional system, and what they could expect under it and how we would carry on the program that we had begun. And that I had been a part of the Kennedy-Johnson ticket that won the election in 1960; that we had a Kennedy-Johnson program, that I had been a participant in the formulation of that program and that we would carry it on, maybe not as well as the late President could have, had he lived, but as best we could, and they need have no fear or no doubt . What was the image that you wanted the potential enemy to get? That we were sure and we were confident, that we were united, that we had closed ranks, and not to tread on us. ENTITY, on November 22 both the President and you, the Vice President, were in the same city, and six Cabinet officers were in the same airplane, going to Tokyo. Yes, I do not think that we realized at that time that so many Cabinet officers were on this trip to Tokyo. And of course in retrospect we can see a good many things that took place that we wish we had made better plans for. But immediately upon returning to Washington, I made it clear to the Cabinet that we did not want any goodly number like that leaving town at the same time, and that when the President and the next in line of succession were out of town, that we wanted most of the Cabinet here. And the President since that time has not been out of town with any appreciable number of Cabinet officers absent. Is there anything that can be done, sir, to afford better physical protection for the President when he travels? Not that I know of. I am not an expert on security, but we have very dedicated and faithful men in the FBI and in the Secret Service. Do you always follow their instructions, sir? And occasionally, they prefer to have two or three policemen between me and the crowds, and I ask them to move out so I can see some of the people. I want to be a people's President, and in order to do so, you have to see the people and talk to them and know something about them and not be too secluded. I think they would feel better if the President kept 100 yards distance from every human being, but that is not practical.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 84, "text": "Well, when you got back here, one of your--obviously one of your immediate jobs was to keep the Government going as a matter of effective politics and leadership. How, specifically, did you think you would go about that? How did you let it be known in Washington that there was a new man here, that things are going to continue more or less as they had been, and how did you think was the best way to make it as smooth as possible? First, to ask the very unusually talented individuals that had associated themselves with the Kennedy administration to stay at their posts of duty during this critical period, and without exception they answered the call. Second, I called the Governors together and made an appeal to them to help me in every way they could in establishing this confidence and letting the people of the country know that their Government was going on and functioning, and was strong, and that it would work. And hour after hour, day after day, that first week, I--while I was preparing my message to the Congress, preparing to go on television to the people, and the Thanksgiving message, I was spending my days and nights, and way into the mornings, talking to the leaders out in the States and trying to instill confidence in them and to ask them to help me with the awesome responsibilities that were mine. ENTITY, is there any one particular memory that is more vivid than the others for you, from those 4 horrible days? I have rarely been in the presence of greatness, but as I went through that period, I observed Mrs. Kennedy, Jackie Kennedy, I saw her greatness, her gallantry, her graciousness, her courage, and it will always be a vivid memory, and I will always appreciate the strength that came to me from knowing her and from associating with her. Did you send any kind of private messages to Chairman Khrushchev soon after you became President? We had representatives from all the nations here. I spent 2 or 3 days speaking to those representatives. Mikoyan was here, and I had a long visit with him, and I talked to him about the visit that Premier Khrushchev had paid me when I was leader in the Senate, and we exchanged views for a period of time here in the office, just about the time of the funeral. Did the subject come up of a possible exploratory, get-acquainted session with Mr. Khrushchev?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 85, "text": "We both expressed desire in our discussion that we understand each other better and that we would be glad to meet at some time when we felt that the agenda was such that would give promise of reaching some solution to the many problems that confront the two countries. But no definite plans were made for a meeting. None were proposed, but it was accepted as a possibility. You mentioned, ENTITY, part of the reason for the transition being so smooth was that your predecessor's Cabinet and staff stayed or In fact, they are still here almost intact. Each Cabinet member stayed, most of the Under Secretaries are here, most of the Assistant Secretaries. We have brought in about three young men who have been associated with me through the years, and we have lost Mr. Schlesinger and Mr. Sorensen. ENTITY, I wonder if you could talk a moment about this problem of Presidential succession. I think you have not endorsed any of the specific proposals that are up for discussion now. Yes; and I think the Congress is giving attention to that, and I think it is quite proper that they do, and I have no doubt that in the next few months when we select the Vice President--but what is very likely is that the Congress will take some action, I do not know just what kind of action, to make it possible to replace the Vice President if he becomes President. I think it is important that we do that. I do not have any deep-set views on just how that should be done. I participated in passing the measure that establishes the line of succession now, and I think that that is very good. President Kennedy sat down with me in the early days of his administration and discussed the possibilities of a takeover, a transition, if the President became disabled. We had an oral agreement on what should be done under those circumstances. The first--one of the first things I did was to ask the distinguished Speaker of the House to come to my office, and I made an agreement with him exactly as President Eisenhower had made with Vice President Nixon, and as President Kennedy had made with me, and that is now in writing and in existence if I should become disabled. But the Congress should consider replacing the Vice President when they have one no more. They are doing that now. I rather doubt that they will explore all the angles of it and make any realistic progress toward constitutional amendments or the necessary statutes this year, but I am sure once we have a Vice President that they will face up to it and take prompt action.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 86, "text": "Have not we really reached a point in the history of this country where the selection of a vice presidential candidate must be nothing but his competence for the highest office? Is this the best equipped and best trained and best fitted man to serve as President should he be called on to do so ? Yet it is a choice which is peculiarly that of the presidential candidate, is it not, sir? I think that the delegates are always interested in getting the recommendations of the President, and in most instances, not all instances, but most instances, the presidential nominee makes his recommendation. I recall one or two instances where the President chose not to make any recommendation. But the Vice President is very close to the President. They have to agree on the same platform, they have to run on the same ticket. In order to be prepared for what might happen the President must have great confidence in the Vice President, and make known to him his thoughts, his views, and all of his secrets, so that he can have the background for taking over if it becomes necessary, so the President's recommendation should not be treated lightly. There have been reports, ENTITY, that you have become displeased with Attorney General Kennedy because efforts have been made in his behalf to have him nominated for Vice President. I think most of that is newspaper talk. I would be less than frank if I said that I thought that it was wise at this stage of the game for either the President or the Vice President to be carrying on a campaign for the office. The Attorney General and I have talked about that, and I think he understands my viewpoint, and I take his word that he has done nothing to encourage those efforts, and all of this stuff that you read about is newspaper talk. Well, speaking of newspaper talk, ENTITY, it is widely believed among the reporters around town that you object rather strongly to being criticized in the papers and on the air. Would you give us what your true feelings on that subject are? How do you feel about it? I assume that almost anyone is human and would rather have approval than disapproval. ENTITY, Kennedy once said in a similar conversation about a year ago or more that he thought the press ought to be as tough as it could be on any administration, so long as it was after truth and not merely a political operation. Is that a good definition of your views? I would have no objection to that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 87, "text": "I would agree to it, and I do not think--it is not the toughness of the press that any President objects to. I think it is sometimes their inaccuracies and--I frequently see stories from 10 or 15 papers that I think are quite accurate, very well done. On occasion, you will see something that is reported as a truth that you never heard of, where you are the principal participant. And if you call attention to it, then you become sensitive. How many papers do you read a day, sir? I guess about 10 or 15. ENTITY, during these 100 days there has been one persistent political issue, which is the investigation of Bobby Baker in the Senate, aimed at you because he was your protg and your friend. As a political animal, sir, what is your estimate of this as a campaign issue in 1964? Well, without agreeing with your assumptions about why the investigation or who it is aimed at, I would say that one of the finest committees in the Senate made up of Members of both parties have been conducting this investigation of an employee of theirs--no protg of anyone; he was there before I came to the Senate for 10 years, doing a job substantially the same as he is doing now, he was elected by all the Senators, appointed by no one, including the Republican Senators--and I think that their investigation will be a just one, and a fair one, and that they will make recommendations to the Senate that will be proper, and whatever they recommend I am sure the Senate will carry out. Well, quite apart from what the Senate committee may recommend, sir, have you formed a personal judgment, a judgment for yourself? I have not seen him since he resigned from the Senate or have not talked to him since he resigned from the Senate, and I think every man is entitled to a fair trial and I would like to see what conclusion is reached and what the evidence shows with which I am not familiar before I would make a judgment. ENTITY, if I could make you a self-critic for a moment, what, if anything, that has happened in these last 120 days would you do differently were you to do it again? Well, I do not know about that. I am sure that we have made a good many mistakes, but I do not know of any recommendation I have made that I would change. I would favor the same measures that I have recommended to the Congress.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 88, "text": "I would handle the developments and the foreign policy fields such as Panama and Guantanamo and Zanzibar, Cyprus, just as we have handled them. So while I am sure that we could improve on them if we had more time, in the light of what developed I would not change any. I believe the first big problem you had to tackle was the budget, the time for making final decisions, and you devoted nearly all of the first month to this Because I think it told the people of the country and the people of the Congress what you are willing to pay for. And if I had it to do over again, I would much prefer to have 68 days than to have 38 days to make a budget of $98 billion. We have been adding to our budget about $5 billion a year. We had about $3 billion in built-in increases. So my big problem was to find ways and means of cutting money out of the budget that we did not need, and we did not need to appropriate, and we could save in order to have some money available to meet the many untilled needs we had--particularly in the welfare field, in the poverty field, in the training of manpower field. During the budget cutting, ENTITY, you made one little talk which caused some controversy in which you said that to meet the untilled needs of the people you would take from the haves and give to the have-nots. Now, just how did you mean that? Well, we have a budget of $52 billion in the Defense Department. They have the money. We say to them that we are going to take from this picture 69 bases that you now have, we are going to close those bases, we are going to take some of these overseas employees and cut them 15 percent, and have some people double-up on our jobs, and squeeze out additional productivity. And out of that money that we save, money that we have, and have used for these purposes, we are going to take it over here and take the young boys that have dropped out of school and have nothing to do, and no job and no work, and unemployed, and we are going to try to train them to be good citizens. You meant, ENTITY, to redivide the money amongst the Government agencies, not some kind of a new soak-the-rich scheme as some interpreted this take from the haves and give to the have-nots ? No, we made no recommendations on soaking anybody.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 89, "text": "We are reducing taxes, not increasing them. Our tax reduction is in excess of $11 billion, $9 billion plus for individuals, everyone is the beneficiary of that already, and corporation taxes have been reduced some $2 1/2 billion, so we were not soaking anyone. But we were taking money that was being used for things that we did not need, or that we could avoid, and taking that money and applying it to meet the untilled needs of our poverty-stricken people. President Roosevelt talked about the third that were ill clad, ill fed, and ill housed. Thirty years we have worked on it but there is still one-fifth of the people that earn less than $3,000 a year. So out of the billion three that we cut from the Defense Department budget we will add almost a billion in the new budget for a poverty program. So it will come from those who have it, to those do not have it. Have you had any second thoughts, ENTITY, about erecting another agency to deal with root causes of poverty--health is one, education and other things--on top of the agencies and departments that already exist that have been dealing with these things? No, we are going to have a very small staff to coordinate the poverty program. the Agriculture Department; the Justice Department in the dealings with the juvenile delinquency; the Health, Education, and Welfare Department in health and education; the Labor Department in training manpower. And we do not want to create more agencies, we want to use the ones we have. So the President is going to have as his chief of staff, a poverty director, administrator, and through him his orders will be carried out through existing agencies. Could you give us an idea--not necessarily specific, unless you care to--what direction you would say your administration would take hereafter? What new approaches or ideas or philosophies we might see? Well, I think a message going to the Congress on Monday will indicate one approach.2 We are determined, and we have a group of dedicated men that are going to try to get at the roots and the causes of poverty that cause 20 percent of our people to live off of less than $3,000 a year. We are going to try to get at the roots and the causes and find the solution to doing something about half a million men that are rejected each year because of mental or physical reasons for service.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 90, "text": "We are going to try to recognize and proceed on the basis that illiteracy and ignorance and disease cost this Government billions of dollars per year, and make for much unhappiness. And the program of poverty this year is one example of what I would like to think will be carried on, and grow in the years to come. I want this Government first of all to be dedicated to peace in our time, and do everything that we can conceivably do, any place, any time, with anyone, to resolve some of the differences that exist among mankind. In order to do that, this Government must be prepared and we must maintain strength and power that would insure our safety if attacked. In order to have peace, and to be prepared, we must be solvent and fiscally responsible. So for that reason we have tried to eliminate waste at every corner. I do not believe that we are going to make the Treasury over by cutting out a few automobiles or turning out a few lights. But I do think it is a good example when you walk through the corridor and you see the closets where lights burn all day and all night just because someone did not turn them off. So we have tried to set that example and we want a Government that is seeking peace, that is prepared for any eventuality, that is fiscally solvent and that is compassionate, that meets the needs of the people for health and for education, and for physical and mental and spiritual strength. And our Government-that is the kind of a Johnson administration I would like to have and that is the kind that we are working towards. ENTITY, administrations come to have rather handy labels, New Deal, or Fair Deal, or Crusade, or New Frontier. Has any ever come to your mind for the Johnson administration? I have had a lot of things to deal with the first 100 days, and I have not thought of any slogan, but I suppose all of us want a better deal, do not we? ENTITY, I do not want to overdo the business of labels, but many of us have long been a little baffled watching your career in the Senate and now here as to whether to call you a conservative or liberal, or Southerner or Westerner. How do you think of yourself if you apply those labels at all to yourself? Well, I do not believe in labels. I want to do the best I can, all the time. I want to be progressive without getting both feet off.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 91, "text": "I want to be prudent without having my mind closed to anything that is new or different. I have often said that I was proud that I was a free man first and an American second, and a public servant third and a Democrat fourth, in that order, and I guess as a Democrat, if I had to take--place a label on myself, I would want to be a progressive who is prudent. While we are talking about Democrats, ENTITY, what is your timing on your election year effort? I would hope that we would not have to--we would not have to begin an active campaign--the Democratic Party--until around convention time, after the Congress disposed of its business. I am going to carry out some commitments that President Kennedy made for fund-raising dinners from time to time, but I think after the convention we will have ample time to give our views to the people. In the meantime, I would like to have the cooperation of the members of both parties in carrying out a program that is best for America. I am the only President this country has, and I would like to be as free from partisanship as possible, at least until the convention. Well, ENTITY, in this interim between now and the convention, do you think we might see a few old-fashioned, nonpolitical conservation tours or inspection tours of that kind? We will see them before and after the convention. They are part of the work of the President. I think part of the President's job is to get out and see the people and talk to them about what the Government is doing and make reports. That is why I am on this--having this little visit with you fellows this afternoon, so that the people may know something about my views and how I feel and my approaches, and may know how much I need them and need their help in the job that I am trying so hard to do. ENTITY, some people have thought that you put in too long and hard a day, that you might endanger your own health that way. How do you protect your health from day to day? We do have long days, and the problems that require attention require time. And you never have as much time as you want to spend before making these decisions, but you must make decisions. The first 100 days were filled almost to the breaking point.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 92, "text": "But I have adjusted myself to the schedule and with the help of the most competent people that President Kennedy surrounded himself with, I am now able--I wake up in the morning and read my papers and read the documents that were left over from the night before that I need to pass upon and have my briefings, and my breakfast, and come to the office between 9 and 10 o'clock. 30 or 2. And I have a swim and take out 15 or 20 minutes. Then I go and have a lunch or--usually a business lunch, working lunch, and about 3 I take a little nap of 20 or 30 minutes, and that breaks the day for me, and then I am good until 8 or 9 that night, and have my dinner. After dinner I see TV news, and then I engage in my night reading, and I usually read until about 1. I do not require too much sleep. But I am never in better health. I enjoy the work that I am doing, and the people with whom I am working. I never felt better in my life. ENTITY, you did manage to quit cigarette smoking some years ago. Have you any advice for those of us who have not managed? I gave up cigarette smoking because the doctor recommended that I do so, and I have missed it every day, but I have not gone back to it, and I am glad that I have not . ENTITY, I gather from what you say that we need not expect any kind of political announcements from you until very close to the convention. I would not want to preclude one. Unless I--there is substantial consideration involved--I see no reason to make any now, and I do not anticipate it, but if the circumstances indicated that one would be fruitful or necessary, I would not hesitate to face up to it. While we are on politics, I wonder--we have heard everybody else's analysis of what happened in New Hampshire. Would you give us yours? I think that we always incline to put too much emphasis on the actions of one primary. But it seemed to me that the people of the State heard all the candidates and decided to select one of their neighbors that apparently they knew and approved. I have very high regard for Ambassador Lodge myself, as I do for some of the other candidates. Has his serving in Viet-Nam during a political campaign been at all awkward or embarrassing for the administration?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 93, "text": "So far as I have been able to detect from his actions, he has been doing nothing but the job as ambassador, and doing it as best he could, and I have seen nothing that has interfered with that work. Did Secretary McNamara bring you any new word from Mr. Lodge just recently when he returned, about Mr. Lodge's future plans, how long he might stay on the job, and so forth? I have had no indication that he plans to leave the job at all, and if he did, I am sure he would let me know, Secretary McNamara brought me some recommendations concerning the situation out in Viet-Nam, in which Ambassador Lodge expressed his views, and in which they were in general agreement with Mr. McNamara and other members of the team, but nothing political. Is it your opinion that Mr. Lodge has behaved properly and within the scope of his role as an ambassador, considering that he has been injected into the political arena? You have had reports in the last day or two from the Ambassador to France and from Secretary McNamara. Can you tell us anything of what he reported to you from Viet-Nam? Yes, he made a very lengthy report and I think a responsible and constructive one. We are going to consider it in the Security Council further the early part of the week. We have problems in Viet-Nam as we have had for 10 years. We are very anxious to do what we can to help those people preserve their own freedom. We cherish ours and we would like to see them preserve theirs. We have furnished them with counsel and advice, and men and materiel to help them in their attempts to defend themselves. If people would quit attacking them we'd have no problem, but for 10 years this problem has been going on. I was reading a letter only today that General Eisenhower wrote to the late President Diem 10 years ago,3 and it is a letter that I could have well written to President Khanh and sent out by Mr. McNamara. Now, we have had that problem for a long time. We are going to have it for some time in the future, we can see, but we are patient people, and we love freedom, and we want to help others preserve it, and we are going to try to evolve the most effective and efficient plans we can to continue to help them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 94, "text": "President Kennedy said, on the subject of Viet-Nam, I think, that he did believe in the falling domino theory, that if Viet-Nam were lost that other countries in the area would soon be lost. I think it would be a very dangerous thing, and I share President Kennedy's view, and I think the whole of Southeast Asia would be involved and that would involve hundreds of millions of people, and I think it is --it cannot be ignored, we must do everything that we can, we must be responsible, we must stay there and help them, and that is what we are going to do. ENTITY, during the New Hampshire primary campaign, Governor Rockefeller criticized what he called divided counsel that was going out from Washington to the leaders of Viet-Nam. He said that while you and Secretary Rusk and Secretary McNamara were committed to winning the war and defeating the Viet Cong, the Senate majority leader, Senator Mansfield, seemed to find favor with the idea of neutralization advanced by President de Gaulle of France. What is your reaction to Governor Rockefeller's criticism? Well, I think the Governor should know that Senator Mansfield is very experienced in the field of foreign relations, and serves as a distinguished member of that committee, and when he made his speech in the Senate,4 he spoke for himself, and so stated. He was not speaking the administration viewpoint and he did not leave any such impression. From time to time he has given me his counsel over the years in this general area of Southeast Asia, but when he made this speech he spoke for himself entirely, and there is no division in the administration between Secretary Rusk and Secretary McNamara and myself. We all feel alike on the matter. I think that there could even be some division between Mr. Rockefeller and Mr. Lodge, judging from what you have said. Lodge sees things pretty much as we do, and we are going to continue with our program, and it is going to be a responsible one, and we think a fruitful one. Do the recommendations that Secretary McNamara brought back from his last trip envisage a continuing role for Mr. Lodge in handling policies in South Viet-Nam? Yes, he has a very important role. He met with me in my office 2 days after I became President, and I said to him at that time that You are my top man there, and I want you to have the kind of people you want, and I want you to carry out the program you recommend and you will have our support here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 95, "text": "He has worked very hard at that job and we have sent him some new people from time to time, and we will be sending more. He has command of the full resources that we have out there, and he works very well with our people. One of your speeches at the University of California in Los Angeles indicated a kind of hint to me that we might carry the war to the North Vietnamese if they did not quit meddling in what you call a dangerous game. Are there any such plans that you can talk about at this time, sir? No, and I made no such hint. I said it was a dangerous game to try to supply arms and become an aggressor and deprive people of their freedom, and that is true, whether it is in Viet-Nam or whether it is in this hemisphere, wherever it is. ENTITY, do we face the decision on Viet-Nam of the order of magnitude of Korea, for example? I think that we have problems there. We have difficulties there. We have had for 10 years, and as I told you, a good many things have come and gone during that period of time; as long as there are people trying to preserve their freedom, we want to help them. Well, ENTITY, not only do we have a new administration in this country, but we also have what might be described as a new world, since it is said now that the postwar world is over, and the American leadership is challenged and questioned both by friend and enemy alike in many places now. What is your view and assessment of it ? How do you see the American role from here on, now that we are no longer the unquestioned leader of the entire West? Well, I think that as long as we are living in a world with 120 nations, that we have got to realize that we have got 120 foreign policies. And we are living in a world where we recognize 114 other nations, and some that we do not recognize, and so I think at this time that our Nation is held in high esteem and respect and affection generally among the peoples of the world, the free world. I realize that we have discouraging incidents from time to time, and we have problems, and because we try to help with those problems, sometimes the role of the peacemaker is not a very happy one.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 96, "text": "And so, for that reason, we have to do things that we do not want to do sometimes, and are rather irritating--and sometimes we are abused because we do them, and sometimes we are misunderstood. ENTITY, about 10 years ago an American Secretary of State termed neutrality as something immoral. Not long ago President Kennedy talked about making the world safe for diversity. Is a more and more diverse world, with the diminishing of the importance of great alliances, a trend toward a safer world? that we are having all the new nations that are emerging, and they are coming in without experience, and they have their pride. A good many of them have the feelings that--pent-up feelings, that they have nurtured for years and years. And they have an opportunity to express themselves, and sometimes it looks a little odd for the Prime Minister of a new country to come in with a pistol in his hand and arrest an American charge d'affaires. But that does happen, and we have to be prepared for those developments and try to understand them and try to provide leadership that will keep us from getting in deeper water or more trouble, and that is what we are doing. They cut the water off on us in Cuba, and I got a good many recommendations from all over the country as to how to act very quickly. Some of them said--some of the men wanted me to run in the Marines, send them in immediately. Well, upon reflection and evaluation and study, realizing not many people want more war, and none of them really want more appeasement, you have to find a course that you can chart that will preserve your dignity and self-respect, and still bring about the action that is necessary. So instead of sending in the Marines to turn the water on, we sent one admiral in to cut it off and arrange to make our own water, and we think things worked out as best they could under those circumstances. But there are going to be these demands from time to time, from people who feel that all we need to do is mash a button and determine everybody's foreign policy. But we are not living in that kind of a world any more. They are going to determine it for themselves, and that is the way it should be. And we are going to have to come and reason with them and try to lead them instead of force them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 97, "text": "And I think, I have no doubt but what for centuries to come that we will be a leading force in molding opinion of the world, and I think the better they know us the more they will like us. We have been very close to agreement several times. I have no doubt but what agreement will be reached that will, in effect, provide for sitting down with the Panamanian authorities and discussing the problems that exist between us and being guided only by what is fair and what is right and what is just, and trying to resolve those problems. We are anxious and willing and eager to do it any time it suits their convenience. I think first, they have an election on, and I think translating our language into their language, that some of the agreements that we have to discuss these matters, they perhaps feel that they would want stronger language than we are willing to agree to, and we want a different expression from what they want. It is largely a matter of trying to agree on the kind of language that will meet their problems, and that we can honestly, sincerely agree to. We are not going to agree to any preconditions to negotiate a new treaty without knowing what it is going to be in that treaty and without sitting down and working it out on the basis of equity. We think that that language can be resolved and will be resolved in due time. ENTITY, what is your assessment now of General de Gaulle's behavior in the last year or two? What do you think about it? In relation to us, sir? My conversations with him have been very pleasant. I would like to see him more in agreement on matters with us than he is, such as recognizing Red China. We did not think that was wise for France or for us or for the free world. That is not ours, and in his wisdom he decided he would follow that course, and that is a matter for him to determine. What do you hear from the people at the United Nations, ENTITY? Has the fact of French recognition now increased the prospect that the Red Chinese may be voted into membership at the U.N.? The situation changes from time to time, but we do not think that they will be voted into membership, and we hope not. What would be our reaction vis-a-vis the U.N. if they were admitted? Well, we will have to cross that bridge--I do not want to admit that they are going to be admitted and do not think they will.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 98, "text": "Senator Goldwater, for example, has argued that we should withdraw at once if the Red Chinese are admitted. Well, that is Senator Goldwater's view, and I do not think they are going to be admitted, and I do not think we will have to face that question. One you do have to face soon, ENTITY, is to say something to Congress about foreign aid. That seems to have reached a peak of opposition. It seems to have reached some kind of peak last year. What do you think the future of it is? I think it is going to be very tough to get a good foreign aid measure through the Congress this year. Last year President Kennedy asked for $4,900 million. He later had that request carefully studied and he reduced it to $4,500 million. He got a $3 billion appropriation--after I came to office. I signed the bill and there was reappropriated about $400 million unexpended balances, $3,400 million. Now, I have conferred with the leaders in the House and Senate on that matter, and they all admit it is going to be more difficult this year than it ever has been before, although I do not think that is justified. Nevertheless, I request--we are not going to pad our request. We got $3 billion 4 this year, and we will ask for something in the neighborhood of that for next year, and we will ask only what we need, and we hope we get what we ask, but it will be appreciably under what was asked last year, and approximately the same that we got this year. We think that we are justified in spending 3 or 4 cents of our tax dollar to protect the million men who are in uniform, our men, scattered throughout the world, and to keep them from going into combat, and this is the best weapon that I have. It is very difficult to get 21 nations to all agree and get their Systems changed and their reforms effected and to blend into their governmental philosophy the modernization that is going to be required to make the Alliance for Progress a success. We are distressed that it has not been more successful, but we have not lost faith. We are having a meeting Monday with all of the Ambassadors from the Organization of American States. We are having a meeting Monday with all the Ambassadors from the Western Hemisphere.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 99, "text": "We are calling in all of our own Ambassadors, and the three groups are going to meet, and we are going to point out the weaknesses and the slowness of certain reforms that are required and the cooperation that we must have from their countries because there is no use of making big investments and taking our taxpayers funds unless these reforms are effective. And we are going to make an appeal for a united attack that will give new life to the Alliance for Progress and we have hopes that it will be successful. ENTITY, are you terribly disturbed about the resort to street protests and demonstrations on civil rights and other things that are taking place now almost all over the country? I think that when the Senate acts upon the civil rights bill, that we will have the best civil rights law that has been enacted in a hundred years, and I think it will be a substantial and effective answer to our racial problems. The Negro was freed of his chains a hundred years ago, but he has not been freed of the problems brought about by his color and the bigotry that exists. And this bill goes a long way to taking the battle from the streets into the legislative halls and into the courthouses, and into where these differences should be settled. Of course, we have a right to petition, and we should petition when we have grievances, but I think the most effective thing that can be done--and I think great progress has been made under the leadership of President Kennedy and the Attorney General and others in the last year is getting all the people of the Nation to accept their moral responsibility and take some leadership in this field where there has been so much discrimination. And I know of nothing more important for this Congress to do than to pass the Civil Rights Act as the House passed it. And I hope that can be done after due deliberation. I think it will be a great step forward for the Nation. I think it will make us much more united, and I cannot think of any single thing we can do to strengthen American foreign policies more than to pass the house civil rights bill in the Senate. You are confident that you can get a civil rights bill substantially like the House bill without major modification? We want to very much, and we are going--the Senate will have to work its will and we believe that a substantial majority favors the House bill, and we believe in due time it will be able to work its will.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 100, "text": "Well, are you concerned, ENTITY, at what might happen if this filibuster is still going in the late spring when the schools are out and the kids are out and have idle time on their hands? I do not want to predict that the Senate will be--how long it will be discussing this bill. I am hopeful and I am an optimist and I believe they can pass it and I believe they will pass it and I believe it is their duty to pass it, and I am going to do everything I can to get it passed. ENTITY, you have now been President for something over 100 days. You have been around Washington for more than 3 years. How is the view from the inside as compared with the view from the outside? Well, it is a much tougher job from the inside than I thought it was from the outside. I have watched it since Mr. Hoover's days, and I realize the responsibilities it carried and the obligations of leadership that were there, and the decisions that had to be made, and the awesome responsibilities of the office. But I must say that when I started having to make those decisions and started hearing from the Congress, that the Presidency looked a little different when you are in the Presidency than it did when you are in the Congress, and vice versa. ENTITY, Thomas Jefferson referred to the office as a splendid misery. Harry Truman used to talk about it as if it were a prison cell. Do you like it? I am doing the best I can in it, and I am enjoying what I am doing. Thomas Jefferson said the second office of the land was an honorable and easy one. But I found great interest in serving in both offices, and it carries terrific and tremendous and awesome responsibilities but I am proud of this Nation, and I am so grateful that I could have an opportunity that I have had in America that I want to give my life seeing that the opportunity is perpetuated for others. I am so proud of our system of government, of our free enterprise, where our incentive system and our men who head our big industries are willing to get up at daylight and work until midnight to offer employment and create new jobs for people, where our men working there will try to get decent wages but will sit across the table and not act like cannibals, but will negotiate and reason things out together.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstranscripttelevisionandradiointerviewconductedrepresentativesmajorbroadcast", "title": "Lyndon B. Johnson Transcript of Television and Radio Interview Conducted by Representatives of Major Broadcast Services.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/transcript-television-and-radio-interview-conducted-representatives-major-broadcast", "publication_date": "15-03-1964", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Lyndon B Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 107, "text": "If we could begin with the issue of Liberia, President Charles Taylor in particular. You said he needs to step down; he needs to leave the country. The U.S., along with other west African countries, are busy negotiating the whole issue. What are the discussions and options that are being put on the table? Well, I am glad you brought up the departure of Charles Taylor. In our judgment, he needs to go in order to create the conditions necessary for a peaceful solution to this difficult situation occurs. You know, look, we are talking to ECOWAS countries right now to determine whether or not the-what the nature of a peacekeeping force might look like. I am the kind of person that likes to know all the facts before I make a decision. We have got special ties to Liberia. That is why we are involved in this issue, and I am going to look at all the options to determine how best to bring peace and stability. That is Mr. Taylor needs to leave, and I have been outspoken on that. Colin Powell has been outspoken on that. And I think most of the people involved with this issue understand that that is important, that he do leave. Does that mean that if those negotiations fail and President Charles Taylor refuses to go, that you will send troops to remove him from office and-- Well, first of all, I refuse to accept the negative. I understand it is your job to try to put that forth. And until he does not listen, then we can come back and talk about the issue. In other words, I hope he does listen, and I am convinced he will listen. No, you-I am convinced he will listen and make the decision-the right decision, if he cares about his country. Let us talk about, then, your trip to Africa. It has not necessarily- it has only recently become more apparent, this particular administration's interest in African affairs and involvement in what is going on in the country. Yes, can I stop you there? As a matter of fact, from the very beginning of my administration, I have been very much involved with African affairs. I have met over 22 African leaders. And I just want to make-correct the record before-- disabuse you of that misinformation, because Africa has been a very important part of my administration's foreign policy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithcnninternational", "title": "Interview With CNN International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-cnn-international", "publication_date": "03-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 108, "text": "However, many people will say that has only become more apparent to them, perhaps not necessarily to the administration, but more apparent, outwardly, that this administration is becoming involved in African affairs. My question to you, then, is if that is the case and looking at the history which you have pointed out, why now? I thought it was important to go before my first term was over to show the importance of Africa to my administration's foreign policy. And besides going on a trip- I mean, trips are fine, but what is more important is policy. And I proposed a Millennium Challenge Account, which will, in my judgment, affect the lives of African citizens in an incredibly positive way, which says that in return for aid-and we are increasing the amount of aid available-governments actually have to make decisions which will be positive on behalf of their people, such as educating their people or providing health care for their people, not to steal the money; in other words, do not focus on elite but focus on the people themselves, create the conditions necessary for market growth. I promoted AGOA. Now, I did not invent AGOA; that happened in my predecessor's time. But I promoted the extension of AGOA, which was the trade agreements between the African Continent and the United States, which has been incredibly beneficial for a lot of countries and a lot of people on the African Continent. I proposed an ENTITY initiative because I believe it is very important for the United States to not only show its muscle to the world but also its heart. And the ENTITY initiative, in our judgment, when implemented, will help affect the lives of thousands of people who are suffering from an incredibly-a pandemic that is actually destroying life. And it is-it is sad for us. And so my administration is not only, you know, good on trips and meetings but more important, fundamental policy. One policy that your administration has not necessarily agreed on with many African countries is the question of Iraq and the war in Iraq. Can you give us a sense of how close the administration feels you are to finding those weapons of mass destruction and banned weapons? Yes, there is no doubt in my mind he had a weapons program. He was-he used them. Remember, he was the guy that gassed his own people. Those were weapons of mass destruction he used on his own people. We found a biological lab, the very same lab that had been banned by the United Nations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithcnninternational", "title": "Interview With CNN International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-cnn-international", "publication_date": "03-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 112, "text": "ENTITY, my first question is, I would like to know, what is the importance of the development of this new ethanol market, regional market, in political and economical terms? And how is that going to strengthen U.S.-Brazil relations? I can remember my first visit with President Lula. He was not sure what to expect when he came to the Oval Office, and frankly, I was not sure what to expect when he came. You know, people have reputations that precede them in life. And yet, after we spent a brief period of time, we both came to realize, we share the same concerns, particularly for the poor, and we both represent big, influential nations; and that we can work together to achieve common objectives. And one such objective is human rights and rule of law, a civil society that empowers individuals; that we believe government ought to respond to people and that people ought to have the ultimate say in the fate of government. We came from different political directions-I readily concede-but nevertheless, when we listened carefully, we found common ground. And that puts us in a position where we can work in practical ways to address significant problems. One such problem is trade, and President Lula and I will spend time on the Doha round to determine whether or not we are able to advance Doha in a constructive way that benefits our nations and, equally importantly, the world's poor. The best way to alleviate poverty is for there to be prosperity, and one way to enhance prosperity is through a world that trades freely and fairly. The other area-another area of common ground is changing our energy uses. My last trip to Brazil, I was briefed extensively on Brazil's capacity to use its raw materials to develop a vast ethanol industry. And I was impressed by the progress Brazil has made. It reminded me of-the progress Brazil has made has reminded me of the vast potential that agricultural can make on the energy front. So I now return to Brazil with a robust domestic agenda on ethanol. We had already had an agenda on ethanol, but it is now even more robust as a result of a mandatory fuel standard I laid out that said, the United States will be consuming about 35 billion gallons of ethanol. The political implications of that, at least for the United States, are profound, in that we become less dependent on oil, which is good for our national security, as well as it helps us be good stewards of the environment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 113, "text": "I happen to believe that the United States and Brazil can work together to, for example, share technologies with others in the region, which will help them become less dependent on oil. And that is important, because dependency on oil exposes economies to the whims of the marketplace. As China's demand for oil continues, if there is not a corresponding increase in international supply, what happens in China affects the ability of someone in Latin America to be able to keep more money- in other words, the gas prices go up. And we live in a global economy, in which global economics-I mean, live in a global world in which global economics affects the lives of a lot of people in our neighborhood. And so becoming less dependent on oil will enhance the economic security of the region, and that is important because prosperity in the region is important for the United States. Recently, Uruguay and the United States signed a framework agreement on trade and investments. Now, how far do you think the United States and Uruguay can advance towards a free trade agreement? As antiimperialist? Fine, that is -I would hope he would define my Government as profreedom. I think that-first of all, there are countervailing pressures in my own Government. People should not take for granted that the United States wants to have trade agreements. I strongly resist those temptations. It is in our interests to be a nation which treats others the same way we want to be treated in the marketplace. I know it is in the interest of the poor to have markets open for their products. And so I will go to Uruguay as a strong defender of trade. I fully understand that there are pressures on leaders regarding trade and that sometimes, it takes a period of time for people to get comfortable with different types of trading agreements. And therefore, I will make my case about why I hope we can continue what has been a constructive relationship with Uruguay without pressing the case beyond that, which is politically possible. And again, I will assure the ENTITY that I will be-we want to listen to concerns, we will work closely as friends. And I will remind him that here at home, it is not an easy sell, necessarily, and that if he believes trade is in the interests of his country and I believe it is in mine, we have both got to work constructively to achieve common objectives. As to characterizations of the United States, I will remind him that we are a generous, compassionate nation that believes in peace.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 114, "text": "And that on the one hand, we will protect ourselves from attacks that I am convinced the enemy wants to launch on America again. But at the same time, I will remind him that the advance of liberty, the advance of human rights and human dignity is in our national interests. Anyway, I am looking forward to the trip. I have never been to Uruguay, and I am looking forward to it. In the last few months, Colombia has been shocked by scandal of possible links between paramilitary groups, which are terrorist organizations, and members of Congress as well as public officials. Given the fact that until now only close allies and collaborators of President Alvaro Uribe have been involved in this scandal, can this scandal affect the support that your Government is giving to the Government of Colombia? President Uribe has made it very clear that he is going to-he promotes and expects there to be a full investigation of any allegations. And as a result of strengthening the prosecutorial offices, he has sent a signal that if, in fact, there are allegations that are worthy of further investigation and the facts lead to prosecution, he will fully prosecute. And to me, that gives me great comfort in seeing his strong leadership. And I believe that that leadership will stand him in good stead with our Congress. The budget I have submitted is one that is a little less than last year but, nevertheless, is a strong commitment to a Plan Colombia II. One of the reasons why the budget is a little less than last year is, it goes to show the progress that Colombia is making. In my judgment, President Uribe has done a fabulous job for leading that country. Secondly, the economy is improving, as you know, and therefore, Colombia can carry more of the load of II. But nevertheless, the commitment is a significant commitment, and I will work very hard with Congress to get that commitment passed in the budget. ENTITY, a lot of people in Guatemala and in Central America is worried about the violence that might be generated by organized crime, gangs, and drug trafficking. And how the Government of the United States can work together with Guatemala and the other Central American countries to fight this problem? Well, that is a common issue that we have with our very important friend to the south. It is an issue that concerns both Mexico and the United States. The issue of crime in Central America concerns both Mexico and the United States because, oftentimes, that crime can be exported into either country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 115, "text": "My attitude is that the United States can help provide Justice Department and information sharing-Justice Department collaboration with their respective people in government. In terms of narcotrafficking, the first thing the United States can do is convince our people to stop using drugs. If there is a demand, inevitably there will be a supply, so we have an obligation here at home to work to reduce drug usage. If people do not find a better market, if people do not find a healthy market, there will be less pressure to produce drugs. Secondly, we can enforce our borders and make it harder for drug dealers to be able to get their drugs to market. One way to better enforce our borders, besides stepping up presence on our border, is to pass a comprehensive immigration bill in the Congress, one that says that the person coming to do work that Americans are not doing does not have to sneak across the border, thereby enabling our Border Patrol to be able to focus on narcotrafficking. In other words, you can raise the cost of getting drugs into our country by making it harder for them to penetrate our borders. Thirdly, we can work internally with governments, and do. We do a lot of bilateral work. I do not want to jump to-I am not going to jump to the next country, but one perfect example is the cooperation and collaboration between Mexico and the United States on helping each other with information sharing. Fourthly, we have got Central American gangs in the United States, that as we find and arrest, we can share information we learn from them with the host government. The best way, however, to ultimately deal with crime, besides reducing the demand for their product, is to enhance prosperity. We would rather people try to make a living honestly. And therefore, there needs to be hope; there needs to be the possibility of that honest living to be able to be made so that youngsters do not turn- feel they have to turn to crime. And finally, a social program, social justice programs, like education; the United States spends a lot of money in Latin America on education programs, programs aimed at either training teachers to teach and/or direct aid to education programs throughout our hemisphere. An educated child is one that will have a hopeful future, and therefore, less likely to be recruited into a criminal gang. And my question goes in the same sense as my friend Eduardo.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 116, "text": "Yes, as you know, President Calderon has positioned himself at the forefront in the war against drugs, and especially on violence that derives from drug trafficking. And would his efforts now motivate the U.S. to be more conscious in stopping illegal weapons crossing the border, north to south? Mexico is rightly concerned that there are traffickers taking contraband from our country into Mexico. Just like we are concerned that there are traffickers bringing humans and/or drugs from south to north, which means that we have got to commit ourselves to rational border policy that will work. I am a strong supporter of comprehensive immigration reform. I believe strongly that a comprehensive bill will make it easier to focus on drugs and guns if people do not feel like they have got to sneak into the United States. Secondly, such a bill will enable us to- it will help us dismantle an industry that has sprung up that uses human beings as product, as chattel. And that is unacceptable to this country. Now the incentive is for people who want to do work that Americans are not doing, is to pay money to be stuffed in the back of an 18-wheeler, for example, and driven across and ducked out in the desert, where they hope somebody will come and rescue them and take them to a motel or a house where they have to rent, and then they finally work their way toward work. The industry that has sprung up as a result of the current immigration law is inhumane, and it does not reflect the values of the United States. So to answer your question about drugs moving one way and guns moving the other, immigration reform will help. It will mean that the people and assets we have on the border can be focused on precisely that which you are concerned about. Now, as to President Calderon's next steps, that is up to him, and one purpose of my visit is to listen to his strategy. I have confidence that this man, elected by the people, will devise a strategy that is best for Mexico. And the role of the United States is not to devise a strategy but is to listen very carefully as to how we can help implement that strategy, and part of my visit is to be a listener and a partner. And I appreciate the strong stance that President Calderon has taken. He has shown courage because he is committing the stake to take on some very powerful, very rich, and very lethal people. And that takes courage, and I admire courage when it comes to leaders in public office.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 117, "text": "There is a perception that one of the objectives of your trip is to strengthen relations with the countries that are U.S. friends. So my question is, what do you think of the rise of this so-called alternative development model, championed by President Chavez, that calls for nationalization, greater government intervention? And what is Brazil's role in the region, taking that new development model into account? Each leader is going to have to adopt a governing style and an economic model that they believe yields to prosperity for their people. I strongly believe that government-run industry is inefficient and will lead to more poverty. I believe if the state tries to run the economy, it will enhance poverty and reduce opportunity. So the United States brings a message of open markets and open government to the region. My trip is to remind the people of Central and South America that we live in the same neighborhood and that the United States is committed to empowering individuals to realize their God-given potential. I would like to cite some statistics for you, just to help prove my case. Since I have been the President, the line item for traditional bilateral aid has doubled, from about $800 million a year to $1.6 billion for the region. And that is a total, when you total all up the money that is spent, because of the generosity of our taxpayers, that is $8.5 billion to programs that promote social justice, for example, promote education and health. The reason I bring that up, it is very important for me to remind our own people as to why it is important to continue to be generous in our neighborhood. If you are interested in peace, then you have got to be interested in prosperity and hope. Our programs are aimed at encouraging hope. Secondly, there is about-make sure I get this right, here-there is about $350 billion of direct foreign investment in the region. Now that is important because investment yields jobs. And wise economic policy recognizes that investment can help improve the lives of the worker or the person who is anxious to make a living. In my speech yesterday, I pointed out the fact that, by far, the vast majority of people in our neighborhood are really hard-working, decent, family-oriented people who just need a chance. And a direct foreign investment-that means somebody believing that the investment climate is worthy of investment-helps that working person, that hard-working person find employment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 118, "text": "And so our presence in the region is sometimes very quiet, but very effective. And one part of-main purpose of the trip is to tell people that we take the region and its problems very seriously and have got a good record. And we will let others make their case as to how best to proceed. We will let others come and explain why their point of view makes sense. All I can tell you is that I believe that the system of government and the system of economies that we promote is fair. Now, I fully recognize that until people actually feel progress in their pocketbook, that there is going to be frustrations with forms of government. But that does not mean you kind of revert to something that I do not believe will work. It does mean you have got to make sure that the aid and the progress that you are making actually helps. I am going to do a followup on that question-- For example, we, in Uruguay, we are seeing President Chavez's policy of financial agreements and commercial agreements on investments. And he is also going to Argentina on the same day that you are going to Uruguay, and he is even holding a street rally in Buenos Aires on that same day.  Look, I dare-I go a lot of places, and there are street rallies. And my attitude is, I love freedom and the right for people to express themselves. I bring a message of good will to Uruguay and to the region. My trip is one that says, let us find ways to work together for the common good. And the United States has got a strong record of helping people, and I am really proud of it. And it is very important for the American people to hear firsthand our concerns about our neighborhood in order for them to continue to support programs, such as the Millennium Challenge Account, which is an $855 million program, and encouraging good governance in the region or the education for the-we have got a new teacher initiative we have laid out, and we believe by, I think it is 2008, we will have trained 20,000 teachers. There are a lot of-you have got to understand that in a country where there are isolationist tendencies, where people sometimes say, It is not our problem, that the President has got to be constantly reminding people that poverty in our neighborhood is our problem. So the trip gives me an opportunity to highlight successes and to point out challenges so that the American people stay engaged.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 119, "text": "One of the great assets in our country is the fact that there are compassionate people that are willing to go into parts of the world where there is desperation and poverty, you know, our faith-based programs, for example. I am not sure to the extent to which they have gone to Uruguay, but I know in Guatemala, there is an extensive program to help poor workers find market access so they can make a living. I am going to visit one such program. Our military-people think of the United States military as war fighters, and they are when the Commander in Chief puts them in such a situation, but our military is building health clinics throughout Central America, for example, in a very quiet way. And my trip will help herald some of the programs we are doing. One, we are trying to convince the American people it is worth it; and secondly, reminding our neighbors that we care. ENTITY, in Colombia, there are growing concerns about two initiatives that the U.S. Congress is now considering. One is the free trade agreement with Colombia, and the aid package for 2008. Democrats in Congress have already raised some objections about labor, ecological, and human rights issues concerning the FTA. In the case of the aid package, some people in your administration have said that Colombia should assume more costs of Plan Colombia in the future. Also, Democrats are already talking about reducing the aid. What will your administration do to increase the possibility for the approval of the FTA? And should Colombia expect to have a reduction in the aid it receives in the years to come? First, I will defend our budget strongly, that we have submitted to Congress, which, as I described earlier, does have a reduction, but only because we think Colombia is more capable of funding certain aspects of the program. And I look forward to telling President Uribe that he can count on the United States defending that which we sent up to Congress. That is what we believe is the right number, and we will vigorously defend the number. Free trade with Colombia and Peru are coming up for votes. And like all free trade agreements, we will battle for their passage. Now, obviously, to the extent that we could-and by the way, the President has been here working hard, been making phone calls. And the reason I mention these tough votes, again, is that people should not take access to the U.S. market for granted.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 120, "text": "I mean, the CAFTA vote was a tough vote, and we worked hard, along with the leaders. And this will be a tough vote; I do not want to send any other signal but that. On the other hand, it is an important vote. And we want to-and I call upon Democrats to understand the consequences of this vote- and Republicans. Members of Congress have got to understand that when we negotiate in good faith a free trade agreement that the-they need to understand the consequences of not supporting it. And we look forward to working with the Government to get it passed. ENTITY, so far, what is your evaluation of the impact of the free trade with Central America? And what do you expect in the medium and long term to be delivered by the CAFTA? And how the countries of Central America and the United States can work together to improve or to make it better, the trade between countries? There are great expectations when trade agreements get signed that all of the sudden, there is going to be instant prosperity. And I fully understand that in parts of Central America, when people heard that U.S. markets were open and the CAFTA markets were open that there would be-people say, well, we have done this to increase prosperity. Part of my messaging in Central America will be that opening markets is the first step toward more prosperity. Now, I am going to go to a program, Labradores Mayas, that is a great example of what is possible for an indigenous farmer that was scratching out a living, ends up kind of establishing a co-op, goes and gets a loan, which, by the way, is an essential part of our program, and that is to provide microloans to people to be able to begin to realize dreams. It was what, a micro thing, but nevertheless, the co-op was able to then develop an irrigation system, which then made their production of high-specialty crops more efficient. I cannot wait to see this. It is a reminder that the United States approach to the region is not a political approach, but it is a human approach. It is one that emphasizes that human potential exists and that the best programs are those that elevate the potential. So I will try to help deal with expectations, Eduardo, about how markets evolve. And one way for me to do so is to remind people about the effects of NAFTA with our important neighbor to the south, Mexico.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 121, "text": "When I grew up in Texas, the border, la frontera, was like a third world on both sides of the border. And then in the early nineties, NAFTA was passed. It took awhile for people to realize how the inevitable adjustments that will come when people start accessing market. And if you were to go down to the border today, you'd be stunned at the prosperity on both sides of the border because of trade. Now, when I was the Governor of Texas-I was elected- I was sworn-in in '95-we were beginning to see the benefits of the NAFTA trade on the border. I fully understand that. To answer your question, in the long run, what ends up happening is, again, I think the Mexican model is good to look at, because we are constantly dealing with trade disputes. Since I have been ENTITY, we have dealt with Mexico on a variety of fronts, like, I think tomatoes or corn, whatever-avocados, exactly, por cierto-cement. There is a constant need to evaluate the trade agreements and to deal with the natural tensions that grow up. It is not easy to have a trading relationship, but it is a lot more hopeful than not having a trading relationship, is my view. And that is why my discussions with President Lula on the Doha round are going to be very important. Brazil is a major player in the international community. And the Doha round, in my judgment, is a vital round that we would like to see progress, because I'd repeat to you that a system that trades fairly and a system with more open markets is one that allows people to more likely rise out of poverty. A successful round of Doha is by far the most effective poverty-alleviating program in the world. From your past experience in the energy sector, you know that Mexico and Canada are strategic partners for the U.S.- through the subject of energy. And what benefits do you think that Mexico will get, and also its neighbors, from a position of opening its energy sector to private investment? Jose was right that our biggest suppliers of energy are Canada and Mexico, and that is good. I'd much rather be getting energy from stable sources that are friendly than from sources that are unstable and not friendly.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 122, "text": "And since we import about 60 percent of our crude oil from overseas, we are obviously dependent upon stability, one reason why, Jose, that it is important for us to work with countries to help develop a more robust ethanol and biofuels industry. However, having said that, we are still going to require oil. And to the extent that Mexico makes the decision internally to be able to attract enough capital to expand to keep up with world demand, that would be positive. But most of all, it would be positive for Mexico. Mexico has got a valuable asset in its energy sector. The demand for that energy is significant; however, the exploitation of that energy requires significant investment. It requires investment to keep their sector-the current sector modernized, and as you all know, that as Mexico continues to expand its production in deeper waters in the Gulf of Mexico, that requires even more capital investment. So to the extent that the Government feels comfortable being able to track sources of capital outside of the Government cashflow, to me that would be something that certainly ought to be considered by President Calderon. Can you come up with a unified question? What role can the countries of Latin America, like Brazil, like other partners in Latin America, can play in the Cuban transition to democracy? The message, in my judgment, to the world during a transition period, is freedom-that we ought to expect that the Cuban people have the right to express themselves openly without fear of reprisal, to be able to express themselves at the ballot box, and to be able to realize potential as a result of an open economy. What I hope happens is that we together insist that transition does not mean transition from one figure to another, but transition means from one type of government to a different type of government, based upon the will of the people. That will certainly be the position of the United States. We believe the Cuban people ought to make the decision for the future. We believe it ought to be up to the people, the long-suffering people of that island to decide their fate, not the fate-not to be decided because somebody is somebody's brother; the fate ought to be decided because that is what the people want. And I would hope those who have lived under the blessings of liberty have the same message. Vamos a ver, cuando-how long he stays on Earth, that is a decision that will be made by the Almighty.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists", "publication_date": "06-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 123, "text": "As you know, head of U.N. inquiry, Serge Brammertz, will present his report to the Security Council in a few days. How should the international community respond if the report concluded that Syria did not fully cooperate with the inquiry, as previous efforts did? Our position is, is that we want to know the truth, and we expect all parties to be forthcoming with the truth. The truth is really important to help Lebanon meet a goal that we want for Lebanon, which is free of foreign interference, democratic and peaceful, so that people can realize dreams and so the great country of Lebanon can grow and prosper like I am confident it can. So the United States will constantly remind all parties that we seek the truth, and we expect parties, when asked about the truth, to be forthcoming with the truth. I am worried about people who stall and hope that the world turns a blind eye to a terrible death. And we are not going to turn a blind eye. We will keep focused on this important issue, because we believe in the future of Lebanon. From what you say, many in Lebanon fear that there might be a deal between Washington and Damascus. In other words, if Damascus complied with Washington demands regarding Iraq, regarding Hizballah and Hamas, would you let the inquiry not reach its ultimate? Part of our desires for Damascus is, of course, to shut down terrorist bases in their country, and is, of course, to stop cross-border infiltration into Iraq, is, of course, to stop allowing people to find safe haven to plot and plan attacks in the neighborhood. But part of our demands was to-was 1559, which is, completely out of Lebanon. We are people who believe that when we say something, we have got to keep our word. I think that the light of truth is very important toward establishing a peace that we all want in the region. I really do want young boys and girls in Lebanon to be able to grow up in a world free of violence. Lebanon is a fabulous country; Beirut is one of the great international cities of all time. And it is in the world's interest that this democracy survive, and not only survive but flourish and thrive. And so we do not -we really are not going to deal away Lebanon's future. Yes. and you have demanded repeatedly that Lebanon should implement this resolution. Will you give the Lebanese Government a chance to resolve this issue through national dialog, or you will exercise more pressure?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdianamoukalledfuturetelevisionlebanon", "title": "Interview With Diana Moukalled of Future Television of Lebanon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-diana-moukalled-future-television-lebanon", "publication_date": "09-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 124, "text": "The truth of the matter is that peace in Lebanon is going to be achieved by Lebanese leaders, people in Lebanon who are dedicated to the future. The United States can-we can work; we can help; we can pressure Syria; or we can do things. But what we cannot do is to force people to be courageous in the name of peace. That is up to Lebanon's people themselves-the people of Lebanon themselves. The Lebanese must stand up and say, We demand a open and free and transparent society so we can live in peace. We will help, but courage comes from within people's souls. And we have been encouraged by courage being shown by those who believe in Lebanon's future. Are you following the national dialog that is happening now in Lebanon? Many believe that without international efforts, this dialog will not succeed, where other parties think that the American pressure is keeping Lebanese from reaching an agreement. I understand the talks have been suspended for a week, but they will be ongoing, and I think it is a very important part of the Lebanese folks putting aside past-the past and focusing on a bright future. And we will help, and we will encourage, but ultimately the decisions have to be made by the Lebanese citizens, that they want something better than violence and war and division. The two controversial items are the ousting of President Emile Lahud and the disarming of Hizballah. 1559, which we strongly support, says that armed militias should be disarmed. And secondly, we believe that the President ought to be independent, ought to be someone who will strongly represent the interests of the Lebanese people. And I think it is very important to understand that democracy-you cannot have a democracy if political parties have their own armed force. Our position is that the Lebanese forces ought to be in control of the security of Lebanon, for the good of the people. What is your position regarding ousting President Emile Lahud? I think the characteristics for the President ought to be somebody who is independent-minded, somebody who focuses on his- the future of the country, somebody who understands that foreign influences inside of a country can be very negative. ENTITY, as you know, the situation in Iraq is really deteriorating; the country is on the edge of a civil war. The support for U.S. policies among Arab public opinion is-it is minimal.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdianamoukalledfuturetelevisionlebanon", "title": "Interview With Diana Moukalled of Future Television of Lebanon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-diana-moukalled-future-television-lebanon", "publication_date": "09-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 125, "text": "Many believe that you are focusing on Lebanon to divert attention from what is going on in Iraq, or it is a part of a whole scenario to control the region. Why did Lebanon get so much of your attention in the past year, whereas Syria controlled Lebanon for 30 years? Because I believe in democracy. I believe democracy yields peace. That is a historical-it is been proven throughout history that democracies yield the peace we all want. I want young boys and girls in Lebanon to grow up in peace. It is what I want. I am-I want the same thing for Iraq. I want Iraq to be a democracy-not a U.S. democracy but a democracy that takes into the-the traditions, the Iraqi traditions and the history of Iraq, just like the Lebanese democracy will reflect the history of Lebanon and the traditions of Lebanon. I believe there are such things as universal values, and I believe everybody desires to be free. And it is difficult in Iraq, no question about it. But I want-I want you to remember that the Iraqi people expressed their opinion last December about civil war. Eleven million people went to vote in difficult conditions saying, We want freedom, and we want democracy. And I am convinced, ultimately, the people's will will win out and defeat those who want to try to create a civil war. Our position in the Middle East and throughout the Muslim world is that we want to be a partner in peace; we want to help people realize their potential. And I hear the-I hear the language about the United States, that United States is anti-Islam. We view Islam as a religion of peace-or that the United States has got this design. But we will protect ourselves. But the best way to protect ourselves ultimately is to encourage good relations amongst Muslim people and to encourage democracy. That is what we want. We believe in societies where women have got a chance to realize their dreams. We want there to be good education and good health care, and to the extent that people want our help, we are willing to help. But so far, you are not winning the hearts and minds of Arab people. Well, it is -there is a lot of negative news on TV. There is a-the enemy to democracy has got one tool, and that is the capacity and willingness to kill innocent people. And that shocks people. People of good conscience grieve when they see innocent life being taken by car bombs or when they read about beheadings.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdianamoukalledfuturetelevisionlebanon", "title": "Interview With Diana Moukalled of Future Television of Lebanon", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-diana-moukalled-future-television-lebanon", "publication_date": "09-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 126, "text": "ENTITY, is there anything you can tell us on the record concerning the visit of your various power officials here today? They are members of a committee, I could not tell you the name of it, that has on it somebody from the Federal Trade Commission, somebody from T.V.A., somebody from Interior and one or two from the Power Commission. They have been working- I think the whole thing came out last spring-on a general survey of the power situation, and they are going to talk with me about that tonight. No, it is separate from that. It relates only to power. It is one of the inter-departmental committees to report on the general situation. Still on the record, does that visit here mean that you have in mind any new moves of a concrete nature in the immediate future in connection with what you were telling us the other day? This has nothing to do with the trip or T.V.A. or anything like that, except in so far as it relates to general power policy. . . . I feel I am doing a lot of talking here, but the other day you spoke of power and there are a lot of interpretations on it. Do you mind telling us what your ideas are regarding private power companies? All right, I shall give you something on that, but this has to be off the record because I do not want to be in the position of interpreting what I said. Two years ago, in this room, you were here, Fred . . . We spent an hour and a half. I think it was in January, 1933, and we had been down with Norris to see the Wilson Dam. And I had said up there publicly that we were going ahead with the development of Muscle Shoals. That is all I said at that time publicly. We came down here and we had this talk in which I outlined what developed into T.V.A. . . . Power is really a secondary matter. What we are doing there is taking a watershed with about three and a half million people in it, almost all of them rural, and we are trying to make a different type of citizen out of them from what they would be under their present conditions. Now, that applies not only to the mountaineers-we all know about them-but it applies to the people around Muscle Shoals. Do you remember that drive over to Wheeler Dam the other day?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 127, "text": "You went through a county of Alabama where the standards of education are lower than almost any other county in the United States, and yet that is within twenty miles of the Muscle Shoals Dam. They have never had a chance. All you had to do was to look at the houses in which they lived. Heavens, this section around here is 1,000 percent compared with that section we went through. So T.V.A. is primarily intended to change and to improve the standards of living of the people of that valley. Of course it is an important one because, if you can get cheap power to those people, you hasten the process of raising the standard of living. The T.V.A. has been going ahead with power, yes, but it has been going ahead with probably a great many other things besides power and dam building. You talk about a yardstick of power. H. A. Morgan is running the fertilizer end of it and at Muscle Shoals he is turning out, not a nitrate-the plant was originally built for a nitrate plant-but he is turning out a phosphate. He is conducting a very fine experiment with phosphate of lime. They believe that for this whole area around here, and that would include this kind of soil around here, phosphate of lime is the best thing you can put on land in addition to being the cheapest. Now at once, the fertilizer companies, the National Fertilizer Association that gets out figures , say, Are you going into the fertilizer business? Therefore, they are going to take this year a thousand acres of Government land, worn-out land typical of the locality, and they are going to use this phosphate of lime on these thousand acres and show what can be done with the land. They are going to give a definite demonstration. They will compare it with the other fertilizers, putting them in parallel strips, and they will see which works out best and at the lowest cost. Having the large plant, they will be able to figure out what is a fair price for the best type of fertilizer. Having done that and having figured out the fair price, it becomes a process of education. If the farmers all through that area can be taught that that type of fertilizer at x number of dollars a ton is the best thing for them to use, then it is up to the National Fertilizer Association and its affiliated companies to meet that price.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 128, "text": "Now, that is the real answer, and we hope that they will meet that price, adding to the cost of manufacture a reasonable profit. We shall know what the cost of manufacture is, and it is very easy to say what a reasonable profit is. Now, if those gentlemen fail to avail themselves of this magnificent opportunity to conduct a sound business and make a profit, well, it is just too bad. Then somebody will get up in Congress and say, These fellows are not meeting their opportunities and the farmers will have to have the fertilizer and of course we shall have to provide it. But I, for one, hope that that day will never come. Now, that is not holding a big stick over them at all. It is saying to them, Here is your opportunity. We go down on our knees to you, asking you to take it. In other words, what we are trying to do is something constructive to enable business . . . You take the example of Corinth we went through the other day. In Corinth, without Government assistance- they did it themselves-they had a county electric-power association and they used to buy their juice from the Mississippi Power Company. Because they were on a through line to Tupelo, the T.V.A. came along and stepped in as a middleman, and still bought the power from the Mississippi Power Company at a lower cost per kilowatt on the agreement with the Mississippi Power Company that it would take more juice. The result was that the Mississippi Power Company gets the same gross profit as it was getting before, but it is selling more power. Then the T.V.A., merely acting as middleman without any profit to itself, turns around and sells it to the county electric-power association. That part of it does not change the existing situation at all. The Mississippi Power Company merely gave a lower rate to the Alcorn County people, but it did it via the T.V.A., instead of direct. It does not cost the T.V.A. anything, and it does not receive anything. Now the Alcorn County people, that is the Alcorn County Electric Power Association, did a very interesting thing. There they had Corinth, which is a good-sized town, and they found they could distribute in Corinth-these are not accurate figures-they found they could distribute household power at about two cents a kilowatt hour.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 129, "text": "But if they were to run an electric line out to a farm, they would have to charge three cents. In other words, the farmer would have had to pay more. What did the Corinth people do? They said, We can get cheaper power than the farmer, but we think he should have the same rates we are getting. Voluntarily they agreed to take and to pay for two-and-a-half-cent power which enabled the farmer to get two-and-a-half-cent power. Now, there was no reason in God's world why the Mississippi Power Company could not have gone to Corinth and said the same thing-no reason in the world. It just never thought of it. It could have done that same thing. But it was the T.V.A. that went down and sold the idea to the people in that county and said, Let us have a uniform power rate for the man next to the powerhouse and the same rate for the man who lives twenty-five miles up the Valley. We do not want to concentrate any more people in Corinth. We want to increase the rural population. The result of that operation is that they are increasing-they have more nearly doubled the consumption of power. Furthermore, they have gone ahead and formed another association, tied up with this county one, by which people can buy refrigerators and electric cookstoves and all the other gadgets at a figure which is somewhere around 60 or 70 percent of what they were paying before. A subsidiary of the Mississippi Power Company in the business of selling refrigerators, generally owned -I am just saying this as a mean aside- generally owned by a son of a president of a power company-there is a lot of that nepotism-would go around and say, We will sell you a refrigerator. You can pay for it over thirty months. The total cost to you at the end of thirty months will be three hundred dollars. In other words, it was a hundred dollars extra for instalment payments. It did not say that, but that is what it amounted to. In other words, it was selling them the thing at two hundred dollars, and it was making an average of 18 to 20 percent on that sale during this thirty months. That selling corporation, of course, made not only its 15 or 20 percent, but also made quite a lot on what it had paid for the machine.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 130, "text": "It had probably paid a hundred and seventy-five dollars for the machine, so it made twenty-five dollars on the machine. Now, whom did it buy it from? It did not buy it from the General Electric or the Westinghouse. It bought it from the middleman, and he also made a twenty-five-dollar profit on it, and the General Electric Company got only a hundred and fifty dollars for the machine. Therefore, when the consumer paid three hundred dollars, it was just 100 percent more than the General Electric Company got for the machine. We went to the General Electric Company and said, Will you give us your wholesale rate on machines? And we went to all the other refrigerator manufacturers so as to have a complete line, and then we said to the householder, You can buy this for a hundred and fifty dollars plus a five-dollar handling charge, paying for it over thirty months at 5 percent interest instead of 18 percent. The net result is that instead of paying three hundred dollars, he pays a hundred and seventy-five or a hundred and eighty dollars. His instalment cost is at 5 percent instead of 18 percent. He gets it at the wholesale price, which the Mississippi Power Company could have done exactly as well as the T.V.A. In other words, we are teaching him something. Whom is Corinth getting its power from now? I do not quite understand the power company getting its same profit. Ruble, who runs a department store down there, told us that the building had its bill cut from sixty dollars a month to forty dollars and he doubled his consumption. That is the point; what does it do? Suppose it were selling-well, let us put it in algebra. Suppose it were selling x kilowatt hours times y cents per kilowatt hour. The total receipts of the company amounted to z. Now, we come in and tell these local people that if they will buy 2x kilowatts times 1/2 y-in other words, half the price-you will still have z. In other words, if they buy twice as much power at half the cost, the gross will be exactly the same at the end of the month. Now, that is what we have been trying to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 131, "text": "I do not know the consumption back in Corinth, but in Tupelo we estimated it would take a year at a three-cent rate running down to one, instead of a rate starting at six cents and running down to three. We figured it would take a year for the consumption of power to double. Actually, it took only four months. The consumption of power in Tupelo has doubled in four months. The result is that the local company has an even bigger gross in the way of receipts than it had before, and yet the consumers of that power, whether shopkeepers or farmers or householders or anything else, are getting their electricity for less than half the price-about 45 percent-of what they were paying before. The only overhead is when you get an extension of rural lines. There you have a larger inspection force to watch the lines. Then we are doing a third thing along the same lines. The power companies did a silly thing when it came to rural electrification. They put out all kinds of specifications for rural lines that were out of the question. There was a certain rural line we wanted here in Warm Springs, and the specifications of the power company, as I remember them, called for thirty-five-foot poles, white oak, that had to come from North Georgia. They had to be hauled here by railroad. Then I think it charged eighty dollars for the transmission line into the farmhouse. The net result is that a line for five or six farmers would cost somewhere on the average of four or five hundred dollars. Then it said to him, along the same line as the refrigerator, You can pay that over a number of years with a small charge for interest. The interest ran from 18 to 20 percent. What we are trying to do is to build a rural line which will be substantial. We will put in transformers, actually at cost from the electric supply company, the General Electric Company or the Westinghouse, and then let the farmer pay for his power line at 5 percent instead of 18 or 20 percent. It means that on the average he can put in his power line for about 60 percent of what it costs the other way. Now, we come back to the old simile we used before. I hope that the proper power-company officials will accept this free education that the Government is giving them. If they come in and do it right with a reasonable profit on their actual cost, that is all we are asking.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 132, "text": "In Atlanta the Georgia Power Company runs its auxiliary plant in Atlanta with gas. It buys gas from Mississippi, makes electricity from the gas-converts the gas into electricity- and sells it at a profit. It uses about twenty million cubic feet a day. Do you know, about gas-Ickes told me this on the train the other day- there is going to waste every year in the Texas oil fields $72,000,000 worth of gas. It is just escaping into the air. Now, if that gas were turned into electricity, think what it would mean to Texas. That is $6,000,000 worth of gas a month. They pipe the gas into Atlanta from Mississippi. If that much is going to waste in Texas, what is the gas wasted on Capitol Hill? That would run the District, anyway. It might cut the District tax rate. Now, coming back to the point, this statement shows a balance available for construction and retirement of 35 percent of the gross. If you were to analyze the financing of most of the private power companies, you will find that in the majority of cases they have been following the pernicious rule of the railroads. They get out a twenty- or thirty-year bond issue and they do not start a sinking fund. When the bonds mature they do not pay them off. For example, in the paper yesterday morning, there is one company that is seeking to refund an issue of bonds which were issued twenty years ago. That is what has hurt the railroads. The railroads never paid off a single' bond which had matured. They never set up a sinking fund. . . . The logical question that that raises is, can the average private utilities undergo the reorganization necessary to cut the rates and take advantage of the opportunity given them? Of course, we all know they do a lot of talking about widows and orphans. A certain friend of mine, who makes or perhaps saves two or three thousand dollars a year, started in about 1928 to put aside a savings fund, realizing that some day he would get old and could not work any more. Wanting a little more than 4 percent, he went to two banks in New York City, the most reputable, oldfashioned banks he could find. I was partly responsible and told him where to go. As a result, today he finds that the fifteen or twenty thousand dollars he put in is invested, about two-thirds, in bonds of utilities, not stocks but bonds.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 133, "text": "Holding companies, all of them holding companies, none of them operating companies. He was advised to buy the bonds of these holding companies as the best form of investment he could get. They were 6 percent and 7 percent bonds and he bought them at 102, 103 and 104. He bought them above par. Today the average of those bonds is about 40. The result is that he has lost over half of the savings that he put into those bonds. Now, why are they selling at 40? For the simple reason that you have to find out what is behind them. That starts you back over a chain. Let us take Associated Gas & Electric, as an example, or Commonwealth & Southern, or any of the big holding companies. Those bonds have printed on them that behind them is so much stock. Let us call the first company the A Company, and its bonds state that it has so much stock of B Company, C Company, D Company, in the treasury of the A Company, as security for those bonds. Then you analyze and you ask, what is the common stock of B, C and D Companies? You will find that they are holding companies. And you will also find that they have outstanding certain bonds which are backed by the common stocks of E, F, G, H and I Companies. And then you will come down to those companies and perhaps they are operating companies or perhaps they are holding companies too. Sometimes you get the pyramid of the holding company principle up to the fourth dimension. The banker who does the merging gets a lot of common stock, and dumps it off on the market. Now what Charlie said was right. I do not like the expression squeezing the water out, but if the utility companies in this country could recapitalize on the basis of the money put into them, every one of them would be making a profit today and every one of them could reduce the rates. But a lot of people have taken their money and gotten out. And a lot of widows and orphans are holding the bag, having been persuaded by the best banks in New York City to buy that kind of bonds, which is not at all honest. The answer is that they hold the bag anyway, so that in reorganization it would not make any difference. In a reorganization it is just too bad about people badly advised. In other words, somebody is bound to get hurt. Suppose, for the sake of argument, you can save the consumers of power one hundred million dollars at the rate of two hundred dollars a year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 134, "text": "That would be five hundred thousand people who would benefit in a year. They would benefit from that kind of saving through cheaper power. You would hurt a lot of people. You might hurt twenty or thirty or forty thousand people in materially benefiting five hundred thousand. But, after all, that is one thing that Government cannot do, and that is to protect widows and orphans against bad advice they have had on investing. . . . To give you a thought, what we are after primarily is to improve the standard of living for the country as a whole. And power is merely one of the things? Do you think it is necessary to go ahead with the Tennessee Valley experiment on a national scale to bring about the plans you have outlined? Not the same kind of governmental power development if the other fellows will do it. They have every chance in the world to do it. Eight miles over here to the eastward is a place called the Cove where they make the best corn liquor in Georgia. Now, in the Cove the Georgia Power Company owns one of the most favorable power sites in the State. It can turn out at that power site something between forty and fifty thousand kilowatts at a cost of less than half a cent. It has owned it for fifteen years and it bought the whole power site for a total of fifteen thousand dollars. In other words, it bought it as a farm lot. It has sought in other years to carry it on its books for a million dollars. It is an undeveloped power site and I think the old Public Service Commission of this State allowed it to do it for a while. Farther up, where we are going to picnic, is a place where it can develop 30,000 kilowatts, and I think it paid fifteen or eighteen thousand dollars for all the land comprising that site. It has a grand chance to make cheap electricity for the whole region and we are just giving it the opportunity as well as showing it how. None of this, I take it, is on the record. No, it is just so that when you talk about it in the future you will know all about it. Cannot we write this as background? You had better keep it. If you write anything at all it will look like trying to explain something. . . . Cannot we use this, what you said this afternoon about Tennessee Valley and before-cannot we use that? Instead of using it right now, jot your notes down and let me give you a hint.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexcerptsfromthepressconferencewarmspringsga", "title": "Excerpts from the Press Conference in Warm Springs, Ga", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/excerpts-from-the-press-conference-warm-springs-ga", "publication_date": "23-11-1934", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Franklin D. Roosevelt"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 135, "text": "Listen, were you there in person? Last night we hosted a reception at the Embassy for many of the leaders of the Catholic Church at home, and they were very grateful that I came and Laura came and Dad came and President Clinton came and Condi came as well as others. And I told them, to a person, that it is such an honor to represent our country at a ceremony honoring a truly great man who is and will always be a great historical figure. I knew the ceremony today would be majestic, but I did not realize how moved I would be by the service, itself, by the beautiful music. I was struck as an aside struck by the fact that the sound was so clear in this huge facility. It was as if we were inside the cathedral listening, and the voices were so pure. We were given an English version, fortunately if you have not read it, maybe you have seen it? I was struck by the response of the crowd. And I think it is interesting to note the moments where the crowd responded. One in particular is when His Eminence spoke to His Holiness's relationship to the young of the world, and there was a great outpouring of enthusiasm for that line. And then I think the thing that struck all our delegation most intensely was the final scene of the plain-looking casket one of three, by the way, lead, wood, and wood being carried and held up for the seal to be seen, and then the sun pouring out. This will be one of the highlights of my Presidency, to have been at this great ceremony. So off we go to home now. Your predecessor suggested that the Pope would leave a mixed legacy, even though he was a great man. Since you differed with him on the war to such a great degree, do you also think it will be a mixed legacy? I think Pope John Paul II will have a clear legacy of peace, compassion, and a strong legacy of setting a clear moral tone. You are going to see Prime Minister Sharon soon. There is been some talk in Israel that maybe you are not going to raise this issue of this latest settlement expansion. Are you going to do that? I have raised the issue of settlement expansions publicly. I mean, it was upon the prompting of your question. What I say publicly, I say privately. And that is, the roadmap has clear obligations on settlements and that we expect the Prime Minister to adhere to those roadmap obligations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 136, "text": "And the roadmap has got obligations for the Palestinians. We have a great opportunity we, the world, has a great opportunity to help a democracy grow begin and grow, starting in the Gaza. The Prime Minister of Israel has decided to pull out of Gaza. As you know, I applauded that decision at the White House, with him standing by my side. And I think now is the time to focus the world's attention on what is possible. And we have already started that process of realizing the possible by having General Ward work with the Palestinians to streamline and coordinate Palestinian security forces so that, upon the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, there is a security presence that will protect people. We have got to do more. So you are going to try to talk him out of this latest settlement expansion he is talking about? My position is clear, and I will I stated, obviously, now the second time in a brief period of time, and I will say so privately as well. And that is there is more than just security in Gaza. We need to have institution-building, and there needs to be an international effort that encourages and fosters economic vitality so that a government which does emerge in Gaza will be able to better speak to the hopes of those who live in the Gaza. And success in the Gaza will make success on the West Bank easier. And so one of our I will be talking to the Prime Minister about the need to work with the Palestinian Government, President Abbas, to facilitate success, to enhance success. Let me make sure I go back to the first answer on His Holiness. I said I think my answer was, is that what did I say? I asked if you thought it was a mixed message, and you said, I think John Paul II will have a clear legacy of peace. A clear and excellent legacy, if you do not mind adding the word excellent. I wanted to make sure there was a proper adjective to the legacy I thought he left behind. It was more than just clear. Yes, you said strong legacy of setting a clear moral tone. But some in the region think that some of our allies there, particularly Saudi Arabia and Egypt, still are not doing enough to help foster democracy in their own countries.  We will continue to encourage democracy. One, our own road to democracy was a little bumpy; we have a Constitution and a Declaration of Independence but, nevertheless, had slavery for a long period of time, for example.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 137, "text": "And secondly, that we should not expect others to adapt that which we think we should not try to impose our democracy on other nations. What we should say is, We will work with you to develop a democracy which adapts to your own cultures and your own religions and your own habits. But I think it is also our job to encourage those nations and, at the same time, recognize that all nations are not starting at the same spot in order to achieve democracy. I mean, Iraq, it is very important for us in Iraq to recognize that we we transferred sovereignty 10 months ago. Remember we all traveled to NATO to the NATO summit? And it may seem like an eternity to you all but 10 months in the greater scheme of things is a short period of time. And nevertheless, during that short period of time, the Iraqis have voted, and today they have announced their Prime Minister. The Government will be up and running, the Government Assembly there, to write a constitution. In other words, things are happening quite rapidly, which is positive. But nevertheless, there is a certain there is got to be a certain realism about how fast things can possibly happen, given where different nations have started from. Now, I will continue to press forward on encouraging democracy and reform in every nation, because I believe that is the ultimate strategy to defeat the terrorists. In the short run, we will continue to find them and work with nations to find them and share intelligence to find them, bring them to justice. In the long term, the spread of freedom and democracy democracies reflecting the nature of the people and the history of those countries will mean that generations will more likely grow up in peace. When you sat there surrounded by that incredibly array of world leaders and looked forward to the kind of spread of democracy you are talking about, is there something about just that assemblage there? Who did you talk to? Who did you see? And did it strike you that this was a remarkable ability to pull together such disparate people? I was most attentive to the ceremony, itself, and was amazed by the size of the crowd. We came walking out of the grand stairway, and it was a very inspiring sight. Of course, the cardinals you know, a handful of whom I know, have gotten to know quite well and admire greatly, by the way. When I first got there when Laura and I first got there, we shook hands with the folks around us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 138, "text": "Obviously, Jacques and Madam Chirac were right next door; I spent some time visiting with them. But what it represented, to have that many people I believe that is part of the power of Pope John Paul II. And he was such a believer in freedom. I saw Lech Walesa, for example. I was struck by the number of Polish flags that were in the crowd. You know, I really did not reflect that much on the politics of the moment during the ceremony. I was more I thought a lot about Pope John Paul II. I mean, here is a person who has shown that a single individual can make a big difference in history and that, in my judgment, he received his great power and strength from the Almighty.  It is hard to follow my Spanish is not very good nevertheless, it is decent enough to pick up sounds that then can help me follow the Italian. Had you ever been to a Latin mass before? I imagine you have been to an English mass. The other question was, we never had a chance to you talked about a lot about what struck you from this ceremony. We never got a chance to talk to you about, by contrast, how you were struck by the wake, if you will, when you went through the other night. How do the two ceremonies you know, different kinds of emotions in the two? I felt I mean, obviously, we were surrounded by a crowd at the wake, but I felt when I was kneeling there, I felt I am trying to think of the right word alone is not the right word, because I was aware of people, but felt much more in touch with a spirit. I was very much felt at peace there and was prayerful. And at the other ceremony, it was probably just because of all the sights and sounds and majesty and colors that, you know, I felt more like a spectator than a participant, but more of a spectator. You knew him personally, I mean, to kneel there and see his body after you have met with him so many times and had I mean, that must have been quite powerful and My relationship with Pope John Paul II was a very good relationship. He was such a gentle man, and at the end of his life he made his points to me with his eyes. Did he speak English? Some, but it was hard to really understand him because he was struggling.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 139, "text": "That is why it is really interesting for people to note that there was a lot of testimony and in my remarks, I tried to witness that as well that his struggle at the end of his life and the dignity with which he struggled was a clear example of Christ's influence in his life. I was honored to see that firsthand. He is one of the great vigorous leaders mountain climber, educator, instructor who then had to struggle using the very tools that enabled him to be a vigorous teacher, outdoorsman, freedom fighter, and yet, nevertheless, he still could communicate clearly through eyes which were, you know, crystal clear. And I remember the Castel Gandolfo, when Laura and I went to visit him. And he took us out on the balcony. The Castel overlooks this fantastic lake; it is a spectacular lake. And he had a sparkle; he really wanted to show us this beautiful setting. I would define Pope John Paul II as a clear thinker who was like a rock. And tides of moral relativism kind of washed around him, but he stood strong as a rock. And that is why millions one of the reasons why millions came to admire and love him. I was asked by some of the leadership of the Church, was I surprised at the turnout? I said, Not at all, because millions from all religions, millions of Catholics and millions of others admired his strength and his purpose and his moral clarity. How did the Pope struggle with his health at the end of his life and his example throughout his life strengthen your own faith? Well, you know, it is as clear example of Christ's influence in a person's life that he maintained such a kind of hopeful, optimistic, clear point of view amidst struggles in his case, physical struggles. And that is a lot of Christians gain great strength and confidence from seeing His Holiness in the last stages of life. Do you think that will help you in the months and years ahead, in your own life? Well, I think all of us get touched in different ways if you are on a faith journey we are all affected differently. But yes, I think my relationship with and Pope John Paul II's example will serve will be a moment in my life that will strengthen my faith and my belief not just me, more significantly, millions of people whose life he touched. I think we might have witnessed I do not know perhaps the largest funeral in the history of mankind.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 140, "text": "But there is a reason why the largest crowd ever to come and pay homage to a human happened, and it is because of the man's character, his views, his positions, his leadership capacity, his ability to relate to all people, his deep compassion, his love of peace. Again, I repeat, I was honored to be one of many there, and I know you all were as well. Besides the pomp and the majesty and the colors, there was a spirit that was an integral part of the ceremony. For me, the spirit was also at the wake, but more personal at the wake. If there was ever a moment where you ever had any doubts in your own faith, what out of the past public things would strengthen your resolve and firm up your relationship with your God? I think a walk in faith constantly confronts doubt, as faith becomes more mature. And you constantly confront, you know, questions. The Bible talks about, you have got to constantly stay in touch with the Word of God in order to help you on the walk. But the Lord works in mysterious ways, and during all our life's journeys, we are enabled to see the Lord at work if our eyes are open and our hearts are open. And today you can analyze, and you can look at the coffin being held, with the sun shining on it, anyway you want. I happen to feel it was a special moment that was part of a special ceremony for a special person. And it helped strengthen my faith. And you can have your faith strengthened on you can have your faith strengthened when you stand up at a faith-based initiative and see someone standing up and testify to what their love has done to help a child or how a child's life has been helped. My faith gets strengthened when I went to the school the other day and saw the mentoring relationship between a young professional woman and a young kid who is going to go to the SEED School where there is a 95-percent chance that kid is going to go to college. And that helps strengthen my faith. So there is , you know, ways whether the moment be majestical or whether the moment be a part of just an average your average moment in life, you can find ways to strengthen your faith. And it is necessary to do so, in my judgment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 141, "text": "It is a constant maturing of an understanding of a and today's ceremony, I bet you, for millions of people was a reaffirmation for many and a way to make sure doubts do not seep into your soul. Given that, how difficult do you think that it will be finding a successor to fill his shoes? And I think that, as Cardinal McCarrick said at the ceremony on Saturday, the day His Holiness died, asked for prayers as he began his journey as one of the electors, as a Cardinal. You know, I am not going to prejudge the selection process. Are there any qualities that you are specifically looking for? I am not a part of the selection process. I will be a ENTITY representing a great nation in dealing with a great institution with which we have diplomatic relations. Can you tell us a little bit about your dinner with Prime Minister Berlusconi? Did you talk, particularly, on Iraq? Did the subject come up, in terms of the intelligence officer who was killed by Americans? Yes, it did come up, and I expressed my regret once again and assured him that the investigation would be conducted in an aboveboard, transparent way. Did he say it had been a problem for him in keeping the support that there is in Italy for having troops in Iraq? No, he reaffirmed his commitment to which he has given in the past that we have got to make sure we complete the mission, that we help Iraqis to fight off the few. He knows what I know, that the sooner that gets done, the sooner our troops will be able to come home. But he is also aware that what we do not want to do is leave prematurely, so that we do not complete our job. And the new Government is just about to be stood up; we look forward to working with the new Government on a lot of things and a lot of fronts. But on the security front, it is to make sure we are in sync with our training schedules, make sure that the chain of command within the military and between the civilian government and the military are strong and capable and will endure. We have been waiting for this new Government so that we can then strategize.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 142, "text": "And as soon as the Government is sworn in, the appropriate folks, we can get Zal confirmed quickly, get him out there of course, we have a good, strong Deputy Chief of Mission there now, upon swearing in of course, I will be in contact with the Prime Minister.  And General Casey, as well as the Charge I mean, the Deputy Chief of Mission will be in touch with; Condi will be touch with her counterpart; Secretary Rumsfeld will be in touch with his counterpart as we strategize as to how to move forward. As we strategize on tactics, on how to implement the strategy which is clear which is, we want to train you and make you as efficient as possible as quickly as possible, so that all of us can begin to, you know, as I say, bring our troops home with the honor they have earned. Italy is going to pull out 3,000 troops, I think, by the fall. Will you be able to absorb that? I do not know why you say that. I am not sure why you said what you just said. I thought that was the number of troops Italy had in Iraq, and I They have got 3,300 now, and you said they are going to pull 3,000 out by the fall? What I did hear was, is that the Prime Minister wants to work to make sure we complete the mission. But I am not sure where that came from. Do you think he will leave troops in if, in fact, enough have not been trained? I think we will work to complete the training mission of the Iraqis. And it is important we do it and get it right. The amazing thing is, is that if you really think about what is happened in the 10-month period, in spite of some very difficult days and in spite of some tragedy, loss of life, this country is there is a democracy emerging in this country. And it was really kicked off by the huge vote of over 8 million people. But no, we will work with all our coalition, continue to make sure we stay in touch with all our I had breakfast with Tony Blair this morning, speaking about coalition. You know, I stay in regular contact with the Prime Minister. Can I ask you about Tom DeLay, the statement he made in the wake of the Schiavo case, that judges were out of control and should be held accountable. What did you think about those? I believe in an independent judiciary.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 143, "text": "I believe in proper checks and balances. And we will continue to put judges on the bench who strictly and faithfully interpret the Constitution. ENTITY, I know you are not you have said you have often said you are not consumed by polls, but a fair amount has been written lately about your approval ratings, which in some polls are at sort of a low point. Some of them were going up the other day. You can find them going up, and you can find them going down. You can pretty much find out what you want in polls, is my point. What about the theory that your Presidency is moving from one dominated by foreign policy to one of domestic policy? Ironically, now that some of things are settling down in Iraq and Afghanistan and you are facing tough issues like Social Security, it is a little tougher road to hoe. My thoughts are the ENTITY has always got to balance foreign policy and domestic policy, and I will I did so in the first term. As you might remember, we were confronted with a recession, and I felt we needed to reform schools, and at the same time, I had to fight the war on terror. We are continuing to fight the war on terror. The war on terror goes on, and that is the important thing for me to continue to remind our fellow citizens. By the way, we will work to defeat the enemy by, you know, making sure our troops are well framed up, prepared, ready to move quickly. It is part of the transformation process that the Secretary is leading. And to make sure our intelligence services mesh and work closely together, I am looking forward to getting John Negroponte confirmed as quickly as possible, so we can deal with this crucial aspect. I might remind you that at points during the tax debate, I can remember people had declared that tax relief was dead on arrival. Occasionally, somebody would say something that was not very positive about the process, and people would all of a sudden assume that nothing was going to get done. So I am accustomed to, you know, the process of getting a piece of legislation out. And I am very optimistic that when it is all said and done, the legislators will understand that the American people recognize there is a problem in Social Security and expect something to be done. And I look forward to being a part of that. I had laid out a timetable to make it clear to the American people my views about the problems inherent in Social Security. And I think we are making progress.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 144, "text": "I think slowly but surely, the American people are coming to realize there is a serious problem with Social Security not if you have retired. And that is the other aspect of making sure we succeed in the Social Security debate, is to make sure seniors know they are going to get their checks. And we have got work to do on that. I certainly hope so, because now is the time to fix the problem. Every year we wait costs billions of dollars more. And I fully realize some people would rather me not be discussing this issue. The job of the ENTITY is to set an agenda that deals with problems. And sometimes sometimes the legislature does not want to deal with the problem. But I am going to continue to remind all of us in Government that when we see a problem, we have an obligation to do something about it, no matter what some may think are the short-term political consequences. I happen to believe that not dealing with the problem will create political consequences when the public realizes how serious the problem is. If you do not deal with the problem or you go home and say, I am not dealing with the problem, there will be a political consequence. I have learned that lesson, as a Governor and ENTITY, that the people expect and respect people for setting agenda items and staying focused on achieving a solution to the problem. And I have set an agenda. I set an agenda on energy. We need an energy bill. You know, we have been talking about energy for 4 years. Now, I fully realize an energy bill reflects a longer-term strategy. But we need to we need to do a lot of things. Eventually what we are going to have to do is change our habits, change the types of automobiles we drive. I believe we will have a zero-emission coal-fired electricity plant. I saw the when we went to Cleveland or Columbus, we saw the technology involved with that. But Congress needs to get me an energy bill. And it seems like to me, with the price of gasoline where it is, that ought to be enough this time to cause people to get moving on the bill. But I will continue to push it. We need to get a budget. We passed I put a pretty good budget, a real good budget. It helps cut the budget in half the deficit in half over a 5-year period of time. Now they need to get their differences worked out and get it to my desk. I will be a part of that process as well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 145, "text": "In other words, I have an obligation to set agenda items. And when I set one, I will continue to work it and remind people that we have a duty to deal with these problems. I like the debate, by the way, as an aside. I am enjoying this. Even if a lot of because I feel I got elected for a reason. My nature is such that, if I came to Washington and saw a problem and did not deal with it, I would not feel very good about myself. I want it to be said that George W. Bush got elected and did what he said he was going to do, for starters. You covered my campaigns. Every speech, I talked about Social Security. And I started talking about Social Security in the year 2000, because I recognized a problem coming down the road. You have no problem if you are receiving a Social Security check. I do not care and I am going to say it like you have heard me say it it does not matter what the propagandists say, people are going to get their checks. You might remember the ads that they ran against me when I was running for office that said, If George W. gets elected, you are not going to get your check. I am sure you guys analyzed those and realized that upon election, people got their checks, which might say something about those who ran the ads, right? Well, they are saying it again. They are trying to frighten seniors in order to stop people from coming together. Now, in 2001, something that has lost a little bit of the focus of those covering this issue, I called together the Moynihan Commission, and I think it might be wise for people who analyze this issue to refresh their memory about the Moynihan Commission, because the Moynihan Commission, made up of equally Democrats and Republicans, came up with some interesting ideas to solve this problem. How deeply have you had to draw down on that political credit that you felt you had? I think you get I think you earn capital, you know? Are you spending any? I am spending a lot every time I go out. But you earn capital by spending capital; that is what the people expect. We have got trips I will be keeping going out, reminding people that there is a problem.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 146, "text": "And one of these days, we will be able to look back and say, You know, we were successful convincing the American people there was a problem, and we were successful reminding seniors that you are not going to have your check taken away from you. And then all of a sudden, it becomes a true generational issue, because the grandparents receiving the checks, they are going to start asking, Now that I am secure, what are you going to do for my grandkid, because the grandchildren are going to pay an enormous price. You heard those experts sit up there and say that if nothing happens it is likely younger workers are going to have to pay an 18-percent payroll tax. Now, I was born prior to 1950. But if I were my daughter hearing somebody predict that at some point in time she is paying an 18-percent payroll tax, I'd be suggesting to the old man me that I get something done. And that is what we are doing.  to make progress on this, because, you know I have heard Members say I am not going to tell you who they are nor what party they are from; I wish you had not have brought this up. We hear the talk out of Capitol Hill saying, Oh, darn, I wish the ENTITY had just focused only on the budget or maybe the energy bill. There are a lot of people who would rather not talk about this issue. I understand that. Again, I do not think that is part of my job description, avoid issues because it may be politically difficult. I think my job description is, if you see a problem, talk about it and work with members of both political parties to come up with a solution. But I am not the least bit surprised, because it is a tough issue for Members, for people who've got, you know, a relatively short-term horizon, 2-year horizon. They are worried about some of them are worried about elections. Some of them in both the House and the Senate from both parties, by the way are thinking longer term. And they are beginning to talk some ideas, and that is constructive. You know, I remember I was telling President Clinton, I remember watching one of his townhall meetings in Albuquerque, New Mexico, on this very subject. By the way, a lot of the language happens to be pretty close to some of the townhall meetings we have had. But, no, I am not surprised people want to avoid this issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 147, "text": "What has it been like spending time with the former ENTITYs for 3 days? You know, we share war stories, you know, a lot of talking, a lot of interesting experiences about different world leaders that we may all have met or all three of us met, just different experiences that, you know, my dad might have had or President Clinton might have had. There is a lot of interest, obviously, with former ENTITYs about, you know, policy, so I had them sit in on our policy briefings this morning with Condi and Steve and the CIA fellow traveling with us not this morning, yesterday and the day before, on Air Force One. And then yesterday at the Embassy, I wanted to include them in. And you know, we had a these CIA briefings a lot of time prompt policy discussions, you know, how is this process going. Steve and Condi, now that she is here both of them were able to bring Dad and President Clinton up to date on our strategy in dealing with a particular issue. It is interesting to get their points of view about their experiences in particular countries. It was really a lot of fun. Are you worried about them spending so much time together, those two? Well, you heard my gridiron speech. Hope you enjoyed the experience as much as I did. By the way, I think when you discuss religion on doubt, there is no doubt in my mind there is a living God and no doubt in my mind that the Lord, Christ, was sent by the Almighty. When I am talking about doubts, I am talking about the doubts that an individual struggles with in his or her life. That is important for you to make sure you get that part of the dialog correct, if you do not mind. Like Stretch, I am on the injured reserve list from running, so I will be mountain biking. I think Cat McKinnon is going come up from Austin. I will be finishing my book, Peter the Great, by Robert K. Massie. Some of you old-timers have probably already read it. I am just now have you read it? Have you read it? I like when you said old-timer, and you looked at Steve . He probably had read it, and I was not going to look at Ann , of course, I am too polite. We will have briefings. Condi is coming to spend the night; Hadley will be spending a night there. We will start briefing the Sharon visit Sunday night.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone1", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-1", "publication_date": "08-04-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 148, "text": "I thought you might be tired of me, so I brought Susan along. ENTITY, can we ask you a couple of questions? Can you give us any indication of what kind of time frame you are operating on on this amnesty question? Would you think within the next week or so? Can you give us any feeling for your inclination at this point? We know that you have opposed this in the past. You said that you were going to look into it. Are you leaning one way or the other at this point? We are having a fair analysis made of the success of the program that I instituted in 1974,2 which showed about 21,000 out of 105,000, or thereabouts, took advantage of the program. But we have to take an overall look at the impact on military morale, public reaction, equity as far as those who participated and went through their process of earning their way to clear their records, and then see how it equates vis-a-vis the blanket order. I cannot give you any particulars as to what the decision will be at the present. ENTITY, I would like to get on to something else. I wonder if you have decided whether to give your former colleagues in Congress a pay raise? Well, we are looking at that and studying very carefully the figures. Are you going to have a recommendation before you go out of office? I will have to make a recommendation before I leave office or else leave it up to Mr. Carter. Do you plan to leave it up to Mr. Carter? We have not made a decision yet. ENTITY, would you have initiated the amnesty study but for your conversation with Mrs. Hart? She made the specific request. She is the window of a dear friend of mine, and at her request I thought that it would be appropriate to do so. We know that you are considering lifting Federal controls on gasoline prices. Some of your aides have said that if you were going to make a decision, you would probably have to make it by the 4th of January in order to allow Congress the 15-day period to approve or reject it. Have you given any thought to that yet? We have given it a lot of thought. We will make a recommendation. We have not decided on the details yet, but there will be a proposal to Congress, because I made a commitment at the time I signed the energy act in December of 1975 that we would eliminate controls as rapidly as possible, and we have. We have not finalized the details yet.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexchangewithreportersvailcolorado", "title": "Exchange With Reporters in Vail, Colorado.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/exchange-with-reporters-vail-colorado", "publication_date": "29-12-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 158, "text": "Let me be, ENTITY, the first Italian to welcome you in advance to my country. I want to thank you for giving us the opportunity to hear from you your points of view on the major issues that will be discussed at the Venice summit. I am Guiseppe Lugato, from RAI-TV One, Italy. Do you feel uncomfortable in going to Europe right now, considering that, in one hand, there are great challenges for the Western World-let us consider the winds-of-trade wars and the Persian Gulf situation-and on the other hand, all the seven leaders, they have problems, too; they look a little weak. And yourself have been damaged by the Iran-contra affair. I will tell you, we keep in touch to such an extent, the seven of us, the leaders of the seven countries represented here, and consult, and none of us go off on our own very much without keeping the others informed. I think we have problems that can better be handled as we discuss them there. I think that the subjects will deal with macroeconomics-the things that we decided on in Japan a year ago that we were going to do about trying to make trading more fair, remove some of the obstacles, market obstacles, to see if we could not stimulate more growth in all of our countries economically, things of that kind. And of course, the East-West situation will be discussed and also the matters that we launched again in Japan-and that is our handling of terrorism and so forth. So, I am looking forward to it. Sir, talking about the obstacles, are you ready, for example, to cut the budget deficit-that these are proof, they say, of so many problems, not only in the United States but also abroad? And do you think that maybe the American people have to tighten their belts? Well, as far as the Government's tightening its belt-long overdue. I have been trying to bring that about ever since I have been here in our governmental system. There has been resistance in the Congress and from the opposition party to making some of the cuts we want to make. If I had been given the budget I asked for in 1982, for that first budget of 1982, the cumulative deficits through 1986 would be $207 billion less than they are. So, we are continuing to do this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "27-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 159, "text": "And now we have a congressional bill that was passed, signed into law, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings bill, which has a definite plan for reducing the deficits annually, until down the road, in just a few years, we will have a balanced budget. At the same time, I am still seeking a constitutional change that will then require a balanced budget every year of our government. And I agree with all the others that our deficit spending, by a government, is one of the economic problems that has an effect on everything and all our trading partners. ENTITY, you will be meeting Mrs. Thatcher when you go to Venice. She may shortly be replaced as Prime Minister of Great Britain. Will you preserve the special relationship between America and Great Britain, whoever is in power in Britain? Oh, I think the relationship between our two countries has been an almost family relationship for many years-and many different governments of the United Kingdom in the past. I do not want to seem to, in any way, try to influence the election in England, but I have to tell you that I have great admiration for the manner in which Prime Minister Thatcher has handled not only the domestic affairs but the international affairs. And beyond that I cannot go, with an election coming up. that even if there was a government in the United Kingdom which embraces unilateral disarmament and seeks the removal of U.S. nuclear bases from Great Britain, you would still maintain your special relationship with such a government? I would try with all of my might to persuade that government not to make those grievous errors. And yet, as I say, we have had a friendly relationship that has survived Labor governments in the past as well as Conservative governments there. The Iranian Ambassador to the United Nations declared 2 days ago on the American TV that should his government decide to attack oil tankers in the Gulf it would do it whatever these ships are protected by the American flag. ENTITY, do not you consider this statement as a sort of anticipated declaration of war from Iran to the United States? I doubt that Iran would ever declare war on the United States, knowing what the inevitable consequence would be. And I can only respond to that statement that was made, I am quite sure, for domestic consumption. There are a number of flash points throughout the world in which the Western World-all of us, our countries here-have to take positions in the interest of world peace.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "27-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 160, "text": "And I have said from the very beginning that wherever we have to put forces in those places to help maintain peace-anytime they are attacked they will retaliate, they will fire back in self-defense. And we are going to continue on in that regard. Why do not you call on French and British Governments to have in the Gulf a sort of Western task force just to assure there the freedom on navigation of the oil tankers? Well, I know that there are warships of the other nations, our allies, that are in the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean, and nearby. And I understand that that is been part of the conversation that Secretary of Defense Weinberger has been having with our NATO allies in Europe right now-about possible cooperation and a relationship between the military elements that we have stationed abroad. Well, ENTITY, about 1 month ago you said that you'd examine the new data on U.S.-Japanese semiconductor trade. What are your findings on Japanese compliance, and will you lift sanctions before the summit meeting? Well, while there seems to be some progress being made, we still have not reached what I think must be the answer, and that is a return to abiding by the agreement that both our countries had made in this regard. I hope that it'll be very soon that we will restore that agreement, and when they do, we shall immediately lift the sanctions that we have put on this. What is your global strategy to stabilize the dollar? You mean about international trade? Well, I know there is been a kind of volatile situation It is always referred to as the dollar being overvalued and then suddenly the dollar losing value. We have had a feeling that the currencies of some other countries have been undervalued and that everyone will be better off if those currencies have come up, so that maybe it is not all just our dollar-that they have come up. We think and believe that the dollar is at the place that it should remain. We do not look for any further serious drops in the value of the dollar. things that we started in Japan next year about review of the GATT treaty or agreement, and that we can have an opening of markets worldwide and an easier flow of trade that will benefit all of us. After all the discussions with the Soviets and the allies, how close are we to an INF agreement and another summit with Gorbachev this year?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "27-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 161, "text": "And would you favor, after eliminating all the INF missiles in Europe, a so-called fire break that means no reductions of short-range nuclear weapons below the range of 300 miles? Well, we have been, again, in close consultation with the allies on this. There seems to be some pretty general agreement on the basic terms of what we are negotiating. It does begin with the long-range intermediate weapons. We are hopeful of getting rid of those in the world. Also, there is no thought on our side of totally denuclearizing Europe at the same time that this would leave the Soviet Union with a great superiority in conventional weapons. I would like to think that, ultimately, all nuclear weapons in the world could be done away with. They violate all the previous rules of warfare in that their principal targets would be the noncombatants, the civilians. And I do not think that the threat of total destruction, mutual destruction, is exactly a sensible defense program. That is why we are going forward with the SDI. We believe we are on the track of something that could maybe render such weapons obsolete. But before any of that can come about, then there must be a bringing together of the ratio of forces between the Soviet Union and ourselves. Now, as to the first part of your question, I am hopeful that this fall we will have the summit meeting. It is up to General Secretary Gorbachev now to set the date; the invitation is there. Now it is simply a case of when will that take place. And I am always a little superstitious about being optimistic in advance about things like the agreement on the reduction of arms, but I do believe that great progress has been made, more than in all the years since World War II, and that we have the best opportunity for beginning the reduction of nuclear weapons that we have ever had. In connection with the arms discussions, three recent polls in my country show that for a majority of Germans Gorbachev is more popular and credible than you are. Does it worry you that in the heart of Europe people have more faith in the Soviet leader than in the American President?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "27-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 162, "text": "I mean no personal rebuke or derogation of Mr. Gorbachev, but I do believe that on the record of abiding by treaties, on the record of striving for peace, that the United States record is one that the people should have confidence in, more confidence than the Soviet Union, which has a wrong record of violating treaties and of using subversion in order to spread its influence throughout the rest of the world. Now, I am hopeful that Mr. Gorbachev, and the things he is proposed within his own country, is taking a different tack and really means to set a different course than has been set before. But I believe there is reason for us to-well, as I said to him in our last meeting, I used a Russian term, a proverb, Dovorey no provorey. President Reagan, the revolutionary government of Iran has caused a lot of pain for your administration over the last few years. And I just wonder if you are going into the Gulf looking, positively seeking, a chance to punch them in the nose, saying as you once did to terrorists, Go ahead, make my day. No, I have to say we are not just in there daring someone to do something. I think all of the nations that you represent have made it plain how important the Persian Gulf is. And I have said for several years, and I have had agreement with the leaders of your countries, that there is no way that we can sit back and let the Persian Gulf be closed to international trade. Now, it is far more important to Western Europe and Japan because of the percentage of oil that comes out of there for their total needs. We also get some from there, but it is a much smaller percentage from that particular area. But what we have said is those are international waters. And can you imagine the precedent that would be set ff we all stepped back and said, Well, this barbaric country has a right to close down these international waters and bring down the economic havoc that it would on so many countries ? We are seeking nothing except the right of commercial trade between the nations of the gulf, those that are not embroiled in the Iran-Iraq war, and we are going to do that. Can I ask you about another emerging strategic ocean, and that is the Arctic Ocean, where Soviet subs, as you know, are very busy these days.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "27-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 163, "text": "Is the United States ready to recognize the Canadian claim to sovereignty up there in its own interest-that is, so that the Canadians can perhaps use subs to intercept and keep track of the Soviets? We honestly want to find an answer to that. Now, on one side-that sort of holds back completely accepting the Canadian position -is the international precedent that, again, would be set if something that by definition is international water could be closed by the nearby countries. There are other chokepoints on the trade routes in the world where that could easily be invoked if the pattern was set. On the other hand, from the Canadian viewpoint, I have to say that that is unique, that area. When you look at the Canadian islands and the extent to which they dominate those waters, and know that a great many of those islands year round are connected by a solid ice cover upon which there are many people who live above those waters on that ice, that this is a little different than the other situations in the world. And we sincerely and honestly are trying to find a way that can recognize Canada's claim and yet, at the same time, cannot set that dangerous precedent that I mentioned. ENTITY, answering the question of my French colleague, Jacques Abouchar, you said that in the case the Iranians will attack your ships you will respond. How far will you go in your response? I mean, are you ready even to hit the Iranian territory if something really huge happens? I do not think that is a question that I should even attempt to ask. First of all, our actions will be defensive. We will defend ourselves. Now, it is true that the Iranians have placed missiles on shore that can reach targets at sea. That has to be considered with regard to more than just shooting at another vessel or shooting at an airplane. But the reason why I do not think I should go farther is I think it is far better if the Iranians go to bed every night wondering what we might do than us telling them in advance. So, you have said repeatedly that you are anxious that the truth should come out in the Iran-contra affair. But is not it the truth, now, that it is coming out that is actually causing so much damage? I wonder if you feel that your credibility has been damaged, perhaps as it is seen in some parts of the world, almost beyond repair now?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "27-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 164, "text": "I know the damage that is been done to my credibility, but it has not been by anything that has been proven-quite the contrary. It has been the image that has been created by our own, particularly, Washington press corps in describing what took place. That linkage is the thing that the press would have had no word of it had I not gone to them and told them what we had discovered. We had agreed to meet with some Iranian individuals who wanted to discuss possible better relations with their country in the event of a new government there, that eventually, of course, there will be a different government. And they were the ones that brought up the idea that to help them-because they were risking their lives, literally, to make such a proposal to us-and to also establish our serious purpose, that we violate our decision to not do business with a country that supports terrorism-and Iran is one. And they asked for a kind of a token shipment of weapons to be sold to them. We agreed to this, but we have put a condition. We said we have this agreement about not supporting terrorist nations, and there is a group of terrorists called the Hizballah that at least has some kind of a philosophical arrangement with Iran. We said to these same people, If you will use your influence to try and free our hostages in return for us doing this thing with the weapons. Now, it was not until the leak through that Beirut paper that brought all of the press of the world into the knowledge of this covert operation we had. We had to be covert to try and save the lives of the people we were dealing with. We did get a couple of hostages back; more were scheduled to come out when the news broke and that ended everything. Well, this is when we discovered that I had not been kept completely informed in what our own representatives had been doing, that the whole arrangement had really kind of degenerated into hostage dealing rather than the thing that they had proposed first about how could we form a better national relationship. And in our digging into this, we discovered that there evidently was more money paid for our weapons than we had asked and than we received, and that that money had gone somehow into some Swiss bank accounts, and then one of those accounts was apparently one used for furnishing money to the contras in Nicaragua. Immediately, the day we learned this, the very next morning, I went before our leadership in Congress and subsequently before the press and told them what we had discovered.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "27-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 165, "text": "Now, I am still waiting to find out who charged Iran that extra money. We got our $12 million for the arms. How was that extra money put there, who got it, where did it go? And I know no more than what I have just told you, and we were the first to bring this to the attention of the press. Now, with regard to contra aid and our ongoing struggle with our Congress-which has appropriated money for aid to the freedom fighters in Nicaragua against that totalitarian Communist government, then the Congress changes its mind and cuts off aid to them-I, from the very first, have said the only hope we have for preventing the establishment of another Soviet base on the mainland of America is by way of the freedom fighters and then negotiating to have a democratic government there. I made it plain, went to the public trying to arouse public opinion in this country in support of our position so that they would influence their representatives in Congress to continue providing the aid. I did that openly. I knew that there were individuals and groups in America which on their own, privately, were contributing. And I never asked how they did it. And at the same time, I had expressed a belief that other democratic nations in the world-it might be to their best interest also to lend support to the freedom fighters. But again, I never solicited any country and asked it to do that, and I never knew who was or who was not , until the head of state of one of those countries told me that they were contributing and were going to increase their contribution. I am being portrayed as having, behind the scenes, violated the law and done all sorts of shady things to try and violate the Congress' restriction on aid to the freedom fighters. Now, I hope this will be carried word for word in each of your countries, and maybe my reputation will be restored. You have repeatedly condemned protectionism, but Europeans are not so convinced-not to mention agriculture. I'd like to give you just an example of the European plane, Airbus. Our feeling is the American side plans nothing less than to kill the project. What we think is going to happen-we have already had discussions and this, too, started in our meeting in Japan, our last summit meeting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "27-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 166, "text": "So just lay out the vision the president expects to deliver to the nation tomorrow. Well, I think he is going to talk about how our founding principles and values can still guide us in today's modern and changing world. We do look at this and the State of the Union as a package, so I think in the inaugural, he is going to lay out his vision for a second term. The detailed blueprint and ideas will be in the State of the Union, so I do think you have to view these as a package. He is going to say that our political system does not require us to resolve all of our differences or settle all of our disputes, but it is absolutely imperative that our leaders try and seek common ground when it can and should exist. That is going to be a very important part of the speech. You have been with the president all through this journey, and I was struck by something that his biographer, David Maraniss, wrote about, the changes he is noticed and others have noticed in President Obama over the four years. David Maraniss said that, in the second term, his will to survive is less likely to contradict his will to do good. He is going to act with more assurance, and he is going to show who he really is in his second term. Is that what you see? Well, I think one of his great strengths is his authenticity, so he is -- he is always been the same person. But I do think that, you know, it is clear, there is a huge consensus in the country about how we ought to approach the deficit, economy, issues like immigration and gun safety, and I do not think he is going to -- he is going to be very frustrated if Washington is completely divorced from the reality in the country. So he is going to seek common ground. He is going to find every way he can to compromise. But he is going to be pretty clear, and we are also going to bring the American people more into the debate than we did in the first term. What is the biggest difference between the President Obama who took the oath four years ago and the one who will take the oath tomorrow? We obviously had an economy that was collapsing all around us, and he was a first-term president, so at that time, he is still putting together his team, his cabinet, his agenda.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsweektranscriptobamasenioradviserdavidplouffestoryid18241822", "title": "'This Week' Transcript: Obama Senior Adviser David Plouffe", "source": "http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-obama-senior-adviser-david-plouffe/story?id=18241822", "publication_date": "17-01-2013", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["David Plouffe"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 167, "text": "I think now the economy's still too weak but recovering, and so the question is right now is, what -- building on that, as opposed to just simply trying to stem the bleeding. And I think the experience of the office, as you know -- you know, that helps a lot. And so I think he does have even more sure-footedness in terms of his approach and where he wants to take the country. It also can become a bit of a burden. You know, historians write about this second term curse. And I know you and your team have spent a lot of time studying how to avoid that. Well, I think -- listen, if you look at President Clinton's second term, he made significant progress on balanced budgets, Ronald Reagan accomplished tax reform. So second-term presidents have had success... Even if they are dealing with other problems? We want to continue that. So -- but if you -- look, it is not like we are roaming around the West Wing looking for things to do. I mean, right now, right in front of Congress and the country, you have got the need to reduce the deficit, continue to grow the economy, energy and climate change, immigration, gun safety. And so I think that that is going to provide the sort of focus and energy you need, and I think his -- his intention is to run through the tape all the way through. Gun safety has jumped to the top of the president's agenda since Newtown. And this week, the president promised to put the weight of his office behind these proposals, but we are already seeing a lot of resistance from Democrats. I want to show some of the reaction this week. Before passing new laws, we need a thoughtful debate that respects responsible, law-abiding gun owners in Montana instead of one-size-fits-all directives from Washington. It makes common sense to not have one-size-fits-all. I feel like it is going to be hard for any of these pieces of legislation to pass at this point. What kind of pressure is President Obama going to bring to bear on them? Well, this is a tough issue, as you know, like a lot of them we are dealing this. These are commonsense proposals that respect the rights of gun owners.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsweektranscriptobamasenioradviserdavidplouffestoryid18241822", "title": "'This Week' Transcript: Obama Senior Adviser David Plouffe", "source": "http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-obama-senior-adviser-david-plouffe/story?id=18241822", "publication_date": "17-01-2013", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["David Plouffe"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 168, "text": "And I think if you look at high-capacity magazines, assault weapons, universal background checks, progress we can make on mental health and school safety, all of these things enjoy enormous support of the American people, both Democrats and Republicans. So I think that putting together the legislative coalition is going to be hard, obviously, but we are very confident. I do think things have changed since Newtown. You know, Senator Manchin, for one, other Democrats and Republicans are thinking anew about this issue. But Senator Harry Reid, the Democratic leader in the Senate, and those senators I just mentioned all signaling that the assault weapons ban is likely not going to get through, and they are likely to vote against it. Will it be a success for the president if, indeed, the assault weapons ban does not pass? The president put forward a package. He is taken some actions on his own on things like mental health and background checks, but legislative proposals that he thinks will protect our kids, help with gun safety. We do not expect it all to pass or in its current form, but we think there is elements of this that are absolutely critical. And I think there is going to be a big spotlight shone on this. I think the American people are paying a lot of attention this debate. And he is going to twist the arms of Democrats? Well, we are going to twist the arms of Democrats, Republicans, and we are going to engage the American people in this debate. And at the very least, we are going to have votes on all these things in the House and Senate. I am confident some of the measures you mentioned -- clips, universal background checks -- I think there are 60 votes in the Senate and 218 in the House that the president would sign. That could be the trade-off, Democratic senators vote against the assault weapons ban, but vote for the magazine clips and for the universal background checks? As you know, you were involved in passing this in '94, and I think that Senator Feinstein's looking at how to improve it and deal with some of the loopholes that were in that legislation. So we think all these things deserve votes. We think a lot of them can -- can pass. You have also bought a little more time perhaps now on the big fiscal issues, taxes and spending. The House Republicans signaling this week that they would approve a three-month extension of the debt limit without any spending cuts. They simply want to have a restriction on congressional pay.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsweektranscriptobamasenioradviserdavidplouffestoryid18241822", "title": "'This Week' Transcript: Obama Senior Adviser David Plouffe", "source": "http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-obama-senior-adviser-david-plouffe/story?id=18241822", "publication_date": "17-01-2013", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["David Plouffe"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 169, "text": "Now, I know the president has said that he did not want to sign any more short-term exceptions. Will he make an exception in this case? Well, we have to see what they are proposing. We have not seen what they are proposing, and they are going to have to pass it. But, no, we do not think short term is the way to go about this. But on the other hand, this is a big departure for them, you know? They were saying, the only way they were going to pay the bills they have racked up is to basically hold the... Yeah, I think they have, on this principle, and that is very important. So, listen, the question is, on the big fundamental issue of, can we come together on a fiscal package that reduces the deficit in the long term and then helps us grow the economy in the short term, I think the answer is yes. We are doing this in stages, as opposed to one big package. So the president likely to accept this, if they do, indeed, pass it. He has said he does not want to negotiate over the debt limit, but if they pass this, there is a breathing space. So will he start negotiations right now on the big budget issues after they pass this? As you know, we made public our offer to Speaker Boehner, over $1 trillion in additional spending cuts, $400 billion in entitlement savings. This is really serious stuff, on top of the over $1 trillion we have already signed into law. So the barrier to progress here is not our position of the president. We have moved more than halfway, which is a fair definition of compromise. And we are going to require some more revenues. John Boehner himself said he thought there was $800 billion in revenue from closing loopholes. We have dealt with the tax rate issue. Now it is about loopholes. And I think the country would be well served by tax and entitlement reform, because it'll help our economy. That is what I was going to ask you, because both the House speaker John Boehner and the Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell, have said the revenue debate is over, no more taxes. Are you saying that the president will only sign a budget deal if it includes new revenues? And, by the way, they were not saying that a matter of weeks ago.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsweektranscriptobamasenioradviserdavidplouffestoryid18241822", "title": "'This Week' Transcript: Obama Senior Adviser David Plouffe", "source": "http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-obama-senior-adviser-david-plouffe/story?id=18241822", "publication_date": "17-01-2013", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["David Plouffe"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 170, "text": "Remember, Speaker Boehner said $800 billion in revenue from closing loopholes. What is changed in the last four weeks? So there is plenty of loopholes, whether it is people shipping jobs overseas who gets preferential tax treatment, the subsidies to the energy companies, loopholes for, you know, billionaires, there are things we can close here to make our tax system fair... So you are saying no deal if they do not give on taxes? We need balance, ENTITY. We need -- we need spending cuts, entitlement reform, and revenue. We have to have that. Let me also talk about immigration. The president has identified immigration reform as another top priority of his second term. You just mentioned it again. The Republican senator, Marco Rubio, has been taking the lead this week. And Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, had some positive words about his proposals this week. But Marco Rubio said this week -- and he was on Bill O'Reilly's show -- that the president has not reached out to him. And I think during that process, I think there will be discussions that we, the president, the administration has with members of Congress and Congress among themselves. But what is clear is, this -- the stars are aligned for immigration reform. By the way, it needs to be real immigration reform, not symbolic. But are not you going to have to team up with Marco Rubio to get it done? And I do think that there is broad Republican support around the country, not as much in Congress, but maybe we are beginning to see a change there. The stars are aligned for progress here on, you know, building on the border security progress we have made, holding businesses accountable, in terms of hiring legal immigrants, in terms of a pathway to earned citizenship. So I do think the moment is here right now to finally get this done, high-skilled workers for our businesses. There is a lot that we can do. But those are all things that he is talking about, as well. Would not it be a more powerful position if the president and a key Republican like that had a united front? Well, ENTITY, this process will begin shortly, another effort here to finally get immigration reform. And at that point, I think you are going to see us working with Democrats and Republicans, people outside of Washington, there is a huge consensus in the business community, in the faith community for immigration reform.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsweektranscriptobamasenioradviserdavidplouffestoryid18241822", "title": "'This Week' Transcript: Obama Senior Adviser David Plouffe", "source": "http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-obama-senior-adviser-david-plouffe/story?id=18241822", "publication_date": "17-01-2013", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["David Plouffe"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 171, "text": "So, yeah, our hope is that we can do this. It should be something where there seems to be a consensus in the country. I think there is a political necessity for the Republican Party to do this. And we believe it is the right thing to do for our country and our economy. I know you want to put the weight of the president's campaign behind all these issues. The president set up a new organization, Organizing for Action, a new political action committee, unlimited donations from corporations, but the president will disclose all donors? Yes, we will voluntarily disclose all of our donors. The people who actually made the president's campaign in both '08 and '12, our great grassroots volunteers, were pretty clear after the election they wanted to stay with it and they want to be out there organizing, driving message, holding people accountable on issues like immigration, you know, the deficit and jobs, gun safety, a lot of passion out there. And so I think one of the lessons from the first term that we want to do better is, yes, there has to be an inside game. And you put those things together, because it -- as you know, times that you really get fundamental progress and change in Washington is where the American people are really focused and pushing, and we want to make sure that we are in communication with them. I know you will be advising Organizing for Action, but this is your last week at the White House. What do you miss most? Well, it is just a privilege, as you know, to work in that building. And you get a PhD in a short matter of time on every issue facing the country. And it is just an awesome honor to spend a little time there. And I think for me personally this has been a remarkable journey. Six years ago today, we were the longest of long shots running for president. Now tomorrow he will be giving a second inaugural address. And so I will miss -- you know, this is a great moment where those of us who always wanted to work in a campaign like this, with grassroots energy, for a candidate like this, with amazing colleagues.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "abcnewsgocomPoliticsweektranscriptobamasenioradviserdavidplouffestoryid18241822", "title": "'This Week' Transcript: Obama Senior Adviser David Plouffe", "source": "http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/week-transcript-obama-senior-adviser-david-plouffe/story?id=18241822", "publication_date": "17-01-2013", "crawling_date": "27-06-2023", "politician": ["David Plouffe"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 175, "text": "With all the changes that are being proposed, one that is paramount in the eyes of many Iowans, particularly those on fixed incomes, is how they are going to maintain their current standard of living with the soaring natural gas prices. I went around doing a little interview with my friends here, and that seemed to be one of the prime issues. And I just wonder, what do you contemplate happening in regards to these people? Well, I think what we are talking about is the same old problem of inflation. I am not sure that that is the best idea, because we found out when we decontrolled gasoline, the oil prices, that the price went down, not up. It encouraged more exploration and more development at the source. And maybe the same thing would happen with natural gas, but no decision has been made on that. But the people on the fixed incomes are, of course, always the ones who suffer first in inflation. Our program is aimed at bringing that down. And I have to say, not enough recognition has been paid to the fact that we have brought it down. We brought it down to single digit, where it is been for the last 3 years-double digit. And I think that we are going to continue bringing it down with the program that we have in place. That has to be-I know today a great concern of the country, and it is of ours, is unemployment and this recession. But underlying that, helping cause that, everything comes back down to the fact that we have been in the longest-in fact, the world has been in the longest sustained period of runaway inflation in world history. And we are very happy about it. As a matter of fact, we have succeeded beyond our expectations, and that is what is contributed to the coming deficit. You know, government gets a profit from inflation. If it is a sales tax, and the price of a commodity goes up, and the sales tax is based on percentage, the government's percentage goes up. In the income tax for the Federal Government, that is been the big steal, where people getting cost-of-living pay raises have been moved up into upper-income tax brackets. Today, a sizeable percentage of the normal working people in this country are up to the 50 percent bracket. And so we have not been able to turn it down to where prices are going down, but we have cut that rate at which they are going up.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithskipwebertheiowadailypressassociationdesmoines", "title": "Interview With Skip Weber of the Iowa Daily Press Association in Des Moines", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-skip-weber-the-iowa-daily-press-association-des-moines", "publication_date": "09-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 176, "text": "And there is fear on the part of many that these farms are going to go under. Can you provide any signs of encouragement for the Iowa farmer? We have an Illinois farmer as our Secretary of Agriculture. And we know that this is the whole basis of any economy; has to be that. One of the things where we believe government can participate and be of help-and we are trying desperately to do this-is to encourage foreign markets, export markets, because there is no question, the American farmer can and does produce more than the people in our own country can eat, so he has to have an export market. He is been caught worse than most people in the cost-price squeeze of inflation. The cost of the things he buys, even the finished products of the food that he himself grows, when he then buys that in the form of bread and so forth in the market, he finds that he is on the low end of the totem pole when he sells that raw product, but he is paying like everyone else is, the inflated price as it is gone through the industrial processes. We do not believe that government, as we have known in the past, is the answer of a--continuing to control and subsidize the farm. What we must do with government is help agriculture get back into the market in getting a fair price for what it produces. I was doing quite a bit in the promotion of gasohol. We have had plans for many more plants here in Iowa, but the plans seem to be falling by the wayside now because of a loss of Federal funds. Well, we are reducing a great deal of our subsidy now of synthetics, simply because we believe that industry has become involved enough, that the free marketplace should take hold and help with that. I can recall a visit that you made to Des Moines a number of years ago on behalf of General Electric. Hal Reed-he worked with my dad down at International News-and at that time, I think the thing we were talking about was socialized medicine. But very vivid in my mind in regards to the remarks that you made then-and then also, back in Harlan, I recall in an interview that you talked about what you had done in California as ENTITY in terms of welfare. And as I recall, you were talking about how, evidently, you were allowed to experiment with the welfare programs there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithskipwebertheiowadailypressassociationdesmoines", "title": "Interview With Skip Weber of the Iowa Daily Press Association in Des Moines", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-skip-weber-the-iowa-daily-press-association-des-moines", "publication_date": "09-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 177, "text": "I am just wondering, in regards to your new approach here on federalism, if your experience in California in terms of welfare played a major role in your thinking in changing this plan? Yes, that and all my years as ENTITY there when I saw how extravagant and wasteful it was to have to run a program where the Federal Government imposed every rule and restriction as to how you must use the money, establish the priorities. The priorities are not the same in community after community or State after State. They say, This problem Washington has decided is of this priority, and therefore most of the money must be spent here. But you can come to a community where that is not their major priority, but they do have another problem that they need to help on, but they do not have the flexibility to switch the funds. And this is what we are trying to do with the new federalism program. I could cite chapter and verse of horror stories about this and about these programs. My first veto of a Federal program, when I was ENTITY, was a program that on the surface sounded just fine. It was one of the poverty programs, and it was in a rural county of California, a project-they were going to put 17 able-bodied welfare recipients to work in the county parks, maintaining and helping to keep them clean, the parks. That is exactly the type of thing that we want to do. My veto was because under their rules, over half the budget would have gone for 11 administrators to handle the affairs of the 17 people that were going to work in the park. And I thought that was a little unbalanced, and I vetoed it, and the Federal Government had 60 days to override the veto. They did not override it when I made public why I was vetoing it. I have copies of some minutes of the National Conference of State Legislatures in a meeting that you participated in. One of the sections here is in regards to welfare, and they are quoting you as saying that one of the major reasons for keeping welfare at the Federal level is the likelihood that differing benefit levels among the States was based on a court ruling handed down while you were ENTITY of California. Do you recall that? And it said the courts had struck down the State residency requirements for welfare because it was a Federal program. The ENTITY implied that if the Federal Government got out of the program, residency requirements might be acceptable to the courts. Is that a problem here in regards to your welfare change?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithskipwebertheiowadailypressassociationdesmoines", "title": "Interview With Skip Weber of the Iowa Daily Press Association in Des Moines", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-skip-weber-the-iowa-daily-press-association-des-moines", "publication_date": "09-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 178, "text": "No, and this will be one to see as we work with all these people-I gesture because I am in the statehouse-to see if this is one of the things that could also then be helpful. It is true that the welfare standards vary, based on-and this is under the Federal domination of the program-so these people who say, Well, this State might cheat and not give as much as another State, are talking through their hats, because that is the present situation. But the Federal Government insists on minimums that are based on percentages of what is a basic cost of living in the various areas. But because Federal money was involved, the States had residency requirements so that you had to legitimately be a citizen of that State in order to get welfare. When the Federal Government-the court-on the basis of the Federal funds, struck that down, you found people just going shopping. And there was a great influx, not only into California, New York City-that was when its great problem developed. People only saw the end result of the amount of money that was being paid. They did not translate it into the added cost of living, of living in those places. Theoretically, you were not supposed to be better off in one State or the other, that the lower amount was because of the lower cost of living in that area. But today, our idea is to find out if this is a part of what they want, to get the help of the State and local officials in fleshing out this concept that we have created in turning these programs back. So we are quoting here in regards to Medicare-the suggestions made here. Under consideration is a voucher system for Medicare. This-although here we are still in the early stages of trying to find a better method of providing the needed care for-Medicare is the program for the older; Medicaid is the program that we have suggested the Federal Government take over instead of giving back and to find a way of doing it that will maintain the funds that are needed for people with a true illness or injury and not the waste, the shocking waste that we have today. For example, I can give you a case-let us say this is not in Medicare or Medicaid-that has just come to us, a man who told the story himself. He fell at work and broke his finger, went to the emergency division of the hospital, and they X-rayed and then splinted the finger.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithskipwebertheiowadailypressassociationdesmoines", "title": "Interview With Skip Weber of the Iowa Daily Press Association in Des Moines", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-skip-weber-the-iowa-daily-press-association-des-moines", "publication_date": "09-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 179, "text": "And then an attendant there told him, when he said he was going back to work, said, Well, you know that under the rules you are entitled to 2 weeks at full pay without returning to work. Well, he said, No, I want to go back to work. Believe it or not, they kept him there for half an hour trying to persuade him to take the 2 free weeks. What business was it of theirs? They were there to heal him. And then, he added to his story, he went back to work. And he told that 2 weeks later he called in a doctor that he'd been referred to to check the finger on how it was coming. And the doctor spent a total of less than 10 minutes looking at the X-ray and looking at his finger and submitted a bill to the government for $100. Now, we think there are better ways to run a railroad. Shifting gears here a little bit, a lot of people seem to be picking your budget apart in terms of the money that you want to spend on the military. Why are you so strong in your support of this additional spending? I am strong for military spending for this reason. In the last several years before this administration, the military was literally starved. Even with our military buildup, we will not even be back in the range of ability to stand in the face of our adversaries, the Soviet Union, until the mid-eighties. We will still be below them no matter how much we do now. But the truth is we are only spending about 6 percent-our military budget is only about 6 percent of the gross national product. In years past, in the fifties and the sixties, this averaged over 9 percent with the military budget. And even in the peace years, without the Vietnam war or the Korean war, it was over 8 percent, almost 9 percent. So, in point of history, we are not up to what used to be considered the normal peacetime budget. But we have to show our adversaries that we have the will to defend ourselves. They have thought for several years we do not . But coupled with that, my idea of the real way to save on defense is with them knowing that they are going to have to accept that we are going to build up to their level for our own security. I want to sit down-and we already are sitting down with them-to discuss legitimate arms reductions, and that would be the major savings in defense and for both sides.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithskipwebertheiowadailypressassociationdesmoines", "title": "Interview With Skip Weber of the Iowa Daily Press Association in Des Moines", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-skip-weber-the-iowa-daily-press-association-des-moines", "publication_date": "09-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 180, "text": "Today they are literally starving their people of consumer products in order to maintain this great military buildup. We think they have been able to get away with this because we have been unilaterally disarming for the last several years. When they see that we mean it-I think a cartoon told it all the other day. There was a cartoon that showed Brezhnev talking to a Russian general and he was saying, I liked the arms race better when we were the only ones in it. By them, obviously you are talking about the Russians. It just dawned on me, one of my colleagues here wanted me to ask you if you have ever been in the Capitol before. I do recall sleeping out on the lawn. I am old enough to remember when air conditioning was only found in motion picture theatres, and on some of those hot Iowa nights, this Capitol lawn out here would literally be covered with whole families that would bring a blanket and come over to the lawn and sleep all night around the Capitol lawn from all the residences around here. Swinging back here, would you favor moving up the 10-percent cut in Federal taxes from July i to some time in the spring? I would be very pleased to see that, because I think it would be beneficial, except that those who are proposing it are then proposing in return that we cancel the third year's cut. Now unencumbered, just a simple move up, yes, I would favor that. I think that one of the things that could have mitigated if not prevented the present recession is if we had gotten our original request. We originally wanted a 10-percent, not a 5-percent cut, retroactive to January 1st of 1981. And I think if that had been in place, there might be a different situation with regard to the recession. As it was, to get the bill we had to cut to 5 percent on the first installment and delay to October 1st in order to get passage of the bill. Many economists are predicting that the economy is going to start turning around in the second quarter. If it does not , what will you do? Well, I think we are going to begin to see turns then. The regrettable thing is that the last to recover is unemployment when you are coming out of a recession and that is our major problem today-the people that are without jobs. So we believe that our program that is in place of cutting the cost of government and reducing the percentage that government takes in taxes is the answer.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithskipwebertheiowadailypressassociationdesmoines", "title": "Interview With Skip Weber of the Iowa Daily Press Association in Des Moines", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-skip-weber-the-iowa-daily-press-association-des-moines", "publication_date": "09-02-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 181, "text": "First of all, it is progress. Great success happens when there is two states, living side by side in peace. I thought I would-since this is an historic trip, I thought I would just have you up and share thoughts and answer questions. We will go around for a while. The first signs of peace happen when people make up their mind to work toward peace. And that is what you saw. You heard some pretty firm statements yesterday. The statements yesterday by the Arab leaders were very strong in public, and they were strong in private. One of the things that we have made clear to all parties is that there are terrorists who have to blow up the process-you all know that; it is been an historic fact-and that these countries in the neighborhood have the capacity to work to cut off money to the terrorist groups and access and arms deals. And they committed themselves to do that, which was a positive sign. It was also important for Prime Minister Abbas to hear that. This is a man who is a newly elected Prime Minister, new to office. All of a sudden now he finds himself in a serious effort, the creation of a Palestinian state, which puts enormous responsibilities on him. And one of the things we are saying is, you are now responsible. But it helped a lot to have the Arab leaders support him, and not only support him but to support him through pledges of activity and action. The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia was particularly strong yesterday in private about the need to chase down terrorists. They have had some recent experience with terrorism. And I was really pleased with the strong commitment and the strong desire to not only deal with terrorists inside his country but to work to prevent arms being smuggled from-out of Iraq and into the territories. We also spent a lot of time talking about Syria and the mutual concern about Syria and the desire to convince Syria to shut down terrorist offices inside-in Damascus. I think it was very helpful for Prime Minister Abbas to hear that. Then we come to today. The way the day worked is that I met with the King of Jordan. He is obviously desirous of Palestinian statehood, which would be very helpful to him. We talked about bilateral relations, economic- matters of economic development, and it was a good conversation. And then I sat down with Prime Minister Sharon. I assured him that security was at the top of our agenda, like security is at the top of his agenda.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 182, "text": "One, we are in a war against terror, or a war against terror on the homefront; we are chasing down these people around. But we also recognize that there are some who would like to blow up the process and that we want to work to create the conditions for a Palestinian state to emerge, which means jointly working with all parties to work on the security issue. I also told him, though, he is got responsibilities. And therefore, we have got to work together to help the Prime Minister achieve his stated objectives, which, one, he had a very clear statement on terror. The other thing that was very interesting was his statement on incitement. And it was a fact statement, for those who follow the process. He needs time to get his security forces set up. And I reminded the Prime Minister-I also reminded him that I was not caught by surprise by his statement on the outposts, the issue of the outposts. He said he would dismantle them; we expect him now to dismantle them. Well, you just heard the first step today in the speeches. And the-you also heard me say that we would help the Palestinian Authority develop a security force. Minister Dahlan will be in charge of that security force. We intend to work with them. We assured the Israelis we intend to work with them. The Prime Minister absolutely rejected terror. In order for him to be effective in rejecting terror, he is got to have an effective security force. And so that is what we discussed. And then we met, all of us together, our delegations. We had a- the discussion was very interesting is the Prime Minister asked members of his Knesset to speak, Minister of Defense, the Deputy Prime Minister, the equivalent of the Attorney General, Minister of Justice. And then I suggested that the three of us just go outside and visit, rather than having the formal settings of the old roundtable discussion. And so we went out and sat on the lawn there for about 30 minutes and discussed a lot of matters. What I wanted to do is to observe the interplay between the two; did they have the capacity to relax in each other's presence, for starters? In other words, it was-the body language was positive. There was a-it seemed like to me, from the conversation, that there was a mutual desire to work toward the vision.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 183, "text": "And obviously I am not going to betray confidences, but it was a very interesting and positive conversation, is the best way to say it I did not need, for example, to be Mr. Chatty-you know, kind of, Hey, fellows. And then after that, we gave our speeches, and here we sit. I will tell you that I am pleased with the last 2 days. We have made a good beginning. And I emphasize beginning, because there is a lot of work to do. Let me just review some of the work that must take place. I believe the Palestinian-I know the Palestinian leadership wants that, has got that desire. And so, he must help them put the institutions in place to do that. On the Palestinian side, there needs to be an emergence of a state, the institutions of which are larger than the participants. I assured the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority-and this was when we were sitting out on the lawn-that there is plenty of help coming. At the G-8 meeting in Evian, there was a lot of discussion about how we can help, What can we do? I said, Well, when the time is right, there is going to be need for money and commercial development and enhancement of the entrepreneurial spirit. Israel has got to recognize that Prime Minister Abbas is desirous for peace and, without compromising security, must make decisions necessary to help the Palestinian people. And they are doing that. Money is-more money is now in circulation. They collect revenues, Israel does, and now they are -they have got great trust in the Finance Minister of the Palestinian Authority, a guy who went to the University of Texas, by the way, for a while. He came to Washington as an intermediary on behalf of Prime Minister Abbas, and Condi and I met with him in the Oval Office. I spent a lot of the time on Palestinian finances, cashflow matters, making sure that aid and money actually end up helping the people and not either bank accounts of individuals that-where it does not belong. I am absolutely convinced he is an honest and upright man who believes in the future of the Palestinian people, believes that a democratic Palestinian state is possible. It is important for Prime Minister Sharon to recognize that. I am confident he recognizes that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 184, "text": "The $100 million that had been held in arrears was released, and the process of talking about more money going through, which-25,000 workers now that were not allowed in Israel now allowed in Israel. In other words, what I am telling you is, is that it is important for the life of the Palestinians to improve in measurable ways. And as confidence is built, as institutions are in place, I assured Prime Minister Abbas-and this was important for Prime Minister Sharon to hear as well-that there is going to be a lot of help, financial help, from around the world. Let me just go around the table. I am cautious, because- and I am cautious because history tells you to be cautious. I do not know where you were in 2000. There are people who have declared their-openly declared their hostility to Israel and their desire to destroy Israeli citizens. There are people that, you know, would rather have chaos than a state. And on the other hand, we have now got a partner in peace, Prime Minister Abbas, who is-wants the tools necessary to chase them down. It is going to be one of the accountability measures, by the way. That is one of reasons why we put Wolf. The news today, of course, from our side was, besides having the meeting, was Ambassador John Wolf and his team. It is Wolf and a team of people that the Secretary will be glad to explain to you. We have a security team there to help the Dahlan. Their job is to find out what is needed and to also hold people to account, both sides to account, reminding people of promises made in meetings and insisting them that in order for progress to be made, people have got to deliver it. And so, yes, I have cautious, but optimistic. ENTITY, previous efforts at making peace in the Middle East did not succeed. You believe you now have a chance. Could you try to put this in history? What do you think has changed since you took office, and how did we get to this point? I think a couple of things have changed. One, I think there is-I think Prime Minister Abbas is willing to make the necessary decisions and take the necessary steps to fight terror and to develop institutions necessary for a state to emerge, a genuine effort.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 185, "text": "Secondly, there is a universal recognition that the war on terror is just that, a war on terror and not empty words, that September the 11th or bombings in Riyadh or the terror that has plagued Israel, these are terrorist acts that must be defeated, and they must be defeated at its source as well. It is no longer isolated terrorism, it is terrorism that is beginning to affect a lot of people and can affect a lot of people. So in other words, the meeting yesterday, for example, with the Arab nations, it seemed like to me the new reality was reflected in their statements, which will make it easier for a Palestinian state to emerge. And so I think that is been one of the changes. I am sure this is-other Presidents have said this; other leaders have-but there is now battle fatigue. People are sick and tired of it. People are sick and tired of the death, suffering, of the humiliation. In other words, there is -hopefully history will show whether or not I am right, but hopefully we have reached the point where a lot of good people have begun to realize that the immediate past will lead to nothing but more suffering and humiliation and death. And people are beginning to change their attitudes on the ground. Do you think September 11th had an impact in the region, as well, in help-ing-did it just galvanize American views about terrorism, or did it also carry through into-- I think it-the terror attacks shocked the world. And it frightened a lot of people, because they realized that if America can be hit, they could be hit. And then terror began to-I just said, the attacks in Riyadh or the attacks in Indonesia, Bali, a nice secure resort community. The next thing is, people wake up the next day and realize-around the world realize that there is no such thing as a nice, secure resort when we have terrorists willing to kill innocent lives in the numbers they did. September the 11th made the world aware of the new war. And then the other acts of terror that have taken place since made the issue come even closer to home for many countries. And then the combination of that plus the terrorist activities in the Palestinian territories and in Israel made people realize the effects of terror. It kind of brought it all home, I think. So, yes, I think September the 11th mattered, but it was not the only event that was-helped galvanize thought.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 186, "text": "People are frightened about terror in the Middle East, not just in Israel. And they have got to get after it. And we are going to help them get after it. It is a part of this war. One of the hardest things I knew that I would have to do as ENTITY is to remind the American people, and for that matter, people around the world, the nature of the war in which we find ourselves. I mean, today, as we speak, we have got intelligence sharing going on, we have got people on the hunt trying to find them, one at a time. It is that same effort that will take place in the Palestinian territories, but it requires the desire by all leaders to want to fight it. ENTITY, you seem to value and even enjoy the spontaneity and informality that you brought in your meetings with these leaders. Could you dwell for a moment on your personal style of diplomacy and how you see it working? I try to tell the truth, put it right out there on the table for everybody to understand what is expected. I do; I like people. You know, I remember, I think it was- Ron Fournier asked me the question, Do you trust Vladimir Putin? It was one of the really interesting questions, to fire up ENTITY standing next to Vladimir Putin. Well, the answer is yes, I did not hesitate, because during my meeting with him, I had developed an interesting rapport. It does not necessarily mean he has to agree with everything that I say, but trust his word. I have spent enough time with Ariel Sharon to know he is the kind of guy when he says something, he means it. I am getting the same sense about Prime Minister Abbas. And therefore much of the conversations, particularly as I get to know somebody, is to figure out whether or not you can- whether or not, when they say something, they mean it. You can tell that, pretty much, during a conversation, which means trying to get people off their script, and as you discuss things, make it as informal as possible, because I think people in an informal setting tend to show their heart and/or their conscience in a lot better way. Condi and the Secretary of State, Colin, can give you a better sense of what my style is like. You know I do not spend a lot of time thinking about myself, about why I do things. I think one of my styles is trying to relax people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 187, "text": "I mean, there is no-we do not have a lot of time, and therefore I like to get to the point. I like to ask people-I can challenge people. I believe I can do so in a way that is not offensive to them. And I hope they sense my sense of optimism. I know it is going to be hard, but I think the fact that I am representing a great country and am willing to sit down with these leaders and give them a sense, We are all in this together, is helpful. The best way to do that is in a more informal type setting where there is not a lot of prepared notes. I have been in meetings where people read speeches. It is not as productive as a meeting in which people can sit down and actually-one of my jobs is to try to help relax people in a setting. I hope I am pretty good at that. Is that what happened when you were in the the anteroom with the Arab leaders, you just decided that it was a more relaxed setting and that you prefer to keep talking-- Could you tell us a little bit about that meeting and what went on in that meeting? First of all, I understand that there was a little bit of hard feelings. We had no idea. I am available for any photo op. But we'd like to know what happened in the private meeting that you had with the heads of state before you came out. Before we came out, the thing that was not supposed to be on TV, that one. It was just a roundtable discussion about-let me make sure I get it right here. I told them, I said, look-all four of those leaders, except for Prime Minister Abbas, were-Prime Minister Abbas was there. The other four leaders are leaders who I obviously talked to during the Iraq war. Before the Iraq war and after the Iraq war, I assured them that I was going to be involved in moving the Middle East peace process forward, particularly after the emergence of the Prime Minister, Abbas. This was my chance to go around the table and look him in the eye and say, I am here to make it happen, but I need your help. The first thing was to-is to let them know about the intent of this administration. I shared with them-well, you know Colin's involvement and Condi's involvement. I did not share with them the Wolf-I knew they would read about it today.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 188, "text": "On the other hand, you occasionally try to hold back some news-you have probably learned it before I did, anyway. And then we listened to them, and Crown Prince Abdullah. And they had a lot of interesting thoughts about different issues. Oh, and by the way, it was not just- the discussion was not just on the Middle East peace process. The other thing I told them, I asked them, was to help Prime Minister Abbas. I directly said, We need your help on this fellow. If he is to succeed, if peace is to succeed, he needs your help. And they were willing; they expressed their desire to help. And I went to Iraq and talked about what was happening there. Then I encouraged them to continue on their paths to reform and about how that would make a significant difference in the lives of their citizens. So it was more than-and they commented on all that, different aspects. I am not going to tell you what they told me. If they want to tell you what-if they want to say what is theirs, they will put it in their own press. And part of it had to do because a lot of it needed to be translated. Therefore, a normal conversation-all of it had to be translated. The Crown Prince does not speak English very well, so therefore every word that was spoken had to volleyed. And so that is -we had a good conversation, again, not structured. People said what they felt like, and there was no-it was not just, Okay, you speak; you speak; you speak, and then we are through. And I met bilaterally with them as well. I met with-Colin and Condi and I went over to President Mubarak's house that night. We had a bilateral with him in the morning, and afterwards we ate. I had a bilateral with the Crown Prince at the hotel after the sauna bath. I know, I know there was one place where you were talking about it, figuratively-- Just to see if you were paying attention. And it is very useful to have those kind of conversations. ENTITY, a big part of why you were here, and you made clear, is because Mahmoud Abbas is the person who is Palestinian Prime Minister, and Yasser Arafat is not the person who you chose to negotiate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 189, "text": "But Palestinian leaders, some of their senior officials, made clear that they still think Yasser Arafat-they made clear that they still think Yasser Arafat is somebody who needs to be dealt with, who needs to negotiate. I am wondering what kinds of conversations you had with the Arab leaders and maybe with Mahmoud Abbas about Arafat's role? Well, it is clear that I am going to deal with Prime Minister Abbas, so there was not much conversation. The Secretary of State is-- Secretary Powell. It did not come up in any of the conversations with ENTITY that I am aware of. And they know our views on this. Do you have any concern that he might be a hindrance to the process at all? Not if he has the Palestinian people's interests at heart. In conversations with the Arab leaders, particularly the Foreign Ministers, we made it clear to them that one of the things we expected them to help with was to make sure that Mr. Arafat does not become an obstacle to the execution of the roadmap. Did they seem to say that they were willing to do that? It really did not -I mean, he is handled most of that. It did not come up during my conversations with the Arab leaders. What came up was, how do we help Prime Minister Abbas? Now, Colin may have had different-with the Foreign Ministers, since they have some frank discussions. A lot of times you will find out that the underbrush has been cleared by the- and by the time ENTITY arrives, everybody kind of understands. And one of his jobs is to clear out underbrush. In other words-I do not know what he told the Foreign Ministers, but I just heard what he told the Foreign Ministers. He is watching the calluses on his hands. Can I ask you, just a followup? What do you consider sort of the importance of the role of ENTITY in this kind of process? For example, this is the first time-it is been 2 1/2 years since you have been President. It is the first time you have had this kind of summit, where some of your predecessors had multiple summits by this time. Well, you know, first of all, we have had a lot of meetings but not summits. I have had a lot of discussions with every one of the parties that have been around the table, with the exception of Prime Minister Abbas, and he is just showed up. He just emerged as a leader.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 190, "text": "I called him immediately upon-I think immediately or soon after he became Prime Minister. I mean, so-let me-just because we have not had the summit does not mean this administration has not been working toward achieving the conditions necessary to move forward. And that is really an important- there has to be-I can remember saying this to the press corps early on in my administration. People want to have to- peace, want peace. And the conditions are such now that there is a commitment to peace by a lot of people that are ready to see if we cannot make it happen. And therefore the timing of this summit was really based upon the attitudes of the decisionmakers. Oh, the American President or the American Secretary of State is-I wish we were the decisionmakers. If we could, we'd say, All the terrorists, put down your arms and become useful citizens, peaceful citizens. Banding together, though, we can deal with the ticket-you know, build up the will necessary to deal with the terrorists. And so what the role of the United States is, is to lay out the vision, encourage people to accept the vision, and then help implement the vision. In this case, we call it a roadmap to achieve the vision. And that is exactly what we are going to do. We can be stewards of accountability. And we can say to somebody, You said you'd do this. You have not done it. You say you want to do this, and what do you need to get it done? So today we asked Dahlan, What is it you need? How can we help you? What exactly can we do to help? ENTITY, can I give four data points to show ENTITY's involvement? Just a couple of quick data points to show you how we got here and how ENTITY caused us to be here. On the 18th of July, ENTITY had Arab Foreign Ministers in the Oval Office-Muasher of Jordan, Saud of Saudi Arabia, Maher of Egypt. And at that meeting, ENTITY said to them, we will now structure a way to go from my vision to reality. And that was the beginning of the work on the roadmap. And then on the 20th of December, the European-the Quartet came together to finalize it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 191, "text": "ENTITY met with the Quartet, finalized it, and then we waited for the Israeli elections to be over, which were just about finished at that time, and then we said, with the appointment of new leadership in the Palestinian Authority, ENTITY is ready to act, and he did. ENTITY, in the events of the last 2 days, have they exceeded what you expected coming over here? You are supposed to say what you think. I am the master of low expectations. I think they-we did what we wanted to-I think we-we accomplished what I hoped we would accomplish, but I do not think we necessarily exceeded expectations. I think met expectations is a better way to put it. I was hoping to have honest dialogs. The statements that came out-I think when you analyze the statements, you will find them to be historic, I guess is the right word to use. The Palestinian-the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority talked about the suffering of Jewish people. The Prime Minister of Israel talked about a Palestinian state which was free. I had a little bit of an understanding of what might take place, because we worked hard. The statement just does not show up out of the blue. And so they met expectations. However, the cordial atmosphere- I will tell you what else was interesting, that I would say met expectations or was pleasing to see, was the interface between the Palestinian Cabinet and the Israeli Cabinet. When we went out to sit on the grounds- and I witnessed some of it but not all of it since I was actually on the grounds- Colin and Condi told me that there was very interesting discussions and dialog going on. There was-people were frank with each other. They were able to joke with each other. They were able to kind of bring up a little history with each other. But the main thing that came out of it, at least to our delegation, appeared to be the desire to work together. If I could follow up, ENTITY, were there any time going into this that you were hearing things, that you were thinking to yourself, uh-oh-- Look, I was not going if we were not going to make progress. I mean, there is no need to go and stand up there by myself and say, Let us work for peace, and look around, and nobody would be there with you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 192, "text": "So I was-I think there were some times where-we have had some-in the runup to the process, there was some-there was a lot of work, let me put it to you that way, and a lot of frank discussion and a lot of convincing of parties that we need to get on this path, and we need to work hard, and we need to make commitments. The speeches that- there were some commitments made in those speeches which now put people on the record, not only on the record, all across the world. I mean, a lot of people were watching this today. And I guess it was live in America. So you had these leaders stand up and say, I commit -not just commit to-I mean, the Prime Minister of Israel saying, I commit to knock down or get rid of illegal outposts. So the process was really to work hard to get people to make commitments toward peace. And Colin went out to the region, as you may remember. Part of what you saw today was his hard work. They always look at ENTITY, but the truth of the matter is that there have been a lot of people working hard to work with all parties to get to where we got today. I just happen to attract more cameras than most of them. Bill, of course, is an Under Secretary. And then of course we-we had to make the decision on the man who is going to run the deal on the ground and how his team was going to be formed. Again, the Secretary had to move him in his Department and had to come up with the right structure and the right people so that when the Palestinians and Israelis see who was sitting out there and what they represent, they realize that it is serious business. All that took a while to get to where we are. To answer your question, I am pleased with the start, is the best way to put it. I mean, this-we are going to go through a tough process, because we are dealing with a lot of history. And you are right, a lot of Presidents have tried. We ought to use the prestige of America to try for peace. I fault no President of the United States for trying to achieve peace. Maybe history is such that now we can achieve it. You were pretty blunt yesterday that Israel must deal with the settlements. Sharon made-I do not think we were supposed to hear that. Sharon made his pledge today.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 193, "text": "If there is a suicide bombing, does he reserve the right to move back into those settlements? Look, I think the operative statement from the Israeli Prime Minister, not necessarily in this speech but recently, was he wants to see a complete effort to fight off terror. In other words, he wants an equal partner. He wants a partner in the battle on terror, not somebody who will say they are going to fight terror and then turn a blind eye to terror, somebody who wants to join him. And that is one of the things that came clear. It should have been clear in my speech, too, that we will fight terror. And security is-we will never compromise on Israel's security. That is one of the reasons why I believe the Israeli Knesset members over there, the Prime Minister, wants to follow us, work with us, because they know I will never compromise Israel's security. As Condi said, one of the things about our discussions, they are frank. There is no question in the Palestinian Authority's mind, either, I can assure you. Now having-so therefore-what the Prime Minister of Israel has said is, he expects to see a complete effort by the Palestinian Authority to fight off terror. Prime Minister Abbas said today in his statement, there is no place for terror. And he is going to put together a security forces necessary fight off the terrorists, because he knows that there will be no state if terror prevails. The terrorists think they are hurting Israel, and they are when they kill Israelis. But they are also hurting their own people, and Prime Minister Abbas understands that. Plus the people in the region know what terror now means. They have lived with terror in the region, but they have now begun to put it in context. And that is -I am trying to put it as clearly as I can. The context of terror now has changed. The death has not changed, but it is now-it is easier for everybody to see how it fits into a larger scheme of things. And the larger scheme of things is the war on terror, because it is beginning to strike in lethal ways in unexpected places, which therefore means that your place could be next, I guess is one way to put it. What do you do? You talked about giving the Secretary and Dr. Rice specific obligations. I show up when they need me to call people to account, to praise, or to say, Wait a minute.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresspool", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Pool", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-pool", "publication_date": "04-06-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 203, "text": "So you have set out your goals for the country, 100 million vaccine doses by next week, $100 million dollars out the door, every American eligible for the vaccine by, adult American, by May 1st, something close to normal on July 4th. But tell everyone, when is everything going to be normal for Americans? Well, first of all, I will not even be able to meet the July 4th deadline unless people listen, wear masks, wash their hands, and socially distance, because not everyone by July 4th will have been vaccinated. How do you get the politics out of this vaccine talk? I honest to God thought we had it out. I honest to God thought that once we guarantee we had enough vaccine for everybody, things would start to calm down. Well, they have calmed down a great deal, but I just do not understand this sort of macho thing about, I am not going to get the vaccine. I have a right as an American, my freedom to not do it. Well, why do not you be a patriot, protect other people? How has life changed for you since you got the vaccine? I can hug my grandkids now. They come over to the house. I can see them. I am able to be with them. I have had the vaccine. Secondly, it has changed my life in the sense that I have been able to demonstrate to other people that, I doubt whether people expected me to take it if I did not think it was safe, to make the case that it is safe to take the vaccine. It is important to take the vaccine. Let us talk about the crisis at the border. A lot of the migrants coming in saying they are coming in because you promised to make things better. It seems to be getting worse by the day. Was it a mistake not to anticipate this surge? First of all, the idea that ENTITY said come because I heard the other day that they are they are coming because they know I am a nice guy and I will not do what Trump did. They are saying this. Number two, what do you do with an unaccompanied child that comes to the border? Do you repeat what Trump did? We are not doing that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenabcinterviewtranscriptmarch17", "title": "Joe Biden ABC Interview Transcript March 16", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-abc-interview-transcript-march-17", "publication_date": "16-03-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 204, "text": "What we are doing is we have brought in HHS and also brought in FEMA to provide for enough safe facilities for them to get out of the control of the border patrol, which are not designed to hold people for long periods of time, particularly children, get them out of those facilities. Most of them come with a phone number. What we are doing is we are putting together an entire organizational structure so that within seven days they are able to get on the phone, contact that number, find out whether there is a mother or a father, whether it is safe, whether it is a secure circumstance to get the child to that adult. It is going to take some time though to get those policies in place again. What we are in the process of getting set up, and it is not going to take a whole long time, is to be able to apply for asylum in place. We are going to make sure we have facilities in those cities and towns run by DHS and also access with HHS, the Health and Human Services, to say you can apply for asylum from where you are right now. We will have people there to determine whether or not you are able to meet the requirement you qualify for asylum. That is the best way to do this. In addition to that, while we also change the circumstances on the ground in those communities, you are going to diminish the reason why people want to leave in the first place. You are out here selling your ENTITY relief package. You are executing the ENTITY relief package now as well. What is next on your legislative agenda? If you notice the criticism of the ENTITY relief package, my Republican friends, is they say it spends too much money and it gives too many tax breaks. All these tax breaks go to the bottom 60% of the population. They need it, the $1,400 check, childcare tax credit. They do not like it because in fact their idea of a tax cut is to give the Trump tax cut where 83% went to the top 1% of the people in America. You are going to be raising those taxes. Anybody making more than $400,000 will see a small to a significant tax increase. If you make less than $400,000, you will not see one single penny in additional federal tax. But, let us talk raw politics here. You did not get a single Republican vote for tax cuts. How are you going to get a Republican vote for a tax increase?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenabcinterviewtranscriptmarch17", "title": "Joe Biden ABC Interview Transcript March 16", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-abc-interview-transcript-march-17", "publication_date": "16-03-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 205, "text": "Oh, I may not get it, but I will get the Democratic votes for a tax increase. If we just took the tax rate back to what it was when Bush was president, the top rate paid 39.6% in federal taxes, that would raise $230 billion. Yet, they are complaining because I am providing a tax credit for childcare, for the poor, for the middle class, keeping people, and by the way, my proposal in the relief plan I put forward, it creates seven million jobs according to a whole range of people, including Moody's on Wall Street, number one. I mean, what are these guys talking about? By your own admission, just so you are not likely to get Republican votes for the tax increase, you are not likely to get Republican for H.R.1, expanding voting rights or the John Lewis Voting Rights Act. I know you have been reluctant to do away with the filibuster. Are not you going to have to choose between preserving the filibuster and advancing your agenda? I do not think you have to eliminate the filibuster. You have to do it what it used to be when I first got to the Senate back in the old days when you used to be around there. That is that a filibuster, you had to stand up and command the floor. No one could say quorum call. Once you stopped talking, you lost that and someone could move in and say, I move the question of,. You got to work for the filibuster. You are for that reform. You are for bringing back the talking filibuster. Look, do not hold me to the numbers, George, but I think between 1960 and 2000, there were like, I am making this number up, I do not know. Just put a hold on it, that is it. I mean, the idea, it almost is getting to the point where democracy is having a hard time functioning, a hard time functioning. Look, I am not saying this is going to be easy, George, but I do believe there is enough Republicans over time who are going to have, look you are - They have not had that epiphany you said you were going to see in the campaign. I think the epiphany is going to come between now and 2022. There is 78% of the people say they support this program, 52% of Republicans.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenabcinterviewtranscriptmarch17", "title": "Joe Biden ABC Interview Transcript March 16", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-abc-interview-transcript-march-17", "publication_date": "16-03-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 206, "text": "Let us assume it is off by 15%. Republican voters want that $1,500 because they are in trouble. Republican voters want to be able to choose between being able to go to work and send their kid to a daycare that they can afford. Republican voters want to be able to take care of a childcare tax credit. By the way, I am not saying I will do it again, but I want those Republican voters in suburbia. Director of National Intelligence came out with a report today saying that Vladimir Putin authorized operations during the election to denigrate you, support President Trump, undermine our elections, divide our society. What price must he pay? He will pay a price. We had a long talk he and I. I know him relatively well. The conversation started off I said, I know you and you know me. You said you know he does not have a soul. I did say that to him, yes. His response was, We understand one another. I was alone with him in his office. It was when President Bush had said, I have looked in his eyes and saw his soul. I said, I looked in your eyes and I do not think you have a soul. He looked back at me and he said, We understand each other. Look, the most important thing in dealing with foreign leaders in my experience, and I have dealt with an awful lot of them over my career, is just know the other guy. You know Vladimir Putin. So what price must he pay? By the way, we ought to be able that old, that trite expression and walk and chew gum at the same time, there are places where it is in our mutual interest to work together. That is why I renewed the START agreement with him. That occurred while he is doing this, but that is overwhelmingly in the interest of humanity that we diminish the prospect of a nuclear exchange. President Trump reached a deal with the Taliban to have all American troops leave by May 1st. I am in the process of making that decision now as to when they will leave. The fact is that that was not a very solidly-negotiated deal that the former President worked out. We are in consultation with our allies, as well as the government. That decision's going to be, it is in process now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenabcinterviewtranscriptmarch17", "title": "Joe Biden ABC Interview Transcript March 16", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-abc-interview-transcript-march-17", "publication_date": "16-03-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 207, "text": "Because, look, one of the drawbacks, George, and this going to be like Sanskrit to people listening here, but it is the failure to have an orderly transition from the Trump presidency to my presidency, which usually takes place from election day to the time you are sworn in, has cost me time and consequences. For example, we did not realize how bad things were in terms of lack of vaccines. We were not able to get access to this information. That is one of the issues we are talking about now in terms of Afghanistan. Let me ask you about Governor Cuomo of New York. If the investigation confirms the claims of the women, should he resign? You saw Chuck Schumer, Senator Schumer, Senator Gillibrand, a majority of the congressional delegation do not think he can be an effective governor right now. Well, that is a judgment for them to make about their state where they can be effective. It is been my position since I wrote the Violence Against Women Act. A woman should be presumed to telling the truth and should not be scapegoated and become victimized by her coming forward, number one. But there should be an investigation to determine whether what she says is true. If the investigation confirms the claims, he is gone. By the way, it may very well be that there could be a criminal prosecution that is attached to it. I do not know what it is, but I started from the presumption it takes a lot of courage for a woman to come forward. You probably walked into the oval office as president with about as much experience, if not more experience, than any other president who has ever served, more than three decades in the Senate, eight years as vice president. What is it about the job that surprised you that even you did not know? What has surprised me is that I am not as surprised as I thought I might be. I do not know if that makes any sense. It is like sitting when I was vice-president, the big, big difference is that famous expression of Harry Truman, The buck stops here. For eight years, I had a great relationship, and still do with Barack. I'd always be the last person in the room. I'd say, Throw the pass, or, Run the ball. I'd give my opinion. I was the last guy and I get to leave, but he is all by himself to have to make that decision.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebidenabcinterviewtranscriptmarch17", "title": "Joe Biden ABC Interview Transcript March 16", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-abc-interview-transcript-march-17", "publication_date": "16-03-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 208, "text": "The first question, obviously, is about Italy. You were in Italy a few weeks ago. I saw you on the Campidoglio with your wife, a beautiful evening. And you spoke with the new Prime Minister, Mr. Berlusconi. So my question is, how is your sense about Mr. Berlusconi and his policy and the implementation of his policy-the first new government in Italy? Well, my sense was that he had given a lot of thought to what he wished to do and that he was bringing a great deal of energy to the task and that he was determined to pursue a course of economic revival for Italy and to maintain a strong democratic tradition and that, in terms of our relationships, that the traditional strong relationship between the United States and Italy would be maintained vigorously. May I follow up with a question that connects to Italy very quickly? We are in the front line. And one of the first requests of the government of Italy, Mr. Berlusconi's government, was to let Italy get in the contact group that is working in Geneva. Do you think this request will be evaluated, accepted, on what? Let me say first, I think that Italy should be very closely consulted about all developments in Bosnia and in the former Yugoslavia. In other words, if the membership were expanded, would every country that has troops there-Canada has troops there, would they have to go into the contact group? Would other countries that border the former Yugoslavia and have intense interests there-Turkey is sending troops there-have to be put into the contact group? Excuse a parochial question, but as you know, we have had two trade agreements in the last couple of years between Canada and the United States. And yet, our trade problems seem to be deteriorating, if anything, over softwood lumber and wheat and now Pacific salmon, so much so, that our Trade Minister, Roy MacLaren, has warned of a trade show between our two countries. And even your Ambassador to Ottawa has criticized U.S. actions on wheat. Do you think the time has come for you to become personally involved on this issue before it deteriorates much further? First of all, keep in mind, this is the biggest bilateral trading relationship in the world, as far as I know. And in one that big, it should not be surprising that there would be some frictions from time to time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-6", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 209, "text": "In all three areas that you mentioned, you have people engaged in the same economic activity, living very close to each other under different government policies and frameworks. That is true with lumber, that is true with wheat, and it is true with salmon. Now, our problem with the whole salmon issue, of course, is complicated by the whole question of the size of the population and what the future of it is. And I think there are- I really believe there are ways for us to work that out. And I have talked to our people about it; I think we are all working very hard on that. The timber disputes are of longstanding and recur from time to time, as you know. And I think-I think we have to let that one play out through the regular course of events. With regard to the wheat issue, I think the question there-it is been referred for dispute resolution, and the ordinary process may resolve it. The real problem there is that the U.S. and Canada need to agree somehow on what does or does not constitute a subsidy. I think we need some general agreements that might solve the wheat problem and some other problems as well. But I think it is important that we not overreact to this. I mean, our wheat farmers in North Dakota are on the verge of hysteria all the time. And in Congress, there are Representatives from certain States for whom this is the only issue because they think they have been treated unfairly. So I am trying to work it out. We do not have any bilateral relationship where we have more in common and where we tend to work more together. I mean, Prime Minister Chretien has worked with me very closely, and the Canadian Government has always worked with the American Government on everything from issues in the U.N., with problems in Haiti, our policy toward NATO, the whole range of issues. And as far as I know, these are the only three disputes we have, and we are trying to work through them as best we can. ENTITY, the dollar has known quite a rough ride on the currency markets these recent weeks, giving the impression that your Government did not want to do anything about it. Do you think a weak dollar is good for the American economy, maybe for trade purposes? And if not, do you intend to do or say anything about it? And do you expect the G-7 meeting to take some resolution about that? But let me answer the question.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-6", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 210, "text": "or let me put it in a more affirmative way. The United States is not trying to grow its economy on a weak dollar. We do not believe a country can devaluate itself into prosperity. On the other hand, these currency markets are subject to significant fluctuations. And great care should be taken before unusual actions are taken, it seems to me. And it is, I think, in the end, over the longrun, the markets tend to align with market realities. When I became , we had been exploding our Government deficits for 12 years. And we decided to change our policy so that the American economy would be stronger in the global economy and so that ordinary Americans would be better off. We have cut hundreds of billions of dollars in Government spending. We have slashed our-we are slashing our work force in the Government by about 12.5 percent, to make it the smallest it has been in three decades. We are targeting investments to areas of economic growth, like education and training and technology. And we have given certain tax incentives to small businesses, new businesses, lower wage workers. The impact of all this has been that, as I leave for the G-7, in the last year and a half, the U.S. has 40 percent of the GDP of the G-7. But we have had 75 percent of the growth and almost 100 percent of the new jobs. Our exports and our rate of investment are growing higher-more than the average in the G-7. Our rate of productivity is growing more than the average of the G-7 countries. So I believe the best answer to this over the longrun is a strong American economy. Transitory political developments in various countries may explain what is going on. But the main thing is, I do not wish-I do not take the weakness of the dollar lightly against any currency. I am not trying to expand the American economy through a low dollar. No country has ever devaluated itself into prosperity. The United States wants to grow into prosperity, to trade into prosperity, not to devaluate itself into prosperity. ENTITY, you are also going to Germany after the G-7 summit. And Germany is more or less emerging as perhaps the European leader. And on the other hand, a lot of Germans are very reluctant to claim this role for their country. What is your wish and your perception of Germany in the future? And would you be prepared to offer a partnership in leadership as your predecessor, President Bush, did?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-6", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 211, "text": "Well, I think we do have a very good partnership with Germany. Bitterlich was quoted in the Wall Street Journal today about the strong support our administration had given, stronger than previous ones, to European unity and to the European defense capacity and to greater strength and unity within Europe. Germany has strongly supported that. Of course, it is up to the German people and to the leaders of Germany to determine what role will be played and then up to the partners that you have within Europe. But I think that Germany has a major role to play in the future in world affairs, has a strong role to play in Europe. I support what I take to be the policy of Germany, which is support for increasing European integration and increasing efforts to reach out to the East. And I feel very comfortable with that. But you are not really into endorsing partnership in leadership, do you? As I already told you, Mr. Bitterlich said that we had a better partnership than you had before. So, you have to define what your role is going to be. It is not up to the United States. I do not see how Germany can walk away from a leadership role. You have the third biggest economy in the world. You have a huge population. You have absorbed the East, and you have managed to keep your economy strong, with all the incredible demands. You have played a very constructive role in a lot of United Nations activities. So, I think you have no choice but to play a leadership role. You have been by far more generous than any other country in investing to your east. I think that it is not even an option to talk about a world in which Germany does not play a leadership role. You cannot withdraw from your responsibilities. Even if you sought to, the vacuum that would be created would require you to move ahead again. But the point I want to make is exactly how these relationships will be-will work themselves out in Europe, for example, is a matter for the Europeans to determine. France has, for example, recently has played a very strong role along with Britain in Bosnia, providing the bulk of the UNPROFOR troops. Canadians have made a major contribution. France recently took the initiative to go to Rwanda, and the United States supported the United Nations giving an approval for France to send troops there to do that until we could put together an African force, that is, a U.N. force. I think that there will be many variations of leadership in the years ahead.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-6", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 212, "text": "But one thing that I am sure of is that the size of the German economy and the values that have been demonstrated by the German leadership guarantee that there will be a leadership role for Germany and that it will be a positive thing for the rest of Europe and for the world. The relationship between the United States and Japan is facing a little bit of difficulty. Trade conflict has caused turmoil of the currency market, and so-called framework talks have restarted but have not reached any agreement yet. Under those circumstances, Mr. Murayama, Socialist leader, was elected Japan's next Prime Minister, and you are going to meet him for the first time in Naples. ENTITY, how are you going to manage with Japan's new government and reestablish a good relationship of both countries? I had a good talk with him last night. I called him last night. And we had a very good visit. We reaffirmed our commitment to our relationship, our security partnership, our political partnership, and our economic partnership. And Mr. Murayama said that he hoped we could continue to make progress in the frameworks. If we'd both make our best efforts, he thought we could. It is difficult, I think, to expect to have too high expectations for what has happened in the last several months because of all the political changes which have occurred within Japan. I think the important thing I would say-it is sort of like the argument I made to the gentleman from Canada. If you look at the relationship the United States and Japan-our troops are still there. We worked as one to try to defuse the crisis in North Korea with regard to the North Korean nuclear program. I did everything I could to make sure that every step along the way, everything I did was coordinated closely with not just South Korea but also with Japan. We had good relationships with Russia during this period. We were able to reach out to the Chinese. But it worked because of the historic ties we have had. So again, I would say that it is very important not to let trade disputes or any other disputes that are inevitable in a world where the economy has been growing slowly and where competition is stiff and where we have not yet solved the problem of how wealthy countries promote growth and new jobs in a highly competitive global economy, these things are going to happen from time to time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-6", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 213, "text": "The important thing is to be able to absorb them and just deal with them in a disciplined and regular way and not let the other aspects of the relationship get out of hand. I mean, the United States and Japan have had some serious differences over trade. But they have not interrupted rather an enormous bilateral investment and trade relationship and a deep political partnership. I think the Emperor and Empress, on their recent trip here, were deeply moved by the friendship and the intensity of the friendship for them and for the Japanese people that were demonstrated by the Americans. So I think the feeling in this country about Japan is as strong and as positive as it has ever been. And you know, you are going through a period of political change. You have to work that out. That is what democracies do from time to time. And so, as that-the whole yen-dollar relationship may be in part a product of the perception that maybe things will not change quickly enough because of political conditions. But I think what we have to do is to reassure people that you have got two strong economies here, that these things will work themselves out if we just have the discipline to do it. ENTITY, your first stop will be in Riga, and it is going to be a real and joyful celebration of independence. Many Latvians, as well as many Russians, were humiliated by the-. The real, very hard question among the former Soviet people-recent developments show and especially the Presidential races in Ukraine and Belarus show-a lot of people stand for much closer cooperation with Russia. So can you, sir, envision any kind of democratic and legal reunification of some of the former Soviet republics- newly independent states-without causing a threat to Central European countries, to Baltic countries, to Europe, to national interests of the United States and all of the world? I think that that depends upon whether such decisions would be made really voluntarily and by will of a majority of the people. That is, I sense, particularly-and I have been to Belarus, so I have a feeling for that. I have also been to Ukraine, but I have not spent as much time. But I think that it depends upon whether such movements would develop out of a genuine democratic movement and a free will of the people involved. I have to say that, from my point of view, the policies that President Yeltsin has pursued in the Baltics are very reassuring.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-6", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 214, "text": "As you know, the Russian troops have withdrawn from Lithuania, that we are very close to resolving the final matters in Latvia. The United States strongly supports the protection of Russians who remain in the Baltics and the whole issue of minority rights. It is a very big issue for us and our country and throughout the world. But I think the feeling in Central and Eastern Europe about the intentions of Russia is probably more positive now than it was even 6 months ago. And the steadfastness of Russia in continuing to move its troops out of the Baltics is a major part of that. So that if there is a truly independent political development in Belarus, for example, that says, you know, we think we'd be better off if we had some sort of different relationship with Russia, that, I think, will depend on what actually happens. I mean, the people of Central and Eastern Europe will know if some new development occurs. I think they will know in their hearts and minds whether it was a grassroots, honest, democratic impulse. ENTITY, the British Government finds itself once again in a familiar position in Europe, i.e. in a minority of one, on the issue of vetoing the new candidate to head the European Commission. When you talked earlier about your desire for European integration, is that the same thing as supporting a federal Europe along the lines proposed by the Germans and the Belgians and the French? And do you think the British are being unnecessarily skeptical about the creation of a federal European state? I do not know that I have an informed opinion about that. I mean, I think that, again, I think that each of you are sovereign nations, and you will have to make up your mind about what you think is in your national interest. It is my-the only thing I can tell you is that the United States has viewed as in its national interest an economically integrated but open Europe. That is, the fact that Europe would become stronger and more economically integrated, not only through the European Union but also reaching out to the East, we have not viewed as threatening. We have viewed that as positive, because I think that we have to find ways to add wealth to the world's economies every year, to add to the growth rate. We also have not viewed with alarm, at least in my administration, the prospect that there could be greater European security cooperation between the French and the Germans and between others as well. But we are willing to continue to be partners through NATO.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-6", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 215, "text": "Now, how far you should go with your political integration is just a decision you will have to make. And we do not have views about that one way or the other except to say we are not threatened that you wish to be closer together in economic or military or political ways. That does not threaten the United States. We feel a stronger Europe makes for a more democratic and a stronger world. But you will have to make up your mind about the politics of it. ENTITY, you are going to start highlevel talks with North Korea. Which do you prefer, the normalization of the relationship of both countries or the solution of nuclear suspicion, I mean especially-to which do you put--weight, the so-called past suspicion or the current and future suspicion of North Korea? You mean with regard to the nuclear issue? Well, it is not so easy to divide them, because of the obligations North Korea undertook in becoming a member of the Non-Proliferation Treaty regime, because that means that North Korea has to be open to inspection by the IAEA for all its facilities from the day that it became a member, forward. I mean, if you asked me, am I more concerned about whether North Korea has one or two nuclear weapons or the capacity to make them now or whether they might make two dozen in the future, that is an easy question to answer. I am more concerned about two dozen than I am one or two. But in the-when you become a member of one of these international organizations and you assume the responsibilities of membership, then you have to honor those responsibilities. In terms of reunification and normalization of relations, all those things, those things will have to be worked out partly between the north and the south, and I am elated that they are going to meet. I think that is a good thing, the leaders of the two countries. But we will begin our discussions first on July 8th. And what we hope to do is to find ways to broaden this debate because really what this is about is, even more than the nuclear weapons, is what role will North Korea assume in the future? What is the vision of the leaders of North Korea for that nation at the turn of the century or 20 years from now? Should it be an isolated country that makes money from selling No Dong missiles and low-level nuclear materials?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-6", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 218, "text": "On the attendance records of the National Guard, it said he had 56 out of a required 50 points. Or do you know what the maximum number of points you can get -- First of all, we were pleased to be able to provide you all with these additional records that just recently came to our attention. These documents clearly show that the President fulfilled his duties. And we had previously released some of the point summaries that you are referencing. There is more complete information relating to those point summaries that document the fact that the President of the United States fulfilled his duties when he was serving in the National Guard back in the early '70s. ENTITY, a couple of questions I have -- the records that you handed out today, and other records that exist, indicate that the President did not perform any Guard duty during the months of December 1972, February or March of 1973. I am wondering if you can tell us where he was during that period. And also, how is it that he managed to not make the medical requirements to remain on active flight duty status? ENTITY, the records that you are pointing to, these records are the payroll records; they are the point summaries. These records verify that he met the requirements necessary to fulfill his duties. Where was he in December of '72, February and March of '73? And why did he not fulfill the medical requirements to remain on active flight duty status? These records -- these records I am holding here clearly document the President fulfilling his duties in the National Guard. The President was proud of his service. I asked a simple question; how about a simple answer? ENTITY, if you will let me address the question, I am coming to your answer, and I'd like -- Well, if you would address it -- maybe you could. But this is an important issue that some chose to raise in the context of an election year, and the facts are important for people to know. And if you do not want to know the facts, that is fine. But I want to share the facts with you. I do want to know the facts, which is why I keep asking the question. And I will ask it one more time. Where was he in December of '72, February and March of '73? Why did not he fulfill the medical requirements to remain on active flight duty status in 1972? The President recalls serving both when he was in Texas and when he was in Alabama. And that is what I can tell you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 219, "text": "And we have provided you these documents that show clearly that the President of the United States fulfilled his duties. And that is the reason that he was honorably discharged from the National Guard. The President was proud of his service. The President spent some of that time in Texas. He was a member of the Texas Air National Guard, and he was given permission, on a temporary basis, to perform equivalent duty while he was in Alabama. And he performed that duty. ENTITY, when Senator Kerry goes around campaigning, there is frequently what they call a band of brothers, a bunch of soldiers who served with him, who come forward and give testimonials for him. I see, in looking at our files in the campaign of 2000, it said that you were looking for people who served with him to verify his account of service in the National Guard. Has the White House been able to find, like Senator Kerry, a band of brothers or others who can testify about the President's service? All the information that we have we shared with you in 2000, that was relevant to this issue. And all the additional information that has come to our attention we have shared with you. The President was asked about this in his interview over the weekend, and the President made it clear, yes, I want all records to be made available that are relevant to this issue; that there are some out there that were making outrageous, baseless accusations. It was a shame that they brought it up four years ago. It was a shame that they brought it up again this year. And I think that the facts are very clear from these documents. These documents -- the payroll records and the point summaries verify that he was paid for serving and that he met his requirements. Actually, I was not talking about documents, I was talking about people -- you know, comrades-in-arms -- That is why I said everything that came to our attention that was available, we made available at that time, during the 2000 campaign. But you said you were looking for people -- and I take it you did not find any people? And we -- Mr. Lloyd, who has provided a statement to put some of this into context for everybody, made some public statements during that time period to verify the records that the President had fulfilled his duties. And he put out an additional statement now to put this into context.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 220, "text": "He is someone with some technical expertise and someone that understands these matters, because he was in the National Guard at the time. ENTITY, can I follow on this, because I do think this is important. You know, it might strike some as odd that there is not anyone who can stand up and say, I served with George W. Bush in Alabama, or in Houston in the Guard unit. Particularly because there are people, his superiors who have stepped forward -- in Alabama and in Houston -- who have said in the past several years that they have no recollection of him being there and serving. So is not that odd that nobody -- you cannot produce anyone to corroborate what these records purport to show? You are perfectly welcome to go back and talk to individuals from that time period. But I would have thought you guys would have had a real good handle on -- these documents make it very clear that the President of the United States fulfilled his duties -- Well, that is subject to interpretation. When you serve, you are paid for that service. And these documents outline the days on which he was paid. And these documents also show that he met his requirements. And it is just really a shame that people are continuing to bring this issue up. People asked for records to be released that would demonstrate he met his requirements. the facts are clear -- -- you cannot read them. Have you looked at these? You cannot -- how are we supposed to read these? Well, I think you can talk -- one, we put it out on email. It is a lot easier to read, I think, on the email version because that was the -- Oh, you did put it on our email? But it was sent to us in email form from the Personnel Center in Denver, Colorado. To corroborate these records, will the President do two things -- one, will he authorize the relevant defense agency in Colorado to release actual pay stubs for the President? And if those do not exist, will the President file a form, as he can do at the IRS, to at least look for a '72 or '73 tax return that would corroborate what you claim are payroll summaries that he actually got paid for this duty? It is my understanding this is the information that is available from his payroll records. And it shows the days on which he was paid.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 221, "text": "In terms of tax returns, the President, like most Americans, does not have his tax returns from some 30 years ago. But it is possible that he could file a form requesting the IRS to search if they have a return for '72 or '73. Is he willing to do that? Obviously, if there is any additional information that came to our attention that was relevant, we would make that information available. Well, it could be relevant if he would file a form -- I think that these documents clearly show that the President of the United States fulfilled his duties. I mean, these were the documents that people questioned and said should be made available. We thought we had all the information that existed previously, but we went back to double-check after the comments that were made over the weekend, to see if there was any additional information available. And when we contacted the Personnel Center in Colorado, it was our understanding that the Personnel Center in St. Louis and Colorado were already working to pull this information together, and that this is the information that they have that is relevant to this topic. So it is your position and it is the President's position that these documents put this issue to rest, period? Oh, I think these documents show that he fulfilled his duties. These documents show that he met his requirements. There seems to be a discrepancy now in the President's record that I wondered if you could help me with. These documents that you are holding up show that the President showed up for duty in October and November of '72, January, April and May of '73. But the President's officer effectiveness report, filed by his commanders, Lieutenants Colonel Killean and Harris, both now deceased, for the period 01 May '72 to 30 April, '73, says he has not been observed at this unit, where he was supposed to show up and earning these points on these days. And certainly by -- the President said he returned to Texas in November of '72. So some of these dates of service, which are in these records, ought to have been noted by his commanding officers, who, nevertheless, said, twice, he has not been observed here. Can you explain that? I am not sure about these specific documents. I will be glad to take a look at them. But these documents show the days on which he was paid for his service.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 222, "text": "And the President -- as I have said, and we previously said during the 2000 campaign -- recalls serving both in Texas and in Alabama during the time period you are bringing up. So he served, but his commanding officers did not know it? Again, I do not know the specific documents you are referring to. If you want to bring those to me, I will be glad to take a look at them and get you the answers to your questions. Then on the general issue, Senator Kerry has said that the National Guard was one way for people to avoid service in Vietnam. The President and the White House have taken umbrage at that, saying that is denigrating the National Guard. In 1994, the President told the Houston Chronicle, in relation to his joining the National Guard, I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment, nor was I willing to go to Canada, so I chose to better myself by learning how to fly airplanes. It sounds like the President, himself, acknowledged that he went into the National Guard because he did not want to go to Vietnam. Now we are trying to change into different issues here. The President was proud of his service in the National Guard. He fulfilled his duties; he was honorably discharged. I think there are some that we are now seeing are not interested in the facts. What they are interested in is trying to twist the facts for partisan political advantage in an election year. I am not doubting that, I am trying to explore it. One of the reasons the Democrats are raising it is because they have got a guy who was in Vietnam. Now it is -- he did not serve, now it is a different issue -- when the facts clearly show that he did serve, he did fulfill his duties, he did meet his requirements, he was honorably discharged. But he did not want to go to Vietnam. It is clear that some are not interested in the facts. It is clear that some may be more interested in using this for partisan political advantage. Are you saying that every date listed on document five is a day that the President was actually -- showed up, he was suited up, he was flying planes -- that is what that means? Because there are, you know, points for active duty, points for inactive duty. Well, and that is why we put out the statement from Mr. Lloyd, so you could put that in context.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 223, "text": "He is someone with the technical expertise that understands those matters and can explain what those points mean. And I think that his statement does that. In terms of the payments, you are paid for the days on which you serve. The days on which you serve, meaning he was actually there on these dates listed, he was actually there -- You are paid for the days you serve. Again, there was a time period when he was in Alabama, and he recalls serving in Alabama. He was still a member of the Texas Air National Guard at that time. What he was doing was performing equivalent duty, because he was working in Alabama at the time. And he also remembers serving in Texas, as well. ENTITY, so, for example, in January '73, the President served, according to this, on January 4th, January 5th, January 6th in either Texas or Alabama -- according to document five. You are paid for the days you serve. You have the documents right in front of you. Is that yes ? I said you are paid for the days in which you serve. The President recalls serving in Alabama. He also recalls serving in Texas. That is what he recalls. But, again, -- I know you are going to bat this down, but there are people who -- You know, there were a lot of people calling for these records to be released. We finally came across these records. They have been released, and these documents reflect the fact that the President met his requirements and fulfilled his duties. And the fact that some of his officers do not recall ever seeing him, are you suggesting that they just do not remember after 30 years? Well, I think I will let them speak for themselves. I am not sure that they exactly said it in that way. Some different ones said different things. They have spoken for themselves. What is your answer to them about why they do not remember seeing the President? I just said that. But why are they saying this? And if you look at the records, if you look at these records, these records document that the President fulfilled his duties. These records reflect that he met his requirements, both in point summaries and that he was paid for the days in which he served. ENTITY, can you just clarify, back to Elisabeth's question here on document five? For example, in February and March of '73, there are no dates that appear, meaning he did not show up then, or what --", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 224, "text": "And these documents show the dates on which he was paid, which means those are the days on which you serve. I do not have -- Roger, I am sorry, I do not have an hour-by-hour itemization of everything he was doing 30 years ago. Are you able to make out any of the paid amounts? How much did he get? I cannot read the letters. And again, this is going to be put out in the email version, as well, and you are welcome to contact the Personnel Center. I am sure that they will be glad to help you, as well. You keep saying he served -- he fulfilled his duty, he met his requirements. No, he recalls performing his duties, both in Alabama and Texas. I said that in response to Elisabeth's question. Well, again, I do not have a minute-by-minute breakdown of every single thing he did throughout that time period. What did he do? You keep saying the word, serve. He met -- he served both in Alabama, and he served both in Texas. Did that period -- can you at least tell us the difference between inactive -- because it is not clear in these documents. No, I think that I will leave it to those who can explain these documents to do the explaining. That is why we put the statement from Mr. Lloyd, who was in the National Guard at the time; he was someone that had the expertise to explain to you what these points mean. And that is why we provided that statement. Obviously, the Personnel Center can tell you more about what everything means on these documents. We just received these late yesterday. But the one thing that these documents clearly show is that the President of the United States fulfilled his duties when he was in the National Guard. He met his requirements and he was honorably discharged because he fulfilled his duties. Just so I can be sure that I am interpreting this crystal-clearly -- you are not making any claim here that the President attended, showed up, drilled on these days? I am telling you that he did -- he does recall showing up and performing his duties. And you are paid for the days on which you serve. And that is what these documents reflect. We are going to stay on this topic, and then we will jump to other topics. It is your position that these documents specifically show that he served in Alabama during the period 1972, when he was supposed to be there. Do they specifically show that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 225, "text": "No, I think if you look at the documents, what they show are the days on which he was paid, the payroll records. And we previously said that the President recalls serving both in Alabama and in Texas. I am not interested in what he recalls. I am interested in whether these documents specifically show that he was in Alabama and served on the days during the latter part of 1972 -- And I just answered that question. You have not answered that question. No, I said -- no, I said, no, in response to your question, Keith. I said these documents show the days on which he was paid. That is what they show. So they show -- they show that he was paid on these days. Okay, but they do not show that he was in Alabama when he was supposed to be -- These are payroll records, and they reflect the fact that he was paid on the days on which he served. Do any of them show that he was paid on days that he served in the latter part of 1972 when he was in Alabama? I do not see any dates for that. It just kind of amazes me that some will now say they want more information, after the payroll records and the point summaries have all been released to show that he met his requirements and to show that he fulfilled his duties. But these documents do not show that. They do not show that he was in Alabama and served at that time. I do not even see any pay dates during that period. They show payments. No, they show pay dates during that fall of 1972 period. Okay, so then, do they specifically show that he served in Alabama during that time? They show payments in October; they show payments in November. You know, like I said, people call on us to release the records. We did not even know they still existed until just the other day. Now we have released the records, which document that the President fulfilled his duties. And now people are trying to move the goalpost even more. You said in Alabama that he had served equivalent duty. Can you describe what that was, and what -- why did he need to move to Alabama? Like I said, Greg, you are asking me to kind of break down hour-by-hour what he was doing during 1972 and 1973. What these documents show is that he was serving in the National Guard and he was paid for that service.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 226, "text": "And they show that he was serving in the National Guard and that he met the requirements necessary to fulfill his duties. Is that what he recalls? I'd have to go back and double-check, but he remembers serving during that period and performing his duties, both in Alabama and in Texas. And these are -- look, these are questions we addressed all during the campaign. The issue that came up recently was some were trying to make an outrageous, baseless accusation. If I recall, some were using the comment, deserter or AWOL. The President of the United States fulfilled his duties, he was honorably discharged. And now there are some that are not -- are clearly not interested in the facts. They are clearly more interested in twisting the facts to seek a partisan political advantage in the context of an election year. And that is just really unfortunate that some would stoop to such a level. ENTITY, what is it that took him to Alabama? that took him to Alabama? ENTITY, we all know people who tomorrow may not show up for work and will be paid. Well, again, when you are serving in the National Guard you are paid for the days on which you serve. I mean, it is specifically related to the service. Could you walk us through the sequence of events in the last few days that led to the production of these records? And did those efforts begin after or before the interview with -- The questions came up in the interview on Meet the Press, and the President made it very clear, some of what I am saying here. And he said, yes, I want all records out there. Back in the 2000 campaign, we went to the Texas Air National Guard to ask for records so that they could be released, and it was our understanding that the payroll records -- it was our impression at the time that the payroll records did not exist. Then after this weekend, after the interview, we contacted the National Guard here and asked them where would one go, if these records existed, to find them. And we were put in touch with the Personnel Center in Denver, Colorado. So we contacted the Personnel Center in Denver, Colorado. It was our understanding at that time that the Denver and St. Louis offices were already working to pull this information together at the time that we contacted them -- They could explain more about why they were doing that. Did you contact them on Monday, ENTITY? I believe it would have been probably Monday before we were able to reach them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 227, "text": "Who initiated the conversations? Anyway, so he contacted them and found out that there was, indeed, additional payroll records. And to our knowledge, this is all the records that exist that are relevant to this topic. The letter from Colonel Lloyd says that he assessed the records. Did -- there is no indication that he had any direct oversight of President Bush. That Lt. Colonel Lloyd, did he have any direct oversight over President Bush at the time he served? I think he could address those questions, in terms of what his role was at the time in the National Guard. But he was certainly someone that had the technical expertise to be able to explain what the point summaries mean, in terms of the numbers, and what they reflect. So that is what he did. And he stated -- he made some comments back during the 2000 campaign; I am sure you can go back and look at those, as well. Just to be clear, what he is saying today is that his assessment of the records is that the requirements were fulfilled. His own words are in his statements so I would refer you straight back to his words. When did Lloyd make this memorandum? I think we received it yesterday from him. Are you ready to take questions on a different subject? We are still on this topic, right? Since there have been so many questions about what the President was doing over 30 years ago, what is it that he did after his honorable discharge from the National Guard? Did he make speeches alongside Jane Fonda, denouncing America's racist war in Vietnam? Did he testify before Congress that American troops committed war crimes in Vietnam? And did he throw somebody else's medals at the White House to protest a war America was still fighting? What was he doing after he was honorably discharged? We have already commented on some of his views relating back to that period the other day. And, obviously, this was a time period also when he was going to get his MBA at Harvard. But the President was certainly proud to serve in the National Guard. And would the White House consider those actions by Senator Kerry, that Jeff mentions fair game in the political season? Terry, I think -- I know that that is a way to try to draw us into a Democratic primary that is ongoing. Well, this is an important matter that some have chosen -- some have chosen to twist the facts. And I think that these documents clearly show that the President met his requirements and fulfilled his duties.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 228, "text": "They can work out their differences. I think if you have questions to address to people that made certain accusations, you should direct them to those individuals. Because now, in light of these documents, this is new information that clearly shows otherwise to what they were suggesting. I will come back to you. We have a few in the back. I will come back to you, I promise. But let me try to get to everybody in the room. I promise I will come back to you. Ben I think had one, and then April. And did you have another one, Ron? The records show, between April 16, 1972 and October 28th there was no pay period, he was not paid. That was when he was in Alabama. Now, you said some of the payroll records were lost, but that you know he did not serve. I think it was for the fall period, when he -- and again, I'd have to go back and look at the exact dates of when he was in Alabama. But it was during the fall that he made a request to perform equivalent duty in Alabama again. That was still a period when he would be a member of the Texas Air National Guard. But I'd have to go back and double-check those exact dates that he was in Alabama. You would not be paid for equivalent duty. You are paid for serving. And equivalent duty is performing your duties for the Texas Air National Guard. But the summary sheets state that he did not perform service in the third quarter of -- These are not our summary sheets, these are the summary sheets from the Personnel Center in Colorado. payroll records were lost, but also, we know he did not perform service in that third quarter. You are paid for the days on which you serve. So when he was in Alabama during that quarter, he did not perform service -- Well, again, I am not sure that he was in Alabama during that whole period you are talking about. He requested -- I know that he requested to perform equivalent duty during that fall time period when he was in Alabama. You are going back further than that. He left in May, I believe -- I'd have to double-check the time period in which he was there. Is this cumulative, the sort of thing you do not have to perform every month, it is just a matter of, out of the course of a year, you get your 50 points?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 229, "text": "You know, I am not -- there are people that have technical expertise in these matters. You can direct those questions to those individuals. I am sure that they would be glad to try to help you out. You keep saying this is a shame, and you are talking partisan politics, but do not you think the American public, as well, particularly the U.S. military, who has been tested right now with the fact that they went to war on faulty intelligence, possibly, and now finding out that their Commander-in-Chief possibly tried to avoid going to the Vietnam War -- do not you think that the American public is owed a little bit more than photo copies that we cannot see things of? Do not you think the military is owed a little bit more than just, he served ? April, I am really sorry that you phrased that question the way you did, some of it, when you were saying that they are owed more than the documents that show that he served during that time period. But would not someone know what he did? And the President -- we have previously said, going back to the 2000 campaign and even before that, that he recalls performing his duties, both in Alabama and in Texas, during the time period that some have questioned. So let us be very clear about that. Let us be very clear about the facts. Because the American people should have the facts, and the facts are right here in these documents. The facts are right here in these documents. We cannot see facts. April, I mentioned earlier that we were going to be putting this out on email, if we have not already, because it was sent to us in email form. You are also welcome to contact the Personnel Center in Denver, Colorado. I am sure that they will be glad to walk you through this. You are saying that this is political -- this is all politics and everything and people are obscuring in putting the facts up. But people are not able to stand up for the President. You cannot even tell us what kind of drills or what-have-you. What do you say to the U.S. military -- No, we addressed all those questions back during the 2000 campaign fully. The issue that came up recently was an outrageous, baseless accusation suggesting that the President did not serve and did not meet his requirements.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 230, "text": "People called on us to release records that might be available to show that he, indeed -- that he, indeed, did meet his requirements and serve and fulfill his duties. These records document that the President fulfilled his duties. Now people are wanting to go further than that. And these are the records that reflect his service. You can detail your job. You can detail what you do as Press Secretary -- During the 2000 campaign, we talked about this issue fully. You are now going to a different issue. Let me be very clear here about this. There are some that made some very outrageous accusations about the President's time in the National Guard. There was a call for us to release payroll records. The payroll records have been released, as they just came to our attention and we shared them with you very quickly. The point summaries showing that he met his requirements have been released. Those were records that were -- that some called on us to release. We did not know that some of these records previously existed. Obviously, if they had, we would have been glad to share them with everybody at the time. Now, there may be some out there that are not interested in the facts. And those people clearly are simply more interested in trying to seek a partisan political advantage in election year, then the facts. I do not really have a question that goes to the politics of this. I just want to ask a question about a contradiction, and a question about a specific record. After all of the things you repeated here, you cannot explain this contradiction, the fact that his payroll records indicate he was paid for a period of time for fulfilling service, and yet his commanding officers at that time wrote that he was not observed. Can you or can you not explain that contradiction? If you are talking about the question that Terry brought up, I said I would glad to go back and look at the document that he is referencing. You know the document he is referencing. No, I have not -- I have not seen the document he is referencing. You are talking about quotes -- you are talking about quotes from individuals. And we said for years, going back four years ago, that the President recalls serving and performing his duties. I understand that, but his commanders do not recall it. And, in fact, they say, that he was not observed. So can you explain the contradiction, or cannot you?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 231, "text": "I have seen some different comments he is -- no, I have seen some different comments made over the recent time period. I have not seen any different -- different comments from Brigadier General Turnipseed, not from his Ellington commanders, who said he was not observed. Can you explain the contradiction? Look, I cannot speak for those individuals. I can speak for the President of the United States. And I can speak for the fact that the documents that -- as far as we know, all the documents that are available relevant to this issue demonstrate that the President fulfilled his duties. Are you suggesting these documents do not reflect that? Here is the second point, the President said to Tim Russert, very specifically, on Sunday, that he would be willing to provide pay stub records and tax return records to corroborate -- And we addressed this situation previously. It is the second time you have asked this question. Right, and I will ask it until we maybe get something -- which is to corroborate these payroll records that are coming from one source. Will he request that all the records are released, from Denver and from St. Louis, to prove that he actually received money, not just that they say he did? Just out of curiosity, how much money does a person get paid for each day's service, and is there any evidence that George W. Bush might not have accepted the money, might have turned it down? Oh, Connie, you'd have to go back and ask at the time what the pay was. Again, it shows the dates on which he was paid. And I think this goes into some of the amounts here on these papers. Am I wrong in reading document five that he did not perform any days of service between April 16 and October 28 -- Yes, we have been through this. You have them right in front of you. I am not disputing these documents. In fact, I am saying that these documents demonstrate that the President fulfilled his duties. Which of these dates refers to days he served in Alabama? If you look at the fall time period, that was a time period that he was in Alabama. Again, Keith asked this question earlier, and asked if it shows exactly where he was serving when he was paid. I said, what these documents show is that he was paid for the days on which he was -- served. These are the payroll records that reflect the days on which he served.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 232, "text": "On what date did he come back, did he return from Alabama? I think we have been through some of these issues previously. I do not know the exact date off the top of my head. We will be glad to look back and try to get you that information. The relevant issue that was brought up by some recently was whether or not the President had served. The documents clearly show that the President served and met his requirements and fulfilled his duties. ENTITY, could you just tell us, are these all the documents you got, you received, here at the White House, from Colorado, or have you kept some in reserve? No, these -- -- do you expect any additional documents from St. Louis or from Colorado? Well, as always, I said that we would -- if there is additional information that comes to our attention, we will make sure to get you that information. This is the information that we understand is available from the Personnel Center in Denver, Colorado. And that is all that they sent you, this is the extent of all the documents? Yes, this is what they sent us. And we just put it in our own email and sent it out for you all. ENTITY, Dan Bartlett told the Associated Press, in June of 2000, that he traveled to the Air Reserve Personnel Center and reviewed President Bush's military file. He said, I have read it, and there is nothing earth-shattering. Did he see these documents when he reviewed the file? Did he see any other documents when he reviewed the file? Well, that is a broad question about other documents. All the relevant documents relating to his service have been released -- So has Dan Bartlett ever seen these documents? And as I said yesterday, everything that we had we released in 2004 -- I mean, 2000, at the time, or during the 2000 campaign. There may be documents that were in that file -- No, this is the first time this information has come to our attention. So Dan Bartlett did not see these documents -- Again, I think I have answered this question up here, and I have answered it back for you. I have got one more -- Do you have this topic, this topic? We are off this topic. I was trying to talk to ENTITY earlier, but he did not want me to talk. I was trying to get an answer, but you did not want to talk. Tell us what you told -- Tell us what you told the FBI about the --", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 233, "text": "They are on you, my friend, not me. the outing, if you will, of Valerie Plame? Wendell, the President has made it clear that he wants to get to the bottom of this investigation. The leaking of classified information is a very serious matter. The President directed everybody at the White House to cooperate fully in the investigation. I, obviously, want to do my part to cooperate. And if there is something that can help those who are leading this investigation get to the bottom of it, I am more than happy to share that information with them. But if you have specific questions relating to an ongoing investigation, those questions are best directed to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice is the one that is overseeing this matter. I want to do everything I can, if there is anything I can do, to help that investigation move forward so that we can get to the bottom of this. But there is no legal prohibition on you talking with us about what you told them. So if you would, tell us what questions they asked you, and tell us what answers you gave them. But I think that it is best for me to refer those questions to the Justice Department. Obviously, if they think it is helpful to the investigation to share that information, I am sure that they would. But I am going to do my part to cooperate fully in this investigation. And I am glad to do it. In doing that part, did you have information about how it was that Ms. Plame's job with the CIA became known -- I really -- I appreciate that you are asking these questions. I appreciate that you want to know this information, as well. We want to be as helpful as we can to those who are leading that investigation. That includes me personally, as well. If there is information that they feel is helpful to share publicly, I am sure that the people at the Department of Justice would. But I am just not going to answers those questions from this podium. Those questions are best directed to the Department of Justice, because I want to help them move forward in this investigation. ENTITY, I have a follow-up on that. You said last year that you spoke with the Vice President's Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, and that he was not the leaker, and he did not authorize the leak. Do you stand by that statement? Russell, we have addressed all these issues previously.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 234, "text": "And I think if you have got questions related to the investigation, I would suggest you direct those questions to the Department of Justice. The Vice President took Supreme Court Justice Scalia on a duck hunting trip to Louisiana while the Vice President had a case pending before the Supreme Court. Does the President see this as appropriate behavior, taking a Supreme Court Justice to a duck hunting trip while he has a case pending? And does he believe that Justice Scalia should recuse himself from that energy task force case? I think that you need to direct those questions to the Vice President's office. I am asking the President's view. I am not familiar with the specifics. Can I go to the major international story appearing all over the globe? Pakistan now admits that Pakistani scientists are the source of spreading nuclear knowledge to several countries. And, also, Musharraf is blaming the United States for not providing him the proof. And yesterday, at the Woodrow Wilson Center of Energy -- speaking and she said that President Bush should stop now supporting dictatorships, dictators in Pakistan, but stop supporting -- and she said that U.S., including President Bush was misled by Musharraf all along, including today, on the spread of nuclear weapons or nuclear technology. Does President believe now that he is satisfied with Musharraf's speeches or what Musharraf told President Bush? We certainly value the assurances that President Musharraf provided. I think I have already talked about this. It is a very high priority for this administration. In a post-September 11th world it is important that we do everything we can to stop proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. That is why the President launched the proliferation security initiative to work with other nations to interdict shipments of weapons of mass destruction, and to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. That is why the President is working closely with other nations to stop proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. And I think that if you look at some of the actions that have been taken in Pakistan, it demonstrates that he is committed to the assurances he provided us. The results are that a network has been broken up, a network of proliferation has been broken up. We are still looking at a number of other areas to continue to make sure we are doing everything to stop further proliferation efforts. The President looks forward to talking more about this very issue tomorrow.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 235, "text": "The United States would like NATO to play a larger role in Iraq, but the NATO Secretary General says Afghanistan must come first. Is this going to cause a delay in turning Iraq back to the Iraqis? Is what going to cause a delay? First of all, we are continuing to move forward on the transition of sovereignty to the Iraqi people, based on the time line that was set out in the November 15th agreement. Obviously, NATO was playing an important role in Afghanistan, and they have talked about expanding that role. And we appreciate the efforts of NATO in Afghanistan. The President met very recently with the U.N. Secretary General, and they had a good discussion about Afghanistan. They also had a good discussion about Iraq. And those are issues that we are continuing to look at and continuing to discuss with NATO. Actually, I have addressed this issue, I think, over the last few days or last week, at least. But we are working closely with the Iraqi leaders and other Iraqis to move forward on the June 30th time line for transferring sovereignty. It is important that we continue to move forward in a timely manner to transfer sovereignty back to the Iraqi people. They are assuming more and more responsibility for their future. And we look forward to continuing to work with them to help make -- help meet that time line. What is he doing tomorrow, exactly? Well, he is going to be giving a speech on -- that will focus on proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Obviously in a post-September 11th world, it is a high priority to confront the threat posed by weapons of mass destruction. There are shadowy networks that exist that seek to spread weapons of mass destruction. There are stateless regimes that seek to acquire weapons of mass destruction. There are individuals who provide technology and know-how to rogue states. And that is why we have taken a number of steps to stop the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, through some of the initiatives I mentioned earlier, as well as working individually with different nations around the world.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan223", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-223", "publication_date": "10-02-2004", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 236, "text": "Eight trips to this region for you since September 2d six, I believe, for you, Give me a sense of the biggest change you have seen over the past 6 or 7 weeks in this area. I mean, the storm hit; it was an overwhelming moment for a lot of people. And then they are beginning to realize, people the local people are beginning to realize there is hope; there is a chance to rebuild lives. And a lot of people care about them. I have seen some infrastructure change. And it is a remarkable spirit here in this part of the world. I mean, people say, Look, we are going to rebuild our lives, and they have realized a lot of people from around the country want to help them. And as you see the progress, you also see how much remains to be done. Well, I am worried about the schools. I am really interested in that. But I am also proud that so many people have gone to school, so many parents have put their kids in school wherever they are, if they are in Houston or Fort Worth or Baton Rouge or wherever, and I think that is really important. So much more visibility on your part, ENTITY, following Hurricane Rita and, as I mentioned, the eight trips to this region, as compared to what was seen as a slow and inefficient Federal response after Hurricane Katrina. Is this one of those situations where you are trying to get a second chance to make a first impression? I do my job as best I can. One of the things that we do is we respond to crises. And as I told the people, if I did not respond well enough, we are going to learn the lessons. If there is any mistakes made at the Federal level, I, of course, accept responsibility for them. On the other hand, there is a lot of good that is taken place, a lot of people are working hard. We had chopper drivers pulling people off roofs. We had, you know, people working long hours to save lives, and the story will unfold. I mean, the facts of the story will come out over time, and the important thing is for Federal, State, and local governments to adjust and to respond.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshowcovingtonlouisiana", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in Covington, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-covington-louisiana", "publication_date": "11-10-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 237, "text": "I talked to a prominent Democrat in Louisiana who has said that this type of appearance, while it is great to see you guys rolling up your sleeves and grabbing a hammer and helping with this piece of wall here, that it is a photo op, and they want to see a plan on paper, your plan to rebuild this region. Do you have that kind of a plan? Well, Matt, you see, I do not think Washington ought to dictate to New Orleans how to rebuild. I guess we have a different philosophy than whoever the prominent Democrat was you spoke to. Last night Laura and I had dinner with Mayor Nagin and a group of distinguished New Orleans citizens from all walks of life. And my message to them was, We will support the plan that you develop. The point is, is that it comes from the local folks. And I recognize there is an attitude in Washington that says, We know better than the local people. Some Democrats complain that there was wording taken out of that loan package, a forgiveness clause that has traditionally been included in loan packages in the past. Would you ask Congress to go back into that legislation and reinstate the forgiveness clause? I think Congress what Congress said was is that the previous loans were limited to a relatively small amount of money. These loans are much greater loans, and that what Congress has said is, You will have 5 years to repay, plus an additional 5 years to repay. And so I think it is a kind of package that Congress was comfortable with giving, and I was happy to sign it. You are quoting a lot of Democrats today, Matt. She said that we are not asking the people of Iraq to pay back the money we are spending there. Why are we asking the people of the gulf coast, requiring them to pay back this money? How would you respond to that? Well, the people of Iraq are paying a heavy price for terrorism. A lot of people are dying, Matt. These people are working hard to establish democracy, and they are paying a serious price. Look, I understand there are a lot of politics. One of the things that I suggested was we keep the politics out of New Orleans and Mississippi as we all work together to rebuild these communities. And we have got people here who volunteered their time, from all over the country, and they did not say, you know, I am a Democrat, and I am going to work here, or, I am a Republican, and I am going to come and work here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshowcovingtonlouisiana", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in Covington, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-covington-louisiana", "publication_date": "11-10-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 238, "text": "And the reason why Laura and I are here is because we want to encourage other Americans to help somebody find shelter or help somebody find food or to continue to express the incredible compassion that the country saw when displaced persons moved from this part of the world and are scattered around the country. So in other words, if someone says to you, Okay, you are moving a wall today, and it is a photo op, but if that inspires someone else in another community to move a wall and grab a hammer, then that is mission accomplished? And also, this gives us a chance to thank the people who do this all the time, not just in a crisis situation but who volunteer with Habitat in their towns wherever they are across the country or volunteer in a million other ways working in schools or other ways. I understand there is a lot of politics, and you keep talking about this politician or that politician. I think our job is to elevate this whole process out of normal politics. I mean, is not it inevitable it will be bogged down in politics? It depends on who asks the questions, I guess. I think most Americans are not interested in this kind of politics. And the amazing thing about Katrina and Rita is that there has been a fantastic response by people from all walks of life that have welcomed a neighbor and said, Brother, what can I do to help you? Or, How can I show you love? And I applaud the Today show and Habitat for Humanity and your partners in being a part of a larger picture of helping people rebuild their lives. While I have you here and while you do not have a hammer in your hand, can I ask you well, you have it in your belt about some things going on in Washington? A lot of criticism coming for your nominee to the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers, from conservatives, people like Trent Lott and Pat Buchanan and George Will and Bill Kristol. Were you taken off-guard a little bit, caught by surprise by the amount of criticism you are getting for Judge Miers? Well, you know, I made a decision to put somebody on the Court who had not been a part of what they call the judicial monastery. In other words I listened, by the way, to people in the Senate who suggested, Why do not you get somebody from the outside. And I figured that people are going to kind of question whether or not it made sense to bring somebody from outside the court.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshowcovingtonlouisiana", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in Covington, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-covington-louisiana", "publication_date": "11-10-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 239, "text": "I would remind those, one, that Harriet is an extraordinary, accomplished woman who has done a lot. As a matter of fact, she has consistently ranked as one of the top 50 women lawyers in the United States, that she has broken the glass ceiling. She has served as a great example. And that just because she has not served on the bench does not mean that she cannot be a great Supreme Court Justice. But you know, conservatives are worried about what is going to happen when she gets on the bench, and they are worried about what is going to happen in the future. are feeling let down by you, and they are thinking they have supported you for so long and when an issue that is so important to them comes up, that you let them down. How would you answer that? My answer is Harriet Miers is going to be confirmed, and people will get to see why I put her on the bench. You said she is the most qualified candidate for the job As I told you. would you agree with that? You had pushed for a woman to be a nominee. And I know Harriet well. I know how many times she is broken the glass ceiling, herself. She is a role model for young women around our country. Not only that, she is very deliberate and thoughtful and will bring dignity to wherever she goes, but certainly to the Supreme Court she will be really excellent. Some are suggesting there is a little possible sexism in the criticism of Judge Miers. How do you feel about that? I think she is so accomplished, and I know I think people are not looking at her accomplishments and not realizing that she was the first elected woman to be the head of the Texas Bar Association, for instance, and all the other things. She was the first woman managing partner of a major law firm. She was the first woman hired by a major law firm, her law firm. My attitude, Matt, is when people get to know her, they will see why I picked her. In the confirmation hearings alone, they will see that she what she is like. I think the Washington Times has a story this morning that said they had about 27 Republican Senators have serious questions about Judge Miers or about Harriet Miers I was going to say kind of getting ahead of myself here. I mean, the person I know is not the kind of person that is going to change her philosophy. And her philosophy is, is that she is not going to legislate from the bench.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshowcovingtonlouisiana", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in Covington, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-covington-louisiana", "publication_date": "11-10-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 240, "text": "So I told the American people when I campaigned for President the type of judge I will pick. I picked that type of person in John Roberts, and I picked that type of person in Harriet Miers. Your political guru, Karl Rove, is set to or scheduled to testify before a grand jury for the fourth time this coming week, it seems, looking into the leak of a CIA agent's name. You have said if someone on your staff had anything to do with that leak, you will take care of that person. Has Karl Rove looked you in the eye, ENTITY, and said, I, in no way, bent or broke the rules or the law when it comes to this case ? Matt, I have also consistently said I am not going to talk about the case. It is under review, so I am not going to talk about it. Thank you for asking, but on the other hand, the special prosecutor has made it clear and made it clear that he does not want anybody speculating or talking about the case, so I am not going to talk about it. But does it worry you that they seem to have such an interest in Mr. Rove? I am not going to talk about the case. I have been asked this a lot; my answer is consistent. The special prosecutor is conducting a very serious investigation. He is doing it in a very dignified way, by the way, and we will see what he says. Got a big date coming up in Iraq this coming week, on the 15th, a vote on the referendum on the constitution there. And what are you expecting to happen in the days leading up to that vote? I expect violence, because there is a group of terrorists and killers who want to try to stop the advance of democracy in Iraq. We had a remarkable achievement last January when millions of people voted. They now have a chance to vote on a constitution that will help unify the country. And then they will have a chance to vote, if the constitution passes, on a permanent government. And so what you are seeing is the unfolding of a dual-track strategy. On the one hand, democracy is advancing, much to the amazement of a lot of people, particularly people in the region. And on the other hand, we are working to train Iraqi troops so they can provide the security for a democracy to move forward. I am going to let you get back to work in a second.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshowcovingtonlouisiana", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in Covington, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-covington-louisiana", "publication_date": "11-10-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 241, "text": "I am just curious about one other subject, and you have spoken about this recently, this whole issue of a possible worldwide pandemic, this avian flu. You know, 60 people have died in Asia so far. They are worried that if this comes here, there are, by some estimates this could claim millions of lives around the world. After Hurricane Katrina, there are some people in this country who are worried. They are not sure who is in charge, who do I turn to, who is going to handle a major catastrophe in this country? Are you confident that this administration has a plan in place to handle something like that? I am confident that we are working to identify the possible outbreak of avian flu, contain it to where the outbreak takes place, and strategize how to deal with it if it ever were to come to the United States. Who would take the lead in that? It is a really interesting question, and it is one that I raised that has created a little bit of consternation among some. I have said that there may be a catastrophic event such that the Federal Government has got the it is only the Federal Government that has got the capacity to move in quickly with a lot of resources, which would require law changes. For example, the military cannot become police without a special proclamation. And so we are planning all this out. We are in the midst of, one, identifying that there may be a problem, and, two, what to do about it. When I have a plan that I am comfortable with, of course I will talk to the American people about it. Your husband has been through an awful lot Our country has been through an awful lot. What toll have you seen this take, personally, on him? Not only you know, we had 9/11 in the first term, and now we have got Iraq, and we have got Katrina, and we have got Rita. What toll have you seen this take? He is about to drop on the spot. He is got big, broad shoulders. There is a lot, but there is a lot on the American people too, and their response has been so terrific. You know, we can face challenges, and they are tough, and this is very tough down here. The number of people, the huge number of people that are displaced, that have lost everything, but you know, people are rebuilding their lives, and other people want to help them, and that is what I see.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshowcovingtonlouisiana", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in Covington, Louisiana", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-covington-louisiana", "publication_date": "11-10-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 249, "text": "Big trip to the Middle East-what are your objectives, and why now? Now because I believe that it is possible to advance the Annapolis agenda; now because I believe this is going to be an-that it will be a chance to be effective on my trip. one, the vision of two states, Palestine and Israel, living side by side in peace; two, to convince our friends and allies in the region that it is in their interest to support the peace process; and three is to remind people that the United States is committed to helping secure the region, that we have a active presence in the Middle East, and that presence is not going to wane. It is a-that we are committed to helping people realize-deal with the threats and the problems of the 21st century. What can you do personally to press both sides, the Israelis and the Palestinians, to reach an agreement this year? Well, first of all, the agreement-they must decide they want to reach agreement. In other words-and so the first thing I can do is to make sure there is a sincere desire on the parts of President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert to achieve an agreement. And it is to give them confidence and to encourage them to come up with the-what a state will look like, the-define that state so that people there in the region can have hope that this kind of a long-time conflict will finally come to an end. And the first step is the definition of a state. I can hold hands when there needs to be-hold hands. And so I am - I will go to encourage them to stay focused on the big picture. There is going to be all kinds of distractions, and people will be trying to throw up roadblocks, and people will be trying to cause these gentlemen to-not to-to lose sight of what is possible. And my job is to help them keep a vision on what is possible. Do you still believe that the-your vision of a Palestinian state can be achieved before you leave office? I think the outlines, the definition of a state can be achieved. The implementation of a state will be subject to a roadmap. In other words, there is a lot of work that has to be done. Palestinian security forces have to be reformed-which we are helping with, by the way. The entrepreneurial class of people has to be encouraged with new capital. The institutions of government need to be strengthened.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhishambouraralhurratelevision", "title": "Interview With Hisham Bourar of Alhurra Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hisham-bourar-alhurra-television", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 250, "text": "And so the state will come into being, subject to-but the first step is to-here is what a state will look like. And I believe we can get that done by the time I leave office. Will you be asking Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia, to normalize relations with Israel? I will be reminding the Gulf countries, including Saudi Arabia, that in order for this to be successful, in order for this process to work, there has to be strong support for both the Palestinians and the Israelis in the neighborhood. And that is why the Annapolis conference-another reason it was an important conference, because in that room were the-my friend, the King of Saudi Arabia, kindly sent his Foreign Minister to that Annapolis meeting. And so both sides are going to need to know that they will have support from the neighborhood. Do you feel that the last NIE report makes it difficult for you to convince these countries that Iran still poses a threat to national security? I am sure this subject will come up, and I will remind them that the NIE said that, one, Iran had a military covert program. They suspended the program. I will also remind them that a regime that once had a program could easily start the program up again, and that the key ingredients to having a weapons program is, one, the capacity to enrich uranium; secondly, the ability to take that uranium and make a bomb; and thirdly, the ability to deliver the uranium-the bomb by rockets. As you know, they say they had-only for civilian purposes, they are learning to enrich. Well, if you can learn to enrich for civilian purposes, you can easily transfer that knowledge for military purposes. And my other message will be, we have got a strategy to deal with it, and that is to prevent them from learning how to enrich. And I will explain to them the different types of sanctions and international efforts we are making and how they can help as well. Do they help or undermine your position toward Syria? But President Asad must understand that if he wants better relations with the United States-and frankly better relations in the region-the first thing he is got to do is stop interfering in the Lebanese Presidential process. And I would hope that those representatives sent that message to President Asad. I do not know how he interprets these meetings, but one thing he cannot be mistaken about is the position of the U.S. Government, the White House.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhishambouraralhurratelevision", "title": "Interview With Hisham Bourar of Alhurra Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hisham-bourar-alhurra-television", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 251, "text": "And our position is, is that you can have better relations, a better way forward with the United States, but you have got to get out of Lebanon, in terms of the Presidential elections, and stop harboring Hamas, stop letting suiciders go into Iraq. Speaking of Lebanon, what could the United States do to break the current stalemate which left the country without a President? We are making it awfully clear to-publicly and privately-that the-Sleiman, who was selected by the- by a lot of the players there inside Lebanon, is the right choice; if that is what they want, that is who we support-and that the obstacle to that Presidency going forward is Syria. So I will be spending some time there in the Middle East discussing this very subject because a free Lebanon is in the interests of everybody in the region. And there is a lot of common ground with the U.S. position, and there-like the Saudis and other nations agree that we ought to have a free Lebanon, free of Syrian influence. How do you think people in the Middle East will remember you? I hope they remember me as the guy who was willing to fight extremists who murdered the innocent to achieve political objectives and, at the same time, had great faith in the people, the average citizen of the Middle East, to self-govern; that the Middle East has got a fantastic future, and that I admire the great traditions of the Middle East and believe that the average man can succeed mightily; that societies are best served when they respond to the will of people, and that we must reject the extremists who have a different view of that, the people who only prey on hopelessness. That is what I would hope. I would hope that they would say, ENTITY respects my religion and has great love for the human being and believes in human dignity. I know my image can be different at times. I had to make some tough choices on war and peace. On the other hand, I hope people are now beginning to see the emergence of a free Iraq, based upon a modern Constitution, is part of my vision for achieving peace that we all want.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhishambouraralhurratelevision", "title": "Interview With Hisham Bourar of Alhurra Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hisham-bourar-alhurra-television", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 258, "text": "ENTITY, what are your expectations in front of the first trip to the united Germany? You will have a speech in front of the Brandenburg Gate; the Wall has come down. Well, first of all, let me say it is an incredible personal honor for me to be able to go as the first ENTITY to a united Germany. One of the formative political images of my childhood was seeing President Kennedy stand there in Berlin at the Wall and give his speech. So, for all of us in America, it is been a source of great joy to see the Wall come down and to see what is happening now in Germany. My message will be that we have torn down the walls, but now we have to build the bridges. We have to unite Europe, and we have to move forward on security issues, on economic issues to make a better world. What will be the significance of the remaining troops in Germany for the future? I think it is a statement that the United States puts great importance on our relationships with Europe, with NATO, and with Germany, especially, and that we have a common security future with NATO. One of the great successes, I think, of the last year has been the Partnership For Peace, the establishment of cooperative relationships between NATO and now 21 other countries, 19 from the former Communist bloc and Sweden and Finland. So this is a very exciting time, I think, and the United States, as long as Europe wants to be our partner, should maintain that partnership and should stay in Europe. Let me return to Germany. Is Germany still the most important ally of the United States? Germany is a critically important ally, always has been, certainly since the end of the Second World War. And I think that if you look to the future, the kinds of things we have to work together on, the way our interests tend to converge and the way we see the world, the relationship I have enjoyed with Chancellor Kohl, all the things we work together on, Russian aid, international peacekeeping, a whole range of issues, trying to find a solution in Bosnia, the German people and the American people and their Governments need to work very, very closely together, not only for the wellbeing of Europe but indeed for the entire world. America is the last remaining world power, and there is more aid necessary than first expected to build up the East. Is the United States willing to increase their contributions for the East, because Germany and Europe, they have spent billions of dollars?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithklauswaltherzdfgermantelevision", "title": "Interview With Klaus Walther of ZDF German Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-klaus-walther-zdf-german-television", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 259, "text": "I think we should do more, and we will. There is a limit to how much we can do. We have been very active in Russia and in other republics of the former Soviet Union. And we are trying to maintain a very vigorous international defense posture as a superpower in the cause of peace. And of course, that costs a lot of money. But I do believe in Central and Eastern Europe, we should be more active, and we will be. There are limits to what we can do, but we will be more active. Talking about peace, does it bother you that the old powers in the former Eastern bloc countries are getting back into power again? Well, it depends on what they do. And the changes that a lot of those former Communist countries are going through are quite painful. And I think it is only predictable that from time to time the election results will vary, depending upon the mood of the people, the level of personal security they feel, the level of results being achieved. And as long as there is a continued commitment to openness and democracy and human rights and to working with the West, I do not think we can be deterred from our policies by particular elections. After all, you know, none of us always agree with the outcome of every election in our own countries. ENTITY, your administration started to solve a lot of international crises through the United Nations. The strategy failed, obviously, in Bosnia. When is U.S. unilateral action in the future appropriate or necessary? First of all, I do not know that it has failed in Bosnia; it has not yet succeeded. It has stabilized a lot of the country. So I think the United Nations, the United States working with the U.N. and working through NATO has done a lot there to improve the situation. And of course, we hope that the contact group will come up with a map that will result in a peace settlement. If you ask me the question, will the United States continue to work through the United Nations, the answer to that is yes, wherever we can. But we must be in a position to act alone when our own vital interests are at stake. That is what we did, for example, when I received proof that there had been an attempt to assassinate former President Bush in Iraq. But I would not give up on the U.N. yet or on multilateral efforts. I also think you are going to see variations of that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithklauswaltherzdfgermantelevision", "title": "Interview With Klaus Walther of ZDF German Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-klaus-walther-zdf-german-television", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 260, "text": "Look at Rwanda, where the French got, in effect, permission of the U.N. to lead in an area where they had an historic interest and historic ties. So I think we will be finding new ways for international cooperation for quite some years yet. Talking about United Nations, would you support Germany to be a member on the Security Council? I have been publicly supportive of that for almost 3 years now. You talked about NATO, ENTITY. How do you envision NATO's future? There is no more threat coming from the East, and how do you envision NATO's future? Well, right now what we are doing is using NATO to try to build a united Europe from a security point of view and to be available to take actions in Europe out of NATO's area. That is really the significance of what has happened in Bosnia, where the NATO planes have been involved in enforcing the nofly zone and trying to enforce the safe area, where NATO planes can be called in if needed to try to preserve agreements and make sure both sides adhere to them. And I do not think there is any question that NATO has made a contribution to the progress that has been made in Bosnia. And the NATO Partnership For Peace is the most important thing we have done in the last several years, because it gives us the chance to have a united Europe, the chance, really, for the first time since nation states were in existence in Europe. So that is what I see. I think NATO should be working on integrating Europe from a security point of view; toward looking toward expanding its membership to other countries as appropriate; and toward the use of coordinated action, military capacity, outside its area of membership but within Europe. ENTITY, today Mr. Arafat is visiting the Gaza Strip. Is this a milestone in the development in the Middle East? Yes, it is a very important trip because it symbolizes what has happened, which is that the Palestinians are beginning to have control over their own lives and affairs. It is a tribute to the courage of the Israelis and the Palestinians and to their leaders, to Mr. Arafat and to Prime Minister Rabin. And it is also a tribute to the peace process in which the United States, as you know, has been very actively involved. The only way to settle the problems in the Middle East is to continue the peace process. I saw King Hussein just last week. We are in close touch with President Asad. We are working with Lebanon.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithklauswaltherzdfgermantelevision", "title": "Interview With Klaus Walther of ZDF German Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-klaus-walther-zdf-german-television", "publication_date": "01-07-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 269, "text": "I am really looking forward to going to Bogota. I have to start by asking you this. You are arriving to Bogota when ENTITY President Uribe is facing a deep crisis because of we have got a political scandal. Does this affect the support, the confidence that you have always expressed to him? As a matter of fact, I have been very impressed by how he is handled this latest issue. President Uribe is a very strong leader; he is committed to justice; he believes in fairness; and he is a man who has proven he can get things done. And so my confidence in the President is very high. And I am looking forward to expressing that confidence about to not only the people of Colombia but also to the people in my Congress. ENTITY, $4 billion invested in Plan Colombia, but the drug keeps coming to the United States, and the leader of the guerrillas remains at large. Why do you support a second phase of the same Plan Colombia? First of all, we have had a lot of successes in working together. I recognize there is still a lot of drogas coming here. Part of that has to do with, we still use drugs, and we have got to do a better job of convincing people to stop using drugs. But we have also stopped a lot of drugs from coming. And therefore, I can argue to the Congress and the people that there has been a lot of notable successes. And the truth of the matter is, Colombia has changed to the better as a result of the Plan Colombia. ENTITY, public opinion in Colombia, as well as in the U.S. Congress, is divided about the free trade agreement. Will you be ready to reopen those negotiations in order to make it pass? No, I do not think we want to reopen the negotiations. We have had good, strong negotiations between our respective parties. Obviously, if there is some fine-tuning necessary but we have negotiated good agreements, and I am going to have to work hard with our Congress, and the ENTITY is going to have to work hard to convince the people of Colombia that trade is fair. And if I were a farmer in Colombia or a small-business person in Colombia, I'd want to be in a position to be able to sell my products into a large market like the United States. And these trade fights are always tough, and I want to make sure, though, that we work to have a world that trades freely and fairly, because it is the best way to eliminate poverty.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnataliaorozcorcntvcolombia", "title": "Interview With Natalia Orozco of RCN TV of Colombia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-natalia-orozco-rcn-tv-colombia", "publication_date": "07-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 270, "text": "Are you concerned about the influence that President Chavez is gaining in the region? As many experts have said, is your trip also an answer to that? No, my trip is a chance to tell the people of Colombia and Uruguay and Brazil and Guatemala and Mexico that the United States cares deeply about the human condition. My budget this year has got or last year has $1.6 billion of bilateral assistance. Much of that money is spent on social justice programs, programs like education and health care. You know, oftentimes, people really do not understand the United States, and my trip is to really explain to people that we believe in education for all; we believe in human rights and human dignity; we believe in prosperity. And the people of this country have been very generous in their help and support to people. But are you concerned about the influence of Mr. Chavez in the region? Each country is going to have to make up their own mind about the systems of government. To the extent that people feel like they can nationalize companies, I think is a mistake. I am very much in favor of open systems, free press, the right for people to assemble and express their mind. My trip, however, is all aimed at explaining to the people of South and Latin America that good foreign policy for the United States is to promote a prosperous and peaceful neighborhood. ENTITY, today, have you the feeling that the policy applies to Cuba has done any good for the Cubans in the island? I think the worse thing that is happened for the Cuban people on the island is the fact that they are not free. And my position is, it is important for people to be free, and that if there is a transition to a new way in Cuba, it is got to be decided by the Cuban people. They should be allowed to freely assemble; they should be allowed to speak their minds; there ought to be strong rule of law. My position has been, and will continue to be, that a free Cuba is what is necessary for the people of Cuba. Do you think President Uribe should achieve the humanitarian exchange, or should he insist in the military rescue? I trust President Uribe's judgment. And my message is not to President Uribe; my message is to the FARC, and that is to give up these hostages. You are making it clear to the world the kind of people you are when you take innocent life and hold them hostage. And it is very sad for the families here in America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnataliaorozcorcntvcolombia", "title": "Interview With Natalia Orozco of RCN TV of Colombia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-natalia-orozco-rcn-tv-colombia", "publication_date": "07-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 289, "text": "ENTITY, you met and exceeded your first 100 days' goal of 100 shots in arms; I have got two of them in here. Is vaccination still your number one priority in the next hundred days? Yes, but there are close seconds that we are going to have - that are going to be announced in a couple of days. We have another 50 million that have been put in arms, so it will be 250 million. And one of the things I focused on when I got elected, I said I had two overwhelming needs; one, to get the American public vaccinated, and we had to go out and get an awful lot of vaccinators as well as vaccine to get 600 million doses of it, and we got that, a lot of it, done. And to get people back to work, because, you know, we lost millions of jobs - 22 million, I think it was 22 million jobs. And they are directly related to the vaccine - not to - to ENTITY. So, what I am continuing to do is making sure we get people back to work and change the circumstance where we get to the far point, where we have at least 70 percent of the American public vaccinated, and my goal is by July the 4. And I think we can do that. We are close to 59 percent getting one shot, so I think we are getting very close. You are coming up against something we have never seen before in any vaccination program or any public health program, which is a partisan resistance to vaccination. This is in addition to other hesitancies that other populations have. But there is a partisan resistance, and that is among people, many of whom fail what is a basic mental competency test -- who is the president of the United States? How are you going to convince them to get the vaccine? All this stuff about vaccine hesitancy; the truth of the matter is more and more and more people are getting the vaccine. And so, I have never believed that there would be a large percentage of Americans who would not get the vaccine. But what is the best way - you know, you used to do local politics a hundred years ago - what happens? When your neighbor gets a vaccine, your next-door-neighbor gets it, you say, well, maybe I should get it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlawrenceodonnellmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lawrence-odonnell-msnbc", "publication_date": "12-05-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 290, "text": "And no matter what your position was, when you see people in a position where you can easily get the vaccine, you do not have to go way out of your way. That is why you see I was on doing some meetings with folks who are providing for example and the governor of Maine, a Republican, is saying, if you want to get a free hunting license, come get a vaccine. And people are showing up across the board. So, the idea, I have never believed that at the end of the day, there would be any large percentage of Americans who would not get the vaccine. I have a question from my Telemundo colleague, Vanessa Hauc, who wonders, what do you say to people who worry that their immigration status is a reason not to get the vaccine? They should get the vaccine. They should get the vaccine. And there will not be any interactions with government that occur because they get the vaccine? What I have said is that it is one thing for people who are in country here to have, if they show up for a doctor's appointment, they show up to drop their child off at school, et cetera, we should lay off those people. We should, and that is why I introduced a comprehensive immigration bill. There is 11 million undocumented people in the United States, the vast majority of whom overstayed their visas. We should move about getting that taken care of, making sure there is a pathway to earn citizenship and get underway. They should not be in a position that, if they are trying to save their lives or their health and they do what is needed to be done to make people around them safe as well, they should not be penalized for that. You just had a meeting with the Big Four; the speaker of the House, minority leader of the House, majority leader of the Senate, minority leader of the Senate, and it had that external signal, which is always a good sign, which is that it went into overtime, it went much longer than people outside the room were expecting. But they do seem to be drawing a red line, as Mitch McConnell called it, on any taxes, any taxes to pay for an infrastructure bill, and you have some serious tax increases in your infrastructure bill. Well, look, there was a red line saying they would not do anything on anything, quite frankly. he had 100 percent of Republican senators lined up against your infrastructure bill. I understand that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlawrenceodonnellmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lawrence-odonnell-msnbc", "publication_date": "12-05-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 291, "text": "That is - but I think we can have a deal. And there are ways in which we can pay for this without just putting the entire burden on working class and middle-class people. For example, there is a situation where there is an estimation of somewhere between $700 billion and a one-trillion-three-hundred billion dollars, if we hire up more IRS agents and we go after those folks who are avoiding taxes at the top end. And that is - I mean, these are serious - this is not pie in the sky - these are serious, serious experts and liberals, conservatives, et cetera. So, let us say it is somewhere in between; that is one trillion dollars. I am confident they would go for that. I am confident, for example, something that is not in the, that two-trillion-dollar tax cut for which nothing was paid for, and it ended up being - increasing the debt. That is not in it. I did not know what it was; I never had any money, so I did not know what it was. But for example, if you have a capital gain, you are a wealthy person, you are about to cash-in, you bought a million-dollars' worth of stock, now it is worth it is worth one-million-five-hundred-thousand, you are going to cash it in, and god forbid, on the way to cash it in, you figure being hit by a truck and you die, that gets left to your son or daughter; they pay none of the capital gains you would have had to pay. That raises billions and billions of dollars. Mitch McConnell said that he is not willing to reopen anything that was in the Trump tax cut. Did you have an exploration of possible revenue with them, actual pay-fors I did not get into that. I got into what constitutes infrastructure. I want to get a bipartisan deal on as much as we can get a bipartisan deal on. And that means roads, bridges, broadband, all infrastructure. But I am not giving up on the fact that we have, you know, two million women who are not able to go back to work because all the daycare centers are closed. They are out of business. And so, they cannot go back to work. I am not going to give up on a whole range of things that go to the question of productivity, of increasing jobs, increasing employment, increasing revenues. I am not willing to give up on that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlawrenceodonnellmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lawrence-odonnell-msnbc", "publication_date": "12-05-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 292, "text": "So we are going to fight those out. So I want to know, what can we agree on? And let us see if we can get an agreement to kickstart this. And then fight over what is left and see if I can get it done without Republicans, if need be. You were trying to make a deal today in a room with Kevin McCarthy, where what he was doing before he came up here was expelling Liz Cheney from his leadership group for saying things like, the election is over, as she said last night on the House floor. And Kevin McCarthy is the same person who supported Liz Cheney just weeks ago. How can you accept whatever someone like Kevin McCarthy says today as something that you are actually going to legislate a few weeks from now or months from now? If a man looks me in the eye, gives me his word that something's going to happen, I take it unless he breaks it. He may have broken his word to somebody else, but to me, has he made that deal - we are nowhere near having made a deal. We agree that we should try to get a bipartisan agreement. But the Liz Cheney/McCarthy thing is above my pay grade. I mean, I have enough trouble figuring out my own party all the time, let alone the Republicans. Are you shocked that there is just, at this point, one member on the Republican side of the House who was willing to stand up last night and say things like, the election is over, and if you do not believe in the outcomes in our courts, you are an anti-constitutionalist on the Republican side. That is what her fight is on the Republican side of the House of Representatives. I think I heard Kevin McCarthy say today ENTITY a duly elected ENTITY. This is the experience I had working with you in the Senate. I have to let the audience in on this. We have known each other 25 years, and when we were working together in the Senate, what I always saw is you take the most positive things someone says in your direction and try to work with that tomorrow. And you try to ignore anything that is not part of what you are trying to work with tomorrow. Is that the way you are doing this job? As Pat Moynihan once said to me, Joe, I am not sure you are Irish. You do not hold a grudge. Look, it is too important to the American people. I do not want to sound - I will just say what I believe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlawrenceodonnellmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lawrence-odonnell-msnbc", "publication_date": "12-05-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 293, "text": "It is too important to the American people for me not to continue to reach out to get things done with people that I agree and disagree with. I mean, I ended up making a deal with Jesse Helms for the lord's sake on funding the United Nations. I did not have to give up anything, but I worked on it and worked on it. But if I had said, because Jesse Helms has done all these other things, I am never going to deal with him - it is just not the way it works. I do not - look, I believe - how can I say it? My mother used to give me - I believe in redemption for myself as well. But look, ENTITY, I have - I once had a doctor who was - had worked on me because I had had an aneurism 20 some years ago. Well, I am, because I know the American people. Not once in our history did they give up. And I just - I have faith. I have faith, and we just got to keep pushing it. Let me ask you about the second most powerful Joe in Washington - Joe Manchin, who has become a visitor to this White House, and he is not there with the Democrats even on everything that is proposed. He is not there 100 percent on your infrastructure bill. He is trying to work with Republicans to bring Republicans along into something that could be a compromise. What about S.1., the voting rights, voting access bill that the Senate Rules Committee considered yesterday? So important that the majority leader and minority leader went to the Rules Committee and - to testify about and talk about that bill. That bill looks like there will be zero Republican votes in the Senate for that bill. That bill also does not fit any reconciliation rule. That bill cannot get through without 60 votes or without an adjustment to the cloture rule, which Joe Manchin would have to agree to. Does Joe Manchin see this road in front of him and what that means for voting rights in America? I have not had - I have not had that discussion with Joe. I have been meeting with a lot of Republicans, a lot of, quote, bipartisan groups have been coming to see me on everything from my - the overall bill, the families bill that I have and the caregivers bill, as well as the infrastructure bill. We were at the same place.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlawrenceodonnellmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lawrence-odonnell-msnbc", "publication_date": "12-05-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 294, "text": "I do not know - I cannot say that you asked me, but other serious folks in your business asked me the same kind of questions when we were trying to do the American Rescue Plan . Well, it passed by one vote, even though up to the time that vote took place there were a number of people saying, I am not going to do it. But look, ENTITY, I have - this is going to sound naive. I have faith in the American people. The American people overwhelmingly support what I am doing. We have got 78 percent of the American people, if I am not mistaken in the last major poll done, showing that they support my - what I am talking about, this gigantic effort to try to build back and build back better. You had an enormous number of American people supporting the last bill that passed. And look what is happened - 1.5 million new jobs, 1.5 million new jobs. You had all that money in there for ENTITY. We have now got - we have 250 million people will have gotten shots. And so, I just think with all I - what I have to do is just keep moving forward. Just keep moving forward, and the more we move, the more I demonstrate what we have done is working and is right, the more likelihood I will have to get it - look, for example, you know, we used to be, back in the old days, when I first got to the Senate, we used to invest in research and development, the things of the future. We invested more money than any - a higher percentage of our GDP than any nation in the world. What do we think is going to happen if we stand still for god's sake? What do we think is going to happen if more corporate American does not invest in research and development instead of buying back their own stock? What do - I mean, so, I think this is a matter - this is a bit of - as my grandfather, Finnegan, might say, this is a bit of an epiphany that is going on here where people are beginning to look and say, whoa, whoa. And I have met with either on the - almost all on a telephone and/or on Skype, with I think now 40-some world leaders. Are we really back in the game?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlawrenceodonnellmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Lawrence O'Donnell of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lawrence-odonnell-msnbc", "publication_date": "12-05-2021", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 295, "text": "It is great to be with you. You concluded the summit. Were there any sticking points that either you or your government did not achieve? And the intentions here were to deepen and broaden what is already an excellent relationship between the GCC countries and the United States. Obviously, we have a whole range of bilateral security arrangements with the various GCC countries. We have consulted and worked with them on a range of regional challenges. But I thought the time was ripe for us to be able to come together as a group, to talk face-to-face about a wide range of these issues, and then to put forward very specific plans in terms of how we can address them. So the joint statement that we issued I think reflected the wide range of topics that were discussed. We discussed the important security assurances that I had delivered publicly in venues like the United Nations and had discussed privately, but I think it was important for them, at a time when there is so much chaos in the region, for the GCC members to hear that the United States is committed, if they are subject to external attack or the threat of attack, to work with the GCC to deter such attacks and to defend the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the GCC countries. We also talked about the joint work that we have to do to counter violent extremism in a whole range of areas, from ending the financing of terrorist organizations to improving intelligence, to what kinds of capabilities-for example, maritime security or cyber security-that are needed. And some of these areas are ones where it is better if we do them together in integrated fashion. And we discussed Iran and why it is my firm belief that Iran cannot get a nuclear weapon and that the best way to achieve it is if we are able to accomplish a verifiable deal. But what I wanted to emphasize, because I think there is been concerns in the region about Iran's destabilizing activities, is that even if we get a deal on the nuclear issue we are still concerned with some of those activities by not only Iran and the Quds Force and the IRGC, but also proxies like Hezbollah. And so I reaffirmed with them the interest in working to strengthen their defenses, strengthen our joint positions, and then hopefully we will be in a position of strength in terms of expressing to the Iranians a desire for good relations, but also a insistence that they stop with some of those activities.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyanewschannel", "title": "Interview with Nadia Bilbassy-Charters of Al Arabiya News Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-news-channel", "publication_date": "15-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 296, "text": "And the best part about it was there was a very frank and honest conversation, the kind that you can only have when you are face to face. I am going to pin you down on a few of the points that you just mentioned. When you said that you would use military power to protect your ally, what does that mean? Well, look, I think that we have seen in the past what happened in Kuwait when Saddam Hussein invaded. I think it is U.S. policy that in the Gulf, because of the wide range of interests and the deep friendship and security relations that we have with those countries, that if there was an external threat, our military would be working with the GCC, and hopefully a broad range of other international actors, to prevent that kind of violation of the basic norms of international behavior. I think that there are concerns among some of the GCC members in how do we deal with not the traditional conventional threats, but asymmetric threats-terrorist activity, or the financing of violent activities in various countries' borders. And part of the point that I made to them is that those kinds of asymmetric threats are best dealt with through increasing capacity of training special forces, improving the interdiction of arms flowing in, better intelligence cooperation. So some of the issues that we discussed had to do with very traditional military issues. And we will be extending additional exercises, as I said, trying to help them evaluate where various GCC members are weaker and where they are stronger in their defense capabilities on, let us say, ballistic missile defense, for example. But some of these are less traditional issues that have to be addressed-how do we identify potential terrorist activity that may be taking place? How do we distinguish that from legitimate political activities that are taking place? I think those are issues that we will continue to work on. And the goal here is not that we have solved all these problems- in one day-and-a-half summit, but rather that we created a framework, a set of intentions, and now we have a series of steps that we are going to have to take through our foreign ministers, our defense ministers, and they will be reporting back to us so that when we meet again next year we will be able to see the progress that is been made. But in this case, why cannot you give them a written agreement to reinforce the Eisenhower understanding? Congress approval.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyanewschannel", "title": "Interview with Nadia Bilbassy-Charters of Al Arabiya News Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-news-channel", "publication_date": "15-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 297, "text": "congressional approval, and it is not necessary in this situation in order for us to be able to accomplish the goals that we wanted to meet. As you know, as you mentioned, it is a great concern about Iran's activities-in Lebanon, in Syria, in Yemen, and all of these Arab countries. And it is equal to kind of the worry from the nuclear threat for most Arab countries. Yet, the security arrangement that you have talked about does not address this. Well, actually it does, in the sense that when we talk about the need for us to have joint capabilities to address destabilizing activities and conflicts in the region, some of those are directly related to the concerns surrounding Iran. Can you give me an example? Well, a very good example is making sure that Iran is not pouring in arms to Houthis inside of Yemen. And the Houthis have their own indigenous history inside of Yemen. But if the IRGC is sending significant weapons into Yemen right on the Saudi border, that becomes then a source of concern. And part of our goal here is to make sure that we are able to identify these problems, to highlight them, and then to deter them. And that was a major topic of discussion throughout the summit. Keep in mind that the United States has been very clear that a nuclear-armed Iran would be potentially even more reckless and dangerous. And so it is in everyone's interest to ensure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon and that we provide a pathway for Iran to engage in positive behavior-in commerce, in trade, in education, in scientific exchange. That is the path that we hope they take. But I have been very clear that just because we are able to resolve the nuclear issue does not negate the very real problems that we have had with their past state sponsorship of terrorism, with the potential for mischief in the region. And that is something that we will continue to address- So will we see an increased military-U.S. military presence in the area of the Gulf, for example, on the Red Sea, around the Red Sea? And we have thousands of ships-or thousands of troops. We have the Fifth Fleet. Our military assets in the region are very significant and ready to respond to a whole range of contingencies. And in addition, the GCC countries have significant capabilities, as well. One of the things that we discussed was that the issue is not necessarily if we have enough military hardware, but are we using it properly?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyanewschannel", "title": "Interview with Nadia Bilbassy-Charters of Al Arabiya News Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-news-channel", "publication_date": "15-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 298, "text": "Are we coordinating it properly? Are we identifying the right tools for the specific challenges that we have today? On the deal with Iran, some say it is a political gamble to have this deal because 10 to 15 years is a short period. And if they are going to use this money from the sanction relief to better the life of the Iranian people, it is kind of a wishful strategy. How do you respond to that? No, but I mean the money they are going to have- -imposition of costs on Iran. So when they receive money, they are going to have to do things just to shore up their economy, which has collapsed drastically during the course of my administration and the international sanctions that we have imposed. So what is true is that we cannot simply trust the Iranians to abide by a deal. And so part of what we did during this summit was to lay out the unprecedented steps to verify and inspect and monitor nuclear activity inside of Iran. And under the framework that we are now trying to memorialize, Iran would be subject to the kinds of inspections that have never been put in place before. So we are confident that we can cut off the four pathways to Iran getting a nuclear weapon. And that verification process does not extend simply 10 years, or 15 years; it extends for a very, very long period of time. The first phase-for 10 years-they would be severely restricted in their activities around any kind of nuclear power. In the subsequent decade, they would still be under the inspections regime that we are discussing, but they would be able to do more around peaceful nuclear power. And so they would have to, essentially, earn-re-earn the trust of the international community around these issues. The alternative is to not have any idea what is taking place inside of Iran. And that, I think, is a much more dangerous situation for everyone in the region. Let me just ask you this. Often you talk about Iran with admiration and you always praise the Iranian people. But somehow it is perceived in the region that you are putting down the Sunni Arabs, that somehow you link them to extremists. And I just want you to correct this, if this is the case, because that is the impression. I think that would be a mistaken impression so Al-Arabiya is going to have to do a better job delivering my message. Our closest friends in the region are the Gulf countries, and that relationship dates back for decades now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyanewschannel", "title": "Interview with Nadia Bilbassy-Charters of Al Arabiya News Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-news-channel", "publication_date": "15-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 299, "text": "And when I have spoken directly to the Iranian people, essentially what I have said to them is, you have the opportunity to restore traditions that would allow you to be a full-fledged and admired member of the international community. I want to encourage that. But I have been extraordinarily critical of the Iranian regime's ideology and the approach that they have taken to international affairs, as well as how they have dealt with their own people. Daesh. Daesh and previously al Qaeda that lead to a dead-end. And that is as significant a danger as any that are faced by the GCC countries. If that continues, then that can end up being a cancer that eats away at the great nation states and traditions inside of the Gulf. And I think we have to be honest about that, and I have had very straightforward conversations about that. This is something that all the GCC members agree-which is why part of our emphasis during this summit was not just weapons and strategies. It was also how do we encourage entrepreneurship- through things like the Global Entrepreneurship Forum that we have initiated? How do we use social media so that we are reaching young people with a positive message that is as effective and as rapid as the use that ISIL is making of social media, that Daesh is making of social media? So these are also part of the cooperation that we want to try to bring about over the coming year. Talking of young leadership, you met with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef and Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman here. What is your assessment of the young leadership of Saudi Arabia? And also you met the King himself. This is a new transition in the Kingdom. Well, obviously, we have extraordinary respect for His Majesty and his leadership. I had a great relationship with King Abdullah, who is deeply missed. And Mohammed bin Nayef has been a partner with us on counterterrorism work and security work for a very long time. So we have great admiration for him. This is the first time that we had had a chance to work closely with the Deputy Crown Prince, and I think he struck us as extremely knowledgeable, very smart, I think wise beyond his years. And throughout the Gulf, what you are seeing I think is more young leadership moving into positions of authority and decision-making. When I came in, I was a relatively young man, as President. I have got some gray hair.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyanewschannel", "title": "Interview with Nadia Bilbassy-Charters of Al Arabiya News Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-news-channel", "publication_date": "15-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 300, "text": "But the world moves so quickly now and is so sophisticated, and there is so much information that is having to be processed, that for us to be able to see that next generation move in, in an effective and decisive way I think will ultimately be very good for a region of the world that is young. And we have to be able to speak and reach to those young people, and to adapt to the new circumstances of today's world. My time is running out, but I want to ask you about Syria and Iraq, quickly. It might haunt you for years to come-200,000 dead; 9 million people displaced; the worse humanitarian crisis in the 21st century. Are we going to see the end of all bloodshed before you leave office, ENTITY? Because the situation in Syria is heartbreaking, but it is extremely complex. And I am haunted by the hardships and the deaths. But when the analogy is used of Rwanda it presumes that some sort of swift U.S. intervention would have prevented these problems. You have a civil war in a country that arises out of long-standing grievances. It was not something that was triggered by the United States; it was not something that could have been stopped by the United States. And one of the things that I have said in this summit-and I was very blunt-is that all too often, I think in the Middle East region, people attribute everything to the United States. They look to the U.S. for leadership. if something-if we did something, then why did not the United States meddle in our affairs. If we do not do something, then, well, why is not the United States doing something. And I was very frank with the GCC leaders. I said, look, we are partners; we can do these things together. But the United States ultimately can only work through Arab countries who are also working on their own behalf to deal with these issues. And part of our goal here is to build capacity. This is why in Iraq, for example, I have been fully prepared to support a legitimate, constitutionally appropriate Iraqi government. But what I have said is we will work through the Iraqi government and the Iraqi military and we will support them. And in Syria, our efforts have to be as part of a broader international coalition, and ultimately a military solution is not going to be the solution.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyanewschannel", "title": "Interview with Nadia Bilbassy-Charters of Al Arabiya News Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-news-channel", "publication_date": "15-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 301, "text": "If the United States simply sent in troops into Syria-our military is very effective, and for a short period of time, we potentially could come down on the side of the opposition against Assad. But in terms of governance, in terms of keeping the peace, in terms of working through some of the sectarian issues that have plagued that country as well as the region for such a long time, those would still be there. And so we are prepared to work not just with the GCC, but with countries like Turkey-which has a very powerful military, are right on the border. They have got 2 million people who they have very generously, I think, accepted from Syria.   Sure but, forgive me, ENTITY, when people rise and they demand their rights, they look up to the United States. They do not look to any other country. And especially after President Assad used chemical weapons, people felt they have been let down. The civil war did not start from day one. They felt that you could have done something in the beginning and you did not . But if you look at the history of the process, essentially what they are arguing is that we should have invaded Syria and overthrown the Syrian regime-which, by the way, would be a violation of international law, and undoubtedly we would then be criticized for that, as well. And so what I think we have tried to do is be very clear about principles, what we believe in. With respect to the chemical weapons issue, my principle was that chemical weapons should not be used. People may criticize us for not having launched missiles against Assad after chemical weapons had been used, but keep in mind why we did not . We did not because they got rid of their chemical weapons. And that, in fact, was very important. It did not solve barrel bombs. It did not solve the incredible hardships that all the Syrian people are going through. But to solve those larger problems, that requires the kind of international work in which we are obviously a very significant part and a very significant partner-and my Secretary of State, John Kerry, has been tireless in trying to arrive at a diplomatic solution to this problem.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyanewschannel", "title": "Interview with Nadia Bilbassy-Charters of Al Arabiya News Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-news-channel", "publication_date": "15-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 302, "text": "Part of the problem we also have is that on the other side inside of Syria, we have extremists who may be opposed to Assad but also deeply opposed to the United States, are deeply opposed to the GCC countries; are interested in establishing a very destructive order and have engaged in the same kinds of brutality and violence that we do not want to see deeply entrenched. What I am optimistic about is that the GCC countries represent stability and also I think an awareness of the need for us to be able to move together and create the framework so that young people-instead of being attracted to violence, or not being able to go to school, or being victims in the crossfire of civil war-are able to live peacefully. And I think they also understand the need for us to move beyond the sectarianism that is being fanned by extremists who just want power and use that as an excuse. You are the second President I am interviewing who is leaving office without realizing the vision of a Palestinian state. You had serious efforts in the first and second administration. Yet we receive-we reached a dead-end. Who is responsible for that? On the one hand, I am a deep and strong supporter of Israel, and the connection between the United States and Israel is obviously powerful. And Israel has legitimate security concerns. And what is also true is I am deeply committed to a Palestinian state. You know, in my visits to places like Ramallah, when I talk to young Palestinian students and I hear their sense that their world is shut off because of their circumstances in the West Bank, or when I hear some of the heartbreaking stories in Gaza, the only solution to me over the long term is a two-state solution. And we worked very hard, but, frankly, the politics inside of Israel and the politics among the Palestinians, as well, made it very difficult for each side to trust each other enough to make that leap. And what I think at this point, realistically, we can do is to try to rebuild trust-not through a big overarching deal, which I do not think is probably possible in the next year, given the makeup of the Netanyahu government, given the challenges I think that exist for President Abbas-but if we can start building some trust around, for example, relieving the humanitarian suffering inside of Gaza and helping the ordinary people in Gaza to recover from the devastation that happened last year", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnadiabilbassychartersalarabiyanewschannel", "title": "Interview with Nadia Bilbassy-Charters of Al Arabiya News Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nadia-bilbassy-charters-al-arabiya-news-channel", "publication_date": "15-05-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 304, "text": "We start with a very basic question. Are you preparing the country to go back to war? I am preparing the country to make sure that we deal with a threat from ISIL. Keep in mind that this is something that we know how to do. We have been dealing with terrorist threats for quite some time. This administration has systematically dismantled Al Qaeda in the FATA. We just yesterday announced the fact that we had taken out the top leader of Al-Shabaab the terrorist-- organization in Somalia. ISIL poses a broader threat because of its territorial ambitions in Iraq and Syria. But the good news is coming back from the most recent NATO meeting is the entire international community understands that this is something that has to be dealt with. So what I have done over the last several months is, first and foremost, make sure that we got eyes on the problem, that we shifted resources, intelligence, reconnaissance. We did an assessment on the ground. The second step was to make sure that we protected American personnel, our embassies, our consulates. That included taking air strikes to ensure that towns like Erbil were not overrun, critical infrastructure, like the Mosul Dam was protected, and that we were able to engage in key humanitarian assistance programs that have saved thousands of lives. The next phase is now to start going on some offense. We have to get an Iraqi government in place. And I will then meet with congressional leaders on Tuesday. On Wednesday, I will make a speech and describe what our game plan's going to be going forward. But this is not going to be an announcement about U.S. ground troops. This is not the equivalent of the Iraq war. What this is is similar to the kinds of counterterrorism campaigns that we have been engaging in consistently over the last five, six, seven years. And the good news is is that because of American leadership, we have I believe, a broad-based coalition internationally and regionally to be able to deal with the problem. What are you asking of the American people on Wednesday? You say you are giving a speech. That is the type of thing, I assume, you are preparing the country for something. What are you asking of them? What do you want--what do you want the American people to receive? Well more than that, I just want the American people to understand the nature of the threat and how we are going to deal with it and to have confidence that we will be able to deal with it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 305, "text": "You realize you are giving that speech the day before the 13th anniversary of 9/11. And I--I want everybody to understand that we have not seen any immediate intelligence about threats to the homeland from ISIL. That is not what this is about. What it is about is an organization that, if allowed to control significant amounts of territory, to amass more resources, more arms to attract more foreign fighters, including from areas like Europe, who have Europeans who have visas and then can travel to the United States unimpeded, that over time, that can be a serious threat to the homeland. In-- in the more immediate term, it is an imm-- it is a threat to friends, partners in the region and is causing all kinds of hardship. And we have seen the savagery not just in terms of how they dealt with the two Americans that had been taken hostage but the killing of thousands of innocents in-- in Iraq thousands of innocents in Syria, the kidnapping of women the complete disruption of entire villages. So what I am going to be ask-- asking the American people to understand is, number one, this is a serious threat. Number two, we have the capacity to deal with it. Here is how we are going to deal with it. I am going to be asking Congress to make sure that they understand and support what our plan is. And it is going to require some resources, I suspect, above what we are currently doing in the region-- This is asking Congress for a vote, an authorization of your strategy. This is not a what-- what does that mean? Well, I-- I-- I am confident that I have the authorization that I need to protect the American people. And I am always going to do what is necessary to protect the American people. But I do think it is important for Congress to understand what the plan is, to have buy in, to debate it. And that is why we have been consulting with Congress throughout. And this speech will allow Congress, I think, to understand very clearly and very specifically what it is that we are doing but also what we are not doing. We are not looking at sending in 100,000 American troops. We are going to be as part of an international coalition, carrying out air strikes in support of work on the ground by Iraqi troops, Kurdish troops.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 306, "text": "We are going to be helping to put together a plan for them, so that they can start retaking territory that ISIL had taken over. We are going to have to work with our regional partners to attract back Sunni tribes that may have felt that they had no connection to a Baghdad government that was ignoring their grievances. And what I want people to understand, though, is that over the course of months, we are going to be able to not just blunt the momentum of ISIL. We are going to systematically degrade their capabilities. We are going to shrink the territory that they control. And ultimately we are going to defeat 'em. Long way, long way from when you described them as a JV team. Keep-- keep-- keep in mind I was not specifically referring to ISIL. I have said that, regionally, there were a whole series of organizations that were focused primarily locally. Were not focused on homeland, because I think a lot of us, when we think about terrorism, the model is Osama bin Laden and 9/11. You do not believe these people-- And I was very specific at that time. What I said was, not every regional terrorist organization is automatically a threat to us that would call for a major offensive. But what is absolutely clear in ISIL, which started as Al Qaeda in Iraq and arose out of the U.S. invasion there and was contained because of the enormous efforts of our troops there then shifted to Syria, has metastasized, has grown. But keep in mind that we anticipated some of these problems in the speech that I gave at West Point you know, several months ago, where I specifically said, our goal should not be to think that we can occupy every country where there is a terrorist organization. Our goal has to be to partner more effectively with governments that are committed to-- pushing back against the kind of extremism that ISIL represents. And that is going to require us to do things a little bit differently. We are going to have to train the military there more capably. We have got to do more effective diplomatic work to eliminate the the schism between Sunni and Shia that has been fueling so much of the violence in Syria, in Iraq. And so we put together a plan that is compatible with the kind of work that we are doing now. You have not said the word, Syria, so far in our conversation. Obviously, if you are going to defeat ISIS, you have used very much stronger language.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 307, "text": "It is gone through the week during your trip to Wales. You got to go to Syria in some form or another. You have ruled out boots on the ground. And I am curious, have you only ruled them out simply for domestic political reasons? Or is there another reason you have ruled out American boots on the ground? Because your own-- your own guys have said, You cannot defeat ISIS with air strikes alone. Well, they are absolutely right about that. But you also cannot, over the long term or even the medium term, deal with this problem by having the United States serially occupy various countries all around the Middle East. We do not have the resources. It puts enormous strains on our military. And at some point, we leave. That is what happened with Iraq. so-- so we have got to have a more sustainable strategy, which means the boots on the ground have to be Iraqi. And-- and in Syria, the boots on the ground have to be Syrian. Well we have a Free Syrian ENTITY and a moderate opposition that we have steadily been working with but we have vetted. They have been on the defensive, not just from ISIL, but also from the Assad regime. And what-- you know, if you recall, at the West Point speech that I gave, I said, we need to put more resources into the moderate opposition in part because, unless we have people we can work with who are Sunni in these Sunni regions, then we are going to continue to have these problems. And so the-- the strategy both for Iraq and for Syria is that we will hunt down ISIL members and assets wherever they are. I will reserve the right to always protect the American people and go after folks who are trying to hurt us wherever they are. But in terms of controlling territory, we are going to have to develop a moderate Sunni opposition that can control territory and that we can work with. The notion that the United States should be putting boots on the ground, I think would be a profound mistake. And I want to be very clear and very explicit about that. I-- I got a somewhat snarky email from a-- from a casual viewer who said, The United States gives a lotta military aid to Saudi Arabia. It is about time they use it. What do you say to that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 308, "text": "Well, I think that it is absolutely true that we are going to need Sunni states to step up, not just Saudi Arabia, our partners like Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Turkey. The dangers that are posed are-- are more directed at them right now than they are us. And that is part of the conversation that John Kerry's going to be having this week. I sent him there after we left-- the NATO meeting in Wales. And the good news is, I think, for the, perhaps the first time, you have absolute clarity that the problem for Sunni states in the region, many of whom are our allies, is not simply Iran. Sunni extremism, as represented by ISIL, is the biggest danger that they face right now. And with that understanding, it gives us the capacity for them to start getting more active and more involved. And by the way, some of that is military. But some of it is giving political support to Baghdad and strengthening relations with Shia leaders in Baghdad. Some of it is reaching out to the Sunni tribes in Iraq and identifying who we can work with, so that they can fight their own battles to free villages and regions that, you know, where they live. So they have got a big role to play. One of the things we have seen about ISIL is they are really good on social media. They--they understand how to -- message to disaffected youth throughout the Arab world and throughout the Sunni world what they are doing. And the question is, when are the moderate Sunni states and leadership going to work systematically to say, what ISIL represents is not Islam. It is an abortion-- a distortion-- an abomination of that-- that has, you know, somehow tied Islam to the kind of nihilistic thinking that any civilized nation should-- should eliminate. Did you-- did you see those messages they sent to you, naming you, when they-- when they-- when they beheaded those American journalists? They sent messages addressing you personally. Did you watch 'em? Did I-- I was-- I review-- as part of our overall counterterrorism effort, I review all the social media that many of these groups. And then these are-- this is not the first organization to deploy social media. This is increasingly the way that they are recruiting, particularly among foreign fighters. And we need a much more effective counter-narrative. And it cannot come from us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 309, "text": "You know, when they address you like that and they behead an American, I mean, does it-- what-- how does that impact you? Well-- you know, when you-- it is not so much how it affects me personally. It is thinking about the parents of and family members-- of these folks who were affected. And you understand that, you know, the way to vindicate the love and concern that these families have, is to make sure we have got a good policy, a smart policy, that prevents these kinds of things from happening in the future. Assad essentially putting-- putting aside that priority that Assad must go, because ISIS is a more direct threat? You know, the reason we are in this situation is because Assad brutalized his people and specifically brutalized the Sunni population that is the majority in Syria. It is going to be hard for us to attract Sunnis to fight against ISIL in this area if they think that we are doing it on behalf of Assad. So, our attitude towards Assad continues to be that you know, through his actions, through using chemical weapons on his own people, dropping barrel bombs that killed innocent children that he-- he has foregone legitimacy. But when it comes to our policy and the coalition that we are putting together, our focus specifically is on ISIL. It is narrowly on ISIL. We will continue to look for opportunities, even as we are going after terrorists who could harm Americans and our friends and partners in the region. We will continue to look for opportunities to see if we can have any political resolution of the challenges in Syria. We are going to need that. But in order to do that, we have got to have a moderate Sunni opposition. Right now in Syria, you have got a choice, in the minds of a lotta people, between radical Sunni extremists or Assad. We have got and what we know is is that there are millions of decent, good Sunnis, many of whom have been displaced. They are in Turkey. They are in Jordan. Many of them are still in Syria although getting squeezed between these two extremes. And we have got to be able to reach to them, find a military and political structure that'll allow them to express themselves. Then maybe we can get the kinda political resolution that we need. I have got a few other topics. Obviously, it is something that Africa's trying to get its hands around.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 310, "text": "Well, Americans should not be concerned about the prospects of contagion here in the United States, short term. Well, I am going to get to that. It is not an airborne disease, like the flu. You can only catch it through the transmission of bodily fluids where you have a strong public health infrastructure. Now, typically, there is one person who is identified, or a couple of people who are identified as having the virus. The problem that we have got is in, right now, a limited portion of western Africa, primarily Li-- especially in Liberia but also Sierra Leone, Guinea-- A part of Africa that economically had been booming. They are -- they are -- they are making some significant progress. But they-- they did not have a public health infrastructure. So now what we have is what should be a containable problem breaking loose because people are not being quarantined properly. So what I have said, and I said this two months ago to our National Security Team, is we have to make this a national security priority. We have to mobilize the international community, get resources in there. It is going to be a U.S. effort-- And we are going to have to get U.S. military assets just to set up, for example isola-- isolation units and-- and equipment there, to provide security for public health workers surging from around the world. If we do that, then it is still going to be months before this problem is controllable in Africa. But it should not reach our shores. If we do not make that effort now, and this spreads not just through Africa but other parts of the world, there is the prospect then that the virus mutates. And then it could be a serious danger to the United States. This is an example of where U.S. leadership is important in dealing with crisis. But it is also an argument for why when-- when I go before Congress, and I say, Let us give some public health aid to countries like Liberia, so that they can set up hospitals and nurses and vaccinations, et cetera, you know, sometimes, you know, the American public says, Why are we wasting money on them? Well, part of it is because, you know, when-- when we make those short-term investments now, it really pays of a lotta dividends in the future. Let me go to immigration.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 311, "text": "You made a decision to delay any executive action until after the election. What do you tell the person that is going to get deported before the election that this decision was essentially made in your hopes of saving a democratic Senate? A couple of things that I want to say about immigration. The country's going to be better off if we have an immigration system that works, that has strong border security, that has streamlined our legal immigration system, so the best and the brightest who want to stay here and invest here and create jobs here can do so, that families can be unified, and that a system where the millions of people who are here, in many cases, for a decade or more, who have American kids, who are neighbors, often times are our friends, that they have a path to get legal by paying taxes and getting above board, paying a fine, learning English, if they have to. So the good news is we have bipartisan support for that. We have a Senate bill that would accomplish that. The House Republicans refuse to do that. And what I said to them was, If you do not act on something that is so common sense that you got labor, business, evangelicals, law enforcement, you have got folks across the board supporting it, then I am going to look for all the legal authorities I have to act. What we have now done is laid the groundwork for that. Jeh Johnson, the head of the Department of Homeland Security, has presented me preliminary, you know, ideas in terms of how we can take executive action. And what I have determined is I want to make sure we get it right. But the politics, I mean, it looks like election year politics. Not only do I want to make sure that the Ts are crossed and the Is are dotted, but here is the thing, and ENTITY, and I am being honest now, about the politics of it. This problem with unaccompanied children that we saw a couple weeks ago, where you had, from Central America, a surge of kids who were showing up at the border, got a lot of attention. And a lot of Americans started thinking, We have got this immigration crisis on our hands. Now, the fact of the matter is-- is that the number of people apprehended crossing our borders has plummeted over the course of the decade.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 312, "text": "And in terms of these unaccompanied children, we have actually systematically worked through the problem, so that the surge in June dropped in July, dropped further in August. But that is not the impression on people's minds. And what I want to do is, when I take executive action, I want to make sure that it is sustainable. But the public's not behind you, you are not taking it - That sounds a little bit like that you are concerned the public would not support what you did- what I am saying is that I am going to act because it is the right thing for the country. But it is going to be more sustainable and more effective if the public understands what the facts are on immigration, what we have done on-- on unaccompanied children, and why it is necessary. And you know, the truth of the matter is that the politics did shift midsummer because of that problem. I want to spend some time, even as we are getting all our ducks in a row for the executive action, I also want to make sure that the public understands why we are doing this, why it is the right thing for the American people, why it is the right thing for the American economy. What is the rationale for this election? Three billion dollars, I would argue, is being decided to see if it is Harry Reid or Mitch McConnell that is in charge of gridlock in the Senate. I mean, we are talking either-- what is the difference between a two-seat Democratic majority and a two-seat Republican majority as far as your agenda is concerned? Well, I-- I will tell you what. And the American people need to know that. If you-- if you have got a Democratic Senate, that means bills are being introduced to raise the minimum wage. Is that on your desk? I will -- I will get to that. We care about that bill. We think it is important to make sure that issues like family leave and-- and family-friendly policies and-- and more effective childcare in place, so that-- so that folks are getting help, that-- young people are getting more assistance, when it comes to, paying for college educations, rebuilding our infrastructure, putting folks back to work on our roads, our bridges, all of which would boost our economy now and boost it into the future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 313, "text": "Now, it is true that if the House stays Republican, that it is unlikely that I get a lot of these bills to my desk. But it makes a big difference if we have got at least one branch in Congress that is presenting these ideas, making arguments. There is, I think, hopefully, an opportunity for us to do something like tax reform next year. But is that tax reform going to be just for folks at the top? Or is it going to be tax reform that closes some corporate loopholes and gives middle class folks a break? And-- you know-- I-- I know that, you know, given the gridlock that we have seen over the last couple years, it is easy to say that these midterms do not matter. But the fact of the matter is that, on every issue that is important to middle class Americans, overwhelmingly, we are seeing a majority prefer the Democratic option and us having a Democratic Senate that can present those issues and put them forward, just like they did on immigration, even if the House Republicans fail to act, means that we are debating the right stuff for the country. We are debating the things that are going to help us grow. This would not be Meet the Press if I did not have a chart with me. It will be bigger for the television. But immigration, overhauling the tax system, raising the minimum raise. You brought up these issues yourself. That was with a Democratic Senate. So that is why you look at this. And do you think your presidency is in bigger trouble than if you have a Republican Senate? And given the fact that the punditry overwhelmingly felt that this was going to-- You are overtly pointing at me. That-- that this was going to be a good year for Senate Republicans, because the seats that were up were in states that were tilting or significantly with-- with significant Republican majorities. If we-- if democrats hold the Senate, I think that should get Republicans to once again-- You think that sends a national message? I think what it does is-- is to-- to send a message to Republicans that people want to get stuff done. Their-- their strategy of just obstructing and saying no to every piece of legislation that might help middle class families, that might create ladders of opportunity, that that is an agenda that the American people reject. And that then gives us room, hopefully, to find some compromises.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 314, "text": "I have -- I have said this before, ENTITY. You know, if you asked me back in August what I want for my birthday, I'd say, Give me a loyal opposition that has some common sense and is willing to work on some basic issues that did not used to be partisan issues. It did not use to be that building roads, bridges, improving our airports, improving our water systems, reducing traffic, those did not used to be partisan issues. They have become partisan issues, because you have got a small portion of the Republican party that is fixated simply on dismantling government or making sure that we do not get anything done around here. If that approach is rejected, then you possibly have two years where we can get a whole bunch of stuff done. And the good news is that despite all that obstruction, America's made progress. You have heard me speak on the stump about this, ENTITY. The fact of the matter is that on almost every economic index that you can think of, America's better off now than we were five years ago. Middle America's not feeling a boom. And-- and that shows that we have still got more work to do. But we have cut the deficit by more than half. We have made sure that manufacturing is stronger than it is been any time since the 1990s. We have got an auto industry that is booming. We have got a housing industry that is recovering. We have got people's 401s healthy again because of the rise in the stock market. We have never been better positioned for American leadership, economically as well as from a national security standpoint, as we are right now. The questions is, do we take advantage of that? And we can take advantage of it if we can just get the Republican Party to stop tilting toward the extreme, move back towards the center, and work with Democrats not on everything. We are going to disagree on many things, but on some basic things that we know would help the American people. Not surprisingly, I am getting a little bit of hot signs. So let me get you to this last question here. I have had former aides of yours, plenty of supporters of yours, say to me, He looks exhausted. You know, I actually feel, energized about the opportunities, that we have got There are days where I am not getting enough sleep, because we have got a lot on our plate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 315, "text": "You know, when you are , when you are ENTITY of the United States, you are not just dealing with the United States, as we saw during the NATO summit. If there is a problem in Ukraine, we are the ones who are expected to mobilize the world community to isolate Russia, put pressure, support Ukrainians, and to vindicate the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity and freedom that we stand for. If there is a problem in the Middle East, the expectation is that we create the coalitions to deal with a problem like ISIL. If there is an issue in Africa around Ebola we need to help mobilize that public health infrastructure. Do you need to rotate-- do you need to rotate some fresh ideas, some new people in here? But-- but having said all that, despite all those challenges, it is invigorating to see how much U.S. leadership is still appreciated and still expected. You know, you-- when I came back from Wales and I was reminded once again that not only is America the only indispensable nation. And our leadership is making a difference. And that gives you a lot of satisfaction. That keeps you getting up even if you have not gotten as much sleep as you want. I got to ask, so-- so during that vacation, you made the statement on Foley. Do you-- do you want that back? You know, it is always a challenge when you are supposed to be on vacation. And part of what I'd love is a vacation from-- I promise you, 2 1/2 years, I think that happens. Because the possibility of a jarring contrast given the world's news, is always-- there is always going to be some tough news somewhere-- is going to be there. But there is no doubt that-- after having talked to the families, where it was hard for me to hold back tears listening to the pain that they were going through, after the statement that I made, that you know, I should've anticipated the optics. You know, that is part of the job. And you know, I think everybody who knows me, including, I suspect, the press, understands that that you know, you take this stuff in. And-- and you care about it deeply. But part of this job is also the theatre of it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcnewsmeetthepress5", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd of NBC News Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbc-news-meet-the-press-5", "publication_date": "07-09-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 322, "text": "ENTITY, I want to give you the first question and to point out that the attention you have given our Senator Herb Kohl in the last couple of days has raised his level of notoriety to a point that he has not known since he was elected. Now, I know you would not trade a vote, but is there anything that you and Senator Kohl mutually want in terms of legislation or other benefits for Wisconsin that you have an interest in? The main thing that Senator Kohl was concerned about-he was interested in two things, to be fair, and there was-in the national interest. One was to minimize the burden on middle class taxpayers. And when he looked at the whole package and saw that working families with incomes under $30,000 were held harmless and that working families with incomes of $50,000 and $60,000 were looking at a $33-a-year burden with the spending cuts, I think that really made a big difference to him. The other thing that he was interested in that I think is certainly as significant over the long run is he wanted a program that had some real economic growth incentives, that had some business help in it. And this program does a lot for small businesses. Over 90 percent of the small businesses in the country are eligible for a tax reduction if they reinvest more money in their businesses. It does more for research and development. It does more for revitalizing homebuilding and real estate. It does more across a whole range of issues. And then the third issue that he raised, which I certainly agree with him on, is that we need to bring this deficit down to zero. And in order to do that, we are going to have to cut more. But to do that, we have to reform the health care system. So the next issue is how to bring down health care costs so we can get this budget deficit down to zero and not just take $500 billion off of it. Have you convinced him, ENTITY, that these changes are enough to get his vote on this issue? I have worked hard on that. That is going to be up to him, not me, and I do not think I should speak for him. I think he has really done a good job here, and he has been very important in bringing a business, pro-jobs perspective to the whole debate. But we have got a $495, $496, $497-something in that range-billion dollar deficit reduction package.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnewspapereditors", "title": "Interview With Newspaper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-newspaper-editors", "publication_date": "02-08-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 323, "text": "We are now going to have more cuts than tax increases in the package. The top 1.2 percent of the American people, of people with incomes over $200,000 will pay more than 75 percent of the burden now. ENTITY, you have not had quite as good a success with our Senator Boren, who, I think, like many people in Oklahoma are concerned that the spending cuts to come later- when we went through that in 1990, and they never came. Well, for one thing I am going to have a trust fund and all the money will have to be put into the deficit reduction package, both the spending cuts and the tax increases. What actually happened in 1990, Jim, to be completely accurate about it, is that the Congress adopted a plan based on the previous administration's rosy revenue estimates. And no one really thought the revenues would grow that much; so they did not . And then spending increased because the recession went on and more people were entitled to Medicare and Medicaid. And between those two things, they were in deep trouble. Now, let me just address the major objections Senator Boren has, because I think what he says is right, but it is not a good reason to vote against this program. What he says is that in order to take the deficit from where we are taking it down to zero, you have to do something about the entitlement programs, especially about Medicare and Medicaid. But the problem is if you do not reform the health care system, that is, if you do not fundamentally restructure the system of the way health care is insured against and the way the-cutting out a lot of the paperwork and a lot of the things that are more expensive in America than anywhere else that have nothing to do with health care, and you cut the medical expenses of the Federal Government, all in the world you are going to do is have a hidden tax on the private sector because the providers will do what they always do. They will pass their costs on to people that have insurance. So that, for example, the Daily Oklahoman would have its medical premiums go up more than otherwise would be the case because the Government's not paying the full cost of its health care. So I do not disagree that we have to do something about health care costs and entitlements.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnewspapereditors", "title": "Interview With Newspaper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-newspaper-editors", "publication_date": "02-08-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 324, "text": "But the time to do that is in the context of a health care reform debate, which we are going to start as soon as we can get this budget out of the way. If we do not adopt the budget, we will never get there. Everybody who looks at it can see that this budget's a lot better deal than the one in 1990. We have got new business capital gains tax in there and all kinds of other incentives for small businesses to grow. Over 90 percent of the small businesses can get a tax reduction under this plan because of it. This is going to create some jobs, too. But you cannot solve all the problems of the world in this bill. That is my quarrel and dispute with Senator Boren. He is right, you have got to get the entitlements if you want to go to zero, but we are going to have to do it in two steps, not one. ENTITY, a lot of people are concerned with, out here, the fact that the spending reductions, the major ones, seem to come so late in the plan, and the tax increases come so early. Would not it be better to go back in and make another slash, even if this means delaying the budget a little bit? First of all, there are going to be more spending reductions all the way along. The House of Representatives has already approved $10 billion in spending reductions over and above what is in this budget, but working with me. I have encouraged them. The Vice President is going to have a reinventing Government report out sometime next month, which will provide a lot more savings. So we are just getting started on the spending reductions. And then as I said, we will be able to project a decade of spending controls in the health care area if we do health care reform. The problem is that no matter what you do with that, the budget we have now and the budget we are going to have next year-we are already preparing to cut more off next year right now. Still the big reductions in spending are those that aggregate up over time. That is, if I cut $10 billion this year and $10 billion next year, then that is $20 billion over this year's figure and then $30 billion and $40 billion. You see what I mean? So the spending cuts are always going to look bigger in the out-years because they compound one another. ENTITY, we are relaying some of our readers' questions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnewspapereditors", "title": "Interview With Newspaper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-newspaper-editors", "publication_date": "02-08-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 325, "text": "One of them was, how can the job market grow when small businesses are afraid new taxes and the health plan will put them out of business? Well, first of all, new taxes and the health plan will not put them out of business. We have tried to send a clear signal to the small business community that there will not be a tax problem here. But if they have to have a premium to cover their own employees, we will limit how much of their payroll it can be, and it will be phased in over a period of years. But let me flip it over to you on the other side. Seventy percent of the small businesses in America provide some health care coverage for their employees, and almost all of them pay much more than they should because we are the only country in the world that forces employers who cover their employees to subsidize employers who do not , and that is what happens. Everybody in this country gets health care, but if you do not have health insurance and you cannot pay for it, you get it too late when it is too expensive. You show up at the hospital; you get cared for, and then the providers, the doctors and the hospitals, in effect, raise their costs to everybody else. So you could argue that the small business community as a whole in this country is more hurt by the system we have than by the one we are moving to. Also, let me make one other point. We spend about 10 cents on the dollar more than any other country in the administrative costs of our health care system because we have 1,500 separate health insurance companies writing thousands of different policies, all with different rules and regulations, so that the cost of compliance is staggering, and then the Government aggravates it. So I think the small business community will wind up ahead on this. But we have tried to send some clear signals that we are not going to pop them with a big payroll tax, and I do think employers who do not provide anything for their employees should bear some responsibility through the private insurance system. But it ought to be limited and phased in so that nobody goes broke doing it. ENTITY, on Friday, last Friday we had a conversation with Roger Altman about your budget plan, and one of the questions we asked him was what the administration would have done differently to sell this plan. And he was very frank about it. And I am curious in terms of your strategy why you did not really start giving everybody the hard sell a lot earlier.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnewspapereditors", "title": "Interview With Newspaper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-newspaper-editors", "publication_date": "02-08-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 326, "text": "You mean not in the Congress but in the country? Well, actually we did a lot of that, but we did not have our war room set up, and we were, frankly, just overwhelmed by the day-to-day news coverage of Republicans carping about taxes and unable to kind of break through about what the facts of the program were. I worked hard-for 2 months after I made my State of the Union Address I went out into the country once a week. I did my best to talk about the program. But we did not have the kind of organized disciplined effort we have had for the last few weeks in reaching out to local newspapers and television and radio stations and bringing in opinion leaders and doing all these things we are doing now. And I think we did lose control of the debate. Also, to be fair to them, to Roger Altman and the others, an issue like this tends to go through cycles. I told the people about it on February 17th, and they liked it. Then the sort of negative rhetoric took over. Now we are kind of coming back to reality, and all the surveys show we are bringing it back our way now. ENTITY, Alan Greenspan has been giving some subliminal signals about raising interest rates. Would not that sort of derail your plan for reducing the deficit if the interest rates went up? And are you worried about that? I do not think you should raise interest rates until there is real economic growth that brings on real inflation. I mean, there is no real inflation in this economy, and we can have growth without inflation. And I think we may be reading too much into his remarks. Have you talked to him directly about what he did mean since he made those remarks? No, but I talk to him fairly often, and I am scheduled to have another session with him pretty soon. I know him pretty well, and my read on what he said was if inflation warranted it, he might raise interest rates. But if you think about it, what we are trying to do in bringing the deficit down is to justify keeping the interest rates down even when there is economic growth because the Federal Government will be taking less capital away from the markets, and therefore, there will not be as much competition for it, and we ought to be able to keep lower interest rates. He has constantly and consistently supported the deficit reduction efforts of this administration in very explicit terms.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnewspapereditors", "title": "Interview With Newspaper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-newspaper-editors", "publication_date": "02-08-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 327, "text": "So I would be surprised to see him raise interest rates when we are doing something to support the reverse. If we were having 4 or 5 percent growth and inflation was getting out of hand, I could understand it. ENTITY, obviously, in this part of the country it would have been more popular to cut spending first, raise revenue later. You used the early year forecast of the deficit to go back on your pledge for a middle class tax cut. Since, there have been other estimates, why have not you gone back to a cut spending first program? Well, first of all, we are cutting spending. We are cutting spending. This idea that we are raising taxes-taxes come in constant amounts, whether it is a fuel tax or an income tax. David Stockman, who pioneered Reagan's program in 1981, has now admitted in repeated interviews that they cut taxes twice as much as they meant to because they got into a bidding war with Congress, that there is no way to restore any kind of fairness to the Tax Code or reduce the deficit to zero unless there is a revenue component. So if I were to say, Okay, we will put these spending cuts in for a couple of years, and then we will raise taxes, all we would do by doing that is basically have a bigger deficit in the first years because we'd have the spending cuts but not the taxes, and we would have higher interest rates, and we'd have slower economic recovery. Let me just say, in the year that I am in now- which I am not even responsible for this budget until October the 1st-our deficit is going to be about $25 billion less than it was predicted to be when I became ENTITY. But to go back to the middle class tax argument, after the election but before I took office, the previous administration said, Oh, by the way, the deficit's going to be $165 billion bigger over the next 5 years. So I always in that campaign said I am not going to say read my lips because I have run a government long enough at the State level to know that sometimes circumstances can change on you. I have been very candid with the American people about that. I think most people with incomes of $50,000 a year do not think $33 a year is too much to pay. I think what most people have believed is, they have been told that they are going to be paying a fortune. Let me just finish this. I want to make this point.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnewspapereditors", "title": "Interview With Newspaper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-newspaper-editors", "publication_date": "02-08-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 328, "text": "We have got opportunities to have even more fairness in the Tax Code if we are bringing down the deficit and we are opening up economic growth. But the most important thing now is to do something about the deficit. The truth is that all these people who say they want to cut spending now, what they really want is an accounting practice which still would have all the spending cuts come in the 3d, 4th, and 5th year of this budget cycle. What they are really saying is let us pass a bill that says it is going to cut spending later now before we raise taxes. They do not propose more spending cuts in these first years than I do, none of them do. And to go back to Senator Boren's bill, particularly the one he offered in the Senate did not have nearly as much support as the one I offered, because it did not have the kind of deficit reduction unless you did what he proposed to do, which was to take more out of Medicare for middle class people. And even then it was not going to happen for the 3d, 4th, or 5th year, most of it. So the people that say cut spending now are saying, We do not want to cut any more spending than Bill Clinton does right now, but we want to pass a bill that cuts spending in the 3d, 4th, and 5th year in health care without health care reform and then talk about whether we should tax the wealthiest Americans later. That is what they are really saying. Is there any chance that it will not pass in the Senate? I think most of those people are going to say, is this a better bill than we have ever had before and better than we had in 1990? And the answer to that will be, yes. Is this fairer to average Americans than the ones we have been considering? The answer to that will be, yes. Does this restore some economic growth incentives for small business, for new high-tech businesses, for housing, for real estate that we have not had in the Tax Code for 7 or 8 years? And the answer to that will be, yes. Does this bill lift the working poor out of poverty and encourage people to get off welfare, not with a Government program but by using the tax system to reward people who work, even at very low wages? The answer to that will be, yes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnewspapereditors", "title": "Interview With Newspaper Editors", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-newspaper-editors", "publication_date": "02-08-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 343, "text": "There has been a huge response since we announced this interview. Forty thousand questions have come in -- as you might imagine, most on the economy. How do you convince them that they are? They are not better off than they were before Lehman's collapsed, before the financial crisis, before this extraordinary recession that we are going through. I think that what we have seen is that we have been able to make steady progress to stabilize the economy. But the unemployment rate is still way too high, and that is why it is so critical for us to make sure that we are taking every action we can take to put people back to work. And the American Jobs Act, the bill that I put before Congress three weeks ago, puts construction workers back to work rebuilding our roads and bridges; it puts teachers back in the classroom teaching our kids; makes sure that veterans are getting a break if they come home and are looking for a job with a small business. It provides everybody a tax cut -- small businesses and middle-class families alike -- so that we have got more consumers out there with a little more confidence, a little more money in their pockets. You know, these are ideas that historically have been supported by Democrats and Republicans, and so -- As you might have heard in the last hour, the Republican leader in the House, Eric Cantor, said he is not going to schedule a clean bill. Well, look, what he needs to do is to tell us what exactly he is for, because what I have done is put forward what economists say can increase our growth by close to 2 percent and put 1.9 million people, ultimately, back to work. Now, if he is got other ideas, we are happy to look at those other ideas. But what I think the American people cannot abide by is us doing nothing. We cannot sit here and pretend that somehow, you know, Washington just cutting spending, in and of itself, is going to be putting people back to work. Well, he said he wants to pass the tax cuts and the trade bills. Well, we are going to be passing the trade bills. And I am pleased we are doing that because that actually will add jobs. You know, the trade bill not only is for Korea, but also Panama and Columbia. All these countries right now are able to sell into the United States. We have one of the most open markets in the world; theirs are still a little too closed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnews", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos of ABC News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news", "publication_date": "03-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 344, "text": "And as I have said before, I want -- I do not mind Kias and Hyundais sold here, as long as Chryslers and Fords are being sold in Korea as well. So I am glad that is an area of bipartisan agreement, but it is not enough by itself. There is more that we can do. In Virginia. in Virginia, but also some that I visited between Kentucky and Ohio, where both Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell hail from -- you know, those are projects that need to happen anyway. Why not do them now, at a time when we have got construction workers out of work, contractors are able to come in under budget, on time. This is the time to do it. We have a brand-new poll out at ABC -- it is just coming out later today -- showing that a majority of Americans, 55 percent, think you will be a one-term president. The -- because, you know, given the economy, there is no doubt that, you know, whatever happens on your watch, you have got -- You embraced that pretty quickly. And I think that at the end of the day, though, what people are going to say is, who is got a vision for the future that can actually help ordinary families recapture that American dream? When I ran in 2008, the basic idea was that, you know, ordinary folks who are working hard, you know, doing everything right, just were not getting ahead. Costs were going up -- everything from health care to college education. And you know, the whole approach of everything I have tried to do over the last three years is to say, what are those big changes that we have to make so that our kids are getting the best education, we have got the best infrastructure in the world, we have got the tools that allow us to succeed again? We actually got a great question on Twitter about 2008. It was from Gil Glover. If hope and change defined the 2008 campaign, what two words are going to make -- are going to define 2012? You know, I have not quite boiled it down to a bumper sticker yet, but I think what'll define 2012 is, you know, our vision for the future. You know, our vision for the future, right. Nobody's going to deny that we are not where we need to be, that the economy is not producing enough jobs that pay well and give people a leg up on life.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnews", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos of ABC News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news", "publication_date": "03-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 345, "text": "Now, there are going to be some folks who make the argument that if you just slash spending, eliminate regulations that prevent us from polluting our air, polluting our water or, you know, we bust labor unions, that that in and of itself is going to restore the American dream. I do not think most Americans believe that. I think they understand that we have got to invest in making sure we got the best education system possible; that we have got to invest in basic research; that part of what made us an economic superpower was we had the best technology, the best infrastructure, and that government has some role to play in that. And so the question's going to be, you know, which vision is more persuasive to the American people? He said you do not have the courage to lead. He called you a bystander in the Oval Office. And I want to get this right, because it -- what he ended up saying is that you have not brought people together; now you are going to divide them. What happened to State Senator Obama? When did he decide to become one of the dividers he spoke of so eloquently in 2004? Well, look, you know, if the guy's thinking about running for president, he is going to say a lot of stuff, and I think in the Republican primaries, saying nasty stuff about me is probably -- polls pretty well with -- But he basically says he did in New Jersey -- brought people together, which you have not been able to do in Washington -- in Washington. Well, I -- you know, I am not sure that folks in New Jersey necessarily would agree with that. I do not think that the American people would dispute that at every step of the way I have done everything I can to try to get the Republican Party to work with me to deal with what is the biggest crisis of our lifetimes, and each time all we have gotten from them is no. I think the -- you are not going to get too much dispute about that, whether the -- How is that going to change in the next term? Well, you know, the way it is going to change is because the American people are going to have a say about where we want to go. You know, they are going to have a decision to make. You know what?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnews", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos of ABC News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news", "publication_date": "03-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 346, "text": "President Obama wanted to reduce the deficit by not only cutting spending, as he is already done, but also by making sure that the most fortunate in our society are paying their fair share, that we are closing corporate loopholes that small businesses do not get; the Republicans have said no to that. Well, that is a contrast in approaches. And, you know, when you tick down which approach the American people generally prefer, they will say mine. Now, what they will say is, he has not been able to get it through Congress. And, you know, I am the first one to acknowledge that the relations between myself and the Republican Congress have not been good over the last several months, but it is not for a lack of effort. It has to do with the fact that, you know, they have made a decision to follow what is a pretty extreme approach to governance. You might have a new issue on your plate over the weekend. Bank of America announcing a $5 service fee for using your debit cards a lot of outrage, a lot of questions. These are the types of things government should get involved in and put a stop to. Can you put a stop to that? Well, what we did was we put a stop, through the Financial Reform Act, of them charging fees for credit cards. And the banks are saying that they need these charges. Well, what -- banks are saying is that rather than take a little bit less of a profit, rather than paying multi-million-dollar bonuses, let us treat our customers right. And this is exactly why we need this Consumer Finance Protection Bureau that we set up, that is ready to go, and what we need is confirmation of the person I have appointed, Richard Cordray, treasurer of Ohio. Back in Ohio, Republicans and Democrats both think he is terrific and he is fair. But this is exactly why we need somebody whose sole job it is to prevent this kind of stuff from happening. Can you stop this service charge? Well, you can stop it because -- if you say to the banks, you do not have some inherent right just to, you know, get a certain amount of profit, if your customers are being mistreated; that you have to treat them fairly and transparently. And my hope is, is that you are going to see a bunch of the banks who say to themselves, you know what, this is actually not good business practice.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnews", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos of ABC News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news", "publication_date": "03-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 347, "text": "by earning it, by lending to small businesses, by lending to consumers, by making sure that, you know, we are building the economy together. But, you know, without the kinds of protections that we are starting to see the Republicans try to roll back, we are going to continue to have these kinds of problems. And this is exactly the sort of stuff that folks are frustrated by. This, by the way, is an example of the contrasting visions that we have. If the Republican Party believes that we should do nothing to curb abuses on Wall Street, and roll back regulations put in place to prevent the next big financial crisis, well, I have got a big difference with them. And I think the American people are going to be on my side on that. Your White House has faced a lot of questions on Solyndra, the solar-panel company you paid a visit to back in 2010. You really held it up then as a model for jobs in clean energy. Do you regret that? No, I do not , because if you look at the overall portfolio of loan guarantees that have been provided, overall it is doing well. And what we always understood was that not every single business is going to succeed in clean energy. But if we want to compete with China, which is pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into this space, if we want to compete with other countries that are heavily subsidizing the industries of the future, we have got to make sure that our guys here in the United States of America at least have a shot. And you were getting warnings not to back that company up, not to visit. I -- it went through the regular review process and people felt like this was a good bet. But the fact of the matter is, is that if we do not get behind clean energy, if we do not get behind advanced battery manufacturing, if we are not the ones who are creating the cars of the future, then we are not going to be able to make stuff here in the United States of America. And one of the most important things that I want to do over the next several years is restore a sense that America can manufacture, that we do not just purchase stuff from someplace else, that we are also exporting to other countries. Let me ask you about al-Qaida following the killing on Friday of Anwar Awlaki. Back in July, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said that the strategic defeat of al-Qaida is within reach.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnews", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos of ABC News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news", "publication_date": "03-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 348, "text": "This week we approach the 10th anniversary of the invasion of Afghanistan. How close are we to that strategic defeat? You know, I think that we have done more in the last couple of years than anytime in the last 10 years to bring that about. Obviously the most prominent case was us getting bin Laden. But when you look at that entire leadership tier of al-Qaida, they have been decimated. And they are rapidly approaching the point where they just cannot replace trained, skilled operatives who could threaten -- Can they still plan an attack on our homeland? Well, you know, I think that given the nature of our open society, we are always going to be vulnerable to the possible terrorist attack. But for them to be able to mount something that is a big project with a lot of financing, that is very difficult for them to do now. But I think that we are in a position where over the next couple of years if we stay on it, that it is going to be very difficult for them to mount the kinds of spectacular attacks that we saw on 9/11. You gave a pretty passionate speech at the Human Rights Campaign Saturday night, and said that every single American deserves to be treated equally in the eyes of the law. Is that possible without legal gay marriage? Well, you know, I think that it is certainly possible for us to make sure that, not only can they serve in our military, but we fully support them; that hospital visitation is available to gay and lesbian partners; that they are not discriminated against on the job -- being gay or lesbian is not a fireable offense -- that -- at minimum, that gays and lesbians have strong civil unions that provide the same kinds of protections -- You said you are struggling with it. What more do you need to know? Well, you know, I probably will not make news right now, George, but I think that there is no doubt that as I see friends, families, you know, children of gay couples who are thriving -- you know, that that has an impact on how I think about these issues. It is also one of the reasons that I made the decision for us not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, which I believe violated the Constitution and, you know, is going to be decided in the courts probably in the next -- next few terms. You think you will change your mind before the election? You know, I am -- I am still working on it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnews", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos of ABC News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news", "publication_date": "03-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 349, "text": "And you are not going to tell me how long it is going to take? Let me just finish up with a couple personal questions, because we got a lot of those on Yahoo as well. A lot of people want to know -- first of all, I should say, happy anniversary. And they want to know what is the best single piece of advice Michelle has given you. You know, that when all is said and done, the mark of success is, do you have children who are happy and healthy and able to go out there and function as responsible, loving people? You know, I -- I think, in this business -- as is true for a lot of professionals -- I think you love your kids, but you are -- always got these distractions and there are always things tugging at you, and Michelle very early on being that anchor that says, no, no, you know, if we have got a parent-teacher conference -- That steady drum beat from Michelle was exactly right. And it is -- it is part of the reason why, I think, not only are the kids doing well, but it provides me just a constant source of joy and sustenance. Four years is a long time in kids' years. They were pretty little during the last campaign. How do you protect them this time around, when everybody's saying all these bad things about you? I mean, partly because they do not watch -- they do not watch news -- -- although, you know, they are starting to read. They go on the Internet, right? They -- they are starting to go on the Internet. I think that the thing we worry about has less to do with them hearing folks say mean stuff about me, which -- You do not have to answer them. They -- they -- they do not -- they do not -- they know who their daddy is, and they are not worried about that. The thing I do worry about is trying to figure out that balance of making sure they have got space to make mistakes, be teenagers, et cetera. But obviously, they are not typical, in some ways. So they are still having sleepovers and they are still going to the mall and they are still going to movies -- but they have got this guy with a gun following them everywhere. We have been able to do it so far. Our Secret Service detail is terrific about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnews", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos of ABC News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news", "publication_date": "03-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 350, "text": "What greeting and message would you like to convey to the Chinese people prior to your visit to China? First, that the relationship between China and America is an important relationship. There is a lot of good that we are doing together, and there is a lot of areas where we may not have full agreement but, nevertheless, are able to discuss our disagreements in a very cordial way. And so I would tell the people of China you live in a great, massive country that is growing well and that we want to have good relations with you. This will be your third formal visit to China. What do you hope to achieve with this visit? Well, first of all, the visit is giving me a chance to further get to know the leadership. ENTITY Hu is a person who I enjoy visiting with. And the more you get to know a person, the better the easier it is to make good policy. Secondly, I am going to, of course, be going to China to represent the interests of my people. I will talk about the need for trade that is free and fair. I will talk about the currency, of course. I will talk about intellectual property rights that the ENTITY and I have discussed before. And then on the international front we will , of course I will confirm my one China, three-communique policy, that not only says that we do not support independence but as well, we will adhere to the Taiwan Relations Act. I think that is important for the Chinese leadership and the people of China to hear. We have also got an agenda to fight terrorism, fight narcotrafficking, as well as to work together to convince the leader of North Korea that the Korean Peninsula should be nuclear weapons-free. So we have got a broad agenda. It will keep us busy, but it is an important agenda, and the people of China must understand that when the United States and China works together, we can accomplish a lot. You brought up Taiwan. I remember in 2001 and 2003 you made strong statements regarding Taiwan and regarding the recent development, do you feel less concern about a cross-strait situation than you were in, like, 2003? Well, I am always concerned that one party or the other will do something unilaterally to change the status quo, which would then create, you know, a source of angst and anger. And therefore, I am constantly reiterating my position so that both sides clearly know the position of the United States.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithphoenixtelevisionhongkong", "title": "Interview With Phoenix Television of Hong Kong", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-phoenix-television-hong-kong", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 351, "text": "Are you optimistic about a peaceful resolution in the end? I have seen some yes, I am optimistic there will be a peaceful resolution. Secondly, I am optimistic because I have seen cross-straits discussion starting to take place. And I urge the parties to continue those discussions. I believe it is possible, through discussion and good will, to end up solving this issue in a peaceful way. You call U.S.-China relationship complicated. And we heard U.S. officials and experts have variously called China a threat, a partner, a competitor, and an opportunity. So how do you see China, and what is your plan to deal with China's emergence? Well, that is interesting all the different adjectives I guess kind of express a complicated relationship. I would say I think we have got a lot of issues to deal with, is the best way to describe it. And on issues on which we agree, we can make positive contributions and change. Issues we do not necessarily agree on, we can work through and do so in a frank way. And I repeat, I think we have a fantastic opportunity by working with China and other countries to make sure that the Korean Peninsula is nuclear weapons-free, which will lay a foundation for a peace in the region and the hemisphere, and that is important. You brought up North Korea. What other issues do you most seek China's support and cooperation? And what do you expect them to do? Well, first of all, on the United Nations Security Council we work on every issue together. And one way for us to be able to work together is just to share opinions on different issues. For example, I will bring up Iran. I want the ENTITY to understand how I think it is important for the free world and the peaceful world to work together to convince the Iranians not to develop a nuclear weapon. China has got influence. And therefore, it is in our interest that we share ideas and work together. I will also want to continue discussions on the economic front, because we have got a big trade imbalance with China, but we are making progress. The Chinese took a good first step on having a market currency; I believe they ought to do more. The ENTITY made a very strong statement in New York about intellectual property rights. We have reached a textile agreement, which is a very important signal to our folks who want to make sure that the ENTITY works for fair trade.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithphoenixtelevisionhongkong", "title": "Interview With Phoenix Television of Hong Kong", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-phoenix-television-hong-kong", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 352, "text": "And with the trade balance as big as it is, you know, it is important for people here in America to be able to say to themselves, We hope it is fair. And I am going to continue to insist on fair trade as well. Finally, there is a couple of other areas we can work on, if you have got a second. We consume a lot of energy. China is consuming more energy. And we need to share information and share technologies so both of us can diversify away from hydrocarbons. My last question, in 1975 you visited China, when your father was U.S. Representative in Beijing. I know you spent your 29th birthday there Can you share with us some of the memories that made the deepest impression on you when you think of China? I think of how different China is today than it was in 1975. In 1975 first of all, I had a fantastic experience when I went there in 1975. The two impressions a couple of impressions. One, everybody was on bicycles; there were not many automobiles. I happened to be one of the people on bicycles. I rode all over the place in Beijing, which was fascinating. In other words, there was not much exposure to the West, and all of a sudden an American starts riding a bike amongst them, and it, frankly, surprised some people. And thirdly, I noticed there was uniformity in dress. People wore the same style clothes. And that is changed, which means there is a market; people are beginning to express their own individual desires and somebody is meeting those desires with a product. When I went to Shanghai right after September the 11th, 2001, I was it was mind-boggling to look at the fantastic buildings that had been built between the airport and the old town. So this is a country that has progressed a lot since 1975, which shows the vast potential of China. And it explains to people it should explain to people in America why it is important for our Government to have a good working relationship as complex as it is, but to have a good working relationship. And that is in the interest not only of our respective people but it is in the interest of the world. I wish you a very good trip to Asia and a successful visit to China.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithphoenixtelevisionhongkong", "title": "Interview With Phoenix Television of Hong Kong", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-phoenix-television-hong-kong", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 358, "text": "It is nice to hear your voice. There is a new poll out today from Newsweek, and I am sorry to give you this bad news, but there is a new poll out today from Newsweek showing that your approval rating has dropped to 40 percent. And these polls seem to come out fairly frequently with results up and down. Why do you suppose you are down now, and do you pay much attention to these surveys? No, because, first of all, the polls are directly related to how much people know about the record of the administration. And all the surveys show that about-over 60 percent of the American people approve of the work of this administration if they know the facts. The frustrating thing is, and the frustrating thing in all these elections, is that people have so little way of getting the facts. If you look at this California election, it is a classic example. I mean, look at the Senate race. the assault weapons ban, a law requiring no tolerance for gun ownership-possession for children in school, the California desert bill. And she is being opposed by Michael Huffington, who never even lived in California until 1991, who bought a race in the Congress with his fortune and then, when he ran for the Senate, lost his own congressional district in the Republican primary and still looks like he has a chance to win because he can spend money to put things on the television that are not true. And the truth is, in a lot of these polls it depends on what information the voters have and how you ask the question. The only things that really count are these elections, but it is getting harder and harder and harder for voters to make good decisions if all they get is a constant barrage of negative information and they never get the facts. The truth is, we have got a 4-year low in unemployment; jobs are growing 5 times as fast under our administration as they did under the Bush administration. We are doing things for working people like the family leave law, immunizing all of our children under 2, expanding Head Start, lower cost college loans. We are moving this country in the right direction. And we are leading the world in moving toward peace and freedom and democracy. If people think about the record and understand the direction, they give us a lot of support. But you cannot blame people for not voting on what they do not know. ENTITY, let us get on to the subject of illegal immigration. We of course know that you are on record against Proposition 187 in this State.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithcynthialouieandfredwaynekcbsradiosanfranciscocalifornia", "title": "Interview With Cynthia Louie and Fred Wayne of KCBS Radio, San Francisco, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-cynthia-louie-and-fred-wayne-kcbs-radio-san-francisco-california", "publication_date": "05-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 359, "text": "That whole issue is causing so many ill feelings; there is anger on both sides. What can you tell us about the threat that California could lose Federal funding if that initiative passes, one, and as a second part, what commitment can you make to our listeners about what the Federal Government might be able to do to help with the problem of illegal immigration? Well, first of all, let us try to- let me try to talk some sense about this issue. The people of California do have a problem with illegal immigration, which is more severe when the economy is in trouble. But since I became President, I have been trying to help you solve it. I mean, from the day I got in office I knew I had a mess in immigration on my hands, and I started trying to fix it 21 months ago. What have we done? We have almost doubled the border guards in San Diego, along the border down there. We have almost doubled the number of illegal aliens who have been convicted of crimes we are sending back out of the country. We are giving money to California for the first time to help deal with the cost of imprisonment. I have asked Congress to appropriate literally hundreds of millions of dollars to help you deal with the cost of education and health care. We have increased funding to California to deal with immigration by one-third, even though we are reducing Federal spending overall for the first time in 25 years. So we are moving to deal with this problem. We are also looking at ways that we can be tougher on incentives for employers not to hire illegal aliens and how we can keep up with the records. So I think the people of California should want more done. I think the Federal Government should do more. I have been in the forefront of doing that, working with Senator Feinstein, Senator Boxer, and others. I simply do not agree that 187 is the right way to go because, first of all, nearly everybody thinks it is unconstitutional. Secondly, it will be directed primarily against children. If you kick children out of the health clinics, you may run the risk of causing health problems for the general California population. If you say kids have got to be kicked out of school, you turn the teachers into police officers and you say, We are going to put more kids on the street. Well, we have got too many kids on the street in America and California today already. It is liable to raise the crime rate and cause all kinds of problems.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithcynthialouieandfredwaynekcbsradiosanfranciscocalifornia", "title": "Interview With Cynthia Louie and Fred Wayne of KCBS Radio, San Francisco, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-cynthia-louie-and-fred-wayne-kcbs-radio-san-francisco-california", "publication_date": "05-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 364, "text": "The much anticipated Beijing Olympic Games will be opening in Beijing in just about a week's time. And you will be attending the opening ceremonies on August the 8th. And the Chinese people are very much looking forward to your visit. So at this moment, what are your expectations for the Beijing Games? And what kind of messages will you bring to the Chinese people? First message to the Chinese people is, I respect the Chinese people, respect the history, tradition. And I am coming as the President of a friend, and I am coming as a sportsman. And I am looking forward to the competition. I am looking forward to seeing-I think I am going to go to the U.S.-Chinese basketball game. I understand Yao Ming is back on the court, and it will be an interesting challenge for the U.S. team. It will be exciting for me to see the athletes compete and to watch the Chinese fans respond, in this case, to the basketball game. A lot of my family is coming as well. You are under a kind of pressure from politicians here in Washington who call on you not to go to Beijing. So out of what consideration did you make such a decision? Well, first of all, I am under pressure from politicians on a lot of fronts. I mean, this is not the only issue that I get pressured on. And Presidents need to make their decision based upon what is best, not what is political. And I think it is best for U.S.-China's relations that I go. I know it is important for me to send a clear signal to the Chinese people that we respect them. I tell people that, of course, we have got differences with China on issues. They have got differences with us on issues. But the best way to conduct our diplomacy and conduct our relations is out of mutual respect. And it is much more likely a Chinese leader will listen to my concerns if he knows I respect the people of China. I am going to have a dinner with President Hu Jintao, who I like. I respect the man a lot. And do we agree on everything? But do we agree to have good, cordial relations and work hard to make our relationship unique and strong? On the agenda of your visit to Beijing, you will be attending the opening ceremony of the new U.S. Embassy in Beijing? And the new Chinese Embassy was just opened in Washington. Yes, I know it. I attended the opening ceremony.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfuqingyangcctvchina", "title": "Interview With Fuqing Yang of CCTV in China", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fuqing-yang-cctv-china", "publication_date": "30-07-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 365, "text": "That is what I hear. You know, I.M. Pei is a famous architect who did the Chinese building. So it just shows 30 years of a relationship that grows. And I found it very interesting, somebody said, Well, what does that mean? Well, first of all, we would not be opening new Embassies or celebrating a 30th anniversary of relationship if, one, the relationships were not important and the relationships were not good. I mean, if the relationships were terrible, no one would be celebrating anything. But it is interesting that both countries are opening new Embassies in the same month. Today is July and August-but in the same couple of weeks. And guess who is going to join me? And he was the man that introduced me to China in the first place, in 1975. Yes, I was born in '46. My brother-see, my sister was 18 during the time. And I explored around Beijing on a bicycle. And you also paid three visits in your capacity as the President of the United States to China. And in a sense, you bear witness to the changes in China too. So yes, how would you elaborate on the changes in the past 30 years, since this year also marks the 30th anniversary of China's opening up and reform? And everybody was on bicycle, truly. Masses of people, me included, riding along on our bike. Everybody wore the same clothes, except for me. People-I can remember going to a department store, and nobody had seen a westerner. And I would go with my mother and my sister. It was like we were, like, from a different planet. It seems like more automobiles than bicycles. And people are used to a relationship between the West and China. One of the first-I think the first graduation speech I ever gave as President was to Notre Dame, and they were honoring the honors graduates in the sciences. And many of the people there were Chinese citizens, young Chinese students, girls and boys, got their degrees at the Notre Dame University. It was just-just shows how different things are after 30 years. So there is also, like, China and the United States are going to celebrate 30 years of diplomatic relations in January 2009. How would you evaluate the developments between our two countries in the diplomatic field in the last 30 years? And particularly, during two of your administrations, if you can give us a self-assessment?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfuqingyangcctvchina", "title": "Interview With Fuqing Yang of CCTV in China", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fuqing-yang-cctv-china", "publication_date": "30-07-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 366, "text": "For example, the strategic dialogue on economics that Secretary Paulson is leading, that is very unique. And so he goes to China, and the Chinese leaders come here. And our Cabinet-many of our Cabinet works with their counterparts. We have dealt with some tough problems in a way that is cordial and respectful. And I told somebody the other day that it is amazing that the United States now has very good relations with China, South Korea, and Japan and the ASEAN countries, all at the same time. And I think that is positive for the region. If North Korea were to end up with a nuclear weapon, it would be very destabilizing and very troubling for all of us. So we decided to work together, sit around the table as five parties, saying the same thing to the North Koreans. You mentioned the six-party talks. Also, six-party talks are high on your agenda during your administration for the last couple of years. With the demolition of the Yongbyon facility, the cooling tower, specifically, it makes some tangible progress, probably gave momentum before the talks. What kind of messages, if you want to say, to the six-party talks? Well, first of all, I value our partners. The only way to solve this peacefully is for us to work together to send a common message. I thank the Chinese Government for their leadership on this issue. I firmly believe multilateral diplomacy can work this issue better than bilateral diplomacy; secondly, that we are at a very critical moment now for the North Korean Government to make a decision as to whether or not they are going to verify what they said they would do. It is one thing to say it, but I think it is going to be very important for them to understand that we expect them to show us. That is perfect verification; everybody saw it. And if they make the decisions that we are comfortable with, then we move the process forward. And I certainly hope they make the right decision. I am looking forward to going to Beijing. I bet I have one.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfuqingyangcctvchina", "title": "Interview With Fuqing Yang of CCTV in China", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fuqing-yang-cctv-china", "publication_date": "30-07-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 367, "text": "As ENTITY approaches his first anniversary in the White House, some of the public's enthusiasm for his ambitious agenda at home and abroad is on the wane. While he helped avert a worldwide financial collapse and may well achieve his goal of health- care reform during his first year in office, the U.S. economy is still very weak with double-digit unemployment. And his approval ratings are at the lowest point of his presidency. This past week before he left for Europe to accept the Nobel Peace Prize, we sat down with the ENTITY in the Map Room at the White House for a wide-ranging discussion, much of it focused on his decision to send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan. Was that the most difficult decision of your presidency so far? Because when you go to Walter Reed and you travel to Dover and you visit Arlington and you see the sacrifices that young men and women and their families are making, there is nothing more profound. And it is a solemn obligation on the part of me as commander in chief to get those decisions right. I do not make this decision lightly. In your West Point speech, you seemed very analytical, detached, not emotional. The tone seemed to be, I have studied the situation very hard, it is a real mess, the options are not very good, but we need to go ahead and do this. You know, that was actually probably the most emotional speech that I have made in terms of how I felt about it, because I was looking out over a group of cadets, some of whom are going to be deployed in Afghanistan, and potentially some might not come back. There is not a speech that I have made that hit me in the gut as much as that speech. And one of the mistakes that was made over the last eight years is for us to have a triumphant sense about war. There was a tendency to say, we can go in, we can kick some tail, this is some glorious exercise, when in fact this is a tough business. And most of the people in your party do not believe this is a war worth fighting. If I was worrying about what polled well, there are a whole bunch of things we would not have done this year. Do you feel like you have staked your presidency on it? There are a whole bunch of things that I have staked my presidency on, right, that are tough and entail some risks, there are no guarantees, but that I am confident we have addressed in the best possible way.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbs60minutes1", "title": "Barack Obama Interview With Steve Kroft on CBS' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-60-minutes-1", "publication_date": "13-12-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 368, "text": "The West Point speech was greeted with a great deal of confusion. I disagree with that statement. Forty million people watched it, and I think a whole bunch of people understood what we intend to do. Well, it raised a lot of questions. I think that what you may be referring to is the fact that, on the one hand, I said, we are going to be sending in additional troops now. On the other hand, by July 2011, we are going to move into a transition phase where we are drawing our troops down. First of all, that is something that we executed over the last two years in Iraq, so I think the American people are familiar with the idea of a surge. In terms of the rationale for doing it, we do not have an Afghan military right now, a security force, that can stabilize the country. If we are effective over the next two years, that then frees us up to transition into a place where we can start drawing down. Now, the other point of confusion I think that at least the press has identified is this notion of, well, what happens on July of 2011? And what I have said is that we then start transitioning into a drawdown phase. How many U.S. troops are coming out, how quickly, will be determined by conditions on the ground. So if the situation is not going well in July of 2011, you could decide -- and I am not making light of this -- to send home the band and a couple of Civil Affairs units and nonessential units and keep as many combat people on the ground as are necessary to perform the mission? Well, look, as commander in chief, obviously I reserve the option to do what I think is going to be best for the American people at that point in time and our national security. But we will know, I think, by the end of December 2010 whether or not the approach that General McChrystal has discussed in terms of securing population centers is meeting its objectives. And if the approach that is been recommended does not work, then, yes, we are going to be changing approaches. And the answer is that, in the absence of a deadline, the message we are sending to the Afghans is, it is business as usual, this is an open-ended commitment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbs60minutes1", "title": "Barack Obama Interview With Steve Kroft on CBS' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-60-minutes-1", "publication_date": "13-12-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 369, "text": "And very frankly, there are, I think, elements in Afghanistan, who would be perfectly satisfied to make Afghanistan a permanent protectorate of the United States, in which they carry no burden, in which we are paying for a military in Afghanistan that preserves their security and their prerogatives. That is not what the American people signed on for when they went into Afghanistan in 2001. They signed up to go after al Qaeda. The main reason we are doing this is al Qaeda. Because according to your government's own estimates, there are maybe fewer than 100 al Qaeda fighters in Afghanistan, that the rest are in Pakistan and the tribal territories. What you have here between the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan is the epicenter of violent extremism directed against the West and directed against the United States. This is the heart of it. It is from here that you see attacks launched, not just against the United States, but against London, against Bali, against a whole host of countries. And half of this territory is in Afghanistan. Half of this territory is in Afghanistan, half of it is in Pakistan. Ultimately, in order for us to eradicate the problem, to really go after al Qaeda in an effective way, we are going to need more cooperation from Pakistan. You are a student of history. The British lost the Revolutionary War, and the Americans lost the Vietnam War, in spite of the fact that they won almost all of the major battles. They lost it because it got to be too expensive, it was too far away, and not enough people cared about it. Are not you facing some of those same problems right now? I think what is true is that if we have an open-ended commitment in a place like Afghanistan, with no clear benchmarks for what success means, that the American people, who have just gone through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, who have already endured eight years of war, at some point are going to say, enough, and rightly so. In Afghanistan, I mean, you can make the argument that it is not even really a country, that it is a collection of tribes, and it is run really by a very corrupt government, some of whose major figures are alleged to be involved in the drug business, including the brother of ENTITY. How are you going to deal with this? How are you going to do this?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbs60minutes1", "title": "Barack Obama Interview With Steve Kroft on CBS' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-60-minutes-1", "publication_date": "13-12-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 370, "text": "Look, ENTITY, I mean, the reason I laugh is because this is really hard, and there is not a question you ask that I have not asked in meetings and that I do not ask myself. I do not have the luxury of choosing between the ideal and what exists on the ground. I have to make decisions based on how, given where we are right now, how do we get to the best possible place. Okay, let us change the subject. We can talk about Afghanistan some more. While the economy is showing signs of growth and job losses may finally be bottoming out, the unemployment rate is still at 10 percent. This past week, he outlined a new jobs program built around tax breaks for small businesses, more infrastructure projects for local and state governments and cash rebates for people to make their homes more energy efficient. What I am interested in is a targeted jobs package that can help to boost what is already taking place. The ENTITY hopes to subsidize the job program and pay down some of the deficit with the billions of dollars being returned to the government under the TARP program. Some Wall Street banks have now recovered to the point where they can not only afford to pay back the loans, but once again hand out huge bonuses to their employees. At three of the biggest banks, they are expected to total $30 billion. That is roughly what it will cost the government to finance the surge in Afghanistan. I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of, you know, fat-cat bankers on Wall Street. The only ones that are going to be paying out these fat bonuses are the ones that have now paid back that TARP money and are -- Do you think that is why they paid it back so quickly? I think, in some cases, that was a motivation, which I think tells me that the people on Wall Street still do not get it. They do not get it. They are still puzzled, why is it that people are mad at the banks? You know, you guys are drawing down 10 , $20 million bonuses after America went through the worst economic year that it is gone through in decades, and you guys caused the problem, and we have got 10 percent unemployment? Do you think that they have made some of these bonuses based, in part, on the generosity and policies of the United States government to help put the financial system back on its feet? I think there is no doubt about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbs60minutes1", "title": "Barack Obama Interview With Steve Kroft on CBS' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-60-minutes-1", "publication_date": "13-12-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 371, "text": "And what is most frustrating me right now is you have got these same banks, who benefited from taxpayer assistance, who are fighting tooth and nail with their lobbyists up on Capitol Hill, fighting against financial regulatory reform. Well, everything appears to take long in Congress. We can talk about health care when you want. This is democracy in action. You mentioned Congress and health care. You ran for office based on the fact that you were going to try and reform the system. You wanted to change the status quo in Washington. Then you came in and you turned over your top priority, health care, to the Congress. Five hundred thirty-five -- well, you laid out what you wanted, and you set the guidelines -- and then stood back and turned it over to 535 people, who produced a 2,000-page bill that is -- Well, I have not read it so -- Not very many people have read it. I have not met anybody who is read it. Seven presidents have tried to reform a health-care system that everyone acknowledges is broken. Seven presidents have failed, up until this point. We are now that close to having a bill that does all the things that I said and most experts said needed to be done when we started this process. It is not only deficit-neutral but will actually bring down the deficit, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Do you think it is going to pass before Christmas in the Senate? I think it is going to pass out of the Senate before Christmas. Are you going to be involved in that process? At that point, we thought the interview was over, and then our executive producer suggested one more question. By now, you must know that -- It is really a shame that I had to go through a whole 60 Minutes interview without talking about the gate crashers. Can you share that with us? I think that what I know is what everybody knows, which is that these people should not have gotten through the gate. Were you unhappy with your social secretary? I was unhappy with everybody who was involved in the process. Now, I do not think that, from a policy perspective, this was the most important thing or even the fifth or sixth most important thing that happened this week, although it got the most news. Were you angry when you found out about it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbs60minutes1", "title": "Barack Obama Interview With Steve Kroft on CBS' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-60-minutes-1", "publication_date": "13-12-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 416, "text": "Let us start right on Israel. Your administration has described Prime Minister Netanyahu's plans to address Congress tomorrow on Iran as destructive. Well, first of all, I think it is important to realize the depth of the U.S.-Israeli relationship. Under my administration, billions of dollars have gone to support Israel's security, including the Iron Dome program that has protected them from missiles fired along their borders. That is the estimation of the Netanyahu government. So we need to make clear from the outset how strong our alliance with Israel is. The second point is that we actually share a goal, which is making sure Iran does not have a nuclear weapon. That is something that I committed to when I was still a senator. It is a solemn pledge I made before I was elected president and everything that I have done over the course of the last several years in relation to Iran has been in pursuit of that policy. And what it boils down to is what is the best way to ensure that Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon. Prime Minister Netanyahu thinks that the best way to do that is either through doubling down on more sanctions or through military action, ensuring that Iran has absolutely no enrichment capabilities whatsoever. And there is no expert on Iran or nuclear proliferation around the world that seriously thinks that Iran is going to respond to additional sanctions by eliminating its nuclear program. What we have said from the start is by organizing a strong sanctions regime, what we can do is bring Iran to the table. we are able to create what we call a breakout period, a timeline where we know if they were to try to get a nuclear weapon it would take them a certain amount of time. And the deal that we are trying to negotiate is to make sure that there is at least a year between us seeing them try to get a nuclear weapon and them actually being able to obtain one. And as long as we have got that one-year breakout capacity, that ensures us that we can take military action to stop them if they were stop it. Now, we are still in the midst of negotiations. What I have said consistently is, we should let these negotiations play out. Double digit years? If we have got that and we have got a way of verifying that, there is no other steps we can take that would give us such assurance that they do not have a nuclear weapon. Now, Iran may not agree to the rigorous inspection demands that we are insisting on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffmasonreuters", "title": "Interview With Jeff Mason of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-mason-reuters", "publication_date": "02-03-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 417, "text": "They may not agree to the low levels of enrichment capabilities they would have to maintain to ensure that their breakout is at least a year. But if they do agree to it, it would be far more effective in controlling their nuclear program than any military action we could take, any military action Israel could take and far more effective than sanctions will be. And we know that because during the period in which we applied sanctions for over a decade, Iran went from about 300 or a couple of hundred centrifuges to tens of thousands of centrifuges in response to sanctions. Let us talk a little bit specifically about the prime minister. Susan Rice said that what he has done by accepting the invitation to speak was destructive to the fabric of the relationship. You know, I think that Prime Minister Netanyahu is sincere about his concerns with respect to Iran. And given Iran's record and given the extraordinarily disruptive and dangerous activities of this regime in the region, it is understandable why Israel is very concerned about Iran. But what we have consistently said is we have to stay focused on our ultimate goal, which is preventing Iran from having a nuclear weapon. Now, as a matter of policy, we think it is a mistake for the prime minister of any country to come to speak before Congress a few weeks before they are about to have an election. It makes it look like we are taking sides. But aside from that, what about that is destructive? I am answering your question, Jeff. And the concern is, not only does it look like it politicizes the relationship but what is also a problem is when the topic of the prime minister's speech is an area where the executive branch the U.S. president and his team have a disagreement with the other side. I think those who offered the invitation and some of the commentators who have said this is the right thing to do, it is worth asking them whether, when George W. Bush had initiated the war in Iraq and Democrats were controlling Congress, if they had invited let us say the president of France to appear before Congress to criticize or to air those disagreements, I think most people would say, well, that would not be the right thing to do. I guarantee you that some of the same commentators who are cheerleading now would have suggested that it was the wrong thing to do. And our focus should be,'How do we stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffmasonreuters", "title": "Interview With Jeff Mason of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-mason-reuters", "publication_date": "02-03-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 418, "text": "Now keep in mind the prime minister, when we signed up for this interim deal that would essentially freeze Iran's program, roll back its highly enriched uranium, its 20 percent highly enriched uranium and so reduce the possibility that Iran might breakout while we were engaged in these negotiations, when we first announced this interim a deal, Prime Minister Netanyahu made all sorts of claims. This was going to result in Iran getting 50 billion dollars worth of relief. Iran would not abide by the agreement. None of that has come true. It has turned out that, in fact, during this period we have seen Iran not advance its program. In many ways, it is rolled back elements of its program. And we have got more insight into what they are doing with more vigorous inspections than even the supporters of an interim deal suggested. is there actually going to be a deal? Can Iran accept the terms that we are laying out? If in fact Iran can accept terms that would ensure a one year breakout period for ten years or longer and during that period we know Iran is not developing a nuclear weapon we have inspectors on the ground that give us assurances that they are not creating a covert program why would we not take that deal when we know the alternatives, whether through sanctions or military actions, will not result in as much assurance that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon? There is no good reason for us not to let the negotiations play themselves out. Then we will show, here - here is the deal that is been negotiated, does it make sense? And I am confident that if, in fact, a deal is arrived at, then it is going to be a deal that is most likely to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. You obviously disagree about that. If the prime minister wins reelection, would you be able to work with him? We are working with him now on a whole range of issues. Would you meet with him? As I have said before, the only reason that we did not meet with him this time is a general policy we do not meet with somebody two weeks before an election. I have met with Prime Minister Netanyahu more than any other world leader. And given the strong relationship between the United States and Israel, I would expect that to continue. Is it fair to say you are angry with him? I think that it is important for every country in its relationship with the United States to recognize that the U.S. has a process of making policy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffmasonreuters", "title": "Interview With Jeff Mason of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-mason-reuters", "publication_date": "02-03-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 419, "text": "And although we have separation of powers, ultimately, the interaction with foreign governments runs through the executive branch. Have Israel's actions been disruptive to the ability to get this deal? I think that in the meantime negotiators are going full speed ahead. Ultimately, what is been remarkable is the international unity we have been able to maintain in saying to Iran, you have to show the world that you are not pursuing a nuclear weapon. You can have very modest enrichment capabilities for peaceful use, so long as there is a vigorous enough inspection process that we have assurances that you are not obtaining breakout capacity. And the biggest challenge right now to getting a deal is for Iran to recognize this is its path in order to ultimately re-enter into the community of nations. Have your communications with the Supreme Leader helped in this? You know, I would say that most of the work has been done directly between the negotiators and Secretary Kerry, Foreign Minister Zarif of Iran, the expert teams that have worked together along with our P5+1 partners. They have done the lion's share of the work. I think it is been important for us to send a clear signal to all parties inside of Iran that we are not the aggressors here. We are looking to resolve this diplomatically if we can. But given the history of Iran engaging in covert programs, given the history of Iranian sponsorship of terrorism in the region and around the world, given the rhetoric that is come out from the Iranian regime including anti-Israel and anti-Semitic statements, it is important for them to understand that they have a high threshold that they have to meet in terms of proof and convincing the world that they are prepared to not pursue a nuclear program. If they do that, and we have ways of measuring that, very concrete ways, if they do that, that is the best path for us to take. What we should not do is to try to jettison the talks, undermine the talks. I am less concerned, frankly, with Prime Minister Netanyahu's commentary than I am with Congress taking actions that might undermine the talks before they are complete. And what I have said to members of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, is there will be plenty of time for us to reapply sanctions, strengthen sanctions, to take a whole range of other measures, if in fact we do not have a deal.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffmasonreuters", "title": "Interview With Jeff Mason of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-mason-reuters", "publication_date": "02-03-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 420, "text": "But what we should not do is pre-judge the deal and initiate sanctions that might allow Iran to walk away and claim that the United States is the one that has eliminated the path to diplomacy. How would you judge, what is your assessment of the percentage likelihood now of this happening. You have said before less than 50 percent. But I think in fairness to them, they have been serious negotiators. And they have got their own politics inside of Iran. It is more likely that we could get a deal now than perhaps three or five months ago. We are running short of time. So I am going to ask you about Russia. A top opponent of President Putin was gunned down last week. What does this say about Vladimir Putin's Russia and do you believe that the Kremlin was not involved? What I have called for is a full investigation and, hopefully, an independent investigation of what happened. Whether that can occur inside today's Russia is not clear. The individual involved is somebody that I actually met with back in 2009. This is an indication of a climate at least inside of Russia in which civil society, independent journalists, people trying to communicate on the Internet, have felt increasingly threatened, constrained, and increasingly the only information that the Russian public is able to get is through state-controlled media outlets It is part of what has allowed, I think, Russia to engage in the sort of aggression that it is has against Ukraine. I have no idea at this point exactly what happened. What I do know is more broadly the fact that free - freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of information, basic civil rights and civil liberties inside of Russia are in much worse shape now than they were four or five, ten years ago. Let me ask you about another area of the world, China. Are you concerned about how hard China is making it for U.S. tech companies to do business there? This is something that I have raised directly with President Xi, and my entire foreign policy team as well as people like Secretary of the Treasury Jack Lew and Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker have raised with them. They have got a couple of laws that are working their way through the system that would essentially force all foreign companies, including U.S. companies, to turn over to the Chinese government mechanisms where they could snoop and keep track of all the users of those services. And as you might imagine, tech companies are not going to be willing to do that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffmasonreuters", "title": "Interview With Jeff Mason of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-mason-reuters", "publication_date": "02-03-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 421, "text": "Those kinds of restrictive practices I think would, ironically, hurt the Chinese economy over the long term because I do not think there is any U.S. or European firm, any international firm, that could credibly get away with that wholesale turning over of data, personal data, over to a government. And so we have made very clear to them that this is something they are going to have to change if they expect to do business with the United States. Let me close with a lightning round of yes or no questions. How soon do you think we will have a decision from the State Department and ultimately the White House - weeks, months or not before the end of your administration? I think it will happen before the end of my administration. O.K. and on Cuba, do you expect to have relations, diplomatic relations restored between Cuba and the United States before the Panama summit? My hope is that we will be able to open an embassy, and that some of the initial groundwork will have been laid. Keep in mind that our expectation has never been that we would achieve full normalization immediately. There is a lot of work that still has to be done. But we are going down a path in which we can open up our relations to Cuba in a way that ultimately will prompt more change in Cuba. And we are already seeing it. The very fact that since our announcement, the Cuban government has begun to discuss ways in which they are going to reorganize their economy to accommodate for possible foreign investment, that is already forcing a series of changes that promises to open up more opportunities for entrepreneurs, more transparency in terms of what is happening in their economy, and that is always been the premise of this policy. That after 50 years of a policy that did not work, we need to try something new that encourages and ultimately I think forces the Cuban government to engage in a modern economy. And that will create more space for freedom for the Cuban people. The Supreme Court is seeing arguments on the Burwell v. King this week. Your administration has said it does not have a Plan B. This should be a pretty straightforward case of statutory interpretation. If you look at the law, if you look at the testimony of those who were involved in the law, including some of the opponents of the law, the understanding was that people who joined the federal exchange were going to be able to access tax credits. Just like if they went to a state exchange.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffmasonreuters", "title": "Interview With Jeff Mason of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-mason-reuters", "publication_date": "02-03-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 422, "text": "We really appreciate it. Before we begin today, there was a terrible tragedy in France with this plane. The French people are requesting assistance from the American people. Is there anything you wanted to say about it, sir? Well, obviously, we are heartbroken by the news, although we do not yet know exactly what happened. Anytime there is an aviation problem, I think all of us are concerned. The United States wants to provide every assistance possible in investigating what is happened. Obviously, until we know all the facts, I cannot comment too much on the specifics. But I am sure that those families who are waiting to find out what happened are going through a very difficult time right now, and my thoughts and prayers are with them. I am sure they will appreciate that very much, sir. Tomorrow we are leaving for the Middle East. What do you want to achieve with this trip? Well, we are going to be traveling to Saudi Arabia; I will be having discussions with King Abdallah. And then we will travel to Cairo, in which I am delivering on a promise I made during the campaign to provide a framework, a speech of how I think we can remake relations between the United States and countries in the Muslim world. Now, I think it is very important to understand that one speech is not going to solve all the problems in the Middle East. What I want to do is to create a better dialog so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what is happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Now, the flip side is I think that the United States and the West generally, we have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam. And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslims Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. You are always speaking about dialog. How can you do that with the young people who sometimes are very tempted by extremists? Does you--as, you know, kind of a new ENTITY, what do you want to tell them, the young people?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlaurencehaimcanalplustelevision", "title": "Interview With Laurence Haim of Canal Plus Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-laurence-haim-canal-plus-television", "publication_date": "01-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 423, "text": "Well, you know, I think the most important thing I want to tell young people is that, regardless of your faith, those who build as opposed to those who destroy, I think, leave a lasting legacy, not only for themselves but also for their nations. And the impulse towards destruction as opposed to how can we study science and mathematics and restore the incredible scientific and knowledge, the output that came about during centuries of Islamic culture---- And you are seeing some countries, I think, that are making more investments in education. I think the importance of educating women has to be something that is emphasized; if you look at indicators of human development across the board, those where girls are getting a chance for an education end up being more economically productive. How to reconcile this with some of the traditional values and norms of Islam, that is not for me to dictate, but, certainly, I think it is something that can be accomplished, and I want to encourage that. When I met you on the campaign trail, you were telling me that you wanted to organize a Muslim summit. Do you still have that in mind? We will have a speech; we will have a roundtable discussion. It will give an opportunity, I think, for people around the world to engage in this discussion. It will be telecast in a wide variety of languages on our White House web site, whitehouse.gov. And my hope is, is that as a consequence you start seeing discussions not just at the Presidential level, but at every level of public life. And I hope I can spark some dialog and debate within the Muslim world, because I think there is a real struggle right now between those who believe that Islam is irreconcilable to modern life and those who believe that, actually, Islam has always been able to move side by side with progress. During this trip, you are going also to Germany and to France for the D-Day. How can you qualify the nature of the relationship between the French people and the American people, and also between the two Presidents? Well, I have had a wonderful relationship with President Sarkozy. And we had a wonderful visit when we were there the last time in Strasbourg. And this time I am sure we will have very productive bilateral relations. France is one of the most important countries in the world and helps to set trends in how we deal with everything from climate change to the global recession.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlaurencehaimcanalplustelevision", "title": "Interview With Laurence Haim of Canal Plus Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-laurence-haim-canal-plus-television", "publication_date": "01-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 424, "text": "his willingness to stand very firm in the need to deal with Afghanistan; his encouragement of tough direct diplomacy with Iran. I think those are areas where he is shown excellent leadership. So I think the American people continue to love all things French and---- What do you love about France, if I may ask? Okay, we got the food. We have got the--we have got Paris. We have got the south of France, Provence, the wine. Did you go to Provence? You know, the--I have traveled through the south of France when I was in college. I have not been back for a long time. Just a serious question before the last one, because we do not have a lot of time. What do you expect from the French people, the French Government, about Afghanistan, precisely? Do you want them to have more troops? Well, I think we have put forward a framework, after having done a strategic review, of all the steps that need to be taken, not just militarily, but also diplomatically, as well as--in terms of development in Afghanistan. Our main goal is to have a Afghan Government that can deal with its security needs, but can assure that Afghanistan is not a safe haven. And if we can accomplish that, then we would love to get out of there as soon as possible. We have provided a lot of troops. We expect all our NATO partners to contribute to that. We also need agricultural specialists. We need gendarmes to help train the police. We need people who understand water systems and electrical systems. So there is more than enough work to do, and I am very pleased so far that the NATO community feels, I think, unified in the approach that we have put forward. You are loved by a lot of French people. They really see you as a model. What do you want again to say to the young people who are inspired by you and who are going through a very difficult time at this moment? Well, you know, I think that the main thing I always want to tell young people is that if they work hard and they are not constrained by the status quo, by what has happened before, then they can remake the world. Now, I think that they have to do it in a responsible way. I think--when I was young, certainly, I thought I could change the world overnight and that I did not have to necessarily make all the sacrifices needed to do it, so nothing comes easy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlaurencehaimcanalplustelevision", "title": "Interview With Laurence Haim of Canal Plus Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-laurence-haim-canal-plus-television", "publication_date": "01-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 434, "text": "You have a budget deficit that is getting smaller, the trade deficit is shrinking, and yet even with a record stock market, virtually full employment, Americans are nervous. In a recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, two-thirds of the American people say that we are either in a recession or headed toward a recession. Why the angst and why cannot your administration take get any of the credit for this good news? Well, we certainly try to explain to the American people that there are some that there is good news. There is been 49 consecutive months of job growth, which is the longest stretch in the history of the country. The budget deficit's down to 1.2 percent of GDP, which is extremely low. A couple of factors, I think, trouble Americans. One is that there is a lot of churning in the job market. In other words, if you are under 30, you are likely to have had seven jobs by the time you are 30. And older people like me take a look at that kind of volatility or some would call it excitement in the job market, and they wonder whether or not this job turnover is going to affect them. People want to know whether or not, one, the government's going to stay out of their business, and two, whether or not this is going to be good policy that'll enable them to have affordable and available health care. People are concerned about their pensions to a certain extent. There is still you know, we have transitioned from defined contribution or defined benefit to a defined contribution plan. And yet there are still some who are involved with defined, you know, benefits. So there is a variety of reasons why people are uncertain. But people, when they take a hard look at the statistics and the reality, they ought to, you know, I hope it brings them some comfort to know this economy is strong and it is setting all kinds of records. Speaking of the benefits, what did you think of the UAW's deal with GM, Chrysler also working on a deal? Should this be a blueprint for other industries? Well, from my perspective, I am glad they were able to settle the deal in an expeditious way. I appreciate the fact that GM and the UAW are able to come together quickly and come up with an agreement that satisfied both sides. Let me ask you about the record number of US exports.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariabartiromocnbcsclosingbell", "title": "Interview with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-bartiromo-cnbcs-closing-bell", "publication_date": "11-10-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 435, "text": "Even with that number, you have got an increasing voice in Congress saying, 'Look, we do not think free trade is working.' It seems you cannot even control the Republicans in Congress. And what do you say to those people who are trying to put trade barriers in place? Well, I have long worried about protectionism and isolationism here in America. We have had periods of protectionism in our past and I am concerned about protectionist sentiment, because I believe that a world that welcomes US products and goods and services is beneficial for American farmers and manufacturers. In other words, if there is more customers for what we produce here in America, the better off the producers will be. It is also good for consumers that we have open markets. In other words, the more options the consumer has, the less inflationary our society can be. And I think it is good when consumers are able to have a variety of choices. And so I it is going to be very important for me to continue to explain the positive side of trade. In other words, people are getting work. There is a lot of people whose jobs depend upon exportation of goods and services. There are people whose jobs benefitted as a result of foreign capital coming into the country. I think about some of the automobile manufacturers in the South. But I understand why people are anxious about trade. People are saying, 'I may lose my job, or somebody else is going to get my job because of free trade.' And what is very important for people like me who believe in markets is one, to explain the economic benefits, but also to assure people that there is trade adjustment programs to help people retrain for better jobs that have got stability. Let me switch to housing. We have had a meltdown in housing. Oh, first of all, there is a lot of people who can afford the houses that they live in and they are going to be fine There is no question there are particularly some people on the margin that are going to have to that are defaulted on their loans, and that troubles me. It troubles me because I want people to be able to stay in their homes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariabartiromocnbcsclosingbell", "title": "Interview with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-bartiromo-cnbcs-closing-bell", "publication_date": "11-10-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 436, "text": "And the solution, it seems like to me, is not more government or more regulation, but to help people refinance their homes, is to I have some transparent policies as well as counseling polices that find people, identified people and encouraged them to go to refinance their homes, and to encourage the lenders to be, you know, refinancers. What happened, it seems like to me in the housing, again, I am not an expert, but there was a lot of incentive for people to, you know, buy homes. And so we had a huge supply of homes. And until the supply and demand gets back in balance, you are going to see some softness. There is not a nationwide phenomenon, there are parts of our country that are doing just fine in their real estate markets. And you know, we are paying close attention to it and we are going to make sure that government policy is not counterproductive but consumers can be helped to stay in their homes, for example, through FHA reform. So were the rate cuts enough or would you think to encourage more? Well, I knew you would try to suck me into the dialogue of monetary policy but you know full well that the Federal Reserve is independent from the president. I never send Ben Bernanke instructions, he does not expect me to send him instructions, nor do I publicly comment on what I would like to see done or monetary policy. I can talk about fiscal policy all day long and that is we will keep taxes low and make sure Congress does not overspend the people's money. Let us talk about that in particular, the health care coverage. You vetoed a plan last week to expand health care coverage for millions of low income children. First of all, the Democrats are misleading people when they say this is a plan to expand health care to millions of low income children. The plan that I vetoed would have expanded health care coverage to families making up to 80 something thousand dollars, in some cases. And which would have meant people would have been moving from private insurance to public care. I do support a program that helps poor children. But the program that I vetoed expanded health care, government health care. By the way, just so you know some of the facts I think will interest you. About a half million poor children under the program as it exists today do not get coverage. And so my first call to Congress is let us make sure they get coverage.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariabartiromocnbcsclosingbell", "title": "Interview with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-bartiromo-cnbcs-closing-bell", "publication_date": "11-10-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 437, "text": "Secondly, in some states, like six or seven states, the states use the money aimed for poor children, they spend more money on adults than they do on children. So my call to Congress was it you are truly for poor children, like I am, let us make sure the program answers that need, and let us not expand the federal role in health care. See, I believe that for some members, this was an important step toward the federalization of health care. Really fine people believe that the best health care policy is when the federal government runs it. I believe the best health care policy is to take care of those who cannot help themselves, like poor children, and encouraged those in the private sector. I am for private medicine. I want decisions to be being made between doctor and patient, not between people here in Washington, DC. And so the I am vetoing the bill, working hard to see that it is not overridden, the veto's sustained, and then I will be willing to work with the Democrats to focus the program on poor children. One Democrat and I do admit this was a Democrat, say look, all of a sudden you found fiscal discipline now and you veto this, but how come you signed the Farm Bill, you signed the Highway Bill and others, passed by Republican Congresses that substantially exceeded your initial target? Well, I would remind that person that over the course of my presidency, we have been able to reduce the federal deficit substantially. As I told you, it is down to 1.2 percent of GDP, which is historically low, very low. And I was able to do so working with the Congress, and at the same time, fight a war and make sure our kids had the support and troops equipment they needed. In other words, the fiscal policy of low taxes and setting fiscal priorities here in Washington has worked. And we are on our way to balancing this budget and it is going to be very important for Congress not to overspend nor raise taxes. What do you think of Senator Clinton's idea, the kid bond idea? It sounds similar, actually, to your idea of private accounts with Social Security. Well, my idea in Social Security was is that rather than putting your money into a trust that was not generating a rate of return that was fair, that you ought to be allowed to take some of your money and set it aside in a personal account.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariabartiromocnbcsclosingbell", "title": "Interview with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-bartiromo-cnbcs-closing-bell", "publication_date": "11-10-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 438, "text": "In other words, it is setting aside a part of the portion of your contribution in the Social Security system, which I think is vastly different from what she proposed. I am not going to interject myself into the presidential campaign yet. You have more than a year left in your second term. What are your goals for the economy for the rest of your service here? Well, first is to keep taxes down and keep, you know, and to have good, wise fiscal policy. To work with Congress and say, 'Look, let us set priorities and meet those priorities,' and be willing to use the veto if they want to overspend, which the initial blush looks like they are going to try to do. One of the reasons why our third quarter growth was good was because of exports. In other words, when we export it means growth in our economy. Continue to work on energy policy that makes us less dependent on foreign sources of energy. And so I have got an important agenda that and win the war on terror and protect the homeland. By the way, one of the best economic measures we can do is make sure we do not get attacked again. As you know, the attacks of September the 11th crippled our economy for a short period of time. I would not say cripple's not the right word damaged our economy for a short period of time. And you know, and we will keep working night and day to make sure we protect the American people. So is Social Security off the table at this point or will you try to fix it in the remaining time? You know, I'd like to, but remember, I am the person that has laid this issue out in my State of the Union address and talked specifically about how to address Social Security. Whether or not Congress has got the will to step up and try to get something done, I do not know. I'd like very much for people of both parties to come in and say, 'You know, you gave us a good starting point, you gave us a good idea. Because Social Security and Medicare, the unfunded liabilities inherent in those programs, are two of the most significant fiscal challenges this country faces. I mean, this is a real problem for us that we have got to get done. Did you see the Republican candidate debate? What did you think? So you are trying to hoax me into saying yet brilliant question. No, that is not what I am looking for, ENTITY.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariabartiromocnbcsclosingbell", "title": "Interview with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-bartiromo-cnbcs-closing-bell", "publication_date": "11-10-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 439, "text": "What did you think of Fred Thompson joining this... Did not watch, and you know, people are going to try to get me to comment on the primaries and I am not going to do it. I will tell you I believe that whomever we nominate will win the general election. Our candidates are going to be talking about being tough on these terrorists and keeping taxes low, and that is a winning message. I just tell people what is in their heart, you know. Let me ask you about oil, ENTITY. Why is it that we really have not seen a substantial energy plan? We all know that we have to be reliant on foreign oil, but should there me more incentives for hybrids, perhaps a gasoline tax, something? I think we have had a significant energy bill pass that is comprehensive in nature, that couples good conservation policy with diversification away from oil. One of the things that has taken place in our country that does not get much notice is the advent of ethanol. Right now, ethanol is mainly created through the use of corn. And we have a billion gallons of ethanol to eight billion gallons of ethanol on an annual basis, and we are spending a fair amount of taxpayers' money on research and development on cellulosic ethanol, which is a fancy word for using like wood chips to make ethanol or corn or stalks or switchgrass. The whole purpose is to incent people to develop the technologies that will enable us to get off of oil. You cannot get off oil overnight but you can diversify away from oil over time, and that is precisely what we are doing now in the most substantial ways of any administration in history. Secondly, we have got to figure out new ways to produce electricity. And I actually use old ways in a safe way to produce electricity where I am for clean you know, new nuke, new nuclear power plants, because I believe the engineering is safe, and I know that, you know, nuclear power is good for the environment. What can you tell us about the war? How is the war in Iraq going? The political progress is, you know, is spotty in that they are doing some good things and they need to do others. And I talked to Prime Minister Maliki today and encouraged him to work hard to see if he cannot get law out of his out of his parliament that will send a signal to the Iraqis that whether they be Shia, Sunni or Kurd this government is for everybody.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariabartiromocnbcsclosingbell", "title": "Interview with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-bartiromo-cnbcs-closing-bell", "publication_date": "11-10-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 440, "text": "And in the meantime, however, there is reconciliation taking place at the grassroots level, at which people are people are coming together at the local government and providing services and taking federal monies being distributed throughout the country and using it for the embetterment of their people. It is in their interest that we succeed. You once said that Putin has a good heart. I said I looked in his eyes and saw his soul, that was my quote. I think President Putin is first of all, I am friendly with him. You can be friendly with people you do not agree with necessarily. One of my concerns about the Russian political scene is that there is got to be checks and balances and, to the extent that those are being reduced, I have expressed concerns. We we are working collaboratively on some issues, such as proliferation of materials, weapon nuclear materials. And we are working together to see if we cannot get Russia into the WTO. People are trading with Russia. It is in our interest that there be certain rules and the ability to, you know, have arbitration serve as a dispute resolution mechanism. And we have our differences with Russia as well. And finally, on Iran, should not we be opening up a dialogue? I mean, this conversation about the possibility of going into Iran, a lot of people say first we need to open up a dialogue with them and try to use diplomacy. I know the first thing that has to happen is the Iranians we are using diplomacy, but it is the it is diplomacy of nations coming together saying to Iran with one voice, 'Give up your weapons ambitions, and then you have a dialogue with the United States.' They know exactly what our position is, and they know what it takes to have a dialogue. My dialogue has been with the Iranian people, and I am going to try it again right here. The Iranian people have got to know that the that their government is isolating them, that their government's making decisions that are not in the interest of their country, and that this great country does not need to be standing alone in the world relative to the rest of the free world. This country is missing great opportunities through trade for people to embetter their life and the government if the government would change its polices toward development or gaining the know how on how to make a nuclear weapon it would be benefit the Iranian people. The United States respects Iran and respects the traditions and history of Iran and we respect the Iranian people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariabartiromocnbcsclosingbell", "title": "Interview with Maria Bartiromo on CNBC's Closing Bell", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-bartiromo-cnbcs-closing-bell", "publication_date": "11-10-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 441, "text": "ENTITY, thanks for giving us your time today as you prepare for the Madrid Summit. The administration has made it clear that it is prepared to accept only Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic in the first round of NATO expansion, but several of our allies, and maybe even a majority in NATO, have said that they would also like to see Romania and Slovenia in that initial round. Since NATO decisions are taken by consensus, we have an effective veto over a broader expansion, but there is been criticism in Europe that we are being a bit heavyhanded, maybe the bigfoot approach to handling NATO affairs. Do you accept that? We consulted extensively with all of our allies. Secretary Albright went to Sintra in Portugal and said what our thoughts were and listened to their thoughts before we announced our position. I personally talked with President Chirac and Chancellor Kohl and Prime Minister Blair and others about this. We believe NATO would be well served by having more members on its southern flank. But we believe that these three countries are the only three that are clearly ready now, in terms of the stability of their democracy and their capacity to fulfill the military requirements of membership. Keep in mind, this is-NATO-there is a political component to this decision, and there should be, but NATO is also, first and foremost, a security alliance. And anybody who gets in as a full member must be able to meet the requirements of membership. Moreover, there are costs to be paid by the NATO members themselves that are significant to integrate new members because we have to operate in more countries. And for all these reasons, on the merits, the United States strongly believes that we should start with three. Now, let me also back up and just go through a little history here. In January of '94, when we recommended that NATO expand-and I did that in a speech in Belgium-there was some controversy about it among the Europeans. Interestingly enough, the French were strongly in favor of expansion, and we have been together on that. Now, what I think is important to do is to see this as an ongoing process so that-let us just take Romania, for example, a very important country, the second largest country in Central and Eastern Europe. Would it be a good thing if Romania were in NATO? Is it a good thing that Romania has chosen democracy and has resolved its problems with Hungary and now has two Hungarians in the Romanian Cabinet? This is a process that is been going on slightly less than a year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgollustthevoiceamerica", "title": "Interview With David Gollust of the Voice of America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gollust-the-voice-america", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 442, "text": "So I think to say-we love what the Romanians are doing; we applaud it. We want them to be a part of our shared future, and the door is still open to them in a very aggressive way. That is the message we want to get out there, it seems to me, and that we will continue to work with them to see whether they can sustain this for another couple of years. Are you going to be able to offer Romania, Slovenia, some of the other countries that will not be allowed in on the first round anything more than consolation? I mean, will there be any kind of specific information given about a timetable or modalities? Well, what I would hope is that all the allies would agree that we will take another look at this in 1999. As we complete the integration of the first members into NATO, we will take another look and see if we should not take some more members in then. There is something that has already happened to increase their stability. The agreement with Russia increases their security and, even more important, their involvement in the Partnership For Peace, which is now going to be folded into this Euro-Atlantic alliance. That is a big deal for all these countries. That has been the great untold and underappreciated story of NATO, the fact that we put together this Partnership For Peace. We do joint military exercises. They are involved with us in Bosnia. So these countries are going to continue to become more secure and more involved with NATO, no matter what happens, if they are getting a clear signal, too, that this is not the last decision on membership and that it is not the last decision for a long time, that within 2 years we are going to take another look at this. You have said many times that NATO expansion is not a process that is directed against Russia. But a number of countries that were formerly part of the Soviet Union, for instance, the Baltic States, are very concerned that at some point Russia might return to totalitarianism and empire building at some point. Are the concerns that they have, the Baltic States, for instance, valid on this? And can you or will you do anything to put them at ease? Well again, we have tried to put them at ease in two ways. One is with their involvement in the Partnership For Peace, and the second is with the clear understanding that the door to membership would remain open on a long-term basis. And let me make a third point.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgollustthevoiceamerica", "title": "Interview With David Gollust of the Voice of America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gollust-the-voice-america", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 443, "text": "The third is, when we made the agreement with Russia-the partnership with Russia is a clear signal that at least as long as this government is there and that President is there, they are not going to define their greatness in terms of their territorial dominance. Keep in mind, it was President Yeltsin that worked with us to withdraw the troops from the Baltics. So they got their-the Russian troops have left the Baltics in the tenure of my service here. So I think time is on our side, that we cannot resolve all issues today but we are moving in the right direction and we have to let a little time pass on some of these issues. And they will settle down and resolve themselves, I think, in a positive way. Could something bad happen to change the direction? After the Madrid Summit is over, of course, I think the focus will shift back here domestically to the Senate, which will have to approve the extension of U.S. defense commitments to new NATO countries. Are the American people prepared to accept U.S. commitments to defend Warsaw, for instance, as they have done to, say, Paris and London? And I think we can prevail on that because it is not just Warsaw; keep in mind you have-I mean, not just Paris and London. We have other smaller countries in NATO right now. Iceland is a member of NATO. So I think when you point out that no NATO country has ever been attacked, it makes it clear that actually the expansion of NATO reduces the likelihood of Americans having to go to war. It reduces the likelihood of Americans having to fight and die and also broadens the burdens of those who will help us in places like Bosnia. So for all those reasons, I think that we can persuade the American people and the United States Senate to do this. I also think, frankly, as a practical matter, it will be a little easier to make the case for three rather than five. And if the three work well and the costs are as we expect them to be, modest and affordable, I think it will make it a lot easier to sell in a couple of years if we are in a position where we can come back and argue to expand some more.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgollustthevoiceamerica", "title": "Interview With David Gollust of the Voice of America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gollust-the-voice-america", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 444, "text": "ENTITY, on Bosnia-of course, this was an issue at Denver a couple of weeks ago; it is going to be on the agenda again in Madrid- you have got a few days less than a year now to the planned withdrawal of the NATO-led peacekeepers, and there are reports that within the administration there is disagreement about the ideal of pulling out in the middle of next year. Is it worth keeping the withdrawal date if it means that Bosnia might lurch back to bloodshed? I think it is important that we keep the date in mind at the end of this mission, because this mission, just like the one before it, cannot go on forever. And I think-right now, I think it is better for us not to speculate about what happens after that. What I am concerned about is that there is all this rather frenetic looking at what happens next June, to the exclusion of looking at what happens today and tomorrow. That is, we would not even have to worry about this if every day between now and next year everyone involved gave a 100 percent effort to implementing the Dayton peace accords, to doing the economic reconstruction, to setting up the common institutions, to resolving the police and the local election issues, to dealing with the war crimes issues. And what the United States has tried to do is to get our allies there to focus on implementing Dayton in an aggressive way. And one of the things that came out of the Summit of the Eight was that each of the countries expressed some interest in being given, in effect, almost primary responsibility for each separate element of the Dayton accords. Then, as we get along toward the end of year, we could take another look and see whether-what is the security situation going to be next June, and how can we best take care of it? But I do not think that this particular mission at this level should continue. We cannot occupy this country forever. Could we conceivably leave with the very prominent war crimes suspects still at large? Well, we had a good arrest last week.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgollustthevoiceamerica", "title": "Interview With David Gollust of the Voice of America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gollust-the-voice-america", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 445, "text": "And I think that the problem, of course, with Dayton was-and this was an inevitable problem, but we were a part of it so we have to take responsibility-is that there was this agreement to set up a tribunal or to support the work of the tribunal with the explicit understanding that the work of then IFOR and its successor, SFOR, would not be used to go and do, in effect, police or military work to get these people, that they would only pick them up if they came in contact with them in the ordinary course of their business, which meant that Dayton left a gap. And so we are trying to figure out how we can accelerate that process consistent with the other obligations the parties assumed at Dayton. That was a big hole in Dayton. But even with that, that is still not an excuse for why the development aid is taking so long to get out. You know, are we supporting the local elections in every way we can? Have we all done everything we can to set up local police units that can maintain security? Are we doing everything we can to press disarmament instead of having an arms race of equality, which is not in anyone's interest? We do have an agreement in the parties now to set up common institutions. Are they going to be set up quickly enough so that the benefits of them will be felt by the Serbs and the Croats and the Muslims in time to keep them moving together and going together? I mean, these people butchered each other for 4 years; you have got to work real hard to give them common interest to live together and work together. And there is a difference in not going back to war, which I do not think any of them really want to do-the ordinary people, I mean-and having a vested interest in continuing to pursue the peace. We have done a good job, I think, of getting them to the point where they do not want to go back to the way it was. We have to do more to get them to try to build a better peace.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgollustthevoiceamerica", "title": "Interview With David Gollust of the Voice of America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gollust-the-voice-america", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 455, "text": "I want to thank Director Goss for his hospitality. It was such a pleasure to come out and see hundreds of folks who work here at the Central Intelligence Agency. I came for a couple of reasons. One, I wanted to assure the people here that their contribution was incredibly vital to the security of the United States and that, together, we have achieved a lot in securing this country. There is a lot of really incredibly bright, capable, hard-working, dedicated Americans who work in this building. So my first mission was to thank them. And the second thing was to explain that the reforms that we will be implementing through the good graces of Ambassador Negroponte, if confirmed by the Senate, will actually help the CIA do its job better. And I got a great reception. I want to thank you, again, Director, for your hospitality. We are making progress in the war on terror. And this country of ours will continue to do our duty, which is to find terrorists, bring them to justice through good intelligence and hard work and some brave souls, and at the same time, work to spread freedom and liberty around the world. I will answer a couple of questions. ENTITY, your CIA Director, Mr. Goss, said yesterday that he has to wear five hats now and that he was concerned there were some ambiguities in the new arrangement about his relationship with Mr. Negroponte and Secretary Rumsfeld. Do you feel there are such ambiguities, and will you move to-if there are, will you move to clear them up? And will this prevent-will this present a problem for the flow of intelligence in this time, this transition period? Porter and I have discussed this, of course, because I do not want there to be any interruption of intelligence coming to the White House, and there will not be. As a matter of fact, Porter Goss comes every morning with the CIA briefer to deliver the briefing. And that, of course, will go on. In other words, it is hard to implement reforms without somebody to be the reformer. Obviously, when his name gets up to the Senate, we hope there is a speedy confirmation. But one of the purposes of the whole process, ENTITY, is to make sure that information flows are smooth and that efforts are coordinated. The CIA is the Central Intelligence Agency; it is the center of the intelligence community.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecentralintelligenceagencyandexchangewithreporterslangleyvirginia", "title": "Remarks at the Central Intelligence Agency and an Exchange With Reporters in Langley, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-central-intelligence-agency-and-exchange-with-reporters-langley-virginia", "publication_date": "03-03-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 456, "text": "And the job of Ambassador Negroponte is to be-to take the information and make sure it is coordinated in its distribution to not only the White House but to key players in my administration. Obviously, one of the reasons I came here is because I know there is some uncertainty about what this reform means to the people of the CIA, and I wanted to assure them that the reforms will strengthen their efforts and make it easier for them to do their job, not harder. ENTITY, on Social Security reform, what is your judgment about where this process stands right now, with polls showing the public skeptical; some Republicans, like Senator Grassley, are seeming to back away from your proposal; and Democrats wanting to declare it dead. I am- know we are at the early stages of the process. I have only had nine trips around the country so far-or nine States on my trips. I have got a lot more work to do. Now, I do believe we are making progress on the first stage of getting anything complicated and difficult done in Washington, and that is to explain the problem. And the surveys I have seen, at least, say that the American people understand we have a problem. And I am going to continue going out to explain that to people, the nature of the problem. And the problem is, in 2018, the system starts losing money. In 2027, it is 200 billion in the hole, and it gets bigger every year thereafter. In other words, we cannot pay for the promises we have made. And my second phase of this explanation to the American people is to say to seniors who have retired or people near retirement, you do not have anything to worry about; you are going to get your check. I have got a lot of work to do on that, and I understand that. But we are making progress. People are beginning to say, We have a problem. The next phase, when people say we have a problem, is going to be, What are you going to do about it? And I am willing to put out some ideas about what to do about it. In my judgment, ultimately, I think politicians need to be worried about not being a part of the solution. And so I am looking forward to continue to make the case. As you know, ENTITY- you have followed me a lot-I like to get out amongst the people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecentralintelligenceagencyandexchangewithreporterslangleyvirginia", "title": "Remarks at the Central Intelligence Agency and an Exchange With Reporters in Langley, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-central-intelligence-agency-and-exchange-with-reporters-langley-virginia", "publication_date": "03-03-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 457, "text": "I get energized- I get energized by being with people, and I get energized when I think about taking on big problems, because that is why we got elected. The American people expect people to come together to solve problems. And I am looking forward to listening to Republicans and Democrats. I said, Put your ideas out there. There will be no political third rail when it comes to Social Security. Now is the time for good people of good will to come together and get the problem fixed. Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan said today that a consumption tax, maybe even a national sales tax, might spur greater economic growth. What do you think about that? I think that I am going to wait until the tax commission I put together, the reform commission headed by former Senator John Breaux, Democrat of Louisiana, former Senator Connie Mack, Republican of Florida, comes forward with some ideas. I told the American people I want to work to simplify the Tax Code and make it easier to understand, so people are spending less time filing paper, and I believe a simplified Tax Code will spur entrepreneurial activity. And so I am looking forward to what the commission has to say. You mentioned Usama bin Laden earlier this morning, and you have said several times that there is progress being made on the war on terrorism. But more than 3 years after September 11th, you still do not know where he is. How would you assess the adequacy of the intelligence you are getting on bin Laden, and do you expect that he is going to be found any time soon, even within your second term? If Al Qaida was structured like corporate America, you'd have a chairman of the board still in office, but many of the key operators would no longer be around. In other words, the executive vice presidents, the operating officers, the people responsible for certain aspects of the organization have been brought to justice- a lot of them have been. And we are- spend every day gathering information to locate Usama bin Laden and Zawahiri, obviously people like Zarqawi. We are not resting on our laurels. We have had great successes, and-but that does not mean that we should stop. And one of the reasons I came out here was to remind people that we have had great successes. I appreciate their successes- Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi bin al-Shibh. I can go down the list. And it is a matter of time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecentralintelligenceagencyandexchangewithreporterslangleyvirginia", "title": "Remarks at the Central Intelligence Agency and an Exchange With Reporters in Langley, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-central-intelligence-agency-and-exchange-with-reporters-langley-virginia", "publication_date": "03-03-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 458, "text": "As far as I am concerned and as far as the CIA is concerned, it is a matter of time before we bring these people to justice. And I cannot thank the intelligence gatherers, the analysts, and the operators- I cannot thank them enough for the sacrifices they are making. ENTITY, on Iran, you spoke to Condoleezza Rice yesterday, we were told. What can you tell us about the pros and cons that you are weighing now as you reach a decision on going forward with the EU? Yes, let me just tell you how I see the state of action here. First, I am most appreciative that our friends in Europe agree with the United States that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon, period-no ands, ifs, or buts. And I thought that was a very important statement from the leaders I met with. And by the way, Mr. Putin feels the same way. And to me that is a very-a positive start for achieving our common objective. First, you got to agree to the goal, and the goal is no weapon. Secondly, I have told our European friends who are handling the negotiations on behalf of the rest of the world that we want to help make sure the process goes forward. And we are looking at ways to help move the process forward. They are the ones who are not living up to international accords. They are the people that the whole world is saying, Do not develop a weapon. And so we are working with our friends to make sure not only the world hears that but that the negotiating strategy achieves the objective of pointing out where guilt needs to be as well as achieving the objective of no nuclear weapon. And I felt good about our visits. I did visit with Condi yesterday, and I am about to go visit with her again in the Oval Office to discuss not only this issue but other key issues, including Lebanon, where the message is loud and clear from the United States and France and many other nations that Syria must withdraw not only her troops but her secret service forces out of Lebanon now. And I look forward to talking to Condi about getting an amplification on her visit with our allies overseas. I look forward to not only hear their words; I want to hear about their body language. I want to hear about their enthusiasm for the project.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarksthecentralintelligenceagencyandexchangewithreporterslangleyvirginia", "title": "Remarks at the Central Intelligence Agency and an Exchange With Reporters in Langley, Virginia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-the-central-intelligence-agency-and-exchange-with-reporters-langley-virginia", "publication_date": "03-03-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 460, "text": "And we welcome you, ENTITY, to the voice of St. Louis, KMOX Radio. It is good to be on KMOX, and it is good to be coming back to St. Louis. I justify it because of the opposition policies of the Republican Party and all the special interest groups that have raised and spent far more money against us, attacking me and my policies and spreading disinformation to the American people. Let me say that all this time, ever since I have been in office, I have worked hard to pass a campaign finance reform bill, which would limit these kinds of contributions right across the board to both political parties and restore basically unfettered debate to the central position it ought to have in our political system. But I do not believe in unilateral disarmament. The money that I have raised will be used to try to make sure that the Democratic parties throughout the country in these fall elections and our candidates will at least have a fighting chance to talk about our record and the facts and what we have done here. If we could change the rules for everybody, that is what we ought to do. When I ran for ENTITY, I did not even take any PAC money. And I have worked very, very hard to pass campaign finance reform laws and lobby reform laws which will make the system better. But until I do, it would be a mistake for the Democrats to just lay down and not raise any money, letting the Republicans and a lot of their allied groups have all the money in the world when they already have greater access to a lot of things like a lot of other media outlets than we do. Would not you be setting a leadership example, though, if you were the first one to say, Look, these $15,000-a-table fundraisers basically are way out of hand. I have got to put an end to this ? Well, I am trying to put an end to it. All the Congress has to do is to send me the campaign finance reform bill, and we will put an end to this so-called soft money. I have been working for a year and a half to do it. But we have enough problems. The Republicans and the far right in this country have their own media networks. We do not have anything like that. They have extra-organized political action groups that we cannot match.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkevinhorriganandcharlesbrennankmoxradiostlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Kevin Horrigan and Charles Brennan of KMOX Radio, St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kevin-horrigan-and-charles-brennan-kmox-radio-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "24-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 461, "text": "And they have the Republican Party's fundraising apparatus, which has been strengthened by having had the White House for all but 4 years in the last 20 years. So we have real problems competing. I am more than happy to stop this. I have been out there fighting to stop it. All they have to do is to send me the campaign finance reform bill, and it'll be done. I'd like to emphasize that the things that are within my control, requirements and limits on my administration and what can be done with regard to lobbying, are stricter now than they have ever been in American history because of the things that I have done, that I can do on my own. But we ought to change it by the law, and we ought to change it for everyone. But if you look at the information they get, if you look at how much more negative the news reports are, how much more editorial they are, and how much less direct they are, if you look at how much of talk radio is just a constant unremitting drumbeat of negativism and cynicism, you cannot I do not think the American people are cynical, but you cannot blame them for responding that way. We, for example, we had a meeting the other day, and a group of people were told that under our budgets we were going to bring the deficit down 3 years in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was President. And some of them said, Well, I just do not believe you. We never hear that on the news. I just do not believe you. I have worked hard to do it. And we are going to we are bringing the deficit down. That is what bothers me. You know, I just got back from Normandy, celebrating the 50th anniversary of D-Day. And when I stood on Normandy beaches and when I saw all those rows of crosses there, it occurred to me that those people did not die so the American people could indulge themselves in the luxury of cynicism. America now has we have the strongest economic performance of any of the advanced countries in the world. We are bringing the deficit down at a very rapid rate. We are increasing our investment in education and training. We are seriously dealing with crime, with welfare reform, with health care for the first time in decades.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkevinhorriganandcharlesbrennankmoxradiostlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Kevin Horrigan and Charles Brennan of KMOX Radio, St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kevin-horrigan-and-charles-brennan-kmox-radio-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "24-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 462, "text": "We have broken gridlock in the Congress; bills that languished around for 6 or 7 years like the Brady bill and the family and medical leave bill have passed. The economy in St. Louis is booming. You look at what we are coming to St. Louis to celebrate today, this Summer of Service. We have got 7,000 young Americans who are going to be earning money for their college education by working and making their communities safer all across this country; in the fall, 20,000 young Americans, doing community service work, earning money for an education, helping to solve problems. We have got a lot of serious problems, and frankly, we cannot afford this cynicism. Well, first of all, we are not sure that just the White House staff did that. There were lots of other people on that boat who were not members of the White House staff. And the George Washington is very, very upset by the press reports that those towels, which were obviously taken as souvenirs, were taken by all the White House staff. They never said that we stole anything. That is the kind of thing I am talking about. Someone in the White House personally reimbursed the George Washington for all of them, because they felt so bad. And the people who were running the aircraft carrier said that they were astonished that the White House staff was charged with taking all those things, that there were members of the press there, there were other people there on that carrier. They were not at all sure that White House staff had done that. But someone on my staff was so upset that anybody had done it that they reimbursed them entirely so that they did not lose a thing on it. But you know, I could give you a lot of examples a year ago there was a widely reported story that I kept airplane traffic waiting an hour in Los Angeles to get a haircut in an airport. It was not true at the time. And I told the press it was not true. They ran the story anyway. Then 4 weeks later when the FAA filed their official report, they said, No, there were no planes kept waiting. Now, I am not responsible for stories that are written that are not fully accurate or untrue, but it feeds into this cynicism.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkevinhorriganandcharlesbrennankmoxradiostlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Kevin Horrigan and Charles Brennan of KMOX Radio, St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kevin-horrigan-and-charles-brennan-kmox-radio-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "24-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 463, "text": "Last year the Congress and the President, according to all nonpartisan reports, had the most productive year working together, getting things done for America, dealing with difficult issues, of any first year of a President since the end of World War II, except Dwight Eisenhower's first year and President Johnson's first year, which were about the same. And to be frank, we did it under more difficult circumstances, with tougher issues. I will bet you nobody in America knows that. Look at all the things you could have asked me about, and you just asked me that. Did you know that there were other people on that aircraft carrier? Did you know there were press people on the aircraft carrier? Did you know that the carrier had been fully reimbursed out of the private pocket of a White House staff member who was so upset about it? Why did not you know that? Because the press reporting it did not say so. I mean, part of the problem in this country today is that this is a good country with a lot of people working hard to get things done. And the American people are entitled to have some balanced and fair picture of what is going on. We have had 3.5 million new jobs come into this economy since I have been ENTITY, far more than in the previous 4 years combined. Most Americans do not even know it, because that is not the purpose of a lot of what is communicated to them. And I think that I have a very high responsibility. I do not mind you asking me whether I should set an example on campaign contributions, but there are a lot of other examples that need to be set in this country. And I think the people who communicate to the American people need to ask themselves, What are we telling the people? Are we telling them the whole truth? Do they know what is good as well as what is bad in this country? And when we make a mistake, then we fess up to it. I think that there is a lot of cynicism in this country. But frankly, I think there are a lot of vested interests that are promoting the cynicism. ENTITY, let us talk about that just a little bit. Today, or yesterday, the Republicans in the Senate asked you to disavow a remark that I believe Representative Fazio made about evangelical Christians. At the same time you have talked about extremists in the other party, the Republicans, that you say may be trying to launch a cultural war.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkevinhorriganandcharlesbrennankmoxradiostlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Kevin Horrigan and Charles Brennan of KMOX Radio, St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kevin-horrigan-and-charles-brennan-kmox-radio-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "24-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 464, "text": "They are attacking you in very personal, derogatory, moralistic terms. Is this the state of political debate in America today, where we call each other names? Let me say, first of all, you have never found me criticizing evangelical Christians. I have welcomed the involvement in our political system of all people and especially people of faith. I have bent over backwards as a Governor and as a President to respect the religious convictions of all Americans. I have strong religious convictions myself. But that is very different, that is very different from what is going on when people come into the political system and they say that anybody that does not agree with them is godless, anyone who does not agree with them is not a good Christian, anyone who does not agree with them is fair game for any wild charge, no matter how false, for any kind of personal, demeaning attack. I do not suppose there is any public figure that is ever been subject to any more violent, personal attacks than I have, at least in modern history, anybody's who is been President. I deal with them. But I do not believe that it is the work of God. I do not believe that people should be criticized for their religious convictions. But neither do I believe that people can put on the mantle of religion and then justify anything they say or do. I think that is what Mr. Fazio was talking about. We do not need a cultural war in this country. We have never done very well when our politics has been devoted to dividing us along grounds of race, religion, creed, morality. We have got a lot of serious challenges in this country, and we need to pull together and face them. Should we have arguments about moral issues? Are you talking about folks like the Reverend Jerry Falwell, who through his infomercials is selling a videotape critical of you? Look at who he is talking to. Does he make full disclosure to the American people of the backgrounds of the people that he is interviewed that have made these scurrilous and false charges against me? Is that in a good Christian spirit? But I think it is very important that the Democrats be careful let me say this to make a clear distinction between tactics with which they do not agree and radical positions with which they do not agree, and the whole notion of evangelical Christians being involved in our politics. I think that evangelical Christians should be good citizens, should be involved in our politics.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkevinhorriganandcharlesbrennankmoxradiostlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Kevin Horrigan and Charles Brennan of KMOX Radio, St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kevin-horrigan-and-charles-brennan-kmox-radio-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "24-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 465, "text": "They can be Republicans or Democrats; they can do whatever they want. But remember that Jesus threw the moneychangers out of the temple. He did not try to take over the job of the moneychangers. ENTITY, world financial markets today report a continued slide of the U.S. dollar against other world currencies. What can or should the United States Government do to halt this slide? Well, the Secretary of Treasury will have an announcement about it today. Let me say, just make one point about it. This is a development that is puzzling a lot of economists because our economy is performing so well. Our job growth is greater than any other of the advanced countries. Our unemployment rate is lower than any of the advanced countries, except Japan. In a funny way the currency values are running in the opposite direction of economic strength because Japan has a great trade surplus with us, as you know. If their economy is weak, no matter what they do, they cannot lower the trade surplus because they do not have the money to buy more American products if their own economy is weak. So in a funny way, the perception of a weak economy in Japan has driven the American dollar down against the Japanese yen because their trade surplus has continued to be high. The German economy, thank goodness, is coming back a little bit, and that is a good thing, but it strengthens the German mark. The American dollar is actually stronger against a lot of other currencies in the world than it was a year ago. I think it is important that we not overreact to this. But the Secretary of the Treasury will have a statement today which will demonstrate the course that we are taking. If I sense anything today, it seems like a frustration on your part about an inability or just for some reason, you have not gotten across to the American people the messages that you want to get across. Well, let me ask you something, I am coming to St. Louis to inaugurate the Metrolink, a Federal project which is good for St. Louis; to talk about the Summer of Service and the crime bill, the most important crime legislation in the history of the United States and the national service program which is going to have thousands of young people working to make our communities safer, all of those things initiatives under my administration, and you did not ask me about any of them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkevinhorriganandcharlesbrennankmoxradiostlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Kevin Horrigan and Charles Brennan of KMOX Radio, St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kevin-horrigan-and-charles-brennan-kmox-radio-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "24-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 466, "text": "So I am not frustrated about it exactly, but I tell you, I have determined that I am going to be aggressive about it. After I get off the radio today with you, Rush Limbaugh will have 3 hours to say whatever he wants. And I will not have any opportunity to respond. So all I am telling you is, I am going to be far more aggressive because the American people are entitled to know what is going on good in this country. When I go overseas I just got back from Europe, and the European press came up to me on several occasions members of the press in Europe would say, What is going on in your country? You have got things going well; you are nothing like they portray you; the things that are happening are positive. Members of the press in Europe said that to me repeatedly. I am going to be very nice about it, but I am going to be aggressive about it. Well, let me ask you a little something about health care, because I know this has been the number one, or at least in the top three in terms of issues for you. And you promised long ago to veto any bill that crossed your desk that did not promise 100 percent health care coverage in the United States. You said you'd veto that, any bill that did not insure every single living American. I said universal, we need to have universal coverage. That is what I said. Are you willing to compromise on this right now if it turns out to be a political reality that Congress cannot go for the full universal health care? Well, I think Congress will adopt universal health care. There may be some minor debates about exactly how to define that, but the real issue is, will Congress provide health insurance to all working Americans? Will they provide a mechanism to do it? I still think there is a good chance they will do it. Now, to go back to the first question you asked, there have been tens of millions of dollars in kind of disinformation spent to falsely characterize the approach that I wanted to take. I am very flexible and always have been about how we do it. But I do believe that it is not rational for the United States to be the only country in the world that cannot figure out how to guarantee health care coverage to middle class working Americans. And in fact, we are going in reverse. We are losing ground. We have got a smaller percentage of our people insured than we did 10 years ago.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkevinhorriganandcharlesbrennankmoxradiostlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Kevin Horrigan and Charles Brennan of KMOX Radio, St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kevin-horrigan-and-charles-brennan-kmox-radio-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "24-06-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 476, "text": "Let me start by thanking both of you for sharing some time on what is obviously a very busy day. We are in the closing days of the campaign for the peace initiative in Northern Ireland, and suddenly there seems to be apprehension, a lot of opposition. You see some slippage in the public opinion polls, the critics saying that you see these people, terrorists, criminals, at rallies being hailed as heroes. Each of you, if you could share your thoughts on what you think of the tone of the campaign, and do you share that apprehension? And how do you counter the message of those who say, vote no? I think before we get a vote as important as this, there is bound to be a lot of apprehension, consideration by people, and it is right that they treat this seriously, because it affects their future. And one of the fascinating things is there has been very little debate in this referendum campaign about the institutional structure, the Northern Ireland Assembly, the relationship with the Republic of Ireland, because the thing has wrecked every attempt to have a peace agreement in Northern Ireland for the past 50, 60 years. Instead, people are worried, as you say, about things like prisoners. But as I say to people, when you look at the facts, these guys who were out on the platform the other day under day-release schemes, they were done years ago. The vast majority of prisoners will be out within a few years anyway. to have stability and prosperity and the chance to bring up your children with some prospect of staying in Northern Ireland and doing well, or to slip back into the ways that Northern Ireland knew for decade upon decade of division and bitterness and hatred? Well, is there some sort of trick here; can somebody have it both ways; can they be part of the political life of the country; and can they sort of condone violence? And I can tell you, at least from America's point of view, the answer to that is no. Anybody who resorts to violence will have no friends in the United States. I do not care what side they are on or what their heritage is or what their previous ties are. And I think I can speak for the overwhelming majority of Irish-Americans in both the Catholic and Protestant communities, that all we have ever wanted was a just peace. This peace embodies the principle of consent. It gives the Irish people of both traditions the right to chart their future in Northern Ireland and to make of it what they will.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprimeministertonyblairtheunitedkingdomjohnkingthecablenews", "title": "Interview With Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom by John King of the Cable News Network in Weston-under-Lizard", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-prime-minister-tony-blair-the-united-kingdom-john-king-the-cable-news", "publication_date": "16-05-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 477, "text": "I think, if it is embraced, you will see a big increase in involvement of Irish-Americans and other Americans eager to invest in Northern Ireland, eager to lift prosperity and to show people the benefits of peace. What is the downside risk of going forward? It is so much lower than the downside risk of blowing this opportunity. You, at one point, considered visiting at the end of this trip, going to Northern Ireland, to the Republic of Ireland, decided not, perhaps that it would be viewed as meddling. Now in the last 24 to 48 hours, you have decided to speak out again forcefully, publicly. And in your view, what role can you play in that process? And sir, what role do you think the people of Ireland will consider as they listen to the American President? Well, I decided to speak out because I think that the people of Northern Ireland know that I care a lot about the peace process, that the United States has been involved in it, that we have tried to not only I think it is important to point out not only has Mr. Adams, the Sinn Fein leader, been to the United States a lot, but I have spent far more time with Mr. Trimble and other leaders, Unionist leaders, than any American President ever has. I have tried to listen to both sides, to learn, to just encourage them to make their own peace and chart their own future. I just was afraid if I went there I can remember when people from outside used to come to my home State and try to influence elections. It never worked, because in the end voters instinctively know they have to live with the consequences of their decision. But if a journalist like you asks me a question about what I think the arguments are, I think that it is important for me to answer. And I hope that people on all sides of the issue will listen to what I have to say, because at least I have some experience here; I know something about this. I know something about what happened in Bosnia; I know something about what happened in the Middle East; I know something about people who are divided and the difference in peace and war, or peace and sort of purgatory with violence. And peace has unfailingly been better, in the toughest of circumstances. As to people who actually get a vote listen to him, your friend, why should they listen to him?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprimeministertonyblairtheunitedkingdomjohnkingthecablenews", "title": "Interview With Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom by John King of the Cable News Network in Weston-under-Lizard", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-prime-minister-tony-blair-the-united-kingdom-john-king-the-cable-news", "publication_date": "16-05-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 478, "text": "I think people do listen because people know the President is sincere, deeply committed, and actually knowledgeable about what has happened in Northern Ireland. And I can say, right from the time I became Prime Minister, but actually before that when the President visited Northern Ireland in 1995 I think it was, that his visit made a huge impact. Perhaps more than any other American President, people really feel that ENTITY both understands, knows, and people, they can also feel his willing them to do well. And I think people certainly will listen to that very much. As you look forward to this vote, take us back if you will. You have described this process as agonizingly difficult. In the last few hours, you had a series of transatlantic conversations yourselves. President, you were on the phone with Mr. Adams I believe twice, Mr. Trimble at least once, John Hume. Can you take us inside those conversations, pacing, raising your voice? You had people on each side that, Nevermind, I cannot do this. How did you keep it together, and how did you interrelate personally as you went through this process? Well, I do not think it was so much a question of raising our voice or obviously, these are conversations that you have with people at a particularly difficult moment, and you do not go right back over them the whole time. But I think in many ways what I found was tremendously useful in respect to the President's intervention was that people did and do respect his views on it, because, obviously in part, he is the President of the United States, but actually it is more to do with him personally, having shown commitment all the way through, having listened to all sides in the conflict, and therefore having some standing because of this own personal commitment, some credibility, if you like, to say to people, Look, the eyes of the world are upon us. Let us see if we can go for this thing and make it happen. This is not going to happen; it is going to collapse? I am afraid I thought that pretty regularly, at about hourly intervals. But in the end I mean, what always comes back home to me is we are 2 years off the year 2000; there is so much happening in the world, so many changes that I have seen in the last 10 or 15 years of my lifetime.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprimeministertonyblairtheunitedkingdomjohnkingthecablenews", "title": "Interview With Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom by John King of the Cable News Network in Weston-under-Lizard", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-prime-minister-tony-blair-the-united-kingdom-john-king-the-cable-news", "publication_date": "16-05-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 479, "text": "I cannot believe 2 years off the millennium that a place like Northern Ireland, which has got this extraordinary potential, where the people are tremendous people, as you know if you have been there, I cannot believe we cannot find a way to live with each other 2 years off the new millennium with all the changes in the world, with all the possibilities there are. So even though a lot of the time I was sitting there thinking, Can we really make this happen, I have a sort of inner optimism about it. And what was your message in those phone calls? You were probably half asleep as you started some of them. Well, first of all, I just when I talked to Prime Minister Blair or Prime Minister Ahern or George Mitchell, I was mostly listening. But when I talked to the parties, what I heard from them actually was very like what you are hearing from the general public now. It was sort of the darkness before the dawn. It was like, Okay, we made this deal, and oh, there is a few things down the road that we'd like to improve, but what they really needed was not me to talk about the specifics; what they really needed was for me to remind them of the big picture, that it was time to join hands and jump off the diving board together and get in the pool and swim to shore. And I say that not in a disrespectful way but in a respectful way. It is very hard, once you have been estranged from people for a long time, to overcome your fears and distrust. And as I have said repeatedly, I will never forget Prime Minister Rabin telling me before Israel signed the agreement with the PLO, that everybody was reluctant to do it, but you do not make peace with your friends. You have to make peace with those and then make them your friends, because of the estrangement of the past. That is what I want people to think about. Now, they are going to be at the vortex of something very, very big, if they can just liberate themselves it could change the past. They do not have to give up their traditions; they can value them. They have agreed to the principle of consent. They have set up a mechanism by which they can chart their own future. What remains is really just to take the leap of faith and realize that the risk of going forward is infinitesimal, tiny, compared to the risk of letting this opportunity slip away.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprimeministertonyblairtheunitedkingdomjohnkingthecablenews", "title": "Interview With Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom by John King of the Cable News Network in Weston-under-Lizard", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-prime-minister-tony-blair-the-united-kingdom-john-king-the-cable-news", "publication_date": "16-05-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 480, "text": "That is why we are so grateful for you to grant RFA your very first post-Vietnam interview. My name is Nguyen Bich, or you can call me just Bich for short. And I am the director of the Vietnamese service at Radio Free Asia. And sitting by me in our studio is Dan Sutherland, who is vice president for programming. So, ENTITY , my first question to you is, how do you feel? Do you feel you have accomplished your goal by this first trip ever made by a ENTITY of the United States to a reunified Vietnam? Yes, I think it was a very successful trip; first, because we were able to see and support the attempts that are being made there to recover the missing in action from the Vietnam conflict and to continue our cooperation with the Vietnamese Government in that regard. We also gave them several hundred thousand pages of documents to help them identify the some 300,000 people still missing who are Vietnamese. Then, I think it was important because we contributed, I believe, to the continuing economic progress of the country which I think will lead to more openness. And thirdly, I think it was important because I was able to speak on television to the country about the kind of future I hope we will share with Vietnam and the fact that I hope there will be more openness and more freedom in it. And I also had, finally, some very good discussions and some constructive disagreements with the leadership of Vietnam. Your speech at Hanoi University certainly was very impressive. And so I think that made a really big impression on the country. As this was your first trip to Vietnam, could you give us a general impression of the country, at least what you saw of it, and of the people? They were very warm and very welcoming and clearly interested in the trip. And the young people with whom I talked were clearly interested in having closer ties with America. So I felt very good about that. I also was interested in all the changes that are occurring in the northern part of the country. I think there is clearly a lot of new investment going on in Hanoi, a lot of new businesses coming out, a lot of changes there that I think will tend to make the south and the north perhaps less different in terms of the economic lives and maybe the political outlooks of the people at least in the cities. Now, the only village that I went to was the one where the search for the pilot was going on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnguyenbichanddansutherlandradiofreeasiainternationalfromelmendorf", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Nguyen Bich and Dan Sutherland of Radio Free Asia International From Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nguyen-bich-and-dan-sutherland-radio-free-asia-international-from-elmendorf", "publication_date": "19-11-2000", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 481, "text": "People say that, in Vietnam, it is still some distance between the potential and realization. Do you get a feeling that the people are impatient for progress, especially among the young, or do you think, as the Government says, that they are pretty satisfied with the present pace of things? Well, I would say that they understand that the country is doing better, and they like that. After all, 60 percent of the country now is under 30. And I think they have a keen awareness that they have to make a lot of changes in order to keep creating jobs. I think they need 1.4 million new jobs every year. On the morning of my last day there, I had an amazing roundtable discussion with a number of young Vietnamese men and women who ranged in age from early twenties to midthirties, and who did everything from working for Cargill, the big international grain company, to running the Vietnam office of Saachi and Saachi, which is a big London advertising agencyexcuse me. Then there was one young man who had a job in the party and others who had other jobs. But what was interesting to me is, they were all thinking about the big questions, you know, how much personal freedom is needed in life, what kinds of decisions should be made by the individual, and what kind of decisions should be made by families or villages or the nation, the Government, and how much of the economy should be private and how much should be public. The man who runs the city government in Ho Chi Minh City was quite proud of the fact that they had done a remarkable job of creating jobs in the private sector, that he had downsized the government, that poverty had been reduced by 70 percent, and homelessness was reduced by 70 percent. So I think there are a lot of people there who have this feeling that if they go more to a private economy and they have more entrepreneurial spirit, that there will also be more personal freedom associated with it. I understand that the First Lady also had some strong words to recommend human rights at her talk in the morning of Sunday. She met with a group of women there. It was something she tries to do in every country in the world she visits. She is been speaking about that, especially as human rights affect women and young girls, ever since she went to the Beijing Women's Conference several years ago. Now, what is your reading of the progress so far made about the U.S.-Vietnam bilateral trade agreements?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnguyenbichanddansutherlandradiofreeasiainternationalfromelmendorf", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Nguyen Bich and Dan Sutherland of Radio Free Asia International From Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nguyen-bich-and-dan-sutherland-radio-free-asia-international-from-elmendorf", "publication_date": "19-11-2000", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 482, "text": "Did you get any indication while you were there as to when the Vietnamese National Assembly might get to ratify that? I think they will ratify it pretty soon. I thinkI had the feeling they want to make absolutely sure that we are going to ratify it. And they understand that the timing is not good for ratification now, but I think as soon as we ratify it, they will. And then I think that we told them that we would be spending a couple million dollars a year over the next 3 years to help ensure the rapid and thorough implementation of the agreement. And we told them that we would like to have a high-level meeting, at least annually, to plot a joint economic strategy for the future, and they agreed to that. So my instinct is that they do want to get the maximum benefits out of this trade agreement. But then, what would be your impression as to when the U.S. Congress might ratify that? I think they will do it as soon as they have a chance, probably early next year. You know, I wish I could do it now, but I just do not know if it is practical. So I think that I do not think there is any shot that it will not be approved by the Congress. But Hanoi's sensitivity to this question is all too obvious. Did you make any headway in your talk with Secretary General Le Kha Phieu or Prime Minister Phan Van Khai on this front, or do you think the U.S. could work with Vietnam on this matter in a more open fashion? I had very open conversations with all of them, with the Prime Minister, with the Secretary General and ENTITY. And what I believe is that once they realize that we are not trying to tell Vietnam how to run every aspect of their lives and that we feel that we are going to be in a friendly relation, we have to be honest about our disagreements, and we have to say what we think human rights and religious rights and individual freedom have meant to our country. I think we will be in a dialog there, and I think that, plus the process of economic and social change which is going on in Vietnam will lead the country in a positive direction. That is what I believe. I think it will be very important for my successor to continue that dialog. I do not think we can drop human rights or religious freedom from our concerns anywhere in the world.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnguyenbichanddansutherlandradiofreeasiainternationalfromelmendorf", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Nguyen Bich and Dan Sutherland of Radio Free Asia International From Elmendorf Air Force Base, Alaska", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nguyen-bich-and-dan-sutherland-radio-free-asia-international-from-elmendorf", "publication_date": "19-11-2000", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 489, "text": "I would say this is one of the most exciting trips of my Presidency. Exciting because when we first got to Washington, Africa was parts of Africa were in turmoil; not much had been to arrest disease; there was not intense world focus on the continent. The second trip to Africa for me the fifth for Laura was a chance to herald courageous people in their efforts to deal with hopelessness. And what really made me happy was that the people of Africa have come to appreciate the generosity of the American people. I had a couple of goals. One was to encourage people to continue to make difficult choices democracy is hard work but also assure them that we'd stay with them if they made the right choices. Secondly, I wanted to highlight for the American people what the that great compassionate work is being done. And I will give you some Laura can share some anecdotes too. You know, in the hospital in Tanzania, to see a 3-year-old baby survive a mosquito bite when years earlier probably would not have was a very compelling moment for me. To have the little orphans in Rwanda put on such a cheerless a cheery face because somebody is trying to provide them love was inspiring to me. To watch their little guys play tee-ball all of whom were orphans against the little school and see how inspired they were. All of these programs are supported by the American taxpayer, and all of them matter. To hear the testimony of these kids and teachers in Liberia about how our aid has helped them regain confidence I do not know if you all were in there when the mother of three talked about her husband left her, she said, because she was illiterate, so he just left her with the three kids. And she is a part of this adult literacy program that USAID is helping with. She talked about being able to read, fill out bank checks, her deposit slips, then announced she wanted to go to college, and then announced she wanted to take Ellen Johnson Sirleaf's job. You heard me say a lot on the trip that we are on a mission of mercy, and that is what I think we are. And I think it is in our national interest to do it. I know that when you volunteer as an individual to help somebody who hurts, it helps you. Well, I believe the same when it comes to collective hearts of America. I mean, you saw the crowds, you saw the enthusiasm. Why do not you take credit for it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone2", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-2", "publication_date": "21-02-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 490, "text": "Why do not you show what you have done for Africa? Well, it is not me, for starters. And you do not act out of the desire to enhance your own standing; that is not exactly why one is called into service. It does not matter about me. What matters is, are we saving people's lives? And so I am really pleased with it and had great meetings with the leaders. It seems like a couple of months ago that we went to Benin. And of course, Kikwete in Tanzania and Kagame in look, the other thing about the Rwanda stop and the Liberia stop is, these are societies that only recently have been ravished by unbelievable and unspeakable violence. And yet they are getting back on their feet. And it is hard work, and we will help them. That was what I told them. And these were five very strong leaders that we visited with. Which leads me to conclude this and Laura can share some thoughts America should not be dictating to these countries, America ought to be helping leaders make decisions. And that is what we are doing. And we go to Africa with a belief in the capacity of human beings to meet high standards. That is what I kept trying to say to you out there in code. We go with a positive sense about the capacity of leaders to rise to the challenge and meet certain basic criteria, such as honest government, investing in children, investing in health, and understanding that marketplace economics and trade is more powerful than accepting relief from countries. You talk about proud people. Okay, we will do a round-robin here. One of the things that we heard from people I guess they do consider the United States a democracy, a role model. Did they talk to you It never came up to us at all. They said they were very fascinated with the election, one group that I talked to. I'd just like to remind you what Kikwete said. is as good as this one. Now, I am not blowing my own horn and I am sure it was a screaming headline. Are you going to vote in the Texas primary? I think I will be in the Republican primary this year. It seemed like a good storyline at the time. Somebody must be putting something out there in the pool, and everybody starts chatting about it. People would mention it to us. If you asked them, yes, What do you think about Obama? Yes, they mentioned it to you all right.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone2", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-2", "publication_date": "21-02-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 491, "text": "I asked them I went out on the street, and two of the four people I asked about you know, I'd say, Obama McCain they like they volunteered, two of them   Look, my mind was not on U.S. politics on this trip; it is just not. It is on yours, not mine. I am focused on conducting foreign policy. We will be having roundtables, and you are going to be fascinated on the latest thing on politics, and I am going to be fascinated on trying to lay the foundation for lasting foreign policy that will make a significant difference to the United States. I am not going to be frustrated about it except every time. A question on that is this how, in the end, you would like this effort or this kind of effort, if this not specific one this is what your Presidency is ultimately about? But we have been a very active we have had a very active foreign policy, whether it be liberating people from tyranny in order to protect ourselves or liberating people from disease, we have been active and strong and bold. And we will let history judge the results. There is no such thing as short-term political history. I mean, short-term history of an administration forget political there is such thing as short-term political history because there is an end result, win or lose. There is no such thing as an accurate history of an administration until time has lapsed, unless you are doing little-bitty things. The other thing about one of the things I hope people, when they are able to take an objective look at an administration which I am not sure is possible, if you happen to have been living at the time of the administration; maybe you can, I do not think so is whether or not an administration makes decisions based upon certain fundamental principles from which it will not vary. And you have heard me say over and over again, freedom is universal, or to whom much is given, much is required. Those are fundamental principles on which one can have a foreign policy. And one of the great dangers for America is to become isolationist or protectionist. And the purpose of on trips like this is to remind people of the need not to become isolationist. And so it is I view this as this was a trip that heralded results. But it was also a trip that gives us an opportunity to explain over and over again the foundations of the foreign policy of the Bush administration. I have asked you twice.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone2", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-2", "publication_date": "21-02-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 492, "text": "That is off the record. No, that is on the record. I see a big microphone. I'd like to ask you about an issue they are raising back home, and it is not the '08 campaign. On FISA, I understand your position, but what I am unclear about is whether you are doing something to break the deadlock. Do you see yourself engaging with the other side, compromising? How do you compromise on something like granting liability for a telecommunications company? If we do not give liability protection to those who are helping us, they will not help us. And if they do not help us, there will be no program. What I am going to do is continue to remind people that unless they get this program done, we are going to be vulnerable to attack.  But I will just tell you, there is no compromise on whether or not these phone companies get liability protection. See, what the American people must understand is that without help from the phone companies, there is no program. And these companies are going to be subject to multibillion dollar lawsuits by trial lawyers, plaintiffs' attorneys. And it is going to drive them away from helping us, unless they get liability protection, prospective and retroactive. It is just so important for people to understand the dangers. If we do not have the capacity to listen to these terrorists, we are not going to be able to protect ourselves. They have got enough votes to pass the bill in the House. So yes, I am going to talk about it a lot and keep reminding the American I am glad you asked the question, because this will give everybody a chance to know the dangers of the course that some in the House have put us on. And I will keep talking about it. The American people understand that we need to be listening to the enemy. Kenya? I mean, are you going to send her back? the opposition. That is the dilemma; how you get two people to sit down at a table and work on what is best for Africa I mean, for Kenya. She was in the room with them. We got Frazer, who is plenty competent. I was going to say that, you know, the most effective way to get these issues resolved is for these leaders to feel pressure from their own people. And it is one thing for Kofi and Condi and people making phone calls, but Kenya is a society; it is got a for example, Kenya is the economic engine for East Africa.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone2", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-2", "publication_date": "21-02-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 493, "text": "I do not know if you saw all those ships in Dar es Salaam. Those were originally many of them were originally headed for Nairobi, interestingly enough. And I suspect these leaders are beginning to feel a lot of pressure internal. Secondly, they are actually hearing from African leaders about the dangers of allowing these kind of conflicts to not be nipped in the bud early, to be prevented from happening. We sent people over, and we will stay engaged. It is really up to the Kenyan society itself and the leaders there to get their leaders with them. Does not it seem to be that they are pressuring with violence? The way that they are pressuring, it seems to be with violence. No, no, no, you are missing it. You are talking about some of the splinter groups on some of the parties. There is a civil society, and it is a relatively sophisticated civil society that is exerting pressure, that is not resorting to violence. I get to ask a question. Will you be taking a nap on the way back? 15 a.m. You are going to go around the clock? I am actually promoting I have obviously got a nap on my mind. I was just trying to, like, plant the seed. I want to go back to Africa. You talked about Americans and their generosity Americans and their generosity what do you think that Americans think of your trip? I do not have any idea. What are you writing about it? I do not know what they think of it. I am focused on the trip. When I get home, I pick up a book and start reading it, and I am sound asleep shortly thereafter. Depends on what you all are showing. It is worthwhile to be supportive of a robust policy on the continent of Africa. It is worth our national security interest, and it is worth our interest to help people learn to read and write and save babies' lives from mosquito bites. That is what I hope they realize, and that is one of the main that is a critical reason to go on the trip. I would hope that the country never says, well, it is not worth it over there, what happens over there or it says, well, we have got to take care of our own first, exclusively. And my answer is, we can do both. And we do, do both. Do you have everything in place so that the next ENTITY, who might not look at Africa in the first 6 months everything is in place to continue?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersaboardairforceone2", "title": "Interview With Reporters Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-aboard-air-force-one-2", "publication_date": "21-02-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 500, "text": "So, we'd like to get down to business right away. Well, let me say I am appreciating your paper and its upholding of our country and the principles that involved and so forth very refreshing. it would seem that congratulations are in order over your efforts to bring about a Lebanon cease-fire. Secretary Shultz has said there is no timetable to pull out the marines, says that goes for the Navy as well. But it is right in line with the mission that took the whole multinational force there to be in a position to help preserve stability as a government of Lebanon reinstitutes its sovereignty over its own territory and the foreign forces get out. ENTITY, you said yesterday that the Saudis played an important part in the helping to bring the cease-fire about. Did they put pressure on Syria by threatening to withhold their bankrolling? I do not know of any pressure of that kind. But I do know that just as we had two ambassadors there who were back and forth working virtually around the clock, trying to bring the various parties together, they were most helpful in doing the same thing and, I think, have to be recognized for that. So, I would not know what persuasion was used or anything else, but finally we have the cease-fire. On October the 15th, Paul Laxalt and others will be forming the committee for your reelection. Can you say at this stage if you have made up your mind to run? If not, will you at least endorse Mr. Laxalt's committee? At least I would endorse what? Well, no, let me just say I do not think this is a time when I can make an answer of any kind to that question. First of all, I believe that campaigns are too long anyway. But I have said there is no way that I am going to make or announce a decision until the last possible moment that it could be done, because either way it is going to make things difficult. If you are not a candidate, you are a lameduck, and if you are a candidate, suddenly everything you try to accomplish is viewed as part of the political campaign. So, I know there is coming a day when I am going to have to make a statement, but not now. Have you discussed the possibilities yet with your family? Well, obviously this has come up in conversation. Will you endorse the committee that is being formed, though? Is it with your blessing?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmemberstheeditorialboardthenewyorkpostnewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Members of the Editorial Board of the New York Post in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-editorial-board-the-new-york-post-new-york-city", "publication_date": "26-09-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 501, "text": "That would be getting into the area of commenting that I still do not think I should. Do you see it within the next month or so, perhaps? Well, I have not set any specific date, and so I will not hazard one. You had a rather historic meeting of prayer with Cardinal Cooke yesterday. How did you find that very brave man? He expressed his interest in so much that is going on in the world and some of the things that we are trying to do. But also we were so grateful for the opportunity to see him and have this meeting with him. They had arranged a little prayer service in his chapel, but not with him present. But we then went to his room, and he concluded the service before our visit with the final prayer. Senator D'Amato of New York and many others have been very forceful in their language calling for Mr. Watt to resign. What are your views about that? Well, first of all, I think Mr. Watt has done a very capable job as Secretary of Interior. I think we have to point out with all of this that it was an unfortunate remark. He has apologized not only to me, but he is apologized to the people on the Commission for that. But I think in all fairness we have to recognize that, yes, it was a very improper thing to say, but it certainly was not said in the sense of any bitterness or bigotry or prejudice. If I thought he was bigoted or prejudiced, he would not be a part of our administration. It was an attempt at lightness that, as we all have to admit, fell very fiat. So, I think that we have to recognize that, hope it will not be repeated. Do you think it'd be possible for him to continue in office? Do you think it would be possible for him to continue in office? Well, I think that is a decision that he, himself, would have to make, whether he feels that he has made it questionable as to whether he can be effective or not. You have no plans, ENTITY, to ask him to leave, then? I accepted his apology. If we could turn to your speech at the United Nations today, which is very calm and very measured. Had you, while you were preparing the speech, had any indication or signal of any sort that your proposals might be agreeable to the Soviets?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmemberstheeditorialboardthenewyorkpostnewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Members of the Editorial Board of the New York Post in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-editorial-board-the-new-york-post-new-york-city", "publication_date": "26-09-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 502, "text": "What I said today I have thought for some time the things that needed saying, both with regard to the United Nations and to their approach to these matters. I just feel very deeply that if and when I remarked about governments starting wars, that if the representatives of the Soviet Union and ourselves sat down at those tables, those negotiating tables, with the conviction in our minds that there must not be a war, then there will not be a war, and there could almost instantly be a reduction in those terrible and dangerous arms, those weapons. I am certain that the Russian people do not want a war, and I know our people do not . And I just do are they willing to come to the table with that idea in mind, instead of an idea as to how they can preserve some margin of superiority for themselves. heard, ENTITY, has there been the slightest signal of the overall regret expressed by some segments of the Soviet leadership, which there has been, small as it may be. Have you regarded that as any kind of genuine signal? No, because I do not think it is come from the kind of people that normally would give the signals. But it is an indication there of, certainly, recognition on the part of some, as you say, that this was as terrible a deed as we have said it was. And I just think the world is owed an apology plus a statement to the effect that they are going to join the rest of us in cooperating to see that such a thing can never happen again. And that could be aided and abetted also if they would recognize some responsibility in compensation for the families of the victims. ENTITY, do you think there may be some sort of a high-level political dispute going on in the Kremlin, that the statements by these lower level officials, which were just referred to, may represent and in fact there is not unanimity in there on what happened? I would not hazard a guess on that. But I do say that there is evidence that is a little different than what we usually expect, because usually the official reply comes out with unanimous support over there, and that is it, and that is the story everyone tells. They were not heard for quite a while. In fact, there was such a difference in the stories that it just further added to the evidence of how deliberate and despicable this act was. Most people are tending to forget that their first statement was that they just did not know anything about it. It just disappeared from their radar.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmemberstheeditorialboardthenewyorkpostnewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Members of the Editorial Board of the New York Post in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-editorial-board-the-new-york-post-new-york-city", "publication_date": "26-09-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 503, "text": "And then when the evidence was presented that it had been shot down and that they were responsible for that, suddenly they come up with a new story about spy plane and so forth. No one's mentioned this yet, but is not that a pretty hardthe idea of errora pretty hard thing to believe, when that plane is one on a regular schedule, that at least every week is flying that same route and at the same time of day? Are your plans firm for Manila? If there would be any reason to change it, it would be domestic, because there is a probability we had planned that trip with the idea that Congress would not be in session, that it would have gone home. And now it makes you wonder, how can you be in two places at once? The First Lady had expressed second thoughts, misgivings about that particular trip, given the recent events, the recent, tragic events. Well, let me just say and I sympathize with her very deeply, but since a previous experience that we had ,I should not use the expression she is a little gun shy. No, but she does feel a legitimate concern and in many places where I have to appear. ENTITY, just to come back to your speech to the U.N. today and your three proposals, I was struck let me not talk for everyone, because we have not all talked about it but it struck me as being rather generous towards the negotiating position, in the view that they have constantly said no, and you say, Well, all right, now, we will count the aircraft, and we will not count the missiles in the Far East. So that would reduce the total number to which we are responding in Western Europe. Ah, but we reserve the right to place in other areas to counter what other threats might be involved in their disposition in other areas of their missiles. Yes, and you go very far towards meeting the Soviet position over the Pershings, which they have been making the most noise about. Maybe that was a restatement of something that was always in our mind. The original concept of what was going in NATO in INF was going to be a mix of Pershings and cruise missiles. And at one time, there was a Russian voice raised that, well, they might listen to cruise missiles but not Pershings at all.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmemberstheeditorialboardthenewyorkpostnewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Members of the Editorial Board of the New York Post in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-editorial-board-the-new-york-post-new-york-city", "publication_date": "26-09-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 504, "text": "Well, this in a way today was a restatement that, no, there will still be a mix, but we are willing that if they agree to reductions, that means that our original figure must be reduced. That reduction will be in both Pershings and cruise missiles. But as I said in the remarks, I'd like to see it on the zero-zero basis. Well, now we want any reduction that can be achieved is going to be better than what threatens us now and threatens our allies in Europe. And so, that is what we are going to continue to strive for, is to the lowest possible point that they will come, and we will meet them on an equal and a verifiable basis. ENTITY, you have been at the U.N and there have been reports out of your administration that you and some of your senior aides feel that there is a double standard operating for example, being quick to condemn Israel for its invasion of Lebanon but not condemning the Soviet downing of the airliner or the Libyan invasion of Chad. Well, no, I have noticed that many times they on many votes have been able to marshal a majority of votes their way and not on ours. What I was trying to point out was again the something happens to the whole concept of the U.N. if we find the U.N., like the world, beginning to divide up into blocs. The ideal was supposed to be that every nation would be there as an individual and seeking the same thing, the things that are called for in the charter of the U.N. And there has been evidence of the other, of kind of taking sides or bloc voting, and I was just trying to call their attention back to the original purpose. I will tell you, may I say something else about that, too? It is time that all of us recognize that maybe we are not as civilized as we were when I was a young man growing up. By that I mean that it was taken for granted for years and years, the days prior to World War II, that all the rules of warfare were aimed at limiting warfare to warriors and providing protection and neutrality for civilians. And without quite realizing it is happened, we are in a world today where not only are the civilians fair game, but the most potent weapons systems, the nuclear weapons, are definitely aimed at the destruction of civilians.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmemberstheeditorialboardthenewyorkpostnewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Members of the Editorial Board of the New York Post in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-editorial-board-the-new-york-post-new-york-city", "publication_date": "26-09-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 505, "text": "So I know that we only have half an hour, and I want to make sure that everybody has time for questions. So I am not going to make an opening statement; I just made a long one in the auditorium, and I will just open it up and maybe if you want, we will just go around the room. And we will start with you, Wafa. I am sure that the Palestinians are overwhelmed by some of the things that you have said regarding the Palestinian issue, specifically about the settlements. We have not heard a U.S. President, or any U.S. official before, saying the United States does not recognize the legitimacy of settlements. However, the Palestinians want to see--want you to show them how different you are from other Presidents. Are there measures that the United States will take in order to ensure that settlement expansion is---- I think you pressed play instead of record; you are getting somebody's interview on that. Anyway, so if the Israelis do not stop the settlements as specified in phase one of the roadmap, are there measures that you plan to take in order to enforce that? Well, I think it is premature for me to go beyond the principles that I have laid out in the speech, and let me explain why. Prime Minister Netanyahu has only been in office now for a month, month and a half. I am still in the process of consulting with Arab States throughout the region. And so I think it is very important for all the parties to listen, to take measure of what they can do, how far they are willing to go, before I make any reactions or prejudge what direction the negotiations should go in. This is a difficult issue across the board. I do not think we should underestimate the difficulties; passions are very high on both sides; the politics are very difficult on both sides. But one of the things that I committed to during my campaign was that I would not wait until my sixth or seventh or eighth year in office, or if I only get 4, my third or fourth year in office, but that I was going to start right away. I have assigned a special envoy, George Mitchell, who is traveling back and forth between all the various interested parties. And we have set out some clear parameters in terms of how we are going to approach the problem.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 506, "text": "And my hope and expectation is that there is going to be some difficulties, but ultimately, both the Israelis and Palestinians are going to recognize this is in their interests. The United States cannot impose a solution, but perhaps because we are not immediately in the heat of the passions involved, perhaps we can see why it is so important for both Israelis and Palestinians to resolve this and resolve this soon and not continue to let it fester. And that is what I am committed to. I do not want to impose an artificial timeline, but I think that all of us probably had a sense in our gut of, Are things moving forward? , or Have they stalled? And when things stall, everybody knows it. People may say a lot of words, but everybody knows that nothing is happening. Right now things have been stalled for quite some time. When things are moving, people also know that. And so what I want to--I want to have a sense of movement and progress. ENTITY--and I will listen to my translation. And you have talked about the Middle East and the future of this region. You also spoke about the commitment of the United States towards achieving progress towards special issues. How is your administration going to deal with the current Israeli Government and with Hamas as a part and parcel of the Palestinian portfolio? And I think so many believe that Hamas is a difficult question that the previous administration did not deal with. What is your vision and your view in dealing with Hamas and dealing with the hawks in the current Israeli Government? The other issue is your clarity and your vision makes me want to ask you, who are your partners in the region that you can rely on to achieve your objectives, either on the Palestinian issue or the Iraqi issue or the Afghanistan issue? First of all, I tried to make clear in my speech that when it comes to Hamas, there is no doubt that Hamas has some support among Palestinians. That was shown in the last election; that cannot be denied. What I also said is that Hamas has responsibilities to those people it represents to have a responsible approach to actually delivering a Palestinian state. If Hamas's approach is based on the idea that Israel will cease to exist, that is an illusion. And what that means is that they are more interested in talk than in results. If they are serious about delivering a Palestinian state, then they should renounce violence, accept the framework provided by the previous agreements, recognize Israel's right to exist.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 507, "text": "That still leaves enormous room for them to negotiate on a whole host of issues. But at minimum, they cannot provide the results for the people they claim to represent if they are not acknowledging reality. Now, with respect to the Israeli Government, I have had three meetings with Prime Minister Netanyahu. The first two was while I was a United States Senator, and one in the White House just recently. In each case, I found him to be a very intelligent, very engaging person, a excellent communicator. And I think because this is the second time that he is serving as Prime Minister, I think he feels a very real historic sense about the task before him. Obviously, it was a very close election in Israel. It took some time to put that coalition together. And I think that just as so many Palestinians have lost confidence and faith that the process can move forward, I think there are a lot of Israelis who have lost confidence and faith that they will ever be recognized by Arab States, or that there will be security that is meaningful, where rockets are not fired into Israel. And so I believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu will recognize the strategic need to deal with this issue, and that in some ways, he may have an opportunity that a Labor or more left leader might not have. There is the famous example of Richard Nixon going to China. A Democrat could not have gone to China; a liberal could not have gone to China. But a big anti-Communist like Richard Nixon could open that door. Now, it is conceivable that Prime Minister Netanyahu can play that same role. But it is going to be difficult, and I do not want to diminish the difficulties for any of the parties involved in making these decisions because, as I said, there are a lot of passions in the people. But part of leadership is being able to push beyond immediate politics to get to where, ultimately, the people need to go. And in terms of partners more broadly, my attitude at this point is, I want to work with everybody I can to get things done. First of all, ENTITY, I want to congratulate you for a great speech. I believe that everybody in the region listened to it, including in my country. One question, which really worries the Israelis, is Iran. In your speech, you did not indicate whether at certain point you--or whether--to stop the nuclearization of Iran is an American national goal, which has to be fulfilled.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 508, "text": "Well, keep in mind that I have been very clear on this in the past, and I will continue to be clear on the fact that an Iranian nuclear weapon would be profoundly destabilizing for the entire region. It is strongly in America's interest to prevent such a scenario. But I believe it is in the interest of everybody in the region--indeed, I actually think it is in Iran's interest--to prevent such a scenario, because it would be a very dangerous place if everybody decides that they need to have a nuclear weapon in the neighborhood, particularly given the conflicts that exist not just between--the tensions between Israel and Iran, but there are a wide set of conflicts that would be affected. So my approach, as I have said, is to reach out to Iran to suggest talks without preconditions, but also to--and as I said in my speech, to have a wide range of issues to discuss. But the issue that is time sensitive, where we have to make progress because we are reaching a critical point, is on the issue of nuclear weapons. And so one of the things that I want to do is to put this in a broader context. And as committed as I am to diplomacy, as I said in the White House just a few weeks ago, I am not just going to talk just for talking sake. If I do not see meaningful progress in these talks, then that will indicate to me that the Islamic Republic is not serious. You did not mention the word normalization between Israel and the Arab world in your speech. Is it--does it indicate something? It does not indicate anything. I think the working assumption--and that is why I added the issue of Arab State responsibilities, not just Israeli and Palestinian responsibilities. I added that paragraph because I thought it was very important to reinforce the notion that the region as a whole has to take responsibility for solving this issue. And I think from Israel's perspective, the importance of knowing that as a consequence of making the necessary compromises to achieve a two-state solution, they are not only making peace and doing what is just with respect to the Palestinians, but that they are also securing--that they are also meeting their own security needs, and broader threats that might come from beyond Gaza or the West Bank--that is a very important element. It also, by the way, would allow, I think, the entire region to prosper much more effectively.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 509, "text": "If you think about the possibilities of commerce and trade in the Middle East, if a country like Israel, as powerful as it is, were able to have normalized commercial relations with Gulf States, with a Palestinian state that is full of talent, and you suddenly have all the Palestinian diaspora coming back and investing and businesspeople throughout the region, you could see huge economic benefits, as well as security benefits. But we are very far from that vision. So right now I just want us to start taking that step down the road. You know, there is the well-known saying that the hardest step on any journey is always the first one. Of course, as an Indonesian, my first question would be, when will you come to Indonesia? Oh, I need to come to Indonesia soon. I expect to be traveling to Asia at some point within the next year, and I would be surprised if when I came to Asia I did not stop by my old home town of Jakarta. And I will go visit Menteng Dalam and have some bakso, nasi goreng. These are some special dishes here that I used to eat when I was a kid. Actually, I live only 300 meters from your old house. Well, I do not want to make any----firm commitments. And the second is, you know, I read your book, The Audacity of Hope, and I had a very great hope that you can reach the Muslim community, because it seemed to me your understanding of a relationship between faith and politics, especially in black churches, is very much--I can imagine someone who is a Hamas or, you know, maybe radical Islamist would probably, if you take away the word Islam and change it with, you know, black Christian, it is exactly the same. Obviously, I am a person of faith, and as a Christian, but also as somebody who believes very strongly in democracy and human rights--and I am a constitutional law professor, so I have some very strong ideas about how a pluralistic society lives together--these are things that I do spend time thinking about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 510, "text": "What I tried to communicate in the speech and what I believe very strongly is that in an interdependent world like ours, where the world has shrunk and different peoples with different faiths and different ideas are constantly having to coexist, that we have to have a mature faith that says, I believe with all my heart and all my soul in what I believe, but I respect the fact that somebody else believes their beliefs just as strongly. And so the only way that we are going to live together or operate in a political system that can work for everybody is if we have certain rules about how we relate to each other. I cannot force my religion on you. I cannot try to organize a majority to discriminate against you because you are a religious minority. I cannot simply take what is in my religious beliefs and say you have to believe and abide by these same things. Now, that does not mean that I cannot make arguments that are based on my belief and my faith, right? If I am a Christian, I believe in the Ten Commandments. If I am a politician and I say I am going to pass a law against murdering somebody, that is not me practicing my religious faith; that is me practicing morality that may be based in religious faith, but that is a universal principle, or at least one that can translate into a principle that people of various faiths can agree on. I think it is very important for Islam to wrestle with these issues. Now, I recognize that not all religious beliefs are going to be exactly the same in how they think about politics. And so in Islam, there is a debate about sharia and how strict an interpretation or how moderate an interpretation of that should be; or should that be something that is not part of the secular law. I do not presume to make that decision for any country or any groups of people. But I do think that if you start having rules that guarantee other faiths and other groups, or in the case of the United States people with no faith at all, are somehow forced to abide by somebody else's faith, I think that is a violation of the spirit of democracy, and I think that over the long term, that is going to breed conflict in some way. It will lead to some sort of instability and destructiveness in that society. But, as I said, I think this is a important debate that has to take place inside Islam.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 511, "text": "I think in the meantime--the one thing I can say for certain is that people who justify killing other people based on faith are misreading their sacred texts. And I think they are out of alignment with God. And that, I think, is a debate that I think is settled for the vast majority of Muslims, but we have a very small minority that can be very destructive, and that is part of what I tried to discuss in my speech. ENTITY, why have you chosen--why did you choose Cairo as the venue for the speech? Because the Arab population, after all, make up only about 20 percent of the Muslim population, and Indonesia---- I should have gone to Kuala Lumpur. And also, I mean, the expectations on you are really, really high doing something to heal the rift. Well, I thought it was important to come to Cairo because I think, if we are honest, the greatest tension when it comes to the relationship between the Muslim world and the United States in recent years has centered around the Middle East. In some ways, going to Indonesia would almost be cheating----because I would have a home court advantage. Not only am I personally close to the culture and have a sister who is half Indonesian, but I think that, frankly, the relationship between the United States and Indonesia has generally been strong. It was weakened for a time immediately after the Iraqi invasion, but generally speaking, there have been strong lines of communication. And so my tendency is to go to the source of the problem and not try to avoid the problem. And I think that the source of the problem in this situation has to do with the United States and countries in the Middle East not communicating effectively. And in terms of expectations, I tried to be very clear that one speech alone does not solve all these problems. What I wanted to do was simply to start a conversation, not just between me and the Muslim world, but within the Muslim world and within America and the West about how do we finally start being honest about some of these problems, and that once you diagnose a problem, it still may take a long time to actually cure the problem, but you are never going to cure it unless you diagnose it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 512, "text": "And so what I was trying to do was at least to get us to start thinking about what are the real three, four, five, six things that are at the heart of the argument, and let us go ahead and look at those directly and see are there ways where we can at least agree to what the nature of the problem is. That is how we can begin to solve it. But it is going to take a long time to solve many of these issues, and I do not expect that some of these problems will ever go away completely. Second, I would like to ask you a question about American policy. I go often to the United States in my work, and I meet a lot of people. And my last trip--and it was after your Inauguration, a few weeks--you met with the key members of your party in the Congress at that time. And we read in the papers that what you did is you convinced them of your approach to the peace in the Middle East. And everybody was--then the expectation rose in the Arab world and in the Muslim world. When they saw Mr. Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, refusing a two-state solution, refusing the freeze of the settlements, and the not talking about this issue, and then when we saw this letter of 300 Members of the Congress, some of the Arabs thought that maybe it was AIPAC again, which is trying to influence the Congress. So my question is, do you feel that, as an administration, can you pressure Mr. Netanyahu, if need be, domestically, and can you--do you think that also Mr. Netanyahu can endanger the historic alliance and relation between his country and the United States? Well, first of all, I tried to make very clear in the speech, the bond between the United States and Israel is unbreakable. It transcends party; it will be there if there is a Democratic President or a Republican President, if there is a Democratic Congress or a Republican Congress. I mean, I think Nahum would be the first one to acknowledge, I do not know what number of American-born Jews are now Israeli citizens, but it is a pretty high number. So expecting a break between the United States and Israel is, I think, not something that people should anticipate. Netanyahu has only been in office, what is it, a month and a half?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 513, "text": "So we maybe might just want to try a few more months before everybody starts looking at doomsday scenarios. This is difficult, and it is going to take some time. Now, it is going to take time for Palestinian leadership. We just discussed the issue of how Palestinians unify around some core principles that could facilitate talks from going forward. If Hamas wants to participate, it is going to have its own political problems internal to Hamas, because there are some who will never agree to recognizing Israel, in part because they would prefer being in the role that they are in now, which is in opposition and obtaining financing and support and living in Damascus and doing what they do, to governing. They are going to have to make some decisions. For Israel, these are also difficult decisions. I believe that, as I said in the speech, these settlements are an impediment to peace. But that is not to deny the fact that there are people who are already living in some of these settlements, that there is a momentum to some of these settlements. So all these things are going to take time, but this is why I say America cannot --we cannot do this for the parties. I mean, I do think that sometimes there is a schizophrenic view in the Middle East of America. On the one hand, everybody wants America to stop meddling, Do not interfere; do not be imperialist. And then on the other hand, When is America going to solve the Palestinian crisis? Why have not they done this? Why have not they created democracy and human rights in--throughout the Muslim world? Well, you cannot have it both ways, right? We cannot , on the one hand, be the respectful partner who is listening to other countries, and on the other hand, you expect us to solve every problem, and nobody else makes an effort. And part of what I have tried to do today is to instead say, we will be a partner, we will work with you, but everybody is going to have to carry their own weight on this thing. Are the Arabs who are now the allies of the United States of America, are they ready to be real partners? Because in the past, some of them were not partners, real partners, especially----", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 514, "text": "For example, in the time of Yasser Arafat and the meetings between President Clinton, I think, and Mr. Arafat and maybe Mr. Barak, most of the Americans I met said, Well, it was Arafat who backed off. Although, some people say, No, this is not the story, but this is what I heard. And when I asked some of my friends in the States, they said, Well, the Arabs --which means, at that time, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, who were the allies of Yasser Arafat and allies of the United States-- did not force him or did not try to convince him just to accept what was the parameter of solution, which was at that time offered and I do not think described something better. One of the things I have learned about being ENTITY is I always read about things that I do not remember happening, even though I was in the room, probably because they did not happen. So I do not try to guess or speculate on what happened a decade ago with respect to why a peace deal was not completed. What is more important from my perspective is, how do we now move forward? And I think that all the parties involved are going to have to seize this moment. And it is going to require some risks. And part of the reason that I tried to emphasize this in a public speech is, leaders have to have followers, and it is important for the publics in Muslim communities to be supportive of the efforts of Arab States to solve this problem and, ultimately, help to create a two-state solution and better or normalized relations with Israel, just as it is important for the Israeli population to provide space for their leadership to make difficult decisions, and it is important for the Palestinian people to provide an atmosphere in which the Palestinian leadership can make difficult decisions. You know, politicians, they lead, but ultimately, they cannot be so far ahead of their people that those bonds between the leader and the people are ruptured. And so if we are going to be serious about this, then the people have to at least try to keep pace with what I hope will be leadership across the board. In your speech, you made a reference to the conflicts which are poisoning the relations between the Muslim world and the West, and America in particular. You just came from a partner country, a strategic partner, Saudi Arabia.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 515, "text": "In your effort to resolve conflicts in Iraq, in Afghanistan--maybe you have noticed that Saudi Arabia keep its distance with the previous administration from those two countries. Did you develop any plans with King Abdallah, who will share the same views as you, so you would work together in your work in Iraq and Pakistan and Afghanistan? Well, I certainly discussed these issues with His Majesty. I try not to disclose the contents of private meetings unless there is been a joint decision that we will discuss them, because I want to always have frank conversations with these leaders. Saudi Arabia is, obviously, absolutely critical to solving a range of problems in the Middle East. It is an economic leader because of not only its oil wealth but its broad-based development strategies. It is a thought leader and a religious leader because of Mecca and Medina. And so if we are talking about Iraq, for example, I think normalizing relations and exchanging ambassadors between Saudi Arabia and Iraq will be helpful to Iraq and its stabilization. With respect to Pakistan and the situation in Afghanistan/Pakistan, we are seeing a lot of displaced people. Making sure that there are resources that are put in place so that those displaced persons do not experience enormous suffering, but also so that you do not have further radicalization of an entire population that has been uprooted because of conflict, Saudi Arabia is going to be critical. So on all these issues, I think Saudi leadership is something that is desirable. I also happen to have what I consider, and I hope he considers as well, a very good and warm relationship with His Majesty. I think he is a very wise man, and he is a very honest man, and I have great respect for him. A question about the other audience who were not here at the gathering. You spoke to a very receptive, cheerful--they declared their love to you also. But the radicals, whom we need to address--Usama bin Laden is alive. They have their influence, they have---- but they have their influence. What are you going to do about that? Well, Al Qaida we will defeat because they kill innocent people. I am a strong believer in dialog, but I do not think that any nation should tolerate an international network that is willing to murder men and women and children who have done nothing. That cannot be the basis for justice. That cannot be the basis for any governing ideology.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 516, "text": "I mean, who would live like that, that I decide somebody lives with a different religion or has a different skin color or looks like somebody that I do not like, and I am just going to go ahead and target them deliberately? And so we will go after them. And part of the reason it is not easy is because they are adept at exploiting the very real tensions that exist that I discussed today. I do not expect to change their minds, obviously. My audience is, though, say, the 20-year-old young man in Cairo in maybe one of the poorer sections of Cairo or in Gaza or in Damascus or in Tripoli who is still searching, is still looking for a way. And my message to that young man or that young woman would be, it is possible for you to be true to your faith, true to your traditions, but instead of destroying, you can build. And if you see injustice, then the way to achieve the changes you seek is not through violence, but is through persuasion. And if I reach a few of those 20-year-olds, or I reach their parents and maybe they have a conversation and debate with those young men and women, then perhaps that can make a difference when somebody tries to recruit that person to join an extremist organization. No quick solutions to Gaza, but by the end of this year, my country will have invested $900 million, almost a billion dollars, in humanitarian relief in Gaza. I think it is very important that we find ways to loosen the borders so that more supplies, more medicine, more infrastructure development can get into Gaza for rebuilding. I think part of that is the international community working to ensure that the smuggling of weapons that are then fired into Israel are no longer taking place. That is going to be a difficult task, but it is one that we are going to have to work on, because in the absence of that, we are not going to solve it. Okay, everybody, I have to go see the Pyramids.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistscairo", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists in Cairo", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-cairo", "publication_date": "04-06-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 523, "text": "ENTITY, let us start with Mexico. You are going down there on Monday. The news today is that Mexico just dismantled its antidrug agency and has put a new agency in place with new trainees. Will this stop the corruption that has been so rampant? Well, I think there is a good chance that it will improve things. Keep in mind the Mexicans have a big challenge. This is not just something they-this cooperation we are undertaking in the antidrug area from Mexico's point of view is not primarily for the United States. Of course, we want to reduce the number of illegal drugs coming into America. Primarily, it is for Mexico. It is to preserve the social, political, and economic integrity of the country. I have had a good relationship with President Zedillo and with Mexico since I became President. I have done everything I could do to try to make sure America is a good neighbor and a good partner for the future. And I think this will enable us to work more closely together in that area. ENTITY, Mexico is going to have midterm elections that are going to be watched throughout the world. And I know President Zedillo has been trying to change some of old time and change the structure of his party. What are your expectations of these midterm elections? It is the first time the mayor of Mexico City is going to be elected. My only expectations are that they will be free and fair and that they will express the will of the Mexican people and that we will support that, whatever that is. ENTITY, NAFTA, according to the numbers, seems to be working. Do you expect the U.S. Congress to help push NAFTA to Chile fast-track? And you have spoken, and your people have spoken, how important Latin America is as far as a trading partner, but does Congress share your view, sir? I am, frankly, disappointed and surprised that there is still so much opposition to expanding fasttrack. NAFTA has been a big success for us, with Canada and with Mexico. It has brought our two countries closer together. When Mexico had a difficult time economically, the United States made the loan that-I made the decision to make a loan to Mexico, and they paid the loan back early with interest and a profit. It is creating more jobs for Mexico, more jobs for the United States.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjacobogoldsteincnnradionoticias", "title": "Interview With Jacobo Goldstein of CNN Radio Noticias", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jacobo-goldstein-cnn-radio-noticias", "publication_date": "01-05-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 524, "text": "And I think we would be very, very, very shortsighted if we did not extend fast-track, go down and involve Chile, and then eventually complete the promise of the Summit of the Americas-involve the Andean nations, the MERCOSUR nations, all the nations, Latin America, Central America, Caribbean in the trade area of the Americas. That is what I want to do, and I am going to keep pushing for it. ENTITY, you placed great importance on the relations with Mexico, personal relation between you and President Zedillo. And now the word is out, you are going to be naming a very famous politician of the other party, the Governor of Massachusetts, Governor William Weld. How will this create better relations between you and Mexico? Well, if Governor Weld's appointment goes through, I would expect it to greatly strengthen our relationships because I think that they will have a lot in common and that the three of us will all have a good relationship, which will facilitate our countries growing closer together and working better together. Will he have direct access to you and Madeleine Albright? I know him well. I mean, he is a member of the other party, and when he ran against Senator Kerry last year, I worked very hard for Senator Kerry. But we have a good personal relationship. He is a highly intelligent man, and he and I are clearly on the same wavelength in terms of what we believe our policy toward Mexico and, indeed, toward all Latin America should be. Finally, ENTITY, I want to touch slightly the issue of human rights. Will the subject of human rights be broached during the bilateral meeting, or will you deal-with President Zedillo? I expect we will discuss everything that is out there to be discussed in our relationship. We have a very open and candid relationship. If he has some problems with the United States, he feels free to raise them with me. And we will talk through everything I think we should talk through. Migrations-the new migration laws have created a huge stir in Mexico and Central America, also-the issue, that will come up? I would like to make three points. First of all, there were provisions dealing with legal immigrants tacked onto the welfare reform bill that had nothing to do with welfare reform, that I strongly opposed, and that will have to be significantly changed if we are going to get a budget agreement here with the Republican Congress.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjacobogoldsteincnnradionoticias", "title": "Interview With Jacobo Goldstein of CNN Radio Noticias", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jacobo-goldstein-cnn-radio-noticias", "publication_date": "01-05-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 525, "text": "I have told them that, and we are working hard on it. Secondly, with regard to the law dealing with illegal immigration, I know that there are some questions about that law in Latin America. But let me point out, the main thing the law does is to give us extra tools to control our borders, to deal with illegal immigrants in our workplaces and who come into the criminal justice system. We are going to work very hard to avoid any draconian interpretation of the law that would lead to any kind of mass deportations or anything of that kind. But keep in mind, the United States admitted last year 960,000 legal immigrants. We are now the fifth largest Hispanic country in the world, with 22 million Hispanic-Americans here. So we are committed to open immigration and to having more people here from the Americas, but we have to do it in a legal way that has some discipline and order and integrity to it. And we will try to do it in a fair and balanced way. ENTITY, there was some concern in Mexico when Mexican trucks were not allowed-truckers to drive in this country. President Zedillo would bring it up if I did not . we are trying to work that out. Our concerns here are basically safety concerns, and we have an obligation under NAFTA, the United States does, to permit Mexican truckers into the United States if they meet the standards that we apply to our people. And we are trying to work out exactly how we define that and resolve it with the Mexicans. And we have two or three relatively minor matter all but one. And I think we have to work very hard to try to rectify the economic harm done to the Caribbean countries inadvertently by Congress when they adopted NAFTA but would not go along with my suggestion to give the same treatment to the Caribbean countries. Excuse me, by Caribbean you mean Central America and the Caribbean Basin? We did not- I do not think the Congress meant to hurt them by passing NAFTA, but I told them what I was afraid would happen. I asked them to at least maintain the status quo, so that they would not lose any ground compared to Mexico because Mexico's great gains have come from the labors of the Mexican people and from the transfer of some production from Asia back to Mexico. They never intended to take anything away from the Central America and Caribbean countries. So we have to rectify that because those countries have to have a chance to grow.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjacobogoldsteincnnradionoticias", "title": "Interview With Jacobo Goldstein of CNN Radio Noticias", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jacobo-goldstein-cnn-radio-noticias", "publication_date": "01-05-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 526, "text": "Otherwise, the more successful Mexico is in its antidrug efforts, the more vulnerable the Caribbean countries will be-especially the Caribbean, even more than Central America. They will become even more vulnerable to drug traffickers because they will not be able to make a living there. So we have got to rectify this, and I am hoping to resolve it with this session of Congress. ENTITY, the Central American countries will also bring up the immigration issue because El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Honduras-they were all deeply affected in the eighties during the liberation or revolution, the civil wars of the eighties. They-because of the unique status that they bore when they came into this country, they are in a position different from legal immigrants or plainly illegal immigrants. They are in a different position. And we have already had one discussion, interestingly enough, about that today. We are trying to work that out in a way that seems fair and humane and balanced, and I hope we can. ENTITY, I would like to ask you two questions as they are pushing me out. One has to do with Peru. You were very much involved, your country was, with Japan during the hostage crisis, which came to a conclusion a few days ago. There seems to be some rumblings about some possible human rights violations when the army barged in and saved the hostages. No. have you had any conversations with Mr. Fujimori? I do not know what the facts are on that. I do know that the Government of Peru was very patient for a long time, that the people who took the hostages were terrorists who threatened their lives, and that it was a good thing and remarkable that only one of them was-life was lost in the rescue attempt. But I do not know what the facts were about what happened on the compound. Helms-Burton has created a rift-between Latin America and the United States because of Cuba and Helms-Burton. Do you visualize any circumstances under which Helms-Burton could be lifted? And do you feel this will not threaten your commercial relations and political relations with the Latin American nations? Well, first of all, I think the biggest problem with Helms-Burton, vis-a-vis Latin America, may well have been solved by the resolution we made with the European Union about the interpretation of Helms-Burton.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjacobogoldsteincnnradionoticias", "title": "Interview With Jacobo Goldstein of CNN Radio Noticias", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jacobo-goldstein-cnn-radio-noticias", "publication_date": "01-05-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 527, "text": "And I think if we look at what happened with the European Union, what we want the other democracies of Central America and Caribbean and South America to do is to work with us on promoting openness, human rights, and freedom in Cuba, and we need to do that every way we can. Now, under the statute, the Helms-Burton statute, about the only agreements I can work out are the ones that-like we worked out with Europe. That law supplanted a bill that I liked very much, the Cuba Democracy Act, which gave the United States the flexibility to be both more open and tougher with Cuba, depending on the facts. But that law was passed by Mr. Castro himself. He passed the law as surely as if he'd been here voting on it when he shot down those planes and killed those innocent people. So we are doing the best we can with the law we have, but we all need to keep working for greater openness in Cuba. I think the only prospects for a change in the law would be those that are, again, completely within the control of the Cuban Government and of Mr. Castro. I mean, if he were to evidence some changes, then he might get some changed attitudes here. Finally, ENTITY, you- during your first term, you fought very hard for NAFTA against your own party. You fought very hard to save Mexico-the economic bailout-against people of your own party including. Will you fight as hard now that you do not need to run for reelection? Political considerations aside, will you fight just as hard to make sure that Latin America has a free trade agreement? It may take about a year or two. And are you optimistic you can do it by the year 2005, as they said in Miami at the Summit of the Americas? And I will certainly-there are no political considerations for me one way or the other now. I would like to point out we did get quite a large number of Democrats who supported NAFTA and that the leadership in both parties supported me with the Mexican loan. I am quite concerned that there may have been an erosion of support for the free trade concept in the Americas, not just in the Democratic Party but in the Republican Party as well. Here we are now at the pinnacle of our economic success, political influence in the world, but the only way we can exercise our political influence for good is to become involved with other countries.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjacobogoldsteincnnradionoticias", "title": "Interview With Jacobo Goldstein of CNN Radio Noticias", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jacobo-goldstein-cnn-radio-noticias", "publication_date": "01-05-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 528, "text": "We are definitely in a better position. Keep in mind that my entire goal throughout this exercise is to make sure that what happened on August 21st does not happen again, that we do not see over a thousand people, over 400 children subjected to poison gas, something that is a violation of international law and is a violation of decency. Well, I think we have the possibility of making sure that it does not happen again. And the initial response is the Syrians act as if they do not know anything about it. At that point they are not even acknowledging that they have got chemical weapons. The Russians are protecting the Syrians, suggesting that there is no possibility that the Assad regime might have done this. And as a consequence of the pressure that we have applied over the last couple of weeks, we have Syria first -- for the first time acknowledging that it has chemical weapons, agreeing to join the convention that prohibits the use of chemical weapons, and the Russians, their primary sponsor, saying that they will push Syria to get all of their chemical weapons out. The distance that we have traveled over these couple of weeks is remarkable. And my position and the United States position has been consistent throughout, which is that the underlying civil conflict in Syria is terrible. I believe that because of Assad's actions, his response to peaceful protests, we have created a civil war in Syria that has led to a hundred thousand people being killed and 6 million people being displaced. But what I have also is that the United States cannot get in the middle of somebody else's civil war. We are not going to put troops on the ground. We cannot enforce militarily a settlement there. In the past you said he had to go. What we can do -- what we can do is make sure that the worst weapons, the indiscriminate weapons that do not distinguish between a soldier and an infant are not used. And if we get that accomplished, then we may also have a foundation to begin what has to be an international process in which Assad's sponsors, primarily Iran and Russia, recognize that this is terrible for the Syrian people, and they are willing to come in a serious way to arrive at some sort of political settlement that would deal with the underlying terrible conflict . And your -- and Vladimir Putin has become your unlikely partner in this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 529, "text": "And, you know, even in this op-ed, which has stirred up a lot of controversy here in the United States, he said there is every reason to believe that the rebels are the ones who used the chemical weapons. So does that tell you he is going to lie to protect Assad? Well, nobody around the world takes seriously the idea that the rebels or the perpetrators. He wrote it in The New York Times. What I said is nobody around the world takes seriously the idea that the rebels perpetrated this attack. Now, what is true is that there are radical elements in the opposition, including folks who are affiliated with al-Qaida, who, if they got their hands on chemical weapons, would have no compunction using them in Syria or outside of Syria. And part of the reason why we have been so concerned about this chemical weapons issue is because we do not want those folks getting chemical weapons any more than we want Assad to have chemical weapons. And so the best solution is for us to get them out of there. But with respect to Mr. Putin, I have said consistently that where the interests of the United States and Russia converge, we need to work together. And I talked to Mr. Putin a year ago, saying to him, the United States and Russia should work together to deal with these chemical weapons stockpiles and to work to try to bring about a political transition inside Syria. But do you trust he has the same goal? Do you really trust that? I do not think that Mr. Putin has the same values that we do. And I think, obviously, by protecting Mr. Assad, he has a different attitude about the Assad regime. But what I have also said to him directly is that we both have an interest in preventing chaos, we both have an interest in preventing terrorism -- the situation in Syria right now is untenable; as long as Mr. Assad's in power, there is going to be some sort of conflict there -- and that we should work together to try to find a way in which the interests of all the parties inside of Syria -- the Alawites, the Sunnis, the Christians -- that everybody is represented and that there is a way of bringing the temperature down so that, you know, the horrible things that are happening inside the country are contained -- .", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 530, "text": "I think there is a way for Mr. Putin, despite me and him having a whole lot of differences, to play an important role in that. I welcome him saying, I will take responsibility for pushing my client, the Assad regime, to deal with these chemical weapons because I think that if, in fact, not only Russia gets involved, but if potentially Iran gets involved as well in recognizing that what is happening there is a train wreck that hurts not just Syrians, but destabilizing the entire region -- -- But are not you worried at all that Putin is playing for time and playing you? Well, you know, Ronald Reagan says trust but verify, and I think that that is always been the experience of U.S. presidents when we are interacting with first Soviet leaders and now Russian leaders. You know, Mr. Putin and I have strong disagreements on a whole range of issues. But I can talk to him. We have worked together on important issues. The fact of the matter is, is that we could not be supplying all of our troops in Afghanistan if he were not helping us in -- in transporting those supplies through the northern -- northern borders of Afghanistan. So there are a whole range of areas where we currently work together. We have worked together on counterterrorism operations. This is not a contest between the United States and Russia. I mean, the fact of the matter is, is that if Russia wants to have some influence in Syria post-Assad, that does not hurt our interests. I know that sometimes this gets framed or -- or looked at through the lens of the U.S. versus Russia. That -- that is not what this is about. What this is about is how do we make sure that we do not have the worst weapons in the hands either of a murderous regime or, in the alternative, some elements of the opposition that are as opposed to the United States as they are to Assad. If one year from now Assad is in the process of surrendering his chemical weapons, but he is strengthened his hold on power, is that a victory? Well, the chemical weapons issue is the issue I am concerned about first and foremost simply because that speaks directly to U.S. interests. It speaks to the potential that other countries start producing more chemical weapons, that the ban on chemical weapons unravels, and it becomes more accessible to terrorists, which in turn could be used against us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 531, "text": "So I have a -- so I have a -- a primary concern there. I also believe that the U.S. has an interest in seeing a stable Syria in which people are not being slaughtered. And it is hard to envision how Mr. Assad regains any kind of legitimacy after he is gassed or his military has gassed innocent civilians and children. And so part of my argument here is that we will not intervene militarily to bring that transition about, but all of the countries in the region and, I think, the entire world and the United Nations should have an interest in trying to bring about that stability. What do you think Iran makes of all this? You mentioned Iran. Do you think they can look at all this and say, maybe all options are not on the table, you are not willing to use force? No, I think -- I think the Iranians, who we communicate with indirectly -- Have you reached out personally to the new president? And -- and he is reached out to me. And I think what the Iranians understand is that the nuclear issue is a far larger issue for us than the chemical weapons issue, that the threat against Iran -- against Israel that a nuclear Iran poses is much closer to our core interests, that a nuclear arms race in the region is something that would be profoundly destabilizing. And so I -- my suspicions is that the Iranians recognize -- they -- they should not draw a lesson that we have not struck to think we will not strike Iran. On the other hand, what it -- what they should draw from this lesson is that there is the potential of resolving these issues diplomatically. You think they believe that? I think they recognize, in part because of the extraordinary sanctions that we placed on them, that the world community is united when it comes to wanting to prevent a nuclear arms race in the region. And, you know, negotiations with the Iranians is always difficult. But, you know, my view is that if you have both a credible threat of force combined with a rigorous diplomatic effort, that in fact, you can -- you can strike a deal. And -- and I -- and I hold out -- I hold out that hope. I am sure you are used to that. Senator Corker, Foreign Relations Committee, said that you are not comfortable as commander in chief; it is like watching a person who is caged.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 532, "text": "The president of the Council on Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, words like ad hoc, improvised, unsteady come to mind; this is probably the most undisciplined stretch of foreign policy in your presidency. What do you make of that? Well, you know, I -- I think that folks here in Washington like to grade on style. And so had we rolled out something that was very smooth and disciplined and linear, they would have graded it well, even if it was a disastrous policy. We know that because that is exactly how they graded the Iraq War until -- . No, what it -- what it -- what it says is that I am less concerned about style points. And what I have said consistently throughout is that the chemical weapons issue is a problem. And as a consequence of the steps that we have taken over the last two weeks to three weeks, we now have a situation in which Syria has acknowledged it has chemical weapons, has said it is willing to join the Convention on Chemical Weapons, and Russia, its primary sponsors, has -- has said that it will pressure Syria to reach that agreement. And if that goal is achieved, then it sounds to me like we did something right. Five years out let us take stock. You know, I am looking at the cover of Time Magazine this week. And we have got polls showing that, you know, two-thirds of the country still think we are going in the wrong direction, think the economy is no more secure. What do you say to those Americans who think Wall Street is winning but they are not? The economy was on the verge of the a Great Depression. In some ways, actually, the economic data and the collapse of the economy was worse than what happened in the 1930s. And we came in, stabilized the situation. We have now had 42 straight months of growth, 7 1/2 million new jobs created, 500,000 jobs in manufacturing, 370,000 jobs in an auto industry that had completely collapsed. It is giving loans to companies who can get credit. And so we have seen I think undoubtedly progress across the board.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 533, "text": "And part of it has to do with a whole bunch of long-term trends in the economy where the gains that we have made in productivity and people working harder have all accrued to the people at the very top -- -- And the folks at -- in the middle and at the bottom have not seen major income growth, not just over the last three, four years but over the last 15 years. And so everything that I have done has been designed to, number one, stabilize the economy, get it growing again, start producing jobs again. Number two, trying to push against these trends that had been happening for decades now. That is why we made sure that we had a tax system that was a little bit fair by asking people to pay more at the top. That is what the Affordable Care Act, health care reform, is about, is making sure that folks who had been left out in the cold when it comes to health care are able to get health care. That is why we strengthened the entire banking system so that, you know, too big to fail is far less likely to be in place if, heaven forbid, there is a crisis the next time because we have said, you know, banks, you have got to double the amount of capital that you have so that you can absorb losses when you have them so taxpayers are not bailing you out. If you do start going under, you got to have a plan, a living will, we call it, so that we do not have to come in and clean up after you; you are going to be on your own. OK, but you do have these things, and still 95 percent of the gains go to the top 1 percent. Do you look at that 4 1/2 years in and say, maybe ENTITY just cannot stop this accelerating inequality? No, I think -- I think ENTITY can stop it. I -- the problem is that there continues to be a major debate here in Washington, and that is, how do we respond to these underlying trends? If -- if you look at -- at the data, couple of things are -- are -- are creating these trends. Capital, companies, they can move businesses and jobs anywhere they want. And so they are looking for the lowest wages. That squeezes workers here in the United States, even if corporations are profitable. If you go a lot of companies now, they have eliminated entire occupations because they are now robotized.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 534, "text": "You know, we do not have travel agents. We do not have bank tellers. It is bigger than Washington. So -- so there is a whole bunch of stuff that is happening in the marketplace. But if we have policies that make sure that our kids are prepared for higher-skill jobs, if we have policies that make sure that we are rebuilding our infrastructure, because a robot cannot build a road, and we need, you know, new ports and a smarter electricity grid, if we are making investments to make sure the research and development continues to happen here, if we have tax breaks for companies that are investing here in the United States as opposed to overseas, all those things can make the situation better. It does not solve the problem entirely, but it pushes against these trends. And the problem that we got right now is you have got a portion of Congress who -- whose policies do not just want to, you know, leave things alone; they actually want to accelerate these trends. There is no serious economist out there that would suggest that if you took the Republican agenda of slashing education further, slashing Medicare further, slashing research and development further, slashing investments in infrastructure further, that that would reverse some of these trends of inequality. This may -- may lead to something even more disastrous. It is deja vu all over again here in Washington. You are a couple weeks away from a government shutdown, few weeks away from a possible default one more time. Speaker Boehner says, listen, you just have to sit down and negotiate with me. Are you still absolutely refusing to talk in any way, shape or form? Keep in mind my position here, ENTITY, because I -- I have been through this a couple times -- with Speaker Boehner. What I am -- what I have said is, with respect to the budget, we have presented our budget. And now it is the job of Congress to come up with a budget that keeps our long-term trends down or -- or our current trends of reducing the deficit moving forward but also allows us to invest in the things that we need to grow. And I have told him and I have told the country what I think we need to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 535, "text": "I am happy to have a conversation with him about how we can deal with the so-called sequester, which is making across-the-board cuts on stuff that we should not be cutting while continuing tax breaks, for example, for companies that are not helping to grow the economy. It is just that they have not been willing to negotiate in a serious way on that. What I have not been willing to negotiate, and I will not negotiate, is on the debt ceiling. But presidents have done that in the past, and you have done it in the past. ENTITY, if you take a look, what has never happened in the past was the notion that in exchange for fulfilling the full faith and credit of the United States, that we are wiping away, let us say, major legislation like the health care bill. And when it comes to budgets, we have never had a situation in which a party said that, you know, unless we get our way a hundred percent, then we are going to let the United States default. That did not happen when you were working here in the White House. The -- ENTITY, I think it is fair to say -- you -- that never in history have we used just making sure that the U.S. government is paying its bills as a lever to radically cut government at the kind of scale that they are talking about. There have been negotiations around the corners because nobody had ever presumed you'd actually threaten the United States to default. You know, they say they need changes in Obamacare. The -- if we set -- if we continue to set a precedent in which a president, any president, a Republican president, a Democratic president, where the opposing party controls the House of Representatives, if -- if that president is in a situation in which each time the United States is called upon to pay its bills, the other party can simply sit there and say, well, we are not going to put -- pay the bills unless you give us what our -- what we want, that changes the constitutional structure of this government entirely. So -- so -- so -- so we cannot negotiate around the debt ceiling. If Mr. Boehner has ideas about how we can grow this economy, strengthen the middle class, put people back to work in a serious way, of course, we are happy to, you know, support the negotiations that have taken place between the House and the Senate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 536, "text": "If we are going to continue to reduce the deficit -- and I think a lot of people are not aware of the fact that the deficit's been cut in half since I came into office, it is going on a trend line of further reductions -- if we want to do more deficit reduction, I have already put out a budget that says let us do it. I am willing to reform entitlements. I am willing to, you know, cut out additional waste that may be there. But I -- what I also think we should be doing is eliminating corporate tax breaks that nobody can defend but keep on reappearing each year in the budget. If we are serious about it, there is no reason that we cannot do it and do right by -- by the -- by the country. You were, you know, re-elected a little more than a year ago, 332 electoral votes, 51 percent of the vote, first president since Eisenhower to do it twice. You put gun control at the top of the agenda, immigration reform, climate change -- all of it is stalled or reversing. How do you answer the argument that beyond the deficit, this has been a lost year, and how do you save it? Well, on immigration reform, for example, we got a terrific bipartisan vote out of the Senate. You had Democrats and Republicans in the Senate come together, come up with a bill that was not perfect, it was not my bill, but got the job done. It is now sitting there in the House. If Speaker Boehner put that bill on the floor of the House of Representatives right now, it would pass. So the question then is not whether or not the ideas that we put forward can garner a majority of support, certainly in the country. I mean, gun control, we had 80, 90 percent of the country that agreed with it. The problem we have is we have a -- a faction of the Republican Party, in the House of Representatives in particular, that view compromise as a dirty word, and anything that is either remotely associated with me, they feel obliged to oppose. And my argument to them is real simple. We are out of time. Your vice president is at Tom Harkin's Steak Fry in Iowa this week, and clearly, Secretary Clinton positioning for a possible run for president. You chose both of them. What do you say to your fellow Democrats when they are thinking about that possible choice?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-this-week", "publication_date": "15-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 537, "text": "ENTITY, I assume that your trip to Europe, after your reelection, was very well tailored, and we can imagine why you go to Brussels and to Germany. But there are lots of-lots of speculation about why you decided to go to Bratislava. So what was behind this decision? I have been trying to think about when this thought got in my mind. I think-I have to credit your Prime Minister, who, in the Oval Office, said, You need to come to our country. And I thought about it, and I think I told Condi Rice then, when she was my National Security Adviser, before I named her Secretary of State, that would be a great idea. I'd like to come, and I am thankful for the invitation, because I want to say to the world, Freedom is a beautiful thing, and here is a country that is working hard to promote democracy. The spirit of your Prime Minister, talking about overcoming the difficulties to become a free society, is-was just wonderful. I have always felt like countries like the Slovak Republic are very important for the world to know more about, and-because, as you know, I am a big believer in liberty, and this is a country which is succeeding. And it is not-there is bumps in the road. It is going to be one of the highlights of the trip; it really is. You have, obviously, a very good relationship with Slovak Government and the other governments of so-called new Europe. But the public does not always necessarily agree with our Government and with American policy. And you, many time, stress that you want to have a very good relationship with the whole Europe. So what is your strategy to improve the relationship with the nations, with the citizens? Well, first of all, nobody likes war. And basically what you are referring to is my decision to go into Iraq. And I can understand why citizens, particularly if they did not feel threatened by Saddam Hussein, would say, We do not like war, and we do not agree with what ENTITY decided. And I know that. But now they have got to see what is happening in Iraq. Eight million people voted in the face of terror. And so what is going to be very important for me is to connect that free country emerging with peace for their children and grandchildren. In other words, there has to be a connection in order for people to say, Well, now I understand what, you know, what the policy means.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithslovakstatetelevision", "title": "Interview With Slovak State Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-slovak-state-television", "publication_date": "18-02-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 538, "text": "It is a-and so one of the reasons-that is what I will speak about not only-I mean, in Europe, it is very important to make that connection. It is -ours is a-mine is a mission and a trip that says, We share values, human rights and human dignity and rule of law and minority rights and respect for women. And therefore, it is those values that should unite our voices when it comes to spreading those values in parts of the world that are troubled parts of the world, Iran or Syria or, as you saw recently, in Lebanon. I am convinced that as democracy-and particularly, Israel and the Palestinian Territories-as democracy takes hold there, the people of the Slovak Republic will see, Gosh, I am beginning to understand what ENTITY was trying to do. United States and you, personally, helped to fulfill the vision of free, democratic, and united Europe. But there is something missing from this picture, and people feel that they are treated like second-class Europeans because of visa. And I am sure you will hear about the visa very often, not only in Slovakia but also in European Union. I know your Government has many other priorities, maybe much, much bigger priorities. But can I count on your leadership, ENTITY, on this issue? No, I have heard about the visa issue. I mean, yes, I have heard about the visa issue. In other words, what I was saying, No, this is not a minor issue. This is an issue that our friends have brought up quite frequently. And we are trying to work it through. There is an old policy in place that needs to be renewed and reviewed, given the new realities of the Slovak Republic or Poland or the Czech Republic or wherever. And so I have told Condi Rice, Let us just make sure our visa policy is fair and balanced. So we can count on your help? I am not sure you can count on the results, but you can count on my interest. ENTITY, you are going to meet President Putin in Bratislava. And in Washington, many people are concerned about corrosion of democracy in Russia. And you, in a summit in Chile, you also raised the issue of Russia's curb on democracy. So how much you are concerned about this issue of Russia? Well, I have a good relationship with President Putin.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithslovakstatetelevision", "title": "Interview With Slovak State Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-slovak-state-television", "publication_date": "18-02-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 539, "text": "And the reason-and that is important, because that then will give me a chance to say in private-ask him why he is been making some of the decisions he is been making. I mean, he is done some things that has concerned people. And I-it is going to be-I want him to be able to have a chance to say he is done it for this reason or done that, so I can explain to him as best I can- in a friendly way, of course-that Western values are-you know, are based upon transparency and rule of law, the right for the people to express themselves, checks and balances in government In other words, not one part of the government is so powerful they can overwhelm all the rest of the government. And I am looking forward to doing that right there in your beautiful country. Listen, I think this is going to be my 12th meeting with President Putin. It is an important relationship that we will continue to nurture and work. You mentioned the war in Iraq and relationship. What is your personal lesson how this war in Iraq changed relationship between United States and Europe and built relation with Eastern Europe? Yes, I appreciate that very much. First of all, war is a terrible thing. And a lot of Europe supported the decision to enforce the United Nations resolutions. Remember, this was not a U.S.-you know, this came about as a result of the United Nations passing 1441, which said-and by the way, the 16th resolution to Mr. Saddam Hussein that said, Disarm, disclose, or face serious consequences. He chose not to do either, so he faced serious consequences. And a lot of Europe supported the decision to go and have him face serious consequences because the international body, the United Nations, needed to be credible when it spoke. And the Eastern Europeans were great friends on this subject, and it is interesting. They understand what it means to live under tyranny. They know what it means to have secret police. And they began to smell that great freedom that comes, and then all of a sudden, democracies began to emerge. And what a fantastic example for the world, and Europe benefits with countries like the Slovak Republic a part of NATO or the European Union. I mean, these are very important lessons for people to see, that you cannot take freedom for granted, and freedom is hard, and democracy is hard work.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithslovakstatetelevision", "title": "Interview With Slovak State Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-slovak-state-television", "publication_date": "18-02-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 566, "text": "A beautiful day here in Seattle; it rained earlier this morning, but there is no city like this. They have been very good to me. It is a real future-oriented place with a lot of different kinds of folks. Do you like this? I do like it. In large measure I like it because it is one of the few times I get to really go out and put out our record, my message. And I also just like to see the American people. We were in Ocala, and you said to me, God, I love this. Remember that we were in that rodeo arena? It would seem that after this time you have been ENTITY for 2 years that it is old hat by now. And perhaps the most frustrating part of being ENTITY is how hard it is to stay in touch with them, to stay connected to them, for them to really know what you do on a daily basis. And so to be able to come back out here with someone like Ron Sims, whom I admire so much, that represents what is best in this country, that is cutting against all this cynicism and negativism that is blanketing the airwaves, it is really just a great thing to do. What do you make of that? And there is lots of bases we are going to cover, of these lots of radio talk shows, other areas of negativism, that is more than just criticism. What do you make of it? Well, it is almost like an institutionalized approach to life, you know, that everything is given the most negative possible spin, information is presented in attack mode. The American people hate it, but they react to it. But portions of them listen to it. Portions of them listen to it, of course. And even if they listen for entertainment, the surveys show in these elections that they react to it, which is, of course, why the politicians do it. So what does it mean to you when you see it, hear it, about you, about people you like, about anyone? Well, it what I think is it is not very good for America. It is not good for our people. It makes it harder for people to take a deep breath and face their problems and seize their opportunities and move forward. And as I have a chance, for example, to go to the Middle East to participate in that peace signing, other leaders are bewildered at the negative attitudes in America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 567, "text": "They say, Gosh, you know, your economy is coming back; your deficit's going down; things are happening in your country. You are leading the way to peace around the world. Why would the American people be in a negative frame of mind? And I always say, well, first of all, a lot of Americans have personal insecurity in their lives. I mean, let us face it, there is some reality out there. There are a lot of people who are afraid they are going to lose their jobs. They have not gotten a raise in a long time. They may lose their health care or their retirement. They are living in a neighborhood where they feel personally insecure. They see things like these children killing children.  So they have a right to that feeling? In other words, the picture is not all positive. But I think the other thing is, the overwhelming way that most Americans get their information tends to be both negative and combative and assaultive, almost. And what I tried to do in the presidential campaign in '92 with all those town meetings, starting way back in '91, where I listened to people and they talked to me, with insisting on three debates and having one debate with the public there asking questions of the candidates for ENTITY, with the bus tours we did was all designed to get people involved, let them vent their frustrations, and then focus on what we were going to do. And that is the thing that has been missing too much in this election. And of course, the Republicans like that because if people are mad, then they think the Democrats do not vote and the extremists on the right in their party do vote, they get a big advantage and it helps them get into power. But it does not do anything to help America solve their problems. How do you deal with it personally, I mean, the carping, the anger, the up and down in the polls, personally? Well, on the up and down in the polls, I basically try to ignore it. Not because I care what people think about the issues, but I knew when I started this job that while everybody said they wanted us to change, if it were easy to do it, someone else would have done it. So to get the deficit down, we had to make some tough decisions. If you are going to make college loans more affordable to Americans within the budgetary constraints we had, we had to make some tough decisions, take on some interest groups.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 568, "text": "If you want to pass the Brady bill and the crime bill, you have got to make some tough decisions. The NRA got real mad at us, and now they are trying to take it out on every candidate in the country that stood up for safer streets. So anybody who ever fights for change is going to have to be willing to risk going down in the polls some. What bothers me more is the general atmosphere where people tend to believe the worst about people in public life, rather than the best, and tend to have a negative view, generally. Because the truth is that this country is in better shape than it was 21 months ago. The Government is smaller, but it is doing more for ordinary working people. The streets are going to be safer because of the crime bill. And we are a lot closer toward having a safer, more democratic, more free world. The Russian missiles are not pointing at us. The North Korean nuclear agreement means they will not present a threat to us in terms of nuclear weapons, if we go through with that. We have the progress in Haiti and in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East and Northern Ireland. We are moving in the right direction at home and abroad. We have a lot of problems, but we are moving in the right direction. And for people to be kept in a constant turmoil all the time, where they do not listen to one another, they do not talk to one another, they just are bombarded by these negative ads on television, I think is not good for our democracy. If you could see the way other people look at us, they know this is a very great country. When there is extreme negativism, do you condemn it on both sides? When Democrats do it and Republicans do it? Particularly if it is unrelated to the work of the job, you know. This whole thing started from the get-go with the determination of the congressional leadership in the Republican Party not to work with us on the economic program. You are not going to get any votes out of us no matter how you change this program. And there was this little town in South Carolina where there apparently had been maybe some division or something in the past, but they were all coming together. You saw those gripping pictures of the schoolchildren praying. You saw blacks and whites going out together to look for the kids. People really were trying to do their best to do a good and noble thing. And then they found out that the mother had done it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 569, "text": "And unlike previous cases we have had some other cases, horrible cases, where parents kill their children. But this was it stood in such stark contrast to those people praying, working, desperately trying to find those children. I think they had a sense of betrayal, of outrage, of bewilderment, of pain. And I think the experience that the people in the community felt riveted all across our country, indeed, across the world. I think every parent was just sickened by it. The fact that and remember the case in Boston with the call to 911 that she drew the picture of a black man tells us what about racism in America? I think it tells us that we have at least some assumptions about race that still color our thinking, our talking, sometimes our voting. The people in that community, without regard to race, were out there looking for those boys. And most African-Americans in this country get up every day and go to work, work their hearts out, pay their taxes, raise their kids, obey the law. And while the crime rate is higher among African-Americans, they are also more likely to be victims of crime. And it is all really it is a complicated thing, but it is plainly related to the combined impact of the breakdown of family and community and the loss of economic opportunity working together. I saw a poll in the Wall Street Journal the other day, a fascinating poll, which said that both African-Americans and white Americans agreed that this breakdown of social order in the family, the community, the rise of crime, violence, drugs and gangs and guns was the biggest problem in our country. They agreed with that. They all supported welfare reform I mean, not all, 85 percent of both races. The classic American clash. And the truth is, in my judgment, they are both right, and they are both wrong. That is, you need a combined approach to it. We have to rebuild these communities. It is hard to have an orderly society without work. It is hard to have a coherent family without work. It is hard for parents to have all the selfrespect they want if they know they will never have a chance to go to work. But on the other hand, we simply cannot tolerate the behavior that has become all too commonplace. I mean, what is it that turns the heart of a 10-year-old to stone in Chicago and makes it possible for them to let go of a 5year-old boy?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 570, "text": "And again I say, the thing that is so wrong about so much of the political dialog in this election or political ads, is there is no dialog. People are not reaching out across racial lines and trying to figure out how to affirm what is best in this country, how to support the lives and the futures of these kids. Are you saying they are playing to the worst in us, the racist in us? I think they are playing to the they are playing to the lowest common denominator, to the fear, to the division, to the anxiety. I believe that it is better to play to the best in us, to address fear, to address anxiety, to admit it, to say it is legitimate, say, okay, what are you going to do about it? And it was delayed to death at the end of the session by our opponents, like a lot of other bills were. But we do not need that. We need to reform the campaign finance system. There ought to be things that involve people, that let them express their anger and frustration and then say, Okay, now, what are you going to do about it? Because what we run the risk of doing in this election which is why I have been out here working like crazy since I got home from the Middle East is we run the risk of seeing people vote for candidates whose platforms and positions they absolutely disagree with just because they say, I am out; put me in. Government's bad; put me in. I have not seen you quoted on it, and every American has talked about it and they all want to know what their ENTITY thinks. Can there be a fair trial in the O.J. Simpson case? Well, the answer to the first question is, I think there can be a fair trial, but it is much more difficult to empanel a jury that has no opinion. What bothers me is that all the previous proceedings have been televised, all the preliminary things, all the backand-forth arguments. But on balance, I think it would have been better if they had not been, because I think it would have been easier to empanel a jury that had no fixed views, no at least predisposition to believe it. Now, what these folks have to say and what they had to convince the judge of was that whatever they had heard in the past, they could put aside and be fair.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 571, "text": "But I just think all of us, we cannot help being affected by the things we know. And the wrenching pretrial publicity I think is more damaging than whatever publicity might have come in the trial itself. Are you impressed with Judge Ito? They all strike me as competent and committed. And the judge strikes me as someone who has been firm and fair. He is trying very hard, and he has an enormously difficult task. Is this the kind of case, when you were prosecuting, you would have liked to prosecute or not like to prosecute? Well, of course, any I think most prosecutors would, at a kind of a personal, professional level, welcome the chance to be in a big case like this. It is the sort of thing that brings great pain to a country. The feelings that we all had about O.J. Simpson and everything it is a very sad case. Friday night on this program, Bob Dole said that on Tuesday night, when the Republicans take the Senate if they take the Senate and the House, the first person he calls will be you. He will ask to meet with you Wednesday morning. I do not think they are going to win the House and the Senate. But whatever happens, I hope he will call me Tuesday night, and I hope he will be willing to cooperate. All I can tell you is that we had bipartisan support for that crime bill, and it turned into naked politics. And the Republicans that did stick with us were lacerated by their leadership. I hope they do not really, seriously believe that we can go back and do what they did in the eighties and have all these massive tax cuts for upper income people and pay for big defense increases and bring back Star Wars and balance the budget in 5 years and not tell anybody how to do it. If you take Social Security off, you have to cut everything else in the budget 30 percent. I tried to cooperate in the health care debate. When we started the health care debate We met with them in advance. We even offered to work with them on drafting a bill. We were told, No, you go ahead and put your bill in; then we will put our bill in and then we will work. They announced an approach where more than half the Republican Senators supported universal coverage. By the time it came to talk about the bill, there were zero Senators from the Republican Party on that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 572, "text": "So and by the way, then they released the memo of their strategist, Bill Kristol, who was not even ashamed to release the memo and say, You must not cooperate on health care because if the middle class ever gets security about health care, they will probably support the Democrats again. Whereas, if we keep them all torn up and upset and angry, we can either keep them home or get them to vote for us. So I want let me just say this I want more than anything to have a bipartisan effort. I want more than anything to move this country forward, not see it go back. But I have not obstructed that bipartisan effort. And I have seen a level of intense obstructionism that I never thought I'd ever see. So what the American people have to say is first of all, I think we are going to do better than everybody thinks because jobs are up, unemployment is down, the deficit is down, the Government is smaller, all these things are different from the way it was before. We are doing things for ordinary Americans like middle class college loans, national service, tax cuts for lowincome working people, the Family and Medical Leave Act. When people know this, I think we are going to do much better than the experts think, because I think people want to keep going forward, they do not want to go back. Worse-case scenario they take the House. Could you work with Newt Gingrich? I can work with anybody who will work with me. I meant worst-case scenario for you. I am not taking a stand. I can work the American people are the bosses of this country. They run this country. They decide who is in the Congress, and they decide who is ENTITY. You work for them. I work for them. So we will do what we are told to do by the American people. But I will say again, I have worked very hard to get this economy going, to bring the deficit down, to get investment back in education and training, to pass that crime bill and now we have to implement it so we make our streets safer to make our country stronger. What I think is going to happen is the American people are going to think about, in the next couple of days, do we want to keep going forward, or do we really want to go back to trickledown economics?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 573, "text": "Do we want to go back to exploding the deficit, shipping the jobs overseas, causing the country trouble, or do we want to keep working forward? A lot of Republicans did work with me. But without exception, when they work with me on anything tough except for the trade bill, except for NAFTA, and except for some education legislation, in a lot of these other areas they were subject to withering, withering pressure and attack from the leaders of their own party. So I want to work with them, however these elections come out. I think we will probably see the Democrats keep control of the Senate and the House because we are changing things for the better, and the American people now are seeing what the record is. But you will take that call, and you will meet with whoever it is you have to meet with? I would have always taken it. When I ran for ENTITY, I ran as a former Governor I was a Governor. I never shut the Republicans out of my office. I always thought my job was to work with anybody the people elected. A lot of bases to touch, and later we will get some predictions on some individual races that the ENTITY is very aware of. They are the bad guys. And that is the way Harry Truman won in '48, by knocking the no-good, do-nothing Congress. Are we adopting that mode? For one thing, I do not believe we are going to lose the Congress if the American people know what has been done. So you will have no Congress to knock in '96. There is well, whether the Democrats or the Republicans are in the majority, a minority can frustrate the will of the majority just with the filibuster in the Senate, if for nothing else, which killed the campaign finance reform, lobby reform, environmental reform, and a number of other things last year. s initiatives in both years. Eisenhower, once for ENTITY Johnson, and then this one. I will say again, it depends on who the American people send to Congress and what their attitude is. I will work with anybody who will work with me to move the country forward. When I ran for ENTITY in '92, I said I thought the Democratic Party had to change.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 574, "text": "We had to do something about getting the economy going again, bringing the deficit down, shrinking the Government, being tougher on crime, all things the Republicans had previously said they were for, although the deficit went up, the economy was in trouble, and they just talked about crime for 6 years. All right, now we have reduced the deficit, reduced the size of the Government, passed a good crime bill, which now will have to be implemented at the grassroots level. Even as we speak, we have got police officers being hired all over the country because of this crime bill. What are we going to do? I am not like that. This ain't going to be a Truman give 'em hell, Bill campaign? It depends on what they do. It depends on what they do. If they want to work with me, then we will work together. I do believe that we are going to that the people who gum up the works need to be held more accountable. Reports in recent books of disorganization in the Presidency, 2 years of unwieldiness, I am sure you have heard about this, if you have not read the books. Well, my comment is, if we were all that disorganized, how do we have the third most successful record in success with Congress, one of only three with over 80 percent of our initiatives passing, including major advances in bringing the deficit down, education reform, trade expansion, crime, and a number of other things, first of all? no Russian missiles pointed at the United States, North Korea, Haiti, Northern Ireland, the Persian Gulf, the Middle East. Are you saying we are looking at the process, not the result? But I am saying the process is more open than perhaps in previous administrations because we are going through a period of historic change. And when for example, when I tried to get my economic program together, after I was elected, but before I took office, we all agreed we had to bring the deficit down; we still had to invest more in education and defense conversion and new technologies. And we had to do things that would expand the economy. We wanted to help low-income working families. And we wanted some other incentives to spur economic growth that cost money, some tax incentives. So we got a lot of people in from different points of view, and we talked it through.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 575, "text": "Now some people wanted to have the image that somebody brings a ENTITY a little one-page memo with two options, and you just check off and say that is the way it is, and it is all neat. This is a complicated world with a lot of variables. It may be unsettling to people that we have honest debates in the White House. But you know, when I think about some of the major mistakes that my predecessors have made, I think the absence of honest debate may have caused some of that. I think that the White House today is much better organized than it was 30 days after I took office. I think it is more orderly; it is running more smoothly, decisions are made in a more disciplined fashion. I think a lot of people have learned to do their jobs better and better and better. But again, I say the a lot of the best companies I know of in America have very lively, open discussions on important issues. They take real time on important issues because then that shapes what the future is. And so far, I say, if you judge us on our results, we are making pretty good decisions. Critics have said now that you fired your wife from health care. What caused this change, and who is running the health care battle? Oh, I did not do that. I know, but critics are saying what happened in that change? She never did she never signed on to, agreed to, or was willing to manage the congressional process.  She took the ball, though. She took the ball, but what she did was to put hundreds and hundreds of people together to go out and consult all the Members of Congress, to run a 2-day seminar on health care for Republicans and Democrats in Congress, and to try to get the work product up and then be the spokesperson. Now whatever we wind up doing on health care, she will be still speaking out on that and doing a number of other things. But the what we were saying is that she would not have primary responsibility for actually deciding what move next to make in Congress and lobbying that. Did she dislike doing it? No, I think she liked it, but she did not want to be in a position where that is all she would do. And that is the only issue she could be involved in, and she did not want to be in a position where she got caught up It is where she got caught up in the process of the lobbying of the Congress process.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 576, "text": "She wants to be a spokesperson for health care, for solving a problem, not the person who has to manage the process in Congress. So we will be hearing a lot from Hillary in the next 2 years. Yes, she you know, she is invested a lot in this. She is done a wonderful job. And she is what we think about the health care deal is that, first of all, keep in mind how long it takes to get things done in Washington. Family leave took 7 years. The Brady bill took 7 years. The crime bill took 6 years. Banking reform took 7 years. I mean, we have gotten things done that took years that other people could not do. But it was probably unrealistic to think you could get health care reform in a year and a half, given the fact that it is bigger than all those other things. By the way, this is the ENTITY's seventh appearance, all together, running and as ENTITY, on this program. It is always great to have him with us. We are touching a lot of bases. If there was a ever a case for campaign finance reform, it is this. The Republican candidate moves to California in '91 from Texas, essentially buys a Congress race, announces 8 months later for the Senate, loses his own congressional district in the Republican Senate campaign but spends, it looks like, $35 million or something, some enormous amount of money, just to run negative ads against Feinstein. She, by contrast, in only 2 years, passes the assault weapons ban, a law that requires zero tolerance for handgun possessions in schools by students, and the biggest protection act, natural protection act in history, the California desert bill. It is his money, but it shows you why we need some sort of campaign finance reform. No Senator in my lifetime has gotten as much done in as short a period of time as Dianne Feinstein. And those three things may not be popular everywhere, but they are supported by a majority of the people of California. Three hundred miles from here, over the hills in Spokane Mr. Foley, Speaker of the House what is going to happen there? I think the people of every every time there is a Speaker who comes from a rural district, there is always the problem of the people in the district thinking that the Speaker is more interested in the national job than the grassroots job.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 577, "text": "All I can say is that of all the leaders of Congress I have ever known in both Houses and in both parties, Tom Foley is the one who speaks most often about his constituency and is most in contact with what he thinks they are thinking about. He is the one who talks to me all the time. And I think that if my feeling is that the people have seen him back there working, defending his positions, defending his record, defending his service for the district. If it is just a question of who can do more for the people in that district to build their economic future and to meet their needs, I do not think there is much question. I think he wins in a walk, but it is a tough race. Our old friend Ross Perot's entrance into the race, endorsing some Republicans, some Democrats, independents and calling for basically a Republican victory. Well, it is curious to me because if you look at what I have done as compared with what Ross Perot advocated, I disagree with him on GATT and on NAFTA, but so does the Republican congressional leadership. So both sides disagree with him on trade. So what else was his campaign about? It was about reducing the deficit, reducing regulation and the size of Government, and getting political reform, campaign finance reform, lobby reform, lineitem veto. We reduced the deficit without any Republican votes. We reduced the size of Government without any Republican support. We have deregulated in banking and trucking. We have deregulated a lot of the Federal rules on welfare reform, giving 20 States the right to move people from welfare to work. We have done things that he said he was for. I supported and most Democrats supported, most Democrats supported, campaign finance reform, lobby reform, a bill to make Congress live under the same laws it imposes on private business. Their leadership opposed it. So what we are doing and where we stand and what we want to do in the future is much more consistent with what Ross Perot said he wanted to do if he were ENTITY. Then what do you make of this? I will leave that to you to make of it. All I can tell you is, we have really faithfully pursued the reform agenda that he and I shared in common when we both ran for ENTITY.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 578, "text": "So the truth is, he'd come a lot nearer getting what he said he wanted done in '92 in fact done in '95 if we kept the Democrats in the Congress who are committed to change. I do not have any idea. Do you expect Democrats to oppose you? I do not have any idea. Do you have a Republican favorite you'd like to run against? No, I am going to leave that up to them. I will say this, sooner or later, we will have a debate and a discussion in this country about what, in fact, has been done and what has not been done. We will have to get over being mad and being negative and talk about what we are going to do to build this country. We cannot for long afford to give in to the blamers instead of the builders. I mean, this is a country you look we have got a lot of challenges we have to work through to get this country into the 21st century as the strongest country in the world, with the American dream alive and well. We are strongest again economically, according to the annual vote of international economists, for the first time in 9 years. We are outselling all other auto companies, Americans are, for the first time in 15 years. We are moving in the right direction. At some point, people who tempt our anger and our frustration but promise to reverse the progress we have made and put us back in the economic trouble we were in just a couple of years ago, are going to have to be held accountable. That is what this election ought to be about. And if it is, the Democrats who represent hope, the future, and the progress that is been made in the last 21 months ought to have a chance. Why should we give up the progress of the last 21 months and not give me a chance to finish and go back to what failed us for 12 years? But can we also say, therefore, can I trace in what you said in the beginning that if you do run for reelection, you will debate your opponent or opponents? We are back with ENTITY , touching a lot of bases. The legal defense fund, are there any second thoughts about that, or was it necessary or do you have second thoughts? I think with a strict limit on contributions, there is no possibility of any conflict of interest there. in a very long time. And all these things are like the Whitewater thing, it is these things come up. They have been embarrassing, though.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 579, "text": "If we are going to make Presidents a subject for the first time in history this has never been done to anybody before to things like special counsels looking into things that happened long before the President became President, that were fully aired in the presidential campaign I do not think President should make money being President, but I do not think they should be bankrupt when they leave because of legal fees. Nor do I think that President should expect lawyers to work for nothing. So, once again, we are in a situation here where do you really want to say that unless you are fabulously wealthy you should not be able to be President? You should not be able to run for an office because you cannot buy enough negative television ads to trash your opponent? I think what we did was appropriate, legal, proper, and restrained. spoken to him awhile back and that he, in the middle of a sentence, got angry that he had forgotten what he had been talking about. He said, I lost my memory on that, and it really makes me mad. Did you then think that this might have been Alzheimer's, a common thing to think in people over 80? Did you think it? I do not know that I know the difference between the manifestations of Alzheimer's for someone who is 80 and just not remembering things as well. But he and I have always had a very cordial personal relationship. When I was a Governor, I supported and worked with the White House when we got the first big welfare reform legislation through back in '88. And even though we have had our differences, I always liked the fact that he was positive about America, that he was an upbeat person, that he at moments he was capable of going beyond partisanship, as he has since he is left office. You know, he supported NAFTA and the Brady bill and the crime bill with the assault weapons ban in it, because, I think, of the experience he had with Jim Brady and the terrible scars it left on everyone. So I just I wanted to say that. I was probably in the most Democratic congressional district in America yesterday. And when I asked them, they all just applauded and they gave him a big cheer. Do you think it will help focus emphasis on Alzheimer's? Do you think he was right to do it, to make the announcement? First of all, I think he was very right to do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 580, "text": "And he sat down and wrote the letter himself I think it will help to focus attention on Alzheimer's. I personally appreciated it, because I lost both an uncle and an aunt to Alzheimer's. And so I think it is one more thing that the American people have to be appreciative to him about. We are back with ENTITY. Our remaining moments, some other quick bases to cover Senator Dole the other night said he likes Warren Christopher, thinks he is done a great job. Is Warren Christopher staying at State? He is done a good job, and as far as I am concerned, he is the Secretary of State. There was rumors that she was going to be leaving that post, and she seemed to have strengthened it. She is doing a good job. Will she be here through the next 2 years? She has not told me yet. She is doing a good job, and she is going to stay as long as we decide she is going to stay, she and I together. I have been a little evasive on all personnel questions. You do not want to discuss personnel? I think ENTITY should always be slightly evasive on personnel questions unless there is some great policy issue involved. George Foreman I like, because I identify with him. He is still got a terrific punch. I'd like to think that there are a lot of us who could identify with that. You know what he said yesterday? He said he was really grateful to America for giving him the chance to fight. I am grateful to America for giving me the chance to fight. So you felt an association with him. You have the same kind of midriff, and he eats like you, fast foods. I do not really eat fast foods anymore. It is part of Dee Dee's counseling to me. She will not let me do it no, we do not do that much anymore. Well, I have not been there, but Ann Richards is supported in her job by over 60 percent of the people. So if they support the work she is done for Texas, you would think they would renew her contract. Oh, I was at the beginning. I was asked to go, actually, to El Paso, but we could not do it. We are out of time. Are you predicting victory in the Senate and the House? You will retain control of both?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingseattlewashington", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Seattle, Washington", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-seattle-washington", "publication_date": "06-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 582, "text": "ENTITY, what are you going to do about the fact that sensitive and relevant documents were not reviewed by the Iran-contra committees? In the first place, I have great confidence that A.B. Culvahouse and those charged with cooperating with Congress were cooperative; I have seen nothing to indicate they were not . Secondly, I would offer full cooperation to any request made of this administration, and I just cannot confirm the hypothesis of your question at all. But you mean you would turn over any documents that they now want to see? Is that what you are saying by full cooperation ? Those procedures were agreed to by the Congress. Certainly, I would see that if any documents are in control of this administration -- relevant documents -- that we would live assiduously by those guidelines. But I have no reason to believe that the previous administration, the lawyers in it who worked closely with Congress, did not fulfill their obligations. ENTITY, were you an emissary to Honduras, as has been alleged? I went to Honduras, sure. That is a matter of public record. And did you have a quid pro quo deal? I have told you that I am not going to discuss that until the trial with North is over. No, I might have something to say on it when the trial is over, but I would simply ask you to understand that this is a request of the lawyers. My conscience is clear. As far as you can tell, was there an oversight by any of those two bodies, or was it a question of -- the Congress was not pushing the right buttons to get the documents? All I can just state is the confidence that I feel in Culvahouse and company. But we have received the letter down here, and I will take this opportunity to tell them we will cooperate fully. But who controls the documents and all of that -- you will have to talk to the lawyers about that.   I think they are in the control and in the custody of the Archives archivists, but I am not sure. When you say you will cooperate fully with -- I presume you mean Senators Mitchell and Inouye . Does that mean -- they have asked you, I think, to launch an investigation to find out exactly what happened. Are you saying you will launch an investigation or that you have? I do not remember launching an investigation. Was that part of their request?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps1", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-1", "publication_date": "20-04-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 583, "text": "Well, I would refer them to the people that were in charge of the documentation, which would be Mr. Culvahouse and company, in whom I have great confidence. But if there is anything we can do to encourage that -- absolutely. ENTITY, when you say your conscience is clear, do you mean that the interpretation that has been made of the documents in this trial, which I gather were made by Mr. North himself, are not entirely accurate? I am not discussing anything about my role in this except to say that everything I have said I will stand behind. You will not even -- since they are sequestered -- just give us a -- -- I have just told the gentleman that I am not going to go into that. So, please, do not ask me to do that which I have just said I am not going to do, because you are burning up time. Sir, can I ask you about assault weapons? Oh, no, you have already used up your time. You know, William Bennett, your drug czar, has made a proposal that you treat them like machineguns, which would mean people would register and they'd have their names on file and so forth. First off, what do you think of that idea? And secondly, when are you going to tell us your next step on that? Well, we are having a meeting this afternoon with certain Members of Congress on this. suitability for sporting purposes. And we are being very careful here, but we are going to make a determination using that as a standard. And, Lesley , I cannot say exactly when it will be, but I have expressed my concern about these weapons and their suitability. I do not know exactly when it will be, but there is a meeting here today that is just ongoing, and I have great confidence in Bill Bennett. We have talked to a wide array of people on this. We have gone to some of the think tanks -- that very intelligent, thoughtful paper from Ed Feulner's group over at Heritage, very thoughtful. And so, our package will be -- I guarantee it will include more on law enforcement. And I am sure that Bill Bennett will be totally on board. But we have not gotten the final administration position yet. ENTITY, will you apply the same standard to domestically made weapons that you apply to imported weapons?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps1", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-1", "publication_date": "20-04-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 584, "text": "We are in the process of discussing that now and what role the administration has -- whether it is strictly restriction of imports or something broader than that. At this point, are you convinced that any package that deals with drug violence and crime must also include some aspect that deals with assault weapons? Well, no, I cannot say that. I cannot go that far, because we really have not gotten that far in determining it. ENTITY, the CBS-New York Times poll this morning puts your approval rating at about 61 percent but suggests there is more style than substance. What do you think about that evaluation? And I think that you and Governor Sununu have been briefed by a Teeter poll that is been taken. Does that contain the same sort of information? No, the Teeter poll -- I am not sure it is just because the committee paid for it -- is much stronger. I do not want this to be considered a vicious assault on CBS. They are entitled to their polling figures. But the others were -- look, these things -- you know me on polls, John . You have heard me on this subject before, and I have not changed my view. It is not a question of polls, but a question of what is going on, achieving what you are trying to do. And we are making some progress here. I am very pleased that the Senate did what it did on the savings and loan bill, pleased that we got a budget agreement that many cynics thought we could never achieve at all, no matter of what scope, whatsoever -- that took place. And so, I have been very pleased with the recent talks on the Middle East with three leaders there. But I do not feel under any pressure to meet somebody else's standard on what is progress or not. I know what I am doing, and I think one thing is the country senses that. ENTITY, are you going to offer military aid to the non-Communist resistance in Cambodia? I will continue to give good support to the process and certainly to Sihanouk's efforts. Did you say no decision or no discussion on that? No decision and -- not with me -- cannot recall, but I am not anywhere close to making a decision of that nature.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps1", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-1", "publication_date": "20-04-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 585, "text": "We are coming up to the 100-day mark on your Presidency, which -- if you will look over the past 50 years, every other President, or almost every other President, has come into office at times of crisis, and crisis has been kind of a stage on which we watch Presidents perform. How would you assess your first 100 days so far? Can you elaborate on that? Martin came in; he was not radically trying to change things. But then, that is about where the parallel ends, because I do not know what he did in his first 100 days. We got an agenda, and I have clicked off things that I think demonstrate progress. And I left out the whole question of an ethics package that I think is a very good one. We have had many visitors from foreign lands. We have moved forward on -- I want to add now to what I was saying -- moved forward on Third World debt in a positive way. And I do not even think in terms of 100 days because we are not radically shifting things; this is the Martin Van Buren analogy. We did not come in here throwing the rascals out to try to do something -- correct all the ills of the world in 100 days. And I am methodically, I think, pragmatically moving forward on these. So, I really do not measure it in terms of 100 days. I guess we are the ones who measure the 100 days. You have had visitors, but do you expect the pace of your foreign policy to pick up after this? I am not sure I understand the question. The pace of it is pretty intense -- numbers of visitors, amount of time I spend on foreign policy, initiatives taken by the Secretary of State, attention given to this in the White House, every single day. So, you see, I think we have got prudent foreign policy. We have set into forward motion certain reviews that are moving towards completion. And so, I do not feel a need for some precipitous and dramatic initiative in order to salve the consciences of those who are saying you have got to do something in 100 days. These reviews will not trigger something then? But I think Gorbachev -- on the Soviet East-West relations -- understands what we are about. I, frankly, thought that what we said on Poland the other day was new and a strong initiative. But that takes time to sort out these things.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps1", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-1", "publication_date": "20-04-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 586, "text": "But I did not do it because I wanted to get in under the 100-day wire. We have spelled out what we want to do, and I have got to move our bureaucracy to see that we do it. And you know, it is that kind of concept on the Middle East -- spent a lot of time on the Middle East. And I think King Hussein was right when he said yesterday that the time is right for some kind of action. But now we have got to assess, after he leaves here, where we go, what next step we take. We have got something out there on elections that offers some promise. We have not backed away from historic positions on conference or whatever. I wish I could give you a more dramatic answer to the Lebanon, because this is one that really does hurt. And I am very, very concerned about it. And here all I can say to you is that we have encouraged the Secretary-General to go forward, to try this mission of peace. There is some stumbling blocks to that; I am told we will renew our call for removal of all foreign troops and for a cease-fire. But here is one where I wish that there was some dramatic plan in which the players in the area could agree to, and it is not there. And we have talked to the Middle Eastern leaders. But I cite this one because I really feel it -- about the Lebanon, of the divisions in Lebanon. We have talked to the Brits about it. We have talked to the French about it -- and President Mitterrand the other day. And the people at the U.N. are trying to figure. But there is not a dramatic plan that can bring peace to Lebanon right now. Is that a problem that defies solution? The problem -- the short-run of it -- how you stop this firing, the shelling, how you get factions to stop warring -- has certainly in recent times defied solution. But we cannot give up on it. How has the U.S. managed to provide any kind of influence in the situation? We do not have great influence in Lebanon, with the factions that are fighting. We do have good influence with many of the countries out there. In fact, I think our standing with the moderate Arab countries is as good today as any time in recent history. And I feel strongly about that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps1", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-1", "publication_date": "20-04-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 587, "text": "And back to the Martin Van Buren theory -- I mean, we are building still, coming back out of a time that hit a bit of a low 3 or 4 years ago. Then we restored some prestige by the way we acted in the Gulf. Then you see a cease-fire in the Gulf. We have, I think, much better communication now with Jordan. We have kept good cooperation and coordination with the Egyptians. The Israelis themselves attest to the fact that they have great confidence in our administration. We have some differences with all three of those countries, but, no, I think it is moving. But, Norm , I wish there was a short-term answer to stop the killing in Lebanon. you missed a couple of deadlines -- -- You have missed a couple of deadlines on the MX missile, on what you are going to do to modernize the strategic arsenal -- go MX, Midgetman. And Mr. Cheney gave you some recommendations this week, and a decision is expected this week. What are you going to do on that? We will obviously be talking to Cheney when he comes back from NATO. I am listening -- because this exercise yesterday in this Cabinet Room was not just a semantic drill of some sort. When I talk about cooperation with Congress, I mean it -- consultation with Congress, I mean it.  But how do you -- you know, what do you do about SDI and levels of funding? What do you do about MX or Midgetman? And I have to make the call, the recommendation, from here; but I wanted to get their input. Now I want to get renewed talks with Dick Cheney when he comes back. The national security adviser has provided me with a lot of thinking on this, had several important briefings on it. And I will be prepared very soon to make a decision on it. But we have not -- I cannot go any further than that. ENTITY, you met now with Mubarak, Shamir, and Hussein. What is the next step in the Middle East peace process? On the table is the election process, and one other thing would be how we flesh that out, taking into consideration the concerns about it that have been expressed by Mubarak and by King Hussein and also by Mr. Shamir.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps1", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-1", "publication_date": "20-04-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 588, "text": "who is represented; making clear that this is not a final step, that that is not going to solve the Middle East problem; making clear that it is a step, but we want it to be a constructive step; and exploring other options as well . What is the structural procedure for doing that? On the U.S. side, we will use the National Security Council procedures to do that. And of course, I plan to be in touch with the various leaders. I have told them I want to do that as President. Is this a high priority? in addition to the ones I have already talked to. For example, I talked to King Fahd the other day, and think that that is useful, to be sure. Now, after this round of visits, what do they think? A lot of these countries can be important players here, and the more agreement we can get on the next step, the more likely it is to succeed. Is it time to say that 50-year-old battleships are, in fact, obsolete and begin taking them out of service? Or if not, what is your lesson on it? That is not -- well, my lesson is that -- to find out what happened in infinite detail, check all procedures to be sure that safety is at the highest point, and -- but not -- I would not jump to the conclusion that because that kind of powder was put into these turrets in that way that that makes a useful platform obsolete. Could you indulge me one quick question because of a conflict that the Attorney General suggested yesterday? Is this for TV or is this for the print? The Attorney General suggested yesterday that it might be appropriate to drug-test people in public housing. HUD took immediate exception to that. What do you think? I'd have to talk to him about it because I do not know, and I am not going to go off on some tangent here until I know exactly the thinking of our key Cabinet people. We have got a good Cabinet system, and I encourage people to speak out. But the decisions on something of that nature will be made right here in that room, and they are not going to be made until I have all the facts. You do not favor a drug -- -- Do you expect interest rates to come down now that you have got a budget agreement? I was very pleased at the market reaction to the budget agreement. I am not heartened by the interest rates.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps1", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-1", "publication_date": "20-04-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 589, "text": "I'd like to comment on the Panamanian elections. I met with the Murtha delegation to hear their report, and I have now received the preliminary report from President Ford and President Carter. President Carter and his whole delegation will be here shortly to give me a full report. In addition, we have the report of other observer groups, including that of the Archbishop of Panama, which demonstrate clearly that despite massive irregularities at the polls the opposition has won a clear-cut, overwhelming victory. The Panamanian people have spoken, and I call on General Noriega to respect the voice of the people. And I call on all foreign leaders to urge General Noriega to honor the clear results of the election. And I might add that I applaud the statement by Peru's President Alan Garcia, who has spoken out against the fraud. I noted with interest that the Archbishop of Panama felt that 74 percent of the vote went to the opposition. And I understand that President Carlos Andres Perez of Venezuela is talking to some of the neighboring countries there to encourage a joint statement against the fraud that has taken place and calling on Noriega to honor the results of this election. What kind of military force are you considering? We were told that that is one of the options. The election results have not been handed in, formally announced, and until they are, I will not discuss the options of the United States. I will simply again call on General Noriega to honor the will of the people. ENTITY, you called on him a year ago to do precisely the same thing, as did Mr. Reagan, and nothing happened. There has been a statement for democracy so loud and so clear that perhaps even General Noriega will listen to it. And I would like to think that he will heed the call of the people and that he would listen to the international outcry that is building and that he would step down from office, in which case, the relations with the United States would improve dramatically and instantly. Have you spoken to foreign leaders? Do you plan to speak with foreign leaders? I probably will, and without going into who I have spoken to, the answer is yes. You know, we have had foreign visitors here and talked to them and -- -- Do you really think you have a military option? And on what basis could you go into someone else's country? I have not discussed that here today. I have obviously discussed options with my own top advisers.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps2", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-2", "publication_date": "09-05-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 590, "text": "I listened very intently to the Members of Congress that came in, and some of them had specific suggestions. But I want to see General Noriega do what I have just encouraged him to do and what other foreign leaders apparently are encouraging him to do. Did you put yourself in a box here by making such a public point of being upset about these elections, and if Noriega decides to stay anyhow, that it looks like the United States has been ineffective? I do not think the United States is ever in a box when it speaks out in favor of free, fair elections and honoring the will of the people. That is what we stand for. Some Members of Congress have called for the abrogation of the Canal treaty. Is that in any way a possibility in your mind, an option? I want to see General Noriega do what I have just encouraged him to do. I want to see the will of the people honored. But under any circumstances would you -- I am not going to go into hypothetical questions at this point. Have you talked to him? Have you given him any personal ultimatum? General Noriega knows my position. Did you call him up? in recent -- he knows about it through recent contacts. Have you issued any orders regarding the military on the bases in Panama? Are they in a state of alert? And are you anticipating increasing their numbers? I will discuss at the appropriate time what course of action I will take. But I am not going to do that now. What I want to do now is encourage this last moment for General Noriega to heed the appeal of those people who favor democracy and to heed the will of the Panamanian people. So, I do not want to go beyond that in terms of deployment of U.S. force. Are you any closer to an SNF agreement with the Germans? I have a good feeling that there is been a lot of smoke out there and that we will have a smooth summit. Have you talked with Kohl again? Oh, I never discuss all these talks I have had. It might mean people are willing to do it our way -- with the United States. Well, do not believe everything you read in the UP. Will it be settled tonight with the Dutch? We will be talking to Mr. Lubbers over here, a friend of long standing and a man with whom I can talk very, very frankly about SNF. You can talk frankly with us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps2", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-2", "publication_date": "09-05-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 591, "text": "ENTITY, we have had a request in for an interview for some time, and you have chosen tonight for it. And I must say, on ENTITY behalf and mine, we are terribly pleased you picked tonight, because it was quite a news day here at the White House. Well, we were talking, ENTITY, and we had a regular schedule of things that in itself was a busy day, and then we had a few little added items that well, I would rather be busy than sitting around not preoccupied , let me put it that way. Well, you were busy enough today, and I would like to begin with that. By the stroke of a pen,ENTITY, this afternoon you issued a proclamation that is going to mean people are going to have to pay more for gas. Can we get into that? How much more are we going to pay for gas? Well, under the proclamation that I signed today, which I hope is an interim administrative action, there will be some additional payments extracted from foreign oil of $1 a barrel, and that in and of itself will probably add 2 cents to 3 cents to a gallon of gasoline. If the Congress acts on the total package, which I hope they will do in a very short period of time, then we will be able to not only collect the necessary funds but we will be able to pay it back. The total cost, when the program gets into complete operation, will probably mean gasoline prices would increase 8 to 10 cents a gallon. Well, it is a little hard to tell, but the first increment of $1 that will be imposed on February 1 it will not go on automatically and immediately, because there are stocks that are in supply, and the total impact on the first dollar will not come for about 55 days but that will mean 2 to 3 cents increase in the price of gasoline, and as it goes up to $2, it will go up correspondingly at the filling station. When ENTITY said 3 cents, he meant that when the full $3 increase in the import fees gets on, it would be 3 cents a gallon. ENTITY, I know that you want to convince the people this plan is the correct one, and yet, today on the White House lawn, a number of Governors from the Northeast were downright angry, threatening legal action. There are people on Capitol Hill on the Democratic side, especially-in the Congress, who think that your idea of a good marriage is roughly the same as Henry VIII's.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 592, "text": "I wonder if you have not overplayed your hand by taking the action that you did today. A lot of people think it was an arrogant action in an attempt to force Congress to go along with your idea about how to solve the energy package. Well, ENTITY, I think you have to look at it this way and I told the Governors who were down at the West Wing this afternoon that in the last 3 years, we have heard from various Administration officials, Members of Congress, my predecessor as President, that we had a serious energy crisis, and of course, that was accentuated by the oil embargo that was imposed in October of 1973. And despite the recognized fact that we do have a problem, a short-range problem and a long-range problem, nothing has really been done to achieve conservation on the one hand or new supplies on the other. There has been a lot of talk and I am not critical of anybody but it had not materialized into any action, either in the Congress or otherwise. It seemed to me the time for conversation had ended and that we had to act. I said a week or two ago in my State of the Union Message that I was only taking this action as a way to stimulate Congressional action. Number two, I think it would have been a sign of weakness around the world that we could not make up our mind, that we could not act decisively, we could not find a remedy. So, even though I have been charged with being a little hardheaded on this, in my judgment, the time for action had come. And I think it will bring action, the right kind of action. ENTITY, your problem involves taking some money from the taxpayers and giving back money to the taxpayers, and it is kind of tricky. As I understand it, you are going to take money from the taxpayers in terms of what they have to pay for energy and some food and plastics and metals and all the things that are related to that. You are going to ask the Congress to give some of that money back through tax cuts. Well, the action that I have taken, ENTITY, is only administrative action up to and through, prospectively, April 1. If the Congress has not acted in roughly 3 months and I certainly hope they will I can, of course, remove the import duty that I have imposed. I have the flexibility it is $1 the first month, $2 the second, and $3 the third.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 593, "text": "I have the flexibility to retain it at $1 or to leave it at $2. I just hope the Congress understands the need and necessity for new legislative action. I think my proposal of taking money from the economy and giving it back will mean equity in the first place; it will help us conserve energy in the second; and it will provide the wherewithal for us to develop and explore for new sources of energy. If the Congress can improve on it, I am more than glad to cooperate with them. But the time for action had come, and that is why I took the rather stern action today. ENTITY, you have been quite adamant in your resistance to some of the proposals that have come from Congress. For instance, a number of the leaders, including Mike Mansfield, have talked seriously about gas rationing, and the White House opposition and criticism of gas rationing has been, I think, clear to everyone. You just would not sign it under any conditions. So, where is the give-and-take in the program? Well, ENTITY, I think you bring up the very fundamental question that I had to decide as we worked for about 2 months on what was the best approach, as we saw it. What are we trying to do? We are trying to conserve energy in the first instance, and we are trying to provide funds for exploration and development of new sources of energy. And we are seeking, basically, to remove our country's vulnerability from foreign oil and energy sources. I was presented with two volumes of options, or alternatives, covering the whole spectrum of conservation and new sources of energy. We took a look at gas rationing. We took a look at the allocation of crude oil and the derivative products. In the case of gas rationing, here is what I found, and I think it is accurate. I found, for example, that it would not be gas rationing for 6 months or a year. This is a 10-year program of conservation. So when we put gas rationing on, it would have to be for a minimum of 5 years and probably 10 years. Well, in World War II, we had gas rationing for 4 or 5 years during a serious crisis, and even then we had black marketeering, we had cheating. And in peacetime, gas rationing for 4 or 5 or 10 years I just do not think would work.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 594, "text": "that everybody thinks that if you have gas rationing they are going to get their full share, and somebody else, or everybody else, is going to cut back. Let me give you this statistic, if I might. There are about 140 million licensed automobile drivers in this country and there is approximately 270 million gallons of gasoline a day, which means that if you divide the number of drivers into the availability of gasoline, it means about a gallon and a half per person per day, or about 9 gallons per week, or 36 gallons per month. And that is a cutback from the average of 50 gallons at the present time, because we have to save that much. Now, how many people can get along on a gallon and a half of gasoline, or 9 gallons a week? So, when you look at the impracticabilities the inequities, in my judgment-gas rationing would not work. ENTITY, you have obviously done your homework on the gas rationing question, but I do not think that anyone in Congress is proposing only gas rationing, but perhaps the combination of gas rationing and other factors. The question still is, if you are willing to change your program and to let Congress go into it, where are you willing to let Congress change it? Well, I think you can find some options, for example, in the most dire necessity of having to put a lid on the actual imports. In other words, if we take in from foreign sources as we are today about 7 million barrels a day of foreign oil, if a conservation program like I have proposed does not work, then I think we might have to move to arbitrary allocations. ENTITY, do you blame people for being skeptical about your plan, given the record of your advisers in the economy and other areas? It was not very long ago that people around here were wearing WIN buttons and talking about 5-percent tax surcharges, for instance. So, can you blame the American public and Congress for being more than a little skeptical that this one will work out just as you say it will? I think there is always room for some difference of opinion, and I must say that I do not contend that my proposal is 100 percent right, because the options that I had to look at there were some honest differences of opinion. But you did indicate that the proposal for the economy that I submitted last October might not have been the right answer. I happen to think in October it was the right answer.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 595, "text": "But in the interval, between October and January, there were some very, very precipitous actions in the economy that nobody foresaw. We had the economic summit, as you know, ENTITY, and nobody at that summit told us that automobile sales were going to drop off as suddenly as they did in November and December and in January. What we have done in the proposals that I submitted on January 15 was to take into consideration the drop-off in automobile sales, the tremendous increase in unemployment, and to tailor our plan or program to meet unemployment, to provide jobs; because in the meantime, inflation had moderated, or the rate of inflation had moderated, so there was a change of economic circumstances, and in reality, I had to be flexible enough to change the emphasis. ENTITY, it seems to me I heard you say a few minutes ago that if the program you started today does not work, that you would go to allocations. Could you expand on that a little bit, how that would work? Would not that require a sizable bureaucracy in itself? No, I think it would be much less bureaucratically a burden than gas rationing. I did not mention in the conversation with ENTITY the number of bureaucrats that I am told it would take for gas 15 to 20 thousand for gas rationing. But you see, when the foreign crude oil or the products of crude oil come in from overseas, it is much easier to handle that than to handle the allocation through rationing at the gas station or through the 30 or 40 thousand post offices. Now you told, I think it was Time magazine, that we might have gas rationing if we get another oil embargo. Another oil embargo which would deprive us of anywhere from 6 to 7 million barrels of oil a day would create a very serious crisis. As I understand it, of those 7 million barrels a day, only about 8 percent come from the Arab countries, or 10, or something like that. I cannot give you that particular statistic. It would depend, of course, on whether the Shah of Iran or Venezuela or some of the other oilproducing countries cooperated. At the time of the October 1973 oil embargo, we did get some black market oil; we got it from some of the noncooperating countries. But in the interval, the OPEC nations have solidified their organization a great deal more than they did before.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 596, "text": "So, we might have a solid front this time rather than one that was more flexible. In other words, you are worried not about an Arab oil boycott but a boycott by all the oil-producing countries that belong to OPEC? Do you regard that as a political - And in that case, that would produce the necessity for a gas rationing system? It would produce the necessity for more drastic action. I think gas rationing in and of itself would probably be the last resort, just as it was following the 1973 embargo. At that time, as you remember, ENTITY, in order to be prepared, Bill Simon, who was then the energy boss, had printed I do not know how many gas rationing coupons. We have those available now; they are in storage. I think they cost about $10 million to print. But they are available in case we have the kind of a crisis that would be infinitely more serious than even the one of 1973. ENTITY, you have talked also about energy independence, and it is a key to your whole program. As I recall, of the 17 million barrels of oil a day we use in this country, about 7, as you say, come from other countries. Let me just put it to you in a tendentious way. An awful lot of experts are saying that it will be impossible for us by 1985 to be totally free of foreign supplies of energy. Do you really think we can make it? The plan that I have submitted does not contemplate that we will be totally free of foreign oil, but the percentage of reliance we have, or will have, on foreign oil will be far less. At the present time, for example, ENTITY, 37 percent of our crude oil use comes from foreign sources. In contrast to 1960 we were exporting oil. But in the interval between 1960 and the present time, we are now using 37 to 38 percent of foreign oil for our energy uses. Now, if my plan goes through, if the Congress accepts it and we implement it and everything goes well, by 1985, if I recall, instead of 37- or 38-percent dependence on foreign oil, we will be down to about 10 percent. Well, a 10-percent cutoff with all the contingency plans we might have, we can handle without any crisis. ENTITY, may I just follow up on that? The other day at your press conference, you were asked about Dr. Kissinger's quote on the possibility of military intervention.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 597, "text": "And something surprised me, ENTITY. You have been in politics for a long time, and you are as expert a question-ducker as anybody in that trade. Why did not you duck that question? You did go into some detail on it. I, in part, reiterated what I had said, I think, at a previous news conference. I wanted it made as clear as I possibly could that this country, in case of economic strangulation and the key word is strangulation we had to be prepared, without specifying what we might do, to take the necessary action for our self-preservation. And when you use the word strangulation in relationship to the existence of the United States or its non-existence, I think the public has to have a reassurance, our people, that we are not going to permit America to be strangled to death. And so I, in my willingness to be as frank but with moderation I thought I ought to say what I said then. And I have amplified it, I hope, clarified it here. The New Republic this week has a story saying that there are three American divisions being sent to the Middle East, or being prepared for the Middle East. We called the Pentagon and we got a confirmation on that; that one is airmobile, one is airborne, and one is armored. And it is a little unclear as to whether this is a contingency plan, because we do not know where we would put the divisions in the Middle East. Could you shed any light on that? I do not think I ought to talk about any particular military contingency plans, ENTITY. I think what I said concerning strangulation and Dr. Kissinger's comment is about as far as I ought to go. Then we have reached a point where another question would be unproductive on that? ENTITY, you said the other day that speaking of that general area you think there is a serious danger of war in the Middle East; earlier this year, you were quoted as saying something over 70 percent. I do not think I ought to talk in terms of percentage, ENTITY. I have had conferences with representatives of all the nations, practically, in the Middle East. I have talked to people in Europe. I have talked to other experts, and everybody says it is a very, potentially volatile situation. It is my judgment that we might have a very good opportunity to be successful in what we call our step-by-step process.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 598, "text": "Is it tied to Secretary Kissinger's next trip to that part of the world? Well, he is going because we think it might be fruitful, but we do not want to raise expectations. We have to be realistic, but if we do not try to move in this direction at this time, I think we might lose a unique opportunity. Should we not succeed this time, ENTITY, do you think it is probably time that we have to abandon this step-by-step process and go on to Geneva as the Soviets would like to have us do? We prefer the process that has been been successful so far, but if there is no progress, then I think we undoubtedly would be forced to go to Geneva. I would not be any more optimistic; in fact, I would be less optimistic if the matter was thrown on the doorstep of Geneva. ENTITY, really, the Russians have been shut out of Middle Eastern diplomacy since Dr. Kissinger began step-by-step diplomacy. Could not the Russians play more of a positive role than they are doing? They are arming the Arabs to the teeth, and that is really about all we have been able to see or all they have been allowed to do under the way that we have set our policies. I am not as authoritative on what was done during the October war of 1973 in the Middle East as I am now, of course. I can assure you that we do keep contact with the Soviet Union at the present time. We are not trying to shut them out of the process of trying to find an answer in the Middle East. They can play and they have played a constructive role, even under the current circumstances. So, I think it is unfair and not accurate to say that they are not playing a part. We are taking a course of action where it is more visible perhaps that we are doing something. But I say sincerely that the Soviet Union is playing a part, even at the present time. Would you tell us what you think about the idea that is going around a little bit and perhaps you have heard it as well, perhaps you know a great deal about it, I do not know that if the Israelis made a significant pullback on various fronts in the Middle East, that that could be followed by some sort of American guarantee for their security? ENTITY, I really do not think I ought to get into the details of what might or might not be the grounds for a negotiated settlement.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 599, "text": "This is a very difficult area because of the long history of jealousies, antagonisms, and it is so delicate I really do not think I ought to get into the details of what might or might not be the grounds for a settlement. Would you entertain a question based on the reported Israeli desire for a threefold increase in our aid to them? The United States, over the years, has been very generous in economic and military aid for Israel. On the other hand, we have been quite generous to a number of Arab nations. The State of Israel does need adequate military capability to protect its boundaries or its territorial integrity. I think because of the commonality of interest that we have with Israel in the Middle East that it is in our interest as well as theirs to be helpful to them, both militarily and economically. ENTITY, I wonder if we can come back at you again about Israel's security in another way. As you know, reporters do not give up easily on some of these questions. I found that out, ENTITY. On a long-range basis, do you think that it is possible for Israel to be truly secure in the Middle East without a United States guarantee of some kind? Well, of course, Israel, to my knowledge, ENTITY, has never asked for any U.S. manpower or any guarantee from us for their security or their territorial integrity. I think the Israelis, if they are given adequate arms and sufficient economic help, can handle the situation in the Middle East. Now, the last war, unfortunately, was much more severe from their point of view than the three previous ones. And I suspect that with the Arabs having more sophisticated weapons and probably a better military capability, another war might even be worse. That is one reason why we wish to accelerate the efforts to find some answers over there. But I think the Israelis, with adequate equipment and their determination and sufficient economic aid, will not have to have U.S. guarantees of any kind. I wonder if we can move to another area in the world, or would you like to go back to the Middle East? I have one question I would like to put to ENTITY. ENTITY, when we talk about strangulation and I hope we do not talk about it any more tonight after this, because I do think it is the hypothetical, I agree with you on that what about the moral implications?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 600, "text": "If a country is being strangled by another country or set of countries that own a natural resource, is it moral to go and take that? It may not be right, ENTITY, but I think if you go back over the history of mankind, wars have been fought over natural resources from time immemorial. I would hope that in this decade or in this century and beyond, we would not have to have wars for those purposes, and we certainly are not contemplating any such action. But history, in the years before us, indicates quite clearly that that was one of the reasons why nations fought one another. ENTITY, what are our objectives now in Southeast Asia, in Vietnam, particularly? Vietnam, after all the lives that were lost there, Americans, over 50,000, and after the tremendous expenditures that we made in American dollars several years, more than $30 billion a year it seems to me that we ought to try and give the South Vietnamese the opportunity, through military assistance, to protect their way of life. This is what we have done traditionally as Americans. Certainly since the end of World War II, we have helped innumerable nations in military arms and economic assistance to help themselves to maintain their own freedom. The American people believe, I think, historically, that if a country and a people want to protect their way of life against aggression, we will help them in a humanitarian way and in a military way with arms and funds if they are willing to fight for themselves. This is within our tradition as Americans. And the South Vietnamese apparently do wish to maintain their national integrity and their independence. I think it is in our best tradition as Americans to help them at the present time. How much longer and how deep does our commitment go to the South Vietnamese? As a matter of fact, the American Ambassador there, Graham Martin, has told me as well as Dr. Kissinger that he thinks if adequate dollars, which are translated into arms and economic aid, if that was made available, that within 2 or 3 years the South Vietnamese would be over the hump militarily as well as economically. Now, I am sure we have been told that before, but they had made substantial progress until they began to run a little short of ammunition, until inflation started in the last few months to accelerate. And I hope the Congress will go along with this extra supplemental that I am asking for to help the South Vietnamese protect themselves. ENTITY, that is $300 million you have asked for the South Vietnamese.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 601, "text": "And given what you have just said well, I am just going to phrase it this way will we see the light at the end of the tunnel if we give them $300 million? The best estimates of the experts that are out there, both military and civilian, tell me that $300 million in this fiscal year is the minimum. A year ago when the budget was submitted for military assistance for South Vietnam, it was $1,400 million. Congress cut it in half, which meant that South Vietnamese rangers going out on patrol, instead of having an adequate supply of hand grenades and weapons, were cut in half, which, of course, has undercut their military capability and has made them conserve and not be as strong. Now, $300 million does not take them back up to where they were or where it was proposed they should be. But the experts say, who are on the scene, who have seen the fighting and have looked at the stocks and the reserves, tell me that that would be adequate for the current circumstances. ENTITY, does it make you uneasy to sit on that couch in this room and have experts in Vietnam saying, only a little bit more and it will be all right? We did hear that for so many years. I think you have to think pretty hard about it. But a lot of skeptics, ENTITY, said that the money we were going to make available for the rehabilitation of Europe after World War II would not do any good, and of course, the investment we made did pay off. A lot of people have said the money that we made available to Israel would not be helpful in bringing about the peace that has been achieved there for the last year and a half or so, but it did. I think an investment of $300 million at this time in South Vietnam could very likely be a key for the preservation of their freedom and might conceivably force the North Vietnamese to stop violating the Paris accords of January 1973. When you look at the agreement that was signed and I happened to be there at the time of the signing in January of 1973 the North Vietnamese agreed not to infiltrate. The facts are they have infiltrated with countless thousands-I think close to 100,000 from North Vietnam down to South Vietnam. They are attacking cities, metropolitan areas. They have refused to permit us to do anything about our U.S. missing in action in North Vietnam. They have refused to negotiate any political settlement between North Vietnam and South Vietnam.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 602, "text": "They have called off the meetings either in Paris or in Saigon. So, here is a country South Vietnam that is faced with an attitude on the part of the North Vietnamese of total disregard of the agreement that was signed about 2 years ago. I think the South Vietnamese deserve some help in this crisis. ENTITY, underlying all of this in much of this interview is a kind of supposition on your part, I guess, that the American public is willing to carry the burdens that it has carried in the past. Do you believe that? Is that your view of the world, kind of, and the view of this country? Yes, and I am proud of that, ENTITY. We have a substantial economy. We have good people who by tradition certainly since the end of World War II have assumed a great responsibility. We rehabilitated Europe. We helped Japan both in the case of Germany and Japan, enemies that we defeated. We have helped underdeveloped countries in Latin America, in Africa, in Southeast Asia. I think we should be proud of the fact that we are willing to share our great wealth with others less fortunate than we. And it gives us an opportunity to be a leader setting an example for others. And when you look at it from our own selfish point of view, what we have done has basically helped America, but in addition, it has helped millions and millions of other people. We should be proud of it. We should not be critical of our efforts. ENTITY, I would like to move on, if I could, and ask you, as a reporter, if you would care to share a little information with me on a paper you read recently on the CIA. You read a paper given to you by the CIA. Officials of the CIA have admitted some of the charges that have been made against them. How far did they get off the reservation, ENTITY? I did read the report that was submitted to me by Bill Colby, the head of CIA.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 603, "text": "And after reading it, I determined that rather than myself making a judgment as to whether they were violating their legislative charter or whether there was any guilt on the part of any individual, the present Director or any of his predecessors, that the proper thing for me to do was to turn the investigation over to a very reputable group of gentlemen who would look into the facts, take testimony, and make a report, number one, as to the charges; number two, make recommendations to me as to any disciplinary action or changes within the present personnel; and to make recommendations as to whether the charter of CIA ought to be revised. I asked the Vice President, Nelson Rockefeller, to head up this group of seven people, three Democrats, three Republicans, men of outstanding experience and, I think, excellent judgment, and they are in the process now. It would be premature for me, ENTITY, to pass judgment on the degree of violation of the charter. But for me to say on this program that Mr. A did something that was illegal or the group did something totally wrong, I think it is better for me to wait and see what this Commission reports to me. ENTITY, another agency, the FBI, has recently been involved in a controversy about keeping track of Americans as well, keeping files on Members of Congress, among others. Clearing away everything else, do you think that there is any reason for those files to be retained? ENTITY, I think you have to look at what the responsibility is of the FBI. Number one, the FBI under no circumstances should do anything they should not spy on Members of Congress. I do not think they ought to spy on law-abiding American citizens. But there are certain areas where the FBI has a legal responsibility. The FBI has the responsibility to check on individuals who are charged with a crime any American citizen, including a Member of Congress. The FBI, if they are seeking to employ somebody or if somebody applies for a job, the FBI has an obligation to check on that person's record. Congress at the present time served in the FBI at various times prior to being elected to the House or to the Senate. So, the FBI ought to have files on those people. Now, in addition, as I understand it, the FBI in the course of investigating a person gets information concerning somebody else, and that may be information concerning a Member of Congress. I am told that that information that is gotten in a peripheral way does go into a file.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 604, "text": "That kind of information, in my judgment, ought to be reported to the Member of the House or to the Member of the Senate. If there is no criminality or evidence of it or they are not interviewing them for a job, why should they even retain it in any fashion? I would have no objection to having that kind of information disposed of. As I understand it, ENTITY, the way it works now is that the FBI tells a Member of Congress if they have heard some scurrilous charge against him, he denies it, and they keep both the charge and the denial in his file. I had not heard that, ENTITY, but I think that is kind of silly. You mentioned the charter of the CIA and you mentioned the responsibility of the United States Government to engage in a certain amount of looking at and investigating citizens who are not necessarily charged with a crime, as in job applications and in other things. Do you suppose that we could work out a better way of sharing this responsibility in the American Government? Could that come out of these FBI and CIA investigations? I think you have to differentiate, ENTITY, between the charter of the FBI and the responsibilities of the CIA. and for various reasons, that line was overstepped, and of course, the investigations, I think, will expose what caused it and how we can remedy it. But the FBI has domestic responsibilities, responsibilities within the continental limits of the United States. The CIA is supposed to be an intelligence gathering bureau aimed at overseas operations on this country's behalf. I think the CIA is vitally important to our total national security, both diplomatically as well as militarily. I can assure you that they do, in the areas that I am intimately familiar with, an excellent job of providing the Department of Defense and providing me with information that is important for decisionmaking process on what I think we should do militarily or diplomatically, and they do a fine job on behalf of the Department of Defense. Now, I do not think they ought to get into any domestic surveillance, and mistakes apparently were made going back as early as 1964 or 19,55. And I have given instructions that under no circumstances shall it be started again, and I think the CIA has probably learned. But I do not think we should destroy the CIA in trying to straighten out the indiscretions or the mistakes that were made.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 605, "text": "ENTITY, on an unrelated subject I have always wanted to ask you this question about the credibility of American justice as, let us say, young Americans see it. We have just gone through the worst scandals in the history of the Presidency. Agnew, we are told, is going to become a millionaire at least his business partner says that. Nixon is in California. Some of these other people who were involved are getting huge book advances. How do you suppose that squares with the idea of justice as young people ought to see it in this country? I am sure it disturbs a lot of Americans young as well as old Americans who have worked hard all their lives, have made middle-income wages or salaries, lived an honest, decent life, raised a family, and find that for various economic reasons they are in trouble, and they see these stories about some of these people who have pled guilty or been convicted and gone to jail and - And some of the big ones not touched at all. And yet, they come out with guarantees or prepayments of substantial amounts. I think it will bother a good many Americans, young as well as old. And I do not have any answer. I would not buy the books, let me add. That is the first non-Presidential plug for a book, I think, that I have ever heard. I have a question, ENTITY, that it just is not easy to phrase, so I will just have to bear straight ahead with it. As you know, I am certain, because I have been told that you have commented on this before, but it has been speculated on in print not only in Washington but elsewhere, and it crops up in conversation from time to time in this town the question of whether or not you are intellectually up to the job of being the President of the United States. When you hear that kind of talk or read that in print, does it bother you? And I suppose people wonder why it does not bother me. My answer is as hard as the question that you asked. If grades one gets in school are a criteria and we have been doing it for years and are still doing it whether I was in high school or at the University of Michigan or at Yale Law School, I was always in the upper third or the upper 10 percent of my class.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 606, "text": "Now, if I do not have the academic capability being in either the upper third at Yale Law School or in the upper 20-some percent at the University of Michigan-there must be an awful lot of people much dumber than I. Now, I do not think that is the only way by which you judge people. I think grades are important, judgment is a pretty important factor, and a capability on the part of a person to work, to analyze problems is equally important. And I think the fact that I have done reasonably well, both in Congress, in first getting there, and number two, in getting to be a leader and retaining that post for five elections among my peers as a Member on our side of the aisle I think that does show some feeling on the part of responsible people that I have the capability of doing the job. ENTITY, I want to just ask you about a personal moment that I witnessed in Vladivostok. After you signed the agreement with General Secretary Brezhnev and there was a shaking of hands, and the champagne, I caught you looking out kind of into the distance for a moment there, and I thought I saw, at least in your eyes, a question of What in the world am I doing here a year after being in the House of Representatives? Do you sometimes find yourself, given the way you came to this office, stopping for a moment and thinking that and wondering as these events brush by you? I cannot recall that particular incident, ENTITY, but to be honest and frank with you, yes, I have thought I never anticipated that I would be in the White House, in this building where this program is originating. I had other political ambitions, and I prepared myself primarily for those objectives. But nevertheless, even though I have wondered how it all happened, I feel very secure in the capability that I have to do the job.. And I can assure you that my feeling of security, my feeling of certainty that I can handle it grows every day. Could I phrase it this way, because I think that the growth on your part, as we in the press have perceived it, has been considerable. For a long while you represented Grand Rapids, Michigan, as you should have, but suddenly, you have been put into another arena, and your Government is about to borrow $28 billion in 6 months", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 607, "text": "Well, we are dealing with these enormous figures now that do not seem to me to square at all with the ideological and political outlook that you have had for much of your life. Could you talk about that? I think all of us, ENTITY, who work at a job and seek to broaden one's self in the process of step-by-step movement in a career, have to understand the much more complex problems that we face. As I moved from a freshman Congressman in 1949 to a Republican leader in January of 1965, and as I moved from being a new Republican leader in January of '65 to a Republican leader, 8, 9 years later if you have the capability and work at it, you inevitably get a broader look at life. And that gives you, I think, a better understanding, not only of the complexities at home but the enormous difficulties and complexities on a worldwide basis. I would be ashamed of myself if I did not think, from January of 1949, when I first took the oath of office in the House of Representatives, till now, I had not learned a lot, profited by mistakes, analyzed what I had done, right or wrong, and expanded my knowledge and understanding. It has been a great deal of satisfaction to me that I have been able to meet those challenges. And now you are here in the cockpit. I mean, you are really on the spot as President now. Have you learned in your months in this office and in this house do we tend to put Presidents too much on pedestals? Do we expect too much from the human beings who occupy this office? But I think a person who is President of the United States should expect that kind of responsibility, and he should act accordingly. I think a person who is President, either elected or, as I was, under the unusual circumstances, has to feel that there is an enormous responsibility and that the American people expect him to perform 150 percent of his capability, both as to mental and time and judgment and everything else. ENTITY, you said in an interview 2 recently that you thought you would have a better grasp of what the Presidency is and what your role is in it in about 6 months. If things do not work out quite the way that you want them to, will it change your mind at all about your own future in this office? ENTITY, I think I said that the public could judge my performance better at the end of 6 months than they could at the present time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnchancellorandtombrokawnbcnews", "title": "Interview With John Chancellor and Tom Brokaw of NBC News.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-chancellor-and-tom-brokaw-nbc-news", "publication_date": "23-01-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 608, "text": "Is that here in D.C.? That is here in Washington, D.C. So with that, we will wade in to taking a few questions. Feller, would you like to take us off? be paying attention to the whole briefing today. We are not expecting the President out here? That would be a way to really kick off the first one, though, would not it? On Afghanistan, the President's apology of the burning of the Korans has not seemed to quell the violence, the protests at all. I am wondering if the White House is worried that there is no clear end in sight to this. Well, as you pointed out, Ben, General Allen, Secretary Panetta, and President Obama have all, in different forms, expressed their apology on behalf of the American people and the American military to the Afghan people to articulate that the United States military and, indeed, the American people have enduring respect for the religious views and religious practices of the Afghan people. We were pleased today to see that President Karzai himself has also called -- or appealed for calm in Afghanistan. And while this is a difficult circumstance that we are working through, we are confident that our goals in Afghanistan -- which I will remind you is to defeat, disrupt and dismantle al Qaeda and to ensure that al Qaeda cannot be used as a safe haven for al Qaeda or other religious extremists -- violent extremists -- so it is our view that we will work through these difficult circumstances and remain on track to making progress on our goals there. Is there anything else -- as this incident continues, is there anything else the President can do or plans to do that you know of? Nothing that I have to announce at this time. Speaking of no end in sight, on a much broader scale, of course, as you know, the slaughter in Syria continues. Secretary Clinton, at the conference in Tunisia, said that the regime will have more blood on its hands if it does not comply with the cease-fire. Is there any thought being given right now that you can help us understand about what happens next? Well, as you point out, Ben, Secretary Clinton is in Tunisia right now meeting with the Friends of Syria group in Tunis to talk about a number of things, including a political transition in Syria.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 609, "text": "They are also talking about the need to find a way to deliver humanitarian aid and medical supplies to areas like Homs and other areas of Syria where Syrian citizens -- innocent Syrian citizens -- have been heinously attacked by the Assad regime. So the question you are raising is a question that is being actively discussed by the United States, our allies, partners, and even other countries in the region, about the way forward in that country, about what we can do to facilitate a political transition there. It is the collective view of all of the nations who are participating in that conference that there are two important things that we need to do. The first is, it is important for us to continue to increase the international pressure on the Assad regime, to isolate further the Assad regime, to ensure that we are working in an integrated, coordinated fashion to apply the sanctions for maximum effect. It is also the collective belief of the people who are participating in that conference that a political transition will take place that ends with the Assad regime no longer being in power in Syria. That is a foregone conclusion, and it is one that the international community is working together to achieve. But you say it is a foregone conclusion, and I know that the White House has said that for some time now, but in the meantime, people are dying by the day including children. Is there a point at which the President's patience simply runs out? Certainly the images that we are seeing on television are appalling. The violence that is being perpetrated by the Assad regime, as you point out, against innocent civilians -- men, women and children -- is outrageous. It is something for which we have zero patience. That is why you are seeing a coordinated international effort to get it to stop, to bring some humanitarian relief, and to ensure a prompt political transition in Syria. Is there any update you can give us about the deliberations on arming the rebels? I do not have an update to our position on this. As you have heard Jay and others say, it is our view that further militarization in Syria at this point in time is not a wise -- is not the policy that we believe is the wise one to pursue at this point. ENTITY, I'd like to ask you about the SPR. This morning, Treasury Secretary Geithner said that the United States will continue to evaluate use of the SPR.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 610, "text": "But what are the criteria that you are using to evaluate tapping the SPR, and how are you making that decision? And the follow-up would be, if you could describe the process that you will use to make the decision -- who is involved, how that will take place. I appreciate the question. I did see Secretary Geithner's interview on CNBC this morning. Like Secretary Geithner, I am not going to speculate about any policy outcomes that may or may not be contemplated by this administration at this point. So I do not have anything on that for you. What I can tell you is that the President will continue to pursue, as he talked about at some length yesterday, an all-of-the-above approach to our energy challenges. So that includes a wide range of options. We are not taking anything off the table. But I am not going to speculate about what kinds of things may or may not be on the table, or how we are going to make decisions about what is on the table. You cannot say anything about what criteria will be used to make the decision? ENTITY, I am going to ask you a couple questions on the President's conversations of late. Has the President -- one, has the President been consulting with the Muslim leadership in this country about what is been going on with Afghanistan and the disposal of the Korans? I do not have any meetings to read out to you on that front, April. There are officials at the White House who work in the Office of Public Engagement, who are responsible for reaching out to people all across the country -- and certainly faith leaders fall in that category. But I do not have any specific meetings on this specific topic to read out to you. Is the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives possibly reaching out as well? You'd have to ask them to check, and I can check on that for you if you'd like. But I do not -- to be honest with you, I do not know. And also, on the gas price issue, what is the President saying to OPEC? And what are the conversations around here like as gas prices are rising? For instance, yesterday I was in California -- in one day gas prices at a regular station went from $4.17 to $4.29 -- and that is in a day. They are likely to see $5.00 quicker than many other parts of the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 611, "text": "What is this President doing and what is the conversations like? Well, the President, as he described yesterday, is certainly concerned about the impact that rising gas prices is having on family budgets all across the country, where family -- as we have discussed, practically every day throughout the President's three years in office -- this is a difficult time for middle-class families in this country, and the rising gas prices only adds to that burden. That is certainly one reason why it is so important that Congress passed a payroll tax cut extension that will put an average of $40 per paycheck back in the pockets of the average American family's budget. That certainly is an important step to offering a little bit of a financial cushion to those families. But what the President is doing, broadly, is pursuing an all-of-the-above approach when it comes to energy in this country; that we have taken a number of steps related to oil and gas production in this country. The President has recently announced an agreement with the nation of Mexico to explore and develop oil and gas reserves along the boundary in the Gulf of Mexico between our two countries. The President -- or the Department of Interior recently announced steps toward additional drilling -- or further drilling in the Arctic Ocean around Alaska. The President has recently also asked his -- or directed his Department of Interior to ensure that 75 percent of the recoverable oil reserves are being developed. And those steps have actually yielded a benefit, which is that every single year that this President has been in office we have seen an increase in oil and gas production. But what that also illustrates is that if your answer to this challenge of rising gas prices is just drilling for oil, you are not going to find a very good answer, because an all-above -- all-of-the-above approach is required. So that also is why the President is pursuing a range of other things -- investments in biofuels and renewable energy, wind and solar. The administration is backing the first -- the construction of the first nuclear power plant in this country in 30 years. So there are a range of things that the President is doing, and he is doing that because he is concerned about the energy challenges facing this country and our economy. Visions of the future, long-term approach -- people are saying, great. But when it comes down to the possibility of putting $5 a gallon, that is in need of a short-term approach.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 612, "text": "Is the President looking at the possibility of tapping into the oil -- the strategic oil reserves. Well, your colleague at Reuters asked me the same question. I am not going to speculate about any sorts of discussions that may or may not be taking place related to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. I am just not going to do that. But what I can tell you is that there are plenty of people involved in the political process who are willing to make phony promises about what they can do to address rising gas prices -- that if -- and I can tell you that they are empty promises. That if there were a magic wand that you could wave, one of the previous Presidents would have waved it. This is something that this country has been dealing with for decades. We have never seen $5. We have seen $4. Now we are going into the possibility of $5. Sure, but we have seen gas price spikes that have had a significant impact on our economy and have significantly stretched the budgets of middle-class families all across the country. And if somebody is going to promise that they can wave a magic wand or sprinkle the pixie dust or plant the beans in the right place so that we can get out of this problem, they are just not being straight with you and they are not being straight with the American people. So it is the view of this administration, and it is the view of this President, that we need to constructively pursue an all-of-the-above approach when it comes to energy. So that means taking advantage of domestic oil and gas production in this country. It means important investments in renewable energy, like wind and solar and biofuels. It means the President's success in negotiating a historic fuel-efficiency standards rule that would raise fuel-efficiency standards in this country -- that would ensure that we are essentially doubling fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks. And what that means, when you double the fuel efficiency, it means that you have to go to the gas station half as often, half as frequently. This will have a significant impact on our reliance on foreign oil, but also it will have a significant impact on the budgets of families all across the country. So this is -- these are difficult policy challenges, and anybody who says that there is an easy answer to doing something about it right away is just not telling the truth.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 613, "text": "All that sounds great, but if the President was willing to tap the SPR a year ago, at the beginning of summer driving season, why would not he be willing to do so this year in what happens to be an election year? Well, principally because the President is not making these decisions based on the fact that we are in the middle of a political season. The President is making these decisions based on the best interests of the country and the best interests of our economy, and the best interests of middle-class families that are weathering the storm of a spike in oil and gas prices. A lot of middle-class families might feel it was in their best interest to have cheaper gas. Well, that is the point of this discussion, right? That we need an all-of-the-above approach to energy in this country. And that is the only way we are going to be able to do something real about securing energy independence for this country. The price of gas, the spike in the price of gas is related to the spike in the global oil market. The impact of the global oil market is significantly outside the ability of anybody inside the United States to influence prices at that level. So the global oil market is influenced by the fact that in China, 10 million new cars were added to the roads in China in 2010. That has added to the demand in the global oil market. We are seeing a booming economy in India, where there is an increasing demand for oil in India -- that is affecting the price of oil in the global oil market. We are seeing a stronger economy in Brazil, where the demand for oil and gas in Brazil has significantly increased -- that is affecting the global oil market. The key here to solving this problem over the long term and making sure that we do not have to deal with these challenges moving forward, that we are not susceptible to the spikes and declines in the global oil market, is to make the United States of America finally independent of foreign energy. And that is the course that the President's pursuing. Well, as I pointed out, in the short term, what the President has pursued was a payroll tax cut that would put $40 in the pocket of every working -- of the average American family every two weeks. That is the kind of thing that is going to help American families deal with the spike in gas prices.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 614, "text": "But anybody who says that they can wave a wand or plant the magic beans to lead to a reduction in oil prices is just not telling the truth. Well, he can wave a wand and release some from the SPR. The President ran a lot of commercials in 2008 about gas prices. It was a big part of his reelection campaign. So I do not understand -- there seems to be a tone of indignance from the White House about the fact that people are talking about gas prices. This is one of the reasons why you guys have your jobs. If I am showing a sign of indignance, it may be because I am a little nervous in my first time. I actually meant the President. I appreciate that. It is very generous of you. Certainly the future of energy production in this country, certainly the challenges that is posed by a volatile oil -- global oil market, those are legitimate -- how to confront those challenges is worthy of a policy debate. There is a legitimate debate we can have about how to address those challenges. It is not legitimate to suggest that you can wave a magic wand and solve those problems right away. What is legitimate is for us to have a debate about what kind of policy we should pursue. There are some who say we should have -- as the President alluded to yesterday -- a three-step approach to dealing with oil prices in this country, which is -- step one is we should drill, the second step is that we should drill some more, and the third step is that we should keep drilling. It is the President's view that we cannot drill our way out of this problem, that we need to avail ourselves of a wide range of options, all of which the President is pursuing. And that is something that the President campaigned on extensively as a candidate for President in 2008, and is an example of the President making good on those promises. Well, because the promise that he was talking about was making America independent of foreign oil And certainly the historic agreement on fuel efficiency standards that the President reached with a range of stakeholders and the auto industry will do more to accomplish that goal than any other recent policy announcement. And in some ways, by many other measures, it is one of the most important accomplishments of this administration, which is that we can significantly reduce our reliance on foreign oil because of those increased standards.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 615, "text": "It will also -- it will reduce our reliance on foreign oil by 12 billion barrels of oil, and it will actually lower fuel costs for families and businesses in this country by $1.7 trillion -- trillion with a t . So that is one example of a substantive difference that the President's policies have made and will make into the future. Many of the benefits of that policy are yet to be enjoyed, but we are on track to get that done. Also I'd like to follow up on a question from Ben about the apology that President Obama -- the apology letter to President Karzai. That is also emerged as an issue that Republicans have criticized the President on. Without getting into their charges, can you walk us through the process and decision-making when it comes to issuing an apology? What concerns are taken into account? When is it thought that something rises to the level of needing an apology? When is there a concern that that is probably too much, or the United States does not need to be too apologetic about such-and-such? I mean, how is a decision made to do such a thing? Is it only the lives of people protesting in the street, or the U.S. service members that are taken into account? This is a difficult thing to discuss in a hypothetical context, but I can talk about this specific context. And it was the President's view that an apology was appropriate because he is putting the best interest and safety and welfare of our service members and our civilians who are currently serving in Afghanistan right now -- that we have seen a spike in violence around this mistake. And the President believed that it was in the best interests of their safety to make it clear that an apology was appropriate, and that the American people and the American military in particular does have respect for the religious views and the religious practices of the Afghan people. So in this case, the President believed it was in the best interests and in -- of safety for American servicemen and women in Afghanistan, and for the civilians that are serving in Afghanistan. There have been other incidents in recent months involving U.S. service members doing things that the U.S. military, the Pentagon expressed regret over. When does it -- who advises the President that something rises to the level of needing an apology from him, as opposed to General Allen or Leon Panetta or whomever? Well, it is hard for me to speak to those range of issues.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 616, "text": "I can tell you that the President obviously consults with his national security team and with the military; certainly General Allen is prominent in those kinds of discussions. But I would tell you that I cannot imagine -- I obviously was not here in 2008, when President Bush issued a similar apology after there was an American serviceman who had damaged a religious document of some kind. So my guess is that those kinds of discussions are not altogether different, that I think President Bush was making -- reaching the same calculation, which is that it would be in the best interests of the safety and welfare of our American servicemen and women to issue an apology and make it clear that those actions were unintentional. And that is clear in this case, too. My understanding is that there is now some training of the service members in terms of how to deal with this kind of situation -- disposal of the Koran, respect for holy books, things like that -- for service members serving in Afghanistan. We have been there for 10 years now, and we have had this sort of situation previously with burning of Korans. It is my understanding that there are some new training methods that are being put in place. I do not have any details about what those training methods are, though, so I'd refer you to ISAF for that. But why has it not been in place before? And are you also confident that the kind of cultural training that is in place for service members is sufficient? Well, again, I cannot speak to the training standards that were in place before and in place now. For those kinds of details you are just going to have to check with my colleagues over at ISAF. The classified report that came out from NATO about a month or two months ago that talked about the uptick in attacks by Afghan soldiers on NATO soldiers talked about how most of those attacks were as a result of personal issues, feeling that the NATO soldiers -- in particular the U.S. soldiers -- were disrespecting their culture. Do we have a cultural disconnect here? Well, I have not seen the report that you are referencing, Victoria. But the issue that you are raising is precisely the reason that the President himself -- and General Allen, and Secretary Panetta -- have made clear to President Karzai and to the Afghan people that the actions that took place at Bagram Air Force Base do not reflect the official United States policy and flagged that they were a mistake.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 617, "text": "And it was important in the view of General Allen, Secretary Panetta and President Obama to make sure that that was clear to the Afghan people. President Obama yesterday claimed credit for domestic oil production being at an eight-year high. But many independent energy analysts say that because of the lag time between lease and production, he cannot accurately claim credit, and a lot of the credit should go to the Bush administration. Does the President think that his energy policies are responsible for that high? The President believes that it was important for this country to put in place an all-of-the-above approach when it comes to energy. That all-of-the-above approach includes many things that the President talked about on the campaign trail extensively -- investments in renewable energy, investments in biofuels, investments in nuclear technology including the construction of the first nuclear power plant in the United States in 30 years, and including expanded domestic oil and gas production. It is simply a fact that every single year that President Obama has been in office, that oil and gas production has increased every year. And our imports of oil and gas have declined every year. I will let all of you in this room assess who deserves the credit and who deserves the blame, but at the end of the day, the facts are the facts. And there have been some who have suggested that that -- who have contested those facts, who have suggest somehow that this President has curtailed production. That is not what the numbers bear out. And so the President was merely underscoring the fact that production has increased while he is been in office, and it has done so because it is part of the all-of-the-above approach to energy that the President is pursuing. So he is not claiming credit? Is that just -- he is saying that under -- he said under my administration -- I think what the President was doing was he was being very specific about the circumstances that we find ourselves in, which is that oil and -- He is not claiming credit? I think you are the one that is sort of injecting semantics here. What I am suggesting, and what the President is suggesting -- are you not? You are the one that raised the issue of credit or blame. I am not suggesting that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 618, "text": "He said yesterday under my administration, and he talked about the high in domestic oil production, which would be an indication that he is sort of -- I mean, I think it is pretty logical -- it is not a huge cognitive leap, right, to say that he is sort of saying that under -- It is also not a huge cognitive leap to suggest that the President was merely using the opportunity of his speech at the University of Miami to talk about what kind of policy he is pursuing and what impact that has had on this country, and our progress toward becoming independent of foreign oil. But he was talking specifically about domestic oil production. He was talking about domestic oil production. So then, dissecting what he said aside, does he think that his policies on domestic oil are responsible for that eight-year high or for the fact that there is this trajectory in domestic oil production? Well, I have not really contemplated sort of the -- as I pointed out when I sort of first attempted to answer your question, I have not really contemplated the credit or blame thing. There are certainly plenty of people on the outside who are attempting to assign credit or blame in different areas -- assigning that credit or blame without proper recognition of the facts. The facts are what they are, which is that oil and gas production under this President has increased every single year that he is been in office. I will leave it to you to decide whether or not the President deserves credit or blame for that. Well, I am asking if the President thinks he deserves credit. I think what the President believes is that he deserves credit for pursuing an all-of-the-above approach to dealing with our energy challenges. So that certainly means -- includes increasing production every single year that he is been in office. It includes the important investments that we have made in renewable energy and biofuels. It certainly includes the historic agreement with the automakers to make fuel-efficiency standards much stronger -- to double fuel-efficiency standards so that we can save consumers and businesses $1.7 trillion at the pump. It certainly includes the construction of a new nuclear power plant in the United States for the first time in 30 years. It includes all of those things. On the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, I know you are not going to say -- -- not making an announcement today -- Am I not being subtle about it? Yes, but does the administration think that releasing oil from the SPR could help affect gas prices?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 619, "text": "That is a hypothetical related to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, and I am just not in a position to get into that right now. I am just not in a position to -- I am not in a position to address that question. I need a magic bean, maybe. Since you laid out the criteria where the President decides when he thinks the U.S. government should apologize, is the President seeking an apology from President Karzai for the fact that U.S. service personnel were killed because of this? The President is certainly gratified that President Karzai has appealed for calm in Afghanistan, as we work through what is a very challenging situation. At the end of the day, what the President and his national security team and our generals in Afghanistan are focused on is making sure that we accomplish our goals in Afghanistan. There is no doubt that we are working through a difficult situation there. But we are going to stay on track of accomplishing our goal and continuing to make the significant progress that we have made in ensuring that Afghanistan cannot be a safe haven for al Qaeda or other violent extremists. In the Univision interview, the President said, when asked about immigration reform, My presidency is not over. Specifically said, I have got another five years, like it is a done deal. Do you run the risk there of looking like you are taking the election for granted, that the President is assuming he is going to win? The President is confident that when we get to a vigorous debate with his Republican opponent about whose vision is best for the future of this country, about which person will be a President over the course of the four years between 2013 and 2017 to put in place the kinds of economic policies that will ensure middle-class families get a fair shot and a fair shake and that everybody is playing by the same rules, that when we compare the President's vision for achieving an economy in a country that fulfills those values, that he is going to win. Now, the President, none of my colleagues in Chicago, nobody that works in this building, is under the illusion that it is going to be an easy election; that there will be a time and a place for a vigorous debate, and a competitive election that is good for the democratic process. It is one that the President and his campaign team will be engaged in, but at the end of the day, the President is confident that he will be successful.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 620, "text": "How is he so confident, given the fact that your friend Jay Carney keeps saying here at the podium that the President not watching the debates, he is not focused on the campaign, he spends about 10 percent of his time on that? How has he made that judgment? Well, I think something that Jay has said many times and something that I will tell you now is that even if the President is not watching the debates live, he certainly is following the race. And at the end of the day, the reason that the President is confident is not because of anything that the Republicans candidates are saying. It is because of the vision for the country that he wants to put forward to the American people. He feels that his approach for the economy in terms of standing up for the middle class and giving -- ensuring that middle-class families all across the country get a fair shot and a fair shake, and that everybody in this country is playing by the same rules, that that is a vision that the American people have responded to, and will respond to when we get into the context of a political debate. At the end of the day, though, we are not there yet. I know that there is a big election on Tuesday. Again, this is all good for the democratic process. The President himself will turn more attention to his own candidacy once there is a Republican candidate in place, and once there is more of an opportunity to compare the President's vision for the future of this country with a Republican opponent. After the President blessed the kind of Democratic super PAC out there and said that his supporters could give money to that despite him not believing the Supreme Court decision on it, Bill Maher just gave a million dollar check last night, as opposed -- we have seen Republicans get way more, $10 million or so, from Shelly Adelson. My question is, the President has said he is not going to raise money for the super PAC but his Cabinet may. What is the White House going to do to disclose which Cabinet secretaries are raising money, which events they are appearing at, since this is kind of unchartered territory? I may have to get back to you on that. Certainly there are rules that we will follow related to the political activities of members of the President's Cabinet and senior members of the President's staff here at the White House. I do not have all the background on what those rules are. All I can do is assure you that the lawyers are familiar with those rules.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 621, "text": "About 10 months ago, the then leader of Syria, Muammar Qaddafi, gave a speech. Of Libya. Said he was sending his troops to Benghazi; they were on their way. The rebels could hide in their bedrooms but they are going to be taken from their closets and killed. He never followed through on that threat, but the President repeatedly used that as a justification for military action, allied military action -- the no-fly and other action over the skies of Libya. Bashar Assad has actually gone to people's homes and killed them. There are a couple of important differences, but I will start by restating something that I said a couple of times from this podium, but it would -- I would be remiss if I did not restate it -- which is that the violence that is being perpetrated by the Assad regime against innocent civilians in Syria is appalling and should stop. That is not just the view of the President, but it is a view of a large number of countries around the world. As I mentioned earlier, those countries are currently meeting in Tunisia -- Secretary Clinton is representing the United States at that meeting -- to have conversations about what we can do try to bring some humanitarian aid and relief, to get some more medical supplies into communities like Homs and other areas of the country that have been under siege by the Assad regime. At that meeting they are also discussing what they can do to ratchet up the pressure on Assad. There are already pretty severe sanctions that are in place. But part of the discussions at that meeting will be integrating those sanctions to make sure that we are closely cooperating to maximize the impact of those sanctions. And we will also be talking about what is necessary to achieve a political transition in that country. So a wide range of these topics are being discussed at that meeting. In terms of what makes this different than Libya, certainly the violence that is being perpetrated by the leaders of those two countries is similar. But the other important difference, however, is that there was unanimity of opinion of the United Nations Security Council about military action in Libya. And that unanimity of opinion does not exist in relation to this situation. As you know, Ambassador Rice and other Obama administration officials were actively engaged in an effort to try to build international consensus.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 622, "text": "And that is something that we have had a large degree of success in doing -- that there are a number of -- I think there is something like 70 countries that are represented at this meeting in Tunisia. So there is a broad international agreement about the way forward in Syria, about the fact that Assad should cease and desist his violence against innocent civilians; that the aspirations of the Syrian people should be realized; that humanitarian aid should be brought there and that Assad should leave power in Syria. I have a follow-up on a completely different and more parochial issue. Does the President agree on a general -- in a general sense with the notion that the Postal Service has to get leaner? And, specifically, does he agree -- or does he agree with the approach taken that some people in rural areas object to, and that is they -- that they are being inordinately asked to bear a greater burden by having their local post offices closed under the plan that was put forward today? The President has indeed put forward a plan -- and I believe it was contained in the budget -- about what we can do to stem some of the red ink that is flowing from the United States Postal Service, that there are some measures that can be taken to improve the financial condition of the Postal Service. I will confess, however, I am not briefed up on the details of that proposal. So there are -- so the President has put forward a plan. In terms of the specifics of the way in which that plan will be implemented, I will have to get back to you on that. Is the timing of the event on Tuesday with the UAW and talking about saving the auto industry related to the fact that that is the day of the Republican Michigan primary? I actually think that it is related to the fact that that is when the conference is being held in Washington. It appears to me to -- I guess you'd have to talk to the schedule that is dictated by the organizers of the convention. Well, the White House makes decision about where it is going to speak and when, and -- Well, we did not make the decision on which day the UAW would hold their conference. You did make a decision to accept this invitation. I am wondering if that decision to accept this invitation was related to the timing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 623, "text": "No, the decision to speak to the UAW is related to, as I mentioned at the very top of the briefing, related to the President's interest in talking to the United Auto Workers about the success of the President's policies, and the hard work of the men and women of the American auto industry have made in turning around that industry -- that for the first time in many, many years, we are seeing increasing profit share -- I am sorry -- increasing profits, increasing market share, and even jobs being created in the auto sector -- 200,000 jobs created in the auto sector in just the last couple of years. So that is what the President is going to talk about, and that is why he is there to talk about it. In response to the last question on Syria, you said that the main difference between Libya and Syria was the lack of international consensus on the U.N. Security Council that we have this time. Does that mean that if that changed, and if Russia and China came around on this, that, therefore, military action would be a real possibility? So those of you who disagree about whether that was -- Brianna's question was hypothetical, I think will agree with me that that one is a hypothetical. So I do not think I will weigh in on that one. Well, that is the implication of what you said, though, was that that was the difference and that is -- The implication is that it is a significant difference from the situation the Security Council -- when they confronted the challenges in Libya and when they are confronting the challenges in Syria. But in terms of what would be the policy process if that difference did not exist, I am not going to speculate at this point. The implication is waiting for unanimity before military action can be -- can go forward. Well, again, I do not want to engage in a hypothetical discussion about what we would or would not do if Russia and China were to change their votes on the Security Council. I am just not in a position to -- maybe I am not enough of a big thinker to go there. But I am not in a position to speculate about what would change if they were to change their votes. Certainly, if they are willing to change their votes, we would be pleased to see that. We believe that the votes that they cast to veto that resolution were the wrong votes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 624, "text": "So we certainly -- if they want to revisit those votes, we are more than open to that. I have seen the reports of those meetings, but I do not have any readout or update on those meetings to give you at this point. What do you hope -- what does the White House hope it will lead to? Well, we certainly -- what we hope they will lead to eventually is for the North Koreans to abandon their nuclear weapons program and abide by the international standards that so much of the rest of the world community follows. That certainly is the goal of our diplomatic efforts. It is the goal of the diplomatic efforts of the six-party talks. But I do not have anything new to update you on in terms of the progress toward that goal. ENTITY, just to I hope clarify this Syria issue one more time. I think maybe the way to clarify this is to ask you sort of directly, does the administration now believe that military action might be warranted in the case of Syria? I do not want to speculate about what might be warranted in the future. What we have said on this issue is that further militarizing the situation in Syria at this point in time is not a wise course -- that is not the wise policy course to pursue at this point. What we are engaged in now with our partners and other countries in the region is an effort to see if there is things that we can do to bring humanitarian relief and aid to those who are affected by the violence, including medical supplies, to see if there are things that we can do to offer support to the Syrian National Council, to speed a democratic transition, a political solution in Syria; and to increase the pressure through sanctions on the Assad regime. That is our posture at this point. And that is irrespective of the position of Russia and China and the Security Council? Yes, but again, you are sort of alluding to this idea that what -- would things be different if they had cast a different vote on this issue, and I just am not in a position to speculate on that. On this issue of humanitarian aid, there is a proposal that was made by the former policy planning director at the State Department in our paper today that one thing that you could do to help in that regard is create zones that she calls no-kill zones that border Turkey and other neighboring countries of Syria, and have humanitarian corridors run into those zones.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 625, "text": "In order to do that, she says that you would have to arm the Free Syrian ENTITY enough to allow them to secure these zones. Given what you have said about not wanting to arm the opposition at this point, is that not a proposal that you guys would consider? In terms of specific proposals, I do not want to get ahead of the conversations that are currently ongoing in Tunisia, so I would not want to weigh in on a specific proposal or not. It is proposals like these that would allow for the delivery of humanitarian aid and medical supplies that involve the support of the Syrian opposition -- these are the kinds of policy choices that are being evaluated at these meetings, and at this point I do not want to get ahead of those talks. ENTITY, there is a new -- Iran -- there is a new IAEA report that has some new concerns about the military dimension, as it calls it, of Iran's nuclear program and also very specifically talks about a missing quantity of uranium that the Iranians have yet to account for. Have you seen the report? Do you have any reaction to what is in it? About 10 minutes before I walked out here somebody told me about the report, so we are aware of the report and we are reviewing it, but I do not have any immediate reaction for you on it right now. You may check with our national security staff later on today and if they have a specific readout or reaction, they can give it to you. In '09, the President said that U.S. donations to the International Monetary Fund were woefully inadequate and he supported a measure of Congress -- went along with appropriating $100 billion more for the IMF from the U.S. Recently Congressman Cathy McMorris Rodgers has introduced legislation to rescind that vote and get the money that remains in the line of credit at the IMF back to the United States and apply it to the deficit. Does the administration have an opinion on that and does the administration consider -- will it consider any future request from the IMF for further funding? I am not able to comment on the legislation that you have cited that is been offered by Congresswoman McMorris Rodgers. I am not familiar with it so I am not able to comment on that. In terms of further contributions to the IMF, that question has previously been asked in the context of offering some financial stability and support to the eurozone region.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 626, "text": "What we have said previously -- we have said a couple of things previously, including as recently as this morning -- Secretary Geithner was talking about the IMF and referenced specifically the fact that it was important for there to be a firm European solution in place, a strong European firewall that would inspire the confidence of the international community and would inspire the confidence of the IMF to offer up additional support as needed. But the support or resources that would be offered by the IMF would not be a substitute for anything that the eurozone countries would collectively do. And what also has been the previously articulated position of the administration is that we do not believe at this point that additional American resources into the IMF is something -- that is not something that is being considered right now. It is off the table? The Obama campaign has a little donation ad running on the Internet that is a picture of the President and his daughters and his wife. It appears to be a photo-shopped version of the official photograph that you all released in December showing the family in the Oval Office. Does the campaign buy the rights to photographs from official White House government photographs and video? Does it have free access to all government video and pictures taken of the President? I have not seen the email that you are referencing. It is not an email -- it is a little ad on the -- I assume -- it is a photo that is available on our Flickr website? And what we have found is that a whole lot of people who have access to the Flickr website use these photos for a wide range of reasons -- whether to put them on their Facebook page, to send them to their friends because they think they are interesting -- But they cannot be used for commercial -- They cannot be used for commercial uses, that is true. But we have also seen a number of political campaigns, certainly in 2010, that used Flickr off the photo -- photos off the Flickr website and incorporated them into their television advertisements and other advertisements. So does the Obama campaign have free access to video like West Wing Week and any of the resources done at federal government -- It is a compliment I will take that they might be interested in -- obtaining that footage is a compliment. Photographs and video of the President taken at taxpayer expense -- are those freely used for the campaign, which can be compared to a commercial enterprise -- it is seeking donations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 627, "text": "my understanding about the way that that material that is publicly released is, is that with the exception -- with the commercial uses exception that you stipulated, that these are basically items in the public domain. So I will confirm with the lawyers and see if there is any more specific guidance that I can offer you on that, but that is my understanding of the situation. I will give you the last one. Totally off this topic -- retired British businessman Christopher Tappin is on his way to a Texas jail today after he was extradited to the United States from Great Britain because he was illegally exploiting weapons parts to Iran. He denies it. He says it was part of a sting operation by U.S. agents. Do you have any knowledge about this? I know that Secretary Clinton was asked this question yesterday, and I do not have anything beyond what she said. So I'd refer you her remarks. I almost forgot, but I do have one. Jay assured me that I should not forget because he knew you would be asking. Oh, wait, wait, it is right here in the front. On Sunday, the President and First Lady will welcome the National Governors Association to the White House for the 2012 Governors dinner. It says in my book here 2011 and I assume that is a misprint. So we are editing on the fly here. On Monday, the President and the Vice President will host a meeting with the National Governors Association in the State Dining Room. On Tuesday, the President will deliver remarks, as I mentioned, to the United Auto Workers Conference in Washington, D.C. On Wednesday, as you have previously heard, the President and First Lady will host a dinner at the White House to honor our armed forces who served in Iraq -- let me say that again -- our armed forces who served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn to honor their families. This dinner, an expression of the nation's gratitude for the achievements and enormous sacrifices of the brave Americans who served in the Iraq war and of the families who supported them, will include men and women in uniform from all ranks, services, states and backgrounds, representative of the many thousands of Americans who served in Iraq. Do you know the press coverage on that? I do not , but we will work with you on figuring that out. On Thursday, the President will travel to Nashua, New Hampshire and will deliver remarks on the economy. In the evening, the President will attend campaign events in New York City.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingprincipaldeputypresssecretaryjoshearnest", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-principal-deputy-press-secretary-josh-earnest", "publication_date": "24-02-2012", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 631, "text": "So you have no doubt you are going to get the eight Republicans you need to ratify this treaty ? Well, listen, I have now been in Washington for long enough for me to say I have no doubt -- -- about how the Senate operates. I feel confident that leaders like Dick Lugar, who actually was somebody I worked very closely with when I was in the Senate on issues of arms control, when they have had the opportunity to fully evaluate this treaty, will come to the conclusion that this is in the best interests of the United States. What I will also say to those in the Senate who have questions is that this is absolutely vital for us to deal with the broader issues of nuclear proliferation. Sarah Palin taking aim at your decision to restrict use of nuclear weapons, your pledge not to strike nations -- non-nuclear nations -- who abide by the nonproliferation treaty Here is what she said. No other administration would do it. And then she likened it to kids on a playground. I really have no response to that. The last I checked, Sarah Palin is not much of an expert on nuclear issues. But the strain of criticism has been out there among other Republicans as well. They think you are restricting use of nuclear weapons too much. And what I would say to them is that if the secretary of Defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are comfortable with it, I am probably going to take my advice from them and not from Sarah Palin. Let us talk about President Medvedev. I am going to see him tomorrow. You have spoken with him about 14 times negotiating this treaty. What did you learn about him? You know, he is a very deliberate, very methodical, very honest partner in negotiations which I find very useful. He is somebody who says, Here is what I can do. Here is what I cannot do -- Are you convinced he is the man in charge in Russia? You know, I will tell you he has been able to consistently follow through on the commitments that he is made. You know, I think there is no doubt that he takes the counsel of Putin very seriously. I think that there is no doubt that, you know, Russia is a big, complicated country just like the United States is and that there are all sorts of different voices coming at him at any given time that he is got to take into account. And it sounds like you may be now on the same page in dealing with Iran.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsgoodmorningamerica0", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos on ABC's Good Morning America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-good-morning-america-0", "publication_date": "09-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 632, "text": "Are you convinced that Russia and President Medvedev take this as seriously and feel the same urgency that you do? I am convinced that what you heard today who have been unimaginable a year ago. We are working together at the United Nations Security Council to pass strong sanctions on Iran. For me to lay out clearly our approach to sanctions and to have them -- a Russian president next to me say, There is nothing I heard that I could disagree with -- But so far, three rounds of U.N. sanctions have not worked. Well, I do not think you have seen the degree of international unity that you have seen in this effort. And I think you are seeing the results of that bear fruit today. So far, the Iranian officials are calling the sanctions a joke. I mean, I am sure you have seen that. And President Ahmadinejad took after you personally. He is basically calling you a callow cowboy. The quote was inexperienced amateur and he wants you to wait until your sweat dries and you get some experience. What do you make of that? Well, let us see, ENTITY. So far, you have quoted Sarah Palin. Well, and President Ahmadinejad, you have to deal with him. You are trying to get a rise out of me. I mean, look, the guy's known for saying some pretty unconstructive stuff -- how is that? -- and offensive stuff. So I do not take that seriously. What I do take seriously is the fact that, if we are consistent and steady in applying international pressure that, over time, Iran -- which is not a stupid regime, which is very attentive in watching what is happening in the international community -- will start making a different set of cost-benefit, you know, analyses about whether or not pursuing nuclear weapons makes sense for them. Let me ask you about Afghanistan. And your press secretary, Robert Gibbs refused to call him an ally the other day, and I think a lot of Americans wonder if he is not an ally, why are we putting American lives on the line. Well, first of all, the reason we are putting American lives on the line is because 3,000 Americans were killed by an attack that was launched from Afghanistan, and those people are still out there, still plotting to kill Americans. That means that we are going after al Qaeda to dismantle and destroy them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsgoodmorningamerica0", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos on ABC's Good Morning America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-good-morning-america-0", "publication_date": "09-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 633, "text": "Now, President Karzai, I think, is going to be a critical partner in this effort because, if we are just succeeding on the military side but not succeeding on the civilian side, then you are going to continue to have instability -- Well, I think he has been a partner, but I think that he has his own domestic politics that he has to deal with. And I think the fact is is that real progress has been made, but, you know, this is a country that went through, you know, 30 years of war. And so part of President Karzai's challenge is he is got to bring his country along into a 21st century in which it is functioning and effective -- But are you convinced he is committed to doing that? I think he is committed to doing that. And that does not mean that there are not going to be times where he and I disagree in terms of how things should proceed and how rapidly things should proceed. I am a big history buff, and I think that understanding the history of the confederacy and understanding the history of the Civil War is something that every American and every young American should be a part of. Now, I do not think you can understand the confederacy and the Civil War unless you understand slavery. I think the governor has now acknowledged that. And I think it is just a reminder that, when we talk about issues like slavery that are so fraught with pain and emotion that, you know, we better do so thinking through how this is going to affect a lot of people and their sense of whether they are a part of a commonwealth or a part of our broader society. Speaking of history, the new book out by David Remnick, a biography of you, includes a story that historian Doris Kearns Goodwin -- she recounts a conversation she had with you during the campaign where she was really struck by your ambition. She quotes you saying, I have no desire to be one of those presidents who are just on the list, you see their pictures lined up on the wall. You are pretty confident now you are going to avoid that fate? Well, look, here is what I have been spending my time thinking about. I am pretty confident that we are not going to plunge into a Great Depression, which I was not so clear about a year ago. I am pretty confident that we have stabilized the financial system.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcsgoodmorningamerica0", "title": "Interview With George Stephanopoulos on ABC's Good Morning America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abcs-good-morning-america-0", "publication_date": "09-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 642, "text": "I had a great weekend; I am in good humor. Got a lot of golf in, I see. I played twice, and I saw tons of movies. We had lots of folks there. I liked it. We must have had 20 people at Thanksgiving dinner, and I liked it. Well, I know we do not have a lot of time, so let us get to this race issue. When we talked about race last, way back in February, you said you wanted to embark on a major initiative that would change the culture of America. Now we are halfway through your one-year program, and there is been a lot of criticism that things have been a little bit slow. And I was wondering what you intend to do in the next 6 months and how you feel about this criticism. I think some of it is justified. I think it took time to get the board to get it organized, to get it staffed up, to get started. And that is why I always left open the possibility of having this thing take more than a year. I mean, I may want to do some things I am certain that I want to do some things after the year elapses, but we may be able to have the major report to the American people I want within a year's time. But I think some of that is justified. On the other hand, I think the board now is working very hard. We are beginning to get some of our specific policy initiatives out. The announcement I made for the scholarship program for people to teach in inner-city areas, the work that Secretary Cuomo is doing on discrimination in housing and trying to find community-based solutions so you will not just be dealing with individual acts of discrimination but you will be changing the environment we will have a lot more of those coming up in civil rights enforcement, in education, in the economy, a lot of other things like that. We will have we will be doing the second thing we said we would do is to basically talk about what is working, put out set the facts of racial life, if you will, in America today, put out promising practices, recruit leaders; I think you will see a lot of that. And the dialog will become increasingly more public and pitched to a wider national audience, beginning with this townhall meeting. We have been spending a lot of time, and we will continue to do that, meeting with small groups of people I have here in the White House and, of course, the board has.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 643, "text": "But I want to notch up the public dialog, and I think this is a good time to be doing that. So, on balance, I am quite pleased with the people that have been involved, with the efforts they are making, and with the number of people who want to be involved and who complain when they are not. That shows that people are interested in talking about this and working on it and trying to get it right. So, on balance, I am quite upbeat. We got off to a little bit of a slow start, but that partly was my fault because I announced it, and then we had to put it together. I mean, we knew what we wanted to do, but we had it just takes time to put something together. What other kinds of policy initiatives are forthcoming? Well, I know we will have one on civil rights enforcement, for example. We are looking at what we can do not only to adequately fund and beef up the EEOC but what we can do to use the EEOC and perhaps much better coordination with all the other civil rights agencies in Government to find alternative ways of resolving these disputes, so that you not only remedy a specific act of discrimination but you change the climate, the environment. You get people to working together and talking together, and you change the dynamics of workplaces all across America. We will have some more initiatives in the area of the education and economic opportunity. We have got this ongoing effort now, which I am very proud of because I think it is going to make a difference, in the economic area to get more of these community development banks out there that will make more loans to minorities to start businesses or to expand small businesses. Because I have always believed that the central thing that our society needed let me back up and say, I have always believed that ultimately the answer to building one America was to give people the chance to do constructive, positive work or, if you are younger or between jobs, learning as you work learning and work in a positive environment that was free of racial discrimination. So I think there has got to be an economic and an educational component to all this that we keep uppermost in our minds. So we will do that. In terms of both economics and education, one of the most divisive issues right now in this country is affirmative action. You said earlier this year that you were going to look for an alternative to affirmative action that would accomplish the same goal of diversity without running into problems in the courts and among voters.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 644, "text": "Have you come up with an idea on that? Well, I think there are some things that can be done, although you know, my position on affirmative action is that we should, as I said when I spoke at the National Archives, we should mend it, not end it. That is what the Court in Adarand required us to do. The Court imposed some limits on affirmative action in the economic sphere. Right, but a lot of voters seem to want to end it. We just won a big fight in Houston, and the mayor did a superb job, and they asked me to do a radio ad for it and I did for their position, to keep the program. And the Supreme Court what I read from the Supreme Court's declining to take the California case is they basically said, look, we have put the limits, the constitutional limits on affirmative action in Adarand. By declining to take this case, they seem to be saying that there is no constitutional duty to have an affirmative action program, so we are going to leave it in the political sphere. It is now going to be up to the people and their elected representatives. That is the way I read the two cases. I think that is a fair reading of it. And so what I think ought to be done is, number one, we ought to continue to make sure that if we have the programs, they are carefully targeted and they do not amount to quotas and nobody is getting anything they are not qualified for. When they are under attack, I think they ought to be vigorously defended. And then I think we have to look for other ways to increase the access of minorities to educational, housing, and economic opportunities. But after all, that is what the empowerment zones, that is what the community development financial banks were all about; that is what our Community Reinvestment Act enforcement is all about. Over 70 percent of all the loans made to minorities in the history of the Community Reinvestment Act have been made since I have been ENTITY. So we have always looked for alternatives to affirmative action to work. Now, I noticed Glenn Loury I do not know if you saw Glenn Loury's column recently about how he had now been excoriated by some of the right because he was not simon-pure on all these issues. He made a point about affirmative action that I do not have an answer for.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 645, "text": "I think that if you look at what we have done in education, we will soon be at a point where we can tell everybody, if you stay in school and behave yourself and get your grades, you can go to college. But we do not want to have all the public institutions of higher education segregated, I do not think. And Glenn Loury made a point that I have not found a substitute for. I do think we can do more to bring economic opportunity to people; I do think we can do more to bring educational opportunity to people. And I think that will help to create more of an integrated environment. Loury's point in his article of why he is supported some continuing affirmative action was that networking is important; if you want to build an African-American middle class, if you want Hispanic-Americans to develop a culture where it is unacceptable to drop out of school and they stay in school, and they not only have a good work ethic, they have a good education achievement ethic, and then you want them to be rewarded, you have to develop these networks. And one of the things that affirmative action does, both in terms of giving people a chance to participate in business, that governments do with private businesses, and in terms of getting into certain institutions of higher education, is to build a networking, the patterns of contact that then help their children, their relatives, their associates on both sides to begin to meld into a more integrated environment. And I do not think so far I have not seen anything that I thought would fully compensate for that. Now, in education, there are Texas has passed and California is looking at this so-called 10 percent rule, or 8 percent rule that is, 8 percent of the the top 8 percent of this graduating class can go to any State institution they want to. But that is clearly a way of another way of achieving the same goal. Do you support those plans? Well, I think in the case of Texas, since they have gotten rid of direct affirmative action, it is sort of an indirect affirmative action, I think it is all right and it will at least keep them from it will keep the State from having more segregated institutions of higher education and more segregated professional schools, which I think is a good goal. And I think most Americans can accept it because there is , by definition, evidence there that people have achieved academically in an environment and therefore are likely to be able to achieve in another and therefore likely to be considered worthy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 646, "text": "One of the big problems that I have talked to Judy Winston about, and others involved in your initiative, is stereotypes, that stereotypes are so widespread now and this is not something that you can wipe away by passing a law. Do you have some ideas on how to change stereotypes and also how to do you intend to take the media on in terms of how the media promulgates stereotypes? Let me answer the question separately. First of all, yes, we do. I think what we want to do to take on stereotypes is get the facts out there. Most stereotypes are wrong, I mean, by definition. And so we need to get the facts out. The American people need to know what the facts of life are about people of different backgrounds and races than themselves. Then we need to get these promising practices out so people can see that there are ways to overcome problems that do exist. And then what I hope to do by having these televised dialogs is to get people to have them on their own, by families, by communities, by schools, by workplaces, everyplace where they do not now exist, because I think that ultimately that having any positive personal experience with someone of a different race, and having more than one, breaks down the stereotypes that exist, because then you start treating everybody based on how you find him or her. And I think that is a very, very important part of this. Now, the second thing, on the media, I do not think that it is there are some portrayals of African-Americans and Hispanic-Americans and Asian-Americans and white southern Americans and others in the media that reinforce preexisting stereotypes. But to be fair, there have also been any number of remarkable portrayals of minorities in ways that shattered stereotypes and allowed people to see each other in terms of their shared values and experiences and perceptions. So I do not think that the media can be fairly singled out for unilateral condemnation. I think that what I'd like to see done in the media is more first of all, more portrayals of people who go against stereotypes; and secondly, more effort to show people in environments that are working across racial lines to solve real problems and give people what they need, which is a safe environment, a good education, a good job, and then how people can work together in those positive situations to have good lives.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 647, "text": "So rather than take what I'd like to do is to point out maybe some stereotyping that can be destructive, some things that go against stereotypes and be completely enlightening, and then talk about what we can do to actually get people in their personal lives to shatter stereotypes so they are not using the media as a substitute for real-life experience one way or the other. One thing that has happened in people's personal life that a lot of polls show is that there is a lot more interracial dating going on than there used to be, interracial marriages. Do you think that is one way to help resolve this racial problem? How do you feel about that issue? I think there is no question about it. When people are together as people, they relate to each other as people. Sometimes people who are passionately liberal on racial issues find that they meet people of different races and they do not like them very much. They treat them as people that is good. That is the absence of discrimination, in a funny way. And then sometimes they like each other very much, and sometimes they fall in love. And I do not think there is any question that it helps to break down stereotypes and build bridges. I know in the military and I have spent obviously, because of my position, I have spent a lot of time with our people in uniform. I have visited a lot of bases; I am on a lot of ships. But on the bases in particular, or when I go to Camp David on the weekend, I am with military families a lot. And I was with a couple yesterday in church at Camp David and I saw those beautiful children that were the products of their union, and I thought to myself that everybody people come in contact with, whoever had a problem about race will have less of a problem. I do not think people should get married to make a statement; they ought to get married for the right reasons. How do you feel about the Piscataway case being settled out of court? Well, I think it was we had, we in the Justice Department and the White House, did not think it was the right case for the Supreme Court to come to grips with the larger issues of affirmative action. And so I think, on balance, it was a good thing that the Court will not be called upon to make sweeping generalizations about affirmative action on constitutional grounds on a set of facts which are, to put it mildly, atypical.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 648, "text": "Because, I mean, that was I would not have favored some attempt just to keep the Supreme Court from deciding on the case. They have already decided on affirmative action in the context of Government contracts in Adarand. But the facts were not it was an atypical set of facts. And the Supreme Court it is hard enough for the Supreme Court to make momentous decisions that elicit from, in a general area, the larger principles of the Constitution and how they will be applied if the facts are unquestionably representative of the class of cases involved it is hard enough or if there is just a few variations. Here is a case where the facts were quite different from the normal class of cases involved and therefore the risk of almost unintentional error, I think, was quite great. So I think on balance it was a good thing. One of the areas where a lot of people agree that there is huge amounts of discrimination remaining is in police the way police treat people in terms of arrests and the way the courts treat them. Do you intend as part of your race initiative One of the things that I think we have to do, first of all, is try to get this out on the table in a way that is both forthright but not threatening. I had a group of African-American journalists in here a few months ago, and virtually everybody in the room said they had been stopped by a police officer for no apparent reason. I mean, it was chilling to me. And now I just sort of every time I am in a room now with a number of African-Americans and Hispanics I will cite this just to see how many people will speak up and say, Well, that is exactly what happened to me; it is happened to me a lot. Just today I was meeting with a guy who said, Oh, yeah, he said, I got stopped once just waiting for a taxicab, like there was something I was doing wrong, standing there waiting for a taxicab, in my suit. So what do you intend to do about it? Well, I think one of the things we need to do is to find a we need to find, I think, a highly visible public forum to try to air this, as I said, in a nonthreatening way, where we just really get people to get the facts out and talk about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 649, "text": "Because it is something in some ways I think it eats at some communities in America as much as anything in terms of continuing evidence that discrimination exists, even though we have made a lot of progress. Is there something that you, as ENTITY, can do about it? Is this something that you are going to take on publicly? Yes, I want to be involved in this. If somebody is actually this kind of conduct can reach a point where it amounts to a violation of Federal civil rights laws. But what we really want to do is to find a way for police, in good faith, to enforce the law and to prevent crimes, but to do it in a way that does not stereotype to go back to your word stereotype minorities just because they are minorities in certain places at certain times of the day. So what would you tell police officers, then? Do you have a message for them? Well, first of all, I would say that the community policing law if every major area, and even smaller areas, has communitybased policing, this is far less likely to occur, because then people are more likely to be stopped or at least questioned in passing because they are strangers in the neighborhoods, rather than because of the color of their skin. And if the policeman happens to be white and the person stopped and questioned happens to be black or Hispanic or Asian or the other way around, some variation of that if there is a real community-based, connected law enforcement program, then people will not all automatically assume it was a race-based deal. They will say, no, no, this person was stopped because the policeman did not know him, because he was a stranger to the neighborhood, because there is been a crime down the street in the last 5 minutes, and this is the only person they saw that they did not know. This is the flip side of the marriage issue and the dating issue. There will always be as long as you have got some policemen who are of one race and they work in a neighborhood where some people are of another race, there will always be times when people of different races are in law enforcement and in contact with each other. What you want to do is create an attitude on the part of the law enforcement officer that they do not stop people just because they are black or brown or whatever; and in the community, that people are not stopped just because of their race, that there is another reason there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 650, "text": "So I think the way policing is done, as well as the attitudes of the people in law enforcement, are both important to getting rid of this problem. I have talked to enough police officers to know that a lot of people have done this and not intentionally done it, not thought they were doing it. Some people have done it and known exactly what they were doing. But this is a complex problem, but it deserves, in my view, a public and honest airing. And I think this race commission can do a lot of good by providing a supportive way for people to come forward and say whatever is on their mind about this. So is that something that you expect them to take on? But I expect that I will be involved in it, too. I really care a lot about it, and I have been quite affected by what people have told me about it. It sounds like it. You support the death penalty, but a lot of people claim that in its implementation it is racist. That seems to be sort of a contradiction because you care so much about racial differences. Yes, but you know, the only actually, the evidence that troubles me most first of all, I think the death penalty should be opposed or supported based on whether you believe, A, it is ever appropriate to do it and, B, whether you think it can be done with almost no chance of error if it is done seldom enough and with enough proof. But the real racial disparity in the death penalty which bothers me a lot that is never talked about there is only one Supreme Court case on it, came out of Georgia is that if you look at jury decisions and prosecutorial decisions, the evidence is that there is not so much racial disparity tied to the defendant but, instead, tied to the race of the victim. That is what all the research shows. And that is a subject for another day. But I still support the death penalty, but it really disturbed me. I never will forget, once in my home State a black teacher was horribly, horribly brutalized and then killed by two students. And I thought to myself, if the positions were reversed, it would have been. That is what I believe. I think that all over the country, if you look at the real research, the research shows it is not so much the race of the criminal defendant as it is the race of the victim that determines a lot of decisions. And is there something you can do about that? I do not know about that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjodiendaknightriddernewspapers", "title": "Interview With Jodi Enda of Knight-Ridder Newspapers", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jodi-enda-knight-ridder-newspapers", "publication_date": "01-12-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 659, "text": "I first met ENTITY when he returned to Chicago from law school in the early '90s to run a voter registration drive. And while I did not realize at that moment where history would take him, I was taken by him, as someone who really cared about public service, was committed to devoting his life to it, and together, we had an incredible journey. Now, as the new year approaches, the days are ticking down on the ENTITY administration, and so I went by the White House to sit down with my old friend and reflect on the road he is traveled. This is a great surprise to be able to sit down with you. You know, I was over at the Kennedy Center the other night... for the Kennedy Center Awards, and when you walked in, there was this thunderous and lengthy ovation and lots of tears. And you know me, so you know that I was among those who were-who was tearing up. But then I was thinking, what are you thinking? And has-is it beginning to hit you that this is coming to an end? Well, let me make a couple points. Number one, you are the last guy I would have help me pack... ... because lets face it, orderliness is not... Point number two, they were applauding Michelle's dress, which was spectacular, even by her own standards. You are not gonna get away with that. I tell you, what has started to hit me is that the collection of unbelievable talent and vision and dedication in my team, the people I have gathered around, some of whom have been with me for this entire ride, some of whom I got to know later, many of whom came of age in this job, so I have seen them start in these really junior jobs and now they are running huge operations and married and their babies are crawling on the floor of the Oval Office... So far, nobody's named their kid Barack. I have been a little upset about that. But knowing that that phase is coming to an end-they will stay my friends for life. Some of them, I will collaborate with, like you, on various things in the future. But to have them all in one place, to see how well they have worked together and gelled, it has been just an enormous privilege, and so I have been getting more sentimental about that. We had our senior staff dinner, you remember these...", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 660, "text": "Yeah, I got through about four minutes of the thing and then started, you know, getting the hanky out and... Which you do not really do that much. You used to mock me for doing that. One is talking about my daughters or seeing my daughters and the second is my team. I mea,n you remember after 2012 when I went over to the campaign office and I saw all those kids who had been working so hard... and it was the same kind of emotion that stirs up this deep gratitude for their devotion and I think an appreciation that even though from their perspective, I am the one inspiring them, in fact all I am doing is drawing from their energy. They are the ones inspiring me. I am reflecting back what is inside of them, which is just a lot of goodness and a lot of heart and idealism . Well if-if they were here, what they would tell you is right back at you because you are the one who-I mean, everything has been organized around your energy and your sensibilities. And you know, we talked about this when you-when we talked about you running for president in 2006 and '07 and I said to you we have not had a campaign that really spoke to the ideals of young people and aspirations for the future since Robert Kennedy. And that campaign stirred people in a way that very few have, and we did that-you did that, and you know, only you could have done it. And one of the things that I tell people I appreciate is that-that spark, that thing that we took a flyer on in 2007, 2008. You know, it did not always manifest itself in the day to day grind of governing, but the truth is it is -it never died out. And I would continue to see it every day in what happened here in the West Wing and the East Wing and the White House. The idealism and the dedication stayed with the staff and got us through some really hard times. And so, I do take a lot of pride in the fact that overall, this place never got cynical over the eight years. There was gallows humor, but we-we never had that fire snuffed out and that is a point of pride for me because what that tells me is there is a whole generation of people who worked in this administration who are going to keep on doing stuff... I do not think they come away from this feeling like government service does not work...", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 661, "text": "The result of the election actually has stirred what I think is an encouraging reaction, which is this stuff matters, we cannot walk away-we cannot walk away from it. Let me take you back because what I was thinking about last night as I was thinking about this conversation was how remarkable your personal journey has been. I-I sort of got to jump on the train and we-we had this trip together, but you know, when I think back to-I always love that story about after you lost your congressional race by what, the narrow margin of 30 points or something... Well, that is good, you did not have to waste the whole evening. No, but I had to rush to get to the hotel to concede. I thought I was going to have half an hour. I had to put my tie on... So-so, I just got thumped in a congressional race and the truth is that it was a great experience for me. It ended up being a building block for subsequent races. It taught me a lot. The one thing I always explain to people is although, I-I have -I am proud that I have tried to conduct myself in office to do what I think is right rather than what is popular, I always tell people do not underestimate the public humiliation of losing in politics. It is unlike what most people experience as adults, this sense of rejection. And so, you are already a little mopey about things, and as you know, David, because we are close friends, Michelle was never that wild about me going into politics. I have got-I have got two little kids, we are pretty broke, or at least at that point I had one little kid and one on the way. And a friend of mine says, Look, you have got to get back on the horse. You are kind of down in the dumps. Why do not you go to the Democratic National Convention in L.A.? It will cheer you up. You will be among folks who are excited about politics and you can stay with me. You know, I will go for the weekend. I fly out there on whatever connecting flight that was the cheapest and get to the rent-a-car place and present my credit card and the credit card's rejected.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 662, "text": "So I have to I think make a couple of calls to engineer somehow renting this car and I get to the hotel where my friend is ready to go and we go over to the convention and they give me the pass that is-basically only allows you to be in the halls, like the ring around the auditorium. Did not actually allow you to see anything, but you could wander around and... This is four years before you gave the keynote speech... This is-yes, and-and I think they'd-my friend would try to get me into some of the after parties after the convention and bouncers would be standing there saying, Who is this guy? And He does not have the right credentials. So, this probably did not have the cheering up effect... I-I felt as if I was a third wheel in this whole thing, so I ended up leaving early and... And I-and that was a stage when I was really questioning whether I should continue in politics. I was going to mention that because I remember when you called me in 2002 to say you were thinking of running for the Senate and you said, you know, I have talked to Michelle about this. I have got one race left in me, and if I do not win it... then I am going to go out and make a living and forget about this. So that is how close you came to being out of politics. And you know, since this is your podcast, I might as well give you a little credit. I think, in our conversation, you were initially and sensibly skeptical about... Yes, but you overcame your skepticism. And-and I saw a possible path. The one thing that the congressional race had done is confirm in my mind two things. Number one, even though in a predominately black district, I had been beaten badly by a well-established African American politician, it was interesting when I went out campaigning, people were actually pretty encouraging. What they'd say is, you seem like a great young man and you are gonna do great things, it is just it is not your turn yet. So what they told me was actually that I had strong support in the African American community, just not in this particular race. And the second thing, as you will recall, in that congressional race, there was a chunk of the city, of the congressional district, Beverly Morgan Park, where there was a sizeable Irish population.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 663, "text": "And it-it told me that in a big field, in the U.S. Senate race, that I might have a chance to win, so. If you had won that congressional race, we would not be sitting in the Roosevelt Room right now. But-but I do always think about the fact that in the 2000 convention, I could not basically get in the hall-or I could not get into the-on the floor and nobody knew my name. Four years later, I am doing the keynote speech. And it was not as if I was so much smarter four years later than I had been in 2000, it speaks a little bit to the randomness of politics. And you know, part of the reasons that I think I have stayed sane in what has been this remarkable journey, and you have known me a long time and I think you'd confirm that I am pretty much the same guy as I was when we started this thing. But part of the reason for that I think is because, you know, success came late to me, notoriety came late. And it-it made me realize that to the extent that I had been successful, it was not about me. It was about certain forces out there and-and me hitching my wagon to a broader spirit and a broader set of trends and a broader set of traditions. And so, when-when we came up with the phrase Yes, We Can, which again, to give you credit I was a little skeptical of, it felt a little simplistic when we first started. You did not like the logo either, but that is -that is a different discussion... The logo I thought was a loser, it looked like the Pepsi logo and I thought... That is what you said, that is ... That is what you said, it became more iconic than the Apple insignia. So-I am glad we straightened this out... I have gotten everything I wanted... That is what I figured. But-but what Yes, We Can described and I really meant was that this was not simply about me, that this was about us. And I think that was well understood and that was what was so energizing about it. So I want to ask you, you talk about your sanity.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 664, "text": "Most politicians have some sort of wound, I find, especially at a higher level that something happened in their childhood and they really need the approbation of the crowds and the affirmation that comes with being elected. I do not know if you remember this conversation I had with you when you were-when you came to my office, right? You got back from Hawaii, you are about to make the decision to run, you come in unannounced and we talked for a long time. And I told you, I am not sure you are pathological enough to run for president. And what I meant by that was I did not think you had that sort of pathological need that so many people who run for president do. And I do not know why that is because your dad abandoned you basically when you were two years old. And your mom-I know she was very loving, but you were separated from her for long periods of time. And if you were just looking at those facts, you'd say yeah, this guy's gonna be a real needy person. Look, you know, you do not know-it is hard to get outside of yourself completely and evaluate all the factors that contribute to your character. Some of it is just temperament. Now that we have been parents and you are a grandpa, you start noticing, there is an essence of each kid that barring really severe trauma expresses itself. And so there is something in me, obviously, that is pretty calm and generally pretty happy and pretty buoyant. Did you feel-did you feel-I mean, this is a weird question to ask because you are president of the United States. But did you feel loved as a kid, even though you are ... No, my mom was-she was eccentric in many ways. Yeah, but she always insisted on shaving her legs. But she was-she was somebody who was-was hungry for adventure and skeptical of convention. But she loved the heck out of her kids. That is what your sister says too. I asked her this question. For all-yeah, for all the ups and downs of our-our lives, there was never a moment where I did not feel as if I was special, that-that I was not just this spectacular gift to the world. And that is what you want your moms... So even-even when you-when she was overseas and you were with your grandparents, she communicated with you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 665, "text": "And-and I never doubted her-her love and commitment for me. And she was so young when she had me. So in some ways, by the time I was 12, 13, she is interacting with me almost like a friend as well as a parent. And you guys also weathered a lot together. Yeah ,and I did not always necessarily handle that well. It is not sort of a recipe for ideal parenting. But what I did learn was that unconditional love makes up for an awful lot, and I got that from her. You did not like it... You know-you know what it was, David, and I think has remained true, is it is not that I did not fear losing, it is that I feared more being dishonest or being a jerk or losing respect for myself. I feared that more than losing. So, subjugating those things that you felt were important in order to win? The-the story I tell about myself did not allow me to say oh, well let us trim my sails here for expediency. And-and so, at the end of the day, I think that part of sustaining my sanity through this thing was having gone through enough growing up and community organizing and not being in the spotlight and having had this weird 15 minutes of success at Harvard and being president of the law review... You were president of law review. but then going back into the state legislature where I am operating in obscurity. And those ups and downs meant that by the time I was elected to the Senate and suddenly, as you pointed out at the convention, shot out of a cannon into this unreal world, by that time I was pretty fully formed, had a pretty good sense of who I was, had a good sense of what was important and what was not . And look, I was also married to a woman who was not going to put up with any foolishness, and you know, Michelle, I cannot underestimate the degree to which having a life partner who is so grounded and so strong and steady and fundamentally honest helped. But it-it-she has been ballast for our family. And I-no doubt contributed to me feeling calm because here is what I knew about Michelle the same way I knew about my girls or my sister or my best friends. Their relationships with me never depended on my success or outward success.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 666, "text": "They did not -my best friends from high school do not operate any differently with me now than they did when I was... You-you have them here a lot. They do not call you ENTITY. As you get older, you figure out some things you are good at and some things you are not. You have hopefully a better self assessment of yourself. And one gift I do seem to have is getting really, really good friends around me who've got my back. And that gives you a certain serenity in the midst of a lot of foolishness. We-you have rebuilt the American economy from when we came here, and as a result, I have to take a word from our sponsor here. One other element-one other element-I want to talk about the 2004 speech, which to me, is foundational for almost everything that came after. But before I do, I just have one other question about your sort of makeup that I think is sort of central to your success and one mystery to me even though we have been friends for like 25 years. What-how is it that you sort of just made the decision in the middle of your years in college that you were going to sort of transform yourself from a guy who enjoyed a party and was kind of a goof-off at Occidental College to kind of becoming an ascetic at Columbia with a much more purposeful view of-I mean, that is an unusual thing as well. Some of this, I think, is just a kid growing up and it turns out-and I see this in my own daughters. People go at their own pace, right? So, I do not think that the more serious side of me sprang up overnight. It just took longer to manifest in me than it might have in some other kids. This may be an area where the lack of structure during my high school years because my mom was not always around, my grandparents, they are older, they are not as strict and paying attention. I am sort of raising myself... Well, that-that is what strikes me. Yeah, well what it meant was that-what-the kind of discipline that I see in my daughters developing at 15 or 16 took me until I was 20 or 21 because there was not somebody nagging me and giving me some perspective the way Michelle and I are able to give my daughters...", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 667, "text": "The two other things that started happening that I think are relevant; one was I became more socially conscious at Occidental even though I was partying, anti-Apartheid movement, starting to be interested in social policy and poverty and starting to study civil rights even if through the haze of a hangover. So-so, that starts giving me a sense of what a purposeful life might look like. That becomes tied up with my racial identity. I start thinking about what it means to be not just a man, but a black man in America and how do you forge dignity and respect in a society that is still troubled by-by the question of race. What does start happening is the awareness that I do not know him, and so I am not going to get that much direction from him but I start needing to understand better my genesis, where'd I come from, all these things just made me brood a little bit more. And so, physically I remove myself from my old life, I go to New York. And it is true, I live like a monk for three or four years, take myself way too seriously. Huge overcompensation, I am humorless, and you know, have one plate and one towel and, you know, and-and fasting on Sundays, and you know, friends start noticing that I am -I am begging off going out, you know, at night because I have to, you know, read, you know, Sartre or something. You know, so in retrospect, wildly pretentious. And when I read back old journals from that time, because I am starting to write, or letters that I have written to, you know, girls you are courting or something, they are impenetrable. I mean, I do not -I do not understand what I am saying, right? There is all kinds of references to and France penon and all this stuff and I am like what-what are you talking about? I should've tried like, you know, wanna go to a movie or... Or get a-or get a dog, that always works. So let me-let me return to 2004. You made-you know, I remember when you wrote this speech, in fact when you got the call that you were gonna do it, you hung up the phone and you said I know what I wanna say. And I said what do you wanna say?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 668, "text": "You said, I wanna tell my story as part of the largest American story and you did. And it was a very-it was just galvanic because people in a country that was riven heard a message about one American community in which we have different stories, but we have shared aspirations, values. You know, all of that, yeah you-you wrote it. And-and you went right out to the notion of a red America and a blue America. How is that worked out for you? The whole hope you change you thing? Where-I mean, you have accomplished an enormous amount here. And I am -you know, I mean, I am so proud of you. But the-you know, the premise of our campaigns, both in 2004 and 2008, were that we could overcome these differences. The-you are right about that speech, I knew what I was gonna write because essentially I had been off Broadway practicing during that Senate race, because I had been traveling through not just Chicago, but downstate Illinois. Old factory towns, you know, you are in the quad cities, you are in Cairo, you are in, you know, places that, you know, people would've assumed I could not connect. But as I have said before, it felt actually pretty familiar to me because they were my grandparent's culture in many ways. And so-so a lot of the lines of that speech in 2004 were really just a pulling together of what I had been feeling, what I had been seeing, the conversations I'd been having. And you told stories of people you met along the way. I do not think any of us anticipated the electric impact that it had... Yeah, but-but I-I always viewed that as an aspirational speech, not a perfect description of what is but a description of our best selves and who we might be, that the reality of our common cause and how it connected to our best traditions, starting with the Constitution through the fight for abolition, through the Civil Rights era, the Women's Movement. And you know, the image of, you know, of-of melting pot army during World War II. You got the Italian guy and you got the, you know, Polish guy and suddenly they are all becoming one unit fighting fascism, right?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 669, "text": "And by the way, resistance to Doris Kearns Goodwin, who we both know and love, was-showed me a speech by Henry Cabot Lodge in 1896 castigating Irish immigrants and Polish immigrants... in the same terms that we have heard in this last campaign. So-so the point was not to bury that ugliness, but to say that there is this trajectory, the arc of the universe is long. It ends towards justice. It is a struggle, but there is this thing in us, there is this thing in this country that is good and unifies us. Now, I would argue that during the entire eight years that I have been president, that spirit of America has still been there in all sorts of ways. It manifests itself in communities all across the country. We see it in this younger generation that is smarter, more tolerant, more innovative, more creative, more entrepreneurial, would not even think about, you know, discriminating somebody against for example because of their sexual orientation. You know, all those things that I describe, you are seeing in our society, particularly among 20-year-olds, 30-year-olds. But what I think we also saw is that the-the resistance to that vision of America, which has always been there, was always powerful, mobilized and asserted itself powerfully. Now, I would argue that in part, very cynically, somebody like a Mitch McConnell or Roger Ailes at Fox News I think specifically mobilized a backlash to this vision in order to accomplish pretty routine, commercial or power... Well, let me try something out on you . I mean, my sense is that McConnell, just as a clinical political matter, recognized the power of your message and figured out very quickly-and he is pretty much said this-that if we were to cooperate, it would've meant that he had figured this out. It would've validated this vision and it would've reinforced it and-and it would have, I think, consolidated itself for a generation or two. And so Mitch McConnell's insight, which I have -I have said, just from a pure... tactical perspective, was pretty smart and well executed, the degree of discipline that he was able to impose on his caucus was impressive. His insight was that we just have to say no to that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 670, "text": "And if we can just throw sand in the gears, then at a time of deep economic crisis, when people are really stressed, really worried, we are already stressed and worried before the crisis, now are thinking the-the bottom's falling out of their lives and their home prices are going down, their 401s are evaporating, they are losing their jobs. That if we just say no, then that will puncture the balloon, that all this talk about hope and change and no red state and blue state is-is proven to be a mirage, a fantasy. And if we can-if we can puncture that vision, then we have a chance to win back seats in the House and... Which they did. Two points I would make though, David, because obviously in the wake of the election and Trump winning, a lot of people have-have suggested that somehow, it really was a fantasy. What I would argue is, is that the culture actually did shift, that the majority does buy into the notion of a one America that is tolerant and diverse and open and-and full of energy and dynamism. And-and the problem is, it does not always manifest itself in politics, right? You know, I am confident in this vision because I am confident that if I-if I had run again and articulated it, I think I could've mobilized a majority of the American people to rally behind it. I know that in conversations that I have had with people around the country, even some people who disagreed with me, they would say the vision, the direction that you point towards is the right one. We are gonna take another short break and we will be right back with There were people-he won 200 counties that you-that you won and many of them are in these more rural or small town communities. Did you think-you always had an overarching message and it had an economic component to it, a very heavy economic component to it. Should this campaign have had that? Look, you know, I think that Hillary Clinton performed wonderfully under really tough circumstances. I have said this publicly, I will repeat it. I think there was a double standard with her. For whatever reason, there is been a longstanding difficulty in her relationship with the press that meant her flaws were wildly amplified relative to... But-but-well, the reason I bring this up is because we have both been in campaigns.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 671, "text": "If you think you are winning, then you have a tendency, just like in sports, maybe to play it safer. There is a sense, obviously, that some communities have been left behind from the recovery and people feeling anxious about that. But if she was looking at the campaign and saying OK, I am winning right now, and her economic agenda was in fact very progressive. But understandably, I think she looked and said well, given my opponent and the things he is saying and what he is doing, we should focus on that. In retrospect, we can all be Monday morning quarterbacks. Here is what I-here is what I would say prospectively, is that the Democratic agenda is better for all working people. This division that is been put out there between white working class versus black working class or Latino working class-look, an agenda of raising minimum wage, rebuilding our infrastructure, you know... Education, family leave, community colleges, making it easier for unions to organize, that is an agenda for working class Americans of all stripes. And we have to talk about it and we have to be present in every community talking about it. See, I think the issue was less that Democrats have somehow abandoned the white working class, I think that is nonsense. Look, the Affordable Care Act benefits a huge number of Trump voters. There are a lot of folks in places like West Virginia or Kentucky who did not vote for Hillary, did not vote for me, but are being helped by this. The-the problem is, is that we are not there on the ground communicating not only the dry policy aspects of this, but that we care about these communities, that we are bleeding for these communities... And there is an emotional connection, and part of what we have to do to rebuild is to be there and-and that means organizing, that means caring about state parties, it means caring about local races, state boards or school boards and city councils and state legislative races and not thinking that somehow, just a great set of progressive policies that we present to the New York Times editorial board will win the day. But some of that would fall on us. I mean, I-take you and me because maybe we did not spend as much time on that project while you were here. I mean, we are trying to save the economy and doing these other things. Our campaigns did it, but...", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 672, "text": "Once you got to the White House and you were busy governing, then... partly, you are just constrained by time, right? You are then more subject to the filter. And this is-you know, I brought up Fox News, but it was Rush Limbaugh and the NRA and there are all these mediators who are interpreting what we do, and if we are not actually out there like we are during campaigns, then folks in-in a lot of these communities, what they are hearing is ENTITY wants to take away my guns... ENTITY about transgender bathrooms and not my job, ENTITY is disrespecting my culture and is primarily concerned with coastal elites and minorities. And so-so part of what I have struggled with during my presidency and part of what I think I will be thinking a lot about after my presidency is how do we work around all these filters? And it becomes more complicated now that you have got social media, where people are getting news that reinforces their biases and-and separates people out instead of bringing them together. It is going to be a challenge, but look, you look at what we did in rural communities, for example... We-we devoted more attention, more focus, put more resources into rural America than has-has been the case probably for the last two, three decades. And-and it paid great dividends, but you just would not know that, that is not something that you would see on the nightly news. And so we have got to figure out how do we show people and communicate in a way that is visceral and-and makes an emotional connection as opposed to just the facts... because the facts are all in dispute these days. I think-I personally think that part of the problem was sometimes, we become a slave to our own technology and politics. And you say well, we have got this group, this group and this group, and so we have the coalition we need to win. And if you misuse that... you send the message to everybody else... we do not really need you. Well, part of what I have been saying to-to people, and this was even when I thought we were gonna win, was that-that narrow Democratic coalition, the quote/unquote ENTITY coalition, that if-if properly executed, yes you can probably win presidencies repeatedly. It constitutes the majority of the country, but you cannot govern.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 673, "text": "So part of the challenge for Democrats and progressives generally is that if we cannot compete in rural areas, in rural states, if we cannot find some way to break through what is a complicated history in the south and start winning races there and winning back southern white voters without betraying our commitment to civil rights and diversity, if we can do those things, then we can win elections. But we will see the same kinds of patterns that we saw during my presidency, a progressive president but a gridlocked Congress that cannot move an agenda for us. Are you worried about the Corbynization of the Democratic Party? Saw the Labor Party just sort of disintegrated in the face of their defeat and move so far left that it is , you know, in a very-in a very frail state. And there is an impulse to respond to-to the power of Trump by, you know, being as edgy... I do not worry about that, partly because I think that the Democratic Party has stayed pretty grounded in fact and reality. Trump emerged out of a decade, maybe two, in which the Republican Party, because it had to say no for tactical reasons, moved further and further and further away from what we would consider to be a-a basic consensus around things like climate change or how the economy works. And it started filling up with all kinds of conspiracy theorizing that became kind of common wisdom or conventional wisdom within the Republican Party base. That has not happened in the Democratic Party. I think people like the passion that Bernie brought, but Bernie Sanders is a pretty centrist politician relative to... Oh I see what you are saying... And-and so-so I do not worry about that. What I do worry about is that in an era where we are looking for simple solutions that-and want 1000 percent of what we want and when we want it, that we end up starting to shut ourselves off from different points of view, shutting down debate, becoming more dogmatic, becoming more brittle. And I do not see that being a successful strategy for us winning over the country. Remember, we won the popular vote. You know, we do not have very good population distribution from a Democratic perspective, right? So I have told the story about how I was in Brooklyn campaigning, I think for De Blasio, and this woman comes up, hugs me, how can we help you, we love you, I said move to Nebraska.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 674, "text": "You know, I got a million... Well, let me-let me before you go because you have been real generous with your time, here. You know, I see this conflict coming down the line here, which is you-you once told me that you admired the Bushs for the way they have handled their post-presidency in the sense that they gave you the room that you needed to do what you needed to do. And I know you feel strongly about that. On the other hand, people are kind of looking to you now to be kind of the point of the spear in the resistance to this new administration and-and partly because of the absence of anybody else, but... Well, I think-look, my-my intentions on January 21st is to sleep, take my wife on a nice vacation, and she has said it better be nice. Because she is -she is earned it. She deserves it. She deserves it. I am gonna start thinking about the first book I-I want to write We have got to unpack, and-and I do not need your help on that either. And-and look, I have to-I have to be quiet for a while. I have to still myself and... That is gonna take some time. I know in some small way what that is like. So-so you just have to-you have to get back in tune with your center and-and process what is happened before you make a bunch of good decisions. With respect to my priorities when I leave, it is to build that next generation of leadership; organizers, journalists, politicians. I see them in America, I see them around the world, 20-year-olds, 30-year-olds who are just full of talent, full of idealism. And the question is how do we link them up? How do we give them the tools for them to bring about progressive change? And I want to use my presidential center as a mechanism for developing that next generation of talent. That is my long-term interest because I do not want to be the guy who is -you know, I joke I am like the old guy at the bar, you know, who is -who is just hanging around re-living old glories. The good news is I think everybody will buy you drinks.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 675, "text": "It-it-I want to make sure that I am doing everything I can to-to amplify and lift up a next generation of voices not just in politics, but in civic life. And I-I have the connections and I think credibility to-to be able to do that in some unique some ways. Short-term with respect to the Democratic Party, I think even before I leave here, what I can do is give people some sense of direction, and-and we already started talking about this. I think what I can do is not do it myself, but say to those who are still in the game right now look, think about this, think about how you are organizing that, you know, what are you doing to make sure that young talent is out there in the field being supported. You know, how are you making sure that your message is reaching everybody and not just those who have already been converted. Identifying really talented staff and organizers who are already out there and-and encouraging them to get involved. So I-I think over the next 45 days, what I can say is here is how I would do it if I were sticking around, but I am not sticking around. I-by virtue of the Constitution and because I believe in the wisdom that George Washington showed, that at a certain point, you make room for-for new voices and fresh legs. Now, that does not mean that if a year from now or a year and a half from now or two years from now, there is an issue of such moment, such import, that-that is not just a debate about a particular tax bill or, you know, a particular policy but goes to some foundational issues about our democracy that I might not weigh in. You know, I am still a citizen and-and that carries with it duties and obligations. But-but the day-to-day scrum, that is not only-not only is it contrary to tradition for the ex-president to be involved in that, but I also think would inhibit the development of those new voices. And I know they are out there; I have seen them. You know them too, it is just... There is a little bit of a generation gap, you know?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidaxelrodcnnstheaxefiles", "title": "Interview with David Axelrod on CNN's The Axe Files", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-axelrod-cnns-the-axe-files", "publication_date": "26-12-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 715, "text": "My big push is making sure we are focused on opportunity, making sure that every single day, all of us in Washington are trying to think about ways that we can help folks get good jobs, make sure that they are trained for the good jobs that are out there, make sure that those jobs pay, make sure our kids are getting a great education. Those are the issues that the American people still very much are concerned about. And obviously there is going to be more that we can do if Congress is able to break through some of the gridlock. And if we are able to, for example, pass immigration reform, that is going to add growth to our economy, reduce our deficits. No, actually, I actually think that we have a good chance of getting immigration reform Oh, I do not mean immigration reform, I mean the jobs issue, though. And I am going to continue to reach out to them and say here are my best ideas, I want to hear yours. But as I said at the State of the Union, I cannot wait. We know that one of the biggest problems right now in the jobs market is the long-term unemployed. Yeah, they are having trouble. People will not hire them because they have been unemployed so long. Because they have been unemployed so long, folks are looking at that gap in the resume and they are weeding them out before these folks even get a chance for an interview. So what we have done is to gather together 300 companies, just to start with, including some of the top 50 companies in the country, companies like Walmart and Apple and Ford and others, to say let us establish best practices. Do not screen people out of the hiring process just because they have been out of work for a long time. We just went through the worst recession since the Great Depression. All those things cumulatively are going to have an impact. Will we be able to have more of an impact if we can get Congress, for example, to pass a minimum-wage law that applies to everybody as opposed to me just through executive order making sure that folks who are contractors to the federal government have to pay a minimum wage? And that is why I am going to keep on reaching out to them. But I am not going to wait for them. And I have been covering you for a long, long time, as you remember, 2005, 2006 in the Senate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketappercnnsstatetheunion3", "title": "Interview with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-cnns-state-the-union-3", "publication_date": "02-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 716, "text": "I remember during the campaign when you talked about your presidency being a moment when the rise of the oceans would slow and the nation and the world would heal. And now you are talking about pen and phone and executive orders and executive actions. Do you think you were naive back then or have you recalibrated your expectations and your ambitions? Well, part of it is we got a lot of that stuff done. We have got in this country a health care reform that has already signed up millions of people and makes sure that everybody who is watching, anybody who already has insurance will not be dropped because of a preexisting condition. And if they do not have health insurance, they can get it on HealthCare.gov. We have made enormous strides on the education front, changing our student loan programs so that millions more young people get student loans. And so part of what is happened is that checklist that I had when I came into office, we have passed a lot of that and we are implementing a lot of it. And so in no way are my expectations diminished or my ambitions diminished, but what is obviously true is we have got divided government right now. The House Republicans in particular have had difficulty rallying around any agenda, much less mine. And in that kind of environment, what I do not want is the American people to think that the only way for us to make big change is through legislation. We have all got to work together to continue to provide opportunity for the next generation. And let us talk about House Republicans and Senate Republicans because there has been a large contingency of Republicans critical of your new approach. Senator Ted Cruz of Texas, who might run for president, calls this the imperial presidency. And in the House, there is this thing, as you know, called the Stop Act. They want to rein in what you are trying to do. How do you respond to that? The truth of the matter is, is that every president engages in executive actions. In fact, we have been very disciplined and sparing in terms of the executive actions that we have taken. We make sure that we are doing it within the authority that we have under statute. But I am not going to make an apology for saying that if I can help middle-class families and folks who are working hard to try to get in the middle class do a little bit better, then I am going to do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketappercnnsstatetheunion3", "title": "Interview with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-cnns-state-the-union-3", "publication_date": "02-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 717, "text": "And you know, I think it is a tough argument for the other side to make that not only are they willing to do anything, but they also want me not to do anything, in which case I think the American people, whose right now estimation of Congress is already pretty low, might might have an even lower opinion of. I am not particularly worried about it. Let us talk about areas where you might be able to make some progress. I know that a pathway to citizenship and immigration reform is very important to you. And it is very important to Democrats and others. It is possible that you might be able to get an immigration reform bill on your desk that has legal status for the millions of undocumented workers who are in this country, but not citizenship. Would you veto that? Well, you know, I am not going to prejudge what gets to my desk. Well, I think the principle that we do not want two classes of people in America is a principle that a lot of people agree with, not just me and not just Democrats. But I am encouraged by, you know, what Speaker Boehner has said. Obviously, I was encouraged by the bipartisan bill that passed out of the Senate. I genuinely believe that Speaker Boehner and a number of House Republicans, folks like Paul Ryan, really do want to get a serious immigration reform bill done. If the speaker proposes something that says right away folks are not being deported, families are not being separated, we are able to attract top young students to provide the skills or start businesses here and then there is a regular process of citizenship, I am not sure how wide the divide ends up being. That is why I do not want to prejudge it. I just wonder if you see this at all in terms of especially the pathway to citizenship in the way that you seemed to when you were passing health care reform and I was covering it, the public option. In other words, it would be great, in your view, if you could do it. It is not going to happen and there might be some expectation- setting you have to do, because I, having reported on this, I do not think House Republicans can pass anything that has a pathway to citizenship. And that, particularly in this Congress, is a huge piece of business, because they have not gotten a lot done over the last couple of years out of the House Republican Caucus. They have been willing to say what they are against, not so much what they are for.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketappercnnsstatetheunion3", "title": "Interview with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-cnns-state-the-union-3", "publication_date": "02-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 718, "text": "I do know that for a lot of families, the fear of deportation is one of the biggest concerns that they have got. And that is why we took executive actions, given my prosecutorial discretion, to make sure we are not deporting kids who grew up here and are Americans, for all practical purposes. And the question is, is there more that we can do in this legislation that gets both Democratic and Republican support, but solves these broader problems, including strengthening borders and making sure that we have a legal immigration system that works better than it currently does. The fact that they are for something, I think, is progress. The second thing here, though, I want to make sure that I am not just making decisions, about what makes sense or not. We are going to be consulting with the people who stand to be affected themselves. What is it that they are looking for? What do they aspire to? And, you know, this is something where you have got to have a serious conversation around the country. I do know that for a lot of families the fear of deportation is one of the biggest concerns that they have got. And that is why we took executive actions given my prosecutorial discretion, to make sure we are not deporting kids who grew up here and are Americans for all practical purposes. And the question is, is there more that we can do in this legislation that gets both Democratic and Republican support, but solves these broader problems, including strengthening borders and making sure that we have a legal immigration system that works better than it currently does. Another big issue in this country right now has to do with the legalization of marijuana. You gave an interview to the New Yorker's David Remnick and you said that you thought smoking pot was a bad habit, but you did not think it was any worse for a person than drinking. Now, that contradicts the official Obama administration policy, both on the website of the Office of National Drug Control Policy and also the fact that marijuana is considered a Schedule One narcotic, along with heroin and Ecstasy. Now, do you think you were maybe talking just a little too casually about it with Remnick and the New Yorker? Well, first of all, what is and is not a Schedule One narcotic is a job for Congress. I think it is the DEA that decides that. It is not something by ourselves that we start changing. Would you support that move?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketappercnnsstatetheunion3", "title": "Interview with Jake Tapper on CNN's State of the Union", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-cnns-state-the-union-3", "publication_date": "02-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 719, "text": "What a pleasure, indeed, it is to welcome back to the program, in an exclusive Philadelphia interview, live from the White House, ladies and gentlemen, the ENTITY. It is nice to hear your voice again. Well, it is nice to have you back. It indicates to me how important you feel the voters of Pennsylvania and New Jersey are and Delaware are in this election year, because you have been all over the place. I recall several weeks ago, the Washington press corps alleging that there were not a lot of people who wanted the ENTITY to come out and campaign for them. But as Dee Dee Myers pointed out then, and as you certainly have seemed to prove over the last several days, you could not possibly get to all the places where people wanted you. You and Mrs. Clinton have been all over the country campaigning. But we have been confronted with quite a challenge just in the generally negative tone of the atmosphere that has concerned me some about the turnout. You know, I had to take a few days to go to the Middle East on what was a truly historic mission for our country and for the cause of peace in the world. And when I was there and when I was coming back, I was struck by how strongly and how positively the rest of the world looks at the United States, at our system, at the strength of our economic recovery, at the fact that we seem to be facing problems that we ignored for a long time. And they are often asking me questions world leaders in other places about how this negative feeling creeps over our people and why it has such a hold at election time So I wanted to do these election morning interviews more than anything else just to encourage our citizens to get out and vote, to make their voices heard, not to sit this election out simply because they feel negatively about perhaps some of the ads or some of the tone of the campaign. Because our country is facing our problems, we are moving into the future, and we need the American people to be engaged in this process. And we need all kinds of people to be engaged in the process, just ordinary mainstream Americans showing up to vote and to try to have their interests and their values advanced in this election. And if, in fact, it works for some candidates, one wonders just how bad it will get the next time around. Well, of course, that is the whole point I am trying to make.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpaulwsmithwwdbradiophiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Interview With Paul W. Smith of WWDB Radio, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-w-smith-wwdb-radio-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "08-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 720, "text": "I am afraid it is been that way because this is a place where the people rule, and a lot of the polling data indicates that sometimes these negative campaigns work, that when people get down on the political system and down on politicians, they are a little more prone to believe the worst as opposed to the best. And actually, if you look at the history of this country, the rich and strong and long history, we have often had our difficulties in the political system. And we have had a scoundrel or two in the history of America, but most of our public officials have been honest and straightforward people. And most of the time the differences have been over what direction we should take. And when we get into voting about who is the worst, as opposed to what do these people believe and what are they going to do, I think that puts us at some risk of making bad decisions. And that is what I have been trying to do traveling around the country since I have come back from the Middle East, is to say to the American people, you know, whatever you do, let us look at this in a forward-looking way. How are we going to work together and move this country forward? We do not want to go back, and we do not want to be divided, and we do not want to think less of ourselves as a result of this election, because we have a very great country. And others who maybe sometimes see us more clearly than we even see ourselves know that for all of our problems, we are facing them, we are moving forward, and we have enormous potential. Our best days are still ahead of us. And every election is an obligation of those of us who are citizens to kind of keep this ball moving forward. you have extended, kind of in advance, an olive branch saying that you will work with everyone and that you can, your administration can work with everyone. How do you feel this election morning in terms of the chances that there will be more Republicans? Republicans have not held majorities in both Houses of Congress simultaneously since 1954. There is a very good chance you are going to have many more Republicans there on the Hill than we have had in a number of years. I think it depends entirely on the turnout, really.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpaulwsmithwwdbradiophiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Interview With Paul W. Smith of WWDB Radio, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-w-smith-wwdb-radio-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "08-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 721, "text": "ENTITY, after Secretary Baker's visit in Moscow, it seems as if we and you cannot have both at the same time speedy unification of Germany and full membership in NATO and full sovereignty. What can be done at the summit to make it more acceptable to Mr. Gorbachev? And that would include Germany in NATO. I feel incumbent on me to try to convince Mr. Gorbachev that there is no threat to the Soviet Union with a unified Germany and with a U.S. presence and with Germany as a full member of NATO. Now, the Soviets do not agree with what I have just said. We will sit down, he will tell me his views, and I will tell him that he has absolutely nothing to fear from that formulation. The crucial point for Europe and the world powers are the reduction talks on troops in Vienna, and they seem to be stalled. Now, what are you willing to do to get them going again and have a treaty at the end of your meetings? I was very much interested in the fact that Foreign Minister Genscher and Foreign Minister Shevardnadze had talks that appeared to offer some optimism on the conventional force formulation. So, Genscher will meet with our Secretary of State, and then the Secretary and General Scowcroft and I and others who are responsible for U.S. policy will be seeing if, out of those talks, we have some hints as to what we can do on our side to move the process forward. Very candidly, I am a little disappointed in conventional force. I thought we would have the agreement further along. It is in the interests of everyone in the free world and, I think, the Soviets to move faster on conventional force agreement. So, I am hoping that the optimism that I detected out of the Shevardnadze-Genscher talk will give us some leads as to what we can do to encourage the Soviets to come along a little more there. You proposed this summit of NATO leaders in London in July. And major shift and change in the alliance strategy is on the agenda. Can it be far-reaching enough to be acceptable to Mr. Gorbachev? But historically, they have seen NATO as an enemy. And we have seen the Soviets as an enemy. Today the enemy, in my view, is instability, unpredictability, not sure -- lack of confidence in each other.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgerdhelbigzdfgermantelevision", "title": "Interview With Gerd Helbig of ZDF, German Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gerd-helbig-zdf-german-television", "publication_date": "24-05-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 722, "text": "So, if we have a NATO that has a broader mission, I believe we can convince the Soviets that that is in their interest. We have not sought territory from any country over the years. And I think they do not need to have inordinate fears of a unified Germany. So, we have got to talk all this out with Mr. Gorbachev. Do you think that the monetary and economic and military offers and concessions of Germany towards the Soviet Union are too generous or even dangerous? But I see nothing that contradicts the United States interests in anything that they have decided or might decide in that regard. We have supported German unification. We have been out front in the United States. And you know, what is touching to me is the emotion with which many Germans have told me that their -- well, I do not want it to come out wrong, but their thanks to the United States for this position. But it is the right position, and I hope the people of Germany understand that we have confidence in a unified Germany. We have confidence in the contribution that the Federal Republic has made for 50 years to democracy and to freedom. And so, when I stand up for these principles of a unified Germany, I do it from the heart, because I believe this. When you last met with Mr. Gorbachev in Malta, it was anticipated that this meeting in Washington would be a big success. No, I would not, because we are living in fascinating but rapidly changing times, and when we were talking in Malta not so many months ago, the question of the Baltic States and the Republics was not right in the middle of that TV screen. On the other hand, the rapidity of German unification was not on the table then. Some good things happen; some things that are less good happen; and some that concern us greatly, like the freedom of the people of Lithuania -- that is in a difficult phase right now. Here is the hand we are dealt, here is what is on the table today. Now how do we, as mature people who want peace, and we, the United States, committed to democracy -- ours and others -- how do we conduct ourselves in dealing with the Soviet power and with Mr. Gorbachev, who has dramatically changed things in the world and changed things inside the Soviet Union?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgerdhelbigzdfgermantelevision", "title": "Interview With Gerd Helbig of ZDF, German Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gerd-helbig-zdf-german-television", "publication_date": "24-05-1990", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 725, "text": "My first question is on the U.S.-Japan alliance. It has been said that relationship between our two countries grew closer than ever before under your leadership. On the other hand, in Japan, the opposition party blocked the extension of the antiterrorism special law, which can be seen as a symbol of the U.S.-Japan alliance. First of all, we do have a good relationship with Japan, and it is an important relationship. The relationship between the United States and Japan is good for the American people, I believe it is good for the Japanese people, and I believe it is good for stability in not only Southeast Asia but where we cooperate in other parts of the world. And so therefore, I would hope that the Government would keep this important law in place so that Japan and the United States and other nations can continue to work for peace and stability. And it is an important piece of legislation, as far as we are concerned. Will you talk about this issue, about the extension of the antiterrorism special law with Prime Minister Abe at the next meeting in Sydney? I am not exactly sure what he wants to talk about. I'd be happy to talk about anything he wants. Secondly, we will be talking about economic issues. Thirdly, I know we will be talking about North Korea, and I will once again make it clear that the abductee issue is an important issue for the United States of America. This battle against extremism and radicalism that is manifested in two theaters right now, which is Afghanistan and Iraq, is going to be a subject matter. And to the extent that we can work together, it is going to be helpful for peace. The Japanese presence helps peace, helps achieve peace. And that is what we want. We will talk about every aspect of our relationship. Do you regard this softer and more direct approach towards North Korea as a success? The discussion was as a part of the six-party talks. I am not for undermining the six-party talks. As a matter of fact, the six-party talks is the most successful forum, because I want to make it clear to the North Koreans that should they choose to ignore what they have agreed to do, that it is not just the United States that will be at the table, but China and, of course, Japan and South Korea and Russia.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkensukeokoshinhkjapan", "title": "Interview With Kensuke Okoshi of NHK Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kensuke-okoshi-nhk-japan", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 726, "text": "So in other words, there is got to be a sense of accountability if somebody says they are going to do one thing, like shut down their weapons programs, and they do not do it. And there is going to be better accountability when they have said that to five countries as opposed to one. And so it is important that we all stay at the table. They are making some progress now. But they have got a lot more work to do. How much will the abductee issue be taken into consideration in terms of removing North Korea from the State Sponsors of Terrorism? I told the Prime Minister this is an important issue for me. Our Ambassador, Ambassador Schieffer, asked me to meet the mom of a young girl who had been abducted. And that is probably the most one of the most profound meetings I have had in the Oval Office, to see her emotion, to feel her sense of hurt as a result of the callous actions of a state. Of course the Japanese are concerned that what will happen is, is that we will conclude the nuclear weapons issue and then forget about the abductee issue. And the answer is, I will not forget about the abductee issue. You made a decision to implement surge. And so far, what are some of the things that have met with your expectation, and on the other hand, what are the elements that have fallen short? First of all, the surge, from a military perspective, from a security perspective, is successful. There are still suicide bombers, and there are still these murderers who are killing people, but we are slowly but surely, along with the Iraqis, taking back neighborhoods and Provinces. Al Anbar Province used to be a safe haven not a safe haven, used to be kind of the grounds where it looked like Al Qaida was going to be the predominant force, and now we have got them on the run. At the grassroots level, in other words at the local level, when people feel secure, they start asking questions about what does it take to create peace so their families can grow up peacefully. In other words, when the thugs get removed and people start saying, I have got a different attitude, that is called reconciliation. They are beginning to say, What do we need to do to build on this momentum so we can live in peace? At the Government level, they are still struggling with frankly trying to recover from a dictatorship. And it takes a while.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkensukeokoshinhkjapan", "title": "Interview With Kensuke Okoshi of NHK Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kensuke-okoshi-nhk-japan", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 727, "text": "And we have asked them to hopefully, they would pass some laws some laws they have not passed. And I am looking forward to our people on the ground coming back and charting a way forward so that we can continue to be in a position to succeed. Are you really inviting the major emitters, including China, to Washington, DC, at the end of this month? What kind of initiatives or roadmaps do you have in mind for the post-Kyoto framework? Yes, look, I think we need to make sure that we get the major emitters, the big economies of the world that are emitting greenhouse gases to the table so that we can all be at the same table. And the first step toward coming up with a common accord is to recognize there is a problem and set a goal, a reduction goal, because I believe once you get people to sign up to a goal, it makes it easier to begin to get ask them to sign up to a solution. The purpose is to set up a process that includes everybody. Now, the United States, by the way, has reduced greenhouse gas emissions last year. We grew our economy at about 3 percent, and our greenhouse gases went down. But the truth of the matter is, if we really want to be serious about solving this problem, the question is, how fast can we get new technologies to the marketplace? And the countries that are going to be leading the way and developing new technologies will be the United States and Japan. For example, I believe that the Japanese battery makers will be coming to the market, hopefully, relatively soon, with a new battery that will enable us to drive a reg-ular-size automobile for 40 miles on electricity. one, less dependence on oil, which will help both our countries; and two, it will help us clean up the environment. And so technologies is going to really make an enormous difference. And to the extent that the United States and Japan cooperates on technologies, it will help the world. We are wealthy nations, and these developing nations are going to look to us to help them develop technologies that will enable them to grow their economies and, at the same time, be better stewards of the environment. So the way I see it is, post-Kyoto is going to be setting goals, helping countries with the technological developments they need so that each country could meet the goal it sets. And collectively we will have done a better job on the environment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkensukeokoshinhkjapan", "title": "Interview With Kensuke Okoshi of NHK Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kensuke-okoshi-nhk-japan", "publication_date": "30-08-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 728, "text": "ENTITY, it is a pleasure to have you. ENTITY, we are just three weeks away from a key date, March 31. That is what the deadline for registration on the program. However, millions of people are eligible for insurance under the new law but have not yet signed up. And would you call this a crisis? Well, first of all, I want to thank Telemundo and Univision for coming together to help inform the community. And the whole purpose here is to have the information so they can make their own decisions. The Affordable Care Act, also known as ObamaCare these days, the whole purpose is to deal with the fact that we have 41 million people in this country who do not have health insurance. I was looking at the video that introduced the subject, and one of the things that they pointed out was people I think do not always understand that if you get in an accident, if you get sick, then the costs of health care without health insurance are so high that either you may not be able to get the treatment you need, or it could end up bankrupting you. You could lose your home, you could lose everything you have, all your savings, just to pay for the cost of a few days in the hospital or the kinds of treatments that are necessary if you have a serious accident or illness. So what we have done is we have set up a system where through a website, CuidadoDeSalud.gov, or for English speakers, Healthcare.gov, that allows you to compare various plans that are available to you, and you get a subsidy potentially that can bring your costs down so that you can afford health insurance at a much cheaper rate than you ever could if you were trying to buy it on your own. Now most people in America get their health insurance through their employers. And if you do, then you should not have to worry about this. But if you do not have health insurance right now, then it is very important for you to at least look on the website or call up the phone number or go to a community clinic and find out whether you are eligible and how much it will cost. In many circumstances, you may end up paying $100 or less a month to have really good health insurance. So for less than it costs you for your cell phone bill or your cable bill, you may be able to have the security, the peace of mind of getting health insurance.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 729, "text": "And part of the reason that it is so important for us to reach out to the Latino community is the Latino community is the most likely to be uninsured. One out of four of the uninsured are Latino. Most of those people work very hard, but because maybe there is a low-wage job, they are in a job that does not provide health insurance, their families do not have any protection. So we want to make sure that everybody has the information, and you have to sign up by March 31 if, in fact, you are going to be able to get covered for this year. That was clear from the very beginning. But many of the family members are covered. This is the case, for example, of Guadalupe Stallone from California, she is undocumented. I have four sons, one daughter, three boys, actually, my youngest is a special case. I have been told that I have to register him so that they get benefits. Insurance, now I am afraid that I have to sign him up and fill in all these documents, I am afraid that they will be taken from me. From the moment we start providing your personal information, you start to feel the fear, that is the fear, that they are going to share it with immigration. Many people are in the same situation. They do not know that ENTITY is not going to hand them over to immigration, and they fear that the next day, they are going to hear someone knocking on their door, and it is going to be immigration to take them away. I would tell ENTITY I want to believe in you. I have kids. And, like Guadalupe's family, we have hundreds of thousands more with a mixed migration status. Fear and lack of trust have become one of the main obstacles for Latinos to register. ENTITY, from the time that you took office, there have been over 1,000 deportations per day in this country. You are looking at 2 million, in fact, this week, the leader of the Latino organization, the largest one, the National Council of La Raza, called your administration and you, sir, as Deporter-in-Chief. So while the question is can our people hear from you a pledge, a personal promise that the information provided in the registration process will not be used for deportation purposes? Let me break that question up because there are a bunch of different issues in there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 730, "text": "The first thing that everybody needs to know with respect to health care is if you are a U.S. citizen or you have a legal presence in this country, then you are eligible for this health care program. That is how the law was written, but if you are a U.S. citizen or you have a legal presence in this country, you are eligible. And none of the information that is provided in order for you to obtain health insurance is in any way transferred to immigration services. So that is something that we have been very clear about if you live in a mixed status family, then the son, who could potentially be eligible for the children's health insurance program or some other mechanism to get health insurance, he needs to be signed up. And the mother should not be fearful that in any way that is going to affec Since I ran for ENTITY, I have been pushing for comprehensive immigration reform and continue to push for comprehensive immigration reform. I am the Champion-in-Chief of comprehensive immigration reform. But what I have said in the past remains true, which is until Congress passes a new law, then I am constrained in terms of what I am able to do. What I have done is to use my prosecutorial discretion, because you cannot enforce the laws across the board for 11 or 12 million people, there are not the resources there. What we have said is focus on folks who are engaged in criminal activity, focus on people who are engaged in gang activity. Do not focus on young people, who we are calling dreamers, who are studying, grow up here, who through no fault of their own find themselves suddenly under the threat of deportation. That already stretched my administrative capacity very far. But at a certain point the reason that these deportations are taking place is, Congress said, you have to enforce these laws. They fund the hiring of officials at the department that is charged with enforcing. And I cannot ignore those laws anymore than I could ignore, you know, any of the other laws that are on the books. We already have seen bipartisan support in the Senate. Now we have the opportunity to get bipartisan in the House. I have spoken to the Speaker John Boehner, about this. I think he is sincere about this. I think he is sincere about wanting to do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 731, "text": "What I can tell you though, is while we are waiting to get comprehensive immigration reform done, I do not want a young person out there to get sick, could have had health insurance, and suddenly they are in a position where they may lose everything they have. Or not get the good treatment that they need, or not get preventive care that would allow them to find out whether or not they can be treated. So, for everybody out there that is in a mixed family, there is no sharing of the data from the healthcare plan into immigration services. You should feel confident that if somebody in your family is eligible, you should sign them up. Well, that is a particularly important point you touched on at the end, ENTITY. Because your administration does not have the best record with keeping your citizen's personal information and sharing among agencies. I could think of a few cases in the past. So you are entirely committed to refrain from sharing information of anybody who signs on to the insurance. Very well then, let us move on to the cost now. We have a great number of questions from the many social media platforms. We have been getting many questions about cost. This question here comes from a gentleman who says that he asked, he wanted ObamaCare for his family. He wanted Obamacare for a family of three. And he says, I make about $36,000 per year, and the minimum amount here is $315 per month. I think that is too much for me. That is a question from this gentleman here, as I was saying, a lot has been said about the cost. And for families that live from paycheck to paycheck, $316 might be a lot. Well yes, for example, ENTITY, the study from the California government shows that our people want medical insurance. They need insurance. They tried to register but when they go to register they cannot cover it. I think it is very important to understand a couple of things. Number one, that many people when they go on the website or they make a call or they go to the clinic, they may be eligible for Medicaid, they just do not know it. In which case, they may be able to get health insurance coverage for free or very low costs. The child who was in the video previously may qualify for the Children's Health Insurance Program. When it comes to somebody who is not qualified for Medicaid, we already have in place what is called a hardship exemption.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 732, "text": "So that you are not required to get health insurance if you genuinely cannot afford it. And frankly, there are a few states like Texas or Florida, that have not expanded Medicaid the way the law allows. Those people should qualify for Medicaid under the federal rules, but the states have refused to expand it for political reasons. And so they may find themselves in a situation where they really cannot afford to pay more. They should be able to get health insurance. That is why we got to put pressure on those governors to expand Medicaid. But, for the majority of people when you sign up on this website, you will discover that because of the tax credits and subsidies that are available, that the vast majority of people will find a good option that is affordable for them. And as I said before, a large portion of people will be able to find health insurance for $100 or less. Now there may be some circumstances where somebody is making $40,000, $50,000 a year. They have got a health insurance option that, you know, cost $300 a month for their family. And they may say, you know, with all the bills that I have got that is too tight. I guess I would say is if you looked at that person's budget and you looked at their cable bill, their telephone, their cell phone bill, other things that they are spending on, it may turn out that it is just they have not prioritized to healthcare because right now everybody's healthy. Nobody actually wants to spend money on health insurance until they get sick. And then once they are sick, the costs of not having health insurance are a lot worse than the cost of having health insurance. I guarantee you if that gentleman who just wrote you that letter, and I do not know his particular circumstance and whether he actually has gotten all the information about the subsidies that might be available. But I guarantee you that even at $300 a month, if heaven forbid something happened to him or a family member where they got sick and really needed, let us say a week's worth of hospitalization, he will wish that he had paid that $300 a month. Because he stands potentially to get bills of hundreds of thousands of dollars for treatment and you cannot pay that without health insurance. You know, I get a pretty good salary as ENTITY.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 733, "text": "But if I did not have health insurance and something happened to me, I am not sure I could pay out of pocket for the kinds of cost of care that are necessary. Your government, once again, extended the deadline for the policies that do not qualify to the new law. Now, these extensions you have granted, are they not a tacit recognition, in fact that this portion of the law is a mistake. Is that some people buy health insurance on the individual market. Yeah, they do not get health insurance for the job, but they know they should get health insurance and so they have gone out and they have purchased it on their own. Sometimes because they are healthy, they do not have a pre-existing condition, they are young, they can get a good deal. Because insurers are very good at figuring out, you know what, we bet we will not have to pay much on this person. And so we will offer them a good deal. And then there're some people who actually get very bad insurance, but they do not know it, because they have not seen the fine print. And so what we have said was, look, if you have health insurance you should be able to keep it. The way the law was drafted it did not cover everybody under that provision. Some people got cancellations, they did not want to see their insurance cancelled. They said, I thought you said, that we'd be able to keep it. And we said, you know what, you are right. You should be able to keep the health insurance that you have, even if it is not very good. Even if you could actually get better health insurance. Even if you are happy with it. Even if you could get better health insurance on healthcare.gov. You should be able to keep it. And that is the law that we have extended. And on a program like this that has so many people involved. And millions of people who are trying to find health insurance, or get better health insurance they are always going to be some smoothing out of the process that has to take place. But keep in mind that for the majority of people even if they have health insurance on the individual market, they should go to the website because they may qualify for tax credits. They may qualify for subsidies that give them better health insurance for less money. And keep in mind that we have already seen over 4 million people sign up.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 734, "text": "And I get letters everyday from people who signed up, they say, you know, I did not agree with you on Obamacare, and I thought it was a terrible law. But then my cousin told me I should look on the website. And I am now saving $200 a month on my premiums for better health insurance. So the main message I have for everybody who is listening or watching is, look to see if in fact you can get a better deal. Even if you have got health insurance on the individual market you should see if in fact you are getting the best health insurance you can. I saw, I met a woman yesterday, I was in Connecticut. She drove up from Rhode Island to thank me, because even though she had health insurance, it turned out that she had not read the fine print and she had not been covered when she got leukemia. It was not going to cover all the costs. And she literally said to me, you saved my life, because we could not have afforded to get treatment. Fortunately, we were able to sign up for the Affordable Care Act and now the treatments that I have is covered. And I have been in remission now for a year. So as I said before, the problem with health insurance is, people do not necessarily want to pay for it until something goes wrong. And what we are trying to do is provide affordable options for all people. And if you go on the website, CuidadoDeSalud.gov , or make a phone call to the call centers that we have setup. Or visit some of the 8,000 clinics, community clinics that exist within the Latino community all across the country. You can get information and make your own decisions about whether in fact this is a good decision for you. ENTITY, the reason we are here, and we said this at the beginning is that the Latino community is key for the success of this healthcare reform. Now we have the very same deadline of March 31, we said this at the beginning. But now we have had access to information, different tools, and different platforms that did not operate the same way in English as they did in Spanish. Now taking this into account, why not consider extending the deadline that we are looking at? Well, first of all the website works really well now. So anybody who is watching, you still have a month to sign up. I was watching the introductory video and somebody was saying, oh it took me so long to get on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 735, "text": "That was in the first month, or the first month and a-half. If you call now, if you get on the website now it works, it provides you the information. You can potentially sign up very quickly to get coverage. And so there is really no reason why over the next four weeks, it is not as if the deadline is tomorrow. You guys are doing us a service by making sure that people know. Well, you have time now to sign up. And the reason that we do not want to extend the deadline forever, the way insurance works is, at some point the insurance companies have to make a decision about what is the pool? How many people are in this insurance pool that they have got to cover? They have got to start making decisions about prices for next year. They cannot make those decisions last minute, they have to be able to see who it is that they are insuring. That gives people enough time to be able to sign up. ENTITY, on the website in Spanish, it still has problems that were already solved in the English language. On the web page and when somebody calls on the phone, sometimes they have to go through two steps in English in order to get to Spanish. We still see problems that my friend, my colleague ENTITY had mentioned. But if we cannot prolong that deadline March 31, would you not at least consider not penalizing those who cannot meet the deadline? Well, keep in mind that what is going to happen is that again, if you cannot afford health insurance, you are going to be exempted. You are not going to be paying a penalty. And if in fact you want health insurance, then I am very confident that between now and March 31 you can get on the website, make a phone call. And we make sure that you get health insurance. And I would say ENTITY, that for people who let us say started to sign up in October, the website was terrible in October. It was, and it still was not very good in November. And so if you got discouraged initially, please go back and take a look, and see in fact is it working? And can you get the information that you need? Here is part of the concern that I have. Is that if everybody waits until the last minute, everybody waits until March 27 or 28, then in some ways it is a self-fulfilling prophecy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 736, "text": "Because if you have 5 million people all going on the website at the same time, even if it is a great website that is working well now, then yes, there are going to be delays. Because there are only so many people that any website can absorb at a single time. What we are trying to see is, the people to spread out their interests, start now, start today. You know, go to the website, get the information. If in fact there is a problem, call the call center number which will be on the screen, if that is a problem go to a community clinic and find out whether or not you can sign up. I would say that for the Spanish speaking website, CuidadoDeSalud.gov that 95 percent of the issues have been resolved. For the English speaking website I'd say 99 percent of the problems have been resolved. Some of the issues that were specific to the Spanish speaking website had to do with if somebody has a change in immigration status or you know, a very complex problem in terms of their family and then sometimes it takes a little bit longer. For if you are a young person, you know, you are 28, 29 years old you do not have a serious history of illness of any sort, or what have you, I promise if you go on the website you can sign up in pretty quick time. So just to make sure, you will enforce the deadline and penalties will be enforced? We are going to enforce the deadline. But we are confident that anybody out there who is interested in getting health insurance for their families they are going to be able to get that done before March 31. And penalties will be enforced after that time? If in fact you can afford health insurance and you have not purchased it, that is what the law says. And I want to be clear as to the reason for that. You know, you may get in an accident. If you do not have health insurance you then go to the emergency room. And we are going to provide you treatment, that is law, that somebody has to provide you initial treatment. And so it is not fair for others to essentially provide insurance for you. You need to take some responsibility if you can afford it. Well, now that we talked about penalties, people that get sick or have an accident and cannot pay, will they continue to be covered? Well, basically they will end up being in the same situation they are now, which is they used the emergency room.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 737, "text": "The problem and this is true in the Latino community, is a lot of people use the emergency room as their doctor. But what that means is that first of all, you very rarely get regular checkups or preventive care. And oftentimes people wait until they are really sick before they go to the doctor. That means already, not only have they been going through pain, but they may have seen a disease advance. And they could have prevented many diseases. One of the things about getting health insurance and this is something that young people should know is, it means that, you know, you can get a regular mammogram. Or you can get, you know, other checkups that can monitor your health. And that is part of making sure that you are living a healthy lifestyle. ENTITY, this year if immigration is approved would you include the, but would you act unilaterally in that case so that the, now people on the path to citizenship would benefit from the healthcare reform. Well, we will have to see what the law looks like. And my suspicion is if we get that passed, then initially at least, the Republicans will insist that people are not eligible for various benefits, even if they have a legal status. But the good news is once somebody has a legal status, first of all, they are more likely to be able to get a job that provides health insurance. So they may not need the subsidies through the Affordable Care Act. Second of all, over time I think it becomes less of a political issue. You will recall that when I came into office the law on the Children's Health Insurance Program did not allow children who were legal permanent residents from taking advantage of the law. It did not make any sense if they are here legally then we should be able to make sure that those children have the healthcare that they need. But that is a discussion for a future date. I think the important thing for now is there are millions of people are definitely eligible who right now are not taking advantage of it. And what I need everybody to do is to talk to your friends, your neighbors, your family, your coworkers and just ask them, take a look. Does this make sense for you? Does it make sense for your family? Do you need the financial security? Do you want a healthier lifestyle? And if you can obtain that at a relatively modest cost.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 738, "text": "In some cases as I said, for a lot of people it is going to be less than $100 a month, which people can afford. In some cases for young people it might be as little as $50, or $40 or $30 a month, if that makes sense to you, then take advantage of this now. Because if you do not take advantage of it by March 31st, then the next chance you may have will not be until November. And you know, I have seen too many stories of people who did not have health insurance and tragedy struck and they were unprepared. And part of what happens I think is when you have children, then you become much more aware of how you want to provide security for yourself and your family. I know you are often asked this. But do you believe that this will be the legacy of your administration? And do you feel comfortable with that legacy, if so? You know, I am very proud of this law. It is already helping millions of people. Keep in mind in addition to the over 4 million people who've signed up for the private health insurance, 3 million young people are staying on their parents' plan 'till the age of 26 because of the law. You have millions who are on Medicaid in the states that have expanded it because of the law. You have got seniors who are getting discounts on their prescription drugs and Medicare because of the law. You have got a patient's bill of rights for those who have health insurance through their jobs because of the law. So I am very proud of this. And I believe that once we get through the initial startup phases, which are always difficult. It was true for Social Security, and it was true for Medicare. Some of the same arguments were made against those programs when they first started off. And at that point the Republicans will not call it Obamacare anymore. Because one of the things the Republicans say is and this week they tried to do this 50 times, the lower house, they tried to change the law in its current form. Now this law is up and running since 2010. Now what changes, what specific changes would you make to this law from here on out? Well, you know, on a complicated program like this, and this is true of every social program.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 739, "text": "And what I have said to the Republicans is if they have something specific that makes sense for families, makes healthcare more affordable, drives down costs, covers more people, we are happy to look at it. But there is a reason why they have never actually put forward a serious alternative. Did you notice for the last 5 years they have been saying, this is terrible, we have got a better way of doing it. And then we keep on waiting for their plan of a better way of doing it, and they do not produce it. Well, the reason is, is because actually we have taken the best ideas, conservative ideas, liberal ideas, and we have put them together and we are now implementing them. And what I can say is that if in fact people sign up and take advantage, if they go to the website, if they make the calls, they go to the community clinic, and they get the information, I am absolutely confident that you will see millions of people benefitting from this law. It does not mean that at some point there will not be some additional problems or improvements that we can make. Do you have anything in mind in the near future?  At this point I think actually it is working the way it should. But I, what we need to do is after the first year we will evaluate what the pool looks like. Can we make sure that we are keeping the premiums low? Are there more people that we could potentially cover through other mechanisms, reaching those who are still uninsured? The biggest improvement I'd like to see right now is for the Governors in states like Texas and Florida to expand Medicaid. Because a state like Texas has the highest uninsured rate in the nation. Keep in mind, the state of Texas would not have to pay itself more money to cover these people. This is money that the federal law and the federal government would provide, all they have to do is to agree to accept these dollars to help their citizens, their residents to do the right thing. And the idea that you would not do that for political reasons I think is, that is something I'd like to see improved. But that does not have to do with making a change in the law. It means changing the attitudes of some of the politicians who've been blocking it. But ENTITY, without a doubt I guess you agree that your credibility has been somewhat tarnished with the Latino community, because of the immigration reform and deportations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 740, "text": "Now how can you ask the Latino community once again to trust and to sign on to this program and to follow your example. Well, I would challenge the premise of my credibility. Keep in mind that, you know, when you are ENTITY somebody's always going to be frustrated or unhappy about something you have done or have not done, or have not done fast enough. But if you look at my track record in terms of expanding, access to college for Latino students. If you look at my track record in terms of the number of Latino families we kept out of poverty during the Great Recession. If you look at my track record in terms of the number of Latino families who I helped make sure that they stayed in their homes through our various programs when the housing market crashed. If you look at the track record that I have had in expanding health insurance for legal residents' children. If you look at the track record that I have with respect to making sure that the Dreamers were not subject to deportation, despite the fact that, that required me to make some very difficult changes administratively in existing law. I think the community understands that I have got their back and I am fighting for them. Of course, but that is true for pretty much everybody in the population. If something's wrong then they are saying, why has not ENTITY done something about this. That does not , that is not just true of here in the United States. That is around the world. You know, you got people in Africa and Asia and Europe and China saying, why did not ENTITY do something about this, this is a terrible problem. And I understand that, that is part of the job. The main message I have for the community right now is, and Latin America. The main question that I have, or the main point that I have for everybody watching right now is you do not punish me by not signing up for healthcare. You are punishing yourself or your family if in fact there is affordable healthcare there to be had and subsidies and tax credits that allow you to have the peace of mind and security and regular checkups and preventive care that would keep you healthier. That is not a matter of trusting me, that is a matter of looking for yourself and seeing if you can get services. We will be back in just a moment. But ENTITY, we wanted to thank you for being here with us today. I enjoyed that very much. I enjoyed it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjosediazbalertandenriqueacevedounivisionnews", "title": "Interview with Jose Diaz-Balert and Enrique Acevedo of Univision News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jose-diaz-balert-and-enrique-acevedo-univision-news", "publication_date": "05-03-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 741, "text": "ENTITY, as representative from the host country, it is been left to me to bowl the first ball. The London Economic Summit is taking place under a number of clouds. So far, Western creditor nations have dealt with this problem on a case-by-case basis. However, I'd like to ask you, in light of the growing hostility of debtor nations, first of all whether a coordinated long-term solution is now essential; and second, what the U.S.. can do to guarantee confidence of its banking system? Well, first of all, let me answer that by saying that I believe the five-point system-or program that we all agreed to at the summit meeting last year at Williamsburg has been working. And I am sure there is unhappiness here and there with some. But I believe that since it is working, and it is working on a case-by-case basis, that we should continue that, and that the greatest thing we can contribute now to helping them in their problems is to do everything we can to ensure and increase, if possible, the economic recovery that is presently taking place. We have had two banks recently to run into trouble as a result of problems with these debtor countries. Manufacturers Hanover. Well, that turned out to be quite a rumor that seemed to be believed only on Wall Street and the stock market for 24 hours and caused quite a panic, but developed that there was not the same kind of crisis involved there. ENTITY, in the last few days you have said that the world feels a little bit more secure because of the strengthening in the American strategic and conventional posture. As paradoxical as it may seem in considering the reported widespread violations of SALT II by the Soviet Union, do you feel that the world can continue to feel a little bit more secure for an extended period of time in the absence of an agreement with the Soviet Union limiting nuclear arms? Well, I think the ultimate of what we want, of course, is for them to come back to the table and join us in not a limitation, as SALT was, that was simply legalizing an arms race in that the limitation was only a limit on how many more you could continue to build-as a matter of fact, it is interesting to note that from the time of the signing by both parties to the SALT treaty, the Soviet Union added 3,950 more warheads.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists2", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-2", "publication_date": "31-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 742, "text": "When I say more secure, I believe that the United States, basically, in recent decades, went all out in various efforts at detente and in which we unilaterally disarmed with the idea that maybe if we did this and showed our good faith, they would reciprocate by reducing their own. They have engaged in the most massive military buildup the world has ever seen. And therefore, the reason I believe that there is more security today is the redressing that we have done of our own military strength, the strength of the alliance, and the unity that we have. And the alliance resisted all that propaganda of the Soviets with regard to the intermediate-range placement, and their efforts to divide us failed. So I think-there is an article that I could call to your attention in The Economist, called May Hibernation. that they are not deviously planning something or having a great plan going forward . The author of this article said that they do not have any answers right now, so they have just hunkered down and they are hibernating, waiting until they have an answer. And all this talk about great strain in the relations-well, the unhappiness is because they are not having their way freely, as they did a short time ago. ENTITY, in the connection of this problem of the United States-Soviet relations, East-West relations, which my Italian colleague just mentioned, I'd like to ask this question. Many observers suggest that the United States and the Soviet Union have a common national interest in calming down the present gulf crisis-Persian Gulf crisis, the U.S.. and the Soviet Union have a common interest. Do you agree with this view? If so, would you consider taking this crisis as an opportunity to reopen the U.S.-Soviet dialog, which so many people are anxious to have . Well, I do not see that particular issue as one lending itself to that. We are not out of touch with the Soviet Union. We have continued to negotiate with them on other matters-other than the arms treaties-that were of concern to them. So, we have made it very plain that the door is open for negotiations. On the gulf, I think the idea-none of us want to see this spread into a major conflict.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists2", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-2", "publication_date": "31-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 743, "text": "And I think the fact that the gulf nations themselves have not asked for help other than wanting more weaponry for their own defense here and there, and which we have provided, and I believe that that is the course to follow. If it ever goes beyond that, then I think that the major nations-it would begin with us and our allies getting together, because basically our allies, including your own country, have a greater stake in-if that energy supply was cut off. But, no, I do not believe that that really offers a kind of opening we are talking about. Yes, but you have direct talk with the Soviet Union on this? So then-this is a followup question-what initiative, if any, do you plan to take at the London summit on this gulf crisis, on this subject? Do you plan to take any- Oh, I am quite sure we will be discussing that. The summit meetings, I am proud and happy to say, since Williamsburg, are kind of planned at a more informal basis. They used to be very programmed and with subjects in advance determined on and so forth. And we did not think, when we had the Williamsburg summit, we did not think that that really opened the door to what everyone would like to talk about. So it is more or less an informal get-together, and whatever subject is on anyone's mind, they can bring up, that they think is of interest to it. And I am quite sure that we will be discussing that. Well, if I can come back to the economic problem, ENTITY, the latest figures on the U.S.. export performance- they paint a rather grim picture. It is understood that the U.S.. trade deficit-trade imbalance will reach a staggering $126 billion this year, compounding, it seems, the deficit problem that already exists. How can interest rates really come down under such auspices? And what will you tell your partners at London, who are worried stiff already about interest rates and about the high dollar that it is created and the capital that comes out of their economies into banks in this country? What are you going to tell your partners about this? Well, the trade imbalance-I do not think it has anything to do with the interest rates. The trade imbalance that you have mentioned there, as a matter of fact, is due to the value of the dollar in comparison to other currencies, and this is part of the worldwide recession that is been going on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists2", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-2", "publication_date": "31-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 744, "text": "But our imports are actually responsible for about a third of the recovery of our trading partners now. And there is another element that we do not consider in the balance of trade, but that is capital investment from outside the United States in our country. And yet, that is a kind of balance to this imbalance. We'd like very much to be exporting more than we are, but we realize that our recovery started earlier and has been faster than it has in the other countries. And the very fact, as I say, that we are continuing to import is helping that recovery. And I think that this will move to change that. Now, we get to the deficit, which is-every country has one right now-the spending over and above revenues in government functions. We have a program right now that is in conference committee before the House and Senate to work out the differences in their two versions of what I have called a down payment. And that is a 3-year program to-certain, some revenue increases-but both domestic spending and some reductions in defense spending that will not set us back too much in our program. But this down payment will amount to about $140 or $150 billion over the 3-year period in the reduction of our deficit. But that is only part of it. We recognize that we have a long way to go in reducing the share of the gross national product that the Government is taking in taxes and is spending. And we had a commission from the private sector-I asked a man named Peter Grace, a businessman, to form task forces and go into every agency and department of our government. I had done this in California when I was Governor, for the State, and it worked. And some 2,000 American leaders from the private sector spent several months doing this. And they have left us with 2,000-I think it is 478 specific recommendations as to how government can be made more efficient and more economical by simply implementing modern-day business practices. For example, when they could find that in one area of our government, it was costing us $4 and something every time we wrote a paycheck for an employee, and out in the business world that process takes less than a dollar-well, there is no reason why government should not take less than a dollar in processing a paycheck-well, this kind of thing. And we now have a task force that is working on those recommendations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists2", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-2", "publication_date": "31-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 745, "text": "Many of them will require legislation by the Congress; some of them only require Executive order by me. And we have already in our planning, right now, and in this down payment, we have already included some of their recommendations and are going forward with them. So, we think that actually the interest rates, however, that-I am dealing with the deficit part now-are not that closely linked to the deficit. As a matter of fact, the deficit of some of our allies as a proportion of gross national product is not too out of line as a percentage of GNP any more than ours is. But what I stand on as evidence that it is not the deficit that is causing the interest rates, the high interest rates, is the fact that we brought those high interest rates down from 21.5 percent down to a little more than half that at the same time that our deficit was increasing vastly over what it had been. We think that out there in the money market in our own country, after nearly half a century of deficit spending in this country and a growing inflation that has been worldwide for a longer period than ever in the world's history, that the money market is not yet convinced that we have control of inflation. And every move by the Federal Reserve System-they always look to see, well, does this mean that suddenly inflation is going to start? Remember that in '79 and '80, before we came here, inflation in this country went up to double digits, and for 2 years in a row it was at double digits. One time, it was running at 17 percent. And since we have been here, it has come down to where for the last 2 years inflation has been less than 4 percent. But I believe we are sound in thinking that it is just the lack of confidence. Now, if we pass-if the Senate and the House come together and this down payment is made, and then, as we begin to put together the 1985 budget, which we will shortly be doing, and we begin to show in that budget the effect of the Grace commission reports and so forth, I think we will see a little more confidence out there in the business community, and I think we will see interest rates come down a little further. ENTITY, first of all, let me say I am disappointed you have not offered us any of those jellybeans.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists2", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-2", "publication_date": "31-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 746, "text": "Our Prime Minister, Mr. Trudeau, set out on a personal disarmament quest last year, based on the assumption that the superpowers were deadlocked, that the world was becoming more dangerous, and that smaller powers might help to break that deadlock-and got the support and endorsement of the Commonwealth. Now, we came to see you in December. You cooled them out with a noncommittal good will. You thanked them for suggestions, you wished them Godspeed, as I recall.-- and, in effect, you trivialized his whole undertaking. So, my question is, why did you not pick up on this initiative and give it momentum as a new run for arms control? Well, I suppose because we were convinced that it has to be the Warsaw Pact and the NATO-I will not just say the United States and the Soviet Union. Here is where the issue lies, here is where the threat, if there is one to the world, comes from. And we were busily trying to show the Soviet Union that we had not made any demands in which we said, It is this or nothing. We tried to show them our flexibility. For example, my first proposal about the intermediate-range weapons was why not 0-0? Well, the Soviets refused to discuss that. All right, then, whatever figure you have in mind, or whatever we have in mind, let us sit down then and see how much we can reduce the numbers of weapons. And we told them, frankly, we would always keep in mind that someday we'd still like to have 0-0, but we were willing to talk a lesser number. Now, they walked away on the-the line that it was the-that when deployment started. You are reviewing disarmament, but this is not-as far as I can tell-nothing to do with the peace initiative. Well, I was asking about Prime Minister Trudeau's peace initiative to try and break the deadlock that the two superpowers were in. We encouraged him and gave him our blessing to go forward with that. I think that it is awfully easy for us in our relations with the Soviet Union to be the kiss of death, sometimes, to these things. The Prime Minister came here-I am sorry, I misunderstood what you are asking. I think the world pretty generally, with just a few exceptions, is ready for world peace.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists2", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-2", "publication_date": "31-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 747, "text": "But I do not believe that you can really-that it is really on a sound basis unless it is accompanied by a reduction, particularly in the strategic nuclear weapons. This is the threat that we cannot-the world cannot go on living under that threat. Our country presented that at a time when we were the only ones who had them-1946. And we suggested an international commission to be given total control over all nuclear material. Now, we knew they were trying to have such a weapon, and eventually did, but at that time they-all they had to do was give in, and there would not be any. ENTITY, during his visit to Washington, President Duarte of Salvador declared that he would never ask American troops to fight in his country. And last week you have stated yourself that you had never had any thought of sending American soldiers to Central America. And what would be your reaction if next fall, for example, the Government of Salvador Was seriously threatened? I mean, with collapse, by guerrilla offensive? The-and again, I have problems with those of you who are further out there. This domed room has terrible acoustics here. I think you are asking about El Salvador and Nicaragua, threatening, and threatening with collapse the Government of Salvador, what would be your reaction? Military-will you send military forces there? Well, it would not be military forces because El Salvador has not only not asked for them, but President Duarte on his visit here recently said, no, they were not wanted or needed. They will do this with their own forces but frankly admit they must have our help with regard to equipment and supplies and the help that we have been to them in training. You know, a great many of the Central American countries, their militaries over the years have been kind of garrison troops-more concerned with internal problems than in fighting a war. And so they have been most open in their request of training. And before we got here-the previous, under the previous administration-some of their training consisted of bringing El Salvadoran troops up here and training them at our own bases with our own men. Well, then, as the war heated up, they could not afford to have the men gone for that long a time. So we have 55 trainers working with their entire army. And the guerrillas, of course, are being supplied by way of Nicaragua-through Nicaragua by Cuba and the Soviet Union-not only with weapons, but with replacements, with personnel.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists2", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-2", "publication_date": "31-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 748, "text": "And now the guerrillas are resorting to kidnapping. They are rounding up-going into villages and rounding up even just youngsters off the streets and simply taking them, forcing them to be guerrillas. And as would happen-the law of averages-every once in a while some of those youngsters escape and get away, and so we know that this is the practice and what they are doing. But, no, if this fall offensive comes, I believe we have confidence in the El Salvadoran ENTITY. We think that the guerrillas could make things very unpleasant, and we think that they are building up the possibility of such a thing. But now the election has taken place, the election of the President, and Duarte is very definitely dedicated to continuing to move toward democracy in El Salvador; certainly has the support of the people. And I am optimistic that we are on the right path. And our Congress has voted now to give us the appropriation we asked for further aid to El Salvador. ENTITY, I want to ask a specifically Irish question, as you are going to be-the first country you are going to touch down in. And I am familiar with what you said about Irish unity and the question-your not becoming involved, as between Ireland and England. But are there any circumstances which might change that? If, for instance, Ireland were to join NATO or such a question were muted, would that make it more attractive, for instance, for America to support the idea of Irish unity? I really believe that that is an internal problem to be worked out, first of all because there are two governments involved, and the other government is already a member of NATO. I have been impressed with the Forum and some of its recommendations, and the-as Prime Minister, your Prime Minister said, the recent finding of the Forum of recommendations certainly provided an agenda for serious thinking. If there is any way in which, without being an interferer in things going on there, but in which the people of Ireland felt that we could in any way be helpful with anything that we might do, we'd be very pleased to do it. I believe I am in order in asking a supplementary. On the question of these unprecedented protests, which are unheard of in terms of an American President visiting Ireland, one of the factors in this is that there is a certain alienation between the Irish at home and the Irish here, because the quota of immigration has cut down the numbers of Irish with a day-to-day knowledge of America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists2", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-2", "publication_date": "31-05-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 749, "text": "The ENTITY joins me live on WBZ News Radio. If we could get right to the questions, we'd appreciate it. It is nice to hear your voice. The man who allegedly shot at the White House was in court today, as you know. He may soon be indicted on charges that he tried to kill you. I'd like to know, how do you talk to your daughter about that? Well, I think my daughter is well aware of the requirements of the office and that a lot of it involves the Secret Service. But I have to tell you, I think they do a good job. I was not in any danger, and I think this matter is being handled in the appropriate way. We are talking live to ENTITY on WBZ News Radio 1030. ENTITY, as a parent, I am concerned about what seems to be a moral decline in this country. Do you share those concerns? I am especially concerned that so many of our young children are being raised, in effect, in a vacuum where they are so vulnerable to gangs and guns and violence and drugs and where they do not have enough people to look up to and enough people to follow. And they are not being taught right from wrong on a daily basis. I think we have to work on all those things. One of the things that I have tried hard to do as ENTITY is to emphasize the importance of parents and churches and community groups taking responsibility for these children again. And one of the things that I liked about our crime bill was that we enabled church groups and others to apply for assistance to reach out to more of these young people. You know, every child is going to have somebody that he or she looks up to. It needs to be the right person; it needs to be somebody who has a sustained and caring relationship with the child over a long period of time. That is the only way to turn this around. ENTITY, if we could get on to the campaign trail, campaign '94, as you know, you are not welcomed by some Democrats campaigning for election this year. Well, most elections are decided on the merits within each State. You know, when I was a Governor, I never had the President come and campaign for me, even when the President was a member of my own party and was popular, because I thought that the voters were discriminating about that. But I do think there are some national elements to this election.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdianesternwbzradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Diane Stern of WBZ Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-diane-stern-wbz-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 750, "text": "And particularly in a lot of these races for Congress and Senate, I am pleased to go where I have been asked to go-I have been asked to go more places than I can-to try to say what the stakes are in this election. You know, the fact is that in the last 21 months, while we have not solved all the problems in the country and while a lot of ordinary Americans still have difficulties, the country is in better shape than it was. We have got more jobs. We are doing more for families and children. We are moving in the right direction at home and abroad. And the voters need to go forward, not back to the easy promises of the eighties. You know, I knew when I took this job, if I really tried to change things I'd have to shake some things up; I would not always be popular. I would not always be popular everywhere in the country and certainly not when people did not know what had been done. So my job is simply to go out in this last week and tell people what is been done, what the stakes are, what the challenges are ahead and let them make up their own minds. ENTITY-we are talking live with the President on WBZ News Radio- what is your take on last week's endorsement of Mario Cuomo by New York GOP Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, and could you see yourself ever going out on a limb like that, backing a Republican? Well, I think he did it as an act of statesmanship. I think that Mayor Giuliani saw himself as an American first, a representative of the people of New York, and then a Republican. And he thought that Governor Cuomo would be better for the people of New York City than the policies advocated by Mr. Pataki and his sponsor, Senator D'Amato. I really respect what he did. I think it had to do with what was best for ordinary New Yorkers. I think that is the reason that the mayor of Los Angeles endorsed a Democratic Senator, Senator Feinstein. I think you are seeing a lot of that around the country today as people get worried about the extreme nature of a lot of the Republican campaigns and how divorced they are from the real concerns of ordinary Americans. So obviously I liked it, but I also believe it was an act of statesmanship. Could you envision yourself ever backing a Republican, especially considering the remarks today to Black Entertainment Television calling them far rightwingers, extreme?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdianesternwbzradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Diane Stern of WBZ Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-diane-stern-wbz-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 751, "text": "I said their congressional leadership had advocated principles that were extreme rightwing, and they have. Oh sure, under the right circumstances, if I were President and we had the equivalent of Oliver North running in the Democratic Party against a responsible Republican alternative, I believe I would do just what President Reagan and Mrs. Reagan have done in Virginia. I certainly do believe that. I know we are running short on time, but Newsweek magazine, you may have seen, gathered a focus group of voters who, rather than being angry with your administration, say they are disappointed. Now, how might you change your agenda the next 2 years, based on what you have and have not accomplished so far? Well, I am going to try to do what we have not done yet. I am going to try to get the Congress to pass welfare reform. I am going to take another run at health care. We have got to find a way to protect the health insurance of people; a million more Americans lost it last year. I am going to take another run at campaign finance reform and at lobbying reform and at some of the environmental measures that we need so badly. But the most important thing I have got to do is to figure out a way to communicate with the American people better. I mean, all the evidence is that the American people basically do not know, for example, that the last 2 years our administration was only the third one since World War II in which Congress approved more than 80 percent of the measures that I recommended, that it included family and medical leave for working families and tax credits for working families with children who are just above the poverty line and immunization of all children under 2 by 1996 and an expansion of Head Start and a big expansion of more affordable college loans for middle class families; that if they did know these things they would have a totally different attitude. So, I really liked the Newsweek poll-focus group-because it showed what I think, which is that the American people, I think, if they knew what I had done and if they knew what we have achieved and if they knew where we were going, I think they'd feel better. I have to do a better job of finding a way to communicate directly with people in an atmosphere which is overwhelmingly dominated by controversy, conflict, failure, combative communication, and just talk straight to the folks. I have given a lot of thought to it; it is a great challenge.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdianesternwbzradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Diane Stern of WBZ Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-diane-stern-wbz-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 758, "text": "Let us bring the former president of the United States. What went into it? Well, we had a great years and I have been watching what is happening and a lot of people, they were remorseful and they were like, Can we do something? And it is really pictures of a lot of great things with the military, with so many of the things we have done. We bring in some negativity what is happening now, but frankly, it is really a happy book and it is a book largely of beautiful pictures, of events that took place, and some of the things we have done. And we are going to talk more about the book a little later on, by the way you pre order right now at 45books.com. Our white house correspondent asked Jen Psaki about something that Joe Biden said about you during the campaign and during one of the debates and she turned it around. Anyway, it is a great question and listen to the answer as well. Here is yesterday at the White House. In 2020, when roughly 220,000 Americans had already died of ENTITY, Joe Biden said about ENTITY, Anyone who is responsible for that many deaths should not remain as president of the United States of America. Now that more Americans have died under President Biden than ENTITY. And the former president was people inject bleach. He apparently reportedly did not even share with people, he was going to interact with, that he had tested positive for ENTITY himself. He continued to provide a forum for misinformation. He is relied on the advice of his health and medical experts, and he is trying to be a part of solving crisis, getting the pandemic under control. And I think there is a pretty stark difference between their approaches. So ENTITY, when Joe Biden said, during the debate with you, that 220,000 Americans had died on your watch, you should not be president the United States. Well, he is done a terrible job, just like he did with the H1N1. He is done just an absolutely terrible job, getting it out and getting people to take it. People just do not want to take it. And the vaccines, I have to be very proud of the vaccines. We did it in less than nine months. People said it to take five years to 12 years and probably would not work.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 759, "text": "Some people do not want to take them and that is their freedom and that is what we have to do, but people do not want to take them because they do not trust Biden, they do not trust the administration. We had none of that. Everybody was fighting to take them and we were doing great. We were doing really great on distribution. We also bought billions of dollars worth before we knew it was going to be successful, which saved us one year. So many things we did right, and what they are doing is very sad when you look at what is happening. But more people died during year than last year by a very substantial margin, and sadly, this year is not up. Well, ENTITY, why would not people trust the vaccines? They were developed during your administration. Number one, they did a pause on Johnson & Johnson, which really sent shocks through, over six people that did not die by the way, but six people, and for that millions and millions of shots given, and they did the pause with Johnson & Johnson, that was very bad. And they just have not been able to sell it. People are not trusting this administration. And if you remember when during the debate, I think she said, and he said, Oh, if it is ENTITY, I will not take the vaccine. I will not take the vaccine. And then as soon as he got elected, he tried to claim that he did it, but he forgot that he got a shot during my administration, he got a shot. But there was just a great distrust of what they were saying and what they were doing, and I think that is the problem. And that is why they are trying to set up mandates and really hurting things with the economy, with the mandates, in addition to other things. Well, Fauci kept changing what we were supposed to be doing. And then when you look at Afghanistan, you talk to military families and they say, We do not trust this administration. We put our kids lives in the president's hand and look what he did. He pulled out and left so many Americans behind enemy lines. Many of them are still there. When you look at the border, people do not trust what he is doing down there, because you will hear Dr. Fauci saying, You need to wear your mask. But yet they are letting so many people flow over the Southern border and ENTITY, he had a busy day yesterday.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 760, "text": "He was also at the press conference with Dr. Fauci, and he pressed him on that issue. Fauci, as you advise the president about the possibility of new testing requirements for people coming into this country, does that include everybody? The answer is yes, and everybody who is coming into the country needs to get a test with in 24 hours of getting on the plane to come here. Well, what about people who do not take a plane and just these border crossers coming in in huge numbers? You do not have the capability, as you know of somebody getting on a plane, getting checked, looking at a passport, we do not have that there. There is testing at the border under certain circumstances, as you know. We have millions of people flowing across, and we are not only talking about the China virus or ENTITY, whatever you want to call it. We are talking about many other diseases coming over the border that are far worse, coming over the border. Prisons of other countries are being dumped into our country. We are like a dumping ground. We had the strongest border in the history of our country. The wall was largely built, it could have been finished in three weeks and they decided not to finish the openings, it is just some openings. We did an incredible job, 500 miles of wall. And this is why that, coupled with other things gave us the greatest numbers we have ever had, the most successful it is ever been. We take people in, but take them in legally. Now, one other thing that is pouring in right now that nobody even mentioned are drugs. Drugs are coming in at a rate of seven times greater than when I was doing it, and our numbers were going way down. We were having the lowest drug numbers, and if you look at the numbers of people that are coming in now, we are millions and millions of people every couple of months, we are look at a 12, 13, 14, maybe even 15 million people a year, and none of those people are tested. So it seems to me that the Remain in Mexico program that was widely ridiculed by the current president of the United States, now according to the courts, has to be reimplemented and officially goes back into production, Remain in Mexico starts again. What is your reaction to that? Well, they should have never ended it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 761, "text": "If Joe Biden would've come in and just gone to the beach, he would've been successful in many ways, because all of this stuff, the border was the best that ever was and getting better, drugs coming in was getting at a level that we have never seen before, meaning- Is there a sense of gratification for you personally, that a policy that he ridiculed, the courts are making input back in? No, because I want to see good for the country, ENTITY. It is so important to me, I want to see good for the country. What they are doing is destroying our country. Our country is being destroyed before your very eyes, and I have never seen anything like it. The withdrawal from Afghanistan, I got us there. We were down to 2,500 troops, the Taliban respected us. Abdul, I dealt with him a lot, he respected us. We were going to take the people out. We were going to take some Afghans out, we were going to take our equipment out. We left $85 billion worth of equipment, it is unthinkable, and they had a parade last week showing off all the equipment they took. It was like a surrender. And do not think that China and Russia and North Korea and Iran were not watching, because that was the greatest embarrassment in the history of our country, in my opinion. If you are just joining us- If you are just joining us, we are speaking to ENTITY, former president of the United States, about news of the day. We are going to talk about his new book that comes out in a couple of days in a moment. ENTITY, we all know that there is a supply chain bottleneck and Joe Biden yesterday essentially said, does not matter if you are naughty or nice this year, there are going to be problems, but he did say one person and only one person can promise whether or not you are going to get your stuff. If you watch the news recently, you might think the shelves in all our stores are empty across the country. for the vast majority of the country, that is not what is happening. I have also spoken with the CEOs of UPS and FedEx, which are on track to deliver more packages than ever. Now, I cannot promise that every person will get every gift they want on time, only Santa Claus can keep that promise. Okay, so he makes a joke out of it at the end, but it is a real crisis.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 762, "text": "If you were present of the United States, and clearly the administration did not plan adequately as the demand returned after ENTITY and the pandemic, and we are creeping back toward normal times. But ENTITY, what would you do to fix the supply chain crisis? Well, first of all, it would've never happened. Nobody ever mentioned those words, supply chains, they were never brought up. We had perfect supply chains. We had the greatest economy in history. We then had the China virus, we fixed it, we did a great job with it. And between not only that, the ventilators, all of the different things that we did, stocking up all of the states, which by the way, all of the cupboards were bare, and that includes the United States government . There was nothing there, we did a hell of a job. We have got no credit for it, but maybe someday we will. But we would've never had a supply chain problem, but one of the causes is the mandates because a lot of people are not working because of forced mandates. That is one of the very big causes. We did not need ships all over the place, clogging up the waters coming in from Saudi Arabia, Russia and other places. We were the biggest in the world. We went to the biggest in the world. Within one year, we would've been bigger than Saudi Arabia and Russia combined with real energy, and it is called liquid gold under our feet. We have an advantage that other countries like China do not have. So many different things, but the mandates had a lot to do with the supply chain problem. Something that is also frustrating for Americans is the amount of crime that has gone up in our country and the way that our men and women in blue are being treated. The Fraternal Order of Police, they have had enough. They tweeted this out yesterday. More officers have been shot and killed this year than any other year. And there is one more month left, 314 officers shot 58 officers killed by gunfire, ambush attacks on officers up 126% from 2020. ENTITY, this does not include the Utah officer that was killed that we are all praying for, and another officer that was shot and is trying to recover right now. What is your reaction into that tweet?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 763, "text": "Well, when you look at San Francisco and you look at 100 kids or people running into a store together, and the cops are standing out there, not allowed to do their job, they are not allowed to do their job. And you allow a thing like that to happen. We have a country has no law enforcement, has no law and order. Our police are great, they are not allowed to do their job. They go and shoot police, they do not respect them. The people of our country love our police and they do respect them, but they are not allowed to do their job. If you allowed them to do their job, that would stop and crime would stop, but they are not allowed. You look at what is going on in New York, you look at what is going on in Chicago and look at what is happening in San Francisco. And it is happening in many other cities that they do not want to report about. The media outside of you people and a few others, the media is not reporting this problem. But where you have hoarded of people running in, kids mostly, running in and stealing, robbing stores where drug chains are closing all their stores in different cities because they cannot keep them open. We just do not have law enforcement. We are not allowed to have law enforcement. I will tell you what, our country is being destroyed. The police have to be given their power back. They have to stop the crime. They can do it and they want to do it, but they are not allowed to do it. President, you referenced this a little bit earlier, and that is China. We know that they launched this virus unintentionally, perhaps, who knows. They will not tell us. This killed 750,000 Americans and millions around the globe. We know they just disappeared their leading tennis player because she accused a former official of sexual assault. The WTA is pulling out all the tournaments there. There is a growing push to boycott the China Olympics, who by the way, also have rounded up their Muslims into concentration camps and are torturing them as well as harvesting their organs, while doing the over fights in Taiwan, threatening their neighbors. Is this the time to say we are not going to go to the winter Olympics? And by the way, before I answer that, none of this happened with us. They did not send bombers over the middle of Taiwan. He knew not to do that. He knew very well, you cannot send bombers over Taiwan.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 764, "text": "None of that stuff happened. And they will wait until after the Olympics and they will do something with Taiwan. They no longer respect us. They watched Afghanistan. They watched our generals not knowing what they were doing. They saw all of that and they are watching very closely. They will be doing things, Russia will be doing things, and maybe even North Korea will be doing things, because they are watching our country I built a great military . We had jet fighters that were 40 and 50 years old. We have knew everything, we are in such great shape, but you still have to have the brain power to know how to use it. And they watched that withdrawal, and by the way, the withdrawal, get out. 21 years, but you get out with dignity and strength. And we were going to get out with dignity and strength. What they did, these countries see that. And I will tell you what, we are in a much different position. With that being said, you hurt the athletes, you hurt a lot of people. I would not do it. Jimmy Carter tried it, it did not work. I would not do it. I took in hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes and tariffs from China. We never got 25 cents for 40 years, they never paid us anything. Hundreds of billions of dollars and businesses were starting to come back to us. China respected our country. Russia respected our country. I stopped the pipeline going to Europe, Biden approved it. But of course, he stopped the Keystone pipeline in our country, and others, he is trying to stop. Now, we have a group of people, I do not know if it is Biden, it might not be, but we have a group of people that are destroying our country and perhaps knowingly, destroying our country. But he does not want us to rely on fossil fuels. Do you think he is doing this on purpose so that we buy electric cars? It is our advantage, and it also can fire up those big factories and those big plants. You look at what they are doing into our landscape, they are destroying our landscape, our birds, they are destroying with wind. And by the way, those turbines are all made in Germany and they are made in China. And if you talk about emissions, the making of those turbines, if you really go with the emissions theory, the making is so onerous to the environment that nothing they can do will ever or save anything.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 765, "text": "And as far as cars, in order to make the batteries of those cars, the electric cars, and now you are not going to have a choice because they want to go all electric. They are taking our greatest asset, it is right under our feet. We are blessed as a country with tremendous energy reserves under our feet, and they do not want us to use them. ENTITY, you were on social media and you said a lot of people were saying, You got to cool it on social media. Now that you are off social media, even despite January 6th and the investigation, everything that happened since, the impeachment that followed, your ratings, according to some friendly polling for you are higher than they have been. Did you overrate the impact of social media? And in retrospect, will you need it if you want to run again? I think that people are seeing the great job that we did. Again, we had the greatest economy in the history of our country. We rebuilt our military, we had great military support. You look at the Hispanic support we have had, we had the best Hispanic support. I just think that people are missing us. Did it hurt you more than help you? And now that you are off it, and you see that nothing's really changed with your numbers except actually going up, do you think that you'd ever you overemphasized social media? I think that is because maybe they look at the opponent and they look at what is happening to our country. I think we have some very bad people. I think a lot of illegal things were done with social media, you understand when they can do 417 million. If you spend more than $5,600, they put you in jail. And yet here is the guy spend $417 million and nothing happens to him . And I think we are going to have a platform that is going to be incredible and that is what is being developed right now. Will you change your approach? A country was in bad shape, I had to move fast. Some of the niceties like, let us sit down and let us talk very calm. China was ripping us off $500 billion a year. Europe, they sound nice, but they rip us. They are almost as bad as China. We made a new deal with Mexico. We made a new deal with Canada. We made a new deal with Japan.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 766, "text": "We were doing a lot of things and you had to move fast, and sometimes in order to do that, you cannot I can be as nice as anybody, I think I am a nice person, but we had to move quickly. And sometimes you have to break the eggs a little bit. So ENTITY, during your four years as President of the United States, you had at least one or two official White House photographers with you at every event. Every time you were out in public, they were snapping pictures. You have sifted through all of those. And you have put together the first book of your post presidency, it is called Our Journey Together. It is got 300 pictures in it. I understand you wrote all of the caption. Out of the millions, how did you figure out which pictures went in and which ones did not? Well, it is a great question, frankly, and it is somebody who also has had some very successful books. But we wanted to do it quickly because we wanted to give people hope. Our country is just now, there is so many people they are down, and we wanted to give, we wanted to show it. Nobody was ever attacked and hit like I was, but I understood that, and I got it, and I think we also gave it back to them. But we had to do something and you are right, we have millions and millions of pictures, but we picked pictures that we thought really represented the time. Even the rallies, we have pictures of these massive rallies that we have. And the rallies right now are bigger now than even before the election, which is shocking. We had in Alabama, 69,000 people. As an example, we had four rallies that I think were the biggest that we have ever had. We had a tremendous rally in Georgia. We had a tremendous rally in Iowa, unbelievable rally in Iowa, but the numbers are so big and it is really, people want hope. And that is a little bit, and maybe a lot of the reason that I did this book. I think it gives people some hope and to look into a very beautiful time. ENTITY came along and we had a fix it, and then we got it going again. So we really did it twice, and now our country's being destroyed. Does it make you want to get another four years and be the 47th president?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 767, "text": "And is it true that the first lady Melania Trump, the former first lady has told you, I am not going back if you run again. She did a great job. She loves the people, they love her. I see how they love her. But no, I will say this. We have to fix our country. We are not going to have a country any longer if we keep doing this. When we allow other countries to empty their prisons into our country- Do you think you are the only one to bring it back as the 47th president? Well, if you look at the poll numbers, I am, because the poll numbers are 95% and 96% approval rating now in the Republican party, nobody's ever had that. So, I am not going by polls. I am just saying I did it before and really did it twice. We had it at a level that has never been seen before, and then we brought it back to a level that was really good despite the China virus. We did a good job. As we were just a moment ago, looking at those many images from the four years of your administration, and you had to struggle to find the photographs for this particular book. Well, we had so much success. Narrow it down to one, if you could, because we- ENTITY If you look at right to try Okay, we got the biggest tax cuts in the history of our country. We got the biggest regulation cuts, that was a great number of days. We did Right to Try. So Right to Try, they have been trying to get it for 47 years and I got it. That is where you can use medicine to take people that are terminally ill and allow them to see if this medicine works, and it is been incredibly successful. That would not sound as big as some of the other things we have done, but that was a very big thing. Supreme Court justice as well, they are going to be making a very important ruling soon. But I had three, it is very unusual to have three and I got three and they are very good and let us see how that all works out because right now, they are going to be making one of their biggest decisions. And putting in almost 300 judges throughout the United States, it is almost 30% of the judges in the country. So we had a lot of big moments and I could just go on and on, but we had a lot of big moments.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpfoxandfriendsinterviewtranscriptdecember2021", "title": "Donald Trump Fox and Friends Interview Transcript December 2021", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-fox-and-friends-interview-transcript-december-2021", "publication_date": "02-12-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 778, "text": "We'd like to talk to you about Texas politics. But if I could just ask you one sort of Texas news-of-the-day question, Mr. Morales is in some hot water over remarks he made a couple days ago. What is your assessment of that? Mike put out a statement, and that is what I agree with. I think that he said something he regretted and he apologized for it, and I think that is a good thing. You know, if you stay in this business long enough, the closer you get to the campaigns, the more you are working, the less you are sleeping, the more you are under pressure, you are going to every now and then people say something that they wish they had not said. And I think the thing to do is just simply say that you wish you had not said it. And that is what he did. So that is what I think about it. Why do you think you can carry Texas? The State of Texas has done well under our policies, both our general economic policies and the specific things I supported, like the space station and the V-22, which is made in Fort Worth, for example. Number two, my plans for the future would be better for the State of Texas than Senator Dole's program. And number three, Bill White and Garry Mauro and all these grassroots Democrats have worked hard to kind of rebuild the party at the grassroots level. And I have worked hard to try to change the relationship of the national Democratic Party, of Texas. For too long, the Democrats just sort of gave up on Texas. So they'd come to Texas and raise money and turn around and leave, and I thought that was wrong. And we have worked out an agreement it is been in place now for some time, you know sending a lot of the money that we raised back to Texas, try to help build the party. And I guess, finally, because I think that last time when I ran I did not really get a clear shot at the voters, even though I did campaign here a couple days. And I was from Arkansas and I had two opponents from Texas, and I think it sort of put me in a hole that and then some of the things that happened early in my term. And I think that, you know, obviously now people are beginning to look at what my record is, what we have done, my ideas about the future as compared with my opponent's.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkathylewisthedallasmorningnewsandnancymathisthehoustonchronicle", "title": "Interview With Kathy Lewis of the Dallas Morning News and Nancy Mathis of the Houston Chronicle in Longview", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kathy-lewis-the-dallas-morning-news-and-nancy-mathis-the-houston-chronicle", "publication_date": "27-09-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 779, "text": "And I just think that for all those reasons we have a chance to win. If we can get people to look at the evidence, as opposed to kind of the accumulated rhetoric of the last 20 years, I think I have got an excellent chance to win. Does your financial commitment here depend on Senator Dole pulling out of California? Because he is not running any ads here right now. No, I think that they probably think that they cannot lose Texas, you know, because Kansas is close and there is you know, a lot of the State officials, major State officials, the two Senators, the Governor are Republicans, and they probably think that they cannot lose. But my commitment here a lot of what I try to do is to help them build the grassroots strength again, to go back into communities. When Bill White left our administration, left the Energy Department and came home here, he really wanted to build kind of a mainstream, progressive Democratic Party in Texas again at the grassroots. And I have tried to support that. And we made an agreement then he and Truman Arnold, some others if I raised any funds in Texas, we'd kick back a certain percentage to Texas. And I also told them I'd you know, I was not interested in coming to Texas anymore just for fundraising; I did not believe in that. I wanted to see the people. And that is why we are here in Longview, we are going to Fort Worth, and we are going to be overnight in Houston when I go to do our event there. You know, in the last 40 days we are going to have pretty well, for a while at least, just kind of play it by ear in terms of what else what we do in terms of television ads because of the we had run some, you know, in Texas already. We did some in east Texas earlier. But what we do, it depends in part on what the other competing considerations are. I do not know whether you know, you told me something I do not know. I thought the Dole campaign was still running ads in California. No, I meant in Texas. They are not running in Texas. I guess the point I was getting at, in '92 you came within 2 or 3 percentage points of President Bush, even though your campaign spent very little money here although you spent quite a bit of time here. And Bush spent a lot of money here and time as well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkathylewisthedallasmorningnewsandnancymathisthehoustonchronicle", "title": "Interview With Kathy Lewis of the Dallas Morning News and Nancy Mathis of the Houston Chronicle in Longview", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kathy-lewis-the-dallas-morning-news-and-nancy-mathis-the-houston-chronicle", "publication_date": "27-09-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 780, "text": "I was just wondering if you were going to make a financial commitment as well as a commitment of your time. Well, let me just say, those are not decisions, believe it or not, that I am personally reviewing here every day. So I cannot answer that specifically. But we plan to make a major effort here. And I hope it will be helpful to the others who are running, because I think the more we get the message out, the more we get the record out, the more we get the contrast out, the more likely we are to do well here. You look at a place like Longview and all these places all through east Texas, it is pretty much like the economy of Arkansas, which also has a 15- or 20-year low in unemployment rates. And I am doing well there because they know me and I was their Governor and they trust me. But we have not done as well here because the Republicans have had a big leg up and they did a pretty good job of kind of characterizing me in a way that would not be acceptable to a lot of Texas voters. And I have been trying to climb out of that for 3 or 4 years, and I think the sheer weight of the evidence is finally beginning to be felt. And I have a certain affinity for this State. I spent a lot of time here ever since the last nearly 40 years, I have been coming to Texas in one way or another. And so I just think I ought to make an effort here, and I intend to do it. I also think it is a mistake for anybody who wants to lead the country to not make an effort in the second biggest State in America. The future of the United States is in no small part going to be the future of the State of Texas. The attitudes of the people here about immigration, about trade, about education, about health care policy, about economic policy, about what is the best way to reduce crime and welfare, all this what happens here will have a big impact on how the rest of the country goes. And I just think it is not responsible for any President just to not be engaged in it. Will you sign the immigration bill if it passes Congress as it is written now, or will you press for the Members to change the provisions dealing with public benefits and legal immigrants? I do not want to dodge this question, but I have to because it is the subject of negotiations, even as we are talking here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkathylewisthedallasmorningnewsandnancymathisthehoustonchronicle", "title": "Interview With Kathy Lewis of the Dallas Morning News and Nancy Mathis of the Houston Chronicle in Longview", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kathy-lewis-the-dallas-morning-news-and-nancy-mathis-the-houston-chronicle", "publication_date": "27-09-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 781, "text": "We are trying to work out a set of agreements with congressional leadership, the Republican leadership and the Democrat leadership, on a set of continuing resolutions on the unresolved budget matters that we can put into one big bill that will enable them to go home they read them this morning go home and at least have a month to campaign. And I understand that. So we were successful in getting the Gallegly amendment out, which I strongly opposed. I believe Governor Bush came out against it, and I appreciate that. And there are still some things in that bill that I do not like. I think they are unfair to legal immigrants. So I would hope that we could secure some improvements. But the less I say, the better now, while they are talking it through. You know, we were so close on all the bills but one. Once we got an agreedupon education funding level, we were so close I was hoping maybe we could do it. ENTITY, this must seem very different to you today than '94. I mean, you basically did not come to Texas in '94, and the general feeling was candidates did not welcome your presence then. Do you agree with my assessment? I do agree with that. What caused you to be in such bad shape then and Well, for one thing, I think that two of the things I mentioned in my speech. I think that the things that candidates all over the country and Members of Congress are trumpeting, the people supporting me today, were directly out of decisions that were made in '93 and '94 that were unpopular then that have been proved right now. And the two that I mentioned specifically are the economic program and the crime bill. You heard me say, I remember very well when Senator Gramm said, If you pass this economic program, it is just going to be a terrible thing. It is going to have a big recession, and everybody's income will go down. And of course the results are just the opposite. But I think that they were effective in attacking that. I think the second thing is, in the crime bill, they in a lot of rural places that had a lot of Democratic voters but were real conservative voters, like east Texas, there was an effective attack on the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban that, you know, this was somehow going to lead to the impairment of hunters' and sports men and women's rights.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkathylewisthedallasmorningnewsandnancymathisthehoustonchronicle", "title": "Interview With Kathy Lewis of the Dallas Morning News and Nancy Mathis of the Houston Chronicle in Longview", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kathy-lewis-the-dallas-morning-news-and-nancy-mathis-the-houston-chronicle", "publication_date": "27-09-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 782, "text": "And of course, now we know it did not do it, but it did help to lower the crime rate. Then, of course, we were just in the teeth just in the immediate aftermath of the defeat of the health care bill, where a vast amount of money had been spent to try to convince people that the Government was trying to take over health care. And I think now, when we went back to a step-by-step reform process, taking various elements that were in our original bill like the Kennedy-Kassebaum bill that says you cannot lose your health insurance if you change jobs or someone in your family gets sick, or the bill I signed yesterday, no more driveby deliveries and a partial mental health insurance coverage included, and then the spina bifida benefits to Vietnam veterans with children those things, they show that we are making progress on health care. Another very important provision we passed that was a part of our original bill was increasing the deductibility, tax deductibility of health insurance premiums that self-employed people have to buy. So I think now when people see we are making progress in health care, we are going to do it step by step instead of trying to do it all at one time, so everyone can see that the Government's not trying to take over health care, we are just trying to create the conditions in which we can, if you will, enable the American people to fill in the blanks, to take these gaps, these terrible gaps and problems out of our system. A lot of those decisions look better in retrospect than they did in '94 because they have brought good results. And I also think that the things we have been doing in the last 2 years to build on that, to show how this country can meet its challenges and protect its values, have been very helpful as well. But it was not good here in '94. I think it is better here in '96. And the only thing I can ask the people of Texas to do is to look at the evidence, look at the record, listen to the alternatives, and make up their own mind. The CNN poll shows the race narrowing to 10 points now. Do you think Senator Dole's charges of being a liberal and the drug issue, is that having an impact or is this a natural narrowing or do you trust that poll? You know, we probably have to let it simmer out another couple of days.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkathylewisthedallasmorningnewsandnancymathisthehoustonchronicle", "title": "Interview With Kathy Lewis of the Dallas Morning News and Nancy Mathis of the Houston Chronicle in Longview", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kathy-lewis-the-dallas-morning-news-and-nancy-mathis-the-houston-chronicle", "publication_date": "27-09-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 783, "text": "I think it is I think if you look on the drug issue, if you look at our record, if you look at the fact that I have not only as President but as Governor consistently opposed any legalization of drugs; consistently increased enforcement; that I passed a crime bill over the opposition of Senator Dole that had 60 death penalties in it, including capital punishment for drug kingpins; that I appointed, first, a former police chief of Houston, Lee Brown, and then the most at the time he retired from the ENTITY, the most decorated veteran in the American military, General Barry McCaffrey, to be our drug czar, so it is obviously important to me; and that I fought for programs that will help communities keep kids off drugs, like the safe and drug-free schools program, again over the opposition of Senator Dole and Mr. Gingrich I think that, again, once people hear both sides of the argument, then they will know that he can take one comment out of context and maybe make a television ad out of it. But the record shows a very different picture. Now, I say that all of us should be concerned about the fact that in 4 years, when cocaine use dropped by a third in America, it increased among teenagers. That should concern everybody. And everybody, including me, should be willing to assume some responsibility for that. I am not trying to disclaim all. You know, if the efforts we are making to have good results should be credited, then we have problems; I have to take some responsibility for that. For example, there is a lot of evidence that in Canada, for example, tobacco and drug use among juveniles is up. In some European countries it is. And it appears that there was a beginning of a shift in attitudes about 1990 about how dangerous this is and that we, the adults of this country, and in other countries as well, have not succeeded in changing those attitudes back. But I do not think his attack on me is very persuasive once you look at the facts. And the liberal issue I just think, you know, it falls of its own weight. I do believe that there are differences between us. He was against the student loan program, and I improved it. He was against the family and medical leave, and I supported it and got it through. He was for the Gingrich-Dole budget, and I opposed it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkathylewisthedallasmorningnewsandnancymathisthehoustonchronicle", "title": "Interview With Kathy Lewis of the Dallas Morning News and Nancy Mathis of the Houston Chronicle in Longview", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kathy-lewis-the-dallas-morning-news-and-nancy-mathis-the-houston-chronicle", "publication_date": "27-09-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 785, "text": "On taxes, the President outlined this accelerated negotiation process to come up with some sensible common ground, as he called it. Did he suggest at all that he would be open to a temporary extension of the tax cuts for the wealthy? Did he lay any markers down at all? No, the -- I think both sides started and discussed where each had been on -- that our priority was ensuring that, as you heard the President say in his statement, that we make permanent tax cuts for the middle class that are set to expire at the end of this year, and to reiterate our concern for borrowing $700 billion over the next 10 years in making tax cuts for those in excess of $250,000 permanent. I think the Republicans restated their notion of making the wealthy tax cuts permanent. So the President wanted to -- as, again, you heard him say -- get to the process of having some of those discussions by asking Secretary Geithner and OMB Director Jack Lew to sit down with four members or senators appointed by -- one each -- by Senator Reid, Senator McConnell, Speaker Pelosi and Representative Boehner. And I anticipate that those conversations could happen as early as later today -- or start as early as today. But you had -- it sounds like you started -- I am sorry, it sounds like you ended where you started with these broad philosophical differences about those tax cuts for the wealthy. So what gives the President confidence that this negotiation process is going to be productive? What I think was the foundation for this -- for, quite frankly, the whole meeting was we have to do -- we have to do things that ensure continued economic strengthening and job creation. We have to deal with our long-term -- with our short-term deficits and our long-term debt. And we have to ensure the safety and the security of the American people. So Secretary Geithner and NEC Director Summers both said -- both gave very quick descriptions of sort of where we thought the economy was. And everybody, I think, as the President said, in the room agreed that this was an issue that we needed to get finished by the end of the year, before the tax cuts expired. And that is the charge that he gave to Tim and to Jack. Senator McConnell said that his caucus was united on doing the tax issues and the appropriations issues in lame duck first, and then if there is time left getting to some of the other pressing matters.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 786, "text": "The President brought up START in his own description but did not seem to acknowledge any forward progress. Is the White House willing to take up that issue in January if need be? I think there was a robust discussion about how that could be done in a lame duck. I think you have heard senators even today discuss the likelihood of being able to get that done. Look, the tax issue may take a little bit. And, finally, on the broader issue of cooperation, I heard Representative Boehner and Cantor say, in their words, that the President -- I am paraphrasing -- the President acknowledged he had not reached out enough to them. I think the President acknowledged that he needed to do better and acknowledged that -- rightly that he would do his part. I think there was a -- there was common ground reached in the notion, again, as you heard the President say in his statement, that the American people did not vote for gridlock. They did not vote for the continual games that we see played in Washington. They voted for two parties working together to get something done. That is going to take -- it is going to take just that, bipartisanship. And that is the only way we are going to make progress. And I think this meeting, which we -- which we set up, is the beginning of that. To come back to this idea of common ground on the tax cuts, specifically, what would the White House be willing to compromise on? For instance, would the President favor extending -- I was in the meeting, but the President did not tap me to be one of those negotiators. So I am going to let Jack and Tim get into that as soon as we have the appointment of those members and senators from the designated leaders. And, again, I anticipate that they will begin talking as early as today. But does the President favor extending all the tax cuts for two or three years? Well, again, the President's most urgent desire is to see that taxes do not go up on the middle class. The President mentioned a possible meeting out at Camp David. And also a sense of who you'd invite -- would it just be restricted to lawmakers? Or could it be extended to the business community, for example?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 787, "text": "Well, I think that the meeting that the President talked about with -- and I should -- just for a second, let me step back and talk about a little bit of the structure of the meeting because I am going to speak about this, but I was not in this part of the meeting. The meeting lasted approximately two hours -- probably a little less than two hours. The last 35 minutes was the President and the Vice President and the members of the House and the Senate, without staff, without Secretary Geithner, without OMB Director Lew in the private dining room right off of the Oval Office. So in that 35 minutes, the President -- that is where the President brought up the idea -- and they talked about it throughout the meeting, the idea of continuing these conversations, and threw out the hope that -- and I think it was agreed -- loosely agreed upon that sometime in the beginning of next year, they would continue this meeting at Camp David. Why did the President ask the staff to leave? Was it that they were no longer needed at that point? Did he want to have a more intimate conversation? I think to have a little bit more intimate conversation. And when you talked about the President telling Republicans, as they describe, that he had not done enough to reach out to them, did he offer an apology at all? No, he said that -- he took responsibility for that. And as I said, in order to have bipartisanship, we have to do this both ways. And the President is ready to do his part. I am still a bit confused about the divide that still exists on these tax cuts. And I know you do not want to negotiate this now, but it seems like the divide is so wide. Look, I am not going to enumerate -- I would not enumerate all the property lines, but I think it is safe to say that -- I think it is safe to say, the President reiterated, that the notion of a -- the notion of a permanent -- the notion of making permanent tax cuts for those on the upper end of our income scale, the predominance of which go to millionaires and billionaires, is not something that -- not something that making permanent would -- he does not believe would make sense. It is a $700 billion expenditure over -- because we do these in a 10-year budget window.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 788, "text": "So I think that is -- I think as he did in his statement -- enumerated where he is on that. The President is scheduled to leave for Hawaii December 18th. Given this very lengthy agenda, what are the odds that he is going to have to delay -- Jake, I think it is largely unknowable, but the President will be here for as long as he needs to be here to get progress on and to make progress on the issues that are -- that he outlined in the meeting. You said the President in a way apologized or expressed regret for not reaching out enough. Did Republicans offer any sort of apology? Not that I have in my notes. Does the President sense that there is compromise possible on these issues that Republicans are willing to give? I think there was -- I think there was a sense in the room in discussing a whole host of issues the understanding on both sides -- let us take taxes -- that we -- there was an economic imperative to provide certainty before the end of the year when these cuts are scheduled to expire. The President also mentioned, as you heard him say in his statement, there are things like AMT, the college tax credit and other issues that are set to expire and will impact those at all income levels. So I think an agreement that we needed to get this solved by the end of the year, and an agreement that we all have a responsibility to work together to make progress and that in order to do so we are going to be required to sit in the same room, have conversations and discussions like this and come to some common ground and agreement. And I think the President believes and I think -- without speaking for them but having read some of their comments after the meeting -- I think everyone thought it was a productive beginning in hopes of finding some of that common ground. Republicans have expressed concern about the fact that Majority Leader Reid has discussed bringing up the DREAM Act and do not ask, do not tell repeal that might eat up a lot of time that could be spent on the tax cuts or START. Does the President share their concern? Well, the President shares Senator Reid's concern -- or I should say the President shares Senator Reid's -- believes that it is also -- those are also issues that are important to the American people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 789, "text": "And I do not -- I think we talked about this a little yesterday -- I do not -- I think, again, I think the Senate is going to be -- this is -- the tax issues is not going to get solved in -- not likely to get solved today. The Senate is going to be here and there is time to do -- there is time to do the people's business. And I am not going to get into a long discussion about do not ask, do not tell because I think as many of you know, that very shortly Secretary Gates, Admiral Mullen and others are going to discuss the public release of the Pentagon's review. But -- and we will have a statement from the President on what that review has found. But I think, in discussions that the President has had on this issue over the past few days, this is an issue that if we do not solve legislatively is going to get solved in the courts. And solving that issue in the courts is not going to provide the Pentagon with the type of orderly transition that they have said they need. But we have the pathway to do it legislatively, make progress, and I think the President -- obviously the President still wants to do that. So just to put a period on this, the President thinks that funding the government, passing unemployment insurance extensions, do not ask, do not tell repeal, the DREAM Act, tax cuts and START all can be done -- You will have a lot to cover. You said that the President, and in fact, the President said that he acknowledged he had not reached out enough and would do his part. But you just told Jake that the Republicans did not make a similar statement. Let me do this, Chip. No, I do not -- look, I am not -- I have got my hands full being the spokesperson for the President. The President -- I think the President just laid out that in order for us to work together we are going to have to communicate better. Does he believe the Republicans -- it is a two-way street -- does he believe they have not reached out? I did not ask the President that. Again, I'd leave that up to others. The President was, I think, pretty clear about the fact that -- in acknowledging that he needed to and would do better. Well, again, I can only speak for the actions of what the President intends to do and what the President told leaders today.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 790, "text": "So his reaching out is not -- reaching out more is not contingent upon their returning the favor? His reaching out is contingent upon the fact that he is the President of the United States and in order to get things done in what will now be a divided government requires working with the other side. I do not -- the President is willing to have a better line of communication with Republicans on Capitol Hill to get something done. I do not -- I am not sure I'd call that bending. I call that trying to work together. I think that is incidentally likely what the American people call it, too. Yes, and I do not want to get too much into semantics here, but you talk to people -- I appreciate the -- yes. I think there is that sign that said, Last chance to not get into semantics. And we might have passed that a few miles ago. We never do that. We never parse words, either. But speaking of parsing words, you said that what Jack and Tim had been tasked with is finding common ground. Would it be accurate to say that they have been tasked with finding a compromise that can pass by the end of the year? And on the tax issue, do you think there was a breakthrough in the meeting? Was this a meeting that constituted a breakthrough? Well, I would say two things. One, there is a -- we have an agreed-upon, appointed process for the continuing of those conversations to happen very quickly. And, again, I will try to get as much information as I can throughout the day and share with you all about the progress and the scheduling for those meetings. I also think that the notion that there was agreement that this is an issue that needed to be dealt with by the end of the year, I think those two things give -- I think they give the President and I hope they give others hope that we can work together. Do you think there is any chance whatsoever that the tax issue will not be resolved by the end of the year? I think there is a extremely strong likelihood that the issue is resolved prior to the tax cuts expiring at the end of this year. And I think there is -- I think there was strong agreement to do that. And I think -- I think there was an acknowledgment on the part of all those involved that we have a window of time to work together on this issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 791, "text": "We have got a little more than a month to come to a conclusion on that and we ought to be able to do so. We could be here like New Year's Eve, I take it. Well, I guess we have got 31 days. It sounds like New Year's Eve. I do not anticipate being here on New Year's Eve, but we will see. So, ENTITY, is the next step the OMB director, the Treasury secretary and representatives of the different camps getting together and trying to hammer this out? And, again, I will -- the way they left it in the meeting, there was an agreement that we would have this group of people do this. The Vice President, I think rightly so, pushed to have a meeting as quickly as possible. And like I said, it could happen as early as today. Is the Democratic position on the tax cuts truly unified? I mean, publicly it sounded like maybe the President was ready for compromise, but perhaps some of the leaders on the Hill were not as eager to compromise. Well, again, look, everybody went in with the position that they brought to that meeting. And I think the President enumerated the position, as he said in the statement, that he and his fellow Democrats hold, and that is our priority is to ensure that those that are in the middle class in this country that have, as he said during the meeting, have been hurt throughout the past decade in terms of watching their wages go down even as they were working longer and working harder, that we had to do all that we could to ensure that for that group of people, their taxes did not go up. So I think that -- I think Democrats are very unified in that. Are you freer today to talk about the State Department cables, or are you choosing not to? The law continues to not allow me to speak about classified information, so -- It is unclear whether there is a period in which that becomes operable for me, but -- Can I follow up on that? What is your read of the situation in Korea right now? Are we on the brink of war? Well, I will say I think that there have been a series of meetings throughout the holidays and the weekend here at a deputy and a principals' committee level. As you know, the President spoke with President Lee in South Korea. We dispatched for joint exercises the aircraft carrier George Washington.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 792, "text": "And we remain committed to -- as you heard the President say a few days ago and during our trip to Seoul -- remain committed to the common security of our allies in the Republic of Korea. And as I said yesterday, Mike, I think the Chinese have a duty and an obligation to greatly press upon the North Koreans that their belligerent behavior has to come to an end. And I think you will see progress on multilateral discussions around this over the next few days. Does the United States government believe China has done enough so far? I do not know that I am going to get into grading them, Chuck, as much as I am going to say that there is an obligation there, and we expect them to live up to that obligation. Should we let the record show that you did not have praise for what they have done so far but said an obligation -- Well, again, I think that the bottom line is movement and progress with the North Koreans. Not that I am aware of. I mean, I can go back and check with others and see what their impression was. I anticipate that the -- I think the next vote on taxes, if I am not mistaken, and I will double-check on this, is that there will be a vote in the House on making permanent middle-class tax cuts. I anticipate that -- while this group worked itself out a compromise? And the other thing, on START, did -- was there any attempt by -- conversation between, for instance, Reid and McConnell with the President sort of mediating and saying, okay, if he takes something off the plate, if he takes DREAM Act off the plate, and then START or any of those -- The President spent several minutes walking through why he believed that this was most important -- why this was so important to our national security in verifying what is going on with the Russian nuclear arsenal; obviously the reduction in deployed nuclear weapons that we all know is a danger; and our efforts in the world to continue to press on Iran and others like North Korea for the strongest possible sanctions and how all those efforts work multilaterally. Again, I think the President believes and I think -- the President believes that we can -- we have enough time to get this done, while acknowledging that there is going to be a process to this. That process also has included 18 hearings. This has been something that is been discussed for going on seven months.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 793, "text": "Was there consensus on extending unemployment benefits in the room, or was it more of an urging? Let me -- that is not clear in my notes, but I will double-check with others. I think the President was very clear that -- and this was also clear from both Larry and Tim in speaking in the meeting -- that unemployment benefits are given to those that have lost their jobs. That is money that is, almost dollar for dollar, put back into the economy. And, look, the President brought up the fact that we are seeing the beginning of the expiration of unemployment benefits and that even as we have these discussions about extending tax cuts for those who make $250,000, those who make a million, those who make $10 million a year, we certainly in no way can afford to look past the fact that there are those that have been hurt extensively in losing a job and need to continue to have those benefits. Was that argument met with any sort of Republican agreement on this, or did -- Not that I recall in my notes, to be honest with you. I mean, has the President said, look, if he does not get this, we are going to yank this off the table? I do not -- Chuck, I do not recall any bright lines in it, Chuck. I think the President simply laid out, as Tim and Larry did, the importance of ensuring that this be and must -- that this must be part of the solution. We cannot -- again, we are going back and forth here on the permanence of tax cuts for those that make a lot of money. Was there an okay -- were you guys agreeing on any way of paying for it, saying, look, if you guys -- because Republican stance has been, find a way to do this, find a way to pay for it. Did you guys offer up, here is a way to pay for it -- No, the President mentioned that this is normally and has historically been considered, rightly so, a measure of extraordinary importance and extraordinary times and should be considered the same now. One, the President said in his statement that on the tax cut negotiations he hoped to get some answers back over the next couple of days. So does that mean that he is hoping that there is an agreement within the next couple of days? Well, I think we can -- look, if you could get an agreement today, that'd be great.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 794, "text": "I think what the President is saying is we want to continue to see forward progress on this. Again, the agreement to come out of this meeting with those that would sit down, again, as soon as later today, I think give the President some hope. And as soon as I have updates on that schedule, we will let you know. I mean, but is he setting up an expectation that he is hoping to have a deal within a matter of a few days? I think the President is setting up the expectation that we will all get in the same room and continue to make progress on this over the next few days. Both of those came up, yes. And was it a matter of people just going around the room and stating their previously stated positions? No, I think that -- again, the meeting started out with the President opening up, and then I think each of the eight members and senators spoke about what they saw as important in the short term and in the medium term. I'd say the tax issue took up by far the majority of time. Again, the President asked both Tim and Larry to give an update on where they thought we were economically. Again, I should note that my timing and my percentages here does not include the 35 minutes in the private dining room without staff. So those two issues came up -- did the President bring this up, or did others? The President started on the issue agenda after everybody had had a chance to say something, walking through and talking about taxes. And that is when he offered to have Secretary Geithner and OMB Director Lew sit down with Democrats and Republicans. And besides the offer of the Camp David gathering, do you know anything else? Can you tell us anything else that was discussed during the 35-minute closed portion? I do not have a readout from that, and I do not know that the President would give that to me to read out. ENTITY, did anybody raise the nature of the campaign rhetoric that came up before the election? Do you mean Slurpees? Well, I was not going to mention that by name, but as long as you brought it up. No, I mean, look, I think there was an acknowledgment, honestly, Mark, by everybody that an election had come and gone, and that after elections there is a time in which both parties are responsible for governing the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 795, "text": "The President mentioned and I think others mentioned that -- the acknowledgment that not soon after one election passes, you enter the political season again, but that he believed -- the President certainly believes that there is a time in which we can seek common ground, that we can work together and that we can make progress on these issues; that there'll be plenty of time for -- there will be plenty of time for a political campaign in 2012. And I would -- I think the President's line in his statement that -- acknowledged and agreed to by those in the room -- that it is time to put our focus on their jobs, the jobs of the American people, not on the jobs of the elected officials that sit in that room. Let me get some on that. I missed that because I was in the meeting. But let me take that question. I want to shift over to the debt commission. I think they were having lunch with the Vice President, if I am not mistaken. Paul Ryan is saying that the debt commission is having trouble getting a vote and that they are going ask for a delay until Friday. Can you fill us in on that? Do you know anything? Roger, I would -- I do not -- I would point you to the commission and their staff to answer that question. I do not know definitively the answer to that. Another question, Senator Schumer has suggested as a possible compromise in the tax cuts of raising it from $250,000 up to $1 million. What does the President think of that? Does that have shades of a compromise? I do not , quite frankly, see that it has -- I do not see that it has moved any Republican, and I think the President has restated the case today for a $250,000 threshold for those filing together. Has the President put any limitations on concessions that Geithner and Lew can make in these negotiations, or is he willing to accept anything that they agree on? Well, they are negotiating for him, so I do not -- So how closely will he watch these negotiations, then? I mean, will he keep tabs on the back-and-forth? Yes, I anticipate that the President will on occasion ask his Treasury Secretary what are the byproducts of said negotiations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 796, "text": "Yes, I mean, obviously this is -- I mean, again, the majority of the roughly hour and 25 minutes that was spent with staff in the Roosevelt Room was done on taxes, and as Laura mentioned, that part of the statement where the President hopes to see some progress in the next few days. I think Senator Reid said to Secretary Geithner and to Director Lew, you just tell us what time and we will have our people there. Why did not the President do a better job in the last two years of reaching out to Republicans? When he is been asked that question in the past he is rejected the premise. Well, I think that the President -- without looking too much backward -- I think the President understands that we are in a period of, as I said earlier, we are going to enter into a period of divided government, that in order for a piece of legislation to make its way through the House and the Senate to get to his desk it is going to go through a body that is controlled by one party and then go to a body controlled by a different party. So if -- that is going to require better communication; that is going to require more communication; it is going to require a better relationship in understanding on both sides what is important. And I think the President is acknowledging that and willing to do his part in changing that. Was there a particular reason he decided to move the meeting from a larger gathering to a smaller one? Was there something particular that happened in the larger session that made him decide that something could be accomplished -- No, I think the President just wanted to give everyone an opportunity to speak as -- I mean, people were speaking pretty freely, but if people wanted to do so without note-takers and such, that they'd feel free to do that. Did the President mention to Senator McConnell his statement about his first priority being to deny him a second term? And moving to a different subject, do you -- I mean, I -- as I said to Mark, I think there was an acknowledgment that there will be time for a political campaign, but that now is a time for those responsible for governing the country to get about doing so. Did the President discuss his priority for whether Senator McConnell is reelected? Not that I recall that, either.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 797, "text": "On a different subject, President Medvedev in Moscow gave his State of the Union equivalent address today and said that there might be a new arms race if there was not a cooperation agreement on missile defense; expressed some frustration that things had not gone as far as he wanted in Lisbon. What is your reaction to that? Well, I think that -- I mean, look, I think the President mentioned in the meeting with the leaders just a little bit ago that we had actually made great progress on missile defense. We had -- what was -- what had been a contentious issue just several years ago now is part of an agreement with NATO with the cooperation of Russia, and that that made -- look, we had made -- and I think there is been an acknowledgment that we have made -- both parties have had a priority on protecting our friends and allies in Europe, and obviously the United States. And our agreements in Lisbon make concrete years of effort into a missile defense apparatus that provides greater protection for Europe and for the United States, and that he was pleased with that progress, and that that was not -- nothing in that, nothing in START constrained our ability to do that. That was clear, even as you had the head of NATO pushing and advocating for ratification of START; was also working through getting NATO on board for missile defense. I will say, taking this a step back, the President reiterated to those in the Roosevelt Room the genuine importance of -- and why it made so much sense for our security and in working with Russia and Medvedev, why it made so much sense for us to get this done and get this done now; that this was not something that the President was doing for political purposes or that the opposition was based on politics, but that this just made good sense and made common sense for our security and for our relationships around the world. Do you have any response to the information the Wall Street Journal reported about the Russians moving tactical weapons, nuclear weapons, closer to NATO countries in recent months? Let me just get something from NSC on that. I mean, obviously that is -- tactical is not something that is -- those are different from launchers and deployed missiles in START. North Korea warned today that the continuing military exercise by the U.S. and South Korea in Yellow Sea could lead to all-out war any time. So how effective does the administration believe the military exercise could deter North Korea's --", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 798, "text": "Well, their -- I guess I would disagree largely with the statement that exercises that are going on now or have -- that are similar to exercises that have gone on in the past are -- will lead us to where they said in that statement. I think the exercises demonstrate our strong desire for common security with our allies in the Republic of Korea. And also could you -- sorry, could you give us some detail about the coming meeting between the U.S., Japan and South Korea next week in D.C.? Let me get that from State and NSC. Did the President secure from the Republicans any commitments on the two-year pay freeze for rank-and-file government employees? And did he urge them to do the same for their own congressional staff? I know that -- I do not -- it just was not something that they talked about. I mean, again, legislative branch appropriations govern the salaries of those working -- I have not asked him, Ann. But, again, that is something that members of Congress -- based on their appropriations -- have the power to do. Several members mentioned, on both sides, that -- spending and the deficit obviously was something that was talked about quite a bit, and that we are going to have to make a series of decisions that might not be popular in individual districts, particularly around the Washington area, but that are hard decisions that ultimately have to be made if we are going to make progress on our deficits and our debt. And the -- several applauded the President for making that decision. I will be honest in saying that some believed that non-uniform military and others they thought should have been covered in what the President announced yesterday. But I think what -- the President believes that, as you heard yesterday, that we all have a responsibility to do our part. And now that the embargo has been lifted on the military review on do not ask, do not tell, what kind of value does the President put on the kind of poll, the survey done of American military personnel -- about 28 percent of them responded. They basically said they saw no problems, foresaw no problems getting rid of the policy. Does the President put a lot of weight in that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 799, "text": "Well, I think the President -- the President wanted to and the Pentagon conducted a study of the attitudes of those serving in our armed forces bravely each day and asked directly their attitudes on ending what the President believes is a divisive policy in do not ask, do not tell. And, again, we will have a statement on this shortly, but the President has been clear that this is a policy that should end, needs to end. And I think that the survey demonstrates that those that serve in the military believe it can be done in a way that does not disrupt unit cohesion and that -- Right, no, no -- and I think the overwhelming majority said that they thought it would -- could be done with little to no disruption. And I think the President certainly shares that. Again, I think you will hear from Secretary Gates -- well, you are hearing from Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen -- and the President's strong belief that doing this through a legislative process provides for a transition that -- an orderly transition that the military has sought and that the President believes is the right way to go about doing it. ENTITY, I am curious about that private part of the meeting today. Does he -- has he done that before, where he sends all the staff out of the room? I mean, look, I do not -- I will say this. It is not unusual writ large in meetings. I do not know that it -- I'd have to go back and check notes and see whether that is happened before in -- I do not recall that it is happened before in the bipartisan meetings. The ones that were had in Cabinet Room, as best I can remember, were always what was set forth in the room and not -- and they did not generally repair to somewhere else. You made note a minute ago that note-takers were out of the room for that. Was that private part of the meeting specifically to interrupt the spin cycle that the President talked about happening? Well, I think it just -- I think it provides people with a candid -- they can be even more candid than they could be in a room full of people. And that is why the President would -- sought to do it. And, again, I think the President believed that both parts of the meeting were productive. And someone in that meeting -- in that part of the meeting, brought up the spin cycle.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 800, "text": "He said it was one of my friends or my friends. Do you know who brought that up and what was said about it? I do not know the answer to that. President Obama acknowledged that he needed to improve his communication. Is some of that going to include some more informal talks, or off-the-agenda discussions between him and Republican leaders like Secretary -- Senator McConnell and Boehner? Yes, I think that -- look, they have had -- he is had occasion to talk with Senator McConnell and Speaker-to-be Boehner during some of this time period. I anticipate that those are conversations that you will see more of. I do not think that -- well, I know that what the President discussed and what the President means in terms of improving that outreach and that communication is not simply reserved for meetings that happen here or meetings that happen at Camp David. I think you will see just an increase in all types of that communication. The President talks a lot about what might happen in January if this process is pushed back in terms of re-educating new members about the treaty and what is in it. Did he bring that up in the meeting with Republican leaders?  No, I do not remember that coming up. Obviously they are -- again, it is been -- I think there is a pretty long record of hearings, formal written questions back and forth out of those hearings on where -- on different aspects of the treaty, and I know that members of our national security team continue to brief members on it, and I think anybody that has questions can get those answered. ENTITY, on a historic story -- stick with what you have right now -- on that side of Pennsylvania Avenue, the House is getting ready to pass Cobell, Black Farmers and the water rights issue. What does the White House have to say about this, after 15 years it is finally going to happen? Well, I think based on hard work both on Capitol Hill and in the administration that we are about to or on the cusp of seeing a much deserved settlement for these two important cases. It is, as you mentioned, April, justice that is overdue and has been a priority, again, of the administration and those on Capitol Hill to see something done by the end of the year. I think it demonstrates that we can find common ground on issues that are important to both sides of the political aisle. And I think it gives people hope for what we can do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 801, "text": "It is been raised the anti-fraud issue, the anti-fraud language that is in the bill. Some Dems on the Hill feel that it could be a tool for intimidation against the farmers. What say you? I would have to ask -- I guess I would point you to USDA on what their reaction is to that. Why is there a difference in the stringency for judgments when it comes to women and Cobell versus the Pigford II climate -- the Pigford II people had to go -- go through a much more arduous process to get -- April, I do not -- again, I'd point you to USDA on the specifics of that settlement. Will there be a signing ceremony, since this is one of the largest civil rights payouts -- Let us get it to the President's desk and then we will go from there. I want to follow up on a question from yesterday's briefing that you might have read out, but I do not think I got a readout on it. It was about the meeting between the President and the service chiefs yesterday. And the question was, what did they talk about? And did the President specifically ask them to stop opposing the repeal of do not ask, do not tell or to get onboard? Let me -- the President asked -- I was not in the meeting, as I said yesterday, because of being out here. The President wanted to have a private conversation with the Joint Chiefs and asked that that conversation be private, and I am not going to violate the President's wishes on that. Obviously the -- I am told that the -- do not ask, do not tell, obviously, was the entire topic of the meeting. Okay, but so the reason we have not heard more is because we are not going to hear more? What is the White House view at this moment on what is happening in Haiti with the presidential election and the cholera epidemic? Let me get some guidance from these guys on Haiti. Since Secretary Clinton's strong message yesterday regarding the WikiLeaks, has the President felt compelled to call any of his -- any of the leaders -- for example, Prime Minister Cameron or anyone else? The President, to my knowledge, has not made -- not made any calls on this. Again, I think this continues to be handled at the State Department at the foreign minister level. And I would say -- I would reiterate largely what we said yesterday.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 802, "text": "Our foreign policy is far stronger than one website. To follow up on Laura's question about timing, Senator McConnell said in his news conference that the Senate might be able to take up START if they could quickly clear the decks of tax cuts and stop-gap spending, or an extension of omnibus spending bill. So is part of the understanding in the room, behind the President's comments about wanting answers quickly, is that you'd get a quick deal on tax cuts in order to leave time for a START debate in the Senate? I think the President understands the desire to have a discussion on START and believes that that can be accomplished. ensuring our economic strength in creating jobs and protecting the American people. He does not have the luxury of deciding only to do one of those things. And I do not believe that the President thinks that the Senate can only do one of those things, either. And I think we can make progress. The Russians, when they discuss the issue, they keep sounding as if they -- they keep saying they want real partnership and they keep sounding as if they do not believe the U.S. is ready for a real partnership. After Lisbon, do you have a feeling that both sides understand what each one means by real partnership ? And is the U.S. ready for such a partnership on missile defense? Again, I think it is clear that the administration through its phased adaptive plan set forth a missile defense apparatus and program that we believe more greatly protects our security. And we pursued and got NATO to sign off on the pursuit of that. I think writ large in our relationship with Russia we have made -- and the President mentioned this today -- we have made tremendous progress. We are working together on issues that two years ago separated us. I think that only because of the strong and real partnership we have were we able to see the type of sanctions that are having a real bite and a real impact in Iran. And that relationship is important to this country and to this President. President Medvedev actually referred to a strike capability. He said that if this partnership does not materialize, then within that 10-year period that he described Russia will have to take a hard decision on the strike capability, that it will have to deploy. Was it the way that the Russians framed this issue in Lisbon, and do you have any idea what strike capabilities they are talking about? I would point you to your comrades in Russia. On the way in I saw President Carter headed into the Oval Office.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryrobertgibbs17", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-robert-gibbs-17", "publication_date": "30-11-2010", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Robert Gibbs"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 806, "text": "I wanted to just talk today, if I could, about more of your personal feelings through a very tough time in your Presidency, and you know, this is kind of a demarcation point. How do you feel about it? Well, naturally it was not the happiest of times, and sometimes I'd get annoyed at the interference with what I thought was getting on with the things that should be done. But, Hugh, I have to tell you, I never felt too upset, because I knew I'd told the truth and that the truth would have to come out-and did. But how did you keep smiling, because a lot of people would not believe you still? A lot of people question, you know, whether the-or at least think that you have not told everything, according to the polls. And what used to make me smile a little bit was the fact that I was the first one to tell them about such things as that there was extra money and so forth. And good Lord, I appointed the first commission, and it came in long before this one started with a lot of the information that was new to me and that I had to hear for the first time. How did you keep your optimism? It was pretty sustained throughout that period. Well, as I say, I just had faith in the truth. How tough was it, though, to see those close to you affected by this-Mrs. Reagan or children or old colleagues? Well, I think that those that were close around me kind of took their cue from me. But I did hear from a great many friends who expressed, again, their faith and trust, and that was very pleasant. I kept reading these stories about sometimes you got sore, here and there, at what people said. Yes, sometimes, and sometimes I got a little angry before all of this in finding out when I learned of things that I had not been told. You had every faith you were going to come out in the end? A number of people have said that the thing that bothers you-friends have told me that-were these polls that said the people thought that you were holding back. Now, can you recover that? Do you fully expect to restore the credibility? Naturally no one's going to be overjoyed at seeing a poll that finds that people thought you were not telling the truth.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhughsideytimemagazine", "title": "Interview With Hugh Sidey of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hugh-sidey-time-magazine", "publication_date": "12-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 807, "text": "But then one other poll asked an added question, and that was a question of the people who said that they thought I was not telling the truth. They asked them, well, you know, what did they think about that? And the overwhelming majority of them thought, well, of course, there are always going to be things that a President should not tell. And it threw a whole different aspect then on that first question and the answers to it. Did you end this period at all-or how did you feel about the group of men that were involved in this that had been on your staff? How do you end this period now with your feelings about North and Poindexter and McFarlane? Well, I heard them out. I can understand why they did what they did and what their motives were, and certainly they were not bad motives. I am the one who went on the air and told the people that and told the press that in the press room, and that I had appointed a commission to find out what there was to know about this. Do you pinpoint something you should not have done or should have done that you did not do? Well, you see, in a covert operation like that-and the covert operation was a response by us to an appeal from this other group of individuals who wanted to discuss better relations with our country. And it had to be covert for their safety, because contrary to what some of the people have said, I was not doing business with the Khomeini. In fact, quite the contrary; these were people that were anticipating another government to follow him. And if you will remember, at that particular time, almost every day there were reports of his failing health and that his days were very numbered and so forth. And they wanted to talk about a better relation than we have with the present government. How'd you get through those days when the hearings started, ENTITY? Did you read the papers as normal? Did you follow it closely in the papers? Actually, I did not change my pattern or my schedule much at all. Occasionally, I might have a few minutes and step into the next room and turn on the TV just to see who was on and so forth. And I did not have to depend on the press. Our legal counsel kept me informed with a summary. So, you had internal information- Did you give up any reading at all?  But you watched a little of it. Did you talk it over with Mrs. Reagan?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhughsideytimemagazine", "title": "Interview With Hugh Sidey of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hugh-sidey-time-magazine", "publication_date": "12-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 808, "text": "We used to she kept an eye on it? Well, she probably did not watch any more than I did. But you felt current throughout the time? Is this sort of thing inevitable in this office at some time or another in the Presidency? has an investigation by the Congress of What is your broad view of it? Well, Hugh, actually, all that I remember is, you know, for a half a century now, with only an exception of a few years, the Congress, both Houses, have been of one party. And I think if you check back, every President of the opposite party has been investigated for something or other. But I do not recall any investigations of the Presidents when the Presidents and the Legislature were of the same party. Well, what you are suggesting, if I am correct, is that there is a lot of politics in this. The Presidential election have much to do with it? Well, I am not going to comment on that. You are going to stay out of that, I see. Maybe I should not have said what I just said. Well, now, did you keep a diary throughout this time? Do you have some private thoughts? Well, I have kept a diary from the first day here. And actually, Hugh, the reason for that was one thing I learned after the 8 years as Governor-that the schedules are such and the succession of things and the meetings-that getting out of that 8-year experience as Governor, I suddenly realized that memory-well, there were things that I could remember, but I could not tell you whether they were in the first or the second term. And then I realized there were a lot of things that I just could not, if I had to, recall, and it was a very busy 8 years there. And so, when faced with this job, Nancy and I both said this time You are going to keep that record, huh? let us keep a record so that that will not happen. Through this particular stressful period, then, you have kept pretty good notes on- As a matter of fact, I made some of those diary notes available to the investigators. Yes, I knew that. Somebody told me you also kept your regular meetings with Edmund Morris . He is working on the book. I see, you know that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhughsideytimemagazine", "title": "Interview With Hugh Sidey of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hugh-sidey-time-magazine", "publication_date": "12-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 809, "text": "Did you expect when you became President, having seen, of course, what happened to Lyndon Johnson and Nixon and Truman and all of them, as you mentioned before, did you expect that anything like this would happen, that there would be an episode in your Presidency? Were you prepared for that possibility, I guess is what I am saying. Well, Hugh, I think after the 8 years as Governor, also, you know that there is always a target painted on the Chief Executive's door. No, the big surprise, however, was exactly what we said. First of all, my reaction when our covert operation was exposed by that leak in Beirut and our press immediately went up with it, my reaction there-it was just one of-and I voiced it to the press at every opportunity, and then it was echoed by David Jacobsen, the hostage that came home at about the same time-and that was, please, you can get some people killed by talking about this and asking about it. And I had in mind the people we were dealing with as well as our own hostages, because when Jacobsen came out, the word we had was that there were going to be a couple more in just a few days. And that was all that was on my mind. Well, then when-as I say, Ed Meese was the one who saw that one paper that indicated that there was somehow more money and in a Swiss bank account this was just the biggest surprise in the world, because we had not set out to trade hostages for-or arms for hostages, even though I always feel a great responsibility to do everything possible to get back the hostages, except ransom. And I knew that the arms we sold were priced at $12 million, and we got our $12 million. That had come back before the exposure and all. And it was just such a surprise that first-well, the very next morning-he agreed with me that we had to make this known. And we called in the joint leadership of the Congress, both Houses and both parties, and told them. And then I went immediately into the press room and then, as you know, a short time later, went on the air. One of the points in this whole thing, ENTITY, was the failure or the fact that you did not just summon Oliver North and say, you know, lay this all out for me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhughsideytimemagazine", "title": "Interview With Hugh Sidey of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hugh-sidey-time-magazine", "publication_date": "12-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 810, "text": "Well, whether our thinking was right or wrong at that point-and we were all agreed here that with this now exposed and my not having been told that they just had to leave the National Security Council, they could not continue. So, I thought of that before I thought any questions or anything, and I think they both felt the same way. And it got swept up in all the litigation or the process there. But finally, how do you think history will deal with this, looking down the road? Do you think it is going to fade away in the minds of people the next few years or Well, it is my hope that, once everything is settled and known, history will deal with it as the big investigation that finally discovered the President was telling the truth from the very beginning. And will you still be in office when that is established, do you think? Is it getting tougher, in your judgment-now you have been here 7 years-tougher to run this place in this city? You invented the term inside the beltway, which implies a certain environment that does not reflect national sentiment. Well, I do not know whether it is any different than it is been for anyone else. I do know that for years back there has been a kind of friction between the executive branch and the Legislature and an attempt to erode the powers of the President, and. I do not really know, because I came here with minus some powers that previously Presidents had had. Naturally, seeing it from the Executive Office side, I believe what is being attempted is a mistake. I think there are some things that just cannot be run by a committee of 535 people. And when you stop to think back over history, we have been in my lifetime-well, in the lifetime of the nation, I should say-five declared wars. But history will reveal that Presidents have sent military forces of the United States into action 125 times, and without it being a declared war, and on the assumption of the executive branch that it was essential for the security of the United States to do that. Your feeling then is that in all the actions you took, to the extent you knew anyway, was perfectly legal. Going back to that one question, you do not see then any evil men involved in this on our side? I am talking about your NSC, White House-nobody that you would point to as a culprit or somebody.-", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhughsideytimemagazine", "title": "Interview With Hugh Sidey of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hugh-sidey-time-magazine", "publication_date": "12-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 811, "text": "Well, this would get me into trying to comment on all that took place in these hearings and all, and I cannot say that, not having seen them any more than that and getting summaries of them of the day that-I just do not think that I should risk making such an assertion.- of all of the people that have been mentioned in the hearings. It is getting a rather lengthy roster, I guess. Who was the most help throughout this period for you in terms of morale and guidance? Because, you know, it had to be somewhat of a burden added on to the normal job. Well, you mean outside of my wife. But, no, from the very beginning, not only the people here in the White House and some outside but also friends and supporters that have gone out of their way from the very beginning to express their confidence in me-and it was very heartwarming. Now, how does your wife buck you up? get you through those days? she knew I'd told the truth, too. Well, you answered that. A lot of comment, ENTITY, that you seem older and look older-how do you feel? I read the Wall Street Journal this morning. I suppose you did, too-a long piece about it. No, I have not read the Journal this morning. Well, it had that piece in column eight saying, you know, the President seemed to be losing steam and this, you know. It was one of those ambiguous pieces, to be true. But anyway, a lot of comment on the feeling that you are slowing down in these last months, not only because of the burden, but just because you are just older. I do not know about any slowing down. Oh, yes. And some doctors seem to be a little surprised that I could have done that. And every night the schedule for the next day and the homework for the next day arrives, and that is my bedtime reading and so forth and- Well, the other part of that theory is that your friends said that you were going to be more combative than normal in these last 18 months. Well, that would have been true even without this other thing. And that has to be, because I think we have accomplished a great many things in these 6 1/2 years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhughsideytimemagazine", "title": "Interview With Hugh Sidey of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hugh-sidey-time-magazine", "publication_date": "12-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 812, "text": "I think the fact that we are within 2 months of having the longest expansion period in the Nation's history-economic expansion and all but I think there are things that I will regret all my life if we do not get them pinned down. Well, for one thing, the great problem that from the very beginning that has faced us-the deficit-that I had thought at one time we could get balanced. But that was during the campaign, and I had had a group of economists who were working on the plan that we followed. But no one's ever asked me, so I will tell you. Before the election, those economists came to me and told me that the deterioration had now been so much greater than when they made their study that, no, there was no way that we were going to, in a few years, be able to balance the budget. But we put the plan into effect anyway, aimed at whenever it can happen. But now with this deficit spending and our Economic Bill of Rights, as we call it-that is based on some things that are just essential, and that is a balanced budget amendment. When I heard some of the Congressmen talking about their obligation to the people and to do what the people want-the polls show that 80 percent of the people want a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. I see that. The new figures have come out on that, yes. And also what 43 Governors have and what I had as Governor-and that is the right of line-item veto I would like to see those in place and a program in place. Well, the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings program is dedicated to this also-that is aiming at a point down here where the budget will be balanced and from then on have to stay balanced. Having had that in our Constitution-I think about 44 States have that in their State constitutions; we had it in California. And I have to tell you, it is a guarantee when you know that as executive officer you are responsible that, when you come to the end of the budget year, the revenues have to have matched the outgo. And of course, the answer to those people who think that, well, then let us just raise the revenues-well, we have done that a few times, and if you want to look back in history, virtually every tax increase has led to lower revenues when the rates were higher because of the lack of incentive and the search by people to find tax shelters and so forth.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhughsideytimemagazine", "title": "Interview With Hugh Sidey of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hugh-sidey-time-magazine", "publication_date": "12-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 813, "text": "And since our tax cuts have gone into effect, the revenues now are bigger. And to those liberal-minded individuals who always want to aim at the top earners and say, Make them pay the heaviest load -they do pay the heaviest load. And the truth of the matter is, the top earners today are paying a higher percentage of the total tax than they were before, even though their rates have been reduced. Now, that means that there is the proof that those people who are in brackets where they look for tax shelters and so forth, or did not earn extra money because it was not worth it, now with a lower tax rate, the incentive is there for them to produce more, and as a result, they do pay a higher tax even though it is at a lower rate. as a kid, as a sportscaster, as a movie actor, as a Governor and a President. Well, I have to tell you something, I have been blessed; I have enjoyed every one of them. I am still very proud of seven summers as a lifeguard. Yes, I had a log with 77 notches in it for the-pulled out. And yet I had always-going through school, high school and college-I'd always, in addition to athletics, I'd always been involved in the dramatic clubs and that sort of thing and the class plays. And when, out of the blue, literally, came an opportunity to switch from sports announcing to acting-and I loved that. And all I can tell you is I fought like a tiger against ever running for office. I thought that was for someone else, that I would do what I had done for other candidates, like my speeches for Barry Goldwater, that I would campaign for others. And when I was beset in 1965 by this group that insisted that I had to seek the governorship against the incumbent Governor then because the party was divided and all, I fought like a tiger not to. But then, I have to tell you, we'd only been there a few months and one night we looked at each other, sitting in the living room in Sacramento, and said this makes everything else we have ever done look as dull as dishwater. So, you went the distance? Now, what are you going to do when you get out? And I anticipate that; I look forward to that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhughsideytimemagazine", "title": "Interview With Hugh Sidey of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-hugh-sidey-time-magazine", "publication_date": "12-08-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 823, "text": "ENTITY, why cannot you seek seclusion, and play hermit for a fortnight? It would reinvigorate you. two or three weeks would do me no good. I cannot fly from my thoughts my solicitude for this great country follows me wherever I go. I do not think it is personal vanity or ambition, though I am not free from these infirmities, but I cannot but feel that the weal or woe of this great nation will be decided in November. There is no program offered by any wing of the Democratic party but that must result in the permanent destruction of the Union. But, ENTITY, General McClellan is in favor of crushing out this rebellion by force. Sir, the slightest knowledge of arithmetic will prove to any man that the rebel armies cannot be destroyed by Democratic strategy. It would sacrifice all the white men of the North to do it. There are now in the service of the United States nearly one hundred and fifty thousand able-bodied colored men, most of them under arms, defending and acquiring Union territory. The Democratic strategy demands that these forces be disbanded, and that the masters be conciliated by restoring them to slavery. The black men who now assist Union prisoners to escape are to be converted into our enemies, in the vain hope of gaining the good-will of their masters. We shall have to fight two nations instead of one. You cannot conciliate the South if you guarantee to them ultimate success; and the experience of the present war proves their success is inevitable if you fling the compulsory labor of millions of black men into their side of the scale. Will you give our enemies such military advantages as insure success, and then depend on coaxing, flattery, and concession to get them back into the Union? Abandon all the posts now garrisoned by black men, take one hundred and fifty thousand men from our side and put them in the battle-field or corn-field against us, and we would be compelled to abandon the war in three weeks. We have to hold territory in inclement and sickly places; where are the Democrats to do this? It was a free fight, and the field was open to the war Democrats to put down this rebellion by fighting against both master and slave, long before the present policy was inaugurated. There have been men base enough to propose to me to return to slavery the black warriors of Port Hudson and Olustee, and thus win the respect of the masters they fought.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohntmills", "title": "Interview with John T. Mills", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-t-mills", "publication_date": "15-08-1864", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Abraham Lincoln"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 826, "text": "ENTITY, I was watching you on CBS This Morning, and you were very funny. I think I heard you say that you also had a manicure in California. But I also could hear a lot of excuses when you talked about the Travel Office problem, the haircut, the economy, the jobs stimulus program. I did say that. I mean, the haircut thing was a boner, but I am just saying I did ask whether I would inconvenience anybody and was told I would not . Now that I have said this, I challenge you to tell the American people that I think that we have a right to run an office with three people instead of seven at taxpayers' expense, the primary job of which is to arrange travel for people who travel with me. And I challenge you to tell the American people that we saved 25 percent on the very first flight that we put out for competitive bid. I take responsibility for any mistakes made in The White House, and mistakes were made in the way that was handled, absolutely. But the goal was to save taxpayer money and to save the press money. And the press complained to me about how much the plane rides cost. I am just trying to fix it. I still think we can achieve the goal and correct the mistakes. We did make a mistake. Obviously, on the stimulus thing-no one asked me about that-if we would have followed the right strategy somehow we would have won, and we did not . But if you try to do a lot of things, you are going to make some mistakes. I am going to admit my mistakes. All I want to do is to have the kind of relationship, with you and others, that will present me as I am to the American people and not as some sort of clay figure that is , all pulled out of shape. I am going to make a lot of-you get out and go to bat every day, you are going to make mistakes. Babe Ruth struck out twice as many times as he hit home runs. But I am going to make a few hits too, if I keep going to bat. ENTITY, we will accept that challenge. And ENTITY joins the CBS Evening News next Tuesday night; we hope you will be watching. She will accept that challenge and meet what you said. I am excited about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithconniechunganddanrathercbsnews", "title": "Interview With Connie Chung and Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-connie-chung-and-dan-rather-cbs-news", "publication_date": "27-05-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 827, "text": "ENTITY, if we could be one one-hundredth as great as you and Hillary Rodham Clinton have been together in The White House, we'd take it right now and walk away winners. As you know, ENTITY, I pride myself on trying to ask the tough questions. So I am not going to apologize in advance for this question, but I do want to put you on tough question alert. You have been through 2 hours of questioning this morning with two of the most insightful questioners on television, Hary Smith and Paula Zahn. ENTITY came at you there with a substantive question. When you are able to take a deep breath, when you are able to watch television, besides news and sports, what do you like to watch? What do you watch on television? I did watch the NBA playoff game last night while I was calling Congress, asking them to help me in our playoff. I like to watch old movies. After news and sports, my favorite thing to watch are old movies. Could you name two or three that you particularly like? Yes, I saw The Maltese Falcon again on television the other night. My two favorite movies of all time are Casablanca and High Noon. It is a movie about courage in the face of fear and the guy doing what he thought was right in spite of the fact that it could cost him everything. I surf the channels. A lot of times when I come in late at night, I punch that button frenetically just to sort of see what is on. And I like Washington because there are a lot of cable stations here. And I get frustrated, particularly on the weekends if I have a little time, when there is not a single good movie on. But I do like to bump through the channels. ENTITY, we all recognize that you have a kind of high noon today with the vote in the House of Representatives. And with that in mind, let us go to our first questioner from among our affiliates, ENTITY from Cleveland. We appreciate it so very much. ENTITY, could you please give us more details on the agreement that you and the House leadership and the conservatives worked out early this morning on your economic package that will be going to a vote in the House sometime later today? And specifically, sir, does it include an increase in spending cuts or a lesser increase in taxes or both? The short answer to your question, or second question, is no.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithconniechunganddanrathercbsnews", "title": "Interview With Connie Chung and Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-connie-chung-and-dan-rather-cbs-news", "publication_date": "27-05-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 828, "text": "But the agreement that was worked out late last night is an enforcement mechanism to make sure that what happened to the '90 budget agreement does not happen this time. That is, this is a mechanism to guarantee that if there is a 5-year deficit reduction target, we meet the targets every year. Because under previous budgets, you could adopt a 5-year budget, but it is hard for CBS or your affiliate or the businesses of anybody represented in this audience today to do 5-year budgets. So this says, after every year, if we miss that deficit reduction target, the President is bound to come in and offer a plan to correct it, and the Congress must vote on it. They do not have to take his ideas, but if they do not do that, they must do something else. This will give the American people the assurance that each year we are going to meet these targets. Now, let me say one other thing. Most everybody believes that to whatever extent we can, we should have more cuts and less taxes. But when you get to the specifics-if you look at, for example, Senator Boren's plan, which reduces taxes on the wealthy and imposes more burdens on working people and elderly people just above the poverty line, you see how hard the details are. The Congress will have three more chances to vote to reduce spending. All the appropriation bills are also going through the Congress now, as soon as this is voted on. We are going to have a health care program which will produce savings in the health care area for Congress, the entitlements. And Vice President Gore is going to present a program to reform the way the Federal Government works in September that will give a third chance to cut spending this year. We are going to keep doing things that will reduce unnecessary spending in the Federal Government whatever happens on this bill today. Thank you, ENTITY, and we have another questioner who will identify himself and his station and town. My name is ENTITY from Missoula, Montana. First of all, on behalf of all the CBS affiliates, I want to thank you, and for free broadcasters all over America, for your support of free broadcasting, and also want to say thank you for participating in this town meeting this morning. We were proud to have you on our network. The subject is the Northwest and development and use of the natural resources in the Northwest. The debates have been going on for many, many years. You yourself have been involved in hearings.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithconniechunganddanrathercbsnews", "title": "Interview With Connie Chung and Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-connie-chung-and-dan-rather-cbs-news", "publication_date": "27-05-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 829, "text": "When is it time to make a decision and let the folks go down the road? We are going to recommend a resolution to the problems that we found in the timber summit that was held a few months ago, very shortly. We are going to make our recommendation. The Northwest now has a lot of difficult natural resource issues. For example, if you cut all the old-growth forests, you can keep people working for a while, and then you will not have any left at all. You will have lost a lot of not only the biological species there, but there will be more water pollution and the salmon fishermen will be hurt. A lot of these things are very, very complicated. We are going to try to resolve them the best we can and make a recommendation that will preserve as much of the old-growth forests as we can, recognize the importance of maintaining responsible logging practices, and keep the salmon fishers going, and doing as much of those things as we can to balance the economy and the environment. I understand a little about this because I live in a State that is over half timberland with a lot of national forest land. Probably no one will be happy with the recommendations that our administration will make. But we are going to do our best to be fair and to look at the long view. We have to think about people making a living not just now but also 5 years from now and 10 years from now and how to preserve those essential parts of our environment that are an important part of the character of the Pacific Northwest. We have, I think, time-we want to keep our commitment to you, because we do appreciate very much your doing this. And ENTITY from KHOU-TV in Houston has a question. We have heard a lot of comments regarding yet another broadcast campaign reform; 50 percent of lowest unit rate and three commercials are just a couple of the things we have heard. I wonder if you might enlighten us on that, please. Well, the whole issue of free campaign time from the broadcast networks arose, frankly, as a result of the opposition that some folks have in any public funding of campaigns. I presented a campaign finance reform law to the Congress which lowers the cost of campaigns, lowers the cost of political action committees, and gives people who are candidates for office communications vouchers so they can have access to the airwaves, so the challengers as well as the incumbents, and without regard to party, can have access to the airwaves.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithconniechunganddanrathercbsnews", "title": "Interview With Connie Chung and Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-connie-chung-and-dan-rather-cbs-news", "publication_date": "27-05-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 830, "text": "ENTITY, I wondered if you had a chance to see our replica of Columbus' ship, the Santa Maria. Not yet, I have not , but I expect that that commemoration next year is going to be fantastic, knowing the spirit of this place. Well, I am not sure I have had a formal invitation. I will have to check with the schedulers. I am going to be participating in many events, because this is American. So I hope I get a chance to come here. We are right now planning a special program on ENTITY aimed at teenagers. I know you were in Europe when Magic Johnson made his announcement. I wondered if there was anything more you wanted to say about him or that you would say to teenagers. Well, simply that Magic is coming onto the National ENTITY Commission. And I believe from what I have heard him say that he will be, because of his fame, he will be a marvelous advocate for education, helping teenagers understand how to avoid getting ENTITY. You cannot do it in every instance, but ENTITY is one disease where behavior has a lot to do, a lot to do, with whether you get it or not, shooting dope or promiscuous sex. Those are areas where we need more education to the teenagers. And I think that that commission and I think that that individual can be extraordinarily helpful, saying here is what I have learned, here is what I believe. In the meantime, we are going forward with a vigorous and large funding in research. And we have got some great research that is hopeful research going on at NIH, National Institutes of Health, in Washington. Headlines all across the country today are talking about ENTITY Reviews Plans for Saddam's Ouster and Move Would Counter Democratic Critics , like Mario Cuomo, who says you waged the war well enough but lost the objective in that you did not get Saddam Hussein. You remember the U.N. resolutions. It was to kick Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait and teach the aggressor a lesson. And that was a lesson that he got loud and clear. So we have got to be careful about redefining objectives for the American people. But if your question is would I like to see him out of there and would we like to help in some way or another, the answer is, yes. But I did see that story.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdougadairwcmhtvcolumbusohio", "title": "Interview With Doug Adair of WCMH - TV in Columbus, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-doug-adair-wcmh-tv-columbus-ohio", "publication_date": "25-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 831, "text": "We never comment on anything that we are doing of a clandestine or covert nature and never should, because people's lives -- if they were doing this, and I am not confirming or denying anything -- could be put in danger by this. But I'd like to see him out. I will tell you what there is -- this is the first time I have said this -- there is some interesting information coming out of Iraq of increasing dissent. People are tired of this man. They are tired of seeing food and medicines go in only to have them ripped off and be sent to the Republican Guard or to the people in Tikrit. And so I think we are watching a situation with growing dissent, growing discouragement about this brutal dictator, regret at being isolated by the world community. And who knows what the dynamics inside Iraq will eventually be when that move that I mentioned now just becomes paramount, when everybody feels that way? Is it difficult having been such a hero of the Gulf war and to see the popularity polls reflecting that and then to see the popularity rating come down with the economy? Do people expect too much of ENTITY that way? No, I think ENTITY has to -- I think people, when they are frustrated on an economic sense, they will blame Congress, they will blame ENTITY, they will blame the Governor. They will blame anybody. And so I can understand it. I would like to say, without being rancorous about it, that if Congress has passed some of the economic growth package that I put forward in the State of the Union and the programs that I have put forward since then, I think we'd be much further along in terms of a boisterous recovery, a robust recovery. But, look, I do not think the American people want blame. I am going to try to constrain myself a little. I will go to some political events, and I will hammer away at the Democrats as they are doing on me right now. But more important is, what can we do to help people? And I am going to continue to fight for the programs that I think will help the American people. And we can take care of the politics later on. And you cannot live or die by polls. I did not live euphorically at 86 percent, nor am I wringing my hands now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdougadairwcmhtvcolumbusohio", "title": "Interview With Doug Adair of WCMH - TV in Columbus, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-doug-adair-wcmh-tv-columbus-ohio", "publication_date": "25-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 832, "text": "You try to assure everyone that the economy is doing well enough, and yet 69 percent of the people, according to the Associated Press, say that the economy is not doing well. It is not, and I do not try to assure them it is doing well enough. Please, that is not what I try to do. I try to put things in perspective. When people talk about Herbert Hoover depressions, they simply do not know what they are talking about. When you see interest rates where they are and you see inflation under control, these are good fundamentals. I think ENTITY owes the American people his judgment. And I do not think that we ought to try to talk ourselves, as seems to be happening by some, into worse times. You see, I have this funny feeling that some of the political opponents think that the only way they can propel themselves to victory is to make America think that everything is wrong. I am in Ohio talking about a revolutionary new education program, America 2000. We moved forward on unemployment benefits. That is helping those now who are hurting. So, we have got some programs that can be short run and some much longer run. Interesting in Reader's Digest this month, a little quote that says you were asked one time what was your favorite Presidential speech, the one you admire the most. And you said it was one that Teddy Roosevelt had carried in his pocket that helped to deflect an assassin's bullet. And I wondered, is that something that concerns ENTITY a great deal all the time, the concern about yourself or about your family being in a position like that? We have the best Secret Service and dedicated young men and women that really go the extra mile for protection. So I do not wake up worrying about that kind of threat. On the family side, I worry more about what you put your kids through, what you put your family through by just being in the arena. And what troubles me is it might get a little worse as the political season goes on. There is a certain ugliness, and I'd like to try to avoid that. But that is on the family side what concerns me, not personal security. I honestly do not think about that. Your call for reducing credit card interest rates got part of the blame for the plunge 120 points on the stock market. I do not think so because I have also jawboned the Fed, saying would not it be nice to have lower interest rates.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdougadairwcmhtvcolumbusohio", "title": "Interview With Doug Adair of WCMH - TV in Columbus, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-doug-adair-wcmh-tv-columbus-ohio", "publication_date": "25-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 833, "text": "So why did you choose to visit Mongolia at this time? First of all, I am really looking forward to going. This is going to be an exciting trip for me and Laura. Mongolia has got a certain fascination for me. I grew up in the West of the United States where there is -where we like wide-open spaces. And when you think about Mongolia, you think about a big country with a lot of space. But what is interesting about Mongolia is it is more than geography now, as far as I am concerned. We kind of consider ourselves-and we like the slogan, the third neighbor of Mongolia. And so I have chosen to go there because of the spirit of the people and a leadership that shares our desire to let the-to have a government of and by and for the people. So, ENTITY, let us talk for a moment about America's foreign policy. Democracies change leaders every few years, so in that change often comes a change in a nation's foreign policy. So what steps has your administration taken to ensure that the foreign policy initiatives you have taken will continue to be guiding principles for the U.S. after you leave the White House? First of all, there are certain values that are inherent in our country that any leader will bring to the White House, the value of human rights, human dignity, freedom to worship, freedom of the press, freedom to speak your mind. And so foreign policy will have inherent in it those values. The other thing is, is that once democracy takes hold-it is hard work to make it work, but once it takes hold, it is hard to change it. Because democracy really speaks to the people and says, We listen to you. You can realize your dreams. And so one of the things my administration is doing is working in places where there has not been democracy. I think of the Palestinian Territories or Iraq. We are working in places where there is a new democracy to help strengthen those democracies. We are working with countries that have dedicated themselves to democracy but want the friendship of the United States to help them even further democracy. And so one way you leave behind a foundation that others cannot undo is to give people-help people develop a form of government that just cannot be unwound unless something catastrophic were to take place inside the country. So as part of our new relationship, Mongolia has contributed our peacekeeping troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheagletelevisionmongolia", "title": "Interview With Eagle Television of Mongolia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-eagle-television-mongolia", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 834, "text": "So in the future, if there are any military threats against Mongolia by its neighbors, would the U.S., under your administration, also rise to our defense? And by being friends, I think we can prevent any potential military dispute from arising. But of course we would support our friends. We certainly would-nobody anticipates over the next 3 years of my administration, any force being used against our friend. But my visit should send a signal to the people of Mongolia that you have got a friend in the United States and a friend in George W. Bush. So during your visit to Mongolia, you will be addressing the nation in a wide televised address. So our nation is experiencing a crisis of corruption. So you will be speaking to our leaders and our nation about the dangers that corruption poses to our democracy. Can you give us a preview about it? Well, I am not going to give you a preview of the speech, because then people may not watch it if they get a preview, see. On the other hand, I will say on your TV screens, there should be no corruption in government, that one of the foundations of any government is the ability for the people to trust the government, itself. And a foundation of democracy and a foundation of our foreign policy and a foundation of our Millennium Challenge Account is that there be honest government. The next related question is going to be to Millennium Challenge. So how has the issue of political corruption affected Mongolia's status for the Millennium Challenge Account? Well, we intend to move forward on the Millennium Challenge Account with Mongolia. On the other hand, we will insist that as a condition of the Millennium Challenge checks being written that there be honest government, that there be investment in health and education of the people, that there be a dedication to rule of law and to the marketplace. Okay, the last question is so important for our television. You might be aware that the Eagle Television was the first independent TV station established in Mongolia, with American Christians and Mongolians are working together to advance freedom of speech, press, and conscience in our country. So, first, how do you feel about the role of ordinary American citizens supporting this kind of work for Mongolia's democracy? And the second, what further role do you think the ordinary American citizens can play in helping to address faith and freedom in Mongolia through media?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheagletelevisionmongolia", "title": "Interview With Eagle Television of Mongolia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-eagle-television-mongolia", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 835, "text": "The big news story of the day today and obviously President Jonathan accepting US aid to help the girls in Nigeria. So what help will we provide? And do you think at this point with three weeks in, is it too late? We are sending in a team made up of our military and law enforcement and other experts, and we are very glad that Nigeria has accepted the help. And as a father of two girls, I cannot imagine what the parents are going through. But this organization, Boko Haram, has been one of the worst regional or local terrorist organizations in the world. We'd long sought to work with Nigeria on dealing with them. And we are going to do everything we can to assist them in recovering these young women. More broadly though we are gonna have to really tackle a pernicious problem inside that county-a an organization that is carried out ruthless attacks and killed thousands of people over the last several years. They are claiming energy efficiency. In light of all the data coming in with this new report, talking about carbon emissions, are you more onboard or are you concerned at this point? Well, the climate assessment plan was done over the course of four years, talking to hundreds of experts across the country, the private sector, not-for profits. Not only is climate change a problem in the future. It is already affecting Americans. It is increasing the likelihood of floods. It is increasing the likelihood of storms and hurricanes. It is having an impact on our agriculture. It is having an impact on our tourism industries. And people's lives are at risk. So, the emphasis on the Climate Action Plan that I have put forward as well as this assessment is there are things we can do about it, but it is only going to happen if the American people and people around the world take the challenge seriously. And, we have already increased our production of solar and wind power. We have already increased fuel efficiency standards on cars, and now we are going to appliances. But we are gonna have to do more. And that should be a bipartisan issue, because always want to make sure that we are passing on an American to our kids and grandkids that is as beautiful as the one that we inherited. And Sir, climate change is the kind of thing a lot of people do not put as a top priority. How do you change that? We cannot attribute any single weather event to climate change. But we know that if temperatures are rising, you are going to see more extreme weather events.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmeganglaroscbssthismorning", "title": "Interview with Megan Glaros of CBS's This Morning", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-megan-glaros-cbss-this-morning", "publication_date": "07-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 836, "text": "You know, I was thinking about something today that I heard, and I wanted to see if you could confirm it, and if you could, whether you could talk about it. I was told that the night of the inauguration it was a huge, huge party here. You are talking about the second inauguration? First inauguration we had-you know, this is a good example of when you first arrive, you do not know what you are supposed to do. So there are all these state balls that take place, and we sort of assumed-we were told-well, you should go to all the balls. Did you try that? Did you try to go to all of them? We went to all of them. And you do a dance at each one. No, no, not every state has one, but we went to 10 or 12. And by the time we were done, it was like 1 o'clock, so we had Wynton Marsalis here playing, and people had been hanging out, but by the time we got back Michelle's feet were all hurting and swollen up, and I was exhausted, and we hung out here probably for half an hour, and went to bed. So we did, like, three balls and then got back here and had a DJ and, yeah, Usher and Stevie. Was the second one more joyous for you- I think the way to think about it is the first inauguration is like your wedding in the sense that it is a joyous moment and occasion, but you are so busy and kind of stressed making sure that Aunt Such-and-Such and Uncle So-and-So and cousins are getting tickets that it ends up going by without you even really knowing what is happening. The second one you could savor. But partly, as you indicated, for political reasons as well. Because we had gone through four of the toughest years this country has gone through since the '30s. And to be able to win a majority of the vote the second time indicated that we had worked with a broad cross section of the country and they trusted what we were trying to do. And it was not just a singular feel-good moment; it was an affirmation that people thought we had done a good job.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 837, "text": "I think for those of us-and I certainly threw myself in this camp-I was telling Valerie the other day, the idea of a black ENTITY was a joke, in every black stand-up comic routine everywhere- A friend of mine gave me Head of State-remember and Bernie Mac?-when we were still running. Said, Man, you got to see Head of State. Yeah, this was like a laugh-fest. But I think one of the things that did distinguish you was the ability to see it and to have the vision that, yes, this could happen, and then to have it again. I am speaking specifically in terms of race ... There were those of us who said, It is no way. And to see it the first and second time must have really reaffirmed a lot of what you thought. They had seen me have victories, they had seen me have defeats, they had seen me make mistakes, they had seen me at some high moments but also some low moments. So they knew me, at that point, in the round. I was not just a projection of whatever they hoped for. You know, we always cautioned each other, in the '08 race, that people were projecting so much onto my campaign-you know, that this would solve every racial problem, or that this indicated that we were beyond race, or that we were going to magically usher in a new era of progressive politics, and that we had vanquished all the backward-looking politics of the past. And for us to then be able to grind it out, to figure out how do we get out of this Great Recession, and what is the process where we can finally get health care done even if it is not pretty, and how do we deal with winding down two wars, and how do we clean up after an administration to reinvigorate things like the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. Do we want to continue on this course, and do we continue to have faith in this person? And so it is true that, for me at least, in some ways the first race was lightning in a bottle. I saw it, I envisioned the possibility of it, but everything converged in a way that you could not duplicate. The second race as a consequence felt more solid, because it was harder. And you know we did not have tailwinds, we had a lot more headwinds.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 838, "text": "Yeah, I have my own theories about this, and I wonder what yours are. Why were you able to see it? You said you were able to envision the possibility. I mean, when you think about yourself-because obviously, as you know, a lot of African Americans could not-what is the difference? I'd say a couple things. The first was that I had been elected as the senator of Illinois, and Illinois is the most demographically representative state in the country. If you took all the percentages of black, white, Latino, rural, urban, agricultural, manufacturing- you took that cross section across the country, and you shrank it, it would be Illinois. So when I ran for the Senate I had to go into southern Illinois, downstate Illinois, farming communities-some with very tough racial histories, some areas where there just were no African Americans of any number, and I had seen my ability to connect with those communities and those people against some pretty formidable opponents. When I ran for the Senate, I was one of seven candidates. One of them, Dan Hynes, was already the state comptroller, was the son of the former Senate president and chair of the Democratic Party, a well-established Irish family in the state, who got the endorsement, I think, of 100 out of 103 county chairs as well as the AFL-CIO endorsement. And you had a multimillionaire hedge-fund manager who was spending huge amounts of money. And when we won that race, not just an African American from Chicago, but an African American with an exotic history and a name Barack Hussein Obama, could connect with and appeal to a much broader audience. And then, keep in mind, that the response of the 2004 convention speech was admittedly over the top, and so I had for two years seen the response I would get when we traveled all around the country. I had campaigned on behalf of other Democrats. Ben Nelson, one of the most conservative Democrats in the Senate, from Nebraska, would only bring in one national Democrat to campaign for him, because typically he tried to distance himself from Democrats-and And so part of the reason I was willing to run and saw the possibility was that I had had two years in which we were generating enormous crowds all across the country-and the majority of those crowds were not African American; and they were in pretty remote places, or unlikely places. So what that told me was, it was possible. Did you have doubts?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 839, "text": "You did have doubts? Look, I think Valerie remembers us sitting around our kitchen table-a group of friends of mine, some political advisers, Michelle-and I think our basic assessment was maybe we had a 20, 25 percent chance of winning. Because I did think given the problems President Bush had had, that whoever won the Democratic nomination would win the presidency. And so the issue really was, could I get the nomination, particularly with a formidable candidate like Hillary Clinton already preparing to run? And my view was not that this was a sure thing, but what I never doubted was my ability to get white support. You never doubted that? And I think that in addition to the proof of my Senate race, if you want to go a little deeper, there is no doubt that as a mixed child, as the child of an African and a white woman, who was very close to white grandparents who came from Kansas, that I think the working assumption of discrimination, the working assumption that white people would not treat me right or give me an opportunity, or judge me on the basis of merit-that kind of working assumption is less embedded in my psyche than it is, say, with Michelle. I had as a child seen at least a small cross section of white people, but the people who were closest to me loved me more than anything. And so even as an adult, even by the time I am 40, 45, 50, that set of memories meant that if I walked into a room and it is a bunch of white farmers, trade unionists, middle age-I am not walking in thinking, Man, I have got to show them that I am normal . like, these people look just like my grandparents. And I see the same the same Jell-O mold that my grandmother served, and they have got the same, you know, little stuff on their mantelpieces. And so I am maybe disarming them by just assuming that we are okay. And if anything, my concern had more to do with I am really young. I mean, when I look back at the pictures of me running in '08, I look like a kid. And so my insecurities going into the race had more to do with the fact I had only been in the Senate two years. Three, four years earlier I had been a state legislator, and I was now running for the highest office in the land. I want to stay with this for a second.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 840, "text": "You know, to prepare for this piece I have been going back and reading some of your writings. And one of the things I noticed going through Dreams From My Father, which I read a long time ago-it is very different reading it. Your grandfather has this black dude come over who is interested in his daughter, and he is accepting. Yeah, listen, I am always kind of surprised by that. And he was like a blue-black brother. And so, yeah, I will always give my grandparents credit for that. I am not saying they were happy about it. I am not saying that they were not, after the guy leaves, looking at each other like, 'What the heck?' But whatever misgivings they had, they never expressed to me, never spilled over into how they interacted with me. Now, part of it, as I say in my book, was we were in this unique environment in Hawaii where I think it was much easier. I do not know if it would have been as easy for them if they were living in Chicago at the time, because the lines just were not as sharply drawn in Hawaii as they were on the mainland. But I do think that at the end of the day, some of my confidence that people are people and that the very specific historical experience and sociological reality of racism in this country has made for significant differences between black and white populations, but that people's basic human impulses are the same. It is a biological necessity for me to believe that, right? And so my politics ultimately would reflect that. In 2008 I was never subjected to the kind of concentrated vilification of Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, the whole conservative-media ecosystem, and so as a consequence, even for my first two years as a senator I was polling at 70 percent. I was at a town-hall meeting, or I was talking to people directly, or they had met me, or I would speak at a university or go to a VFW hall. But they were not seeing some image of me as trying to take away their stuff and give it to black people, and coddle criminals, and all the stereotypes of not just African American politicians but liberal politicians. You started to see that kind of prism being established towards the end of the 2008 race, particularly once Sarah Palin was the nominee. And obviously almost immediately after I was elected, it was deployed in full force.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 841, "text": "And it had an impact in terms of how a large portion of white voters would see me. And what that speaks to-and this is something I still strongly believe-is that the suspicion between races, the way it can manifest itself in politics, in part comes out of people's daily interactions and the fact that we are segregated by communities, and by schools, and our churches, and people's memories passed down through generations. But some of it is constructed on a constant basis; it is being created all the time. And I think what I did not fully appreciate when I first came into this office was the degree to which that reality would be the only thing that a large chunk of the electorate, particularly the white electorate, would see. You know, Bill Clinton told me an interesting story. He went back to Arkansas with a former aide of his when he was governor and when he was running, who ended up running for Congress and was about to retire from Congress. This was one of the last blue dogs. And as they were traveling around ,this former member of Congress said to Bill, You know, I do not think you could win Arkansas today. He says, You know, when we used to run, you and I would drive around to these small towns and communities out there, and you'd meet with the publisher and editor of the little small-town paper, and you'd have a conversation with them. And they were fairly knowledgeable about some of the issues, and they had their quirks and blind spots, but basically you as a Democrat could talk about civil rights and the need to invest in communities and they understood that. Except now those papers are all gone and if you go into any bar, you go into any barbershop, the only thing that is on is Fox News. And it has shaped an entire generation of voters and tapped into their deepest anxieties ... Just as a counterpoint to that, I wonder about another argument one might make-that you were more likable to these folks before you had power. In other words, once you literally became a black ENTITY, that was a real thing. And that activated their fears- Like, that they needed Fox News. Yeah, but what I would argue would be that the folks for whom that is true-they had not voted for me in the first place.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 842, "text": "I mean, what I am arguing is not that the concerns or suspicions or fears around changing demographics and increased diversity are not right there on the surface for a lot of voters. But what I am saying is that they are shaped and influenced depending on what they see day to day. And they are more malleable, and they can go in a better direction or a worse direction. And if what they are seeing and what they are taking as truth is that this black ENTITY is trying to hurt you or take something from you and looking out for his own, then they will respond differently than if they hear that this ENTITY is trying to help you. And here are the issues involved and here are the choices that he is having to make. There is no better example of that than the whole debate around Obamacare, where the whole way in which it got framed as 'He is trying to take something from you to give free stuff'-in this case free health care but it could also be free phones, or free cheese, or whatever-ended up dominating the debate even in those communities that stood to benefit most from this program. But part of that was the story, the narrative that they were receiving. And people do not have the ability to fact-check and, you know, sort through what is true and what is not, especially on a complicated social program like this. Do you think that holds true even in an era right now when we have so much access to information? You know, in some ways the access to all this information has made it easier to set up narratives that are entirely separate from fact. I mean witness the current election and what Trump is doing. But because, with all the proliferation of websites, and blogs, and digital content, you can just create your own hermetically sealed world where people are never going outside of their existing assumptions, I think it is a bigger problem, not a worse problem. Was there always a certain quotient of people who, even if it was hard for them to admit, would not vote for me because I was African American? That was true when I was running for the U.S. Senate and that would be true if I was trying to catch a cab. Do I believe that is the majority of white Americans? And I think my elections proved that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 843, "text": "Do I think that good people who are not instinctively afraid or concerned about an African American in authority can be made afraid, and suspicious, and fearful, because of what they are seeing, hearing, and reading if it is not attached to the facts, and evidence, and reality? I think that can have a big impact. One of the things that I think also is here is not just your ability to envision the presidency, just the optimism for the country you have in general. I think, at this kind of young age you really saw-if I may say so-the best of white America in a very sort of direct way- Which I think is very different than most African Americans. I did not really grow up around white people, but even the abstract construction was as a malignant force in my life, which I had to make my way out of much, much later in life, in my 20s, when I had intimate contact. And I wonder how much of that general optimism you think emanates from your biography. The exposure too, the cosmopolitan nature of all you have seen. I mean, look, I think all of the above. I think I was deeply loved by my mom and my grandparents. I felt that, and I carried that with me. I spent time outside of the United States, which gives you a perspective on how people of all kinds of different races, and ethnicities, and religions, and backgrounds can figure out ways to divide themselves and try to be superior to others. So that I ended up looking at race in America as one example of a broader human problem, rather than something that was unique and I was trapped in. But I also, I think, benefited from the very particular era that I was growing up in, because in some ways, the last 55 years-the years I have been on this Earth-have a very particular trajectory of progress that is incomplete, is partial, that middle-class African Americans enjoy in ways that really impoverished African Americans do not yet feel. But that trend would feed my optimism as well. Now, you know, what is interesting is the work that I did as an organizer in Chicago would help to temper that optimism and ground it so that it was not just a bunch of happy talk. And it is one of the reasons why, for the generation just ahead of me, I would learn of the anger, frustration, bitterness of my elders and respect it and understand it even if I ultimately did not agree with it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 844, "text": "Did you right off the bat, when you first encountered it? And part of it was just because, you know, I had sort of steeped myself in it, although as still an intellectual exercise. I remember reading The Autobiography of Malcolm X, and I remember reading it, even as a young person, and saying to myself, Now, if this had happened to me, I'd have a very different attitude . And that is part of what I tried to explain in my race speech in Philadelphia when the Reverend Wright controversies came out. He is of a different generation. He had different experiences. And that sense of being trapped and caged and witnessing brilliant people broken by an unjust system-family members beaten or jailed, or just harassed, or unable to realize their potential-could drive you crazy. And so I think I not only was mindful enough of it by the time I had moved to Chicago, but even in my relatively sheltered and unique circumstances, I had the experiences that every African American has. Which is somebody in front of a restaurant will hand you the keys, thinking you are there to park their car. Or-I write about this in Dreams From My Father-being in a tennis tournament and the tennis coach, who is supposed to look out for all the kids, telling me, 'Do not put your finger on the draw that is been posted about who is playing who, because you might make it dirty.' What? Or walking into an elevator and having some woman who you know lives on your floor or above you walk out of the elevator because she is worried about riding with you even though you are a kid. So, you know, you have enough there to have a sense of how anger could pool and well up and, in some cases, consume you. But I also, I think, by that point would have benefited from enough circumstances in which assuming the best in people had paid off-where there had been a teacher who had really been helpful and looked out for me even when I did not completely deserve it. Or, you know, just witnessing the example of a Dr. King, or an Arthur Ashe. And so I am coming of age at a time where you have got the strength and defiance of a Malcolm or an Ali, and you have also got the soulfulness and the moral strength of a King. And those things are speaking to each other. They are in a conversation. And you are saying to yourself, I can draw from both of those traditions .", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 845, "text": "And there may be times where you have got to give the country and white people the benefit of the doubt. And if you are so eager to give them the benefit of the doubt that they slap you down and you do not know it, that is a problem. But if you are so invested in the anger that you do not seen when somebody is putting out their hand in a sincere gesture of friendship, then you have now become your own jailer. It is not just someone else jailing you. It occurs to me, obviously, to have our first black ENTITY a product of the times, a product of certain things going around, a product in some part of the administration before-but have you ever thought you needed to be a certain person who had not had this sort of trauma at a young age? Who was capable of giving that sort of optimism-that it could not just be, okay now the country's ready, Joe Blow Black Dude steps up, and wins, with political gifts, obviously-but I think that optimism sticks out. Look, I have no doubt that the first African American ENTITY had to be somebody who could speak the way I did in the 2004 convention speech about the ideal of what America is. What it is not . What it had not done. But that is true of just running for president generally. Very rarely has somebody won the presidency based on a dark, grim vision of what America is. Well, we will see my proposition tested in this election cycle. Maybe the closest is Nixon, who employed the southern strategy and surfed the backlash coming out of both the antiwar movement and the civil-rights movement. But as a general proposition, it is hard to run for president by telling people how terrible things are. Because at some level what the people want to feel is that the person leading them sees the best in them. And so, did the innate optimism that I carried with me both because of my upbringing and maybe just temperament help? I have said before that Deval Patrick could have been the person who broke that particular barrier back in 2008. And it so happened that he had just run for governor and felt committed to finishing up his term. But he has the gifts and I think the persona that would have appealed at that time to the American public. And there are probably some other figures as well who might have pulled it off. We are at home watching the State of the Union and some guy stands up and yells, You lie.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 846, "text": "And this is a guy from South Carolina-we know about South Carolina, he is confirming everything we feel- I still remember looking at him like, Really? what are you doing? It was just so unexpected and raw that I did not -and to me just kind of ridiculous-that I could not really generate anger. There is no doubt that there have been occasions during my presidency when I have said, 'Y'all just would not do this with anybody else.' There was one time where I was making a statement out here. And in the middle of my statement, somebody just started yelling. It was a reporter from The Daily Caller. I remember this. And I was probably more mad on that one. Because-whereas Joe Wilson, you got a sense of just this weird impulsive action on his part-this felt orchestrated and showed a lack of respect for the office that I think was unprecedented in a Rose Garden statement. Part of what is been difficult, though, during my presidency, is untangling the degree to which some of these issues are because of race and some of these issues being reflective of just a coarsening of the political culture and a sharpening of the political divides. Because I do remember watching Bill Clinton get impeached and Hillary Clinton being accused of killing Vince Foster. And if you ask them, I am sure they would say, 'No, actually, what you are experiencing is not because you are black, it is because you are a Democrat.' And right around the beginning of Bill Clinton's presidency and what corresponds with the rise of right-wing media, a lot of the old boundaries and rules of civility just broke down. Now, one way to think about this is that issues of race and issues of political philosophy have always been entangled, and it is hard to draw them out. So when I think about the Tea Party or conservatives who've opposed my agenda, I have no doubt that there are those who oppose my agenda because they have a coherent and sincere view about the role of the federal government relative to the state governments; they believe that an overreaching federal power that is taxing, regulating, redistributing is contrary to the vision of freedom that the Founders intended-and they can believe those things independent of race.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 847, "text": "Having said that, a rudimentary knowledge of American history tells you that the relationship between the federal government and the states was very much mixed up with attitudes towards slavery, attitudes towards Jim Crow, attitudes towards antipoverty programs and who benefited and who did not . And so I am careful not to attribute any particular resistance or slight or opposition to race. But what I do believe is that if somebody did not have a problem with their daddy being employed by the federal government, and did not have a problem with the Tennessee Valley Authority electrifying certain communities, and did not have a problem with the interstate highway system being built, and did not have a problem with the GI Bill, and did not have a problem with the subsidizing the suburbanization of America, and that all helped you build wealth and create a middle class-and then suddenly as soon as African Americans or Latinos are interested in availing themselves of those same mechanisms as ladders into the middle class, you now have a violent opposition to them, then I think you at least have to ask yourself the question of how consistent you are and what is different, what is changed. You know, I always talk about when I was doing civil-rights law and people would talk about the dearth of African Americans in police departments and fire departments around the country. And they would say, 'Well, this should be a meritocracy, and everybody needs to take a test, and that is objective, and anything else is affirmative action and unfair.' And I am thinking, Well, when Officer O'Malley or Officer Krupke was walking the beat, nobody said it was a meritocracy then. We are suddenly now of the notion that somebody who is a police officer or firefighter having some affinity and familiarity with the community they are serving is completely out of bounds. So I think that one of the things I am always trying to do is to just promote a consistent philosophy and ethic about how government can help everybody and try to show that what worked for the majority community in previous generations would be likely to work now, too. And the burden is on those who oppose investments in these things to explain what is changed. I was caught because you said that you were the only person that Ben Nelson brought in to campaign for him. And maybe my memory is wrong, but I believe he was one of the harder folks to negotiate with in terms of getting the passed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 848, "text": "You can correct me if I am wrong, but as I recall, I heard in 2008 from your campaign that there was room to work across party lines, there was room for people who disagree to come together. If we just put forth intelligent proposals, folks would be able to come together. Did that surprise you when that got to you? No, because by that time we had seen the behavior. But, and I have told this story before, the economy was in a free fall. And the one thing I anticipated was that we could get some bipartisan cooperation early on, at least to stop the bleeding, before normal politics kicked in. I mean, we were losing hundreds of thousands of jobs, folks were losing their homes everywhere, the financial system was locked up, the auto industry was melting down. And the risks of us going into 15 percent unemployment and a real catastrophic situation were reasonably high. And so speed was of the essence. And we put together this package, called the Recovery Act, which was basically a big stimulus package, and we designed it in such a way that we thought it would have some appeal to Republicans. Because we had infrastructure spending, and we had spending going directly to states to make sure they were not laying off teachers and police and firefighters, and we had a big tax cut for ordinary families, as well as spending for clean energy and education and a whole host of other things. And I still remember the day that I am scheduled to meet with the House Republican caucus, and I get into the car and we are driving up, and I forget who it was, but one of my staff tells me that John Boehner has just announced that they are opposed to the Recovery Act. Before they had even seen it, before I had made a presentation, before I had had a conversation with them This was going to be sort of the opening round of negotiations where I am explaining to them the dire situation and asking for a bipartisan effort to help the American people. And they had shut it down. And that, I think, gave me an inkling of a different political environment than the one that we had seen in the past. Now, again, I think it is really important to understand that had there been a white president-had Hillary Clinton been president, or Joe Biden been president-it is entirely possible that they would have pursued the same strategy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 849, "text": "Because the way politics had been structured at that point, where there was so much political gerrymandering, and the media has increasingly become so balkanized, there was an understandable political incentive for them not to cooperate. You know, the genius of Mitch McConnell-and to some degree John Boehner-was a recognition that if we were about to go into a bad recession and the president had come in on this wave of good feeling, Democrats control the House, they control the Senate-if he is completely successful in yanking us out of this and cleaning up a mess a Republican president had left behind, that we might lock in Democratic majorities for a very long time. But on the other hand, if Republicans did not cooperate, and there was not a portrait of bipartisan cooperation and a functional federal government, then the party in power would pay the price and that they could win back the Senate and/or the House. And they executed well, and we got clobbered in 2010. I just want to push this a little bit more. What about the idea that it is not so much you as a black man as ENTITY, but the fact that we are at a point in history where the Democratic Party, especially locally-the states-has become very racialized? Well, I think what is true is that when the southern Democrats all flipped, and over the course of successive elections, dating back to '68, you have a process whereby 90 percent African Americans are voting in the Democratic Party, and southern and many rural and western whites are increasingly voting Republican, and cultural issues become more prominent, that it helped to accelerate what has been called this great sorting. And when you combine that with political gerrymandering, when you combine that with the impact of the media, it makes it easier for Republicans not to cooperate, because there is nobody in their districts that will punish them for not cooperating with a Democratic president. I think what was more of an early lesson around race was the Skip Gates incident. And the reason that was interesting to me was because I did not think it was that big of a deal, and I did not think my statement was particularly controversial. I do not know if you know Skip, but Skip is a little guy who uses a cane and has a limp and is late 60s. And if he is on his porch and he ends up being handcuffed, then my working assumption was, everybody would kind of think that was kind of an overreaction.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 850, "text": "Now, Skip can be, you know, salty, so I have no doubt that-I was not there, but I would not be surprised if Skip used some inappropriate language with the officer when the officer came up to question him. The Cambridge police probably handled this a little stupidly. And the fact of the matter is that part of the reason this becomes news is because there is this underlying feeling on the part of a lot of African Americans that interaction with police is not always evenhanded. To see the cultural reaction, and in retrospect to see how my poll numbers with white voters dropped really significantly off this one tempest in a teapot, that was instructive. Now, there are some who say that is when Obama started trimming his sails on racial issues. The truth is that I wanted to make sure that we did not have a bunch of distractions at a time where I am just putting out fires everywhere. I mean, I have got two wars, I have got an economic crisis of a proportion we have not seen since the Great Depression, and that was not the time, from my perspective, to just open up a big floodgate of conversation around race, which I did not think was going to be productive. What I did learn from that, though, were two things. One was-that was one lesson among many, in those first six months-about the magnification of my words. So if I look at the statement that I made at the time that I thought was pretty innocuous, using the word stupid would be a word I'd never use now, just because I am ENTITY and everything gets magnified. So I could have made the same point in a way that would not have, I think, felt as visceral. You think you could have got that across about it? I think I could have got it across better. What it also showed me was the degree to which the filter that I discussed earlier can completely shape a narrative in a way that will just run until you get some sort of circuit breaker going. not to overreact to that. Because what is absolutely true is that, you know, my press office freaked out around that in a way that I was not that freaked out about. There was a part of me that was like, 'Okay, so the Cambridge police is not happy with me, but this really is not a big deal, we have got other stuff we have got to worry about.'", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates", "publication_date": "27-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 863, "text": "Have these guys told you what I am up to? I will give you the quick version. It is a piece about year 8 of the Presidency. It is not a legacy piece, looking back at the 8 years. It is a piece about this year and sort of what you are doing on the policy front, on the political front, on the personal front. The historic pattern in, you know, basically since World War II has not been last years of Presidencies. Most people have sort of slunk to the finish line, if they made it at all. And it seems to me that you are defying that pattern, and the China vote showed that you have continued policy relevance. I think there is a lot of interest in what you are doing politically for Democrats, particularly for the First Lady. And I think there is a lot of interest in how you are doing personally, after you know, by any definition the ordeal of '98, '99, sort of how do you come back and have, by any sort of objective measure, this very energetic final year? So those three dimensions are all things that I am interested in. One thing I am curious about is to what extent how self-conscious you were at the end of last year, at the start of this year, that, look, we have got a very limited window, and was there sort of a methodical approach to organizing the limited amount of time you had left, or was it just sort of, you know, a race to the finish line? In other words, was there an acute sense of the window closing? Well, let me back up a minute and say I have I was aware, I suppose, at some level, from the moment I got here, although I did not have much time to think about it, that generally, Presidencies seem to wind down. And normally, it starts sometime not just in the last year but in the year before that. I did not think that that was necessary but that it was something you had to have a definite strategy to avoid, because it is just not right for the country. You know, they pay us to show up for 4 years, and there is always a lot of business to be done.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 864, "text": "And even in the political context of an election and even, clearly, the change of administration as I always remind all my colleagues in the Congress, on both side no matter how much we get done, there will still be plenty of things that will not be resolved, over which there will be genuine differences, and therefore, you can have a meaningful election. So we all had a job to do. So if you just want to focus on the last year, let us start with that. I essentially organized this year the way I have every year from the beginning. And that is, you begin by laying out a strategy consistent with the vision we started with, based on what has been achieved already, what has not been achieved, and what has come up. And you articulate that in the State of the Union Address with as much clarity as possible. Now, this year what I did was to try both to articulate what I would try to do this year and to look in terms of not just what had been achieved over the last 7 years but in terms of the remaining long-term challenges for the country. I laid it out with great specificity. And the good thing about that is, it serves as a real organizing principle for the White House staff and for the Cabinet, for how I spend my time, both in the office with the Congress and in the country. I think one of the things that has gotten that has led to some Presidents and some White Houses to get less than they might have out of all their days is the tendency to become overcome with the politics of the political environment or the conventional wisdom. A lot of being ENTITY is a job like any other job, and you have control over your attitude toward it, your priorities, and what you work on. And if everybody is working on the same page and full steam ahead, a lot of things happen. So you start with a strategy and with as many specifics as possible in the State of the Union, and then you just try to execute it. And we have had some success, as you pointed out. I was talking to somebody, one of your advisers, who said they had come back from a meeting with one of the organized labor leaders who told him, Look, we have got the votes. We are jamming you on this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 865, "text": "But I did not think so because I thought that in the end, the vote was so clearly in the national interests, and the consequences of defeat where somebody says, Well, let us just put it off, or, Maybe we will come back to it next year, or something like that were so clearly adverse to what was good for America's future that I thought in the end they'd come around and do the right thing. How much easier do you think this job is in year 8 than in year one? I mean, is there a sense of, like, Look, there is no kind of curve ball that is going to get thrown at me that is going to be one I have not seen before? Well, at one level, it is much easier because I had never worked in the Washington environment before, and as you remember, the strategy of the opposition was that I would have no honeymoon and I did not . And I also had a country with a lot of big problems when I started, and we had to get a lot of big things done. And I tried to maybe even too much I tried to put a lot of things through the system in the first 2 years. We got three of the four big things I wanted to do done. We got the economic plan that eventually we got welfare reform, but I could tell we were going to get it. And we got started with executive actions, and we passed the crime bill. But we could not do health care. And then there was all this, you know, a lot of and we were also, at the time, putting together a team in the White House, in the Cabinet, working together, and working with all the others, which the White House and the whole administration with whom the White House and the whole administration had to work. So to try to get stuff done and put the thing together, it was very difficult. Since then, every year I think it has gotten a little easier from that point of view. On the other hand, there are always it never ceases to be challenging or interesting. And if you are trying to do meaningful things, there are always going to be things that are very, very hard to do. For example, one of the toughest things we are working on now is the Middle East.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 866, "text": "I think it is a mistake, just because you are near the end, rather than the beginning of an administration, not to try to do the big things, especially if they really need doing within the time frame that you have. One of the early themes when I showed up on this beat, which I guess was '95, '96 period, was a sense among a lot of your advisers, and I think it reflected your view, that you were not getting credit for what had been done the first couple of years, either from the press or from the public, more broadly. Do you think you will get credit for your Presidency, at this point? I do not worry about it as much anymore. The only reason I worried about it in those years was that I felt that Congress. those people reported back you were feeling really angry about this. Well, you know, I do not think it is possible for me to convey how terrible I felt for other people that we lost the Congress in the '94 election. And all those people that put their necks on the line and were defeated, primarily because they voted for the economic plan and the voters had not felt the positive impact of it yet and they voted for the crime bill. And they had all these fear arguments out there on what we did on assault weapons and the Brady bill and that was really in the election cycle, and that passed and there was no attempt to see that the 100,000 police and the gun safety measures would work. But the fear was out there and then, of course, when we were unsuccessful in getting even a compromise initiative on health care that deflated our side's vote a little bit. And those three things together caused a lot of very good people to lose their seats, and I felt badly about that. I never felt that as so many people did at the time that it meant that the administration could not get reelected, because I always believed that the country had serious problems, and we had to tackle them early and brave the controversy early and that if I turned out to be right about our economic strategy and we continue to make progress and we passed our education program, the beginning of it, in '93 and '94, that it would work out fine. But I was frustrated more by what I thought was the preoccupation with other things, which seemed to me anybody who looked at the evidence would see did not amount to anything. And now we know, after all this time, that Whitewater thing was a total sham.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 867, "text": "It was a sham from the beginning. It was a put-up deal, and everybody knows it now. But it seemed to me everybody should have known it years before they did. So I was frustrated by it, just because I felt that the most important thing was to keep moving the country forward. In terms of personal credit, I think that you know, Presidencies go through several incarnations, many of which occur after they are long gone. I have had the opportunity just in my service as ENTITY to read about administrations, through a lot of American history reading, including about administrations that most Americans do not know much about. And I see all the time there is this sort of constant process of reassessment about every period in our history. So I will have to leave that to history. People will be reassessing this period after I am not even alive anymore. The only thing I ever wanted enough credit to do was to keep elected, to stay in office, and to keep pushing the country in the direction I thought was important and to get enough support in the Congress to do the things we had to do. When you see Republicans borrowing at least some of the image of your political model, if not necessarily the content, do you take that as a compliment in any way? Or does it tick you off, or do you feel like, How dare they steal my playbook? What is your reaction to that? No, I am complimented by it, because I think it shows that what we did was right, you know, to change the whole nature of our political rhetoric in the Democratic Party, and that it resonates with the American people. This country has always worked best when there was a dynamic majority for change. And it always operates out of the center, but it is not the center, a split-the-difference center. It is a center that reflects the commonsense judgment of the American people that the time has come to change, and we ought to change in this direction. So I take that as a great compliment. It is an important beginning for them to say, Okay, we know we cannot be and we should not be mean, extremist, and sanctimonious in our political rhetoric anymore. I think that is a positive thing for them. Now, I think there is a big difference, however, which is that when I ran in 1992, I did not just say we are going to change our party so we can say to change the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 868, "text": "Here is the way I am going to do Government. Here is the way we are going to change the way Government works. And we had you know, people used to make fun of me and Paul Tsongas, in New Hampshire, because we put out these long, detailed booklets about what we'd do, and then all of a sudden, there were more people showing up for our town meetings than anybody else. Maybe it is because I'd been a Governor for a dozen years and because I'd been through a lot of these the policy debates, as well as the political debates. But I think one of the most important reasons that we have had some success in our Presidency was that we actually laid out in 1992 a vision and a strategy for achieving it. And one of the things that I thought was interesting, just reading the aftermath of the Republican Convention and what a lot of the swing voters are saying, is that I liked what I saw. They seemed like very nice people, and I am glad they are being more inclusive, but what are they going to do if they get the job? We do not have to say that some of it was, We have not really changed our policies, so we cannot say what our policies are. One of the things I think is great about Al Gore's selection of Joe Lieberman is, it sort of ratifies this kind of New Democratic direction we have taken, where we say we will continue to have policies that are pro-business and prolabor, that are pro-growth and pro-environment, that are for individual responsibility and a broader, inclusive American community. I do not want to beat this to death, but I think this is very important. There is a scholar named Thomas Patterson, who used to be at the Maxwell School at Syracuse, used to do a lot of work on the media and the Presidency, who said that in 1995 He is a Ben Bradley professor at Harvard, by the way. Well, he put out a I had never met him at the time. I have since actually met him once or twice now, but I did not know him at the time. In 1995, when our fortunes were not exactly high, he was quoted in a newspaper article saying that my administration had already kept a higher percentage of its promises to the American people than the previous five Presidencies, even though we made more commitments, more specific commitments. These State of the Unions have been very important.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 869, "text": "State of the Unions for us have been the equivalent of that first booklet I put out in New Hampshire. They are a guidepost, and we do the best we can on it. But you also have to take other initiatives that come up that are consistent with it. You know, all the things we did with Executive orders, setting aside the national monuments or including making sure seniors could be in clinical trials because Medicare would cover it, all those things that they those are things that may come up, where we have got an idea factory here, where the staff is encouraged to come up with ideas, the Cabinet is encouraged to come up with ideas. It is all consistent with that. And even then when we are reacting you know, sometimes things just happen, and you have to react to it. You cannot be so rigid in your organization that you cannot change. That is the sort of whole essence of the new economy. Can I ask you about the First Lady's campaign? There is this sort of universal consensus that, you know, you are aware of great details, or the ins and outs of that campaign, even though you are not running it or trying not to run it. But I am not really sure I know what you do, do. Like, what is the sort of the nature of your involvement or at least awareness of the campaign? How often are the two of you talking? What kind of input can you give? She spent a quarter century being a, sort of, contributor to your political career. Now the shoe is on the other foot. What do you do? Well, first of all, I bend over backwards not to get too involved in it. Sometimes a week or 10 days will go by, and I will not talk to the people that are running the campaign. But obviously, I talk to her every day, usually more than once a day. And I ask her how it is going, what she did. We discuss it, talk about her day, talk about how it is unfolding. I give her my best thoughts. And then if they ask me to come to a meeting and sit and listen, I do it. But it is no there is no organized part to it, except that we talk every day, and we talk about it. Were you an important voice in having her hire Mark Penn, not just as the pollster, but also helping run the media strategy?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 870, "text": "At one point there was an expectation, like, David Axelrod in Chicago was, you know, almost had that job. And some people attributed that to you, saying you thought that was really important because he had sort of the right formula down for Democrats to get elected. Well, I do think that, and I have a high regard for him. Axelrod helped me in '92 and has done things for us since then. And it seemed to me that she got the best of both worlds, because Axelrod works with the New York Democratic Party and does their party thing. She came to me and she said, What do you think about this? And I said, It sounds good to me. She thought it through because she wanted to find a way to have both of them involved, and because of our relationship with Mark over the years, she felt very close to him. I think that there are a lot of good people, pollsters and political strategists, but it is important to have someone that you feel really comfortable with. And he basically Mark has basically been a part of our whole kind of New Democrat movement. And I think she just felt a high comfort level with him. The call you made to the Daily News was one thing. I did not know if that was you sort of acting sort of impulsively, as a husband who was angry about that; or whether that was you saying, Look, this is potentially a problem. I better see if I can help blunt that as a political matter. What was that about?  Most people knew it was hokum. But I think it hurt her for a few days only because it happened fortuitously fortuitously for her adversaries right at the opening of the Middle East peace talks, when anxiety was very high in the Jewish community. So I think that I may have been in error. But what actually I just wanted to make sure that since they were working the story, and I knew Mort Zuckerman and Michael Kramer quite well, and that since I had been injected into the story, that I had a very clear memory of it, and I wanted to know what did and did not happen and what the whole background was. And so I told him. But you know, by and large, I try to stay out of it. He is got moxie. Senator Moynihan was really angry when he was used and said what he thought about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 871, "text": "But I figure the voters of New York are smart enough to figure out that I am for her and not him. But I have not been harshly partisan so, you know, Tom DeLay could do the same thing because there is one issue that Tom DeLay and I really agree on, and I bragged on him. He came to the White House, and I bragged on him. I think that is what we ought to do. I think we can argue with each other in elections without demonizing each other, and I think when they do that, they are wrong. But I think the voters are smart enough to figure that out without my help. You mentioned the Whitewater thing a little earlier, which leads to a question I wanted to ask about. Remember in September '98, when you spoke to your Cabinet, and many of them afterwards spoke to us? They said that you had said you had been you realized, had been angry for many days of your Presidency. And I remember that struck me quite a lot, because, you know, to cover you, you do not seem most of the time like an angry person or somebody filled with. I am not by nature an angry person. So I was sort of astonished to learn that description. I work on it all the time. But I think that this whole Whitewater business will be looked upon by any rational observer in history as an absurd episode in American history which did not amount to a hill of beans if there had been any special council law on the books at the time it came up, it would not have triggered a special council and that the coverage of it as if it were serious required people essentially to suspend all ordinary notions of proof and common sense. That is what I really believe. And as a consequence, scores of innocent people got hurt. A lot of people got charged with criminal offenses, simply because they refused to lie, and it did a lot of damage to our political system for no good end. And I think it will be viewed as an absurd aberration in American history. I felt very badly about it. I felt very badly about the way everybody involved was treated about it. Terry McAuliffe and other people who are friends of yours I was out in Arkansas last week and saw David Leopoulous and Jim Blair, everybody I do not know him well. Did he tell you how he did in his tennis tournament? He told me he was playing that weekend. Oh, so you saw him right before?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 872, "text": "Yes, because I have not talked to him since then. And I was reluctant to see him. I went out to dinner with him and his daughter. The one that lives here, in Maryland. She made millions of dollars and now spends all her time she spends all her time tutoring innercity kids in math. She is only a year or two older than me and she is All of his kids are wizards. They are all in computers somewhere or another. One of them has a Ph.D. in philosophy, but she does all the data processing for a big hospital network in Chicago. And the other one works in Texas, his son. He showed me his art, Peruvian art collection. Anyway, everybody is sort of the mind that you seem more relaxed, sort of more at peace than you have previously. In a funny way, I think I am. And I think part of it is, when you go through any difficult period, it either breaks you or makes you better. I just wake up every day with this enormous feeling of gratitude. I am grateful to my wife and to my daughter. I have got my family back. I am grateful to the people who work with me, who stuck with me. And I am enormously grateful to the American people for continuing to support what I was trying to do for them. To me, every day is a gift now. And one of the things that I am doing, that I have to work on, frankly I will make a little confession. The only thing that I am feeling about this last year is that I just want to keep working. And when Hillary is gone, particularly, in New York, you know, I go to bed with a pile of stuff that I want to do, and I just read and read and read and read. It does seem like you are in a sprint, you know, traveling here, fundraiser tonight, fly to Japan and then back, land here today, down to Charlottesville. Look, I have got 6 months to go or whatever. I am just going to race to the finish line. Is that what it is about? And also, I think of it in a different way. I think, you know, I do not have a campaign to do. I do not have to live with those pressures.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 873, "text": "And if there is something out there to be done that is good for my country or that I think is the right thing to do, even if it puts a big strain on me physically, I know that I will not be under the kind of stress that I would be in if I were trying to manage a campaign and manage the Presidency; and I ought to resolve down in favor of making the effort. Because I ought to do everything I can for America as ENTITY that I can do and still function at a high level, and I can rest starting at noon on January 20th. And that is what I intend to do. We are all going to a rest home together. You know how the ENTITY gets to take one last ride on Air Force One, and you wave to everybody, on the helicopter, and then you get on Air Force One, and you wave to everybody? I am thinking of loading the whole White House staff and the whole Cabinet on and going to Bermuda. How much progress have you made in figuring out to me, one of the big mysteries of the Clinton year, which is, you are a ENTITY, not a leftwing President I think your basic instinct is to try to get along with people and yet, you have this intense antagonism that you excite on the right? Do you have a theory on it? That is, I have not been but I think there are two or three reasons for it. And I guess I should start with a little humility. You cannot be liked by everybody. You know, my favorite story that I tell at least 10 times a year is about the guy that is walking along the edge of the Grand Canyon, and he slips. And He says, Son, there is just something about you I do not like. So you have got to allow for that. But I think, first of all, I have some insight into this because I was a Governor for a dozen years, so I knew all these guys. I knew the people that were engineering the campaign in '91 on. I think, first and overwhelmingly, you have to understand that basically the Republicans believed that they had made a marriage between the establishment Republicans and the far right, the religious right, and other ultraconservative elements like the NRA and all those folks.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 874, "text": "And they thought that that coalition, particularly when it came back and gave President Bush a resounding victory over Governor Dukakis, they basically believed that they would always beat Democrats, that they would never lose the White House until a third party came along. That is what they believed. They thought they had found a formula and that they would put us in a certain box, and we would be there, and they would make us, in the inimitable words of Newt Gingrich, the enemy of normal Americans, and it would always work. I think one of the problems that their party had was they developed a sense of entitlement to the White House. They railed against entitlements, but they thought they had an entitlement to govern, and I think it caused them a lot of trouble. You have got to give Gingrich some credit. They do not want to anymore, but the truth is that he figured out that if they came back in '94, before people felt better about what we did with the economy or what we did with crime or whether they saw any progress on welfare, with a specific plan that could both mobilize their right and hold their establishment, Republicans, they could make some gains. And what we did in '96 and '98 is, we came back with better plans and better ideas. But a great debate was joined in America about the future of the country, and we were winning it. So I think that but they got back in the game, and they stayed in the game, even though what we did in '98 was truly historic, what the Democrats did and I give Gephardt and Daschle a lot of credit for it and what our people do, because we had a program, and we ran on it. And we said, We are interested in what we can do for you, not what we can do for ourselves. So I think part of it was they secondly, what were their options? If they knew the American people agreed with my political philosophy more than theirs, if they knew the American people agreed with the specifics I was advocating more than theirs, then what was left? And they never stopped, not from '91 through the '92 campaign. Then they just started the day after I took my hand off the Bible taking the oath of office; they kept on going. That is, they succeeded in hurting me but not helping themselves. So now they are in a different place now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 875, "text": "They are trying to change their image and their rhetoric. But to be fair, too, I think that there are a lot of the whole movement of the Republican Party, even beginning with President Nixon and the Silent Majority campaign, to what President Reagan said, right up to the present day, was based on a certain critique of the sixties, and what the Democrats were. You know, our notion of inclusiveness was, to them, accepting things that even now, the leadership, we cannot get them to embrace the hate crimes bill because it includes gays and the whole idea of opposing the Vietnam war and all that. And I think they thought Ithink a lot of them genuinely felt that I represented a lot of things in the culture that they did not like. I think a lot of them did not like that. Have you figured out I mean, I think it is fair to say you had a certain amount of scratchiness in your press relations over the 8 years. Is that your view of it? And I have got a theory about why that is, but I think if you leave Whitewater aside, because I know you have very specific grievances about that, we have talked about that modern political journalism makes its business sort of first and foremost to go to what are motives behind what somebody says. And I think that kind of reporting felt like whenever your motives are questioned or not taken at face value bugs you a lot. It used to bug me a lot. It does not bug me so much anymore. That is, I do not make a big habit of questioning the motives of people who are on the other side of arguments from me. And I have learned enough from my own mistakes in life and also from misjudging other people to know that an analysis based solely on what other people's motives are you need to try to understand them. But in the end, what matters in public life is what is done and does it advance the American people's does it advance the ideals of our country, the values of our country, the interest of our people? Also, I did feel that, in a certain way, I got a little more of that than most, maybe because I was the first person of my generation to win the Presidency, and maybe because I was, in the stirring phrase of my predecessor, just the Governor of a small southern State, not really known to a lot of people, and also the fact that I had basically carried this New Democrat DLC banner.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 876, "text": "And there was, I think, a lot of suspicion to that, because there was a certain paradigm, I think, for reporters about, Here is what the Republicans are. And I think when you challenge that paradigm, it was easy to say, Well, that is just a political stratagem. But out there in the country, I do not think those paradigms ever worked very well. I was talking to Dirk Kempthorne today, who is a Republican I admire a lot and like very much and a man I worked with on a couple of fairly important pieces of legislation when he was a Senator. And he said he really liked being Governor, and I told him he would. He asked me one time if I thought he should run for Governor. I told him I thought he would like it very well because he is a guy who thinks, and you know, we are really different on a lot of issues. If I were running against him, it would be an honor. I admire him. I like him. We could have an honest difference. And then we could make a lot of agreements and do a lot of things. That is the politics that I grew up with. And to be fair, I also grew up with a lot of the other, of the race issue in the South; there was always a lot of politics and personal destruction around that. So I was not unfamiliar with the kind of things I had been exposed to. But I think, to me, motive analysis at least has to be undertaken with a certain amount of humility. That reminds me of a question I have got. What is your view of Arkansas? Are you going to go home there, at least part of the time? Skip Rutherford showed me the site where the library is going to be. I had not been there in a while, that whole new shopping center there. That is an important part of my life, that whole area, because it is very close to the old State House, where I declared for ENTITY and had my two election nights, a building that I basically restored to its historic that was one of my projects as Governor, to take it back to the way it was between right when it was opened in 1836, the year of our statehood. When you look at Arkansas, it is a place with all this sort of sentimental attractions for you. And a lot of your friends are still there. I would think, on the one hand, it is a very positive association.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 877, "text": "And it is also the place where it seems like somebody is always crawling out from under some rock. You have got this disbarment thing. Jim said, If I were him, if they do that, I'd pull the damn library out of there and put it in Georgetown. A lot of my friends in Arkansas think that. But see, I do not have a look, I always had adversaries in Arkansas. And when Dale Bumpers and David Pryor and I retire, they got the upper hand, because a lot of the people that we thought were coming along behind us, like David Matthews, whom you know, decided for personal reasons not to run for Governor, not to run for Senator. And Arkansas, I believe, was hurt by the fact that the Arkansas Gazette could not go on. It was one of the great progressive newspapers in America for decades. And it got in this newspaper war, and the man that won is a hardcore conservative Republican with a longstanding opposition to me. They basically intimidated all the good people off that committee. Blair probably told you what happened. But I think it is a great mistake to analyze a situation only in terms of the adverse factors. I mean, look at this this State, they elected me Governor five times; they stuck with me through thick and thin; they voted for me twice, even after the Democratic Party had lost a lot of its leverage there, and the main newspaper was in a tirade daily against us. And if it were not for them, I would not be sitting here talking to you today. We have got this very progressive my Congressman, Vic Snyder, is a great, progressive Congressman. He is one of the few people in Congress he is a lawyer and a doctor, a very interesting fellow. Marion Berry, who worked in the White House for me, is our other Democratic Congressman from there. I think we have got an excellent chance to win a third seat down there. You know, you cannot let the politics get but all these rocks that turn out, you have got to understand the kind of people that they have turned up. I made enemies in my years in politics, and there are people who are disappointed. What they learned was, they got a certain set of signals here. People will assume it is true, unless you can disprove it. And you will be rewarded for that sort of stuff. So I think that, with all of that, the great majority of the people there just hung in there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 878, "text": "I often get the sense at these fundraisers that you are you hear it when you are talking at these fundraisers. It is almost like, well, you wish you could make the argument or grab the Vice President or other Democrats by the lapels. This is the way to frame the argument. This is the way to frame the question. How often are you sort of befuddled by the inability of other Democrats to articulate the case the way you feel it should be articulated? Well, first of all, I think that in '96 and '98 we pretty well sang out of the same hymnal, and we did a very good job. As I said, I think you have to give Gephardt and Daschle enormous credit, and their colleagues, for what happened in '98. Only a few people understand the truly historic significance of that election. I mean, we could have lost six Senate seats and did not lose any. And it was the first time since 1822 that a President's party had won seats in the sixth year of a Presidency, in the House. And what I think has happened this year is, you know, we had a primary, a Presidential primary; then other things happened. And I think that one of the reasons I am really excited about the Lieberman selection is, I think what you will see now is a clear commitment to build on the future. We will be able to distill it in the congressional races around three or four issues. And then I think the Vice President and Lieberman will do a great job at the convention. I think my job is to try, in these fundraisers the reason I talk the way I do at these fundraisers is that all these people who come to our fundraisers know a lot of other people who do not come to them and who are not as political or maybe even moderate Republicans or whatever. And what I try to do, that I think I am in a unique position to do because I am not running, is to analyze the choice before the American people today in terms of what is happened and what is going to happen. The frustration you pick up in my voice is not what the others are not doing; it is what I think is the only risk for us in this election which I, by the way, if you have been talking to our people, you know I have always believed that Al Gore will be elected. I have always believed it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 879, "text": "I never stopped believing it when he was 18 or 20 points behind a year ago. I always believe it. I think he is easy to underestimate because he is a very serious man who does not think only about politics all the time. But if you look at that sort of bouncy, bouncy Gallup poll that is in the USA Today, today you know, 19 down, 2 down it shows you that the people are looking for a little meat here. That is the most encouraging thing I have seen, because the thing that I have been frustrated about is when times are really good and people feel good and nobody wants to bring them down, least of all me everybody has got other things going on in their lives. So the temptation, first of all, is to think, well, things are rocking along here, and this is not the biggest election I have ever had to face here, because things are going so well; and then to feel, well, because of the strategy adopted by Governor Bush and by the whole group, well, there is maybe not that much difference anyway, which reinforces that it may not be important, and it clouds everything up. What I want to do is to have people stay up but understand that what you do with all this prosperity is as big a decision as what we had to in '92 and maybe more difficult because you have to create something. What is it you want America to look like in 10 years? You actually have the ability to do it now. It is not like you have just got to turn the ship of state around. What do you want to do? So I think that I am in a unique position to sort of talk to the American people about it like that, and that is what I do at these fundraisers. I do not want the Democrats to be in a position of personally attacking the Republicans. I do not want us to get in the position that the other guys have been in for so much the last 8 years. I do not think we should say bad things about them. I think we should posit that they are patriots, that they love their country; they love their families; and they can do what they think is right. But we should not be fuzzyheaded here that there are not profound differences that will not have profound consequences for how we live and how we go into the future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 880, "text": "And I believe that, after we have our chance at the convention and then we will have the debates unfold, I think that we will have some clarity of choice, and then we will see what happens. When young people come to me and say they want to run for office, what should they do, I always give them two pieces of advice. Number one, you have got to have a reason that is bigger than yourself for wanting this job, and you have got to be able to tell people what it is in fairly short order. On election day, everybody who votes against you will know exactly what they are doing. Because if everybody who votes against you knows what they are doing, then you do not have any gripe if you lose. Now, if everybody that votes against us this time, votes against the Vice President and Joe Lieberman, knows what they are doing, we will have a majority of the vote. Can I ask a one-sentence answer, or will I be in the doghouse? Do you think a strong year, finishing up 2000 in a sprint, can that cleanse the mistakes of 1998 to some degree? And you do not view it that way? For one thing, I think that the only thing that can cleanse a mistake, ever, is an apology and an atonement. And I think that my to the extent that the promise I made to the American people to work like crazy for them every day I was President is a part of that, I think that the answer to your question may be yes. They know that I did something I should not have done, and I apologized for it. But I have tried to atone for it both in a deeply personal way with my family and my coworkers and friends but also in a larger sense by serving the American people. And I think they have long since been a framework of putting it behind and of looking to the future and seeing whether what I am doing makes sense for them and their families and their future. But it is, for me I have felt a renewed sense of rededication to the business that I have been elected to perform because they stuck with me, and it is something I will never forget and always be grateful for.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharristhewashingtonpost", "title": "Interview With John Harris of the Washington Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harris-the-washington-post", "publication_date": "08-08-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 881, "text": "ENTITY, can you hear me? Can you hear me? This is ENTITY, and welcome to Cleveland. Thank you, ENTITY, it is nice to hear your voice. Now, let us clear up a matter here of this budget memo. This story broke yesterday in the Washington Post, and your reaction to it came on the West Coast yesterday. And some people in Cleveland may not be caught up on it, but apparently there was a budget memo that was leaked to the Washington Post indicating that one of your administration's options in the future might be a reduction in Social Security benefit COLA's and a raising of some taxes. What is the straight story on that? The straight story is that that was not an options memo for us, it was a memo which simply cataloged all the things that we might be confronted with over the next couple of years by this commission on entitlements that is meeting, this bipartisan commission, as well as if the Republicans make substantial gains in the Congress and try to implement their Contract With America. big tax cuts for the wealthy, and they have promised to balance the budget while cutting taxes to the wealthy and increasing defense and increasing Star Wars again. Our calculations indicate that it would require a 30 percent cost cut in everything else. So you are going to have exploding deficits, Medicare cuts, and other things if this contract goes in. This memo was simply designed to show us the kind of problems we were going to confront over the next few years if those sort of things came up. The truth is, we are doing a good job right now in bringing the deficit down. Today I am going to speak at the Cleveland City Club and talk about the deficit reduction. We brought it down from $290 billion-plus to $203 billion this year in 2 years. That is $100 billion less than it was projected to be when I took office. And we have done it by cutting the size of Government, by eliminating Government programs, by cutting others, while still being able to increase our investment in education and training and new technology. And that is what I want to keep doing, managing this thing in a very disciplined way to give us a smaller Government that does more. And if we do that, we can maintain our commitments to our senior citizens and do what we have to do to grow this economy. The main thing we cannot do is to throw our economy in a tailspin by going back to trickle-down economics.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchuckmeyerwwweradioclevelandohio", "title": "Interview With Chuck Meyer of WWWE Radio in Cleveland, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-meyer-wwwe-radio-cleveland-ohio", "publication_date": "24-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 882, "text": "ENTITY, I am looking at a political cartoon that appeared in the Cincinnati Enquirer the other day, and it is a couple sitting on their front porch and she says, I know I am mad at Clinton. And the whole question comes up here, while Ronald Reagan was the Teflon President and nothing stuck to him, everything is sticking to you. And you are getting blamed for just about everything going on in the country today, including the heartbreak of psoriasis. I think part of it is the skill of the Republican congressional leadership and the far right in this country in just continuing to keep the American people in a turmoil and obscuring the facts. I mean, what I have got to do is to spend more time communicating with the American people about what we have done and where we are going. Business failures have dropped by 24 percent; jobs are up. The economic plan that the Congress passed has given us 2 years of deficit reduction already for the first time in more than 20 years, and next year it'll go down again; it'll be the first time since Truman was President. Eleven times as many Ohio families got a tax cut as a tax rate increase under our economic plan, 509,000 families. The Family and Medical Leave Act that we passed gives 2 million families in this State opportunities for the working people to take a little time off when their babies are born or their parents are sick. That bill was something we supported that the Republican leadership opposed. The same is true of college loans for middle class kids, immunizing all the kids in this country under 2, things that will strengthen work and families. So I believe if the people of Ohio and the people of this country knew what we have done to empower working people, to increase our investments in education, to shrink the size of the Federal Government, shrink the deficit, and grow the economy, they'd be pretty well pleased with this administration. But if you look at the environment in which we have operated, which has been highly contentious, highly negative, and almost no opportunity to get through the positive achievements, it is not surprising. People can only act on what they know. But, ENTITY, do not you play into those hands sometimes yourself? For instance, the crime rate's been going down now for several years, and yet crime seems to be the number one issue in this campaign, if there is such a thing as a top issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchuckmeyerwwweradioclevelandohio", "title": "Interview With Chuck Meyer of WWWE Radio in Cleveland, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-meyer-wwwe-radio-cleveland-ohio", "publication_date": "24-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 883, "text": "We have a lot of politicians running around the country ready to throw everybody in jail, and yet the crime rate's going down. No, it is not a non-issue for a couple of reasons. The crime rate is going down in some categories in some places because we know that local police and community groups have figured out how to lower the crime rate with community policing and having neighbors work with law enforcement. We know that. But we also know that the crime rate is going up in two ways that are very troubling. First of all, it is going up among teenagers and people under 18. And secondly, the amount of random violence is going up among children under 18. And that is very disturbing to people, and it makes for a more insecure society. Now, what happens about whether people know the crime rate is going up or down is a function of what they see on their local and national news. How can you say we made our own problem? I gave the Congress a comprehensive crime bill, which the first time around both Republicans and Democrats voted for it, and the second time around all the Republicans bailed out and tried to make it a political issue-or most of the Republicans bailed out. Some of them stayed on and showed good citizenship. But that crime bill will increase police presence by 20 percent in the communities of this country. It offers strategies to help prevent crime, and it has much tougher punishment for seriously violent offenders. It makes a real start in the right direction. So if you look at what we have done here in the last 2 years, we have strengthened the economy, we have made a serious assault on crime, and we have done a lot of things for ordinary working people like the family leave bill, the middle class college loans, and things of that kind. But I think most people in Ohio support the Brady bill, support the crime bill, support the things we have done and regret the fact that it became a political football in Washington. ENTITY, we have had some calls this morning asking about health care. I know it was a big disappointment that it did not pass, and I read where the White House is gearing up for a more aggressive health care plan to pass next year. And yet, the other day I read where that 30-some-odd million people in this country who do not have health care has grown to nearly 40 million people now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchuckmeyerwwweradioclevelandohio", "title": "Interview With Chuck Meyer of WWWE Radio in Cleveland, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-meyer-wwwe-radio-cleveland-ohio", "publication_date": "24-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 884, "text": "I think these people want to know why health care did not pass and why the debate got so bogged down when this was clearly a top issue that Americans wanted and were willing to pay for 2 years ago. Well, it got bogged down because the people who are making a huge amount of money out of the system that we have spent a lot of money to terrify the people who do have health care today into thinking that if our bill passed it would make it worse and it would lead to more Government intervention in the health care system. And what we have got to do is to come back and find a way to demonstrate to the American people what we want to do is to protect the plans that they have now that they like, but to make sure we cover the people who do not have health insurance and we control the costs better. Every other country in the world with an advanced economy, every other wealthy country, spends between 9 and 10 percent of its income on health care to cover everybody. We spend 14 percent of our income, or another $240 billion, and we have almost 40 million people without insurance. Another million Americans in working families lost their health insurance last year. Well, the people that are making that extra $240 billion by and large do not want us to change. And they spent somewhere between $200 million and $300 million lobbying against our health care plan. Then again, the Republican congressional leadership operated on the theory that they could not permit any kind of health care to pass because it would be politically beneficial to the Democrats and to the administration. I wanted them to have half the credit. And we have just got to keep dealing with this. The health care problem is the main cause of the big Government deficit. It is a main source of insecurity for working people who have jobs. And we are going in reverse. We are the only major country where we are actually losing ground in providing coverage to people. So I am going to come back and try to find a way that the American people will support and will not be frightened by, to cover the people who do not have coverage, to protect the coverage of the people who do have coverage, and to slow the rate of cost increases. ENTITY, I'd like to ask you another political question. My 17-year-old daughter, Andrea, told me to pass along the message to you that she intends to vote for you in 1996 when she is allowed to vote in a Presidential election for the first time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchuckmeyerwwweradioclevelandohio", "title": "Interview With Chuck Meyer of WWWE Radio in Cleveland, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-meyer-wwwe-radio-cleveland-ohio", "publication_date": "24-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 885, "text": "The bad news is, why is not Tom Foley as excited about you as my daughter? Well, what are-Tom Foley has done a pretty good job. Well, he was not by your side in Seattle yesterday. He had a debate last night, and he was preparing for it, and he was doing exactly what he should've done. He was over in the part of the State where his district was, doing exactly what he should have done. And I think he-I would have been disappointed if he had come all the way over there and then turned around and gone back and taken away 3 or 4 hours from his debate preparation time. He is in a tough fight. He is been in tough fights consistently in his district for the last 15 or 20 years, and he is over there paying attention to the people of his district, which is what he ought to be doing. But there are Democrats around the country this year who do not want you to come and campaign for them. And you are reduced to helping get votes for Mario Cuomo and Ted Kennedy, and these guys should be winning easy reelection, should not they? I do not know why you would say that. It is very hard for any Governor to get elected to four terms, very, very difficult. And Governor Cuomo had a pretty close race 4 years ago. I think he is going to win, but it is a very combative environment in New York. And I was asked to come in there because it was a difficult case and because I think he is an important leader for our country and I hope he can be reelected. Senator Kennedy has been in office 30 years, and there is a big anti-incumbent feeling out in the country this year. I think he will be reelected because he is been willing to change, embrace new ideas, and take a different approach in the last few years. I think he is really become an instrument of a lot of the new ideas the American people would like to see adopted by the Congress, and I think that is why they will reelect him. But I do not think you should assume that because somebody is well known they will have an easy reelection. Sometimes that makes for a tough reelection, particularly given the harsh feelings people have about the Congress. I know that you have to go in a moment, but I wanted to ask you a quick question about Syria.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchuckmeyerwwweradioclevelandohio", "title": "Interview With Chuck Meyer of WWWE Radio in Cleveland, Ohio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-meyer-wwwe-radio-cleveland-ohio", "publication_date": "24-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 886, "text": "welcome to St. Louis, and thank you for making this your first stop. Our first question concerns a matter of major concern to the vast majority of Americans; that is, your personal safety. It is a frightening fact that a President of the United States would have to wear a bulletproof vest, and we wonder whether this is going to become standard hardware, standard issue from the White House for future American Presidents and yourself? We also wonder whether or not you feel that in the interest of national security, world security, you should modify your campaign style? Julius, let me say at the outset I do not think I should discuss whether I wear or do not wear--or whether I do something or do not do something that involves the security. The Secret Service makes recommendations. I feel an obligation to follow their recommendations. But to identify, Julius, what I am doing or why I am doing it, involving security, I think makes security that much more difficult. As to my desire to meet people when I come to either St. Louis or in New Hampshire, where I was yesterday, I feel it is important for the American people to have an opportunity to see firsthand, close-up, their ENTITY. In any job, you know, there is a risk of some kind. I feel that you have to balance or weigh the risks as to my own personal security against what is a very important aspect of our political life in America. It is helpful for me to meet with the people, shake hands with them, get their questions, and it is just as important for them to have me say hello or to answer their questions. So, as I put the alternatives or the contending arguments on the scales, it seems to me that what is good for the country overbalances anything else. We can see that your vest today, that we can see, matches your suit and is quite attractive. ENTITY, you seem to be doing more than just meeting the American people, though. You are actually campaigning at a breakneck speed, with the election still 14 months away. Why are you doing that? Are you afraid of Ronald Reagan as a possible rival? I'd like to ask you, also, if you think this is a wise use of your time when there are so many problems of government bearing on you? I will answer the last question first.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersstlouis", "title": "Interview With Reporters in St. Louis.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-st-louis", "publication_date": "12-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 887, "text": "I work a minimum of 12 hours a day, and usually it is 14, and the odd times that I take out to come to St. Louis, to New Hampshire, do not in any way whatsoever interfere with the conducting of White House business by me as President. I have an excellent staff. They prepare the options for me to make decisions. I have ample time to read and to study. So, when I come to St. Louis, or Kansas City, where I am going, or New Hampshire yesterday, it in no way whatsoever interferes with the responsibilities I have, which are the highest, of being President of the United States. Now, I do not consider coming to St. Louis a campaign effort. I did not go to New Hampshire yesterday for myself. I went there for the purpose of trying to elect a Republican candidate for the United States Senate. That was not for me, but for him or for our party's candidate. The aim and objective of coming here is to appear on this program, to attend a White House Conference, to help the Republican Party in Missouri and Kansas City. Dudman also asked you another question, and that is regarding Reagan and your possible fear of his candidacy. Julius, I like competition in the political arena. Governor Reagan has not announced as a candidate yet. He has indicated either personally or through one of this representatives that he may sometime in November. Governor Reagan was a fine Governor of the State of California. Until he announces his candidacy, I am assuming that I am the only Republican candidate, and I will welcome any competition. I love it. ENTITY, with the seeming inability of government to solve the Nation's critical problems--oil, energy, the economy, growing Federal spending--and the seeming preoccupation with intelligence probes and pay raises and recesses, what can be done to restore confidence, believability, and credibility in government? There are a number of things that I think can be helpful. There is not any one thing that will answer the perplexing problem that you have posed. I happen to believe that a ENTITY traveling around the country, meeting people, is one way. The alternative for a ENTITY is to sit in seclusion in the Oval Office. I do not think that adds to the credibility or improves or enhances the public impression of Washington.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersstlouis", "title": "Interview With Reporters in St. Louis.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-st-louis", "publication_date": "12-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 888, "text": "On the other hand, I think the Congress, which is an integral part of our Government, one of the three major branches, has an opportunity to also project itself and to improve its credibility by the work that it does, the answers that it gives, and its efforts to meet firsthand the American people. There are some substantive matters that have to be solved that would enhance the credibility of the Government as such. We are making slow progress but, I think, constructive progress, out of the recession. Employment has gone up by about 1.5 million in the last 5 months, even though the unemployment statistic is still too high. We are making headway in meeting the challenge of inflation. But as we move forward in meeting the challenge of our economy, that will enhance our Government's credibility with 214 million people. Also, energy must be solved, and this is probably the most frustrating domestic problem that I have faced. Having submitted a plan, a comprehensive program to make the United States invulnerable against foreign oil cartels in January, I hate to admit it, but the Congress has done nothing affirmative either on their plan--if they have one--or on my plan, which I submitted. I think the American people are frustrated in this area, and our credibility as a government is harmed. I still think we can do something here, but we have to achieve this improved credibility two ways--by people in Government appearing to be human and by having the Government do things affirmatively. ENTITY, the latest poll shows that Nelson Rockefeller is not doing too well in the form of popularity. I wonder if you'd give us some thoughts on the polls and how much faith you have in him and whether Rockefeller continues to go this way that he will not be your running mate the next time around? Of course, you recognize the final decision as for myself as the Republican candidate and the Vice-Presidential candidate will be made by the delegates to the Republican Convention. I am, of course, interested in the polls, both personally as well as concerning any other individual for President or VicePresident, but I do not think that should be the sole criteria. I believe that a candidate for President or Vice President must be either approved or disapproved on the job that is done. If a President does a good job, even though the immediate public opinion polls may not be favorable, I think the delegates ought to approve him, and the same for Vice President.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersstlouis", "title": "Interview With Reporters in St. Louis.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-st-louis", "publication_date": "12-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 889, "text": "Now, in the case of Nelson Rockefeller, I picked him because he had done a fine job in New York State. He has done far better as Vice President than I could possibly have expected. He has got a vast amount of experience. I think those attributes will be watched, and the delegates will respond to them at the Republican Convention. So, based on performance and expectations, I would assume that the delegates would probably nominate him. If I may interpret, as we so-called political experts do, that sounds sort of like an endorsement for the Vice President. Well, I certainly have to endorse the job he has done, no question about it. ENTITY, in your speech to the National Baptist Convention,1 you promise that economic and social equality will become a reality for black Americans. That is a rather easy surface promise to make to a group that represents some 5.5 million potential votes. In the first place, we are going to get the economy as a whole out of the recession, and we are on our way now to, I think, a substantially improved economic picture. In the process of that, the black American will also benefit, as all other Americans will. If we look back on the last 5 years, Julius, we find that more blacks have gone to college, more blacks are entering better paying jobs. We are doing our utmost to improve living conditions for all disadvantaged people, including blacks. We are seeking to enforce very vigorously the equal employment opportunity legislation. I appointed a friend of mine from Michigan, Lowell Perry, who you may or may not know, as the new Chairman of that very important Commission, and they are going to do a good job. So, through a combination of circumstances, the general improvement plus specific actions, I believe that blacks as a whole, particularly those in the lower end of the spectrum economically, will be the beneficiaries. ENTITY, I'd like to ask you a question about the Middle East. The United States, for the first time, is becoming directly involved there, and quite deeply, with the prospect of stationing technicians. Do not you owe it to the American people in these circumstances to make public every American commitment that is being made and every detail of the deal that the United States has helped bring about between Israel and Egypt?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersstlouis", "title": "Interview With Reporters in St. Louis.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-st-louis", "publication_date": "12-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 890, "text": "We have submitted all of the official documents to the two committees in the Congress--the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and the House Committee on International Relations--and Secretary Kissinger has testified to those two committees and the two Armed Services Committees. We are working out arrangements to give the documents that I mentioned plus the content of any other communications between me and the heads of state. of Egypt on the one hand and Israel on the other. Now, we have committed to give the content of those documents and those communications, but I do not think--it has never been done in the past--that a direct communication between a President and another head of state should be made public. I think that is adequate assurance to the American people. I would add, the commitment that we have made at the request of Egypt on the one hand and Israel on the other--they made them to us--authorizing up to 200 U.S. technicians, nonmilitary, in a U.N. buffer zone--all of the details concerning that part of the agreement will be made public. The sense of it will be filtered through selected Congressmen and Senators. Well, the exact words of our commitment of up to but not more than 200 American technicians will be made public, no question about that. I understand that, but things like the level of aid that is to be given to Israel and-- Well, no, no, I must correct the record there. When I submit the budget request for the total foreign aid program on a worldwide basis, I will submit the details of the request of economic and military aid for Israel just as I will do it in the case of Egypt. But that will all come as a part of the package for the total worldwide foreign aid program. ENTITY, it has been suggested that we use our grain for Soviet oil or for somebody's oil. You currently have someone working on that in the Soviet Union now, we are told. What kind of a deal do you see, sir? We have a high level group of negotiators under Assistant Secretary of State Robinson in Moscow now negotiating for a long-term purchase agreement by the Soviet Union up to, say, 5 years for American grain and other agricultural products. We feel that a long-term agreement with minimums and maximums is in the best interests of the farmer and the country, as well as our relations with the Soviet Union.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersstlouis", "title": "Interview With Reporters in St. Louis.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-st-louis", "publication_date": "12-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 891, "text": "Now, there are some very preliminary discussions going on concerning grain and oil, but they have not gone beyond very preliminary discussions. Have you reached some level of amounts when you talk in terms of oil? Have you set a figure or a number of barrel amount? We have no specifics, because these are preliminary discussions. The Soviet Union, we understand, does have a surplus of oil. We have a surplus of grain. So, at least we ought, in a very preliminary way, just discuss any alternatives, but we have not gone beyond that. Has any kind of barter arrangement--if the Soviet Union cannot supply the oil in exchange for grain, are you hoping that they will exert their influence over the Arabs who listen to them? I think there is a better way to exercise our influence with the Arab nations, and that is through the International Energy Agency, which was set up or promoted primarily by the United States about a year ago, where the basic industrial consuming nations have joined together to meet with the producing nations, OPEC, for example. We are negotiating directly with them. I think that has more potential than relying on the Soviet Union to help us with the Arab nations. Our relations with the Arab nations are good. I do not think we have to go through the Soviet Union in this case or any other case, as far as dealing with Arab nations. ENTITY, if Israel is expelled from the United Nations, would the United States withdraw, and can you foresee any circumstances that might prompt the U.S. to withdraw from the U.N.? I do not expect the United Nations to kick Israel out, and of course, the United States would vigorously protest and vote against any such effort on the part of any nation or nations. We believe that the prospects for that happening have subsided considerably, particularly since the agreement between Egypt on the one hand and Israel on the other. If we can continue to have momentum in the Middle East--which I think will continue--the prospects of Arab nations and other nonaligned nations trying to kick Israel out becomes less and less. In other words, the position of Israel in the United Nations becomes stronger as we keep momentum going for a solution, a long-term solution, to the problems in the Middle East. To answer your last question, I foresee no circumstances where the United States would leave the United Nations. It is good for us to be a part of that forum, to have an influence --", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersstlouis", "title": "Interview With Reporters in St. Louis.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-st-louis", "publication_date": "12-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 892, "text": "You know we have had problems there in the past. We have problems in other forums as well. I have always found the best way to win a game is to play it, not to sit on the sidelines. And the United States ought to be in the game in the United Nations to protect our interests. It is a lot better inside than sitting out doing nothing. Would it be in the interests of the United States to try to arrive at. a formula sometime so that North and South Vietnam could enter the United Nations? They were vetoed this time because of the connection with Korea. But is not it true that the United States continues to have a great interest in that part of the world, and is not there a danger that relations with North and South Vietnam can get into a deep freeze the way China and Cuba did for so many years, to nobody's advantage? We believe in the universality of the United Nations. We feel that it is in the interest of the world as a whole to have all nations that want to become a part of the United Nations be members, but the effort of North and South Vietnam to get in was predicated on their coming in alone. We felt if North and South Vietnam were to be a part of the United Nations, South Korea, that has had its application in to be a member for a good many years, also ought to be included. You cannot be selective on who or what nation should be a part of the United Nations. I presume, based on our overall interest in matters involving Southeast Asia, that it is conceivable under certain circumstances that our relations with North and South Vietnam will improve, but a lot has to happen. For example, North Vietnam continues to refuse to give us information concerning the MIA's, and they try to bribe us by saying, We will give you information about MIA's if you will let us in the United Nations. Well, North Vietnam agreed in January of 1973 to give us information, to give us access to North Vietnam to find the MIA's, and they have not lived up to it. So, how can we trust them? They have got a lot of things to do before we are going to be very receptive to their participation. ENTITY, busing is a subject and a practice that is distasteful to a large segment of the American population, both black and white. And is there any alternative that you see?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersstlouis", "title": "Interview With Reporters in St. Louis.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-st-louis", "publication_date": "12-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 893, "text": "I think we have to decide in the first place what we are really trying to do by busing before you discuss whether it is good or bad. All of us-white, black, every American, in my opinion--wants quality education. Now, the Court decided in 1954 that separate but equal schools were unconstitutional, and the courts have decided that busing is one way to try and desegregate on the one hand and perhaps improve education on the other. Many of those decisions have raised great problems in many, many localities-Louisville and Boston being the most prominent at the present time. Discussing those two communities, let me very strongly emphasize the Court has decided something. That is the law of the land. As far as my Administration is concerned, the law of the land will be upheld, and we are upholding it. But then I think I have the right to give what I think is a better answer to the achievement of quality education, which is what we all seek. I think that quality education can be enhanced by better school facilities, lower pupil-teacher ratios, the improvement of the neighborhood, as such. Those are better answers, in my judgment, than busing under a court order. Quality education can be achieved by more than one method. I was reading in the Washington Post this morning a column by one of the outstanding black columnists, Raspberry. And Raspberry has come to the conclusion that court-ordered forced busing is not the way to achieve quality education for blacks or whites in a major metropolitan area. That is a very significant decision by Raspberry, who I think Dudman, for example, highly respects. In Boston and Louisville, where the court has ordered busing, how well do you think the people of those two cities have conducted themselves in bringing about court-ordered exchanges of black and white students? I am thinking about this fall. Are you reasonably well satisfied with the way things have happened or not? I hope that that attitude can prevail in the months ahead as the police involvement and the Federal marshal involvement becomes less and less. I am always an optimist, even though I disagree with the method by which they are trying to achieve quality education. Well, are you counseling the people of those two cities to cooperate with the courts, or are you encouraging them to maintain their strong feelings in some cases that this is an improper solution? Last year I did a televised tape urging the people of Boston.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersstlouis", "title": "Interview With Reporters in St. Louis.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-st-louis", "publication_date": "12-09-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 900, "text": "ENTITY, Secretary Cheney was saying on the weekend that he might envision deeper troop cuts after the CAFE One, as sort of CAFE Two. Now, do you think that such talk is premature, or have you calculated that you may need further troop cuts in order to avoid raising taxes next year? Well, there are pressures on the defense budget; and Dick Cheney, a man who has always believed in a strong defense, still believes in a strong defense. But for those who follow our budget process, they know that defense has been hit 5 years in a row, and so, it is appropriate that any Secretary of Defense encourage active reviews. What I want to do is get on with the -- you call it CAFE One -- and get those conventional forces reduced in accordance with that and do it on schedule, and then see where we go. And I am not suggesting that forevermore we will have the same levels of troops anywhere -- standing army, Europe, Korea, anywhere else. But we are certainly not doing to take any unilateral action. We do what we do in conjunction with allies. We will be perfectly prepared to think anew -- always -- because we are living in fascinating, changing times. The Secretary of Defense, in conducting a review, is doing what I want him to do. But there will be no what I would call premature decisions in terms of unilateral cuts. Sometimes we accept cuts in the congressional process that we do not want. We have got to digest those cuts. But I think Dick is, along with the Joint Chiefs, are looking forward, looking ahead, trying to figure out what levels are appropriate under various scenarios with international tensions or lack of tensions. So, I think we are on the right track on this. But I think people are reading, in some places, in some cases, too much into the story that he has ordered this review. At least I did not get all excited when I saw it, because I know what he is doing. Could you tell us what is your agenda for the summit meeting in Malta? You are quoted as saying that that would be an historic opportunity to enhance the peace. How do you think you will be able to achieve that? And lastly, would it be correct to say that your Soviet policy is firmly in place now? And if so, what are the basic premises of your Soviet policy? Arms control will be taken up in the summit that has already been set, and that summit will drive the arms control agenda.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 901, "text": "I know the third part. You were quoted as saying that it will be an historic opportunity to enhance peace. What I want to do is be sure we do not miss an opportunity. I want to be sure we do not have any misunderstandings -- Mr. Gorbachev conducting himself in one way and our not understanding the underpinnings of his thinking. It is not a meeting -- because I do not like using the word summit. Summit has the connotation, in our country anyway, of mainly agreements on arms control. And we are not looking forward to crossing t's and dotting i's at this meeting. I hope he does not , but maybe we can use your newspaper to make clear to him that we are not expecting that. But there is enough background of understanding here on the meeting that I do not think there is that expectation. But look, there is so much rapid change going on in Eastern Europe that I am very anxious to hear from him what his thoughts are about the future of Europe. a Europe whole and free. They know my convictions about self-determination. They know our conviction that democracy and freedom are on the move. And I will have a chance to reiterate that and to give him my conception, my ideas of the future. In terms of U.S.-Soviet relations, they are based at this juncture on our desire to see perestroika succeed. And I think there may have been some misunderstanding on the part of some of our Soviet friends about that. I think they wondered from various statements or the time it took for us to formulate an arms control agreement, a proposal, or maybe even to set the date of a summit, or maybe even to make the proposal -- which was mine -- that we meet in Malta. Certain elements in your country want to see perestroika fail, or wonder if perestroika will succeed. There are no serious elements in the United States that want to see perestroika fail. I am not sure that he understood that this new administration, taking our time prudently to review our defense posture and all, really believed that. But so, you ask about the relationship. that freedom and democracy are best, the right to self-determination is the best, that people have the right to choose their leaders is the best. And so, I cannot mask that. We still have some differences of system.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 902, "text": "But our policy is based on respect for what he is trying to do and for our interest in seeing perestroika succeed, because if it succeeds, the world will be a lot more peaceful for everybody, it seems to me. And a lot of us can, indeed, have more of our product going into helping people instead into arms. In view of the changes in the Eastern bloc, would it be possible and in the interest of the United States to limit military expenses and to increase economic assistance for our countries in order to help us with reforms? Well, take Poland, a country with which you are quite familiar. We will help, I might say, in concert with our allies, too. And I have been talking to most, and I think you will find a common interest in seeing the economic success. But if your question is can we make unilateral defense cuts in order to put more money into the development of Eastern Europe, the answer is no. I am not going to recommend unilateral defense cuts. I will not do that without -- not even unilateral -- but we will discuss the legitimate defense needs, given the changes in the world, with our allies. And I think every country -- the emerging democracy of Poland, and I say that because they have had free elections; those that want to be democratic and will have free elections. Other countries in Eastern Europe -- Hungary coming up -- who knows what will happen in the GDR in terms of elections. All those countries have a stake in NATO being a respected alliance. And it becomes less of a respected alliance if we make unilateral cuts, unless the changes around the world on other forces take place. I mean, the Soviet Union is spending, we reckon, about 17 percent of the gross national product on defense. It is an enormous burden on an economy that is having difficulty anyway. So, what we have got to do is have good discussions with the Soviet leaders and try to show that a lessened defense will not hurt their security, because we have no intention of raiding the Soviet Union, going after them. And once we convince them that the West does not threaten them, then I think you can see a reallocation of resources worldwide from arms into helping others. Can I get to the beginning of this story about the meeting and ask you who thought of Malta and the Mediterranean first? It takes two to tango. You have heard that expression.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 903, "text": "And we went back and forth with several ideas, always -- and I say this without any reservation -- in a spirit of total frankness and total accommodation. But I think he would tell you that, in terms of logistics, that I was the one that proposed Malta itself. How about this as a suggestion? He made a couple of other suggestions that, for timing purposes, did not work out. So, in telling you that -- you come from Malta -- I'd love to take full credit because I think it will be good. I think we made the suggestion, but I think it was a collegial decision. It was a decision that clearly the Soviet side was enthusiastic about, and it was driven somewhat by Mr. Gorbachev's own logistical problems. He will be in Italy, and so, it made inordinate good sense. But in any event, I think both sides are very pleased about it. As I am the only Asian journalist present today, so I have to ask you this. The Pentagon published a report on the Soviet military at the end of September, saying that in Asian regions there are no indications so far of the lessening of Soviet military strength. Have you seen since then any indication of the lessening of that strength? And also, are you talking about -- with Mr. Gorbachev -- about new Asian security situation, including the Korean Peninsula problem and our dispute with the Soviet Union on the Northern Territory? No, I see no reduction in defenses. Now, I want to check with our experts on that. I have not seen them, but I do not want to misrepresent. Has the Soviet Union, since that Pentagon report came out in the fall, to our knowledge reduced defense spending -- -- Well, they have cut back some on conventional forces and, therefore, probably on spending. We see very little evidence on strategic forces that they have reduced their expenditures. In terms of the rest of your question, this meeting is so open that we can discuss anything we want. And clearly, the United States considers itself a power with tremendous interests in the Pacific. And I would have absolutely no inhibitions about discussing the lay of the land in Asia, and your other question related to the Korean Peninsula. And again, I will be prepared to discuss our policy as it relates to the Korean Peninsula with Mr. Gorbachev.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 904, "text": "To the degree we can get understanding on that question, although I am not sure we differ too much -- why, that would be good. But again, no agenda item -- a preparation to discuss not just the changes in Eastern Europe that I referred to as one of the things that spurred our interest in a meeting at this time -- the rapidity of the change -- but, indeed, the entire globe. There is a lot of regional problems that we have with the Soviets. And we have been frank about it. They know of our concerns about Cuba, their relationship in Cuba -- one of three people in this hemisphere that is swimming against the democratic tide -- Nicaragua the same thing. And so, we will discuss this, and I expect Mr. Gorbachev will be very open to discussion on this. We are not going to just discuss things that are of more interest to the Soviets. And this is of prime interest to us. So, I am glad you raised it because we have not diminished our interests in Asia, given all this change in Eastern Europe. I will tell you one little anecdote, and then we will go to the next one. All this talk of yours about Eastern Europe, does this show -- he put it more negatively towards me, he said: Should not this lead us to believe that you are showing less interest in your own hemisphere here? So, I would say that I would like to feel that we can discuss problems anywhere in the world. I would be very anxious to discuss all these things. That is not what this meeting is about. It would be a mistake to do that. ENTITY, the most recent developments in Eastern Europe have taken people by surprise -- I guess even your administration. And some people in Western Europe are very worried about it. And the big question is how fast the process of integration of Western Europe should happen. Do you think that the idea of having the monetary fiscal integration should move forward as soon as possible as a guarantee of forming a strong bloc on the other side? In the first place, I do not think many people in Western Europe worry about the fact that the change has taken place. Some might worry about where it leads and whether some unforeseen event will happen that will reverse this very salutary change. We are very pleased this is taking place, but we are a little uncertain as to what is next.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 905, "text": "And that is one of the reasons we as the United States are trying to not listen to those that are out there encouraging flamboyant action but to rather respond prudently, as a great power must, to the change. And you know and I know that I have been criticized for timidity. I discount that by about 99 percent as pure, gut, American politics. But nevertheless, some are saying that. And what they mean -- some have wanted me to go jump up on top of the Berlin Wall. Well, I never heard such a stupid idea. I mean, what good would it do for an ENTITY to be posturing while Germans were flowing back and forth by the millions? It makes no sense at all. So, we are conducting ourselves in a prudent way. In terms of what comes next or what role we can have, the only thing I can speak to in managing the change is to encourage a Europe that is whole and free, self-determination when it comes to elections for people, openness, a glasnost that spreads -- give Mr. Gorbachev credit for igniting the fire -- it spreads to countries that have been denied glasnost, openness, for years; and do it in a way not to incite violence, not to do something that will cause repression. And so, I come back to the word of prudent -- managing of what we do and what we say -- and resist flamboyant actions. Things are moving our way. And I speak in response to your question -- the West. What do you mean by our way ? They are moving our way. And so, we do not need to be out there trying to micromanage the desire for change in these Eastern European countries. We want to be ready and available -- this gentleman suggested -- in terms of trying to help financially, if we do not go broke in the process. And we are going to do our best. And we have limited resources now -- it is a great country -- but we want to help. It takes time because you have got to have fiscal reforms before you can have the confidence that would lead to total fiscal and monetary reunion, but it is coming. Poland is trying hard, for example. ENTITY, as you know probably, that a lot of Hungarians are urging that Hungary should declare neutrality.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 906, "text": "But others say that it requires more than a Hungarian decision because it should be accepted and guaranteed by others, especially by great powers. So I wonder, sir, whether the United States would be ready to accept and guarantee Hungary's neutrality, and would you even support this idea at the forthcoming summit? Every country has sovereign rights; and every country, the way we look at it, has a right to determine its own fortunes. And that will be the guiding principle behind the U.S. I think it would be a mistake for the U.S. to try to dictate to a country what course it ought to follow in relationship to the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet Union, or anybody else. I do not think that is the role of the United States. Here is what we think is best -- democracy, freedom, free elections, freedom of the press, freedom of worship. This is what we believe. We have always believed it. Keep advocating it, but I do not think it would be a productive role for the U.S. to try to micromanage the change that is taking place in Hungary. That is a matter for the Hungarian people. But will you accept if Hungary would declare its neutrality? Well, one thing I learned to do is to not answer a hypothetical question that might position me in terms of favoring one course or another. But you can rest assured that the more countries that are free, reform their economies, want to have the very freedoms I talked about -- to the degree they want good relations with the United States, that makes it a lot easier for us, given the constraints in our laws for countries that are not willing to do that. ENTITY, what do you say to people in France and Great Britain who are against a German reunification? That is a matter for the German people to decide. And there are some that worry about it. I understand that Mr. Gorbachev has some understandable constraints, because he looks at borders, he looks at history -- he is concerned. This is 1989. And we can learn from history, but we also can look to the future. Let this matter be determined by the people in Germany. And if that determination is made, there will be all kinds of representation that this is not by the parties, that this has no reason to threaten anybody else or change borders or anything of that nature. So, I think it really is better at this juncture to be in that broad posture, which we have always had.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 907, "text": "This is a matter for the German people. Let this evolution take care of the question -- that is our role. With the Thousand Points of Light beginning to shine in Eastern Europe now, what is the future role of NATO? And should we recast it according to the new political realities, or should it just remain as it is for awhile? Which -- repeat it again. A Thousand Points of Light are shining, and we see -- -- Well, they are beginning to shine in Eastern Europe, obviously, so the role of NATO probably has to take on another cast. Well, I see the role of NATO as an alliance continuing. As I have tried to indicate here, levels of military involvement have a way of being negotiated, have a way of changing from time to time. But NATO has a rubric under which you can discuss economic conditions. So, the Western alliance threatens no one. It is not a threat to anyone. And I do not see its obsolescence. I do not predict, if that is the question, an obsolescence of this. You might see under different circumstances different kinds of mission. But I will approach this meeting with Mr. Gorbachev that this alliance is very, very vibrant. As the ENTITY, I owe my alliance partners total consultation, and I do not really see that changing in the short-term future. But just to follow, I guess, in the longer run, how do Europe's great alliances evolve? Ten years out, do you still see NATO and the Warsaw Pact right against each other? Listen, I cannot see 10 days out, and I do not think you can. How can I predict what the conditions are going to be? Well, I really do not want to go beyond where events have us right now because I think if I made a prediction on NATO, then you'd say how do you get there? What are the steps that get you there? And I do not want to do that. So, I do not do that. I do not see any factor emerging that would diminish the friendships and the associations between these Western countries because we are bound by common values. It is our values that bind us. And then, we have common military interests. Fine -- we do -- but I really cannot predict that for you because I cannot see it that clearly.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 908, "text": "So, what we do is move down this path in a way where we make clear that our resolve to be a strong NATO partner is known to everybody and that we look for opportunities that might suggest the kind of change that I think a lot of our NATO partners would like to see -- less tensions with neighbors in Eastern Europe and all of that. But I really want to stop short of predicting what it might be like 10 years out, although it is a very good question, and I think a lot of thinking is going on about that, a lot of thinking by our best people here, under different scenarios. But we are at a very delicate time now. And I think what I had better do is address myself to the present and the near-term future. And that is why I think this meeting with Mr. Gorbachev is going to be very interesting. Has that thinking increased since you have planned this summit? I mean, it was initially just sort of get to know you, get acquainted. Yes, because the genesis came before the rapidity of the change in Eastern Europe. I will tell you one of the things that stimulated my interest was my visit to Poland and to Hungary. And then I sat with our NATO partners. I think I asked a couple of them do you think it would be a good idea -- I was not going to say a summit meeting -- but do you think it would be a good idea to have this? And you know, what we have picked up since then was keen interest from a lot of countries that are not in NATO or are in the Warsaw Pact or the Soviet Union. And some of it is almost overly euphoric in terms of expectation. So, what I have tried to do here is dampen euphoric expectation because I want the visit to be seen as a success. And if you just get together and discuss change, that is my definition of a success. Whether you all will buy it or not, I do not know. I am a little skeptical about that. ENTITY, do not you fear that the U.S. may lose its leadership in the Western alliance if things move too fast, and NATO will change? If you will excuse some chauvinistic pride as we approach Thanksgiving, why, that is one worry I do not have. We will continue to be, whether it is in the Pacific or whether it is in Europe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-1", "publication_date": "21-11-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 909, "text": "Sir, you mentioned the ties that bind both countries, the U.S. and Mexico. But those ties are also-those issues are extremely politically charged in both countries-trade, immigration, et cetera. So my question would be, where do you expect to lead the U.S.-Mexico relation in the next 3 years? First, I think it is very important for both President Fox and myself to explain to both our countries the benefits of $300 million two-way trade-well, nearly $300 million in the year 2005 of two-way trade. In other words, it is one thing to talk trade, and I fully understand that unless those benefits are translated to more and more people, people begin to wonder whether or not trade is worthwhile. You will find that here in America, we are having a debate as well, over trade. I said in my State of the Union that we have got to reject protectionism because I believe that trade, when it is done right, free and fair, is beneficial to the parties. And I strongly believe that the trade between the United States and Mexico has been beneficial for Mexico, as it has for the United States. But as a leader, I have got to continue to explain to people why. I have a different perspective than many because of the relationship between-because of my time as Governor of Texas, and I remember full well what life was like on the border before NAFTA. And if you go down to the border now, you see vitality on the border, you see that- and vitality on both sides of the border . There is been-commerce has helped people get jobs, and commerce has helped people realize a better life . And it is important for us to make sure we continue to explain that because if not, there will be protectionist tendencies that will tend to emerge, not only in our two countries but around the world. And in my judgment, leadership has got to fight off protectionist tendencies. I think that would tend to isolate each other and make it more difficult for us to realize the benefits of our relationship. anticorruption measures; free press; free religion; institutions that sometimes can be challenged in the course of politically-development within our neighborhood and around the world, for that matter. So the common value theme is a very important theme for me to continue to work with Vicente Fox and whoever were to replace him-obviously, we have got a lot of human issues to deal with.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 910, "text": "The migration of people across our border is a vital issue that must be done in the same way to protect and honor people's lives. Americans are-I am disgusted by a system in which people are snuck across the border in the bottom of an 18-wheeler. There is a lot of big issues that confront us. But in order to make the relationship vital, we have got to explain to people exactly why-you know, the consequences of, for example, not having commerce flow as frequently as we do. Over a million people across the country have marched in support of legalization and against H.R. 4437, the Sensenbrenner bill. Since you are opposing amnesty, sir, would you agree on a language that puts the undocumented on a path to earn legalization-- Let me tell you what I am for. First of all, there is a-the legislative process is one that-obviously, it goes through the House and then the Senate, and if there are differences, it has got to be resolved. And what people are now doing is reacting to a legislative process. I believe that any immigration bill ought to make sure that we are , one, able to secure the borders. That is what Americans want; that is what any country should want. And I also recognize that part of securing the borders requires a guest-worker program. In other words, the two go hand in hand. I do not believe people who have been here illegally should be granted citizenship status right off the bat. I just, as a matter of fact, gave a speech to a group of citizens that have become U.S. citizens today, in my presence. They had stood in line. And I do not think a country that relies upon law ought to say to somebody who was here illegally, you get to be ahead of the line. In other words-so therefore, I think that part of a rational worker program is- say you are here on a temporary basis, and if you choose to be a citizen or want to be a citizen, you get in line. But like I said today, I have called upon Congress to increase the number of green cards. To me, that is the most rational way of dealing with the citizenship issue. It is essential that we not have automatic amnesty or legality. First of all, it would send a signal that said, all you have got to do is get here illegally and eventually you get in the head of the line.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 911, "text": "But what if they get in line behind those who are waiting for their green cards now? That is why I said I think one way to deal with this is to increase the number of green cards. And right now part of the problem is that the green cards are limited. And that is why I have spoken before and again reiterated my position that there ought to be a temporary-worker program; people who want to be here should not get-be a citizen should not get ahead of the line but ought to be waiting in line. And if the Congress so desires, they ought to increase the number of green cards in order to take the pressure off the system. It is a plan that-again, I know people are saying, Well, the House bill did not have a temporary-worker program in there, and I think any bill should be a comprehensive bill including a tem-porary-worker program. I have spoken out on it ever since I have been the ENTITY, and I think it is the best way to go, because I realize that, one, it is important to enforcing the border-that being a temporary-worker program; secondly, that it is a humane way to deal with people who are making a contribution to our economy. In other words, if something is illegal, then people will figure out ways to get around the system. That is what creates the coyotes; that is what creates the smugglers; that is what creates the document forgers; that is what creates these places where people are dumped for a period of time and then smuggled across and then told to walk; that is what creates the dangerous predicament for people coming across the desert. And so there is a-and that is why people- that is what causes people to hide in the shadows of our cities. And there is a much more rational way and much more humane way to deal with people who are doing jobs that Americans will not do. Anyway, that is why I think the work component is a vital part of an immigration policy, and I believe border-I know border security and a guest-worker program go hand in hand. In other words, one supports the other. I guess I wanted to ask you about an issue on the northern border that is of some concern. Your administration has proposed a Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, which would require passports or pass-port-like documents for Canadians and Americans coming and going.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 912, "text": "And there is been some concern in Canada that this will, in effect, do more to harm economic trade and tourism and do little to actually improve security. And I am wondering, when you are moving towards, sort of, a more integrated approach to security on things like NORAD, why move ahead with something that really amounts to a bit more of a restriction? Well, I think-first of all, we have the same issue to the south, by the way. How do you come up with a policy where there are thousands of border crossings a day, without-and trying to have a rational approach to determining who is coming in and who is going out of the country, without endangering workforce, tourism, trade? Our goal is to, obviously, consult with our partners to develop, you know, passport and/or passport-like document, you said, and I think that may be the operative word as a plan develops. There is a desire for a lot of our citizenry-and it is reflected in the Congress- to know, as I said, who is coming in and who is going out and why. And I think that-I am pretty confident that if we work closely, we can develop such a plan that enables a scanning device or a card that can be dealt with on a scanning device to not stop the flow of traffic of people who make a daily routine of it, and also make sure that we know who is coming in the country. The purpose is not to impede trade and/ or cross-border relations. The purpose is to expedite them in a way that gives both countries, or all three countries, comfort in knowing who is coming across. In Texas, for example, like in El Paso, on a daily basis, there is thousands of people that it is just a part of their daily routine. And the idea would be to develop a document that could be scanned as they just walk across the bridge. It is the same concept for Canada as well. You could not just do it through a driver's license? Well, that is what they are working on. First of all, we have found in our own country that drivers' license are not necessarily a secure document. I mentioned to you that this is a-the document forgery is a significant problem for our country, primarily for people coming in from the south.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 913, "text": "And you have got a person looking for somebody to help build an apartment building, and people show up, and they flash a document, and the employer is not equipped to be a document checker. It is not what they do. And the truth of the matter is, there is a whole industry out there to provide fake documents for people doing work that Americans will not do, because the system needs-the system says-just has not been rational, let me just put it to you that way. And therefore, there is a skepticism about certain documents which can be forged. And that is why you are seeing the notion of trying to develop one that is tamper-proof, for not only border crossings but also for working. And it seems to me to make sense without-again, I understand the sensitivity. I am very aware, and I am sure Stephen and Vicente will bring this up. I have already talked to Vicente about the issue in regards to Mexico. Look, again, this is an issue I am very familiar with because of my time as the Governor of Texas. Immigration issues and border issues are-it is been a part of our State's history for a long period of time. You are not going back to migration, are you? I can see it is on the tip of her tongue. The question would be, though-if you excuse me, a few months ago, or a year ago, you said that you would invest political capital in the issue of-the immigration issue. You did come back to it. Yet in the last couple of weeks, there have been a lot of people in this town talking that your political capital is wasted. Is this Congress underestimating you? But I will keep speaking out on it. One thing is I am -I believe it is very important to get this issue-to reform the immigration system. I have spoken out on it before, and I will continue speaking out on it. It is now coming to a head. And I will continue to call Congress to have a comprehensive package that is more than just border security but also enforcement-interior enforcement, as well as a guest-worker program. And I am going to say it again, that-particularly for the American audience-the two go hand in hand. A temporary-worker program that enables people to cross our border legally to do work Americans will not do takes pressure off of Border Patrol agents who are trying to stop illegal activities, which makes it easier to secure the border.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 914, "text": "If I may, sir, then what would you expect-or what would you propose or expect or hope that the Mexican Government would do in this case? No, I appreciate that. I think it is very important for the Mexican Government to continue doing what they have recently done, which is to make it clear to the American people that we have responsibilities on both sides of the border. And I thank President Fox for putting out those statements. You are aware of, I am sure, a series of advertisements in our newspapers that said, we have an important relationship with the United States. And it requires the understanding that we will work together on our border-as well as, by the way, working on the southern border of Mexico, because many of the folks that are now coming into our country are coming up from Central America, for example. A lot of folks from Central America have been crossing into Mexico and across. And part of making sure that our borders are secure-all our border, when I say our borders, I am talking about Mexico and the United States borders in this case-is that we work hand in glove in the north and also help in the south. And Vicente has told me he understands that there is an issue on the southern border of Mexico. The truth of the matter is, the long run for the issue is going to be for Mexico's economy to extend its promise beyond just certain regions. Look, I strongly believe most people want to be able to find decent wages at their home, where people are able to provide for their families. And I have told our people ever since I have been involved in this issue that-and the way I like to put it is, family values do not stop at the Rio Grande River. In other words, moms and dads in Mexico are anxious to put food on the table for their children. And therefore, many of them are willing to come great distances and lengths to be able to provide for their families. And I think most people would rather be providing for their families close to their homes. And so part of a larger strategy has got to be to make sure that we work in concert to develop-to encourage economic growth so that there are meaningful jobs throughout the country. That is why I am a believer in trade. I believe if we were ever to stop our trade, it would make it harder for prosperity to spread. And I appreciate Vicente's understanding that education programs are vital.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 915, "text": "People have got to have a skill set in order to be able to make sure that jobs are-that jobs spread throughout the country. And for a period of time, many people used to come across the border from the border regions, but prosperity, as I mentioned to you, is visible. The life has changed on the border. But the prosperity on the border has caused people from other parts of the country who are looking for work to migrate north, come across the border, and try to find jobs in the United States. And I believe that the immigrant worker has helped grow our economy. In other words, there is jobs Americans will not do, and it makes sense to have a legal policy that says, if there is a job Americans will not do and people are willing to do it for the sake of their families, we ought to encourage them to do so and make it a legal, temporary experience. And we will negotiate what the definition of temporary is, and we will negotiate the kind of documentation necessary to make sure that they are not- there is not a lot of fraud. And we will- and also the issue of citizenship. And again, my own judgment is, is the best way to deal with the citizenship is to not say- to say to somebody, If you are here illegally, you do not get to take somebody else's place in line who is here legally. The reason we have lines is because of the green card issue. And Congress has the right to increase the number of green cards. Sir, do you believe there is a difference between amnesty and earned legalization-- What does earned legalization mean? Why do not you give me your description, and I will answer your question. According to Chairman Specter, is they have to pay a fine-the undocumented, I am talking about-pay a fine, get in line, prove they have a job, that they have paid taxes, that they do not have a criminal record. But get in line, you said? That is exactly what I just said. Somebody, in order to become a citizen, must get in line. In other words, there is no line; you are just it. You know, you have been here, undocumented; you are legal; boom, you do not have to wait in line. Getting in line is exactly what I just said. You can call it by any way you want to call it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 916, "text": "I would say that it is a system that does not-that rewards and understands people here are doing jobs Americans will not do-take out rewards -understands that there are people doing jobs that Americans will not do, but you do not get to be an automatic citizen. You have to get in line. So you agree with Senator McCain, then. Look, I am just telling you exactly what I am for. And what I am for is a program that is not amnesty. In other words, amnesty means you are automatically legal. And the reason I disagree was, one, it undermines rule of law. In other words, there is a lot of people here trying to become a citizen that are waiting in line, and all of a sudden-and they are doing it legally, and all of a sudden, you know, by law, it means that those who have been here not legally get ahead of the line. Secondly, I think it sends a wrong message. In other words, basically, It is okay; fine, all you have to do is come, come in the country, be undocumented, and in a matter of time, we will make you legal. And I think that will cause another group of people to come. So therefore, my view is, is that, yes, you can become a citizen, but you have to get in line. In other words, you cannot get ahead of those who have been here playing by the rules. And the bottleneck is the number of green cards the Government issues. And that can be changed, and that is why I called upon Congress to increase the number of green cards. One of the things that is very important is that this issue be conducted in such a way as it brings dignity to our process, that immigration is emotional and the people who are speaking out on the issue must understand its emotional nature and must not pit neighbor against neighbor, must treat people with respect. After all, we are a nation of immigrants, and I believe has helped-it helps revitalize our soul. I think it is a very important part of our Nation's history. And America should be viewed as a welcoming society that supports its laws, and the two do not necessarily contradict each other. If I could ask you about-a bit of a two-parter. I know you do not like two-parters, necessarily. It has not stopped these people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 917, "text": "Did it stop you, Nedra , the two-part question, or are you still giving them? You mentioned that there is skepticism in Canada about the U.S. And I am wondering, over the last few years, you have had some-- Let me just make sure that-first of all, I believe most-I believe people on both sides of the border think it is a very important relationship, and there is great friendships. Having said that, the Canadians have, oftentimes, taken independent view of decisions the United States makes. And there is concern about some of the decisions I have made, yes. I just want to make sure that it is not, kind of, universal skepticism-kind of, define it to the proper source. You were the star in one of the former Government's campaign ads. It did not work for them. I wonder whether that is tarnished your image of Canada at all, and whether- one of the issues that is caused a lot of skepticism-- If it did tarnish my image of Canada, it would also tarnish my image of my own country, because part of being in the political scene is that people-it is the great thing about free societies, people speak their minds. That is what happens here in this country as well. Well, do you see the opportunity for better relations, and specifically on the issue of softwood lumber? That is an issue that is caused a lot of skepticism. People are looking for a strong signal from the ENTITY. First of all, the relationship is much deeper than softwood lumber. And there will be- I will comment on softwood lumber in a minute. First of all, I'd like to get the issue solved. So the strong signal is, is that I have told our folks that, let us work hard to bring this issue to conclusion. And we were close to getting it done at one point. And so my strong signal is, yes, let us get this behind us. I predict, however, that there will be other issues that arise because of our- when we trade as much as we trade, nearly half-a-billion * two-way trade in '05, there is going to be issues that come up. I can remember the potato issue-I do not know if it had as much impact on thought that softwood lumber did, but it was an important issue. I guess it was mainly confined to the eastern part of the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 918, "text": "But with as much trade as we have got going for us, there will be other issues that arise. We are dealing with, you know, tomatoes, on occasion, or corn syrup, I think it was-yes, corn syrup. And it is just very important to be in a position to have a relationship such that we can work through these problems. It is a chance for people to express themselves. Sure, there were some harsh words, but- at least from my perspective, the people tend to discount the polemics and the, you know, kind of, just how politics works, and they want to know whether or not there is a genuine commitment to friendship. The migration issue, obviously, as you can see, has created a great deal of, at least, questioning, because it is on people's minds. Would it help if there was a little more maturity in the relationship, in terms of how Canada deals with the U.S.? Because there is been a perception in Canada that we have not always been-dealt with you square on issues like missile defense or-you know, there have been a few things. I do not view-I, frankly, view the relationship as a good and strong relationship. Look, people-face it, part of the problem that we had was because of my decision to go into Iraq. And the Government of both countries did not agree, and I understand that. And yet we are still able to maintain good relations. When people are dealing with the subject of war, there is a lot of emotion. And I fully understand that. So I view the relationships both as not only important and vital, but I do view them as mature. As I said, this is the third Prime Minister with whom I will have dealt, and I-there is a certain camaraderie that takes place by virtue of our close ties and close history. And I bear no ill will whatsoever, and I understand the strategic importance of being close to our friends and to have a capacity to talk among ourselves. The great competition for our respective economies, in the long run, will be coming from the Far East. And therefore, the more close our relationships and the more we are able to deal with cross-border issues on trade and other issues, the more we will be able to work in concert to keep our standard of living high.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists1", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-1", "publication_date": "27-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 937, "text": "When our group discussed the framework of this interview, it was very hard to achieve a consensus regarding the priority of questions. We hope there will be no such problem at the summit meeting in Bonn, which is, of course, the main purpose of your visit to Europe. The world is faced with the problem of if the economic momentum can be sustained and secured after the great locomotive seems to be slowing. How do you see the economic scenario in America and globally? And what would be, in your view, the best outcome in Bonn? What should be done at the summit meeting? I am not going to attempt to set an agenda for it. I know that we will be talking about political problems, we will be talking about this economic situation, and I know that our economic recovery did get out ahead of the others. I think one of the things that is of great importance that we want to be talking about is another round of trade talks, to resist the protectionism that raises its head every once in awhile and to see if we cannot come more and more to open trade between ourselves and other industrial countries. That will be, I am quite sure, prominent on the agenda. I know that in the last two summits we have also exchanged ideas about what we all can do to help in the recovery, and I am glad to see recovery beginning to take hold in those other countries. It will, hopefully, equalize the currency values and so forth. I know that just as one country, our own, can export inflation and economic problems, it can also export prosperity and help to the recovery, and I think that we are having a hand in that. Especially for Western Europe you recommended recently at the New York Stock Exchange, I remember, to follow your recovery program of '81 by cutting taxes, spending, and overregulation and throwing off the weight of government. What kind of tax cuts did you mean? High tax rates do not necessarily mean high revenues for government. As a matter of fact, this, we think, was responsible for our recent recession-our government was taking too big of a share of the private sector. And I think that other countries-some of our allies and friends-are looking at themselves to see if this is the same situation. When we reduced the rates there was an increase, a surge in the overall revenues because of the economic expansion that resulted. Incentive, whether it is for business and industry or for individuals, does result in higher earnings.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists4", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-4", "publication_date": "25-04-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 938, "text": "There was an Arab philosopher about 1,400 years ago by the name of ibn-Khaldun who said that in the beginning of the empire the rates were low, and the revenues were great. And he said at the end of the empire the rates were great, and the revenues were low. ENTITY, I wanted to ask you something about the dollar and the international monetary system. The dollar has lost in the past month about 20 percent of its value and before then, in a matter of a few weeks went very, very high, reaching high records against the Deutschmark and other currency. Your Secretary of the Treasury said that he was willing to do something about it, and it seems that something should be done. How strong is your commitment for a high-level monetary meeting, that should be hosted in Washington, and what concrete steps are you willing to take to improve this shaky system? Well, I am afraid your question is too specific for the answers that I have available at this time. Two years ago at the Williamsburg summit we all agreed upon embarking on a study-the European Ten, ourselves and others, our trading partners-and that study has been going on for 2 years. The study will be, and the report will come in in June, after the summit conference in Bonn. And I think when we get that report and see the recommendations and what has been proposed, then it can be determined whether a meeting of the kind that has been suggested is warranted and what the agenda would be, as that meeting would then take up the report of this 2-year study. So, until then I cannot comment on an agenda. So, are you backing off from the statement of Mr. Baker who said that Washington will host a- No, I think that this is also what he was trying to say-that we are perfectly willing, but we feel that we should wait and see what is the result of that study, what are we going to be hearing and seeing as a result of that. And of course, to the preface to your question there about the dollar declining, we think that that part could be attributed to the economic recovery of our trading partners. We think also that some of the fluctuation has to do with speculators, those people who read all the economic signs and then go running out and either buy or sell other currencies or our own. And that this can, on a simple buy-and-sell market, result in changes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists4", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-4", "publication_date": "25-04-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 939, "text": "Frankly, we were very pleased with the decline in value. Let me ask a question with regard to trade, ENTITY. How are you going to deal with the trade conflicts between Japan and the United States, and do you think that you have to berate Mr. Nakasone for his inability, even at the meeting of the Bonn summit? Well, we think we have been making great progress in the bilateral meetings that we have been having. I can tell you that Prime Minister Nakasone, I think, himself, is committed to a belief in more open and free trade between nations. I realize that, just as all heads of state do, he has some political problems, too, in opposition to some moves he might want to make. The same would be true of me here in our own country. But we have made great progress, and I think we will continue to make progress in opening up markets to open trade between allies. And I have a great admiration for what he is doing and what he has set out to do. ENTITY, in recent years your trade policy officials have made much of their efforts to promote the multilateral trade system. At the same time, they have used the possibility of bilateral deals with individual countries as something of a lever to bring other trading partners to the bargaining table. There are experts who suggest that subjecting a fifth or a quarter of your trade of the United States, external trade, to a deal, perhaps with Canada, could weaken the multilateral trading system. A, how you feel about that; secondly, what happens if there is a new GATT round? What happens to the bilateral deals at that point? Well, because of the direction the bilateral is taking between us and Canada, we have been, for each other, we have been the greatest of trading partners. Here we are with a very unique border that extends for several thousand miles with no guards or forts along that border. We have a pretty common heritage in this country. It is been reflected in trade, and sometimes there have been efforts here and there in particular areas to curb trade. Just as we are meeting with Prime Minister Nakasone, we have been meeting with Canada to eliminate some of the problems that, in reality, are peculiar to our two countries. And I do not think that that in any way does anything but even strengthen or add to our multilateral efforts. It just demonstrates that countries can mutually benefit from free and open trade.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists4", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-4", "publication_date": "25-04-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 940, "text": "ENTITY, I imagine that there'll be a number of leaders in Bonn who would like to discuss with you your Strategic Defense Initiative during your visit there. The question I wanted to ask was that the British Foreign Secretary recently raised some concerns about your initiative. He warned that there would be no advantage in creating a new Maginot Line, which could be outflanked by simpler countermeasures, and he also suggested that the huge research program might acquire an unstoppable momentum of its own. I wonder what your reaction would be to those two points? Well, I think that is in a sense borrowing trouble. We are embarked on a research program. We do not have something ready for deployment; we are not talking about deploying. What we are researching to see is if there is an answer to the nuclear threat to all the world. We have a situation now between the major powers where we have a deterrent based totally on offensive weapons, and in our own country, it is called the MAD policy, and what it stands for is mutual assured destruction, meaning that-and to me, there is always been something a little immoral about that-that our deterrent is if you try to blow our people up, we will blow yours up. Now, in the whole history of the world, every offensive weapon has always led to a defensive weapon. an effort to reduce greatly the number of such weapons in the world to the point that we do not leave as a heritage to our children this threat of destruction, literally of the world, if some madman comes along someday in one country or the other and decides to take that action. And I have made it perfectly plain that if our research-while I have any claim to it-is successful in any way, before there would ever be deployment, I would want to sit down with our allies and discuss this totally and share. And I have not even ruled out sharing with our potential adversaries. If we could substitute for simply an exchange of offensive threats, either totally defense or a combination of the two, so that we were not just living under this total threat that threatens even the rest of the world who might not even be participants-except in the destruction. Still on this subject, ENTITY, President Mitterrand of France has invited other European countries to joint efforts to create European technological cooperation. I was wondering what you think of this initiative and if you do not think that SDI has set the stage for a technological confrontation between Europe and United States?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists4", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-4", "publication_date": "25-04-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 941, "text": "I do not know that I can answer that. I imagine that I will be hearing about that at the summit, and I will be looking forward to the discussion of it. The only restriction we have ever wanted to place on technology is letting or giving that technology to a potential adversary, who then could use it to an advantage over us militarily. And that is been the result of COCOM, which we have with our allies in our restraint on providing such technology to the other country. I know that we, on SDI, we have invited all of our allies to come in and compete for contracts on the research and to participate in the research on that weapon. I think on that previous question, I left out something or other there that I should have said in addition, and that is that on SDI, also, that in the meantime-no, we support France and England in going forward on their own nuclear weapons. We are, as you know, going forward with ours-with the MX, with the B-1 bomber and even a bomber beyond that, and with the Trident submarine-because that-to use one of our own expressions, that is the only game in town. Now, did I finish with yours?  ENTITY, NATO is today much stronger than it was in '81, when you assumed the Presidency, thanks to the United States. But is NATO in these days strong enough? I think basically-for a deterrent, yes. There is no question we do not match the Soviet Union in its military buildup, either in the strategic or in the conventional. But I think in the sense of a deterrent that a war, trying to take advantage of their superior forces, they would face more damage than they would want to accept. So, I think that from a deterrent standpoint-yes. You stopped the stationing of the Pershing II in Germany.  Geneva- -yes, we have not arms control talks? we have not stopped that on a basis of changing a policy-no. We are going forward with that plan. Those countries requested those weapons of us, and the Soviets have continued to augment their intermediate-range weapons that are targeted on European targets. No, we would like, in the talks going on at Geneva, we would like something that would indicate that they were willing to reduce those. You know, our original proposal on the intermediate-range weapons was total elimination, zero-zero. Well, we gained half our point.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists4", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-4", "publication_date": "25-04-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 942, "text": "The Soviets agreed to zero for us, but not zero for them. Incidentally, I want you to know also that SDI and the research that is going forward is not just aimed at strategic weapons, such as a protection for ourselves. It would be very definitely a factor with regard to those SS20's, those Soviet intermediate-range weapons, for protection of the allies. Yes, ENTITY, we are going to have very soon in Italy local elections, and the Communist Party has said that if it should win those local elections, it would give them a political, national meaning. And they would want to be in charge of the government, to put a crisis on the Craxi government and have a new government headed by Communists. How would you feel about that? They were talking about NATO and all of this. How would you feel about the Communists taking the leadership in Italy? Well, if you look at any country in the world that is run by a Communist government, you see that the people are denied all the democratic rights that we and our societies have come to believe are democracy and are the rights of the people. I cannot quite believe that the Italian people, with their love of independence and freedom, would settle for what the Communist government would mean to them and would take away from them. But if it does, from what I know of your people, I would think the Communists might get a rude surprise when they started to implement their ideology. It seems that Europe is at a balance. You have asked Europe to take responsibility on the economic side, and it is also a quite balanced point of equilibrium from the political side. And how do you feel about a unified European monetary system to balance the general equilibrium? Oh, I do not know that I want to get into things that are purely- But it seems to me that, as you so graciously said about the alliance and its closeness now, it seems to me that there is a greater bond-certainly in Western Europe, which is all we can talk about-a bond, between the countries than I can remember in my rather long lifetime, a friendship, and now with the Congress that I will be addressing there that represents all the countries of Europe, elected directly by all the people of Europe, and the European Community-all of these things I think represent great progress. European monetary system. I just do not feel that I could comment on that. I have not done any study on my own of what that could mean or what the problems might be.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists4", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-4", "publication_date": "25-04-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 943, "text": "Well, let me throw out my question on trade. Do you think that the Bonn summit would be able to set early 1986 as a target for starting a new round of multilateral trade talks? Well, that is what we are going to ask for, that the trade round begin early in 1986. And I have a feeling that we are not going to be alone in that. I think there are others that want to see another trade round. So, I am hopeful that will be an outcome of this summit. Are you really optimistic about this result, outcome of Bonn? Well, so far everything has shown progress. There have not been very many setbacks in the sense of countries adopting more protectionist measures. My own feeling is that protectionism just leads to a restraint in trade and a lowering of prosperity for everyone involved. And I know in our own Great Depression back in the early thirties, I believe that depression was worsened and was maintained over a longer period of time than need be because our country turned to a thing called the Smoot-Hawley tariff. And I think that was a great factor in our decline. Just on that same point, ENTITY, if there is no agreement for a 1986 start to the GATT round, is it your feeling that another Smoot-Hawley can surface quickly, and it will be beyond your control? Is that what you are saying to the world? No, because I know that there are factions in our country, as there are in every country, who want protectionism. But I think the progress we have made so far and the economic recovery we are having, I believe we can defeat those protectionist factions. Now, what could happen if others suddenly adopted protectionism and strengthened the hand thereby of those people in our own country; I do not know. But I do not see any threat of that right now. The less-developed countries, of course, are not at the table in Bonn. They have a special interest in what takes place. Of course, their debt problems we all know about. Will you be pushing your fellow summiteers to perhaps drop their own protectionist policies with regard to the Third World? Textiles comes to mind, sugar quotas. I think it could help those countries. We have all expressed a desire to help the lesser developed countries. And too much of the time that has taken the form of just economic aid, handouts. I think that we should be directing ourselves more to helping them help themselves.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists4", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-4", "publication_date": "25-04-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 944, "text": "And in that connection, I have to say, our own country, this country, has purchased more of the production, particularly manufactured goods, of the lesser developed countries than all of the rest of the world put together. And I do not think it is hurt us; our recovery continues. But your Caribbean Initiative, for example, explicitly excludes textiles. We have had a setup on textiles with regard to growth because-and this, I think, every country agrees on-that here and there, when an industry is faced with a crisis, a temporary situation, to help rather than let them go down to destruction. Yes, we have all done that, and we have done it. We have a steel program in our country that is only invoked in the event of unfair competition first, but also if it is leading to a disaster. And then we have temporarily invoked some regulations to help them get on their feet again. ENTITY, when Mr. Gorbachev took over as Soviet leader, Mr. Shultz greeted the event as a moment of opportunity for an across-the-board improvement in relations. Do you think that the killing of the U.S. major in East Germany and Mr. Gorbachev's latest accusations about the Geneva negotiations mean that we are now in for another rough period of East-West relations? Well, I think it was in keeping with what has been the Soviet attitude on other things of that kind, including the shooting down of the Korean airliner. We certainly, out in the Western World, I do not think can quite understand that kind of attitude. I think they missed a great opportunity to achieve some stature in the world by not admitting that this was a most regrettable thing and a tragic thing and extending an apology to the widow and child of the major and, yes, offering some compensation. ENTITY, it is been announced from Moscow that Mr. Gorbachev will come to New York for the United Nations session next September. Could you tell us today if you will meet him at that time? I have expressed the belief that we should have a meeting, and his letter to me acknowledged that and said that he felt the same way. Now, I do not know what his schedule-he will be coming here for the United Nations-whatever it is, if that should be the time. I certainly could arrange mine to accommodate and have that meeting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists4", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-4", "publication_date": "25-04-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 945, "text": "Let us talk about Mars. It is much in the news right now, some new discoveries on Mars that suggest there is at least a real possibility that this was once, some good long time ago, a land of lakes. That puts it on the radar screen. All along, our people have thought there was some chance, based on other research that had been done, that there might have been some kind of life on Mars, at least for the last couple of years we have had some evidence of it. Now, these new pictures that we have seen indicate that there might have been water there, quite near the surface, and much more recently than had previously been thought. So I think it is important that we continue our exploration, that we continue to take photographs, and that we keep working until we can set a vehicle down and get some things off the surface of Mars and bring it back home so we can take a look at it. We had a couple of difficult missions there, but we learned some things from them. NASA was very forthright, and they came up with a new plan, and I think we should keep going at it. The question is how you should keep going at it. As you mentioned, there had been a couple of losses, and that is been a hard public relations blow to get by. This new information at least raises what is going on in Mars, to the public's attention, a little higher. Well, I think the NASA people will be the best judge of that, but they are and they should be committed to Mars exploration. They should continue to do more, I think, with the photographs. We should get as much information as we can from observation, in the greatest detail we can. And I think they should keep working on trying to get a vehicle to land on Mars that will be able to not only give us more immediate photographs but actually, physically get materials off the surface of Mars that we could then return to Earth. I think they should keep working on it. You recall President Kennedy saying there should be a concerted effort to put a man on the Moon. I think it is just a question of when, not if.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 946, "text": "I think that now that we are committed to space exploration in a continuing way, now that we have got the space station up and the people there are working, and they are there 3 years ahead of the original schedule-I am very proud of them-I think that what we should do from now on is to figure out how much money we can devote to this and what our most immediate priorities are. The space station, I think, is going to prove to be an immense benefit to the American people and, indeed, to all the people of the world, because of the research that will go on there and what we will find out. And so I think it is just a question of kind of sorting out the priorities, and the people who will come here after me in the White House and the space people and, of course, the interested Members of Congress will have to make those judgments. But I think the- what we know from Mars is that the conditions of life may well have-for some sort of biological life-may well have obtained on Mars at some point in the past. Now, we know also that our solar system is just a very tiny part of this universe, and that there are literally billions of other bodies out there. And we cannot know for sure what the conditions are on those bodies. The International Space Station is not without controversy, and you have pushed hard for it. It is, in good measure, risky. Well, first of all, it is expensive. It will cost us about $40 billion over about 10 years. That includes the cost to put it up, our part of the cost, and then to maintain our part of it over 10 or 15 years. But I think it is important for several reasons. First of all, it is a global consortium. There are 16 nations involved in it, each of them making some special contributions. The Russians, for example have-because they had the Mir station and we conducted some joint missions to Mir, I think nine of them over the last 2 years and 3 months-have made it possible for us to expand the size of the station and the number of people we can have there. I think that it is important, because we can do a lot of basic research there in biology. We can see without the pull of gravity what happens with tissues, with protein growth. We have got a whole lot of things that we might be able to find out there that will help us in the biological sciences.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 947, "text": "Secondly, I think we will learn a lot about material science without gravity, how can you put different kinds of metals together and things like that. And the revolution in material science here on Earth is a very important part of America's productivity growth. It is just like our revolutions in energy that are going on now, our revolution in information technology. Advances we have made in material sciences are very important to our long-term productivity and our ability to live in harmony with the environment here. Then there are a lot of basic physics things we are going to find out there. So I think the whole range of scientific experiments that we will discover will be enormous. And we have been able to keep literally hundreds of Russian scientists and engineers occupied who otherwise would have been targets of rogue states to help them produce nuclear or biological or chemical weapons or missiles or do some other mischiefmaking thing. But I believe in the potential of the space station, and I think that over the years we will come almost to take for granted a breathtaking array of discoveries, what they will be beaming back to us. The critics are saying, ENTITY, we have been doing work in weightless conditions for 20 years. And when you take 16 nations, each one of them contributing a piece, this is enormously complicated; it makes it much more expensive; and frankly, for the astronauts, it can make it more risky. First of all, we are ahead of schedule. We are doing well up there, and we have never been able to keep people up, essentially, continuously. There were limits to our previous manned missions in outer space and the period of time in which weightlessness was available to them. You are going to have now, 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, 52 weeks a year, for more than a decade, to see this work done and develop. And I believe in its potential. The scientists who believe in it sold me a long time ago, and I have never wavered in my belief that it is a good investment, and it'll pay back many times over what we are doing. I think you said $40 billion for the United States part. And what the critics say, not the right calculations. In fact, all you have to do is look at the Russians right now, and they are not contributing what they were expected to contribute at all. And that could happen with the other nations, as well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 948, "text": "What I think about the Russians is that as their economy comes back-and it is important to realize they went through a terrible, terrible economic crisis at the same time oil was less than half, almost a third of the price it is now-so I think as their economy comes back and they become more financially stable, I do not have any doubt that they will pay their part. Do you have any question in your mind about sharing technology with a nation that is certainly more politically unstable than we would like-and that includes sharing missile technology? Well, we try to have some restraints on that. But I think, on balance, the technology we are sharing up there, the benefits of it, the benefits of cooperation, the sense of the-what we get by working together and how much greater it is than what we get from being in competition with one another, I think makes it a good gamble. What do you see the space program transforming to? Well, I think we will focus- I think we have already talked about it. I think there will be more and more focus on how we can do specific things with enormous potential in the space station. And I think there will be a lot of interest in Mars, in terms of exploration. And then with our powerful telescopes, I think there will be more and more emphasis on what is out there beyond the solar system. And to those who say, ENTITY, famine, the countless problems that array themselves before us right here on Earth, those billions of dollars are so precious to those problems-you say? I say, first, we should address those things. But the United States has tripled the money we are putting into international ENTITY program. We pioneered for the last 2 years the largest international debt relief initiative in history. It is one of the finest achievements of this Congress that they embraced in a bipartisan fashion the legislation that I presented them on debt relief. We should continue to move ahead with those things. But you all must take some of your wealth to invest toward tomorrow, the long-term tomorrow. And that is what our investment in space is. It is the investment in the long term. We have to know more about the universe, and we have to know more about what space conditions, particularly the space station, can do to help us with our environment here at home, to help us deal with diseases here at home, to help us grow our economy here at home. I believe this is an investment that has a return.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 949, "text": "And I feel the same way about other scientific investments. We have increased investment in basic science. You can argue that, well, it has a long-term payout; maybe we should spend something else on that. I just do not agree with that. I think you have to-societies have to take some of their treasure and invest it toward the long run. And that is how I view this. Let us come back down to home, then. Earlier this week you set aside thousands of square miles of coral reefs off Hawaii, to be protected in perpetuity. Now, if my calculations are right, since 1996, you have 13 times established national wildlife protection areas. And you are considering some more? Yes, we have set aside more land, through legislation-we have established three national parks in California, the Mojave Desert Park. We saved Yellowstone from gold mining and saved a lot of the old-growth forests, the redwood forest in California, and we are recovering the Florida Everglades over a multiyear period. We have basically protected more land in this administration in the United States than any administration since Theodore Roosevelt, about a hundred years ago. And the coral reefs are important because what is happening to the oceans as a result of global warming and local environmental degradation is deeply troubling, long-term, for everybody in the United States and everybody on the planet. Twenty-five percent of the coral reefs have been lost-are now dead. Over the next several decades, we will lose another 25 percent of them within 20 to 25 years unless we do something about it. We did not end all fishing. We did not end all recreation. Indeed, we are preserving for the natives, the Hawaiian natives who live in that area and for those who come as tourists-leave live, vibrant coral reefs. But we had to protect them. And others will have to do the same thing. We have got big challenges to the Great Barrier Reefs in Australia, big challenges to the magnificent reefs off the coast of Belize, and these are very important sources of biodiversity. So I am glad we did it. I am looking at-I have asked the Secretary of the Interior, Bruce Babbitt, to follow the same process we followed the whole time we have been here, to look at other potential areas for protection, make some recommendations to me, and we will take one more look before I go to see if there is anything else I should do.  which happens to be near a military bombing range.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 950, "text": "Will you set that aside for protection? Well, I am looking for a recommendation from Bruce on that, but I think there is a lot of support out there for that, across the board, members of both political parties and all the different cultures that make up Arizona. And we are trying to work through that, and there are some very compelling environmental arguments there. And when he gives me his recommendation, I will make a decision. But we are both very interested in that, and of course, he is from Arizona, so he knows a lot about it. The military wants its flying rights to continue, and you would approve that? We are working on that. I have not made a decision yet. We have got to work through all that. You know that a lot of folks are talking about the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. Some suggest that you could, by executive fiat, establish it as a protected site from oil drilling. As a national wildlife refuge right now, oil drilling is not legal there. There are some people who believe if I were to make it a national monument, as I have created national monuments, for example, and a million acres around the Grand Canyon to protect the watershed area there, that it would have extra protection. Now, as a legal matter, I do not believe that is right. That is, I do not think-sometimes I do not think people understand that in order to have drilling there, I believe legislation is required, regardless. So there may be some other reason to establish some part of the National Wildlife Refuge as a national monument, because it would have other beneficial impacts during the time a monument existed. And of course, it depends in part on what happens in the ultimate resolution of this election, because one of the candidates, Vice President Gore, is against drilling; the other, Governor Bush, is for drilling. But he would still have to get some legislative acquiescence or approval of drilling even if it is a national wildlife refuge, just like it is now. I have not made a decision on that, but I will just say I do not believe that the drilling issue should be the determinative factor, based on the research I have seen so far. I do not think it has-in other words, I do not think that it would make it any harder to pass an act of Congress. And I think that as the land is now, it would still require an act of Congress.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 951, "text": "There may be other reasons to do it, and as I said, I am going to talk to Secretary Babbitt, and we will look at what the arguments are. May I ask how many other areas you are considering? I think there are three or four or five that we have been asked to consider by people around America or things that we have been interested in. We always like to get out and talk to the local people in the communities and see what the arguments are, pro and con. Which one stands highest on your radar screen? I do not want to talk about it until I can give the recommendation. No point in stirring everybody up unless we are going to do it. High tech underpins all of this. And we have been going through a bit of a resettling period here. I know that a lot of the dot-com companies have been up and down, just like biotech companies go up and down. But that should not be surprising, because a lot of these companies do not make money in themselves, that they really have value, inherent value for what they can do and how they might someday add to some other enterprise. So that should not surprise people. But I think that the continued explosion in information technology and in biotechnology is inevitable. I do believe that the vagaries in the market should strengthen the resolve of Members in Congress of both parties who care about science and technology to keep up the basic research budget. For example, one of the things I have fought very hard for is a lot of investment into nanotechnology, or super, super microtechnology, because, among other things, it will enable us to have computer capacity the size of a supercomputer some day on something the size of a teardrop. I have a piece of nanotechnology in my office. It is a little outline of me playing the saxophone that has almost 300,000 elements in it, and it is very tiny. So I think that-what does this mean to real people? It means that if you take nanotechnology and you merge within it the sequencing of the human genome and the ability to identify defective or troubled genes, what you are going to have before long, I think, is the ability to identify cancers when they are just several cells in the making, which-and if you could do that and you develop the right kind of preventive screening, you can make virtually 100 percent of cancers 100 percent curable.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 952, "text": "For any of these things to be accomplished, Government has to function and function well. And we are living in an extraordinary time. As you look forward, whoever becomes President, is that President running the risk of not being considered legitimately the President of the United States? Well, I think-first of all, it is a difficult question to answer, because it depends on how this plays out. If Governor Bush is elected, there will always be some Democrats who believe that Al Gore not only won the popular vote in the country but also had more people in Florida who wanted to vote for him, and perhaps more who did, which is-one good argument for counting all the so-called undercounted ballots and all the punchcard counties is trying to help resolve that. But once we actually get a determinative decision, that if it is in accord with our Constitution-and the Constitution, you know, our Founders foresaw close elections and tough fights, and they have prescribed all kinds of ways to deal with it. Back in 1800, we had 36 ballots in the House of Representatives before we resolved it. And it produced Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Jefferson turned out to be successful because he was mindful of how divided the country was. He served two terms. He retired in honor. A member of his party succeeded him, served two terms; a member of his party succeeded him and served two more terms. So then, in 1876-nobody ever really quite felt good about it-the President who won did not run for reelection, and then everything was sort of up in the air for a while. I think it depends a lot on whether the constitutional system is followed, the will of the people is determined, and then it depends on how people behave once they get in office. I think what a lot of people are worrying is that it is very difficult to determine what the will of the people is when the country appears to be divided right down the middle and, in fact, Congress is divided right down the middle. And we have the Democrats on one side saying, What we really want when we have a 50-50 split in a Senate is cochairmen, and we want an equal split of everything. And the Republicans are saying, Not on your life. Now, that looks to me to be a recipe for gridlock.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 953, "text": "You know, I am leaving the budget in pretty good shape, and they are going to ride up the surplus a little bit, although they should be cautious about that, because, again, these surplus numbers are 10year numbers, and I always believe in taking them with a grain of salt. Our success here these last 8 years has been based in no small measure on being conservative on economic forecasts and trying to make sure we had the numbers right. And I personally believe that America is best served by continuing to pay the debt down. I know it is not as appealing as having a bigger tax cut now or having the money go to-all to some spending program or whatever. But I think that if you keep paying that debt down, you are going to keep interest rates lower than they otherwise would be, and that is money in everybody's pocket-business loans, car loans, home mortgages, college loans, credit card payments-and it keeps the economy stronger. But still, even if they do that, they will still have money for a tax cut; they will have money to invest in education; they will have circumstances that will argue for cooperation rather than conflict after the election. Your worst critics admire your political acumen. When you look at what is happening in Congress right now and the pushing and shoving that is going on, where is the resolution? How do you resolve the Democrats saying, I want cochairmen and the Republicans saying, It is not going to happen ? Well, of course, if all the Republicans vote together, they can stop it, because they will have-if the Vice President is elected President, then Senator Lieberman leaves the Senate and his Republican Governor appoints a Republican Senator, and they have a 51-49 lead. If Governor Bush is elected, and then all the Republicans vote with him, with Vice President Cheney, they could vote 51-50 for whatever system they wanted. But since in the Senate it only takes 41 votes to stop anything except the budget, that is a difficult sell. And I think-all I can tell you is, I think the country would like it. The country would like to see that one House of the Congress shared the resources, even-Steven, and shared the responsibilities. Somebody could chair a hearing today; somebody else could chair it tomorrow, because as a practical matter, to pass any of these bills, they are going to have to have broad bipartisan cooperation anyway.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 954, "text": "And I think that it-we know that there is kind of a dynamic center in America that has the support of two-thirds of the American people, and if they could reach out for that in the Senate, it might be quite exciting. Now, it is also going to be interesting in the House. Now, there will only be, depending on-I think there are one or two recounts still going on in the House, so there will be, in effect, a three- or four-vote difference in the House-margin. And they need to decide whether that is going to change their rules any, because individual House Members or even our whole caucus in the minority, no matter how narrow the minority, very often cannot affect a rule. So in the House, debate tends to be cut off much more. So they are going to have to think, should they change the procedures in the House as well, at least-not necessarily to have cochairmen, because they do have a narrow majority in the Republican Party, but at least to have the opportunity for more options to be considered. But I would not assume it is going to be bad, because they do have more money. They have a strong economy, and if they keep paying the debt down, it will keep going for some time to come, I think. Let us look at what we have learned from this extraordinary period. Should we now consider voting reform, looking at these machines, looking at the vote count? For one thing, even-I was impressed-I did not know very much-I am probably like most Americans; I did not know very much about some of this beforehand. When I voted absentee, most of the time I was here in the White House, from Arkansas, instead of a punchcard system, we had a system with an arrow by every choice, and you had to take a pencil and fill in the arrow. There was a gap in the arrow, and you had to fill it in. So it was much less subject to misinterpretation. And I think-the question I think is, can we find a way to both simplify the ballot but also feel good about the return? For example, in northern California this year, in a county there was an experimental computerized voting system, where you punched on a screen the person you were for, and it would say, You have voted for Ralph Nader.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 955, "text": "If that is correct and that is what you meant to do, punch 1, and you punched 1, so it had a guarantee. None of these 3,400 predominantly Jewish voters that now think they voted for Buchanan-or did vote for Buchanan, who apparently meant to vote for Vice President Gore-you could not have that happen there. The only question I would have with that is, every computer from time to time goes down, so you would not have any error in the voting there like you did with the 19,500 doublepunched ballots in Palm Beach County or the 10,000 African-Americans who apparently were told they had to vote on two pages, and then they wind up voting for some of these minor Presidential party candidates they never even heard of and did not know what they were doing, so that is 10,000 more votes out the window that were lost. You could probably fix that with electronic voting. In other words, there may not be any perfect system, but it seems to me that-I think particularly troubling to people is the evidence that is come out that these punchcard systems where there was most of the trouble had a plastic coating underneath, rather than the original sort of spongelike design which would have made it much easier to pierce all the way through-that they tended to be in the counties that had lower per capita income voters, and therefore, the people that maybe needed to vote the most, that we have always tried to bring into the political system, lost their votes because of a flaw in the system. But the only thing that bothers me about the northern California system is-I think you can probably design it, but to have the confidence in the voters-because every system has to be subject to a recount at some point if it is a close enough election. Even a computerized system has got to be very hard-like in Canada. Of course, they only have 30 million people in Canada, but in Canada, interestingly enough, they all still vote with paper ballots, and they have like 100,000 counters, so they count all the ballots within an hour of the polling close, even though they are all paper ballots. He played golf with me over the weekend. And I said, Do not you all vote with paper ballots? And I said, How did you count them all? He said, We have 100,000 counters.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 956, "text": "He says, Every community has equal-all the parties are represented, and then there is sort of a judicial overseer type. And we all sit there and look; everybody can watch everybody else; and you just count the ballots right away. You are an advocate of hightech. You are an advocate of applying science to technology and applying that to our lives. Should that not also be applied to the way that we choose our representatives? Yes, I think anything that increases the likelihood that a legal voter will have his or her vote counted in the appropriate way should be done. Anything that increases the likelihood that every legal voter will actually fully understand the ballot and not make the wrong choice by accident should be done. Yes, this is what I ordered; this is what it cost; this is what I know. If you can simplify the voting that way, that would be good. The only question I have is, what do you do if the computer goes down, and how do you know for sure that no votes are lost, so that there has to be a recount, you know that the tabulation is accurate, because that is also very important? You are never going to have a time in America where we are never evenly divided over something. So anyone who runs for office ought to have access to some sort of legitimate recount if it is very tight or if it is a deadeven vote. But I think that, surely, a lot can be done to make sure that no one ever goes into the polling place in a national election with ballots as confusing and as subject to error as we have seen here. You just think how you'd feel if you were one of the people who had lost his or her vote. We have a lot of friends with kinfolks down in Florida who think they may be some of the people whose votes were wrongly cast. ENTITY, we are talking about science and technology. And your administration is coming to a close. In years to come, looking back, how would you like the administration to be remembered in this area? First, I would like to be remembered for a serious commitment to pushing America forward and keeping us on the forefront of science and technology in two or three areas. We reorganized and revitalized the space program, kept it alive, and kept it moving. We had a very serious attempt to deal with the climate change in the development of alternative energy sources and conservation. We finished the sequencing of the human genome and began to work on its practical implications.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforrestsawyerforthediscoverychannel", "title": "Interview With Forrest Sawyer for the Discovery Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-forrest-sawyer-for-the-discovery-channel", "publication_date": "06-12-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 957, "text": "What is the main purpose of your trip to Australia? Are you hoping for greater Australian contribution to the stabilization and rebuilding of Iraq? No, the main purpose is to thank the people of Australia and thank my friend John Howard for being strong in the face of terror and being understanding that we have a historic opportunity to bring peace and freedom to parts of the world that need peace and freedom. I would define our relationship as a unique relationship. And I am looking forward to it. They tell me it is kind of like Texas, which is another reason I want to go. But not everyone agrees-in Australia, agrees with you on the war. Some members of the opposition are talking about possibly protesting when you address the Parliament by wearing white armbands or turning their backs. Would that concern you? It is a- I do not expect everybody to agree with us, but one thing is for certain, the Prime Minister was strong. And I have talked to a lot of our generals and commanders about how the Australians participated, and they were just- A-plus was the rating. And I think a lot of people would like to hear that from the ENTITY, and I am going to tell them. And if somebody feels like they want to express discontent, that is okay. Well, what about the suggestion from your critics that while you won the war, the peace is being bungled? We are making great progress in Iraq. We have got a pretty steep hill to climb. After all, one, we are facing a bunch of terrorists who cannot stand freedom. These thugs were in power for a while, and now they are not going to be in power anymore, and they do not like it. And they are willing to kill innocent people. And secondly, that life is pretty darn good compared to what it was under Sad-dam Hussein. I talked to our Secretary of Commerce today. His exact-he is in Baghdad. He said, Look, he said, ENTITY, he said, You are not going to believe the world here is a lot different than some in America think it is. He met with women businessowners. I mean, there is excitement there about a free society emerging, and it is in our interests that this society be free. What is going to happen to them? And what do you say to people in Australia who think they should be either charged or released? Well, we would be glad to work with the Government on the issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlaurenceoakesaustraliaschannel9tv", "title": "Interview With Laurence Oakes of Australia's Channel 9 TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-laurence-oakes-australias-channel-9-tv", "publication_date": "14-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 958, "text": "And if John wants to discuss it, I am more than happy to discuss it. We are working with a variety of countries that have got people in Guantanamo Bay. These are people picked up on the battlefield. We are trying to learn more about them to make sure we fully understand-- We do not torture people in America. And people who make that claim just do not know anything about our country. Another issue between the two countries is the-possibly the free trade agreement. Do you think you will get it, and will you be using this to push it along? I told John that we'd like to get a free trade agreement done by the end of this year, and I think it is a good opportunity to say that again. And he and I will not sit down and negotiate the fine points. That is what we have got fine staffs to do, but at our level we can encourage the negotiators to move along. Let us resolve our differences. Australia is an important friend, an important economy, and I think trade is in our national interests. Australians have spent this week at memorial services for the victims of the Bali bombing. Can you hold out any hope for them that this-that the war on terrorism is actually getting somewhere? He is the guy that organized the Bali bombing. He will not be bombing anybody anymore. First of all, I understand what it means to be in a country that grieves over the senseless death of innocent life. And the Australians suffered a mighty blow. And the-matter of fact, the other day I was in Kentucky, you know, politics for a guy running for Governor. And a mother-a fine looking couple walked up, a mom and dad, said, You have got to know, our daughter died in Bali, and tears in his eyes. And I gave him a big hug. And he said, ENTITY, whatever you do, do not stop, so it does not happen again. The best way to deal with terror is to be on the offensive and to find these people and bring them to justice. That is why Australia is such an important partner, equal partner, in the war on terror. John Howard gets it. The Prime Minister knows that we have got to be tough and at the same time create the conditions where there is an alternative to terrorism, and that is freedom and peace. You are in trouble politically, if you believe the polls. Why do you say that? The polls show you dropping in popularity.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlaurenceoakesaustraliaschannel9tv", "title": "Interview With Laurence Oakes of Australia's Channel 9 TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-laurence-oakes-australias-channel-9-tv", "publication_date": "14-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 963, "text": "This is the Oval Office in the White House. First, ENTITY, let me thank you for this opportunity to give us an interview before the Moscow summit. I am from the YLE, Finland. And I am here with Edward Stourton, ITN, Britain; Antonclio Marescalchi, RAI, Italy; Kenichi Iida, NHK, Japan; Wolf von Lojewski, ARD, West Germany, and Jacques Abouchar, Antenne-2, France. And, ENTITY, you are soon in Helsinki, and next Friday you will speak from the very same stage where the Helsinki document was signed in 1975. And at that time, President Gerald Ford was criticized by going there and signing on to something that was cause of detente, which only served the Soviet interest, as it was said. How do you evaluate the document now? Well, I value it very much because it specified the agreement of a number of governments to recognize those basic rules of freedom for people. And since our country, this country here, is the first one that ever declared that government is the servant of the people, not the other way around, we heartily endorsed it. Right now our concern, as I am sure the concern of a great many other people is that there has not been a complete keeping of those pledges in that agreement by some of the participants-by the Soviet Union, particularly-in recognizing the fundamental rights of people to leave a country, return to a country, worship as they will, and so forth. has moved that direction after this document- I am, I think, reasonably optimistic in view of the summit meetings that we have had, and the meeting we are going to have, that we have made progress with the Soviet Union on a number of those things under the present leader. ENTITY, you hoped, I think, to have an agreement on strategic nuclear weapons ready to sign in Moscow. You have not got one. Is it still realistic to expect a START agreement in the lifetime of this administration, or is Mr. Gorbachev simply going to sit on his hands and wait for the next President? Well, I do not know whether he necessarily wants to do that and gamble that much. But we are working as hard as we can, and it is a far more complex treaty than the INF treaty, which we did sign here at the summit in Washington.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 964, "text": "We will continue to work there at the summit if it is not completed, and none of us really think that it will be because of the complexity. But I think that it is possible that we could have that, yes, while this administration is still here. Since the last time you saw Mr. Gorbachev, your former press spokesman has said that he manufactured quotations on your behalf, including one at a summit. Your former Chief of Staff has said that astrology played a part in your scheduling, indeed, in summit planning. How do you think that may change the way Mr. Gorbachev views the President and the administration he is dealing with? Well, I hope Mr. Gorbachev has heard some of the things that I have been saying about those charges, because no decision was ever made by me on the basis of astrology. And some of these other things-the quotations by a former Press Secretary-actually, I have to say he was not too far wrong with some of the things that were being said in our earlier summit meetings. I remember that the General Secretary and I, together in a room, one on one, remarked about the uniqueness of our situation and that very possibly, between us, war and peace for the world could be decided, depending on what we did. And I remember also saying to him that I did not think that we distrusted each other because of our armaments. We were armed because we distrusted each other. And therefore, while we were going to talk about weapons and reducing the number of weapons and so forth, at the same time we should recognize that we ought to try and eliminate those things that cause the mistrust between us. Among the many discussions you will have in Moscow, probably you will talk with Mr. Gorbachev about the Middle East. What is your opinion for the future of the occupied territories? And do you know there is a projected program of a possibility of sending some European troops under the United Nations flag? What is your opinion about that in the Arab-occupied territories? Well, I do not know about the sending of troops or anything of that kind. I'd like to be a little more optimistic and say that I believe there is a desire in the Middle East to settle once and for all what is still technically a state of war between the Arab nations and Israel. We have made a proposal, and this proposal could involve putting together an international conference of nations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 965, "text": "not an international conference to dictate a settlement but to be helpful if we can, to give advice and to make proposals that might help them arrive at a fair and just peace. And if the Soviet Union is to be a member of that conference, I think there they have a step they have to take, and that is to resume diplomatic relations with the State of Israel. But who will represent the Palestinians-the PLO? And actually I think that a lot of that has to do with the feeling that some of the Arab States-because I know that there is a great difference in many of the nations about who could be a proper representative for the Palestinian people and a great feeling that that could hardly be Arafat's element, since here again you have a group that refuses to recognize the right of Israel to exist as a nation. ENTITY, do you honestly support a statement made by British Prime Minister Thatcher that the West should support Mr. Gorbachev's domestic reform because it is not only to the benefit of the Soviet people but also to the West? Well, yes, I think that if there is any way that outside nations could be helpful in this they should because many of the reforms that he is undertaking are aimed at the things that we have always criticized in the Soviet Union. And if there is a way to be helpful in that, and certainly to at least acknowledge our approval of what he is doing, that we should do that. Could you tell me what is your personal opinion of Mr. Gorbachev's ability to reform his country and chance of success? Well, I think it is evident that he is running into opposition, that there are those who want to cling to what are more the Stalinist policies, and yet he is apparently going forward with the recommendations. Just recently it became public information that he had met with the heads of the Russian Orthodox Church and discussed some loosening of their opposition to worship. ENTITY, with Mr. Gorbaehev running into some kind of opposition and your term of office expiring, have you ever discussed what is solid and will definitely remain of the arms control process, for example, whoever is in the White House, whoever is in the Kremlin, or do you see the chance that this thing might falter, for example, like detente did? We have to recognize, I think, that a nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 966, "text": "Once you engage in that kind of conflict, how do you declare a victor if their country is so poisoned by radiation that there is no place for the people to live? And that is what would result if we began exchanging the weapons that we have today. I think that is what has led us to some success in the reduction of nuclear weapons, is that recognition. Possibly in the Soviet Union it was their tragic experience with Chernobyl and to see that how an area would be made unlivable for the people who had lived all their lives there. And when you stop to think that that explosion was less than the power of one single warhead, and we are talking about exchanges of thousands of warheads. I was interested one day not too long ago, back around the time of our summit meeting here, to hear in this room my own words coming back to me, not with any acknowledgement that they were mine-maybe he did not know it-but from a Soviet official who word for word said, a nuclear war cannot be won and should never be fought. The Germans, for example-there are a few people across a political aisle who after INF believe-or are very nervous about modernizing short-range nuclear missiles. They say the shorter the range of the nuclear missiles in central Europe the more dead are the Germans. How can you reconcile these people? Well, I know, and I have talked with the Chancellor many times about this. And they see the possibility of-if such a war would occur-they would be the battlefield, largely. But at the same time, as I say, those weapons-I have to repeat myself-those weapons are the thing that right at the moment are kind of wiping out the imbalance in conventional weapons. And when you look at that imbalance, you have to say that the Soviet Union's military does not really represent a defensive force; it is far beyond the bounds of what is needed for defense. And so, you look at that as an offensive force. And since the nuclear weapons have been hailed as a deterrent to prevent war, I think that it is only logical that if we negotiate those battlefield tactical weapons and their reduction or elimination, that must be accompanied by the same kind of negotiations with regard to conventional weapons so that we come down to a parity and do not suddenly eliminate a form of weapon that leaves the other side with a great superiority. That might be too much of a temptation to some future leader.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 967, "text": "In the last 2 years, France has obtained the release of 10 French hostages while 9 U.S. hostages are still held in Beirut. So, what is your idea about it? Do you think the French are more efficient than you are, or do you suspect the French to have made a deal with the terrorists? I cannot say, and I cannot hazard a comment because I know none of the elements that were involved in that transaction. I still think that all of us want our hostages free. I believe it is the duty of government when the citizens of a country are-their human rights are being unjustly denied by a means of that kind of kidnaping-that the government should take advantage of everything it can to get those people free. At the same time, we must recognize we cannot do something in the form of ransom that creates an advantage for those other countries in taking hostages. I have labored under a misapprehension here-well, worldwide, I guess-about the so-called Iran-contra affair. We were not dealing with the Khomeini or with the Iranian Government. Some individuals had sought a meeting with us on the basis of better relations in the event of the passing of the Khomeini and that it would be a new government. And they had an idea of a different kind of government and a relationship with us. And at one time, asking us to prove our credentials, they made the proposal of us violating our policy and selling, really, a token force of weapons to them, and also that they could use those to build some prestige for themselves with the military, which they would need if they were to become important in the next government. Well, I said back to them that, yes, we could do that, even though it was against our policy of providing weapons for nations that supported terrorism. But they had made it plain that they did not support terrorism. And I said we have kidnaped now some Americans held hostage by an organization, the Hizballah, that we understand has a relationship with the Government of Iran, and said maybe you would have some influence, that if we did this, you could be helpful to us to try to get some of our hostages free. Now, we argued right in this room about it, and some people said that would appear to be trading arms for hostages.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 968, "text": "Well, no, because we were not giving them to the Government, and we were not -or we were not giving them, I should say, to the kidnapers. We were doing nothing to make an advantage for them. And I likened it to if I had a child who was kidnaped. I do not think that you should pay ransom, but if I found there was another individual that could get that child back for me in return for my doing something for him, that would be all right. And the truth was we got two hostages back and had two more that were scheduled to be released in the next 48 hours. And that was when the story was leaked, of what was going on, in that Lebanese paper. And all of a sudden the world media was full of this and translating it as trading arms for hostages. And I went on the air and tried to convince all of them that we were not trading arms for hostages and tell them what the truth was, but that is what it is been made to appear. Speaking of Iran, France is reestablishing diplomatic ties with Tehran while the U.S. is still in a situation of undeclared war in the Gulf against Iran. How do you explain such a difference between close allies? We have been doing everything we can behind the scenes to try and bring about peace between Iraq and Iran. The U.N. proposal that was made about them coming to a peace was accepted by Iraq, but not by Iran. And our position in the Gulf-yes, it is brought us into combat with Iranian forces, but we have had naval forces there since 1949 to ensure that that international waterway comes under the international rules of freedom of the seas. And it is Iran that has been trying to close that off and shut down an international waterway, and we do not think that that should be allowed. And that is what we are intending to do, is to try and keep it open. ENTITY, you are going to certainly talk about Afghanistan while in Moscow. Is it United States policy now to support the rebels or give the Soviet Union a hand by trying to calm down the situation?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 969, "text": "We feel that as long as the Soviet Union has provided support and arms and so forth and advisers to the Afghan force of their puppet government, that even though they go, we must continue to support the Mujahidin so that the people of Afghanistan can now, without the absence of the Soviet Union-I mean without the presence of the Soviet Union, that they can bring about a government that is a government chosen by the people of Afghanistan. And we do not recognize that the government there in Kabul is anything but a puppet government established by the Soviet Union. And so, yes, as long as weapons are being supplied to that other side, we are going to do whatever is necessary to support the Mujahidin. ENTITY, the Vice President yesterday broke publicly with you over the negotiations with Panama's General Noriega. He said he would not negotiate with a drug dealer. Is not his stand rather more consistent with the administration's hard line on drugs than your own? Well, I think that I have not changed my mind about the hard line on drugs. But you have me now in a situation in which I cannot comment on what has been going on because there has been no resolution as yet. I can see why the Vice President said what he said because the impression has been given, based not on information from us but based on rumors and news leaks and so forth, that we are in negotiation somehow over-or with a participant in the drug trade and all. And I think he was making himself plain that you do not negotiate with people of that kind with regard to their activity in drugs. Our goal, what we are trying to achieve, is the restoration of democracy in Panama. Right now we have a situation where, not legally but just through custom and tradition and started by a previous general, that you have a military dictatorship, in effect, in which even if the people elect a President, the dictator, using force, maintains control. And our goal is a democratic Panama with a government chosen by the people. When you speak about-I know you hate the word, the name, but they are Star Wars in Moscow-but at what stage are we? Could you elaborate a little bit about the Star Wars?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 970, "text": "Well, this started a number of years ago when I first came here and I met with the military of our own country and asked, is it possible, can you foresee that our science and technology is such that we could create a defensive weapon against nuclear missiles, ballistic missiles, that could literally make them obsolete because there would be so much doubt as to whether, if they were once employed, they could ever get through that defense? And a few days later, they came back and told me that, yes, they believed such a weapon could be designed. And I said, go to it! It has made such great progress-some scientific breakthroughs-that the people involved believe that not only can we have such a system but that it will come much earlier than we had believed was possible. There have been a number of breakthroughs that have advanced the timing on this. And then, once you have such a weapon, I believe that that is when we could then really move worldwide, even if it meant sharing that weapon. And I would be amenable to that, that if we had such a weapon, a defensive weapon, that we could eliminate the offensive missiles. Now, the question arises naturally, well, then, why would you need that system if you'd eliminated the weapons? Well, you cannot wipe out of people's minds the knowledge of how to build a nuclear missile. And someday there could be a madman loose in the world, as we have seen in our own lifetime a number of times, who, with that knowledge, could then secretly build the only one. I have likened it to when, after World War I, the nations all met in Geneva and decided to eliminate poison gas. But everybody kept their gas masks. ENTITY, you deserve credit for including a Far East Asian region for elimination of INF at the Washington summit. What is your next logical step to ease the tensions in the Asian region, for example, Korean Peninsula, where, as you know, the Olympic games will be hurt? Well, now, I am not quite sure I understand your question there. How do you plan to propose to Mr. Gorbachev in order to ease the tensions in the Asian region? I think that all of us have an obligation to see that in the world tensions that nothing-if I am answering you correctly-in the area of terrorism or something could be employed to upset the Olympic games.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 971, "text": "And I think what that would require are those nations that probably have a more friendly relationship with North Korea than we do, by virtue of the war that was fought there, that if some of those other nations would make it plain that North Korea should not take advantage of their proximity to the games and do anything of a terrorist nature to upset those games. ENTITY, how would you like to be remembered in history? I am asking about the Reagan legacy, something like that-just a remark. The two front-runners struggling for your succession-both of them seem to be of quite a different brand of politician, more the managerial type of candidate as compared to a Reagan revolution and inspiration and these kinds of things. Has the mood changed in America? I have to say something about the Republican candidate for President. Now I can safely say that since everyone else has dropped out of the race. I have to say that the Vice President has been an important part of everything that we have achieved in this so-called revolution in these last 7 years or so. I could just give you a figure here of one thing from the very beginning. I had always believed that Vice Presidents in our system of government were relegated to a kind of just standing and waiting position. And I think that is a waste of talent. I have always believed that your Vice President should be like a vice president in a private corporation. He should be an executive with duties and functions. So, one of the first jobs that I put on the Vice President was to set up a task force and find out how many government regulations imposed on the private sector, on people and on local communities and State governments and business and industry-how many could be removed. And that task force, under his direction, was so successful that we estimate that we have eliminated 600 million man-hours a year of filling out government paperwork on the part of the citizens and businesses and the local and State governments. The book that registers-or contains all those regulations-is only half as thick as it used to be. And then I put-in the next time, in the task force when the State of Florida-it became disgraceful, the extent to which drugs were being flooded through there into the United States-and put him in charge of a task force there. And for the first time, he put together the law enforcement agencies from the Federal, the State, and the local level, and including cooperation from the military.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 972, "text": "And that was so successful there that then moved him to a task force for the whole southern border, across the 2,000 miles, the border between our country and Mexico. And again success, and the figures sound so great, except that with the boundaries such as we have and the two great seacoasts, that is not really the answer to the problem because of all of the thousands of tons of drugs and the planes and ships and trucks and so forth that we have confiscated, and the hundreds of millions of dollars that we have confiscated. As long as there is a demand, the drug dealers can get the drugs through-with these task forces. I do not think it would be helpful to eliminate them and just let them come in free with no interference, because we are doing that. At the same time, we are trying to win the battle where it must be won, and that is in taking the user away from the drugs, not the other way around-to convince the people that they should not. I know I am taking a great deal of time. My wife has been very active in that area, and all on her own. But she answered a little girl's question in a schoolroom one day when she was talking to them about drugs and why they, as children, should not engage in this. And the little girl stood up and said to her, Well, what do we do when someone offers us drugs? And that is why we are going to try to win that battle. But that all started from what you were saying about differences with the Vice President. And, no, I think that, as I say, he is been a part of all that we have done here with regard to the economy. We have had the longest period of economic expansion in the history of our country. In the last 5 years, we have created 16 million new jobs for the workers in our work force. We have the lowest unemployment rate in many years. And we have the highest rate of employment among what is considered the potential employment pool-all of the people that could be considered as potential for jobs-the highest percentage of them today are employed than has ever been true in our history. And as I say, the Vice President's been a part of all of the things that helped bring this about. ENTITY, do you consider Mikhail Gorbachev as a friend-I mean, a real friend?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeigntelevisionjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Foreign Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-television-journalists-0", "publication_date": "19-05-1988", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 973, "text": "And we begin with ENTITY. We met in the Roosevelt Room, just off the Oval Office, for a spirited conversation on several topics, starting with the president's big push on health care. Probably the most definitive promise you made in the campaign is that no one in the middle class would get a tax increase on your watch. Yet this week, Senator Rockefeller and several other Democrats say that this bill by Senator Baucus is a big middle class tax increase. Do you agree and does that mean you cannot sign it? I think that what they were referring to -- and I have not looked at the quotes, but I think that they were concerned about whether or not this was actually affordable. If you are saying to people, you have got to get health insurance, but they cannot actually afford it and they have to pay a penalty if they do not get it, then that is a pretty big burden on middle class families. But the first thing we have got to understand is you have got what is effectively a tax increase taking place on American families right now. Health care premiums went up 5.5 percent last year at a time when the rest of the economy, inflation was actually negative. So that is a huge bite out of people's pockets. And part of what I have been trying to say throughout this campaign --- this effort to get health care done is that if we do not do anything, guaranteed, Americans' costs are going to go up, more people are going to lose health care coverage, the insurance companies are going to continue to prevent people from getting it for pre-existing conditions. Those are all burdens on people who have health insurance right now. And so just to close the loop on this, the principles I have put forward very clearly when I spoke to the joint session of Congress, is that we are going to make sure that, number one, if you do not have health insurance, you are going to be able to get affordable health insurance. Number two, if you have health insurance, we are going to have insurance reforms that give you more security. You know what you are going to get. You know that if you are paying your premiums, you are actually going to have coverage when you get sick. Number three, it is going to be deficit neutral -- it is not going to add a dime to the deficit, now or in the future. Number four, it is going to start driving down our costs over the long-term.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 974, "text": "Now, 80 percent of what I'd like to see is actually already in all the various bills that are in Congress. That last 20 percent is tough because we have got to figure out -- making sure that we are paying for it properly, making sure that it really is relief to families who do not have health insurance, making sure that all the various details that are out there line up. And that is going to take some time. But I think that the effort by the Senate Finance Committee is a serious, strong effort to move an agenda forward. We have seen some positive signs from people who might have been otherwise a little bit shaky on health care, including Republican Olympia Snowe, I think, had some nice things to -- Has not signed on, but has said that this is a legitimate effort to try to solve the problem. What I want to see is that we just keep on working on it over the next several weeks. You mentioned these premium increases. But they are not happening as a result of a decision by the government. You were against the individual mandate -- Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you do not . You and I are both paying $900, on average -- our families -- in higher premiums because of uncompensated care. Now, what I have said is that if you cannot afford health insurance, you certainly should not be punished for that. If, on the other hand, we are giving tax credits, we have set up an exchange, you are now part of a big pool, we have driven down the costs, we have done everything we can and you actually can afford health insurance, but you have just decided, you know what, I want to take my chances. And then you get hit by a bus and you and I have to pay for the emergency room care, that is -- The -- for us to say that you have got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it is saying is, is that we are not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore than the fact that right now everybody in America , just about, has to get auto insurance. People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that if you hit my car, that I am not covering all the costs. No, but, George, you cannot just make up that language and decide that that is called a tax increase.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 975, "text": "If I say that right now your premiums are going to be going up by 5 or 8 or 10 percent next year and you say well, that is not a tax increase; but, on the other hand, if I say that I do not want to have to pay for you not carrying coverage even after I give you tax credits that make it affordable, then -- I do not think I am making it up. George, the fact that you looked up Merriam's Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you are stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you would not have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition. what you are saying is -- I wanted to check for myself. My critics say that I am taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we are going to have an individual mandate or not, but -- I absolutely reject that notion. Let us go to Medicare then -- because you also said that no one will lose what they have. Right. are going to force people to lose coverage they now have. These are essentially private HMOs who are getting, on average -- and this is not my estimate, this is Democrats and Republicans, experts have said -- they are getting, on average, about 14 percent more over payments, basically subsidies from taxpayers for a program that ordinary Medicare does just as good, if not better, at keeping people healthy. Now, they package these things in ways that in some cases may make it more convenient for some consumers, but they are overcharging massively for it. And so what we have said is instead of spending $17 billion, $18 billion a year, $177 billion over 10 years on that, why would not we use that to close the doughnut hole so the people are actually getting better prescription drugs? Why do not we make sure that we are using some of that money to actually make people healthier? But he said it is going to cause beneficiaries right now to lose what they have. If what you are saying is that people who are currently signed up for Medicare advantage are going to have Medicare and the same level of benefits, but they may not be having their insurer get a 14 percent premium, that is absolutely true. They may drop the coverage.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 976, "text": "No, these folks are going to be able to get Medicare that is just as good, provides the same benefits, but we are not subsidizing them for $18 billion a year. So Senator Nelson, he wants to pass an amendment that shields anyone currently on Medicare advantage from any cuts. Do you support that? George, I am not going to be negotiating a particular provision of the bill sitting down with you here right now. the basic principle that is indisputable is that we are wasting hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicare that is not making people healthier. I want to make sure that we are using that money to actually make people healthier. But if people lose their Medicare advantage? What I have said is we are not going to take a dollar out of the Medicare trust fund. We are not going to subsidize insurance companies in ways that end up creating a situation that Medicare is actually weaker and has a less sound financial foundation because right now we have got eight years from now potentially Medicare going into the red. Let me ask you about the broader debate around this, and you have seen a lot of your allies look at this whole debate around health care and see the issue of race being injected after Joe Wilson's outburst. This week, President Carter -- I know you disagree with that -- that race is involved here. And, you know, we have talked about this in several interviews, about these kinds of issues. You always dismiss it. Does it frustrate you when your own supporters see racism when you do not think it exists? Look, I think that race is such a volatile issue in this society -- always has been -- that it becomes hard for people to separate out race being sort of a part of the backdrop of American society versus race being a predominant factor in any given debate. And what I have said -- what we talked about during the campaign, are there some people who do not like me because of my race? Are there some people who vote for me only because of my race? The overwhelming part of the American population I think is right now following this debate and trying to figure out is this going to help me? Now, there're some who, setting aside the issue of race, actually I think are more passionate about the idea of whether government can do anything right. And I think that that is probably the biggest driver of some of the vitriol right now. Whether you are going to raise their taxes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 977, "text": "Well, it goes beyond taxes. I mean, I think that what we are seeing right now is a part of a running debate that we saw during FDR, we saw during Ronald Reagan. Anytime there is a president who is proposing big changes that seem to implicate the size of government, that gets everybody's juices flowing and sometimes you get some pretty noisy debate. But you are in a different -- But just to finish the thought, I think what I am proposing is a very modest attempt to make sure that hard-working families out there are going to have the security of health insurance that they can count on. This is not grafting a single payer model onto the United States . I think that there are some opponents who have used -- seized on this and tried to use this as a proxy for saying that somehow we are vastly expanding government and taking over every sector of the economy. That is what a lot of this debate is about. The one thing I hope is, is that we can have a civil argument about it and that we are able to acknowledge good motives on both sides. Each of us are Americans that care deeply about this country. And sometimes I think that, frankly, the media encourages some of the outliers in behavior because, let us face it, the easiest way to get on television right now is to be really rude. If you are just being sensible and giving people the benefit of the doubt and you are making your arguments, you do not get time on the nightly news. You might on Sunday morning, but -- But if you say something outrageous, you are there in a hot second. But have your --- have some of your allies made it easier for -- handed your opponents some ammunition, like ACORN, for example -- Well, look, the -- you know, I think that -- are there folks in the Democratic camp or on the left who have not always operated ways that I'd appreciate? Is -- is -- -- all funding for ACORN. Are you for that? Is that true on the other side, as well? I did not even know that ACORN was getting a whole lot of federal money. Both the Senate and the House have voted to cut it off. You know, what I know is, is that what I saw on that video was certainly inappropriate and deserves to be investigated. So you are not committing to -- to cut off the federal funding?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 978, "text": "George, this is not the biggest issue facing the country. It is not something I am paying a lot of attention to. Afghanistan is a big issue facing the country right now. You were for a flexible time line in Iraq . Some people now are saying that is exactly what should happen in Afghanistan if the same conditions hold. Do you agree with that? Here is what I think. When we came in, basically there had been drift in our Afghan strategy. Everybody acknowledges that. And I ordered a top to bottom review. We are there because al Qaeda killed 3,000 Americans and we cannot allow extremists who want to do violence to the United States to be able to operate with impunity. Now, I think we have lost -- we lost that focus for a while and you started seeing a classic case of mission creep where we are just there and we start taking on a whole bunch of different missions. I wanted to narrow it. I did order 21,000 additional troops there to make sure that we could secure the election because I thought that was important. I also said after the election I want to do another review. We have just gotten those 21,000 in. General McChrystal, who is only been there a few months, has done his own assessment. I am now going to take all this information and we are going to test whatever resources we have against our strategy, which is if by sending young men and women into harm's way, we are defeating al Qaeda and -- and that can be shown to a skeptical audience, namely me -- somebody who is always asking hard questions about deploying troops, then we will do what is required to keep the American people safe. I just have one -- one last question -- Now, the only thing I want to say, though, is that what we -- I just want to make sure that everybody understands that you do not make decisions about resources before you have the strategy right. I just have time for one final question. I am sure you know the story about John Kennedy's first summit with Nikita Khrushchev back in his first year in office. He meets with Khrushchev. Khrushchev cleans his clock. I know there are no perfect analogies, but what is the moment in the last eight months where you took a step back and said, 'Wow, I am going to have to step up my game'?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 979, "text": "ENTITY, I want to thank you very much for your time. And as you know, I am neither a politician nor a journalist, but being given the opportunity to sit down with you here and talk about an issue like global warming was an opportunity as a concerned citizen that I could not pass up. So my first question is, global warming is obviously a controversial topic among scientists and politicians. What is your understanding of what the effects of climate change will have on our future if preventative steps are not taken immediately? Well, let me, first of all, thank you for your interest in this because I think it is important that we get citizens more involved in it; and secondly say, I do not think it is all that controversial a topic among scientists. There are a few who say that it is not proven, but we know that the hottest years in recorded history, and certainly in the last 600 years, that 9 of the hottest 11 years have occurred in the last decade. So, the climate is changing, and the globe is warming at an unsustainable rate. And if it is not slowed and ultimately reversed, what will happen is, the polar ice caps will melt more rapidly; sea levels will rise; you will have the danger of flooding in places like the precious Florida Everglades or the sugarcane fields of Louisiana; island nations could literally be buried. The whole climate of the United States, for example, could be changed where you would have more flooding, more heat waves, more storms, more extreme weather events generally. And then you will have some public health consequences. For example, we are already seeing in Africa, for example, malaria being found at higher and higher altitudes where it used to be too cool for the mosquitoes. While growing up, I always felt that environmental issues were constantly overlooked, and I watched people band together for various causes which seemed to come and go, and it was almost like they were going in and out of style. So how do we take a misunderstood issue like climate change and not only raise awareness but make its prevention an ongoing commitment? Well, I think we have to make climate change a local and a personal matter in the same way other successful environmental issues are. You know, since I have been here, we have been able to strengthen the quality of our air, strengthen the quality of our water.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 980, "text": "We have set aside more land for protection and protected forests than virtually any administration in history, except those of the two Roosevelts, because they were things people could understand and identify with, and they knew how to advocate for, and they understood the benefits. So I think we have to bring this down to practical applications and convince people that they can do something about it, number one; and number two, we have to talk about the first question you asked me what the consequences of not doing anything. We started a project here at the White House called the Greening of the White House. Just by changing the lighting in this whole building, we lowered our electric bills by $100,000 a year. Then we put in a different sort of roofing system which kept out more heat and cold. Then we put in a more energy-efficient heating system and water system. We brought more energy-efficient equipment copiers, computers all with the Energy Star label, which is a totally voluntary thing the Department of Energy provides. Now, these are things that businesses all across America could be doing. They are things that homes all across America could be doing. We have worked with the Home Builders to help build lower cost housing that will cut energy use by 50 percent. There is one housing development built in the Inland Empire out in southern California, east of L.A., for lower income working people where the average utility bills are 65 percent lower than in houses of comparable size in the rest of California just by putting the most modern, thin solar panels on the roofs, by having sensible insulation, by having energyefficient lighting, and by taking new windows that let in more light and keep out more heat and cold. These things are out there now, and I think when people know there is actually something they can do, as well as what the consequences of our not acting and not pushing Congress and other countries to act are, then I think you will see action. Well, my other question pertaining to that is, if there was a profit incentive there, would that make us pay more attention? I mean, right now, for example, if you take the most energy-efficient lighting, it costs you more now, up front, but it lasts so much longer, eventually you turn a profit. And this is true in many processes in all the energy fields. So what I have proposed to the Congress is that we do basically two things.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 981, "text": "First of all, we give significant tax breaks to consumers to buy energy-efficient products of all kinds, and that we also give tax breaks for people to manufacture and develop them. And then, that we spend more money on research, like the project we have had that the Vice President headed for new generation vehicles, that we work with the auto companies and the autoworkers union to develop more energy-efficient vehicles and to develop alternative forms of fuel, including biofuels, which could dramatically change the whole future with regard to the greenhouse gases we have put into the atmosphere. So there is a lot more we can do, and we ought to provide tax incentives to the private sector to help us. But what I want to drive home is that right now it is no longer necessary, in order to grow our economy, to put more greenhouse gases which cause global warming into the atmosphere. You do not have to burn more oil and coal to get richer now not in America, not anywhere else. Now, in Kyoto, in the 1997 Global Conference on Climate Change, it asked industrialized countries to drastically reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. And when we tried to enforce such protocols in developing countries, they came right back to us and said that the U.S. is responsible for a quarter of the greenhouse gases that are going into the atmosphere. How can we not practice what we preach? Well first, I think we should practice what we preach. And that is why I think it is so important that the Congress pass the budget that I recommended, that would dramatically increase our investment in developing the kinds of technologies and alternative fuels that would cut our greenhouse gas emissions. But I also believe that we have a big stake in working with other countries to convince them that they, too, can grow without increasing greenhouse gas emissions. For example, no matter how much we cut emissions in the United States, since this is a global problem, unless we also get China and India and the countries that have the big rain forests to work with us, we are going to be in real trouble. So, for example, when I was in Bangladesh recently, I announced a debt-for-nature swap that we were going to help finance with them. I signed a bill to do the same thing with the South American rain forest last year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 982, "text": "In India, we signed an agreement by which they committed that as they continue to grow and need more power, that they will have more and more coming from natural and renewable sources in the future, so that we can work together, because it is a global problem. But we should lead the way. And since we have already so much technology, and since, as I have just explained, just with these minor things we cut the power bills here at the White House by $100,000, and we are going to do it across the Federal Government if the Federal Government alone will do what we did at the White House, we will save $750 million a year, and it will be the equivalent in terms of greenhouse gases and climate change of taking 1.7 million cars off the road. We should be doing that. But we should also work with other countries. I tell other countries, the developing countries, I am not asking you to give up your growth; I am not asking you to give jobs up. I am asking you to pursue a different pattern of energy use, which will give you more growth, more jobs, and a healthier population over the long run. You can grow an economy and use less energy if you do it right. Why do you think this issue is so constantly overlooked, and why do you think people do not take it seriously enough? And for you, is it as important as something like health care or education? Oh, yes, over the long run, it is one of the two or three major issues facing the world over the next 30 years. I think it is because it takes a long time for the climate to change in a way that people feel it, and because it seems sort of abstract now. That is why I think it is important that programs like this are aired and people like you, not politicians or scientific experts but citizens, express their concern. And then it is important that citizens know that it ought to be an issue; it ought to be a voting issue at election time. And I do not say this in a hateful way. It is just that people need to tell the politicians and the candidates they care about this; they want action. But our citizens need to follow the lead of a lot of our religious groups and other civic groups in actually doing things themselves. Right now, if the American people knew all the options that are available to them and understood the economics, we could do much better.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 983, "text": "And of course, if my plan were to pass the Congress and we were to give the tax breaks to consumers and manufacturers of these products and technologies, we could do it even faster. Now, the major polluters are obviously the big industries, such as the oil companies, who are one of the most powerful lobbies in the world. How do we convince them to change the way they have been doing business for the last century? Well, for one thing, oil is a depleting resource. And I think that oil companies and coal companies should be given incentives to become energy companies and to promote energy efficiency, so that the oil they have will last longer and provide them a more steady stream of income and so that they can develop other ways of earning money. They should become they should think of themselves as energy companies, not oil companies. And if you look at the record, starting with British Petroleum and its leader, some members of the oil industry are beginning to come over to support action on climate change. Some leaders of the auto industry are beginning to come over and support action on climate change. They understand that this is real and that when these gases get up in the atmosphere, it takes at least 50 years for them to dissipate. So we need to begin now a disciplined effort, which will be good for our economy. I will say again, this is good for the American economy and good for public health. We need to do this, and if we did it from today until the time you are my age, we'd be a much wealthier country, a much healthier country. And with that kind of effort over that length of time, we could head off this crisis. How do we get power companies to replace their coal plants with cleaner technologies? And why do not we make it so expensive for power companies to keep their old coal plants that they have to invest in cleaner fuels? Well, I think you can do it in two or three ways. I think, first of all, it is important to have very rigorous clean air standards. And I think it is important also to provide them the tax incentives they need to move as quickly as possible to alternative energy sources. A lot of the most enlightened utilities in America also see conservation itself as an energy source, PG&E in California, for example. But other utilities have understood that our inefficient patterns of using electricity are pressing them to use more traditional energy and emit more greenhouse gases and warm the climate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 984, "text": "So I think what we should do is to have a system where we finance not only the conversion to alternative energy but also looking at conservation itself as a form of energy. When you save, you do the same amount of work with less energy, and it is like creating more energy in a totally clean way. And I think that we should be financing those things in part with tax breaks from the American Government. And I have pushed for that, and I will continue to do so. Now, you have enacted tax credits for people who want to buy electric and fuel-cell vehicles. What are we doing to encourage oil companies to research alternative fuel technologies like fuel cells? Well, I want to give tax credits to them, too, to make it easier for them to spend money on that kind of research. And we are doing a lot of the basic research in the Government. A hybrid vehicle. hybrid vehicles the work that we have done to try to help them develop cars that run on electricity, but where the electricity regenerates, the capacity regenerates so they do not have to pull in every 80 miles and juice up the battery again; and a lot of the research we are doing through the Agriculture Department in biofuels all these things I think are very important. As we do more of that research, the basic research, we then make it more cost effective for the energy companies and for the auto companies to take that basic research and quickly convert it into commercially viable research to develop products. So I think our research at the national level should increase as well. I think it is very, very important that the Federal Government do that. You know, to get out of the energy context, the Internet basically began as a federally funded research project. So a lot of the things we take for granted today in the private sector began with a heavy investment of basic research from the National Government. And I think we are still at a point where the National Government should be doing a lot of this basic research. I will just give you one example. If we could suppose we get cars that will get 70 miles to the gallon, 80 miles to the gallon. And then suppose they can run on clean biofuels that do not have any greenhouse gas emissions, instead of gasoline. The problem today is it takes about 7 gallons of gasoline to produce 8 gallons of ethanol or other biofuel. So the researchers today are working on a chemical breakthrough which would permit you to produce 8 gallons of biofuel with 1 gallon of gasoline.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 985, "text": "If you did that, if you improve the ratio 8 to 1, and you had a car getting 70 miles to the gallon, it would be like getting 500 miles to the gallon of gasoline in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. Then the whole future of the world would be different. And then Americans, simply by buying fuel that would be cost effective, could whip this problem. And we are on the verge of those kinds of breakthroughs, but we need the energy companies to think of themselves as that, not oil and coal but energy. We need the auto companies to keep supporting the work of combating global warming, not pretending it does not exist, and many of them are today. And we need more action from ordinary citizens, smaller businesses, and the Government to promote energy conservation and alternative energy sources. But again I say, this is not a problem that requires big taxes, big regulation, and slow economic growth. It is no longer necessary in the information economy, with the dramatic scientific breakthroughs already made, we can grow economies faster by conserving energy rather than burning it up. And that is what people do not yet believe. If we can get people to really believe that we could have a great future using less energy, not more traditional energy, I mean then we'd have the battle half won. And maybe that will come out of this program. Because there is nothing so dangerous to society than being in the grip of a big idea that is not true anymore. And it is just no longer true that for America or India or China or Latin America or any other place to grow wealthy, they have to put more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere by burning up more coal and oil. And so we have to show people that that is not true, and show them how they can make a difference, and then keep making these products and technologies available so that it becomes easier and easier and easier to do what is not only the right thing environmentally but the right thing for our long-term economic and public health purposes. Many people have said in the past that the American dream was to buy a car and live in the suburbs. But it has created massive problems that have made us more reliant on our cars. Since it is so difficult for us to convince people to use mass transportation, how can we promote hybrid vehicles and convince people to give up their SUV's? For instance, if it only costs $575 a car to make them cleaner, why cannot you make it a law, like seatbelts?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 986, "text": "Well, I am not sure that it only costs $575 to make them cleaner in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. I think first of all, I think if these SUV's are going to be sustainable over the long run, they also are going to have to become much more fuel-efficient and be able to run on alternative fuels. And I think the American people would pay a little more if they would do that. And the auto companies for the first time have said now that they want to bring in the SUV's and their other less efficient vehicles into this sort of new energy future that we are trying to build. Secondly, I think that people will take mass transit more if it works better. I have worked very hard to support more investments in mass transit to make it more convenient and faster, including more high-speed rail. And I still believe that as our urban areas become more and more populated and traffic becomes more congested, quite apart from pollution in the air, if we can have clean, efficient, and fast mass transit, people will begin to take it more and more and more because they can do other things; they are not wasting so much time if they are riding the train. So I am hopeful that you will see that. I very much hope that we will continue to develop mass transit alternatives, and I believe they will become much more popular with people, especially in the highly populated areas. But we cannot stop the development of fuel efficiency because a lot of our people live in rural areas and drive a long way to work, and that is not going to change anytime soon. Now, Louisiana is the second largest consumer of fossil fuels and the city most at risk for sea level rise. Cannot something be done, like in Atlanta, where the Government withheld highway funds, making it the model city for environmental responsibility? But under the law, we can only withhold these highway funds if the air pollution of a given metropolitan area is so high and they have not done anything about it, anything else about it. Then we can withhold the highway funds. They have to come up with an alternative program, which usually involves mass transit or carpooling or some other means to reduce air pollution, and in this case, also to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. And I am sorry to say I do not know exactly the answer to your question, but it may be that for other reasons, New Orleans is in full compliance with the Federal laws on air pollution.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 987, "text": "But we have tried to do that in more than one other place, to use the obligation of a city, a big metropolitan area to have clean air to promote the development of alternative energy technologies and alternative travel patterns. In other words, instead of telling people we are going to shut you down, or imposing big, heavy, complicated regulations, say, Here is the standard; if you want the money, meet the standard. And then, in Atlanta, they figured out something to do that was very good for the environment, and they got their money. Now, I am sure you have heard so many reports from scientists and politicians and citizens. What do you think the best course for American citizens is, within the next 20 years, as far as helping the environment is concerned? Well, the biggest global problem by far on the environment is global warming. The biggest problem in many developing countries right now is safe water. We still have huge numbers of children dying from diarrhea and other related diseases and problems because they do not have safe water. And there are local air pollution problems that are horrible in various places. And I think the most important thing we can do is, every citizen must first understand that he or she can do something about this, and it will not bankrupt them. They should have their homes, their cars, their businesses everything they do should be oriented toward energy efficiency and alternative energy technologies. And then they should make this one of the issues that has to be discussed by public officials running for office at every level. This has to become not just an issue that we talk about once a year on Earth Day but an issue that is debated along with health care and education and national security and other issues at every election. You know, I was fortunate when I asked Vice President Gore to join me in 1992 that he had written a book on this, that he was interested in it. He talked to me about it. And so we just, on our own initiative, have done a lot of these things. But we could have had a whole environmental agenda and not dealt with this really very much. And then we had Kyoto, which we strongly supported, the Kyoto Protocol. But this needs to become an issue for every public official. It needs to become a matter of citizen debate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithleonardodicaprioforabcnewsplanetearth2000", "title": "Interview With Leonardo DiCaprio for ABC News' Planet Earth 2000", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-leonardo-dicaprio-for-abc-news-planet-earth-2000", "publication_date": "31-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 988, "text": "It is great to be with you. In your State of the Union you proposed a series of measures that you say would create jobs that would help the economy, strengthen the economy. Can you move forward on any of them without Congress, without the support of Congress? Well, I think there are a number of things we can do without Congress. As you know, we started back in the fall saying we cannot wait. And so helping families refinance their homes, we went ahead and did it administratively. Some of the changes that we are making on immigration, we are trying to make sure that we are prioritizing criminals. That the three in 10 program is something that we can change administratively so that families are not separated so long, when they have the opportunity to apply for citizenship. There are things that we are doing with community colleges, and on education that we can do administratively. But ultimately, we can obviously do a lot more if Congress is willing to move. There is no doubt that when it comes to jobs, our biggest priority is manufacturing. We are here at this Intel plant that is going to provide 1,000 jobs here in Arizona. And thousands of construction jobs building this facility. And companies like Intel are not unique. What they are finding is they can be competitive here in the United States, but we have got to change our tax codes in order to provide even more incentives to invest in the United States. When it comes to American energy. There are a lot of things that we can do administratively, for example, natural gas. We think that we are going to be looking at 600,000 jobs in natural gas extraction here in the United States and all the industries that come with it. But we could be doing more if we are investing in clean energy. So on each of these areas, making sure that we are building the skills of American workers, making sure that we are encouraging American manufacturing. Making sure that we have got a strong American energy program. That we can do some things administratively, but ultimately Congress, which has the power of the purse, is going to have to act as well. Unemployment is about 11 percent among Latinos, much higher than the national average. What can you say to Latinos? And what can you do for Latinos who are looking for jobs? Well, there are a couple of things that obviously would make a huge difference. One of them is all the construction workers who were laid off.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivision", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision", "publication_date": "25-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 989, "text": "Latinos were highly represented in the construction trade, and when the housing bubble went bust a lot of people got laid off. That is one of the reasons why we are going to continue to encourage refinancing, and we are actually expanding the refinancing program that we talked about a few months ago so that it can reach more people. And that should help shore up the housing market. And that could help create jobs. But we are also going to make sure that we try to push Congress to fund infrastructure projects that put a lot of construction workers back to work all across the country. Latinos are just unfortunately represented when it comes to small businesses. And so one of the things that we want to do is to continue to get more effective financing programs to small businesses and startups, because they create most of the jobs here in the United States. So everything that we do is designed to help America as a whole grow, but there are certain industries that have been badly affected because of the housing crisis. Latinos have been badly affected by them. If we can start helping those areas, then that is going to give a big boost. You spoke a lot about fairness in your speech. You mentioned the importance or the need for all to pay their fair share. Governor Romney we know that recently said that he is paid only 13.9 percent on 46 million income. Does he represent the inequities in our tax system? Well, I will let Governor Romney speak to his own taxes. What I know is that as a general rule, those who are making the most in the top one percent or in the top one-tenth of one percent often times pay lower tax rates than their secretaries, or their drivers, or the people who are working in their homes. Now what makes it especially important is because right now we have got a big deficit. And we are all debating how do we reduce the government debt and the deficit, so we have a stable fiscal environment. We cannot reduce the deficit if people like me or anybody else who is making a lot of money are in a position where they are paying the lowest rate in taxes in 50 years, even lower than they were under Ronald Reagan, lower than they were under Bill Clinton. It is not good for the economy. It is not good for our deficit. And ultimately what we do not want to do is to cut more programs for higher education or cut more programs in basic science and research that create these tremendous innovations like you see here in Intel.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivision", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision", "publication_date": "25-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 990, "text": "If instead we could be making those investments, also closing our deficit by making sure that everybody is paying their fair share. Well, you have been strongly criticized by Republican contenders. For example, Romney says, that you are you failed America. And Newt Gingrich told Univision today that your presidency is littered with broken promises. He challenged you to three or seven three-hour debates. When are you going to respond to them? Well, I will let them determine who their standard bear is going to be. Until the Republicans have a nominee, we do not have a campaign. Right now they have to decide who it is that they want representing them. Who will be a more challenging contender for you? You know, I do not really think about that. What I can say is this. That whoever their nominee is, they represent ideas that I think are wrong for America. They believe that we should not provide a pathway to citizenship for young people who were brought here when they were very young children, and are basically American kids, but right now are still in a shadow. They have said that they would veto the Dream Act. They both believe that we should repeal a healthcare law that stands to provide millions of Latinos who work every single day the opportunity to make sure that they have got health insurance. And so on a whole range of issues I think that whether it is Mr. Romney or Mr. Gingrich or Mr. Santorum or whoever else they might decide to select, they represent a fundamentally different vision of America. And it is not the bold generous forward looking optimistic America that I think built this country. Republicans are also criticizing you saying that you are campaigning instead of governing. Now as an incumbent, you have the right to campaign for your re-election. But how will people be able to differentiate between your campaigning and your governing? Well, you know, the truth of the matter is, is that I think a lot of commentators have said that I spent most of my first three years not doing a lot of politics, 'cause we were so busy with policy. And you know, my general instinct is to focus on doing my job because my attitude is, if I am doing my job well, people will recognize it, and the politics will follow. Obviously right now we are having a big debate in the country as a whole about the direction that we are going in. And the views that are held by the presidential candidates are the same views that are held in the House of Representatives.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivision", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision", "publication_date": "25-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 991, "text": "You know, when we had an argument back in December about whether or not we should extend the payroll tax cut, or as some Republicans were arguing, we should go ahead and let middle class families suffer a $40 per paycheck increase in their taxes. You know, there were politics involved in that debate. But politics in the sense of how we are determining what is best for our country. And so I cannot really separate these debates. What I am trying to do is persuade as many members of Congress as possible, as well as the American people, that we are making progress. We have created three million jobs in the last 22 months. We have seen a recovery in manufacturing. And probably the best manufacturing hiring that we have seen since the 1990's. We are moving in the right direction. What we cannot do is go back to the same policies that got us into this mess in the first place. It also means by the way that when I am out on, you know, in Arizona or other states I am going to be arguing about issues like regulation. One of the things that we have been talking about is the reason we had this housing crisis was because we did not have strong regulations in place. And people were subject to predatory lending. They were fooled into buying homes that they could not afford. And so we have had to, for example, appoint Richard Cordray as the head of the Consumer Protection Bureau that we have setup. And I want to build a case as to why that is important. Because for Latino families it is very important to make sure that they are not cheated when they are purchasing a home. It is very important that when they send remittances to Mexico that somebody is not taking too much of their hard-earned paychecks. So those are the kinds of fights that we are going to have. And you know, some people may interpret that as campaigning. I consider that to be important to my leadership in governing this country. Talking about Latino families there is a new Univision/ABC /Latino Decisions poll that has good and bad news for you. Hispanics continue to support you. Fifty-three percent they are less excited about your performance. In part, because they feel that you did not keep your promise for immigration reform. Can you explain to them why? We could not get any Republican votes. Yeah, Senate, even if you have a majority of votes, even if you have 51 votes you still cannot pass something through the Senate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivision", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision", "publication_date": "25-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 992, "text": "And a lot of Republicans who used to support comprehensive immigration reform decided that it was bad politics and they would not support it anymore. So I have continued to advocate on behalf of comprehensive immigration reform. Obviously in the State of Union yesterday, I could not have been clearer about not only my interest in comprehensive immigration reform, but if we cannot do the whole package, at minimum let us get the Dream Act done. But we now have two Republican candidates who said they'd veto a Dream Act. And you know, that kind of lack of responsiveness to the very real stories that are out there of families who work hard, who are contributing to our society, young people who should be our next engineers here at Intel or next teachers in our schools, are not able to access the kind of opportunity that I think everybody feels they should. So this is the kind of barrier that we are meeting in Congress. We are just going to keep on pushing and pushing until hopefully we finally get a break. But ENTITY, one of the concerns is the deportations. Over 1.2 million people have been deported under your administration. You could not do anything administratively for this? Well, there are some things that we are doing. Now first of all, the fact is Congress allocates this money. Whoever was president, you were going to see some increase in terms of enforcement. But, but, well, because that is the law that is on the books right now. And the way our system works, the president does not have the authority to simply ignore Congress and say, we are not going to enforce the laws that you have passed. What we do have the ability to do, and what we have systematically done, is to use our administrative authority to prioritize and say, let us not focus on Dream Act kids. Let us not focus on a law-abiding family that is out there trying to, you know, make their way. Let us focus on folks who are engaged in criminal activity. Let us focus on those that are breaking laws not just immigration laws. And in fact you have seen a steady increase in the percentage of those who are deported who have committed crimes. Now I cannot , again, just wave away the laws the Congress has put in place. But what we have tried to do is to, you know, create a system that is more humane, that is better prioritized. And until we get comprehensive immigration reform, there is going to continue to be heartbreaking stories.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivision", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision", "publication_date": "25-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 993, "text": "That is what we are trying to change. But ultimately the way we change it, is we have got to change our politics. And that is why I talked about it at the State of the Union and that is why I am going to keep on talking about it. One is, as you know, your government expelled the Consul of Venezuela in Miami. After a Univision documentary showed that she was participating in some kind of cyber espionage against the U.S. Were you involved in the decision making? You know, I will not go into the details of this. Obviously there were investigations and follow-up that took place. My wish is that we could see improved relations with Venezuela. We do not desire ruptured relations with any country. But you know, we are going to continue to try to pursue a diplomatic path in Latin America that upholds the values that we care about. Democracy, you know, respect for human rights, respect for freedom of the press, making sure that no country is interfering with, you know, the legitimate claims of their neighbors. And so you know, that is going to create some tensions with Venezuela. But you know, there are tensions that we can manage. Is the growing influence of Iran in Latin America including Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, does that concern you? You know, I think Iran is an example of a country that has become more and more isolated because of its own actions. Obviously it is trying to reach out to some countries in Latin America. But overall Iran has never been more isolated, because they are pursuing nuclear weapons that violate international law. And I think the world community recognizes that the last thing we need is an arms race in the Middle East. What we have done is organized international sanctions. We have worked collectively with other countries to try to put pressure on Iran. But we have also said, you have a path to reintegrate with the world community. You can pursue peaceful nuclear power, forego nuclear weapons, and the international community I think will accept you. But so far at least they have not been willing to take that path. And we are going to be relentless in continuing to apply pressure on them until they make a better choice. We have run out of time. By any chance have you been practicing your Spanish? I heard somewhere that you have and that you have a few words or lines that you can say. You know, I have to say, Malia and Sasha are both studying Spanish. And already they are much better than me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmariaelenasalinasunivision", "title": "Interview with Maria Elena Salinas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-maria-elena-salinas-univision", "publication_date": "25-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1001, "text": "Why has it been so easy for critics to say the administration does not have its story straight on Benghazi? Well, look, the fact of the matter is that this is a tragedy. There is all kinds of legitimate questions to ask because anytime a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans who were serving our country get killed, we have to figure out what happened, and fix it. And most importantly, we have got to bring those folks who carried that out to justice. That is exactly what we are going to do. But I do take offense, as I have said at one of the debates, with some suggestion that in any way, we have not tried to make sure that the American people knew, as information was coming in what we believed happened. Was it the intel community that gave you bad information early on? Well, that is what we are going to find out from the investigation. But the truth is that across the board, when this happened, my number 1 priority was, secure Americans, figure out what happened, bring those folks to justice. We are in the process of doing that right now. Congress has been getting the flow of information continuously from day 1. And what my attitude on this is, if we find out we that there was a big breakdown, and somebody did not do their job, they will be held accountable. Ultimately, as commander-in-chief, I am responsible, and I do not shy away from that responsibility. My number 1 responsibility is to go after the folks who did this, and we are going to make sure we get them. I have got a pretty good track record of doing that. But at the same time, it is like Dr. J, when he went around, you only have 9 more days to do this. One of the things that happens at this point is - it is just kinetic energy. You are just running, and you just want to make sure that your voters are enthusiastic, that you are getting your message out in a clear and concise way. Why did you look at me when you said concise? Because some people accuse ENTITY of maybe not being clear enough about the next four years. I do not know who would do that. Well, but it is also, you know - in rallies like this, at this point, what people just want to know is not every point on every plan.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmikabrzezinskiandjoescarboroughmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mika-brzezinski-and-joe-scarborough-msnbc", "publication_date": "29-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1002, "text": "What they want to know what is the vision that you have got for the country, and the good news is, I am feeling very optimistic about the next four years. I think the country is bouncing back, as we always do from tough times. I want to make sure that I lead over these next four years. When I say that this is like Dr. J, you know. This has to be bittersweet for you. Cause I saw you out there, and I thought, Oh my god. This guy is not going to be doing this again, after and then, you are going to have to be like Bill Clinton and find other people to campaign... It has to be bittersweet for you. I mean, you start thinking about your first campaign. I was thinking about my first campaign, when I was running for state senate. We had like four volunteers around the kitchen table, designing our own flier, taking it over to Kinko's, you know? And now, I am not going to be doing this much longer. And you know, the nice thing is though, the energy, the crowds that we have seen, makes me feel as if we are running this campaign in the right way. So, let us talk about the next 4 years, and try and get specific as possible. What is- How would you define your mandate for the next four years? I'd like to know the sacrifice that will not be asked of just the 1% but of the 99% as well? Well, there is no doubt that our first order of business is going to be to get our deficits and debt under control. You know, the Bush tax cuts end at the end of the year. That would not be the right way to do things, that is taking a machete to something, as opposed to a scalpel, and after the election, I think that both Democrats and Republicans have to step back and say, You know what, this is something that the country wants to solve. If I have won, then I believe that is a mandate for doing it in a balanced way. We have already made a trillion dollars worth of cuts. We can do some more cuts. We can look at how we deal with the health care costs in particular under Medicaid and Medicare in a serious way, but we are also going to need some revenue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmikabrzezinskiandjoescarboroughmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mika-brzezinski-and-joe-scarborough-msnbc", "publication_date": "29-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1003, "text": "If we get that piece done, and we kind of settle on the big question, how much government are we going to have, and how are we going to pay for it? Then, a lot of the other stuff falls into place. Because Republicans demagogue it. Democrats demagogue it. Everyone's demagogued it through the years. Can you go to the Republicans, and say, Guys, wait a minute, we got to do this together? Well, look, here is what we can do. I mean, look, I am on record. I think turning it into a voucher, premium support is a bad idea. I do think though that anybody realistically looks at it and says, you know, if we are spending 17% of our GDP on health care, and every other country is spending 11%, and their outcomes are better, that difference is 6%, that is our deficit and our debt, and so, let us find good ideas. Now, I stole a whole bunch of ideas from a Massachusetts governor that I think over time is going to save us money, and you know, part-the $716 billion dollars that Governor Romney suggests that I stole from Medicare is actually money that we are saving in the system, and extending the life of Medicare, so I think there are ways that we can do this in a creative way, but if we get that piece done, then, immigration reform, I think is there to get done. And I think your side is going to need to get it done because you cannot continue to alienate the fastest growing segment of the country, and it is the right thing to do. I think that infrastructure, ENTITY, when you were in Congress, since when did roads and bridges become Democratic issues? A guy named Ike kind of liked infrastructure, did not he? But the thing is, we got a whole bunch of deferred maintenance. Contractors are begging for work ? Putting folks back to work right now as part of an overall package, This has also got long term deficit reduction, can jumpstart the economy, at the same time that housing is starting to recover. And the education agenda that I have got is one that even Jeb Bush has occasionally complimented, because you know, we have said, you cannot just give more money into a system without reforming it, and there is got to be a lot more accountability. How do Republicans react in Congress post-election? It is been unified, in opposition to me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmikabrzezinskiandjoescarboroughmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mika-brzezinski-and-joe-scarborough-msnbc", "publication_date": "29-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1004, "text": "Boehner still is Speaker, and the House goes either Democratic or Republican by 1. You are still in the same situation in the next four years, you were in the last four years. So, what is going to make the difference. We have talked about this to you, one-on-one before, what makes the difference over the next 4 years? I truly believe that if we can get the deficit and debt issue solved, which I believe we can get done, you know, in the lame duck, or in the immediate aftermath, of the lame duck, then that clears away a lot of the ideological underbrush. And then, you know, now, we can start looking at a whole bunch of other issues, as I have said has historically not been that ideological. Let us take an example. Now, the truth is, I put out fewer regulations than George Bush did. Obviously, Dodd-Frank, welfare reform, Wall Street reform is a big example of that. But I have actually initiated a whole process to look back at all the old regulations to see, are there ones that do not work? That should be a project Republicans are happy to work with me on, because you know, if we are going to streamline government, we are going to do it smartly. I have said I want to consolidate a whole bunch of government agencies. We should have one Secretary of Business, instead of nine different departments that are dealing with things like getting loans to SBA or helping companies with exports. Now, the reason we have not done that is not because of some big ideological difference. It has something to do with Congress talking a good game about streamlining government, but protective about giving up their jurisdiction over various pieces of government. So, there are going to be a whole things of government that I think we can work on, the first thing though is, let us go ahead and get settled, how big a government, how do we pay for it? If we solve that problem, and I think we can solve it, and we have to solve it, then, I think we will be in a position to make some progress in the last four...", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmikabrzezinskiandjoescarboroughmsnbc", "title": "Interview with Mika Brzezinski and Joe Scarborough of MSNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mika-brzezinski-and-joe-scarborough-msnbc", "publication_date": "29-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1005, "text": "Well, I sure appreciate you joining us. I guess you folks down in Washington are officially in the thick of the budget battle. Your reaction to the rescission package just passed by the House was that it favors pork over people, and you promised a veto. How comfortable are you with the prospect that your role may be shaping up more and more to be a blocker of action rather than an initiator? Well, I do not want to block action. I have offered even more spending cuts than is in their bill. This is not about cutting spending, and they know it. I worked in good faith with the Republican majority in the Senate to shape a rescission bill that would be better for the American people and would still cut spending. For example, I worked with the Senate to add back some of the money in the LIHEAP program, which goes to States like New Hampshire to help older people with their utility bills, but we cut spending somewhere else. So we had an agreement that I would go along with this bill, and we worked in good faith. Then the Senate and the House Members went behind closed doors when nobody was looking and remember, this is not a partisan issue members of both parties put a lot of pork in the bill and took a billion and a half dollars in education funding out. And so let me just finish so all I told them was, I am all for it, cutting this much spending. Indeed, I think we should cut a little more spending. I offered another $100 million in spending cuts. But I do not believe if we are going to balance this budget and cut back on Government spending, then we need to be very careful about how we spend the money we do spend. We ought to target it to education. We ought to target it to things that will raise incomes and grow jobs in America and improve the security of the American people. Instead, they took out money to make our schools safer and more drug-free. They took out money to fund college educations for young people who are working in their community in the national service program that is received broad bipartisan support in New Hampshire. They instead, they put in $100 million for a courthouse. They put in even more road projects into a Congressman's district who now has nine special-purpose road projects in his district. They even put in a million dolllars for a city street in a State in the Midwest where the mayor did not ask for the money.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermalofnewhampshirepublicradio", "title": "Interview With Peter Malof of New Hampshire Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-malof-new-hampshire-public-radio", "publication_date": "19-05-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1006, "text": "Now, that is what was done behind closed doors. If we are going to change things around here, we have got to move away from the old politics, cut unnecessary spending, and then when we do spend money, the money ought to be well spent. We should not be trading in pork for people, behind closed doors. That is what we did, and it was wrong. And I want to change that. But I am all for the spending cuts. Now, it is my impression that the only new spending in the House bill is disaster relief, antiterrorism laws, and Oklahoma City aid. You originally signed on to items that you are now calling pork, such as the highway construction and That is when we had a that is right. But that is when we were spending more money. But let us just let us look at the real facts. If we are going to cut $16 billion worth of spending, and I signed let me remind you that I signed on to it because the Congress has the ability to put these special projects in there and because I do not have the line-item veto, which the Republicans say they are for and which I have agreed with the Republicans for. Now, they passed the line-item veto in the House, they passed one in the Senate, but they are different. If they had they still have not appointed the conferees to resolve the difference between the House and the Senate. If they had sent me the line-item veto, we would not be having this discussion today. But if you say if they say we want to cut $16 billion and I say we want to cut $16 billion and then we reach an agreement I reached a good-faith agreement with the Senate, and then they go behind closed doors and they say, No, no, no, we do not want to do all this education business; we want some of our pork-barrel projects. So we will cut education a billion and a half and put pork in. If you are going to cut spending, you have to make choices, what you cut and what you keep. If you are going to spend more money, you can spend more money on different things. But I will say again, I think they are wrong to put in pork-barrel projects and cut education. And I do not think they can defend it. And they are not trying to defend it very hard; they are just talking about process. Obviously, nobody's saying we do not need deficit reduction.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermalofnewhampshirepublicradio", "title": "Interview With Peter Malof of New Hampshire Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-malof-new-hampshire-public-radio", "publication_date": "19-05-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1007, "text": "Do you consider yourself at odds with those who are determined to actually balance the budget by the year 2002? Well, I am first of all, I am not certainly not at odds with those who are determined to balance the budget by a date certain. And I invited the Congress to do what the law required them to do and submit a budget and then to work it through. They are now in the process of working through that budget. I want to evaluate it, and then I would including the date. But I think we have to balance the budget. I think we have to do it by a date certain, and I agree with that. And I think we ought to do it in a bipartisan fashion. And I will support them. They have not had let me just point out I am prepared to work with them to reduce the deficit and to bring the budget into balance. For 2 years, for 2 years, they said no to all my efforts to get them to work with me. So we reduced the deficit 3 years in a row for the first time since Harry Truman, with nobody helping us in the other party, none of them. And they were all saying we were going to have a big recession, and it would wreck the economy. A lot of those people who are up there in New Hampshire running for ENTITY said, If President Clinton's budget passes, it will wreck the economy. Well, New Hampshire had a 7.6 percent unemployment rate when I became ENTITY, and it is 4 1/2 percent today. You have got almost 40,000 new jobs, and in the previous 4 years you lost over 40,000 jobs. So now they believe in deficit reduction. And I say, welcome to the party, I am glad to have you here, and I will work with you on it. And if we are going to cut spending more quickly, I will support that. I think people in New Hampshire will really identify with that. If you are going to spend if you spent $10 yesterday and you are going to spend $8 today, then you have got to be more careful about how you spend the $8. That is my argument over this rescission package. If they will take the pork out and put the people back, I will sign even more deficit reduction than they have. Finally, Granite Staters are by no stretch of the imagination a tax-friendly bunch. But according to surveys, we are in step with the rest of the country in preferring deficit reduction to tax cuts.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermalofnewhampshirepublicradio", "title": "Interview With Peter Malof of New Hampshire Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-malof-new-hampshire-public-radio", "publication_date": "19-05-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1008, "text": "Are you determined to stick to fulfilling your long-delayed promise to cut taxes on the middle class even though it would set back the pace of deficit reduction? Because I would think if you back away from tax cuts, you'd be opening yourself up to more attacks that once again you have not done what you'd say you would. Well, first of all, let us look at what I did do, before we get all carried away here. Let us look at what we let us look at what we did do. In 1993, we cut taxes for lower middle income working families with children an average, this year, of $1,000 a family, for working people with incomes of $27,000 a year or less. We have already done that. We also cut taxes for 90 percent of the small businesses in America that increased their investments in their own business. So we did do that while reducing the deficit. Do I believe that we can bring the budget into balance within the next few years and still have a tax cut? I do, but not one the size that the House of Representatives has adopted. You cannot , you cannot cut taxes as much as the House has and balance the budget. And it is not right, frankly, to cut taxes in ways that largely benefit upper income people and to pay for it by cutting Medicare and Medicaid to the elderly and disabled. When I was in New Hampshire 4 years ago, I met people who were already making a decision every week between buying drugs and paying for food. So my answer to you is, if we have a targeted tax cut that focuses on the middle class and rewards education and childrearing, we can do that and we can afford to do that in the context of deficit reduction. But we cannot afford a big, broad-based, huge tax cut in the magnitude that the House passed and balance this budget without doing severe damage to the elderly of this country, including the elderly people in New Hampshire. And do I understand you correctly that you are not prepared at this point to set a date for balancing the budget, a year? No, but I can say this. Well, it can first of all, it can be done in 7 years. I think it clearly can be done in less than 10 years. I think we can get there by a date certain. But I want to evaluate the actual budget that the Republicans finally agree on. That is, the Senate has to adopt their budget proposal.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermalofnewhampshirepublicradio", "title": "Interview With Peter Malof of New Hampshire Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-malof-new-hampshire-public-radio", "publication_date": "19-05-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1018, "text": "ENTITY, as you may know, we are preparing a story for this Sunday's Post on the third anniversary-right after the third anniversary of your inauguration, that is going to try to look at what is been accomplished and what might lie ahead. We'd like to ask you, what is it you feel that you have achieved as ENTITY-as a central achievement? And assuming on our part that you intend to seek a second term-we are not going to step on your announcement, but if that should happen, why is it you would want to run again? What would you want to accomplish in that second term? skyrocketing interest rates, higher than they have been in a hundred years; inflation in double digits; a continued decline in business; and a continued increase in unemployment. And today we are in the midst of a recovery. We have returned to economic growth without inflation. In fact, we have brought inflation down to about a fourth or so of what it was. It is 3.2 for the year. Personal earnings, after taxes, increased last year about 5 percent-real income, about 5 percent. All of this turnaround, this economic turnaround, I think, is one of the great accomplishments, because a great many economists are suggesting that it not only is a recovery from the recession but that it is the beginning of growth and expansion. Prior to this time, we were told that we might-you will remember, voices were saying that we might have to give up the idea that there is any future growth in America, that it would be a no-growth society. Voices were saying that inflation was institutionalized and it would take a decade at least of great effort before it could ever be brought under control. We have about 4 million more people working today than we had working a year ago at this time, and that is one of the biggest increases-or decreases, I should say, in unemployment in a great many years. You seem to have done so much. I said repeatedly-and long before I was ever a candidate for this job-in recent years there is been a growing hunger in our land for what I called a spiritual revival. We know that, in the defense field, that our national security had been badly eroded. We know that we did not have the approval or respect of many of our neighbors and allies and certainly of our adversaries. All of this has changed also.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1019, "text": "Well now, without saying what I am going to say on the 29th, one way or the other, no, the job is not finished. Not with those deficits out there that have to be brought under control. We have not gotten all of the economic improvements that we asked for. And no one ever wants to walk away from a job unfinished. If there was to be a second Reagan administration, a second term, what would be your central purpose in it? What would you want most to accomplish in that second term? To continue on the same economic path to where we did have not only just a recovery but a return to a growth economy in this country. To continue what I think we have started, and that is a real, viable search for peace, particularly by way of disarmament. And that is the goal above all that-must meet. I remember as a small boy the war to end all wars, World War I. But I also remember coming out of World War II and coming out of uniform with the firm conviction, this must never happen again. And I still have that conviction. We have only begun in the area of trying to better international relations and bring about reduction of armaments, and particularly a reduction of nuclear weapons, and, hopefully, one day, the total elimination of them. There are things like reforms in our budgetary system, the adoption of constitutional amendments to require a balanced budget as so many of our States do, line-item veto power for a ENTITY to help curb spending and keep it under control. There are things of that kind that I have not fallen back from or retreated from and we still have not made much progress with. When you took office, some of those things that you mentioned were items like the line-item veto, which you have in Sacramento. And there were people in your administration who described Washington kind of as a big Sacramento and said that you could deal with the problems here much the way you did there. Has that turned out to be true, and has there been anything that you have learned from being here in the White House specifically that you did not bring when you came from Sacramento? Well, of course, there is one phase and one facet of this job that no one has at the State level, and that is foreign policy. I think I was surprised at how much a part of the job that is, how much, what percentage of your time and effort and thinking is devoted to the international situation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1020, "text": "But with regard to domestic policies-and I never referred to it as just a big Sacramento-but the same situation-it is a very funny thing-prevailed When I became Governor of California, California was in a desperate economic strait. It was spending a million dollars a day more than we were taking in. I know the figures are a little different at the State level than they are at the Federal level. California is about 10 percent of the population of the Nation. But we had to deal with that, and there we had a time consideration in dealing with it, because California does have a constitutional provision that you cannot have a deficit. And you come into office in the middle of the fiscal year. So, a deficit had already been piled up, and we only had 6 months to treat with that problem. But that and the other part of the situation is I had a legislature the majority of which belonged to the other party, in that case, in both houses. Here, at least, we have a majority in one House. I was kind of geared-the only experience I'd had was dealing with that kind of a situation. When you entered office here you were preoccupied, as you said, with the problems of the economy- and 3 months into your term you are the target of an assassination attempt and are wounded. Looking back on it, do you think that in the first year you left, perhaps of necessity, foreign policy issues too much to your subordinates, or how do you feel about that period now? No, from the very first, as a matter of fact, lying in that hospital bed after that assassination attempt, I wrote a letter to Leonid Brezhnev on our relationship and sent it to him in longhand as I had written it. No, you cannot be here very long without realizing that that is very much an important part of this job. When I expressed earlier my surprise, I guess it was just that, as I say, I had not anticipated that it was that much of a daily problem. From my own experience in California, it is true I came here with my attention fixed on the great economic problems that faced us. At the same time, I had declared over and over again that I was going to see if we could not embark on a refurbishing of our defensive capability, which had been allowed to decline so much. It did not take me long, as I say, to find out that the international situation was very much a part of the daily schedule.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1021, "text": "How much does the President-you, any President-control this international situation? I mean, as a President do you feel you can effect control of these foreign situations from the Oval Office, or are you pretty well governed by events over which neither you nor anybody else has any control? But you have to deal with those, and you have to deal very definitely with the problem of your relations with the friendly nations of the world, as well as the adversarial ones. And you'd better start right in doing that, which I did. Let me, just if I could, illustrate a surprise, a real physical surprise that came to me. And that was my first awareness, leaving the White House just that distance, to discover that now, wherever a ENTITY of the United States goes, phones have been installed, all the communication equipment and so forth, that keeps you in touch with every corner of the world. I was overwhelmed to discover that, that I could not do something of that kind without having that kind of preparation take place. And it brought home to you that-and when you stop to think about it, I had to say to myself, I understand the necessity for this. This is not something in which I could say, Well, this is foolish. And you know that there is one person, yourself, who must be available for instant communication worldwide. You said in a recent interview that you would not use the phrase now focus of evil to apply to the Soviet Union. Your language today in this speech was obviously very careful. Do you think that some of your own rhetoric, phrases like evil empire and so forth have-whether or not those are accurate descriptions, do you think those phrases have contributed to the difficulty of negotiating, dealing with the Soviets? And really, I think they have been overplayed and overexaggerated in much of the talk about the present international situation. We are not in greater danger. We are not closer to a war than we were a few years ago. The rhetoric-and all you have to do is look back at the pattern of Soviet rhetoric, no matter who is in the White House, and what has been going on for years, that we are imperialists, we are aggressors, we are all of these things that they have been saying about us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1022, "text": "No, I am not repeating some of those things simply because I said them, and what I felt was necessary was for the Soviet Union to know that we were facing reality and that there was some realism on our part with regard to them and their style. ENTITY, let me take advantage of this to straighten something out, that ever since the first press conference, there has been a distortion of an answer of mine to a question there that has become just accepted, and that is that I called the Soviets a lot of names, gave an answer to a question about dealing with the Soviets. And everyone seems to have forgotten that I was quoting them with regard to lying, cheating, and so forth. I did not say that, that that was my opinion of them. I made it very plain that they themselves, in their writing and speaking over the years, have said that anything of this kind that furthers socialism is moral. They do not view it as immoral if it furthers their cause. Lenin's famous line that Treaties are like pie crusts. Well, even if they said it, do you think it was wise of you to bring it up? Now, I did not volunteer that as a statement. It was an answer to a question. But I think it was necessary for them to know that we were looking at them realistically from here. There was an end to what, I think, maybe has been prevalent in some dealings for several years, and that is the idea that, well, they were just a mirror image of ourselves, and you could shake hands on someone's word and walk away confident that a deal had been made. That, no, we were aware of the differences between our two societies in our approach to things, and we intended to deal with that realism. You said-you touched on this today in your speech-and you said today that we are safer than we were when, I think, when you took office. With the negotiations broken off and a pretty good stream of rhetoric from the other side, what is the evidence that we are safer and that this defense buildup which you advocated and achieved has made this country safer than it was? Because-with realism on their part-we have a deterrent capacity we did not have 3 years ago. Now, you are in danger if a possible adversary thinks that an action of his would not lead to unacceptable punishment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1023, "text": "And I think the very fact that we have proceeded on this path would require them, with their realism, to say, this, it would be unacceptable, the damage to ourselves. Excuse me, can I just interject here to ask you if you think that the American people have not heard that message from you, and do you really think that they feel safer today than they did when you were elected? I have to say that, from all the reports that I am getting, and from all the contact that I, myself, have-whether it is through mail or personal meetings or meeting new people, as well as old friends-that, yes, there is a new feeling on the part of the American people. They have a confidence that they did not have just a short time ago when they knew that the Soviet Union had engaged in this massive arms buildup and they saw evidences that we had not . Not only the decline in quality, as well as in quantity, the restiveness of our NATO allies about whether we were dependable as an ally-I think there is a great change in the feeling of our people now. I think a little evidence of that-granted, this was not any great military operation, but I think the reaction of our people to the success of our rescue mission in Grenada was an indication. ENTITY, speaking of Grenada, and turning to another foreign policy issue, when we sent American forces to Grenada, they were welcomed. When you sent American forces to Lebanon, they have been shot at. What, in your mind, accounts for the difference in that reception? Oh, well, let me put two things out. For one thing, there was no question that we rescued some people that-not just Americans. The Grenadians, themselves, made it plain that they were not happy with the form of government that they saw being imposed on themselves. But let us go back to when we first sent the marines to Beirut. And remember, they went in answer to a request from the Lebanese Government. Thousands and thousands of civilians were being killed, were being wounded and maimed because a battle-a war was being fought right within the streets of the city. We arrived and were well received by the people there. As a matter of fact, our American marines in a typical American military fashion, pretty soon were organizing helpful things for kids, teaching them to play ball, and all the sort of things of this kind in the city.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1024, "text": "I have mail that indicates that the people felt that finally they had a chance to live relatively normal lives. Now, granted, that very much divided society is a place where you are never quite sure that there is not going to be a sniper in the street, some terrorism of some account. the agreement between Lebanon and Israel, Israel's withdrawal, the beginning of communications between some of the internal factions and the Lebanese Government; the progress in the Lebanese-in building their own military, in which we were very much a part. Our training, our provision of weapons built that army up to about 35,000, as it is right now, and it is continuing to build up. And it has conducted itself well in the battles that it has been engaged in. Now, all of this-I have a letter from a young man-actually, he is Greek, but his job and his life is in Lebanon. And this letter did not come to me; it was sent to his girlfriend, who does not live in Lebanon. And she thought I would like to see this letter. And he was telling her of the experiences and what the marines meant, and telling her what the slaughter would have been if it was not for the presence of marines. But now, a few months ago, this started, the thing that you have mentioned-this attack not only on our marines but on the others of the multinational force. And it started, I think, for one reason, and it is very obvious, one reason only. There are terrorist elements who know that they cannot succeed in their cause while the multinational force is there. And they are trying to take advantage of what they see as criticism here, lack of public support in the hope that public opinion will force the withdrawal of the multinational force. But what we should see is that the very fact they are doing that is proof of the fact that the multinational force was being successful in its purpose. Given that these terrorist attacks began, do you agree with the Long commission that the mission of the marines changed while they were there and that they were unwisely deployed, specifically at the Beirut Airport? Well, I have read that report very carefully. I thought they had great understanding in everything that they were criticizing there. I do not interpret their suggesting a change in the mission as meaning that they had one purpose when they went there and now, suddenly, they have changed and have a different purpose.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1025, "text": "The only incident that could be interpreted as them participating in a military action, say, in alliance with the Lebanese forces had to do with one in which the decision was very carefully considered and before it was made, and that is at Suq al-Gharb, the little village of Suq al-Gharb, which looks down the throat of our forces there, as well as others. It is about the situation of Capitol Hill with regard to the White House, geographically. And the Lebanese Armed Forces were in an engagement, and this was at a period before they were as well built-up as they are now, to retake and preserve Suq al-Gharb from being possessed by the same forces that are creating the terror and so forth. Well, we believed that if we were going to have the marines at the airport there, that we had a stake in their security and safety. And so, we joined in during that engagement with naval offshore artillery, in support of the Lebanese Armed Force. Now, I do not think that that makes us as presently changing our purpose or our mission. The decision was made based on the fact that our marines would be in an untenable position if that area in the hills looking down on them fell into those hostile hands. So, we helped in the preservation of it as a neutral territory. No, the mission is still what it was, and that is that-remember that the main goal was the departure from Lebanon of foreign forces. We helped in the evacuation of the PLO, which was definitely one of the host fie foreign forces. Granted, many of them then came back in by way of Syria and other places, but that was out. We had had the word previously that both Israel and Syria would withdraw when the Lebanese Government was able to take over the policing of its own territory. The multinational force was to be there, you might say, behind the Lebanese ENTITY, helping preserve order in that divided land while they went out and restored sovereignty. Well, Israel withdrew to much closer to their own borders. And so, the mission still remains to enable the Lebanese Armed Forces and the Lebanese Government to resume control over their own sovereignty, their own territory. That remains the mission, but, ENTITY, you are well known for your optimism. Do you think, in retrospect, you were just too optimistic in believing that sending the marines there could bring about a prompt diplomatic solution, given what is happened in the past year?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1026, "text": "No, I never set any timetable on it, never thought it was something that was going to happen in 48 hours. We had-remember, with Phil Habib, the long time and before any marines were ever, anything of that kind ever sent there-his shuttle diplomacy and the successes that he had. Incidentally, this was at a time when Israel had invaded, and all the way into Beirut, and was battling the PLO in Beirut. If you look at what has been achieved, and if you look at the difference in spite of the still ongoing fire and fighting that is going on, there has been great progress made. This was part of our whole, overall peace plan for the Middle East. We did not feel since a fair, legitimate settlement of the PLO problem-the Palestinian problem must be a part of the peace proposal that I made a year ago September-that it could not go forward while you had that war going on in Lebanon. So, Lebanon, which is not really, you might say, the primary part of what we are trying to achieve, which is finally a peace between the Arab nations and Israel To date, other than Lebanon, the only peace treaty that we have is between Egypt and Israel. What we are aspiring to are more Egypts, more Arab nations that will drop that claim that Israel has no right to exist, will recognize their right to exist, will come into peace negotiations with them. But it seemed that you could not move on that until you settled this Lebanon issue and then proceeded on. Maybe now it has reached a point that we can begin to proceed with the broader peace initiatives. All of this is part of the diplomatic exchanges that are going on. We have two questions. Could we ask them both? Do you have time? ENTITY, in 1980 you-is this not the one- In 1980 you expressed a lot of confidence that you could balance the budget, build up the defense budget, and cut taxes, and you could accomplish all three of these. In retrospect-and one of your officials said last week that it was good that you accomplished two out of the three-do you think you promised too much in terms of reducing the deficit? No, but, again, with all of this having to project economic situations 5 years ahead and so forth, which I do not believe in-I think the best of economists are not very much good beyond the first year, and most of them will privately admit it to you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1027, "text": "The thing was no one-there had been no prediction of the sudden deepening of the recession. That caught everyone by surprise. And that has had a lot to do with the fact that only two out of three so far. We have not balanced the budget. Fifty percent of the deficit is occasioned by the recession, the fact that people, instead of being employed and paying taxes, suddenly became dependents, you might say, of government because they were no longer working and paying taxes-the great increase in unemployment that took place. There was one other thing that none of us could foresee, and again it comes down to projections. None of us ever dreamed that we could be as successful in lowering inflation as we were. And you must realize that inflation accounts for some of your tax revenue-the bracket-squeeze that takes place on people. And our tax revenues dropped below what had been projected by us because of the effect of the reduced inflation. So, we had to readjust our projections based on how far down we had brought inflation. So, we did not foresee that. I still believe that, in spite of this setback, that we can-and with the cooperation of Congress, proceeding on the same lines involving both further spending, getting the spending measures or the cuts that we asked for and have not yet gotten. Remember, our deficits would be considerably smaller if Congress had given us all the cuts in spending that we asked for. But we are going to continue on that path. And we are going to continue looking at the longer range on planning and reviewing those things that you might say are structural changes in government that have not been dealt with as yet, so that you do not have a built-in increase in spending that is-well, as Congress itself refers to it-as uncontrollable. You know, if you pass something that guarantees a constant increase in spending, and you have passed the measure, and then you never have to lay hands on it again, it just automatically keeps increasing. That is uncontrollable only to the sense that you and Congress and the government are not willing to deal with it and change what you did that was wrong. Juan, do you want to take the last question? And many people celebrate that because of the efforts he put into bringing about changes in the laws in the country-put in civil rights laws so that blacks and whites would have equal treatment under the law.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1028, "text": "Do you think there is anything more to be done now by the government, by anyone, to bring about equality between the races? Oh, yes, although I do think that-you know, you cannot , I guess, ever totally erase anyplace in the world among human beings, bigotry and prejudice, one way or the other. But, having lived longer than anybody in this room, I have firsthand memories of the situation as it was, and I sometimes wonder if some of you who are younger realize how far we have come, how totally different this country is than what it was then. Occupations, let us say, and jobs and so forth that were once denied to a segment of our society and now are open to them, but they do not have a past history and tradition going way back in them. So that, you have to be alert, and you have to continue making sure that we do not fall back into any of the other patterns. Well, as a followup to that, if you were a young-let us say that Ronald Reagan was a young black woman in Dixon, Illinois, today, trying to make it in America, and Ronald Reagan was the ENTITY, do you think that that young black woman would prosper? And I think that much of what we have done in our economic recovery has been more beneficial at the bottom of the economic ladder. And we have to admit that because of past practices, that a disproportionate number of blacks and other minorities are in that segment of the population, at the bottom of the ladder. But there are also a great many whites that are in that too. But the things that we have done in the economic recovery benefited them first and most of all. Let us take someone who only had an income of $5,000, which is way below the poverty line, as we know, at the beginning of 1979. By the end of 1980, in just those 2 years, that $5,000 had lost 20 percent in purchasing power. It would only buy $4,000 worth of food and shelter and clothing. Now, the very fact of inflation alone, look what it has done for those same people. Today, the person at the-the average family, the median income has $3,300 more in purchasing power than they would have had if we had stayed at the same tax and inflation rates of 1980.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1029, "text": "The very fact that now the-even with the unemployment-the fact that there are more people working than have ever worked before in our history, and not just more in numbers, that you could say, Well, it is accounted for by the growth in our population. No, a higher percentage of all the people between 16 and 65, which is taken as the work force in-the potential work force; a higher percentage of those people are actually employed today, even with our continued, above-normal unemployment, than at any time in our previous history. And the truth is that for both women and for minorities, the percentage of decline in unemployment is greater for both women and minorities than it has been for the adult male-or white male. So, I think we have done those things. I am going to be referring to this young lady in a speech. She was on the air the other night; a story of-she did not come from Dixon, Illinois, but 90 miles away-Chicago, out of a ghetto. And she is the sole head and proprietor of this successful operation. And it is not the case that that person would get the breaks only because of tax breaks given to the rich or something like that? As a matter of fact, that again-that, too, is a distortion, that our tax program gave the breaks to the rich. Let me just draw a contrast with numbers so I will not have to try and convince you by rhetoric. John F. Kennedy had a tax reduction program somewhat similar to ours back in the early sixties. Some of his own party opposed him very much on this, but he went forward with it and said it will stimulate the economy. It will actually increase, eventually, revenues, more than decrease them. Now, 29 percent of his tax relief went to business; only 23 percent of ours did. And he gave greater cuts to the top five tax brackets than we did with ours; our greater percentage of ours is below the top brackets in this 25 percent across the board that we put in. But in addition to that, we put in some other things, like giving working mothers more tax credit or deduction for child care that they might have to provide; like giving the working wives-there is a tax penalty on them in the income tax. We reduced that very sizably. Now most two-earner families are two earners because they are at the lower end of the earning scale.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithloucannondavidhoffmanandjuanwilliamsthewashingtonpostforeignand", "title": "Interview With Lou Cannon, David Hoffman, and Juan Williams of the Washington Post on Foreign and Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lou-cannon-david-hoffman-and-juan-williams-the-washington-post-foreign-and", "publication_date": "16-01-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1042, "text": "The news of this day is that Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel, is investigating allegations that you suborned perjury by encouraging a 24-year-old woman, former White House intern, to lie under oath in a civil deposition about her having had an affair with you. I did not ask anyone to tell anything other than the truth. And I intend to cooperate with this inquiry. No improper relationship define what you mean by that. Well, I think you know what it means. It means that there is not a sexual relationship, an improper sexual relationship, or any other kind of improper relationship. You had no sexual relationship with this young woman? We are doing our best to cooperate here, but we do not know much yet. What I am trying to do is to contain my natural impulses and get back to work. But I want to focus on the work at hand. Just for the record, to make sure I understand what your answer means, so there is no ambiguity about it You had no conversations with this young woman, Monica Lewinsky, about her testimony, possible testimony before in giving a taped deposition? I did not urge anyone to say anything that was untrue. I did not urge anyone to say anything that was untrue. That is my statement to you. Did you talk to her about it excuse me, I am sorry And beyond that, I think it is very important that we let the investigation take its course. I did not ask anyone to go in there and say something that is not true. What about your having another one of the allegations is that you may have asked or the allegation that is being investigated is that you asked your friend Vernon Jordan I absolutely did not do that. I can tell you I did not do that. I did not do that. He is in no way involved in trying to get anybody to say anything that is not true at my request. I did not do that. Now, I do not know what else to tell you. I do not even know all I know is what I have read here. I did not ask anybody not to tell the truth. I do not know what the basis of them is, other than just what you know. And I will be vigorous about it. But I have got to get back to the work of the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1043, "text": "I was up past midnight with Prime Minister Netanyahu last night; I have got Mr. Arafat coming in; we have got action all over the world and a State of the Union to do. I will do my best to cooperate with this, just as I have through every other issue that is come up over the last several years. But I have got to get back to work. Would you acknowledge, though, ENTITY, this is very serious business, this charge against you that is been made? And I will cooperate in the inquiry of it. If it is not true, that means somebody made this up. Look, you know as much about this as I do right now. We will just have to look into it and cooperate. But meanwhile, I have got to go on with the work of the country. I got hired to help the rest of the American people. Speaking of the work of the country, other news today, the Pope is arriving in Cuba almost as we speak. Is the time come, maybe, for the United States to also bury some economic and political hatchets with Cuba? Well, I think that our previous policy, the one that we have had now and the one we have had through Republican and Democratic administrations, of keeping economic pressure on and denying the legitimacy of the Cuban Government, has been a good policy. I have made it clear from the day I got here that we would be prepared to respond to a substantial effort at political or economic opening by Cuba. And we have, as you know, a system for communicating with each other. Nothing would please me greater than to see a new openness there that would justify a response on our part, and I would like to work on it, and I think Mr. Castro knows that. I have tried to proceed in good faith here. Have you thought about doing something dramatic? I mean, this is your second term getting on an airplane and going down, or inviting him to come up here, something like that just like what the Pope is doing? I hope that we will have some real progress toward freedom and opening there, and I will work on it. But that is still mostly up to Mr. Castro. Why is it up to him? Well, because look what the Pope is saying. The Pope is saying, I hope you will release these political prisoners. You know, no American President getting on an airplane and going down there or having him come up here is going to deal with that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1044, "text": "I mean, the Cuban-American community I know a lot of people think they have been too hard on this, but they do have the point that there has been no discernible change in the climate of freedom there. And I hope that the Pope's visit will help to expand freedom, and I hope that after that we will be able to talk about it a little bit. The Pope, in fact, was interviewed on his plane a while ago by some reporters, and they asked him, What message would you give to the American people? And he said about the embargo and he said, To change, to change, to change. That would be his message to the American people. His Holiness is a very great man, and his position on this is identical to that, as far as I know, of every other European leader. Explain to Americans who do not follow the Cuban issue very carefully why Cuba is different, say, than China, a Communist country, North Korea, a Communist country, Vietnam we had a war with Vietnam, as we did with Korea and in some ways China as well. We have relations with them. I think Cuba is different, in no small measure, because of the historic legacy we have with them going back to the early sixties. I think it is different because it is the only Communist dictatorship in our hemisphere, a sort of blot on our neighborhood's commitment to freedom and openness. And a lot of Americans have suffered personal losses there of significant magnitude. And I think, as a practical matter, we probably think we can have a greater influence through economic sanctions in Cuba than we can in other places. Now, I have worked over the last 5 years in a number of different ways to explore other alternatives in dealing with this issue, and I would not shut the door on any other alternative. But I believe that our denial of legitimacy to the government and our economic pressure has at least made sure that others did not go down that path, and that now, I think, it is one of the reasons that every country in this hemisphere is a democracy and a market economy except for Cuba. I think a lot of people forget what the impact of our policy toward Cuba and what the highlighting of the Cubans' policies have done to change the governmental structures in other countries in our neighborhood. So I am hoping nobody in the world would be happier than me to see a change in Cuba and a change in our policy before I leave office.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1045, "text": "But we have to have both; we just cannot have one without the other. You do not see anything happening anytime soon as a result of the Pope's visit? As you said a moment ago, you met with Mr. Netanyahu twice yesterday; you meet with Mr. Arafat tomorrow. First, on Netanyahu, what is it exactly you want him to do? Well, let us talk about what he wants. What we want is not nearly as important as what he wants, what the Palestinians want, what the other people in the Middle East want. What we want is a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. What I believe that he and his government want is an agreement to go to final status talks in the peace process under circumstances that they believe maximize their security. I think what the Palestinians want is an agreement that moves them toward self-determination under circumstances that maximize their ability to improve the lives of their people and the reach of their popular government. And we have been out there now for a year I mean another year, of course, 5 years since I have been President but since the Hebron withdrawal, we have been out there for a year in the Middle East looking around, listening, talking, watching the frustration, seeing the growing difficulties in the Middle East peace process. And we came up with an approach that we thought, in the ballpark, would satisfy both sides' objectives. We worked with Mr. Netanyahu yesterday exhaustively to try to narrow the differences. And we did not get them all eliminated, but we made some headway. And we are going to work with Mr. Arafat tomorrow to try to do that. And then we are going to try to see if there is some way we can put them together. And I am very hopeful, because I think it is not good for them to keep on fooling with this and not making progress. Why does it matter that much to an American President that these two men get together and make an agreement? Well, first of all, I think it matters in the Middle East because of our historic ties to Israel and the difficulty that it would cause us if there were another war in the region. Secondly, of course, we have major energy interests in the region; a big part of our economic recovery is having access to it. The third thing is we have a lot of friends in the region, beyond Israel, and if they all fall out with one another that is bad for America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1046, "text": "And of course, then if deprivation among the Palestinians leads to a rise of violence and leads to a rise of more militant Islamic fundamentalism in other countries throughout the region, then that could be a destabilizing fact that could really make things tough if not for me, then for my successors down the road and for the American people down the road in the 21st century. So you believe with those who say only America can make peace in the Middle East? I believe America is uniquely situated to help to broker a peace in the Middle East. I actually believe only the parties can make peace in the Middle East. I think only Israel and the Palestinians and Syria and Lebanon can join Jordan at that table; that is what I think. I think in the end we need to be very aggressive in stating what our views are; we need to fight hard to at least have our position taken seriously; but in the end, you know, they have to live with the consequences of what they do or do not do, all of them do. And they are going to have to make their own peace. The word around, as I am sure you know, is that you and Netanyahu really just do not like each other very much. It is certainly not true on my part. But we have had differences of opinion on occasion in approach to the peace process, and then there has been a little smattering in the press here, there, and yonder about those differences and whether they were personal in nature. But for me, they are not personal in nature. I enjoy him very much. I like being with him. I like working with him. We had a difficult, hard day yesterday. We had a long session in the morning, and then he worked with our team, including the Vice President, the Secretary of State, through much of the afternoon. Then after my dinner last night, I came back, and we worked again for a couple hours. So it is hard to do that if you do not like somebody. I really believe that he is an energetic man, and I think that within the limits of his political situation, I believe he is hoping to be able to make a peace and to get to the point where he and Mr. Arafat can negotiate that. But our job is to see, if you will, from a different perspective, the positions of both the Palestinians and the Israelis.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1047, "text": "It is sort of like standing too close to an impressionist painting sometime there is lots of dots on the canvas and the people who are standing too close to it, even though they are painting the canvas, may get lost in the weeds, and then the people that are standing back can see the picture. So that is what I am trying to do. I have to keep backing the painters back, so they can see the whole picture, and then getting to the details and trying to help them ram it home. Because the one thing that I worry about is, you just sit there and have the same old conversation over and over again until the cows come home, and it is easy to do. So that is what I am trying to I am trying to broker this thing, be a catalyst, get the people together, and give an honest view of what the picture looks like from back here about what the two artists can live with.  they just do not want to do it. And I do not know what to say about that. But you are not going to give up on it? You know, if I do not make any progress, I will level with the American people and the rest of the world and tell them I am doing my best but I am not making any progress. But we were hitting it last night until late, and then we are getting ready now for Mr. Arafat to come, and we will hit it hard tomorrow. And that is all I know to tell you; we are just going to keep hitting it. On Asia, the Asia financial crisis, what business is it of the United States to save these failing Asian economies? Well, first of all, we cannot save the Asian economies if they will not take primary steps to help themselves, the way Mexico did. You remember, we loaned Mexico some money, and they paid back early with interest, and we made about $500 million because they took tough steps to restore economic growth and create jobs, raise incomes, and get their financial house in order. But in order to make it, they also need the backup of the International Monetary Fund and a plan designed to deal with the particular problems of each country, and then the U.S. and Japan and Germany and the rest of the Europeans to stand behind that to say, if necessary, we will put together a package to really restore confidence.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1048, "text": "In most of these Asian economies, the problem is the financial system and people cannot pay back their loans or investors take their loans when their loans are repaid, investors take the money and go somewhere else. What is that got to do with America? Well, every day now in some of our newspapers you can see what is happening in the Asian stock markets and the Asian currency markets. When a country's currency drops, it does not have as much money in dollars, and therefore it cannot buy as many American exports. A big part of America's economic growth since 1993 has occurred from exports, a big part of that from exports to Asia. If the value of all their money goes down, they cannot keep buying our exports. And that hurts us. Also, if the value of their money goes down, everything they sell in other places in the world is all of a sudden much cheaper, so they can push us out of those markets. So if you want to just look at the plain, brutal, short-term economic interest, that is the short-term economic interest. If you want to look at the long run, we have got an interest in Asia in having stable democracies that are our partners, that work with us to help grow the region and grow with us over the long run to help shoulder burdens like climate change, cleaning up the environment, dealing with global disease, dealing with weapons of mass destruction, contributing to the efforts in Bosnia, ending the nuclear program in North Korea. All those things we depend on the Asian countries to be a part of. They can only do that if they are strong. So, we live in a world that is so interdependent that we need them to be strong if we are going to be strong. As you know, there is some Members of Congress who are saying what this really boils down to is welfare for international bankers that is what we are up to. How do you respond to that? That is going to get that seems to be growing particularly in the last few days. It bothers me a lot. That is, if a country like Indonesia gets money from the International Monetary Fund to deal with its financial problems, what are its financial problems? You have got to pay notes when they are coming due.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1049, "text": "And if somebody made a foolish loan that they should not have made in the first place, that is an only 90-day loan on a building that is going to last for 20 years, for example, you hate to see them get their money back plus a profit at someone else's expense. On the other hand and let me say, we are sensitive to that. Secretary Rubin has done a very good job of trying to get these big banks to roll over their debt. They will actually get their interest back They do not need to just take the money and run. On the other hand, if you start saying, well, everybody is going to get half back of what they put in, that will actually speed the rate at which people take money out and reduce the rate at which people put money in; you do not rebuild confidence, and therefore the collapse is more costly. That is what bothers me. I mean, nobody likes the idea I do not think any American likes the idea that every single banker in one of these countries that made every bad loan will get paid back. And that, in fact, will not happen. But when you try to pay back most things to stabilize the situation, the reason you are doing it is not to give the people who made the loans their money back; the reason you are doing it is to send a signal to the world that business is back up and going, that you have to be more careful now, but you can trust this country now and you can invest. So I think I am convinced we are doing the right thing for our own economy. I am convinced we are doing the right thing for our values and our principles. And I hope I can persuade the Congress that we are. What can you tell us about where that thing stands, in terms of whether the inspectors are going to be allowed to do what they want to do, et cetera? Iraq does? Iraq open the sites that Mr. Butler believes that ought to be open. That is a problem for us because we believe that we have to do everything we can, as quickly as we can, to check for chemical and biological weapons stocks.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1050, "text": "And as I told the American people the last time we had the standoff with Saddam, before he relented and let the inspectors go back, my concern is not to re-fight the Gulf war; my concern is to prepare our people for a new century, not only in positive ways like creating a big international financial framework that works for them, as that we just talked about, but also to make sure we have the tools to protect ourselves against chemical and biological weapons. So tonight I cannot rule out, or in, any options. But I can tell you I am very concerned about this, and I do not think the American people should lose sight of the issue. Saddam Hussein cannot say who, where, or when about these inspection teams. That has to be done by the professionals. And sooner or later, something is going to give here, and I am just very much hoping that we can reason with him before that happens. Now, Ambassador Richardson with the U.N. and others in the administration have said the military option just to pick up, just to continue your sentence the military option remains on the table. The Ambassador from Iraq to the U.N. was on our program recently, and he pretty much acknowledged that Iraq is banking on that not being real, that the U.S. alone is not going to go in there and take out some suspected anthrax facility, particularly if it is in the palace where Saddam Hussein lives, et cetera, et cetera. The United States does not relish moving alone, because we live in a world that is increasingly interdependent. We'd like to be partners with other people. You used the anthrax example. Think how many people can be killed by just a tiny bit of anthrax. And think about how it is not just a question of whether Saddam Hussein might put them on a Scud missile an anthrax head and send it to some city of people he wanted to destroy. Think about all the terrorists and drug runners and other bad actors that could just parade through Baghdad to pick up their stores if we do not take the strongest possible action. I far prefer the United Nations; I far prefer the inspectors. I have been far from triggerhappy on this thing. But if they really believe that there are no circumstances under which we would act alone, they are sadly mistaken. I have shown that I do not relish this sort of thing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1051, "text": "Every time it is discussed around here I said, you know, one of the great luxuries of being the world's only superpower for a while and it will not last forever, probably, but for a while is that there is always time enough to kill. And therefore, we have a moral responsibility to show restraint and to seek partnerships and alliances. And I have done that. But I do not want to have to explain to my grandchildren why we took a powder on what we think is a very serious biological and chemical weapons program, potentially, by a country that has already used chemical weapons on the Iranians and on the Kurds, their own people. So you would order an air strike or whatever it would take to take out some facility if you could not get rid of it any other way? I am not ruling out, or in, any option. I was responding to what you said, that the Iraqi official thought we were just talking because we would not want to discomfit anyone or make them mad. This is a serious thing with me. And you imagine the capacity of these tiny amounts of biological agents to cause great harm; it is something we need to get after. And I do not understand why they are not for getting after it. What can they possibly get out of this? If he really cared about his people he is always talking about how bad his people have been hurt by these sanctions if he really cared about his people he'd open all these sites, let everybody go in and look at them If he is telling the truth, there is nothing there; and if he is not, he'd get it behind it one way or the other. And we could then he could say, Okay, what grounds does the United States have now for stopping the U.N. from lifting the sanctions? I have done everything I have been asked to do. And that would be a hard question for us, even though we have got reservations. We'd have a hard time answering that question. But would you go along with lifting the sanctions? Right now our position is, if he complies with all the United Nations sanctions the conditions of all U.N. resolutions leading to sanctions, that that is what we want Iraq to do. But what he wants is, he wants to have it both ways.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1052, "text": "He wants to get the sanctions lifted because he thinks people want to do business with him, and he wants to be able to continue to pursue a weapons program that we think presents a danger to the region and maybe to the world and certainly to our own interests and values. So I just want him to think about it again before they wait all this 2 months. I want him to think about it and let these inspectors go back. Well, it has not worked out as fast as I'd hoped, but it actually is kind of working out the way I had hoped in the sense that the Dayton peace agreement is very much alive and well. And we have separated the troops I mean the forces and the people, and we have got some relocation going on, and we have collected a lot of the bad weapons and destroyed them. We are making some progress on the joint institutions and other things, and we are trying to get that country together. And I must say, I was very impressed on my recent trip there by the level of support for the United States and the international community in our presence there, the level of support for our staying there, and the level of commitment of so many people to genuine pursuit of peace. And I think we can make it in Bosnia. But if you had told me, on the other hand that is the down side. If you had told me, on the other hand, you can go there and stay a couple of years and there will not be any gunshots fired, and the only people you will lose will be in accidents of one kind or another, and you will have an increasing amount of harmony in the urbanized areas that you had not imagined you would get, and some of the other positive things that have happened, I think we'd all been very happy about that. So I am going to stay after this. That depends on how long it takes to achieve the mission. What I do think we should do, since it just invites recalcitrance on the part of any parties in Bosnia that do not want to do something that is in the Dayton peace agreement, if the Americans say, Well, we are leaving in a year, and then the Europeans say, We are going to leave as soon as they do, then the people who have to make changes say, Well, all I have got to do is hang around a year, and I will not have to make any changes at all. No more deadlines.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1053, "text": "Because it the world community really has not done anything like this in a while not like this and it is very complicated. But on the other hand, at bottom, it is about people getting along together and working together and serving together as citizens. And I have been quite impressed by how much has been done. We have been talking now about all these foreign policy things and I was just if you were to go back through here, only the U.S. can keep peace in Bosnia; only the U.S. can make peace and make peace in the Middle East; only the U.S. can stabilize They have got to make the peace. Only the U.S. can help stabilize the economies of Asia; only the U.S. can stare down Saddam Hussein in Iraq. If there are going to be any coalitions, the U.S. has to organize them and make them work. Is this the role of the United States of America for the immediate future? Well, it is a big part of it. But it also is a part of our role to put together a broad coalition on the climate change treaty to deal with global warming. It is also our role to put together global efforts to stiffen our efforts against biological warfare, or to put together a global effort to support the International Monetary Fund and nations themselves in dealing with the Asian financial crisis. We live in a world that is interdependent in two or three ways. Number one, what happens in one country affects what happens in another one. We can see that. Number two, what happens on economic issues increasingly has a security impact, and vice versa. I will just give you the most blatant example is there is all these articles in the paper about all these countries, that their currency dropped and therefore they cannot buy jet airplanes for their air forces. And I just think that in this world, if you happen to be at the moment it is occurring, that this huge new world of interdependence is occurring and plus you have got all this interdependence at a citizen level with the Internet exploding and the information explosion. We are going to have all kinds of implications with the scientific explosions going on now. And we just happen to be, at this moment in history, the strongest and the wealthiest country around. It is a unique gift for our people. They have worked hard for it, but it is still a blessing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1054, "text": "And, you know, looking back over the last 5 years I just celebrated my 5th anniversary here I think that our administration has had good success in changing the role of Government, in changing the debate about Government from you know, the debate I heard for the 12 years before I got here was, the Government is the problem versus Government is the solution. Government is a catalyst; it is got to give people the tools to solve their own problems; it is got to be a good partner; it is got to empower neighborhoods and people. So we have got a smaller, more active Government, and yet we have invested more in education, more in science and technology, more in the environment. And it is working, and we have got good results. We have not been as successful in convincing people in very practical terms about the interdependence of foreign and domestic policy, of economic and security policy. The way it would come back to you would be this way, ENTITY. If there is a problem, like Asia has an economic problem, we are the folks that send the most money. You had a problem in Bosnia, Somalia, a military problem; we are the ones that send the most troops. That is how it translates in practice. Yes, but if you look at it if you look at there are some areas in the Bosnian peacekeeping operation, like civilian police, for example, where the Europeans have 9 times as many as we do. We put up more money. You look at the different allocations. If you look at what is going on in the United Nations, if the congressional position which is that we ought to have our U.N. dues lowered to 20 percent prevails, since a lot of really poor countries pay even less than their fair share of the world's GNP, we'd actually be getting off light compared to many, many other countries really light. So it is just not true that we always pay an unfair share, but it is true that we are called upon to bear the largest burden. If it helps us, I think we ought to do it. And if it is right and we can do it at an acceptable price, we ought to do it, whether or not we are sure it helps us. But it is hard to quarrel with the argument that we have been hurt by having 220-odd trade agreements in the last 5 years, when you look at what is happened, and a third of our growth coming out of trade.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1055, "text": "It is hard to quarrel with the argument that we have been hurt by our leadership in Bosnia or the Middle East, in Northern Ireland or any of these other places. It is hard to quarrel with the fact that our efforts to work with other countries to deal with chemical and biological and nuclear weapons, to deal with climate change, to deal with global disease spread, those things are good for Americans right where they live. And we just simply do not have an option to say, Well, I am sorry, it looks bad in the newspaper today so I think I will check out of this old world. But it looked pretty good there for a couple of years, and we were getting a whole lot more than we were giving, so we liked that. We have got to be consistent, and we have got to realize that there is an interdependence within our country, on each other, and beyond our country. And I have been working on that. I have got to do more to persuade people. On a domestic issue, one that you have also been talking about a lot recently, in particular, but you have always talked about it and that is the racial divisions in this country. Where would you put that in terms of your own concerns and the concerns that you think the average American should have about their country right now as we sit here? Well, I think the average American should be concerned about it particularly as it relates to the racial disparities in the results we get in living and working and educating in America. I mean, if you look at the number of minorities who are in poor innercity schools, where the performance is lower than it should be; if you look at the number of people who either do not have jobs or are still underemployed, no matter how strong the economy is; if you look at the patterns of opportunity wherever there are differences, I think we should be concerned about that. And we do not have to have a fight over affirmative action every time. We can actually say, how are we going to make it possible for more people to live together, learn together, and serve together and work together at the same level of excellence? I think everybody should be concerned about it. I think everybody ought to be concerned about discrimination where it still exists and it still does.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1056, "text": "And finally, you know, the Vice President gave a brilliant speech on Martin Luther King's Day, Monday, down in Atlanta, talking about how profoundly embedded in the human heart and culture and history the feelings of racial prejudice are. And I think it is really worth if we are going to be an interdependent country leading an interdependent world, then all this interdependence has got to work. And with all of our diversity, we have got to keep working on it hard. It is not just a question of education. You have got to really work at it all the time. Why are you having trouble getting some blunt talk started on this? I do not know we finally got some blunt talk going on affirmative action. But I would like to see some blunt talk. Well, we had some blunt talk on affirmative action. I do not think the whole debate ought to be about affirmative action. I mean, you know, look at what we have done, for example, with something that is supposed to have a civil rights impact that is largely economic, the Community Reinvestment Act. It passed in 1977, over 20 years ago. Now, the Community Reinvestment Act was set up to say to the bank regulators, Look, you guys go in and look at these banks and tell them, you have got to take some of your money and invest it in inner cities and neighborhoods and with people who otherwise would not get it so they have a chance to build homes, to build businesses, to create jobs, to build neighborhoods. In the 20-year history of the Community Reinvestment Act, 85 percent-plus of the money loaned out under it to poor inner-city neighborhoods has been loaned in the 5 years since I have been President. So I think there are things we can do to improve education, to improve job growth, to improve not just having jobs but also income and ownership among minorities, to create opportunities for service that will bring people together, that will also mean fewer racial discrimination claims that have to be dealt with by Government, and also I think will help to tame the savage heart that still lurks within so many of us. What should the American people think about their President right now? You are going into your the last 3 years of your administration; you got all this controversy today; you have got all kinds of things in the air.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1057, "text": "I think they ought to, first of all, think that I came to office after the '92 election with a real theory of what I wanted to do to build America's bridge to the 21st century; that I wanted to strengthen our Union, and I wanted to broaden our set of opportunities, and I wanted to deepen our freedom, and I wanted to prepare for this modern world. I had an idea about changing the philosophy of Government, which I talked about earlier. opportunity, responsibility, and community. We had a plan for changing the economic policy of the country, the welfare policy of the country, the crime policy of the country, the policy helping people balance work and family, of integrating economic and other kinds of foreign policy. We had all these plans, and I think you'd have to say, on balance, it is working pretty good. So the first thing I would hope they say is, the President might be right about his philosophy of Government and the values and the principles that we ought to be looking to, and about this whole interdependence business because we do have the lowest unemployment rate, the lowest inflation rate in a generation, the lowest crime rate in a generation, the biggest drop in welfare ever, dropping rates of juvenile crime, teen pregnancy, drug use, and we are moving ahead in the world. The second thing I'd like for them to say is, we have still got some significant challenges out there before we are completely prepared for this new era. How are our parents going to be on Social Security and how are the baby boomers going to be on Social Security without bankrupting their kids? How can you do the most important work of society, raising children, and still be good at work? How do you deal with climate change and clean air, clean water, safe food, diseases spreading all this sort of stuff preserving the environment, growing the economy? Those are just three of the big changes out there. You know, in America we talk about diversity, and it is a real positive thing. We say we are going to get all these people together. In a world where the Internet can also give you information about how to make a terrorist bomb, and there is more and more diversity among religious and racial and ethnic hatreds, how can you make sure the world is about community, not conflict? And I do not think any serious person believes we have resolved all these questions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1058, "text": "So when I look at '98, yes, I want to balance the budget; yes, I have got this great child care initiative which deals with work and family; I have got a Medicare initiative and the Medicare commission, which deals with honoring our obligations to our parents. But we have still got a bunch of work to do. So the second thing I want them to say is, yes, he was right the first 5 years, and we are way ahead of where we were 5 years ago, but we have got a huge amount to do yet, a huge amount before we are really ready for the year 2000 and the 21st century. But on a more personal level, ENTITY, you are a week from your State of the Union Address, and here you are under investigation for a very, very serious crime allegation of a serious crime. I mean, what does that do to your ability to do all of these things that we have been talking about, whether it is the Middle East or whether it is child care reform or what? Well, I have got to do my best. But I have been living with this sort of thing for a long time. And my experience has been, unfortunately, sometimes when one charge dies, another one just lifts up to take its place. But I can tell you, whatever I feel about it, I owe it to the American people to put it in a little box and keep working for them. This job is not like other jobs in that sense. You do not get to take a vacation from your obligations to the whole country. You just have to remember why you ran, understand what is happening and why, and go back and hit it tomorrow. But going back to what we said at the beginning, what we were talking about, is not this one different than all the others? This one is not about a land deal in Arkansas, or it is not even about sex. It is about other things, about a serious matter. But all the others, a lot of them were about serious matters. All I can tell you is I will do my best to help them get to the bottom of it. I did not ask anybody to lie under oath. I did not do that. I did not do it. And we will just get to the bottom of it. And meanwhile, I have got to keep working at this. I cannot just ignore the fact that every day that passes is one more day that I do not have to do what I came here to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1059, "text": "And I think the results that America has enjoyed indicates that is a pretty good argument for doing what I came here to do. Whatever the personal things may be, the polls show that people approve of your job as President, even though they may not have that high regard of you as a person. Hardly anyone has ever been subject to the level of attack I have. You know, it made a lot of people mad when I got elected President. And the better the country does, it seems like the madder some of them get. What is important here is what happens to the American people. I mean, there are sacrifices to being President, and in some periods of history the price is higher than others. I am just doing the best I can for my country. 15 eastern time. All of the cable news organizations have been full of this story all day. The newspapers are probably going to be full of it tomorrow, and the news may; this story is going to be there and be there and be there. The Paula Jones trial coming up in May, and you are going I am looking forward to that. Because I believe that the evidence will show what I have been saying, that I did not do what I was accused of doing. It is very difficult, you know one of the things that people learn is you can charge people with all kinds of things; it is almost impossible to prove your innocence. I think I will be able to do that. We are working hard at it. You are the President of the United States. You have got certainly you have got personal things that you want to prove or disprove, et cetera. But when does just the process become demeaning to the Presidency? I mean, somebody said in fact they said it on our program that this trial in May will be tabloid nirvana. I tried to spare the country that. That is the only reason that we asked the Supreme Court to affirm that, absent some terrible emergency, the President should not be subject to suits, so that he would not become a political target. They made a different decision. And they have made the decision that this was good for the country. So I am taking it and dealing with it the best I can. And the new thing you are going to be, you know, Pour it on; nothing is going to change ? I have got to go to work every day.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerthepbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of the PBS News Hour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-the-pbs-news-hour", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1060, "text": "ENTITY, this is Jim Gardner from Philadelphia. ENTITY, I am sorry ENTITY, we were interested to hear your spokesman, Marlin Fitzwater, this morning proclaim today that the country is, in fact, still in a recession. Until now you have said again and again that the country was technically not in a recession. What changed your mind? Well, I do not know about technically, but I think what we are trying to put the emphasis on is people are hurting. And some people can define it. Some areas will say, Hey, we are not in recession; we have got a certain amount of growth. Others will say, Tell us about it. We are in a serious recession. We are trying to help. And we have got to get this country doing better, to bring pressure on all of us, the administration and Congress, to do what we can to help. And we have done certain things that I think will. We have freed up $9.6 or $9.7 billion worth of Government spending. We are signing a jobs-intensive transportation bill that will kick it. And then, as you know, we are going to have some new initiatives at the State of the Union. You might argue technically, are we in recession or not? But when there is this kind of sluggishness and concern, definitions, heck with it; let us get on with the business at hand. ENTITY, many thousands of Philadelphians have been suffering at the hands of the economy for far too long, and many of them would feel that they have been abandoned by your administration and specifically by you. I would assume that you do not see it that way. But I can understand their frustration. For a person that is out of work the unemployment rate is not 6.9 percent or 6.8 percent nationally; it is 100 percent. So, I can understand the frustration and, you know, you have got to take the heat in this job. I do not think there is any quick and easy answers to this economy. There are certain things we can do and that I have tried to do in three separate State of the Union Messages. But for somebody that is hurting out there, Jim, I can understand their saying, Hey, the President is not doing enough. Congress is not doing enough. And I have to take the heat on that. I have got to take the responsibility.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimgardnerwpvitvphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Interview With Jim Gardner of WPVI - TV in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-gardner-wpvi-tv-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "17-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1061, "text": "But what I am trying to do is to lead this country out of this sluggishness to the best of my ability. And, as I say, we have got some proposals, and we are going to have more. The new ABC News/Washington Post poll, out this morning, says that 58 percent of the public think that you care more about serving the wealthy than you do about the middle class. I wonder, does this point to a failure of your economic policy or an inability of the administration to convey how it does feel? I think it is the latter and possibly the former, because people look at it and say, Hey, why cannot you get Congress to do what you want it to do? You did it in Desert Storm. The difference is I did not need Congress to move on Desert Storm, as you may well remember. So I think it is a combination of things. And I can understand when people are hurting that they feel that way, and a good thing happened on this polling, though. I vowed when the polls were sky-high not to live by the polls and saying I did not believe them. What we are trying to do is help people and get on with this trying to do what the Federal Government can do to help the recovery. It is not just Federal Government, I might say, but we have got a large role in it, and I want to see us be more effective. Russian President Yeltsin is saying that Ukraine and Byelorussia have agreed to destroy their nuclear weapons. But the Presidents of those two Republics are reportedly saying that they will not get rid of their nuclear weapons or the nuclear weapons on their soil unless Boris Yeltsin gets rid of his. And the President of the Islamic Republic of Kazakhstan is now saying that he wants to keep his nuclear arms. Secretary of State Baker is saying he has no more concern than normal. But are not Americans right to be concerned about nuclear stability in that part of the world? One of the things that we are trying to do in handling this peaceful evolution in the Soviet Union, in the Republics, is to be sure that the nuclear question is handled well. And one of the reasons I spend a fair amount of time on this question is because I think I owe it to the American people to use the best of our ability to see that this nuclear question is handled correctly. We are getting proper assurances from all about the safe disposal of and accounting for and control of nuclear weapons.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimgardnerwpvitvphiladelphiapennsylvania", "title": "Interview With Jim Gardner of WPVI - TV in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-gardner-wpvi-tv-philadelphia-pennsylvania", "publication_date": "17-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1064, "text": "I have got a couple of opening comments, and we will go around the table a couple of times and answer your questions. First, I am really looking forward to my trip. We are involved with a lot of interesting initiatives that will help the world grow toward peace and freedom, and this trip will be an opportunity to not only to talk about American values but to talk with friends, allies, important parties about how working together we can achieve grand goals, the goals of peace, the goals of freedom, the goals of hope and prosperity. I start off in Poland. It is my second trip to Poland since I have been ENTITY. I am going to Krakow; I am going to Auschwitz. I am going to give a speech, which I am still working on right now, but it is a speech that reminds us that together we can achieve the big objective. It is a speech, really, to Europe that says that our common values are strong and that we welcome the emergence of countries like free countries like Poland, and as well as we must be reminded of the lessons of the past. I am going to Auschwitz to see firsthand one of the greatest lessons of the past, that there is evil in this world and that the only way to deal with the evil is together. And we did so in the past, and now there is you know, terrorism and killing of innocent people is evil, and we have got to work together to achieve the same objectives that were achieved in the past, and that is peace and freedom. And then I go on to St. Petersburg to not only honor the great city of St. Petersburg, their 300th anniversary, but also to have an important dialog with Vladimir Putin. It will be a dialog that will really show the world that in spite of our disagreements over what happened in Iraq, that our relationship is strong and that we can move together in positive ways. Then I go to the G-8. I know the press corps is going to be you know, they will be observing the G-8 as a great you know, will this turn into a meeting a confrontational meeting? It is an opportunity to talk with some who agreed with us on Iraq and some who did not , about how we move forward. And I have laid the groundwork for the trip by talking about some great goals that wealthy nations can achieve. One, of course, is to fight ENTITY in Africa.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1065, "text": "Another which is to enhance trade, so that people have a chance to rise out of poverty, and others address famine as well as to continue to keep our focus on dealing with those terrorists who would like to hold the world blackmail the world as well as to kill innocents, take innocent life. I then go from there to the Middle East. One, it says that I am committed to the peace process; that I look forward to working with the new Palestinian leadership as well as Ariel Sharon to make it clear to the world that we have as leaders, we have the intention of working together to achieve peace, that there is a commitment, a personal commitment, not just by me but a personal commitment by Prime Minister Abbas as well was Prime Minister Sharon, to work together to achieve peace; and that there are responsibilities that all of us have as leaders, not only responsibility to the new Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority, not only the responsibility of the Israeli Prime Minister, but a responsibility for the leadership in the Arab world to fight terror, prevent killers from stopping the process from going forward. And so the first stop will be in Sharm el-Sheikh, in Egypt. I am really looking forward to the visit. President Mubarak has urged me, consistently urged me to come to Sharm el-Sheikh, and this is my chance to see this spectacular part of Egypt. And that is where I am going to meet with the Arab leaders, some of the Arab leaders, to talk about shared responsibility. I want them to hear from me firsthand the commitment of the United States of America to move toward peace in the Middle East. And I want them also to hear from me firsthand that I expect them to be partners in the process. And then I am going to go to Jordan. Of course, I will see the King of Jordan. I believe the King is going to be in Sharm el-Sheikh as well. And then I will have a bilateral meeting with the King. It will give me a chance to thank him for his strong support on the liberation of Iraq. I am sure he will want to talk about matters of trade with the United States, and I will be fully prepared to do so. And then I will meet with the Prime Minister of both the Palestinian Authority and of Israel, and I am looking forward to these meetings. I believe in the possibilities of peace. I trust the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority when he condemns terror.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1066, "text": "I believe that provides an opening for the United States and others to expend the necessary energies to move the process forward. I will remind them that I was the first President ever to stand up and say I am for two states, living side by side in peace. And I did so at the United Nations. I still have that vision. So I will talk to these two leaders about our mutual desire to move the process forward. And then I go to Qatar, where I will meet with General Franks and Jerry Bremer to talk about the reconstruction of Iraq. I will also meet with Amir of Qatar and then speak to our troops, and head home. Let me answer some questions. The trouble is that so many people still have suspicions; they are afraid. No, I understand your question. Oftentimes, we live in a processed world you know, people focus on the process and not results. Let us work together to achieve positive results. And I fully understand, for example, the Middle East it is a suspicious world. And until people see the emergence of a Palestinian state, there will be suspicions; until I can prove for the average Palestinian citizen, there will be suspicions. And so I fully understand the skepticism. I mean, after all, we are dealing in a world where there is a lot of heartbreak, a lot of death, a lot of sorrow, a lack of hope. I have got great confidence in what America stands for. I have said to our country and to the world many times that in order for there to be peace, there must be freedom. And I believe that a free Palestinian Authority and a free Palestinian people will yield to peace in that part of the world. Therefore, we are striving toward the development of such a state. And until people begin to see, however, the results of that vision, people will be skeptical. And the only thing I can do is to continue to speak out as clearly as I can about the values which motivate our foreign policy and motivate me personally and work hard to achieve results, tangible results. And when people see results, when the people see that the Iraqi people are more free and that their economy begins to develop, when people see that the Iraqi people have control of their own oil for the benefit of the Iraqi people, then some of the suspicions will be turned aside. I will never win the hearts of the terrorists, nor am I trying to, because the terrorists have got one thing in mind, murder to stop peace.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1067, "text": "And it stands in stark contrast to what I believe, which is freedom to bring peace. So, you know, there are some I would never try to win their hearts and minds over that are absolutely bent upon stopping not only what the United States is trying to do but a lot of other nations as well. I understand skepticism; I understand the attitudes of some; but I refuse to be stopped in my desire to rally the world toward achieving positive results for each individual. I have said many times that freedom and human dignity is not America's gift to the world; it is the Almighty God's gift to each and every individual. And I firmly believe that. And it is that principle which motivates my desire to see to it that the Palestinian mother or father can raise their child in a comfortable environment, knowing that their child can have a good education and the possibility of a peaceful life. And I feel the same way about the Israeli citizen who grows up, a child who grows up in an environment where they can go to the market with their mother or father and get blown away. We must stop that kind of violence and provide hope for people. So what do you think will happen if the rush for the settlements continue? And how would it affect your vision of having a Palestinian state with borders and with land, a viable Palestinian state? I believe a viable Palestinian state with the institutions necessary for democracy and freedom to prevail, the institutions bigger than the occupants of the offices which they hold, is very important to gain the confidence not only of the neighborhood, the confidence of the Israelis, the confidence of other Arab nations, but the confidence of the free world as well. So I believe the emergence of a Palestinian state is very important. I have consistently said that the Israelis are going to have to deal with the settlement issue and that there is a part of the process is going to be a focus on the settlements. I fully understand that settlement expansion is not in concert with the development of a state. And we will deal with that. And I will also remind everybody, however, that the process in order for the process to go forward, in order for there to be confidence of all parties, there must be an absolute determined effort to fight off terror, to not allow the few to destroy the process. I believe we can make progress, otherwise I would not be going. Well, since I am French, I will ask you a French question. Well, I will try to do it in American.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1068, "text": "A number of American high officials have repeatedly said that France would have to pay the price for its opposition to your policy in Iraq. So far, we did not see much as far as reprisals are concerned. Have you forgiven France? I look forward to working with France to achieve common objectives. People did not understand the decisions by the French leadership to thwart the desire for the American the American desire and the desire of others to work on security and freedom, security for our countries and freedom in Iraq. However, that is not going to influence my policy. Let us work together for a Europe which is whole, free, and at peace, a Europe in which countries are allowed to be friends of the United States and at the same time participate in institutions such as the European Union; that rivalry will end up weakening our efforts to jointly deal with issues like security and peace and ENTITY and trade. So, no, I will have a good discussion with Jacques Chirac, and I am looking forward to going to the G-8, not only talking to Jacques Chirac; I will talk with others who have not necessarily agreed with our Iraq policy. We have got a lot of work to do. And I have got work to do to convince the skeptics in France that the intentions of the United States are positive. And the French leadership has got work to do to convince the American people that they are concerned about the security of our country. And I will look forward to conducting that work with Jacques Chirac. ENTITY, please allow me in genuine Texan style to grab the bull by the horns. It is quite obvious that your personal relations with Mr. Putin are much more developed, much more warm than the relations between Russia and the United States. We need to get rid of the Jackson-Vanik amendment, I want you to know. Make sure the Russian people know that. And this difference between your personal relations and the relations between our countries creates negative feelings in the Russian public opinion and among Russian elites. And that is why I think it somehow hinders President Bush for his in his quest for further democratization and westernization of Russia. My question is, what do you want to undertake to upgrade the Russian-American relations to the same level as your personal relations with Mr. Putin, including, of course, the Jackson-Vanik amendment, which became in Russia, unfortunately, the litmus paper of our relations?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1069, "text": "And by the way, our Russian Jews are a little bit indignant that they are replaced by the American chicken. And we do not understand in Russia how the genuine American eagle can defeat an artificial American chicken. Well, first of all, at least we are arguing about chickens and not about whether or not we have got enough missiles pointed at each other. By the way, ENTITY, before you start answering my question, you can already do something in improving our relations. I brought two books. If you sign them, you will improve the relations. It is for my I am certainly not going to try to influence your story. Oh, no, no for my Presidential library, which has all the signed books and pictures of all American Presidents, beginning with Eisenhower and, of course, your highly esteemed father. First of all, Vladimir Putin and I do have a good relationship. And that is an important beginning in order to make sure the relationship is positive throughout our respective Governments. If we had a poisonous relationship, it would be awfully difficult to convince others in our Governments to work closely together. Secondly, I did take note that the Moscow Treaty was overwhelmingly approved by both Houses in the Duma. As a matter of fact, if you think back, people if you put this in historical context, this treaty is pretty darn good progress early in our respective administrations. In other words, Vladimir and I made the decision that we will work together to create better conditions and make the world a more peaceful place. One way to enhance relations between our Governments is to have a meaningful and real strategic dialog throughout our entire Government on key matters, so that the participants in both our Governments recognize that we are willing to not only share information but to deal with issues before they become problems and to work together in a collaborative way to show the world that we can handle and deal with some of the large issues, such as proliferation, for example. So therefore, we have got Spence Abraham, our Secretary of Energy, working very closely with his counterpart. Secretary Veneman has got a task force set up to work very Agriculture Secretary to work very closely with her counterpart not only on chickens, but on other issues dealing with our farm communities. This dialog, this kind of strategic framework was initiated at my request and I think at Vladimir's request as well. But Condi, when she went over to Russia, began the setting in place this capacity for our two Governments to relate on a variety of issues in a consistent way.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1070, "text": "Now, I agree with Vladimir, we need to get rid of Jackson-Vanik, and have talked to our some of the folks on the Hill to deal with this issue. And I would like to get rid of Jackson-Vanik. I think it is an important symbol to say to the Russian people, The past is over. Now we move forward in a positive relationship. What role, if any, you foresee for international organizations like the U.N. or NATO in the future, for instance, in the war against terrorism and any other international conflict? NATO I see a robust role for NATO, which says that NATO must reform herself. NATO has got to be a military collaboration that is modern, that can move quickly, that is got the newest weapons. I will speak to NATO when I go to Poland. It is part of my speech in Krakow. And it is I am a strong advocate of NATO. As you know, I, with Warsaw, talked about the expansion of NATO, which, thankfully, came to fruition and had been ratified the expansion has been ratified in our United States Senate, overwhelmingly so. NATO is now its vision is beyond the old days of when the Soviet Union posed a threat to Europe. NATO is now willing to take on new assignments, all aimed at creating the same conditions of the past, in other words, a peaceful and free world. And that is why NATO is now in Afghanistan. I welcome that. NATO will play a supportive role for Poland in Iraq. I want to thank the Polish people for their and the Government for sending, I believe, 8,000 or 9,000 troops to run a sector in Iraq. And NATO has agreed to help in that sector, help the Polish troops. I think that my point to you is NATO is becoming more modern, and a more modern NATO is going to be very useful for dealing with the true threats that we face in the 21st century. In terms of the United Nations, it is going to be important for all of us to work to keep the United Nations a strong and viable institution. And I think a useful dialog at some point in time will be how to make sure the United Nations has adapted to the threats we face. Obviously, it was a frustrating experience to have gone to the United Nations and spent a lot of time and a lot of debate on whether or not United Nations resolutions should be upheld. I believe in this world, when you say something, you'd better mean it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1071, "text": "And I gave the speech, as you might remember, on September the 12th, 2002, in the United Nations, the day after the anniversary of the attacks on our country. And I said to the United Nations, You have passed resolution after resolution after resolution I think is said it 12 times and my point was, Do you mean it? And my answer in a rhetorical if that is a rhetorical question, my answer to you is, I hope they mean it, because I want the United Nations to be an effective body. However, its effectiveness is undermined when they say something and nothing happens. And therefore, we have got to, all of us who care about the United Nations, must figure out how to make it effective in the future. ENTITY, if you would permit me a couple of detailed questions. Do I need to write these down, because my memory is getting somewhat . I am getting that too. Sir, on the issue of Iraq, it looks like a messy situation. Are you worried about a lengthy American-British occupation of Iraq? Let me answer that one first. Then will you permit me the Palestinian question? And that you admitted you have got a flawed memory like I do. First of all, you made a broad statement, the security situation, as if all of Iraq is there is lawlessness in all of Iraq. A lot of Iraq is improving from the pre-war conditions, and that is important to know. And we are dealing with that. And we will deal with that for the sake of the Iraqi people, who want most first and foremost, to have a secure life, food on the table, lights in their house, running water, sewage that works. They want the conditions of life that everybody yearns for, which is a comfortable lifestyle so their families can be secure. And we are making progress on all fronts. I fully understand the degree of difficulty, and it is created by the fact that these people have been enslaved by a torturous ruler for many, many years. And therefore, I do not expect the conditions to improve automatically after 70 days. And it is going to take a while. And therefore, to answer your question I do not view it as an occupation, by the way. I view it as a group of nations. You said British and Americans. There are many, many nations who are involved in the contribution of help so that the Iraqi people are able to establish their own Government and have comfortable lives and can be a free society.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1072, "text": "And it is going to take a while. And I remind you that it is like the writing of the Constitution. America, after our revolution, did not write its Constitution overnight. As a matter of fact, it probably took, what, 11 years or so. We live in a world now where everything has to happen yesterday. He will not be correcting me much longer. Do not worry, he will be correcting me, but on TV. Anyway, 13 years, as my man corrected me. The process will take a while. I am in touch with Jerry Bremer. I mentioned to you that I will see him when I go over to Qatar. We get a report all the time. And we are making progress, slowly but surely. And that is and it makes sense, given the conditions. And so, therefore, our coalition of a lot of countries will stay the course, until such time as the Iraqi people the life is improved and the Iraqi people would be in a position to, you know, run themselves. Freedom is going to be a beautiful thing in this part of the world. It is a very powerful sentiment that I believe all people feel. And therefore, one of our ambitions and one of our values is to create the conditions necessary for the Iraqi people to run their own Government. And you will see over time here that they will be getting a group of people will be coming together to write a constitution. And you know, it'll be a constitution written by the Iraqis, for the Iraqis, and of the Iraqis. Now, look, I recognize there are some in the world who say Iraq cannot run themselves. I refuse to condemn people. I mean, They need a dictatorship in order for the country to survive. I do not believe that. It is just not in my makeup. That is just not what I think. I think people I think the Iraqi people are plenty competent about running themselves. It is just going to take a while to go from a society in which one person dominated and killed and murdered people in order to stay in power. I mean, we have discovered an unbelievable amount of graves. And by the way, we have discovered weapons manufacturing facilities that were condemned by the United Nations; biological laboratories described by our Secretary of State to the whole world, that were not supposed to be there, in direct violation of the U.N. resolution, have been discovered.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1073, "text": "Thanks for giving me a chance to say that, so the American press, in particular, could hear it off the record, of course. Sir, on the Palestinian issue, what if the government of Mr. Abbas really becomes unable no matter how much it puts up an effort to produce eliminating these operations, the suicide bombings what if he fails? Is this a failure of the peace process, of the roadmap? Would you then give it up? And then can you afford, really, sir, to pressure Mr. Ariel Sharon in a pre-reelection stage? Can you really do that? I do not know about listen, if I were afraid of making the decisions necessary, for political reasons, to move the process forward, I would not be going. I believe peace is possible, and I believe that I have a responsibilities, now that the conditions are such, to move the process forward. Well, there is a new Palestinian leader who is openly, firmly committed to fighting terror. And I believe he can be successful, particularly when the Arab world helps him. I believe the conditions are such that people are so sick and tired of a hopeless situation in that part of the world that together we can defeat the forces of terror and dismantle the forces of terror. That is not to say that a suicider could slip through, and it is possible, but we will not allow the evil designs of a few to stop the process that can provide such hope for a lot of people. So I believe, with the right effort and the right focus and the leadership, not only of the United States and Israel and the Palestinian Authority but the leadership of Egypt and Saudi Arabia and other nations of concern, Jordan, that we can defeat terror, the forces of terror that would like to stop the process. ENTITY, you mentioned today that you want to have commitment from the parties about the peace process. Do you want to have, like, concrete steps? Are you going to ask them for concrete steps, like what? And then in Sharm el-Sheikh, what do you want what do you look to get from the Arabs? And you are meeting with President Mubarak also.  Well, listen, President Mubarak and I have had a lot of meetings and a lot of conversations. And I am confident that he will bring up bilateral relations. As you know, we have got a very strong commitment to Egypt, particularly a funding commitment. And we want to look forward to a I will talk to him about economic reforms.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1074, "text": "And there is no telling what he will talk to me about. We have got such a good relationship that he does not need to pre-clear it with anybody. He can say what is on his mind. I will be glad to visit with him about it. Yes, I mean, first of all, we have a road-map which talks about specific things people need to do. The most constructive thing that the Arab nations can do is to stop funding terrorism to the extent that is to stop the funding of terrorism, make sure you get that right is the work to cut off monies to terrorists whose design it is to stop any peace process. To me, that is the most fundamental task. Secondly, as conditions improve, it would be very helpful if those in the neighborhood provide financial resources to help the economy of a new Palestinian state begin to grow. I recently met with the finance minister of the Palestinian Authority, was very impressed by his grasp of finances, by the fact that he believes that in order for there to be confidence amongst the Palestinians and confidence in the world that they have got to fight corruption. Listen, stories used to emerge out of the in the old days, of the Palestinian Authority that much of the aid went to enhance a few, as opposed to the people. And I do not stand for that, at least from American perspective. We are not going to let corrupt elites take aid that is supposed to go help the people. And so when the institutions evolve and confidence emerges that the develop aid will go to help the Palestinian people, which I want it to do, that will be a useful role for the Arab world. And I look forward to working with them on it. But the main thing is for them to see me and my commitment to the process. And it is one thing to read about it in stories; it is another thing to look a person in the eye and tell them, Let us work together. And that is what I am looking forward to doing. I have got very good relations with President Mubarak and Crown Prince Abdullah and the King of Jordan, Gulf Coast countries. I have worked very closely with them. And a lot of them ask me, Well, are you going to move forward now that there is a new Palestinian Authority, a leader of the Palestinian Authority, somebody that you see, the old leader of the Palestinian Authority is somebody who had a chance to lead and did not .", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1075, "text": "He has been in power a long time, and the life of the Palestinian people have gotten worse, not better. I remember what happened at Camp David during the tenure of my predecessor. So I have always said, we need to be able to work with somebody who is committed to peace. And I believe the new Prime Minister is committed to peace. And therefore, I want to share that with the leaders. Sir, can you assure that the other party is committed without reservations?  It is a big problem to the Palestinians now. Well, there is a reservation, and there should be a reservation of all parties, and that is the reservation of security. In other words, people are not going to go forward with a process unless there is a full commitment to enhance the security of all people. And remember, terrorist killers not only affect the security of the Israelis; they affect the security of the Palestinian people. You cannot have a Palestinian state if people continue to blow up the process. And therefore, it is in all our interest to work together on security. And I am convinced that as the area becomes more secure, as the institutions necessary for a democracy to emerge, that we will have a positive partner in Israel. I believe that. I believe they want peace. Most Israelis understand two states, side by side in peace, is in their national interest. And so I think the ingredients for peace are very possible. And the conditions are to work together to stop the killers from stopping the process, and I share that condition too. And I suspect a lot of the Arab leaders share that condition as well, because they fully understand the consequences of terrorist groups of taking innocent life. Well, I take it back. Thirty years ago, the G-7 or G-8 summit was set up to coordinate the big powers They were set up to coordinate the big powers, the economic strategists. Or will it be everyone for himself, with the U.S. capitalizing on the slide of the dollar? It is very important that we do spend time talking about our respective economies. It is essential that the G-8 meeting remember why it was first started, because much of it many of the grand goals that we have, together, are very difficult to achieve if the economies, our respective economies, are not strong. You just heard me talk about a hopeful Palestinian state will require trade and commerce.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1076, "text": "And if the wealthier nations are not generating cashflow and the capacity to be able to trade with other countries, then it is going to be difficult to achieve our goals. And so, absolutely, I will tell them that here at home we are have got sound monetary and fiscal policies. After all, I just signed a tax bill yesterday that will cut the taxes by $350 billion, which will help energize growth here in America. I will reiterate our strong dollar policy. I will talk to listen to their plans and initiatives to reform their economies. I had a very good discussion with Prime Minister Koizumi of Japan about economic matters. As a matter of fact, we want the European economies to be strong. It is more likely somebody in America will be able to find a job if our closest trading partners have got vibrant economies. So we need to spend a lot of time on this subject. And I will remind them that we have a great opportunity on the next round of the World Trade Organization to advance a free trade agenda, which I believe will make it more likely people in our respective countries can work. But it will make it more likely that nations will be able to rise out of poverty. And we will focus on the economy. You got rid of the policy that My whole family laughed when they heard that. You did not exactly answer the question. No, I answered it. You see what do you mean, did not exactly answer the question? You have got my answer on your tape machine. No, you have got my answer on the tape machine. It is an old trick they use in the American press corps too, You did not answer my question. What are you talking about? I spent 15 minutes answering your question. You might not like the answer but, nevertheless, I did answer it, absolutely answered it. And I loved the question. I look forward to working with the French. ENTITY, do you visualize Russia as a member of the World Trade Organization, and in the future, the member of the NATO? I think that the question on NATO is a question that will be answered over time, but first things first. Let us deal with the framework we have now set up, which is a great advance and a tribute to Vladimir Putin's leadership and our NATO leader's desire to have a unique relationship with Russia. In terms of the WTO, it is in our national interest that Russia join the WTO.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1077, "text": "And Russia is going to have to make some internal decisions as to whether or not they are willing to conform to the guidelines of the WTO. But we I strongly support Russia's admission in the WTO. Do you see the issue of restitution of Jewish property as a problem in Polish-American relations? You know, it has not made it to it has not made it to my desk. And so, therefore, if it is a problem, it is a problem that has not been brought to my attention. In other words, a lot of Polish Americans have yet to express themselves to the point where it has become an issue here in the White House. I think it is very important let me speak to the broader issue of Jewish relations around the world. It is very important for all of us to reject anti-Semitism wherever it is found, just like it is very important for us to reject those who condemn Islam. Our Nation is one that believes in freedom of religion, and we respect and tolerate people's religious faiths, no matter what their faith. And so my greater concern about Judaism and Europe is that society resist and thwart a culture which would tolerate any kind of antireligious fervor, anti-Semitism, or an anti-Islamic bent. In other words, one of the things I did I thought was most important was right after September 11th, went to a Islamic center here. I wanted to send a signal that the evil people who hijacked a great religion should not condemn that religion. In other words, Americans should not hold Islam accountable for the deaths. And so one of the things we believe here in America is religious tolerance. And I will continue to speak out on religious tolerances in a clear fashion. As I said, I am going to Auschwitz for a reason. I want to go I want to see Auschwitz. I have studied a lot of history. But I also want to send a clear signal that all of us must work together to make sure that kind of evil never happens again to anybody. At any rate, I am looking forward to going. I want to thank you all for your interest. What do you think about a third presidential term in the United States? I am only supportive of a second term these days.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithprintjournalists", "title": "Interview With Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-print-journalists", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1078, "text": "Okay, I'd like to go off the record. We will start with the older people first. Well, one of the things that we were all interested in is Secretary Rice going to Ira When did you decide about that, and what is that all about? Decided when it looked like that there was serious momentum on the legislative front, that she could help push the momentum by her very presence. So I cannot remember the exact moment; I would say it was maybe 10 days ago or something like that, when we were getting word that their budget moving, the deBa'ath law was on its it had gone through two readings, I think, before the holidays. So it seemed to make sense that she go sit down with the and the Presidency Council happened to meet yesterday, which was good. So she is going to go and sit down with the leaders and encourage them to continue making progress. By the way, I talk to the Prime Minister quite frequently on secure SVTS, which is a real-time feed from our Embassy in Baghdad to the Situation Room in the White House. I meet with Ryan Crocker and David General Petraeus weekly, and it is like a meeting. Yes, she will be back this evening; probably hold a press conference here this evening. The Saudis want to have a press conference with the Foreign Minister and Condi. Time and location because, you know, you do not want to set the time and have her not be back for it. But her intention is to get back here for dinner at the King's ranch. 40 a.m. or left the facility here at 6:40 a.m. And I presume it is , like, on the news, right? I have not seen the news.  It is to, first of all, be there. And secondly, is to there is a momentum; there is a political process that has been working that is with some of those laws coming to fruition. Her job is to be there, sitting down with them, explaining how much we appreciate what they have done, how they need to do more and keep moving the process. You know, we have been talking about these benchmarks for so long. Do you really feel like maybe now it is starting to turn a corner a bit, or is that too early to say? First of all, I think we have been talking about the benchmarks for how long? Almost a year now, is not it? It grows when people have confidence.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1079, "text": "It grows when the grass-roots begins to agitate for change. Those are all the forces necessary to bring people together to get things done. This is we assume that democracy is a natural phenomenon for people out there. These are people that lived under tyranny. They lived in a society that was divided by a dictator. And they are beginning to form the habits of self-government, manifested in laws being passed. I am not going to predict, Steven Lee, about moving this forward. I can only assure you that we will continue to work the process as hard as we can. I reminded everybody last year, you know, people did focus on the benchmarks, and so do I. But I also reminded everybody last year that one way to determine whether or not a government is functioning is to look at their budgeting process and how they distribute revenues from central Government out to the Provinces, which is a key component of a federalized-type system. And the definition of federalism, by the way, has yet to be clearly defined in Iraq, and that is part of the issues they are working through. But it is a proper role between the state government central Government and the Provinces, and that is another piece of legislation that is part of the benchmark process. But nevertheless, even though they have not passed that, there is revenue sharing. Do they have an oil law yet? Are they sharing oil revenues that would be inherent under an oil law? I knew you were anxious to ask because you are waving your hand. Look, this is not like the White House press conferences. I never know when you are going to be shuffled out before I get a chance. Stand your ground, whatever you do. I just wanted to ask you if you could just clarify a little bit your statement this morning to OPEC. What specific action would you like them to take at their first meeting coming up February? I would like for them to realize that high energy prices affect the economies of consuming nations, and that if these economies weaken, those economies will eventually be buying fewer barrels of oil. What is happened is, is that demand for energy has outstripped new supply. And I fully understand how it affects the U.S. consumer. And my point to His Majesty is going to be, when consumers have less purchasing power because of high prices of gasoline in other words, when it affects their families it could cause this economy to slow down. If the economy slows down, there will be less barrels of oil purchased.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1080, "text": "Now in our case, just so the American people know, most of our oil comes from Canada and Mexico. That is what I meant. Did you bring it up already? I brought it up with members of his administration and will do so with him tonight on the farm. Can you talk a little bit about your discussions with him so far and whether you have had a meeting of minds on any issues, whether it is Iran, Iraq I appreciate that. first, the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. I think what he really wanted to determine was how when I said, optimistic about a state being defined, why? So he is interested in the meetings, interested in the behind-the-scenes observations that I was able to share with him. He is part of my mission was to make it clear that one reason why the talks failed in the past is that there was not participation by the neighbors. And I thanked him, in front of the people assembled there, for sending his Foreign Minister to Annapolis, because the presence of Saudi at Annapolis inspired the Palestinians as well as sent a message to the Israelis Israeli population, for example. We did spend time on Iran. The interesting issue on Iran is the effect of the NIE. And I went over the NIE with him. I assured him that our intelligence services came to an independent judgment. I reminded him of what I said at my press conference when we got involved with that story. They were a threat, they are a threat, and they will be a threat if we do not work together to stop their enrichment. So we spent a fair amount of time on Iran. I have spent a fair amount of time on Iran in every stop. Many of the leaders in the region, many of the people I have spoken to, equate troubled times with no peace between the Palestinian and Israelis. It is the subject matter that, if you follow this subject, you know that this is on a lot of people's minds. And so they were they wanted to make sure that the efforts by the United States were real and how we conducted our policy wise. It is interesting; they were not all that interested in, okay, give me the negotiating points, or where are you, or what are the talking points on both sides, or where are we in the negotiations. They are interested in commitment and vision. I would like to share a universal concern I have heard on this trip, and that is, the United States will not welcome foreign capital or does not welcome foreign capital.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1081, "text": "I heard it from entrepreneurs; I have heard it from government leaders. They are concerned about reinvestment of dollars back into the United States. And there is our visa policy concerns the leaders because they know full well that the best way these are pro-American leaders, and they know the best way to defeat some perceptions that may exist on the street is for their people to go see America firsthand, like colleges and business travel. And our visa policy is getting better in some fronts, but we have still got some work to do. So I came away with the distinct impression about a concern by government and citizen alike that the United States says, not welcome. And that troubles me because that is not the way our country is. On the NIE, did you were you, in effect, distancing yourself from the conclusions of the NIE, and these guys No, I was making it clear it was an independent judgment, because what they basically came to the conclusion of, is that he is trying you know, this is a way to make sure that all options are not on the table. So I defended our intelligence services, but made it clear that they are an independent agency, that they come to conclusions separate from what I may or may not want. And on the issue of Iran, did the question of a possible military strike either by the United States or Israel come up? I just made it clear that all options are on the table. But I'd like to solve this diplomatically and think we can and talked about making sure consistent messages emanated from all parts of the world to the Iranians. Related to that, this confrontation in the Straits with the Iranian gunboats, are the rules of engagement going to change on that? You have warned of serious consequences if they do it again. I said, If they destroy our ships, yes. If they destroy our ships, there will be serious consequences. I did not say, If they do it again. If they do it again, I do not know. What do you mean, If they do it again ?  Our captains I was briefed by the admiral in Bahrain about the rules of engagement. But I just was wondering whether the next time something like that is attempted by one of these Iranian boats, they might be fired on. It is going to be up to the captain to determine whether or not his vessel is in jeopardy. My only point is, they should not be doing it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1082, "text": "It was provocative in the first place, and our captain showed restraint. These are judgment calls, and there are clear rules of engagement. Our people operate under very strict rules in the Straits, and so should the Iranians. And they better be careful of and not be provocative and, you know, get out there and cause an incident, because there is going to be serious consequences. And what I said in my statement was, if they hit one of our ships, there are going to be serious consequences, and I meant it. Do you have any sense of what they were up to? Do you think they were playing some sort of game? I was briefed; I spent some time in Bahrain with you know, when I went over there for the breakfast with the troops, command briefed us, our security team, on what are the rules of engagement, you know, and how do they work, how does it react. This is one of these moments where there is no time to be spending a lot time on the phone trying to figure out what to do. And there is these are highly trained professionals who, I thought, dealt with it in a very professional way. It could be. IRGC or versus the military , but you know something? It is not going to matter to me one way or the other if they hit our ships, and the Iranian Government has got to understand that. We lost lives when one of those boats loaded with explosives attacked us called the USS Cole. In this case, it would be states it would be the actions of a state. Whoever made the is in control of these boats best be careful. You were suggesting that this could be could have been directed by the Revolutionary Guard? His question was, do we know the chain of command? There is several chains of command inside the it was a very perceptive comment by the lad, and it was there are separate military organizations, separate organizations inside Iran, and so we do not know. The IRGC could be is a player inside Iran. Do not write the story that I am predicting who made this decision, because I am telling you I cannot be any more plain about it I do not know. And my other was, it is not going to matter who made the decision. If they hit our ships, we will hold Iran responsible. Can we ask you on You can ask me anything you want. If I do not want to answer, I will say, I do not want to answer it. Are you in a good mood?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1083, "text": "Dates put you in a good mood, right? I am in a great mood. Which kind of dates are you talking about? In your discussions with King Abdallah and other Gulf Arab leaders, were they in any way urging restraint? Were they in any way urging you restraint in your dealings with Iran? I told them that I want to solve this issue diplomatically. I explained to them the diplomacy we are going through. They need to make it clear to nations that do business with Iran that if we want to solve this diplomatically, there needs to be pressure on the regime so that some the hope is, is that somebody shows up and says, We are tired of being isolated, and we are tired of the economic deprivation that comes from our desire to enrich. I also explained to them why I support the Russian position. And for those of you who follow the White House and have listened carefully to what I have been saying, know full well that is been my position for quite a while. Because I said early on that I supported the Iranian desire for they said, every sovereign nation has the right for a civilian nuclear power. I said, the problem with you is, you have not honored the international agreements you being the Iranians. And secondly therefore, we cannot trust you with enrichment. But because I believe that you have a sovereign right for nuclear power, I support the Russian idea of providing you with enriched uranium and collecting the spent uranium, thereby undermining their position that they need to learn to enrich in order to have civilian nuclear power. And the danger with enrichment for civilian so-called civilian purposes is, is that that technology can be transferred easily to another covert military program. Knowledge is transferable, and so what I have explained to our friends in the region is the best way to stop any potential weapons program is I have also explained to them our position is, is that if they verifiably suspend their program, there is a way forward for dialogue through the P-3 process. What do you call what do we call that? Are you hogging this? I do not remember that. What did he say? Oh, he said there was concern about what the Israelis might do. Who? Bruce Riedel he used to work on the NSC said that he came back from a visit to Iran Can we ask you about let us go back on the economy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1084, "text": "You talked about the threat of the economy slowing down if consumers buy less oil, or can The price of energy can have an effect on economic growth. I was talking about they were asking me about what I am going to say to King Abdallah. And I am going to say, high energy prices can affect economic growth because it is painful for our consumers. My question is, you have talked about inheriting a recession when you came into office. You are a year away from leaving office. Do you think that your successor is going to wind up in the same boat? I have always said these are times of economic uncertainty, but I have confidence in the future immediate future because the underpinnings of our economy are good. Inflation core inflation is low; we have still got some. We have still got some issues, obviously, and one of them is the housing market. That is one of the things the leaders have been interested in, is my views on the economy. It is the R word. My position has not changed from 3 days ago, or whatever it was, when I commented on this. The fact that you are optimistic, that suggests does that mean that you are not going to suggest any change in your tax policy or And we will let you know if I decide one way or the other. ENTITY, I am wondering if you can talk a little bit about what you are hearing from Arab leaders Sorry, ENTITY, I have already answered that. I am used to it. About the Palestinian-Israeli issue, what kind of feedback are you hearing? I will be glad to tell you again. The first question in their mind is, one, why do I sound optimistic? Two, are we going to spend the time and effort to help move the process? I made it clear to them that in order for this to work, they have got to be supportive of the Palestinians and make it clear that Israel is an important part of the future of the Middle East. Do the Arab States recognize Israel? I mean, do they want to have they shown any sign that they want to improve relations with Israel? I think the fact that they sent major players in their administration to Annapolis was a sign. That answers your question. And they want to see a deal done, and they want progress because the issue frustrates them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1085, "text": "As I said earlier, Michael, this issue is kind of the touchstone in their mind for a lot of other problems in the Middle East; you solve this, then a lot of other problems go away. I hope they are right on that. I will be glad to go off the record and tell you why now. Sir, if I could just follow on that point. I noted that the King of Bahrain mentioned the peace process in his statement when he welcomed you. We have not heard similar statements. I understand that they sent their representatives. Do you think that many of the Arab leaders are still holding back a little bit; they want to see, perhaps, a little more progress towards a deal before they are willing to come out and start talking about things like recognition of Israel? First of all, after years of disappointment, those of us directly involved in the process have a lot of work to try to instill confidence in the people. And I think laying back is too strong a word, but I think wondering whether this can happen is the right way to put it, Steven Lee. They are willing to send a in the Saudis' case, their Foreign Minister to Annapolis. They are most interested we spent a lot of time on this subject in each stop because they are most interested in getting my point of view about how I think the process is going to unfold, what are the problems, what can the U.S. do to help, and will we be actively involved. They have this great hope that the United States involvement will cause the process to be more likely to move forward. I want to apologize for our tardiness. If you covered this, I apologize for that too. Which reminds me of the question, did you get what I mouthed to you there? What do you hope to get out of the King, or what do you hope to accomplish with this talk about our economy and the impact of high prices? Well, first of all is a realization that high energy prices can damage consuming economies. It can hurt the economy. And it has not it is been it is affected our families. Do not get me wrong; paying more for gasoline hurts some of the American families. And I will make that clear to him. But I also understand the dynamics behind the issue, and that is growing demand from U.S., but more particularly, China and India, relative to supply. Oil is a commodity; it is not something you just turn a tap.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1086, "text": "I mean, it requires investment, exploration, a lot of capital. I talked to His Majesty early on in my Presidency in the hopes that they would explore for new fields; they have. They have increased their capacity. But in the meantime, demand has gone up quite substantially. Well, do you want him to open the spigot more? Do you want him to lower the prices? What does that mean? That is what I hope that OPEC, if possible, understands that if they could put more supply on the market, it would be helpful. But a lot of these economies are going a lot of these oil-producing countries are full out. I would follow up on that the security barrier what I was trying to get out of my question was the notion that if ENTITY You did not think of it until I said, Nice question. You were coming with this? And so I did not get a follow-up. I was not going to give you a follow-up in front of the cameras anyway. The question I had is, do you see a day someday when some President in the future will come and say to some Israeli leader and Palestinian leader that it is time for that wall to come down, not unlike Ronald Reagan's You know, I do not think in the short term that day will come. I meant barrier, is what I meant, the barrier you drove through Well, no, it is not, in all due respect to the questioner. It was your question; of course, it is the same question. What I meant to say was . Look, first of all, the state comes into being subject to the roadmap, which requires security measures being in place so that the Israeli population is comfortable that it is not going to have a state that harbors people that want to destroy them. The reason why you articulate a vision is to give people inside the Palestinian Territories, who do not want violence and who do not want to destroy Israel, a chance to be for something. This is how I answered the question. The wall is a was necessary, in the Israelis' minds, to protect themselves. It is that sense of security which I hope will give them a chance their politicians a chance to negotiate the deal. In other words, it is a series of security measures that will eventually cause a state to come into being. And whether or not the wall comes down or not, I cannot predict that to you, Steven Lee.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistsriyadhsaudiarabia", "title": "Interview With Journalists in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-riyadh-saudi-arabia", "publication_date": "15-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1087, "text": "We understand you made a foreign policy related call shortly-- Yes, I just talked to President Kim about the No Gun Ri incident and personally expressed my regret to him. And I thanked him for the work that we had done together in developing our mutual statement. We also set up this scholarship fund and did some other things that we hope will be a genuine gesture of our regret. It was a very-you know, I had a good talk with him. Any particular reason why you used the word regret instead of apology in your statement? I think the findings were- I think he knows that regret and apology both mean the same thing, in terms of being profoundly sorry for what happened. But I believe that the people who looked into it could not conclude that there was a deliberate act, decided at a high enough level in the military hierarchy, to acknowledge that, in effect, the Government had participated in something that was terrible. So I do not think there is any difference in the two words, on a human level, because we are profoundly sorry that it happened and sorry that any Americans were involved in it. But I think that in terms of the kind of responsibility the institution of the military that the facts were sufficiently unclear after all this time that the people who were reviewing it thought it was the appropriate language. And we worked it out with the Koreans and obviously shared whatever we could find with them. These people have been our friends for 50 years. We did not have-I told our guys to play it straight, that we did not have an interest in trying to cover anything up or sugar-coat anything; we needed to try to get to the bottom of this. I think that we have done about the best we can do. And I hope that the people of Korea will accept our statement as genuine, and I hope it will bring some solace to the family members and the few people that still survived who were involved in it, who will never get over it. Let me ask you another topical question. California is on the verge of blackouts. Is there anything you can do in your remaining time in office? Well, I am working at it. We have done some things. Secretary Richardson has worked very hard to make sure that the wholesalers kept selling the power to the utilities.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1088, "text": "But essentially, what happened was before-without any involvement from the Federal Government and before the previous administration in California, the deregulation was done in a way that made them vulnerable not to- in essence, to very high prices, maybe prices that are not justified by market conditions on occasion. They need to get all they can get from out-of-State generators and in-State generators, because they have grown so much. And they still have a regulation of prices to the ultimate consumer. So we have got a situation here which it seems to me might have been predictable at the time the deregulation legislation was done. But I, frankly, until this happened, I did not know what the nature of the California deregulation law was. So we are dealing with the situation the best we can. But I also think we need to talk to some of the producers, see whether more power can be brought on line at economical rates more quickly. I actually talked to one of them myself just in the last 2 or 3 days. So I am trying to get all of our options out there, and if there is anything else I can do, I will. I saw Governor Davis about a week ago, and I told him that. But I do believe that the Governor and the people of California know that, through the Energy Department, we have done everything we can so far. Let me turn you to the election very quickly. You seemed to surprise everybody when you said that the Republicans only-that when they stopped the counting, that is the only way that George W. won. What point were you trying to make there? I was actually just having fun with Bill Daley in Chicago. We were home and his brother-he had introduced his brother. I think Bill did a very fine job running the Vice President's campaign. I was just having a good time, trying to put them all in a good humor. I was not trying to be sarcastic or hateful or even make any kind of deliberate point. I was basically having fun with what I think are the undisputed facts. I do not think there is much dispute about the facts. They did not finish the vote count. Do you have any hard feelings about the election outcome and the way the Court, the conservative majority stepped in to stop the counting? Well, I do not have much to add to what I said. I think the Vice President said it all for us. We accept the principle of judicial review.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1089, "text": "It has been since John Marshall wrote the opinion in Marbury v. Madison in the early 19th century. And it has helped us to have some finality in our law. But yes, I disagree with the decision, and I think most constitutional scholars do. I saw a quote in the paper the other day from a man who was a law professor in the Middle West- I am sorry, I do not remember his name-but he identified himself as a conservative, pro-life Republican. But he said, I am a constitutional law professor, and I disagree with this decision. But the country has had, periodically-thankfully not often, but periodically-there is a handful of Supreme Court decisions that I think were unfortunate. But we nearly always straighten it out with time. And in the meanwhile, the election was very close. It was fought nearly to a draw, and the political forces in Florida, the legislature might have done the same thing, and it might have been upheld. I just hated to see the Court involved in this way when there was, you know, 6 days less to count the votes. But I did not mean to make any big point. I did not say anything that I and the Vice President and other Democrats had said tons of times. I was just having fun, trying to say something nice, to make people laugh about Bill Daley. It is pretty tough on him, you know, because he really did do a good job. I think they were about 10 points behind or something, and Bill took over, and he really did, I think, a very good job. Can I switch to the Middle East? Today they had some talks-- Let me just say one other- you should not read anything about-that has nothing to do with-we have tried to be very supportive of the President-elect and his team and the transition. I have not tried to politicize this. I was strictly having fun with my friends in Chicago and bucking up Bill Daley. What are your thoughts about the next 8 days? It depends on what the agreement is and then how the Israeli electorate responds to it. General Sharon has, I think, never liked the Oslo agreement and has been very honest about it. But he did come to Wye River; he participated fully. Then Prime Minister Netanyahu had been very critical of Oslo. But they negotiated that agreement at Wye River, and previously to that, I think he was in when they finalized the Hebron agreement.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1090, "text": "The reason we went-let me just back up and say, the reason we went to Camp David in the first place is that it was obvious to everybody that just as the Hebron and then especially the Wye River agreement was absolutely essential to keep the peace process alive, because the previous understandings had come to the end of their rope and they had to stay on the process, it was obvious to me that we had come to the end of our capacity to stay in the peace process with just the Wye River agreement. It worked very well for a couple of years, but there had to be some continued movement. Because what happens is, when you reach a stall, then the people that really do not want this to happen, particularly rejectionist elements within the Palestinian community, they can have incidents; then they provoke reactions; then the borders get closed; then the incomes of the Palestinians drop again, and you get in a downward spiral. So I was trying to head off just what we have been through these last 3 months. So I think that they will have to reach some sort of accommodation, unless they really want the thing to spin out of control. And I really do not believe either side wants that, so we will just have to see. But you know, whatever happens will be the responsibility of the next administration and the winner of the Israeli election, whoever that may be. Do you think it is important for you to set out a list of, maybe, points that have been agreed to so far, so that they do not start from scratch again, that you do not lose what you have already gotten? Well, I think it was quite significant, actually, even though it came 6 days later than I wanted it to, that the Palestinians have now agreed in principle with the parameters. So at least that Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority have agreed-this Israeli government, excuse me-and the Palestinian Authority have agreed to the parameters. Both sides have some concerns and some questions which are, frankly, quite well known to either side. So I think we have narrowed the debate and moved it forward. Now obviously, unless there is an agreement, the United States Government is not bound by the position I took.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1091, "text": "For example, when I felt that I had to continue a number of President Bush's policies-I did not particularly disagree with them, either, by the way, in Somalia and one or two other places-but I did not really believe it was an option to reverse them, because our Government was committed. And I think it is very important that we-except in the most extreme circumstances-maintain some continuity in foreign policy and in our commitments to other countries. But President-elect Bush is in no way, shape, or form bound by the positions I have taken on this Middle East agreement, unless there is some agreement. In all my 8 years of service as ENTITY, I have never seen a situation quite like this, where the circumstances, including my short time in office, seemed unfavorable, but the determination of the main players seems strong, in fact, maybe even intensified. I am trying to keep myself free of expectation one way or the other, and to do whatever I can to try to help end the violence-and we had a good day today-and just create the conditions in which, if they are willing, they can do as much as they can do. I do not think we can predict it. Do you think the incoming Bush people will be as interested in pursuing this as you have been? Well, I think they will be very interested in stability and peace in the Middle East. Their orientation has been a little more toward, you know, the Gulf, the oil-producing states, honoring our historic commitments to Israel to maintain their qualitative military capacity. But to be fair, the previous Bush administration took a pretty strong line on expanded settlements after the Madrid talks started in the hope that they could help to create the conditions in which the Palestinians and the Israelis could move toward peace. So I think that there may be differences in approach and priorities that the President and the Vice President and Secretary Powell will have to work through. But my guess is that their general direction will be the same, because in the end, what happens is-let us assume-and I am not saying this, because I do not believe this-but listen, even if you had an administration that did not really care about the Palestinian problem on its own merits and said, Well, our real interests are in the geopolitics of the oilproducing states and the problems created by the lack of an agreement with Syria.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1092, "text": "And by the way, I am fairly optimistic that there will be an agreement between Israel and Syria sometime in the not-too-distant future, and I do not think there would be much difference in the policy positions taken by Likud or a Labor government on Syria, or by my administration or the incoming administration. We worked this hard, I mean, for years. And I think if the late President Asad had not kind of felt he was not in the best of health and was not- that they wanted to freeze things in place, and if he can secure his son's accession, we might well have been able to do a peace agreement when I met with him in Switzerland shortly before his death. So even if it is not a priority for you because it looks like a morass that cannot be solved in a small place with people that do not have a state, do not have nuclear arms, do not have an air force, do not have an army, inevitably what we always get back to is that the absence of an agreement with the Palestinians and the absence of a stable situation between Israel and the Palestinians infects the other countries and their capacity to relate to us over the long run. And particularly as these other countries have more and more young people who are more and more drawn to the sympathetic-drawn with a sympathetic ear to the claims of the Palestinians, and they have more demonstrations in these other countries and more unrest in these other countries, I think that our concern for stability in our relations with the Saudis, with the Kuwaitis, with not letting Saddam Hussein develop weapons of mass destruction again, the whole range of concerns that any American administration would have to have leads you back down to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and trying to get to the end of the road there. I think that that is why I made the speech I did to the Israeli Policy Forum the other night. I waited until the very end, and until, essentially, I had put these parameters out before saying that, because I do not believe an American ENTITY should try to impose or create a peace between these two parties. The questions go too much to the heart of their respective sense of national identities, their cultural identity, their whole set of religious convictions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1093, "text": "So all I said in these parameters and all I meant to say in the Israel Policy Forum speech is, Look, I have been listening to these people for 8 years, and I have studied these issues as closely, I believe, as any American President ever has, down to the maps, the settlement locations, the maps of the city of Jerusalem, the whole thing. My best judgment is if there ever is going to be a comprehensive agreement, it will have to look something like this. In other words, they could do what they did at Wye River. They could say, Okay, here is the next chapter, and this is what we are going to do. But the real problem with the sort of sequencing of interim steps is that, at least so far, because of all the other very complex forces going on there, these steps have not brought sufficient stability to the relationship and to the climate within the Palestinian areas or within Israel that there can be a long-term sort of set of nonpolitical measures that lead to progress-which is exactly the reverse of the Irish situation. And you may have heard me say this before, but the difference is, in Ireland-I may have said this in the Israel Policy Forum speech, I cannot remember-but my physical analogy is, some unsolved problems are like scabs on a wound. If you leave them alone, they will heal. Some are like an abscessed tooth. If you leave it alone, it will get lots worse. In Ireland, because the underlying economic circumstances are dramatically improved and because there has been a dramatic increase in interpersonal contact which is positive, and because while there is a small terrorist group that is still trying to upset the Irish thing, it is much more contained, the absence of final resolution of the thorny political issues is unlikely to crater the situation. In the Middle East, the per capita income of most Palestinians is the same or lower than it was when we signed the agreement on the White House Lawn, because there are so many different groups that can paralyze the process with acts of terror or violence that close the borders, that stop everything, that wreck the economy, and that kind of burn the bridges of trust that get built up when things are going okay for a year or so. I think it is more like an abscessed tooth. So that is why I decided to make the speech I gave at the Israel Policy Forum. But they do not have to do that. They could reach another accommodation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1094, "text": "They could say, Okay, we cannot do this whole thing, but we cannot just rest on Oslo plus Wye River, so we have to do this, whatever this is. And they could do that. But I think any Israeli leader would have to see that, and I think in the end, any American government will come back to a concern for it, if for no other reason than a desire to have stability in the region. Let me turn you quickly to the economy. The Republicans are talking about a retroactive tax cut. You have got an economic statement tomorrow. Are the factors there, is the evidence there strong enough that there is a downturn going on and we need this retroactive tax cut? Well, first of all, the blue chip forecast, I think, is for 2.6 percent growth, which is enough growth to keep the unemployment rate at about 4 percent. And that really does not surprise me. When I saw the initial estimates, which were about 3.4 percent, I thought they were a tad high because we have been growing for a couple of years at nearly 5 percent, which is, for an advanced economy of our size, it is just virtually unprecedented. You simply could not sustain it at that rate. On the other hand, there is been a fairly sharp drop in stock values, and that takes a lot of wealth out of the economy, and eventually, that backs down into lower consumption and orders and things like that. So you see, for example, real problems in the steel industry today at a time when steel imports are also dropping. So it is not like the '97 crisis where-the crisis in Asia and Russia led people to try to flood the market in America with bargain basement prices. Here, you have got an overall problem. So I think I have always believed that a tax cut should be part of the next budget. I thought it should have been part of the last budget. It can be a little bigger than the one that I proposed, because the surplus has been written up some-the estimated surplus. Although I think it is very important that they go back and subtract from the estimated surplus the 10-year costs of the budget we just adopted, because it is the best education budget, for example, that we have had in my 8 years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1095, "text": "But you have to prorate that out, and President-elect Bush has said he is very interested in continuing to support education, even though he wants to kind of rearrange the deck chairs on how we allocated it- which is, you know, that is up to him and the Congress. They will have to work that out. So I think the question is not so much whether one is warranted but what kind of tax cut should it be, and how big should it be? My concern-what I have believed in-I said this back during the campaign period so I can reiterate it-my view is that it should not be so large as to preclude our continued ability to pay down the debt and to stay more or less on the track we are on to get the debt down over the next 10 years, because if the markets perceive that we are going back into deficits, that would lead to an increase in interest rates, which would wipe out the impact of a tax cut for most Americans-even wealthy Americans, because it could have a depressing impact on the market, and it certainly would increase the cost of business borrowing and tend to slow down the growth of the economy. So the trick is-that also, by the way, would foreclose-this is what happened to me when I got in. I did not have the option to do what Americans would normally-the Government would normally do in a recession, which is to have a substantial tax cut and pump the thing back up, because the deficit was so big, it would just have caused interest rates to skyrocket. So the trick for the incoming administration- they have lots of options here. They can spend money; they can cut taxes; they can do more of one or less of the other-and less of the other. But the real-what I would be thinking about if I were in that position is, what is the aggregate amount we are going to commit here, particularly on the tax cut side, because it is not like-you do not have to repeat spending in years 2, 3, and 4. You can cut spending if times are tough. We have proved that. But once the tax money-once you cut the taxes, that is normally gone. It is hard to raise taxes when times are tough.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1096, "text": "So what I hope is, I think they ought to have a tax cut of some magnitude, but I think they ought to save back enough to keep on the track of paying down the debt, which also gives you the protection down the road. Someday, surely, the expansion will come to an end, but I do not think it has to come any time soon. And when it does, the more we pay the debt down, the more free we will be then to have a substantial tax cut to help the country in a recession-when that happens sometime in the future-without having an adverse impact on interest rates. So I do not think there is any question that they can have a tax cut. But I just think you do not want it so big that it takes you off the path of getting us out of debt, because the mental knowledge that that is the path we are on keeps interest rates low. The average American family now is saving $2,000 a year on a home mortgage, as compared to where we were back in '93. Long-term interest rates are 2 percent lower than when I took office, even though we have had an 8-year expansion, which is unheard of. You normally would not have that. And paying down the debt has a huge impact on that, because it frees up more and more money every year to borrow in the private sector, and interest rates are lower than they would be if the Government were competing. And let me also say there is something else that we should keep in mind. The more you pay down the debt, the lower your interest bill is. I think this year we have got interest payments on the debt down under 12 cents on the dollar. But they were at 13 or something, headed north, when I took office. Let us say we went-I am making this up, of course-let us say we went 4 or 5 more years on the same tack, and we got interest on the debt down to 6 cents on the dollar. That is a huge amount of money that is freed up every year for either investment in our future or for tax cuts. And you have more and more and more flexibility. Anyway, that is kind of a long-winded answer, but it is a very, very important subject, and I have thought about it a lot.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1097, "text": "On NMD, which has become topical now with the Bush administration and Rumsfeld's hearings today, do you regret at all making it a commitment of the United States, since some diplomacy efforts, like with Korea, are working out? And is it just going to create more problems with China, Russia in the future? Well, I think I made the right decision not to deploy. And I think that I made the right decision to continue the research program. And I hope that is what they will do. It is not clear to me exactly how they are going to operationalize their commitment. That is, because in the campaign, the President-elect said that he would do this if it could be developed, whether anybody else liked it or not, which bothered some people. But he also-the it that he was trying to develop was a system that was, in effect, more comprehensive than the more limited one that could have been deployed in the timeframes we were talking about during my tenure. So it may be that what he will decide to do is to intensify research. Look, if we actually knew we had the technology to take missiles out of the sky, even assuming that we get this agreement with North Korea-which I think we will get, on freezing the missile production, not selling missiles. That is teed up, and I believe the Bush administration will see it as a great opportunity. And I think it will be one seized within the first few months of the incoming administration. I think it will be one of their first achievements, because it is set, and I think it will happen. But even if that happens, with the proliferation of technology around the world, we cannot possibly know who might have missiles in the future. So I think we are almost morally obligated to continue to try to develop this kind of system. However, if we deploy the system in a way that leads to more proliferation and more insecurity, that is very problematic. And it is one of the things that I had to consider, that if we just set it up, even if we were worried about North Korea and the Middle East, if the Chinese interpreted it as a move to try to contain them, even though there is no way we could- even if they have just 50 missiles, that is more than-or two dozen, whatever they have got-two dozen I guess, more or less-they might decide that now they need 300.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1098, "text": "If they did that, the Indians would decide that they needed more, under the present state of play between the two countries. If they did that, the Pakistanis would certainly build more. And circumstances that exist on the Indian Subcontinent are not as stable as those which existed between the United States and the Soviet Union during the cold war, or that exists today between the United States and Russia. And by the way, I expect that there will be a further reduction in nuclear warheads by both countries. That is one thing I think the Bush administration will be in a position to do, because of the development of our relationships, I will be-I expect that President Putin and then-President Bush will be successful in continuing to reduce the nuclear arsenals. But you do not want to have all this sort of uncontrolled instability in some other part of the world. But there is a way to continue to work the missile defense issue, and then there would be a way to put it at the service of all countries, the technology, which is what President Reagan used to talk about when he was talking about the Star Wars in the sky and all of that. Philosophically, he had an idea of making it available to all countries so that no one would be any more at risk, including from us. We are talking about technology to stop the accidental launch or a terrorist or a country with two or three missiles that could lob them at you. Two or three missiles could do a world of damage on the United States or someone else. So I just think-I think that I left it with a maximum number of options for the next administration. I have tried to leave the economy with maximum number of options in good shape, and I think this program gives them the maximum number of options. And I think-again, you know, we all say things in campaigns, and then you get to be ENTITY and it looks a little different. Presidents pretty much do what they promise to do in campaigns, but sometimes when you turn an idea into an operation, when you operationalize your views, the world looks different when you are sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office than it did when you were running for the job. And that is no criticism of him. They are the same things that looked different to me when I got there. And so I just-it is a big issue, but it will be closely covered and widely debated, and I hope it will be resolved in an appropriate way.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1099, "text": "How are you going to feel on January 21st? But I will say this, right now, I just feel very at peace and very grateful. And I am going to start thinking about the rest of my life. Every stage of my life has been rewarding and good. I am just going to try to imagine how I can make the most of it. I am kind of looking forward to it. I do not expect that I will have sort of prolonged periods of semi-depression because I am not ENTITY anymore. I was only halfway kidding when I told the church the other day that I expected to be disoriented when I go into big rooms and nobody plays a song anymore. I mean, I am sure there will be somehow some kind of things that will be tough, and I will have to learn how to be a real citizen all over again, but that is good. The Presidency is what was so well taken care of, and a lot of the cares of normal daily life that I never had to think about when I was in office. It is probably healthy for a person not to have that kind of support for too many years in life. So I am kind of looking forward to it. What is going to happen to Socks? You know, I made more progress in the Middle East than I did between Socks and Buddy. And I do not know that I have got enough space and enough help when I am gone to keep them both away from one another and keep them both happy. But I still have not quite resolved what to do. I love that old cat. You know, we picked him up as sort of a half stray in Arkansas, and I hate to give him up. But Betty loves him. Half the White House loves the cat, and the other half loves the dog. You cannot break them up into that many pieces. I am sure going to take-I know I will take Buddy, because I slept with him for 16 months all during the Senate campaign. He was with me all the time. I cannot live without him. But I really-I have even talked to some of the guys, a couple of the guys at the White House are quite good at training pets, and we have all kind of tried to work at this. None of us have been able to figure out how to actually get them in peaceful coexistence. I feel, of all the skills I learned as ENTITY in bringing these people together, I did not do very well with that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevehollandanddebbiecharlesreuters", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Steve Holland and Debbie Charles of Reuters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-holland-and-debbie-charles-reuters", "publication_date": "11-01-2001", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1111, "text": "The Summit of Madrid marks the first expansion of the NATO to the Eastern European countries. ENTITY, it is perceived by the public opinion in Europe that the United States limits this expansion. It is perhaps a misperception from Europe? First of all, let me say that the expansion itself is historic, and we should not minimize it. Of course, Spain was the last new member of NATO, and that was an historic thing as well. But to expand NATO in a way that enables us to move closer to our goal of a united, democratic Europe for the first time in history is very important. I do not want to limit NATO expansion; I want to leave the door open to all democracies that would like to be a part of it. But keep in mind, NATO is not simply a political alliance. It is primarily a military alliance, and we have done a lot of work to try to adapt NATO to the security challenges of the 21st century, to the Bosnias, if you will, rather than to the cold war. So it seems to us, after having consulted with all of our allies and after having looked at the capacity of those that would like to become members, that the three members from Central Europe, Poland and Hungary and the Czech Republic, are clearly ready to assume the responsibilities of NATO membership and ready to integrate militarily with NATO. That does not mean that the door should not remain wide open to others and that we should not make every effort over the next couple of years to do what it takes to help others qualify for NATO membership. I do not want to exclude anyone, but I think it quite important on principle that we not admit anyone until we are absolutely sure that their democracy is stable and that they are militarily capable. And this is just a difference of opinion. Some of the NATO members agree with us; some would prefer four; some would prefer five. But, ENTITY, does that mean that when you go to Madrid, in effect your mind is made up, and those who disagree in the alliance will have to join your view? NATO has always made decisions by consensus. For example, suppose we were for five and the British were for three- alone. In order to achieve a consensus, since that is the only way we can proceed, three would still prevail. In other words, it is not because it is America; it is because we have to reach a consensus. But we have spent a lot of time with this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1112, "text": "I have personally visited with President Chirac about it. I have personally talked with Chancellor Kohl about it. I have personally talked with President Aznar and with Tony Blair about it and many other European leaders. I had a long talk with Prime Minister Prodi about it. Then Madeleine Albright went to Sintra in Portugal and talked to all of the people about it before we announced a public position, and I have spent a long time with our military leaders talking about it. And others had announced their position before ours, so I do not foresee any circumstances under which I would change my position that today we ought to have three. But keep in mind, my position also is-and some of the members do not agree with this- that we should leave the door open, that we should have a review, we should take another look at it in 1999, and even at 1999 we should keep the door open. That is, I see NATO as a way of continuing the process of European integration, which I have supported. I have supported the European Union; I have supported the independent security unit, the ESDI within NATO, which is something that is been important to France and others. So I am looking forward to other meetings like Madrid. I do not think this will be the last one by a long shot. ENTITY, NATO is a bone of contention between you, President Chirac, and his Socialist Prime Minister Jospin. Concretely, why do you refuse the French, but any other European countries, to have the command of the South NATO flank? And I would like to add, is the communist presence inside the French Government a problem in the NATO context? First of all, I hope that France will become integrated into the military structure of NATO, and I hope that Spain will be as well, and I think we are quite close with Spain. Secondly, I believe that more command positions should be open to Europeans, and I have supported that. That is-so, in the adaptation of NATO internally, the United States has favored the integration of France and Spain into the military command structure, has favored an independent European security defense initiative within NATO, and has favored more command positions going to French and to European officers. The particular command, the AFSOUTH Command, is-the real problem there for us right now is that right now, the AFSOUTH Command is essentially command of the 6th Fleet of the United States Navy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1113, "text": "And except for, and maybe even including-I'd have to check the numbers-our presence in South Korea, it is the biggest single deployment of United States military assets anywhere. So if we were to divide the AFSOUTH Command, it would not , from our point of view, be a sensible thing to do militarily because that is essentially the central asset of AFSOUTH. We have offered to revisit this-even that position with the French in a few years, because it may be that we decide to change the composition of what makes up AFSOUTH. But in terms of the command structure, we believe the Europeans should have more command positions. And we hope that we can resume these discussions and work this out. Look, France is a democracy, and they elected a new leadership for the Parliament, and that is up to the government. As long as the Government of France is a great democracy, standing for freedom and participating, I do not have a problem. The French people should make their own decisions over that; the United States should not make a judgment about that. ENTITY, one could say that the main beneficiary of the new security structure in Europe is Germany. Our country is not a front line state anymore; the Bundeswehr, which has been trained and equipped to fight a war on its own territory, defining the Eastern flank of NATO, will not have to do that anymore. So when the new, the next Gulf crisis, Somalia crisis, Bosnia crisis come about, what would America expect from Germany to take over in terms of burden from the Americans? I do not know that I would expect them to take over anything from the Americans, but I would make two points. One and most importantly is that the Germans are in a position to be partners with us now because of decisions which have been made by your supreme judicial body, and because of the vision of Chancellor Kohl-we are in a position to be partners in Bosnia, for example-that the Germans can participate and are not only trusted but relied upon to participate in cooperative security challenges beyond the German borders. The second thing I would say is that the Germans have supported the French and others in being for a European security defense capacity where Europe can act alone without the United States and Canada in appropriate circumstances within NATO as part of our adaptation. So that is what I would expect, if you will.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1114, "text": "I think that there will be continuing partnership, and now we will be able to worry not about the eastern border of Germany but about the stability of all of Europe, and we will be able to do that together now. But it will also mean an increased military role, probably. It could, but it may not require an increased military budget. That is, all of our militaries are doing different things. On the budget, let me say-this is one other point I should make-there are costs for Europeans and costs for Americans in expanding NATO, and it is important, therefore, to make a good military decision because you have to justify the costs to the public. That is why it cannot simply be about politics, because we have to-we are all obliged to do certain things to keep the military able to work with one another; the term of art is interoperability. ENTITY, I think it would be interesting to know how you did convince President Yeltsin three instead of five. Is it the price that you paid to get yes from Mr. Yeltsin? I would not say that, but I think that it is important to note that we made an agreement with President Yeltsin to have an agreement between NATO and Russia that would make it crystal clear that NATO is no longer an organization designed to contain Russia; NATO is an organization designed to work with all free countries to respect the territorial integrity of its members, to protect the security of its members, and to work with its members and their allies, Russia, soon to be Ukraine, and those in the Partnership For Peace, on common security problems like the problem in Bosnia. I think the great contribution Boris Yeltsin has made to the integration of Europe is his willingness to say, Russia is not going to define its greatness in terms of territorial domination, Russia will define its greatness in terms of the achievements of its people and its partnerships with other countries. That was the contribution, that is what he did, and he deserves a lot of credit for that. Now, should we expand NATO in a way that is at least aware of the nationalist elements in Russia, the people that do not feel the same way? Should we be sensitive to that? But I think as NATO and Russia continue to work in partnership as we have in Bosnia, the continued expansion of NATO will not be seen as a threat to the Russian people but will be seen as something that reinforces our partnership and therefore makes the Russian people more secure.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1115, "text": "You decided for a slow start? The main reason I decided this is I really believe that these three countries are the only three countries right now that can start tomorrow and within a reasonable time meet the same standard of membership militarily that the other NATO countries met. We have to remember, this alliance is the most successful alliance in history because it is had military as well as political integrity. But these other nations, I believe, that are either developing their economies and their military capacity, are stabilizing their democracies, should all be considered for future NATO membership. And the irony of this is, right now a lot of the European countries say five, and I say three, but over the long run we may find the United States in favor of considering more countries than a majority of Europeans would be. ENTITY, the government of Madrid wants to remain in the chain of command of NATO. Is Spain's petition to maintain under its control of the Canary Island territory acceptable for the United States? I think the Spanish position is certainly understandable, and it is my understanding that Spain is at least close to being satisfied with the discussions that have been held. The position the United States has taken on this is that the military experts should resolve this, that only Spain can decide whether its concerns about sovereignty and leadership have been satisfied. But for all of the rest of the countries, what we should do is to make this a military decision and see if we can resolve the issue with Spain in a way that is consistent with the way NATO should operate. And they are working very hard on it, and I hope and believe they will resolve it soon. On another security matter, ENTITY, you have nurtured the peace process in Northern Ireland personally, but things are looking very ominous, coming up to this weekend with the scheduled Loyalist march in Drumcree. No, I am not pessimistic, but frankly, the ball is in the IRA's court right now in terms of declaring a cease-fire, and then there is also a ball in the court of the Protestant Loyalists and whether they will continue to exercise restraint. But let me say, to me the most hopeful thing is that we have got this meeting, I believe, today between Prime Minister Blair and Mr. Ahern, the new Irish Prime Minister. There has been sort of a reaffirmation of the position of the British and Irish Governments about how decommissioning should operate in a fashion parallel with the peace talks.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1116, "text": "And so I think that the British and Irish Governments are right on track and doing what should be done, and the Irish people should be heartened by the new leadership in both countries, reaffirming the peace process and trying to invigorate it. But the truth is that in order to get all the parties involved and do it without bloodshed, the IRA will have to renounce violence and reinstitute the cease-fire. We have tried to involve Sinn Fein; we have tried to reach out, as you know. But two young men were brutally murdered in what is clearly an assassination recently in Ireland. That is unacceptable, you know; we cannot do that. The Irish people want the peace process, the British and the Irish Governments want the peace process, and the IRA ought to give it a chance to work. But would you favor the Loyalists calling off their march, postponing things? I think that is a matter best left to the people of Northern Ireland and to the British and Irish Governments. I have tried to be very disciplined in the role the United States has played in this, and I just do not think that is a matter on which I should express a view at this moment. Let us see what Prime Minister Blair and Prime Minister Ahern say after their meeting today. What I would favor is that they do nothing to try to provoke violence. If it happens, there are marches and there are marches; we all know that. So I hope that we can-whatever happens, it will not be an occasion for further violence. ENTITY, going back to the French, President Chirac and the Socialist government are often quoted, and it is true-as criticizing the-what they call, I quote, the arrogance of the U.S. superpower which wants to rule the world politically and economically, and they add that they criticize the United States for wanting to oust France of Africa. What do you answer to this double accusation from the French authorities when they talk to the French press or that got quoted in the American media, too? The one on Africa is a new one on me, but the other two-I have heard people say things like that. I have read it in the press with regard to economic issues and with regard to NATO. First of all, let me restate what I said. I do not know whether we would be where we are in Bosnia today if it had not been for the leadership of President Chirac and the French.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1117, "text": "The United States and the French- there have been words in the press for decades now, but the truth is that when the chips are down, we are almost always allies. Jacques Chirac supported NATO expansion when some European leaders did not . He was instrumental in getting the agreement with Russia. He was instrumental in forging our common position in Bosnia. All I can say is, I do not want America to dictate to Europe; I want-I have supported European integration. When other Americans were afraid of it, I said-because Europe would be bigger than the United States then-I said, No, we want a democratic, free, strong, united Europe, and the next 100 years will be different than the last 100. On economics, we have been very fortunate in the United States in being able to discipline our spending, invest in our people, and create a lot of jobs. But we have problems here, too. We have-a lot higher percentage of our children are poor than in France or Germany and other countries. We do not have the kind of health care and child care supports that you provide to your working families. How are we going to create jobs, raise incomes, and hold the social compact together in a global economy? We just happen to be in different places in meeting the challenges. In Africa, let me say I am very grateful for what the French and we have done together to help each other's citizens get out of harm's way in African countries in trouble. We have offered an initiative on Africa because we have been repeatedly challenged to do more, and we think there should be aid, and I do not think we have given enough aid to Africa. But we think we can do more to expand trade as well. So I hope we will be working with France on that. I do not want to push France out of Africa. I want to lift Africa up. And if we would lift Africa up, the fact that the French were there, caring about Africa all along, will only redound to France's benefit. ENTITY, in line with what the French colleague just said, there is-especially I feel it after Denver-a growing feeling in Europe that America leans toward something like grandstanding or patronizing toward Europe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1118, "text": "And then when it comes time to make sacrifices, like in firm commitments to reduce greenhouse gases or to make compromises like in extending NATO and not risking a rift within NATO over the question of these two countries who will join in addition to the three who are not, America says, this is what our interest is and pushes through. Do you feel that there is a little imbalance in the transatlantic relationship? First of all-let us deal with the two things separately. I do not think that is a fair characterization of what happened when we had the Summit of the Eight in Denver. Before the other leaders arrived, I gave one speech in Colorado in which I said, 7 years ago when the other countries met in the United States, Europe criticized America, 7 years ago, for dragging down economic growth in the world because our budget deficit was so high, for taking money away from worthy investments in Europe and in other places in the world by having high interest rates in America to finance our deficit. And we have changed that. So now we cannot be criticized by our friends in the Summit of the Eight, because we have changed that and we are better off than we were then. But I said in the same speech, we still have a lot of problems at home and we have no cause for arrogance, and I outlined what those problems were. When I met with the other leaders, I said clearly we have been fortunate; we have created a lot of new jobs. The British also have now created a lot of new jobs. But what happens in this global economy is, as you create more new jobs, the more open the economies are, you have more difficulty in avoiding greater inequality among your people. So the trick is how to preserve the social compact and create jobs. This is a problem we share together; that is what I said. And anybody who was there in those private meetings will say that. Now, in NATO, let me say again-I want to say two things. Though quietly-- --that there are five, but quietly they say, We know that you are right, that this is the right thing to do. Not all of them-I do not want to be-the Italians and the French and others clearly want five. Some would favor four; I think Chancellor Kohl is genuinely open to that. But there is more difference of opinion within Europe than you might think.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1119, "text": "The most important thing is, if we were for five and France was for three, if that were the case, then the French position would prevail because three is a smaller number than five, and we have to do that. This is not an American win; this has nothing to do with me. I am trying to keep NATO's integrity intact from the military point of view, and that is what I want to do. Do I believe that we should consider expanding to the south when next we meet in '99? Do I think that we should exclude the Baltics? Might Bulgaria be ready in the future? So I think that-this is not-this does not have to be done in a day. Keep in mind, 3 1/2 years ago when I proposed this, it was a revolutionary idea. Now we are talking about how many and when. So I am not trying to impose this. I am just trying to do what I think is best for the military alliance, and it just happened that we strongly believe that if you look at the conditions of membership, that these three clearly meet those conditions, and no one else does now. But I am for-I am very sympathetic with the French and the Italian position that we have to consider moving to the south, and I am sympathetic and interested in the new interest in Bulgaria and in Austria, and the Baltics are moving very-forward. We should not tell anyone they cannot be part of it. But if you look at it, everyone agrees that at least three should be in, and that is what we ought to do. We always go to what everybody agrees on. May I ask about the Baltic States because you mentioned them three times? Nobody is as desperate to get in psychologically as the Baltics, and nowhere are the Russians as adamant as in the Baltics not to let them in. Will they come away from Madrid with something more than a vague promise, We will consider you in the future ? Keep in mind, the Baltics are in the Partnership For Peace. Let us not overlook that. That has been-I think one reason we have so many people wanting to be in NATO now is that the Partnership For Peace has been so successful. The Euro-Atlantic alliance that we have with these Partnership For Peace countries will continue to be strengthened.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1120, "text": "And I think what we plan to do is to offer to work with the other European countries to try to-to set the stage for what we will do 2 years from now, and also to keep going into the future, to keep integrating these Partnership For Peace countries more and more and more into the military and other operations of NATO. So I think the Baltics should feel reassured by that. I worked very hard, you know, to work with President Yeltsin to get the Russian troops out of the Baltics, to keep them on the path of reform and democracy, and they have done very well. So I think they should be considered in the future like everyone else, and we should make that clear. ENTITY, you said that the Italians definitely want five. Well, they certainly want Slovenia. I think they would favor five; they would take four. Romania-is not the reason of this, is not that the real threats are there coming from the south, no more from the east? Well, we certainly hope that, yes. And, sir, do not you think that Romania and Slovenia will guarantee more stability in the crucial area of the Balkans? Yes, I do think that. My problem with Romania and Slovenia is I believe, compared to the other three countries, we cannot say that they are clearly ready now to assume NATO membership. Let us take Romania. There is a terrific case you can make for Romania-it is the second biggest country in Central Europe. I mean it has-it is very large, and it has a lot of people, strategically located, and the people want to be in NATO. But they have been on this path now for a little less than a year. The countries that are getting in have already been through ups and downs in their economy, in their political systems. They have had elections. They have really been through all the tensions that happen when you move from communism to freedom. The Romanians have done an amazing job in a few months. They have resolved their differences with Hungary on the border. They have got two Hungarians in the Cabinet. But it has still been less than a year. So my position is, give them a couple of years to stabilize their democracy, to develop their economy, and then let us take a look at it. Would it be better if, going into the 21st century, we had a NATO that had more membership in the southern flank to deal with those problem areas that are just beyond our borders?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeantelevisionjournalists", "title": "Interview With European Television Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-television-journalists", "publication_date": "03-07-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1121, "text": "You are having a lot of fun there for this early in the morning. And you are having a lot of fun, too, are not you? Now that Chelsea is gone, you all are having some fun, are not you, ENTITY? That is what Hillary says. I told you. He can say that. You cannot say that about him. And what was going through your mind when you saw all this that was happening here in Little Rock? But as I said yesterday, most of the white kids did not think about it one way or the other until it actually happened. Until the Little Rock Nine were turned away, I think most people did not think about it one way or the other. Children are basically self-absorbed in their own lives. It is part of the privilege of childhood. But then, all of a sudden, kids that had never thought about it before, it is all they talked about for weeks. And everybody then had to decide really how they felt about it. It seemed obvious to me that sooner or later this was going to have to be done; it might as well be done sooner. But I also I was always amazed at how there was an element in the South and probably in the rest of the country, too, of people that were they always just needed somebody to hate, needed somebody to look down on. But it is no way to run a country and no way to run a life. Sooner or later, to me, it was obvious it had to change. ENTITY, there seems to be so much symbolism to the fact that you were opening the door yesterday for the members of the Little Rock Nine coming through, as well as this year that you have stepped before the Nation, before the world, and telling them that you are taking this step into the 21st century and making a difference in terms of race relations. This is a year in which you are just really making us aware and bringing these things out to us. And I commend you for that. I think part of the symbolism yesterday was that thank you very much. I think yesterday part of the importance of the symbolism was that political leaders closed the doors and stood in the doors in the fifties and the sixties and kept people out of the doors. And apparently, that idea to open the door came from the students at Central High themselves. It was a great, wonderful idea, and I was glad to be a part of it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtomjoynertavissmileyandsybilwilkesthetomjoynermorningshowlittle", "title": "Interview With Tom Joyner, Tavis Smiley, and Sybil Wilkes on the Tom Joyner Morning Show in Little Rock", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tom-joyner-tavis-smiley-and-sybil-wilkes-the-tom-joyner-morning-show-little", "publication_date": "26-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1122, "text": "First of all, to the affiliates of 93 stations around the country on the ENTITY Morning Show, as you can tell, we are running long. We are going to go right through the break. We want you to hang with us. you said that what happened 40 years ago really developed your idea of what race relations in this country should be about. At 11 years old, you were thinking race relations? Well, it was discussed in my home because my grandparents were interested in it. That is what I said yesterday. So I had a chance to think about it earlier just because my grandfather expressed himself very strongly about it. He had once been a grocer and had a lot of black customers, and he knew a lot about black people as human beings and about the troubles they were facing and the problems in their lives and the potential they had. My grandmother was a nurse and she had a lot more contact with black people in the fifties than most white people did, and she thought it was wrong. And they just had a big impact on me, and they talked about it a lot. And even though my grandfather died in 1957, and everybody was talking about this happening in the 2 years coming up to that, I still remember as a little boy, 9, 10 years old, sitting around the table, having him walk through this with me and telling me that this was something that had to be done. ENTITY , ENTITY asked you a moment ago about the symbolism of yesterday this is ENTITY and I want to ask you about the substance, if I can. As you know, the two issues that are facing this country, certainly facing black America, with regard to education as we talk about this incident 40 years ago are the issue of school vouchers and this whole issue of resegregation of schools. You know, the NAACP was even considering earlier this summer reassessing their position on school integration. What are your thoughts specifically on how the issue of school vouchers and the issue of school integration are impacting the African-American community? Where do you come down on that debate on those issues? Well, let me say, first of all, school vouchers that is, giving people money that used to go to the school district that they can then use and spend in the school district or they can use it to defray the cost of tuition to private schools school vouchers are the most extreme version of more school choice for parents and students.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtomjoynertavissmileyandsybilwilkesthetomjoynermorningshowlittle", "title": "Interview With Tom Joyner, Tavis Smiley, and Sybil Wilkes on the Tom Joyner Morning Show in Little Rock", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tom-joyner-tavis-smiley-and-sybil-wilkes-the-tom-joyner-morning-show-little", "publication_date": "26-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1123, "text": "I have supported for years and years giving students and parents more choice for the public schools their kids attend, and also the national charter school movement which allows groups of teachers and parents to organize schools on their own and be more loosely affiliated with public school districts and to meet the special needs of the community, and then they can have a lot of freedom from the rules and regulations of the school districts and the State as long as they meet high standards. I support the school uniform movement which a lot of private schools have and which have made a big difference in a lot of school districts. The reason I have opposed school vouchers is that I think if you look at the facts, it is a relatively small financial contribution to give somebody, for example, what the Federal Government gives to a school district, but if you take it away, you can have a big adverse impact on the school districts without helping any individual children very much. I believe that sooner or later there will be a lot of people who will try it, going beyond Milwaukee and, I think, Cleveland, unless we can prove that the public schools can work for children again. But I think from my point of view, particularly with the Federal dollars, I simply do not believe that we should be diverting resources when our schools have been relatively underfunded on the whole. The parents ought to have some say, which is why I think they ought to have more choice over the schools their kids attend, and they ought to have the right to participate in new schools that are outside a lot of the bureaucratic rules that burden school districts. On the resegregation, I think that my own view is that we ought to continue to try to have integrated schools. We ought to recognize that segregated neighborhoods and different patterns in who has children of school age in various places have led to a resegregation of a lot of our schools. We still ought to try to integrate these neighborhoods and mix them not only racially but economically. We still ought to have, where reasonable, transportation plans that work and are not too burdensome for the kids. But we should not use the fact that a school is not especially integrated at this moment as an excuse not to give those kids an excellent education and do the very best we can. Ten years ago, ENTITY, there was a 30-year celebration for the Little Rock Nine that you helped organize when you were Governor here in the State of Arkansas. It was a lot smaller celebration than the one we have had this week, huh?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtomjoynertavissmileyandsybilwilkesthetomjoynermorningshowlittle", "title": "Interview With Tom Joyner, Tavis Smiley, and Sybil Wilkes on the Tom Joyner Morning Show in Little Rock", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tom-joyner-tavis-smiley-and-sybil-wilkes-the-tom-joyner-morning-show-little", "publication_date": "26-09-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1128, "text": "Do you essentially agree with my sense that you had that the big issue has been moving from the industrial age to the information age, and that I mean, the toughest thing The short answer to that is yes. to explain to people is, you take something like how can being in favor of affirmative action and being in favor of welfare reform be part of the same vision? There are people on the right or the left who would say, You cannot do that. And yet, I think that they are part of the same vision. But my first question is, how would you describe that vision? I think my view I saw my Presidency as a transformational period, and basically, America has gone through two before. Maybe it could start if we did it in historical times. There were basically I look at American history in the following we had the creation how we got started and sort of filling out the elements of the National Government and defining what it meant. And that basically went from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution, Washington's Presidency, and the appointment of John Marshall as Chief Justice which is a very important thing and then, ironically, through Jefferson's Presidency, with the purchase of Louisiana and the Lewis and Clark expedition, and then the next big challenge was, how would we adapt that to our growing industrialization? And how did we get rid of slavery, which was inconsistent with our principles? So obviously, that is what Lincoln and the Civil War and the constitutional amendments and everything that happened on civil rights after that was about slavery. But there was no single President that managed the process, if you will, or laid out a framework from the agricultural society to an industrial society. But that is part of what the railroads, the canals was all about, and it is part of what and Lincoln was a part of that with the Morrill Land Grant Act, with the colleges.  But it happened over a long period of time. Then, there was the transformation from the you know, it happened over a long period of time as we slowly became a balanced society. But then, when we burst onto the world scene as a major national industrial power, that process was basically defined by Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson. And I sort of saw this period in parallel with that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1129, "text": "The rest of the 20th century was mostly about dealing with the rise of first, the Great Depression; then the war and the need to defeat totalitarian systems, which was part of the war and the cold war; and dealing with the specific challenges at home, principally civil rights, the women's movement, and the growth of environmental movement in America. So here, we are moving into, basically, from an industrial society an industrial economy to an information economy, and at the same time moving into an ever more globalized economy, which also is more and more of a global society in that we share common challenges and common interests that go beyond economics. And the globalization of the media has accelerated that. So I saw my challenges trying to, first of all, maximize America's presence in the information economy; second, to try to maximize our influence in the welfare of our country and likeminded people around the world in a globalized society. And then, the other and I will get to your questions and then the third big thing for me was trying to make people have a broader and deeper vision of the American community and how to handle diversity and how we would finally get a chance to see, in ways we never had before, what it meant to make one out of many, what our national motto meant. And I think the and you ask me, well, how can you reconcile those things? It seems to me that the two operational strategies we had to pursue those three great goals were, one, the Third Way political and social philosophy. If you believe in opportunity and responsibility and community, then it is perfectly clear why you would be for affirmative action and a global trading system, you know, why you would be for health care for everybody and whatever else you said what was the other thing? No, I said that. Welfare reform, because first of all, work is the best social program. Secondly, it is imperative to have a basic work ethic if you believe in individual responsibility and you believe it gives meaning and direction to life, and I do. But if you do, you also recognize that there is no society no society has succeeded in providing access to health care to everybody without some governmental action. But there have been people all along, as you know I mean, you and I had this same conversation in 1991. It was never just an electoral strategy to me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1130, "text": "And the question I guess my question is, do you feel that you were ever able to really communicate the depth and breadth of this to the public? Yes, but only probably only at the State of the Union Addresses, because it is probably the only time I ever got to say it unfiltered. If I made an error in those, even though they always received very high public approval ratings, they said it always took me so much time to explain my specific ideas in education or whatever, I am not sure I ever took full advantage of the opportunity to lay the coherent philosophy out because I do think at those points, that people got it. But what I was going to tell you, if I could go back I think we had the transformation from the industrial economy to the information economy, from the idea of a national society to an idea of a more global society in which nation-states matter. I think the nation-state will matter more in some ways in the 21st century. We can talk about that some. And thirdly, the whole idea of defining America where our diversity was something to be cherished and celebrated because because our common humanity and common values were more important. And then, operationally, I think, the two things I think that mattered, I made some the whole Third Way political and social philosophy, one; and second is sort of a relentless focus on the future, making people always trying to force people to always think about not only what we are doing, how does it affect today, but what is it going to be like 5 years from now, 10 years from now, 20 years from now? And I think that is often that has not often been the business of the Government. But if you go back to Roosevelt's focus on conservation or Wilson's struggle of failed attempt at the League of Nations, I think what made them both great Presidents for the transformational period America was in is that they were not only successful in the moment, by and large, but they had this focus on the future; they kept trying to spark the public imagination with the future. And that is I hope very much that the announcement of this genome project, although I think it fills people with foreboding as well as hope, will tend to spark future orientation on the part of the voters, so the issues that are plainly before us, but will not be felt for a few years will have more effect on the debate and also on people's voting rights.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1131, "text": "Charlene Barshefsky said to me that there are times that you have really been concerned, that the expression you used was that you had not found your voice on trade, which is the equivalent of Well, one of the things she, of course, has to deal with it. But the two things in trade that have frustrated me most, although I think we have got a great record and you can go from NAFTA to the WTO, to the Africa/ CBI, to launching the free trade of the Americas to China. The reason I raised it was because what you just said about the genome reminded me I just read your remarks about NAFTA in October '93, and it was very similar, too. And then, of course, China, and then in between we had 270-odd agreements, and we had the Mexican financial crisis and the Asian financial crisis. One, I have so far not created a consensus within my own party, at least among the elected officials, for the view of trade which I hold. I think it is how people view the world the second thing, and closely related to that, is that I went to Geneva twice, and I went to Davos once, and then I went out to Seattle to try to make the case that you cannot have a global trading system apart from a global social conscience, anyway, where there is a legitimate place for the voices of those who care about the rights of workers, the condition of children in the workplace, the impact of economic development on the environment, both nationally and globally. I have not yet, at least, been able to convince people that there is a synthesizing vision here that has to drive not only a global trading system but these other initiatives as well. And one of the great things that always struck me is, if you look at the people who were demonstrating in Seattle, while I think they were all sincere that is, they believed in what they were demonstrating against their sense of solidarity was truly ironic, because they had completely conflicting positions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1132, "text": "I mean, for example, a lot of the labor union people that demonstrated believe that even though for example, they think that even though this China deal is a shortterm benefit to American industry because China drops their barriers, that they are so big that there will be so much investment there that they will develop a great deal of industrial capacity and that wage levels will be so low that it will cost the developed world, and particularly America because our markets are more open than the Europeans, a lot of our industrial base within a fairly short term. And that is what they really believe. I do not believe that, but that is what they believe. And then you have the people that are demonstrating on behalf of the Third World, and they believe our concern for labor and the environment is a protectionist ruse to protect American high-wage jobs. But they are all out there in the streets in Seattle demonstrating together, because they are genuinely frustrated about the way the world is going and they kind of do not like this whole globalization thing. They think it is going to lead to further loss of control by ordinary people over the basic circumstances of their lives, and that bothers them. I think that this is to kind of put a cap on the first question I mean, that is so much at the heart of what you have been trying to overcome. I was talked to Zoe Baird, who said that she always remembers the statistics that you used, I think in around '95, that more jobs had been created by companies owned by women than had been lost by Fortune 500 companies. You always tried to make the future less frightened for folks. And yet, I am not sure you are convinced that you made the case. Well, I think I made the case to the people that were open to it, but I believe that I think that it is hard. Everybody's for change in general, but normally against it in particular. You know, what is that Dick Riley used to say? That is his sort of formulation of it. But I still believe, first of all, I think that what I said to the American people is true and right. Secondly, I do not think there is any alternative to change. So I think the real question is, how do you bring your, basically, values that do not change how do you translate them into specific approaches and policies that have the greatest chance of enhancing those values in the world you are going to live in? That is the way I look at this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1133, "text": "And I think that for the United States to have essentially turned away from this world, I think, would have been a terrible mistake. And in fact, I think the only mistake we have made in this whole thing is not accelerating the integration of the free trade area of the Americas more more rapid. Let me ask you some specific questions. Let us take a walk; start in '93. The First Lady said to me the other day that she believed that deficit reduction was a predicate for doing all the rest of the stuff. She compared it to education in Arkansas when you were reelected. The '93 economic plan made all the rest of this possible. There were a fair number of people on your staff that were saying, you know, it would throw the economy into recession. And you were dealing it was a theory at that point that if you lowered the deficit, interest rates would come down, and you would achieve the kind of growth that you have achieved.  First of all, let me back up a little bit. The people on the staff who favored somewhat there was nobody on my staff that was against vigorous deficit reduction. There were some who were afraid that to make the decisions we would have to make to get the $500 billion, which is what Lloyd Bentsen and Bob Rubin felt was sort of the magic psychological threshold we had to cross to get the bond markets and the stock market to respond in an appropriate way, they were afraid that if we did that, we would have to shelve too much of our progressive commitments in the campaign. Now, what finally happened was, we came up with a plan that raised income taxes only on the top 1.2 percent of the people, which I had, after all, promised to do in the '92 campaign. It was not like I did not tell upper income people who supported me I would not try to raise their taxes. But we had to raise them at the very end. Bentsen came in with a plan that essentially lifted the income cap off the Medicare taxes, which closed the gap. And we stuck with the gas tax, which Charlie Stenholm and some of our conservatives who were big deficit hawks were worried about, because they were afraid it would make our guys vulnerable, and I think it did. It was the only thing that average people had to pay, except that there were, I think, 13 percent of the Social Security recipients paid more because we began to tax Social Security income more like regular pension income.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1134, "text": "But it was the Republicans who believed that tax increases by definition were recessionary and that so they unanimously opposed the plan. You asked me what convinced me. What convinced me finally was that I believe fundamentally, unless we got interest rates down and investment flowing, that we would never be able to see a decline in unemployment and growth in new businesses, particularly in this high-tech sector which depended on vast flows of venture capital, confidence capital, if you will, that it seemed to me was just out there bursting, waiting to happen. I think and maybe it was my experience as a Governor that informed all this but I really did believe there was this huge, vast, pent-up potential in the American economy that had been artificially repressed ever since the deficit spending recovery at the end of President Reagan's first term. Basically, what happened at the end of the first Reagan term is, interest rates were not too high because we had such a terrible recession and so much inflation and such high interest rates at the end of President Carter's term, so when the interest rates came down, then inflation naturally inflation around the world came down. Those huge deficits brought us back a little bit. But the long-term potential of the American economy, I was convinced, could never be unleashed until we got rid of the deficit. So finally, I just decided that if I did not get the economy going, nothing else would matter in the end, and I believed that the pent-up potential of the American economy was so great, that if we did get the interest rates down and we did get investment up, everything else would fall into place. And I thought that I ought to listen to Bentsen and Rubin because they knew a lot more about it than I did. But you did not listen to Bentsen on the EITC. No, but we had promised that, and I believed in it. I thought and again, I am confident that not only what I saw in the campaign but my experience as Governor of a State that was always in the bottom two or three in per capita income had an impact on this. But I just believe that we had to use the tax system to dignify the work of low-wage workers and to make it possible for them to raise their children more successfully.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1135, "text": "I did not think I could go out there and argue for a tough welfare reform bill and a tough deficit reduction package, and say I was going to have to slow down my increases in education spending and some other social spending, housing, and all these other things that I would otherwise like to do if we were not prepared to give lower income working people more income. I also thought it was good economics, because they were going to spend it. They needed to spend it. Did you ever think that was there any way that you could have gotten Republicans to go along with this? I do not know, and I will tell you why. In retrospect, maybe there were some things I could have done. What if you had invited Dole and Michel to that dinner in Little Rock? Yes, or invited them down even on their own it might have worked. The real problem I see with it in retrospect, the reason I say I do not know first of all I wish I had done that, because later on I started bending over backwards. I had Gingrich in and Armey in, and I met with them exhaustively, and I tried. Often it did not work, but we did get some things done from time to time. I think they had made a decision to oppose all tax increases because of the Gingrich position vis-a-vis President Bush. And he was pretty well in the ideological saddle, the political saddle in the House then. And I think because Senator Dole obviously hoped to run for President in '96, I think the Republicans in the Senate were going to be reluctant to break ranks once it was obvious that the House Republicans were going to oppose any kind of deficit reduction package that had any tax increases in it. And I did not believe if we had not gone for some upper income tax increases, then number one, we would have had to adopt cuts that the Democratic majority in the House would not have supported, even under me. And number two, we could not have kept our commitments on the earned-income tax credits on education, where we did have a substantial increase, or on the empowerment zones or a lot of the other things I did that I believed in. Did the atmosphere surprise you, the vitriol, the difficulty? Yes, it did, I think, basically, but I now know things I did not know then. What do you know now?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1136, "text": "Well, they really believed first, I know now something I did not know, which is that some of the people on the Republican side actually, I did know this, but I did not believe it when I got a call from the White House early before I decided to run in the summer of 1990 from a guy I knew who worked there who was saying, You know, you should not run. Bush was at like 80 percent then or something. I could not believe so I had this serious talk with him about how President Bush had used his popularity to try to deal with the economy. And after about 5 minutes, the guy said, Now, let us just cut the crap. We have looked at this crowd, and we can beat them all. All the guys in Congress have votes. We can beat them all. You might beat us, and so if you run, we are going to take you out early. Then, after I got up here and started dealing with them, what I realized is that they had been in for 12 years, but they basically had been in since President Nixon won, except for the Carter interregnum, which they thought was purely a function of Watergate, and therefore they saw it as an historical accident that they had quickly corrected, and that is the way they saw it. I actually think Jimmy Carter and, before him, Bobby Kennedy were the precursors of the sort of New Democrat, Third Way stuff I have tried to do here. And I think, therefore, it is not fair, but that exactly, to diminish but that is the way they viewed it, anyway. I really think a lot of them thought they could hold the White House forever, until a third party came along to basically offer a competing vision. And so, they just never saw me as a legitimate person. They just thought I was, in President Bush's words, the Governor of a small southern State. And as I often crack on the trail, I was so naive that I actually thought that was a compliment. So anyway, it did surprise me. I mean, I knew it was there, and I'd seen the Democrats do things in my view, I guess I have got a warped view, but I never thought it was nearly as bad as what they did to me. But from time to time, the Democrats did things I did not approve of.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1137, "text": "I did not like the nature of their arguments against John Tower or the fact that somebody checked out the movies that Bob Bork and I knew there was some of this up here. But I never thought I would see it in the kind of systematic way that I saw it unfold. But when I got to know Newt Gingrich and actually had a lot of candid conversations with him, I realized that that is just the way they thought politics worked. Yes, that is what they thought. That is what Newt called it. I had a fascinating conversation with one Republican Senator in the middle of the D'Amato hearings when they were impugning Hillary. And I asked this guy, who was pretty candid, I said, Do you really think that my wife or I did anything wrong in this Whitewater thing? He said, Any fool who has read the record would know you did not do anything wrong. He said, How could you do anything wrong? You did not borrow any money from the S&L which failed. And you lost $40,000 or whatever you lost on the real estate deal. He said, Of course, you did not do anything wrong. He said, That is not the point of this. The point of this is to make people think you did something wrong. Yes, I was surprised by their vitriol, and yes, I was surprised, and I must say I was surprised that they believed and they had an electoral and they turned out to be right, but I made a mistake or two that helped them. They believed that they could win the Congress if they could just say no to everything, and they did. And I think it rested on basically three things. One is, we did the economy, the budget plan, which we had to do, and we had to expect some loss of midterm seats. And some of those seats we had for a long, long time were naturally Republican seats, anyway. The second thing is but the people had not felt the benefits of it. Then the second thing we did that cost us some seats, but I am absolutely convinced is the right thing to do, was the Brady bill and the crime bill, which had the assault weapons ban. But there again, we got that done in 1994. Had it happened in '93, I think it would not have hurt us so bad.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1138, "text": "But in '94 there was not enough time, between the time that bill passed and the time people voted to convince the world people that voted, against our Congressmen on the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban that there was not anything going to happen to them and their hunting and sport shooting and all that. By '96, the issue was working for us, because I could go to places like New Hampshire and say, I want everybody that missed a day in the deer woods to vote against me. But if you did not , they did not tell you the truth, and you ought to get even. That is what I said. And our winning margin in New Hampshire went from one point to 13 points or something. But in '94 my party's Members bore the brunt of that. Then the third problem we had, and this is where I think you were right, is I was trying so hard to keep all of my campaign commitments and the way I made them I should have done welfare reform before health care. You were right about that. I do not know that I took that position. I thought you were saying that.   I will tell you where I was wrong, is that when it came to doing welfare reform, I chickened out, and I wrote a column the week you signed it telling you not to sign it. I talked to Elwood last week, and he is turned around on it as well. But the reason is, I think, if you go back, there is one thing that nobody in the press has picked up and we ought to talk about this later is why I vetoed the first two bills and signed the third one. We will come back to that. But if I had not done welfare reform first, that would have given the Democrats a chance to appeal to more conservative and moderate voters. And the system one thing I have learned is, since I have been there, is actually the system is capable of great change, but it can only digest so much at once. So in '93, they did a big economic plan and NAFTA, and in '94 they did this big crime bill. And they might have been able to do welfare reform, but there is no way the system could digest the health care thing. Why did you say that? it was one of those decisions we made practicing for the State of the Union, and I just should not have done it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1139, "text": "I was trying to bring clarity to the debate, and I was afraid that they would try to run something bogus by. You are saying that you think there is no way you could have gotten a health insurance deal in '94? Let me tell you what happened. if you had gone and just dumped your bill and gone over to Chafee's press conference and said, I am with him ? He had universality. He had a tax increase to pay for it, and he had Bob Dole. Well, he sort of did, but let me tell you what happened. What happened was, I offered and Hillary offered not to submit a bill. We offered to do two different things. We offered to submit sort of a generic bill and let Congress fill in the blanks, and Rostenkowski asked us this is a little more detail, but then we offered not to submit our own bill at all but instead to submit a joint bill with Dole, which I thought was good politics for him, because then he could not lose anything What was the timeframe for this? Well, before we introduced a bill. Yes, before we introduced the bill. And Dole said to me I will never forget this, because we were at a leadership meeting in the Cabinet Room, and he said, No. He said, That is not the way we should do it. He said, You introduce a bill. We will introduce a bill. We will put them together. We will compromise and pass them. Then after that, Dole got the memo from Bill Kristol, I think, which said which basically took the Gingrich line. The way you guys are going to win in the Congress and weaken them is to have nothing happen. If anything happens, the Democrats will get credit for it, so you guys have to make sure nothing happens. After that, I do not think we really had a chance, because Mitchell killed himself to try to figure out a way to get to Chafee, do something and maybe if I had gone to Chafee's press conference, maybe that would have worked. You know, I had not thought of that, but all I can tell you is that I really believed, because Dole with that single exception, all my other dealings with Dole, whatever he said was the way we did it. In other words, not the way we did it, but I mean, if I made a deal with him, it always was honest.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1140, "text": "He was as good as his word. And in this case, I just think, you know, he saw a chance to win the majority, saw a chance to get elected President. Bill Kristol told them do not do it; they did not do it. But this is the thing that people on the left point to, that would have been your big achievement, the big, New Deal kind of achievement. And when you look back on it, do you regret the substance of what you did? Do you think that going with an employer mandate was the wrong thing?  On the substance, I think basically it was a privately financed plan that relied on managed care but had a Patients' Bill of Rights in it. And I think the two things that made it unpalatable to Republicans were the employer mandate and the Patients' Bill of Rights. I think the thing that made it unpalatable to Democrats, a few of them, was the employer mandate. But if you are not going to have an employer mandate, then you have to have a subsidy where people buy into either Medicare or Medicaid. That is what you are going to have eventually. That is what you are going to have eventually. And if I could do it now, that is what I would offer. But the problem is, I could not do it in '94, with the deficits the way they were, without a tax increase. And I did not feel that I could ask the Congress to vote for another tax increase, even if it was a dedicated thing, after we had just had that big one in '93.  We were getting killed by the scoring. The scoring was all wrong, and we knew it was wrong, but I was stuck with the scoring. So if you look at it, the position I was in is, I was stuck with the scoring. I did not want to ask for another tax increase; I did not think that was right. So I had to try stay with the private insurance system. And I would have thought that the insurers would actually have liked that, because they were going to get a lot more customers. But basically, they did not like it because we could not just let them have all those mandated customers and have no Patients' Bill of Rights and no restrictions on managed care, so they then developed this whole argument that it is a Rube Goldberg machine, it is a Government takeover of health care, and all this stuff.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1141, "text": "And that sort of stuck because they had all that money to put behind it. But the truth is, in defense of what we offered, if you go back and look at all the early soundings from all the experts when we first laid it out there, everybody said, This is a moderate plan. They have tried to keep their private insurance system. They have certainly left the private health care delivery system intact. Because nobody said it was some big Government takeover until all the people spent whatever they spent, $100 million, $200 million, whatever they spent in there later, to try to perform reverse plastic surgery on it. But I think that in the context you ask the questions, to go back, I think that the combined impact of the economic plan, with people not fully feeling the benefits in '94; the gun deal, where people had their fears fully allayed; and the health care thing, where the people that wanted it did not get it and the people that did not like it knew what they did not like about it. That tended to depress the Democratic voters. And the three things together produced plus the fact that the Republicans had this contract on America, and people did not really know what it was; they just knew they had a plan gave them the big win they got. Just to stay with health insurance for a minute, do you regret structurally the way you went about doing it? If you had to do it all over again, would you give it to the First Lady? I do not think it was a mistake to give it to her. I think the mistake I made was, I either should have insisted on having her say, Okay, here is all of our work. You guys draft the bill, or I would have insisted that we had a joint bill. If we were going to draft the bill, I would have made the Republicans draft it with me. Neither one of those things was her doing. She gets a total bum rap on this. The plan she came up with, which was she was told, We ain't going to have a tax increase, right, and therefore it is not going to be a total Government program, but you have to try to get 100 percent coverage, so there was no other way to do it except with an employer mandate. And she was also told that managed care is going to happen, and we favor it, which she did favor it, but we have got to have some protections in there for people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1142, "text": "I do not know how many doctors I have had come up to me since then, tell me that we were right and that basically it was a good plan. So in a way, I think she really got a bum rap on that deal, because she was operating within constraints that were, we now know, impossible. What I should have done is to let her do all the work, publish all the findings, say, Here are our principles. You guys write the bill. Or I should have said, If you want me to do a bill, I will only do it if we have a bipartisan agreement on the bill. That would have produced something less than 100 percent of coverage, but at least it would have produced something that would have passed and gotten us up to 90 or maybe above 90 percent. She, I think, has gotten a totally bum rap on this deal. All she did was what she was asked to do. I asked Ira about it, and he pointed to his E-commerce protocols, and he said, What I did was, I decided to do everything the exact opposite of what we did with health insurance, and it worked. But the interesting thing there was, it worked because number one, we did not have to pass a big bill because of the Telecommunications Act, which was a great success which we ought to talk about later was a big part of the economic program, was operating on a parallel track. And all we had to do there was to basically invite them to help us make Government policy that would maximize economic growth. There was absolutely no way to get to 100 percent of coverage, to have universal health coverage, unless you had an employer mandate or the Government filled in the difference. If we were doing it today, we could do it. And the next administration could do it, because now we have the money to do it. The CHIPS program, the parents, and you let people between 55 and 65 buy into Medicare. Then the only people that will not be able to get health insurance are young, single people who think they will live forever and just do not want to do it, or very wealthy people who just would rather go ahead and just pay their doctor. The reason why I was always for universal was because I thought those people had a moral responsibility to pay in to help the risk pools. I do not know if I can get this CHIPS thing, but if I can, it will make a huge difference.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1143, "text": "I do not want to stick on the bad stuff in the first term too long, but things in retrospect, things seemed pretty much a mess in the White House for the first couple of years. And there were times several people have said to me that you came to them at various times and said, Look, I am in the wrong position. I am to the left of where I should be, or Things just do not feel right, or Things are out of control. How did that happen? I mean, how do you come out of the box doing gays in the military, for example, which I assume well, you believe in the policy it probably was not the best thing to come out of the box with. Why did you surround yourself with why were there so few At what point did you get a White House that you were really happy with the way it was working? Well, first of all, I think that in retrospect, I think if you compare the functioning of our White House, for example, with the Reagan White House in the first term, I think ours looks pretty good. And I think that the problems we had were fundamentally most of the mistakes we made were political, not substantive. So I do not think I do not think it is fair to say and Laura Tyson agreed with us. I do not think we had a bad I think we did have people who were, philosophically and substantively and on policy terms, consistent with our New Democrat philosophy. And I think that budget, from the empowerment zones to the charter schools we got in the beginning, to the Goals 2000 program, to what we did on the student loan program which was terrific; it saved $8 billion in student loan costs for kids to the overall economic plan, I think it was consistent.  You left out NAFTA and reinventing Government. Yes, we had NAFTA, and we did RIGO, and we did the WTO all that in the first 2 years. But what was wrong was that the political image was different from the reality. I have heard Bob Rubin defend the White House repeatedly and talk about how the things that worked well later, especially the sense of camaraderie and teamwork and joint decisionmaking, were all put in place in that first year and a half. But let us just go through the problems, and you will see.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1144, "text": "Part of it was, I think, none of us were sensitive to the way sufficiently sensitive to the way Washington works and to the way little things would look big to other people. Now, let us just start with the gays in the military. It is not true that we brought it up first. Andrea Mitchell brought it up in a press conference on November 11th. Dole introduced legislation Dole deserves credit for this. The Republicans should give Dole credit for this. They should give Dole credit for this. And I give him credit for it. I have thought a lot of times about how I could have outmaneuvered him on it. But I had two things going and the Joint Chiefs obviously agreed with him, which helped. But what put this on the front burner early? Dole introduced a bill in Congress which was going to fly through there, because Nunn agreed with him, to keep the present policy. And then the Joint Chiefs demanded a meeting with me. The President cannot refuse to meet with the Joint Chiefs. So it was those two things that put this thing front and center.  The bill came in after you said after Andrea Mitchell asked the question and you responded the way you did. I always thought that was because she needed a vacation and had not taken it. No, no, it was because but he was going to put that in anyway. We knew what he was doing. So what happened was, between the Joint Chiefs and the Dole bill, we were forced to put it up. I was going what I intended to do was to get all the stuff, my basic stuff organized, lead with that, and figure out how to handle the gays in the military. And they basically forced me to deal with it from the beginning. And then the thing that then I got a lot of heat, obviously, from the gay community for what I did. But everybody ignores what precipitated do not ask, do not tell, which was a vote in the Senate, essentially on the Dole position, that passed 68-32, i.e. by a veto-proof margin. In retrospect, given the way Washington works, what I probably should have done is issued a clean Executive order, let them overturn it, and basically let them live with the consequences of it. And I might have actually gotten a better result in the end, more like the one I wanted.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1145, "text": "But when General Powell came to see me about the do not ask, do not tell policy, the commitments that were made were very different from the way that it worked out in practice later on. And so there was no question in my mind, given the way they laid out what their policy was going to be, that gay service people would be better off under the new policy than they were under the old one. It did not work out that way, but the commitments that I got and the descriptions that I gave when I announced it at the War College, there is no question that if that had been followed through, the gays in the military would have been better off than they were under the old policy. And the thing that I did not understand about the way things play out in public, because I really was inexperienced in the way Washington worked when I got there, is that sometimes you just need clarity. And even if you lose, it is better to lose with clarity than ambiguity. And what had not sunk in on, I think, even the press writing about this was that once the Senate voted 68-32, the jig was up. It was over, because everybody knew there were more than 300 votes in the House against the policy. So we had a veto-proof majority in both Houses in favor of legislating the present policy, unless I could find some way to go forward. So that is what I tried to do. So it was not the Andrea Mitchell question on November 11th? Because I had lots of options there. Integrate; come back within 3 years and tell me how you did it. You could have signed an Executive order. I could have done that. And like I said, in retrospect, we would have had greater clarity. And since there had been so many problems with implementing the policy, I am not sure that for the past 6 years it would have been better. Now I think Secretary Cohen has really taken hold of this thing, and there have been some changes in the last 6 months that I think really will make the future better than the previous policy was. But to go back to the original question, I have a strong sense that during that first year, year and a half, you were not satisfied with the way the White House was working. No, because I thought we were often first of all, we had to do some stuff that was tough, that was going to get us out of position.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1146, "text": "Our foreign policy team, I think, was working very well, and except for it took us too long to build an international consensus in Bosnia. But we eventually did it and did the right thing there. We were doing well in the Middle East. We took a big, bold step away from the traditional American position to get involved in the Irish peace process. And on balance, I was pleased with that. And actually, a lot of people have forgotten this, but when I came back from Jordan, from the signing of the peace agreement in the Wadi Araba in Jordan in late '94, right before the election, we were still in reasonably good shape, because my numbers went back up and that helped the Democrats. But I still believe that the underlying problems were the reasons for the election results. But the political problems of gays in the military hurt. I think that we had a lot of I was more frustrated by operational things, like leaks on Supreme Court appointments that were not even accurate, and I thought that the White House was not operating politically in a way that I thought was effective. I thought, policywise, we were not out of position on anything except the retrospective on health care. And I have already said what I thought the political mistake was there, about how I should have handled it, given the fact If you had to do it over again, you would have done welfare reform in '94 and the crime bill? If I had to do it over again, I would have tried to do the welfare reform and the crime bill in '94, together, and started a bipartisan process on health care. I would have had Hillary up and meeting, issue the report with basic principles that whole 600page however long it was, the stuff we did, I would have given it all to the Congress and said, Either you write a bill, or we write a bill together. Let me give you another, I think a tough if you had to do it all over again. When I look back on this period, you were rolling at the end of '93. You did NAFTA. You gave the speech in Memphis. I mean, even I was writing positive stuff about you at that point. And then came the wave of stupid scandal stories, the Troopergate story, the Whitewater stuff. That December the Washington Post asked for all the documents.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1147, "text": "And there was a meeting that you had, maybe the only time in recorded history that George and David Gergen agreed and said you should turn over all the data, everything. And you did not do it. Do you regret that? Do you think that that changed things? I do not believe, given the subsequent coverage of the Whitewater thing, it would have made any difference. What I regret is asking for the special counsel, because under the law that existed before and the law that existed after, under neither law could a special counsel be called.  Why did you do it? I was there the night you did it. You were in Ukraine, Kiev. I did it because I was exhausted, because I just buried my mother, and I had poor judgment. And I had people in the White House who could not stand the heat of the bad stories, and they suggested that I do it and that I'd have to do it. And I had Bernie Nussbaum and Bruce and a few other people screaming at me not to do it. I knew that Janet Reno would appoint a Republican, even though all other Presidents had been investigated by people who had basically supported them. Lawrence Walsh supported Reagan; Sirica no, what is his name? Jaworski supported Nixon. I knew Reno would not do that. I knew Reno would appoint a Republican, but I knew that there was nothing there. I knew she'd appoint an honest, professional prosecutor. So I just did it, but it was wrong, because the decision to appoint a special counsel is a decision to bankrupt anybody who is not rich. I mean, by definition, there is a penalty associated with it. But if Fiske had been allowed to do his job, this whole thing would have been over in '95 or '96. And of course, that is why he was replaced, because he was going to do his job. No, because I think I mean, I do not want to get into this. I should not talk about this much until I am out of office. But I believe that the desire, the almost hysterical desire to have something to investigate was so great that it would not have made any difference, because, look, what did this thing hang on? There was nothing in those private papers that we we gave it all to the Justice Department. There was nothing in there that did anything other than support what the report said, which was that we lost money on a real estate investment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1148, "text": "And if you noticed, when Starr got ahold of this, he immediately abandoned that and just went on to other stuff. And I do not believe I have no reason to believe, given the coverage of the events of Whitewater, that it would have made any difference. I think they would have found some way to say, Oh, there are questions here; let us have a special counsel. But do I wish I had done it? Last week you talked about the clanging tea kettle, and you know I have written this continuum I have wrote that this era is going to be remembered more for the severity for the ferocity of its prosecutions than for the severity of the crimes. What do you think it is about you? And what about the Steve Skowronek theory, the Yale professor who talked about Third Way Presidents like you, like Wilson, substantively like Nixon, people who take the best of the opposition's agenda, sand off the rough edges, implement it, and are therefore distrusted by their own party and hated by the opposition? Well, I think that that I read his book, and it is a very good book. But I think in this case that is not accurate, for the following reasons. Number one, if you go back to '93 and '94, the Democrats in Congress supported me more strongly than they had supported a higher percentage of Democrats voted for my programs than voted for Kennedy, Johnson, or Carter. Number two, the Republicans never owned crime and welfare. They owned them rhetorically, but they did not do much about it. And at least in the tradition that I came out of as a Governor, we thought we were supposed to act on crime and welfare. Nobody when you check into the morgue, they do not ask for your party registration. And I never knew that anybody had a vested interest in poor people being out of work. And so I just never accepted that, and I found that there were a lot of Democrats in the Congress that were eager to deal with those issues. And if you look at it, we had I do not know more than two-thirds of the Democrats in the House and more than 75 percent of the Democrats in the Senate voted for welfare reform. And we had a higher percentage of Democrats than Republicans in the Senate voting for it and slightly higher percentage of Republicans than Democrats voting for it in the House but not huge.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1149, "text": "So I think that maybe transformational figures generally inspire that, because most times people like to deal with folks they can put in a box. Maybe it is just maybe it is something about me that made them mad. You know my favorite joke about the guy that is walking along the edge of Grand Canyon and falls off so this guy is hurtling down hundreds of feet to certain death. And he looks out, and he grabs this twig, and it breaks his fall. He heaves a sigh of relief. He looks up in the sky and says, God, why me? I have taken care of my family. I have paid my taxes. And this thunderous voice says, Son, there is just something about you I do not like.  The folks like you. They never cared about this stuff. But I believe the Republicans thought I told you, I think that they thought The press, I think I was not part of the Washington establishment, and I think that the press did not know what to make of me. I think this travel office deal, it was largely a press deal. I mean, I did not know that they thought they owned the travel office. And of course, all I ever heard was one guy in the press who happened to be the head of the White House Correspondents at the time said, I wish you'd have somebody look into this because the costs are going up and it is not working well. But I think that all I can tell you is that the same guy that told me the same Senator that told me that it was about making people think I'd done something wrong in Whitewater also said that the Republicans had learned a lot from my Presidency. And he said, Now we have a different view. We think that they are liberal and that they vote like you, but they think like us, and that is more important. And I said, What do you mean? And he said, Well, we just do not believe in Government very much, but we love power. And he says, You know, the press wants to be powerful, and we both get it the same way, by hurting you. But I am sure maybe there were times when I did not handle it all that well in the early going. But all I can tell you is, if you look back over it, the Whitewater thing was a total fraud. Now, I have got a friend named Brandy Ayres, who is the editor of a little newspaper in Addison, Alabama.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1150, "text": "I have met him, yes. He wrote an editorial that said, This is what always happens when Republicans get in the majority. They did it when they got in the majority after World War II. They tried to convince us Harry Truman and Dean Acheson were Communists. And then the second time, they gave us McCarthy. And now, they gave us this. I think part of it is how you view power. But for whatever reason, there is something about me that they did not like very much. Like I said, I am sure that my not being familiar with Washington mores may have had something to do with the way I did not handle the press right. Yes, you know I mean, I have said this in print, so I can say it to your face. That is the other thing we know about you. But I think in the beginning, for the first 2 years, I thought I was pushing a lot of rocks up the hill. Thomas Patterson, who has written books about the Presidency and the media and all that, he said in '95 that I'd already kept a higher percentage of my campaign promises than the previous five Presidents, which I felt really good about. We had just lost the Congress. I needed something to feel good about. But I do believe in '95 I was and '93 and '94, I was just fixated on trying to get as much done as quickly as I could, and also on trying to learn the job, get the White House functioning, all that kind of stuff. And I think that I did not spend enough time probably at least working with the media, letting them ask me questions, at least trying to get the whole letting them get something in perspective. And I think maybe I was just the last gasp of 25 years of scandal mania. We may be swinging the other way on the pendulum now. I think, after '98, maybe we have learned. You might see that in a different way. Let us talk about '95 for a second. Oklahoma City? No, the press conference the night before Oklahoma City when you said the President is still relevant here. I thought, Oh, my God, that must be the rock bottom for him. I did not have the same reaction to it than maybe you know, we often do not perceive ourselves as others see us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1151, "text": "But that question, I learned something from that, which is, if someone asks you a question that you want to answer directly, but there is a word in it that is dynamite, you should answer it without using the word, because actually, what I was doing in April of '95 in my own mind was prefiguring the fight which occurred at the end of '95 and the end of '96. I knew that in the end, if a veto-proof minority of my party would stay with me, after the terrible licking they'd taken in '94, if they would stay with me, I believed in the end we'd have our chance to make our case to the American people. In other words, I believed it would turn out the way it did turn out at the end of '95 and the beginning of '96. So actually, to me, it was not the worst point of the Presidency. When they asked me that question, a light went on in my head. I actually felt good about it. But because I used the word, it came out people perceived it differently than I did. I did not feel that about it. But then, a week later, you said at Michigan State, you said, You cannot love your country and despise its Government. He is figured out how he is going to go up against these folks. Yes, that is what I believed. But I think it began a kind of reassessment, a kind of breaking of the ice. Someone told me that you said, you told them that you would not use the word bureaucrat again in a speech after that. It affected even me. I realized that I had played on the resentments people feel about Government. And I thought that when Government did something stupid or indefensible, they ought to be taken on. But I realized that even when you do that, you have to be careful what word you use. And I did say that. I said, How many times have I used the word bureaucrat, and there are people there. And I did not mean to say that I or even Newt Gingrich was responsible for Timothy McVeigh. I do not want to get that is what he did. Are the liberals responsible for Susan Smith, the one throwing her kid out the window? I did not want to get into that. But Oklahoma City had a profound impact on me, too.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1152, "text": "I went down there, and I was sitting there with the relatives, and one of the people that was killed had been in my Inaugural, and I was talking to his kinfolk. And I said, you know I just made up my mind I would try never again to discuss the Government, even people's frustrations with it, in a way that could be directed against categories of people. It really had a big impact on me, and I think it did on the country. Would it be fair to say that by the time you gave that speech at Michigan State, you were ready for battle? Now, this is a really interesting part of your Presidency to me. You had at that point a brilliant strategy in place to screw them. It was, smoke them out. You could have done to them what they did to you in '94. And yet, you insisted, ultimately against, from what I can gather, your entire staff, including people like Bob Rubin you insisted on coming out with your own budget, your own balanced budget, that June. Why did you do that? In other words, I could have done to them what they did to me. And that was the argument, that we'd just say no to them like they just said no to us. But governing is important to me. And I thought that in the end we would all be judged by how we had performed and by whether we had performed. And this may sound naive, but I believed that in the end, we could change the politics of Washington. I got an idea. You got an idea. Let us fight, and maybe we can both get our 15 seconds on the evening news. I did not want to do that. I came here to do things. I wanted to be President to do things, to change the country, to be relevant. And I thought that the Democrats I did not think the Republicans would take us up on it initially, because Gingrich had basically made it clear that he wanted to basically be prime minister of the country and turn me into a ceremonial and foreign policy President. We'd have the French system, in effect. Not only that, he told me on the phone one night he was personally going to lead a Wesleyan revolution that year. So that is basically what he wanted to do. But I just felt that the Democrats could not sacrifice what I was trying to do was to build the Democrats as a party of fiscal responsibility.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1153, "text": "And for us and I went out there saying, Look, our credo is opportunity, responsibility, community. I just did not see that I could stand there and say, What do you expect of me? They are in the majority. I believe that you have to do things if you can. And my own view of politics is that there is always plenty that the parties are honestly divided about at election time, no matter how much you get done. Furthermore, I really did believe that the Democrat Party, in the end, would be successful by developing what is now known as the Third Way, but which I really saw as basically an information age version of what we'd always been for. What was your fantasy for a second term? If you'd had everything you wanted the day after you were reelected, what would it have been? Well, the validation of the economic strategy has been a part of it. I would have finished the job in health care and enacted my entire education budget. And the rest of it is still sort of pending. I am still hoping that we will get more done in the Middle East. And then, on the foreign policy front, it is going to pretty much work out the way I'd hoped it would, I think. When I look back at your speeches, if there were a couple of paragraphs where you best describe your political philosophy, the Third Way, they were in the 1998 State of the Union Address, and nobody paid any attention. Because I was standing what I got credit for there was just getting up, standing up What was the opportunity cost of that scandal? What did it cost you? I do not know yet, because actually we did in '98 we won seats in the House of Representatives, the first time a President's party has done that since Well, I do not know, because I do not know whether the Congress, the Republicans would have been more willing to work with me or not. Maybe. What I wanted to do with Social Security I am disappointed there. We still may get some Medicare restructural reform out of this. And in any case, Medicare is going to be okay for 30 years, which is the longest it is been okay for in forever and ever. And I think ENTITY Yes, but that is a problem, for God sakes. I mean, the generational transfer issue, I think, is something that you are really concerned about. I am concerned about it. You cannot keep a fee-forservice", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1154, "text": "But, but, but both Medicare taxes and Social Security taxes, in fairness, since 1983 have been paying for everything else. So we have had a little of that in reverse. Everybody has forgotten that. We have been dumping all these Social Security and Medicare taxes into the general economy all this time. I personally believe, though, that I regret we did not get to do Social Security because I would have what happened was, I think maybe we could have gotten it if we had not had that whole impeachment thing. But there was more resistance in both parties to do anything than I had imagined there was. They will have to come to terms with this. And I think you have either got to raise taxes, cut benefits, or increase the rate of return. What I proposed in '98 on Social Security, I think, was a very good beginning, and I really thought we'd get something. You could have, with your abilities, you could have gotten some kind of deal if you'd been able to at that point. Well, I do not agree with what he wanted to do there, and he knows that. I mean, I thought I agree with some of what they proposed, but some of what they proposed I think would not be good for Medicare. On policy grounds, he and I have had long discussions about it. I think there are a couple of things in that report that I just simply did not agree with. In general, when you talk about an information age safety net, what would it be, and what would be the guiding principles? I do not think that you can have the kind of centralized, top-down sort of programs that Social Security and Medicare I think if you had yes, but there is a great article let me just say this. And I do not believe I think you have to have some sort of if you believe there should be a safety net, there has to be some sort of safety net. Now, there is all kinds of options to get it done, and I think there should be more you can have some more room for private initiative. But if you had a safety net that worked, you'd have something for the poor and the disabled, the people who through no fault of their own were in trouble. You would have genuinely worldclass education for everybody who needed it, which is everybody. You would have access to health care at an affordable rate and decent housing, and you'd have to have a lifetime learning system.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1155, "text": "And then I think you'd have to have some more generous version of the new markets initiative I proposed, because there will always be unevenness in the growth of the market economy. That is part of its genius, because you have to have opportunity for new things to branch out. But in my view, this new markets thing has been underappreciated. I was out there a year ago watching Al From and Jesse Jackson cavort along beside you. And it may be one of the great opportunities for bipartisan achievement in this session. It may be one of the great opportunities because Hastert is completely committed to it. He is been as good as his word on everything. I have talked to them both a lot. We do have a good working relationship now, even though we have our differences. I think the Senate has been far too grudging on the judges, particularly since I appointed basically mainstream judges. But they want more ideologues, and they hope they can get them next year. But anyway, I think a part of the safety net ought to be viewed as a willingness of the Government to make continuing extraordinary efforts, including big tax incentives, to keep the people in places that are left behind in the emerging global economy keep giving them a chance to catch up. And I think this whole digital divide is a I prefer to think of it as a digital bridge. I think if you think about what this means, basically, this information economy can collapse distances in a way that telephones and railroads and electrical I mean, I think about it in terms of Arkansas. When they brought us REA and the Interstate Highway System and I put all these little airports up in remote towns and all that, it all helped to bring, like, small-scale manufacturing to places that had been left behind. And then I got to a place like the Shiprock Navajo Reservation, where they make really beautiful jewelry, for example, where the unemployment rate is 58 percent and only 30 percent of the people have telephones. And you realize that if they really were part of an information age economy, there are ways in which they could do I remember when I became President there were a lot of banks in New York shipping their data processing to Northern Ireland every day every day and then bringing it back. There are all kinds of opportunities that we never had before. And I think people ought to start thinking about that as a part of the safety net. You know, this raises an interesting point about you, personally.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1156, "text": "Shalala said to me that she thought that just as you were obsessed and voracious about social policy when you were Governor in the eighties that is one of the things I first noticed about you, is that you knew everything. I mean, you knew about the schools up here in East Harlem, more than Cuomo did, in fact. But as you were to social policy in the eighties, you have been hungry in the same way for knowledge about science and technology in the nineties. And I talked to Harold Varmus about it, and other people have said the same thing.  Well, let us talk about that. The one thing in our mantra about our economic policy which we always repeat fiscal responsibility, expanded trade, and investing in people those three things really were the sort of three stools of our economic policy. But one thing I think that tends to understate is the role that technology, particularly information technology, has played in this remarkable growth and the productivity growth and the long economic expansion. And I think our major contribution to that, apart from getting interest rates down so capital can flow to that sector, was in the Telecommunications Act of '96. And there were our major contributions to that act I might say, Al Gore deserves a lot of credit for because he was our front guy on it were two. One is we insisted that the Telecom Act would be very much pro-competition, which required us to get into a very difficult political fight principally with the RBOC's, operating companies, many of whom I have had very good relationships with because they do great stuff. They have helped us on all of our digital divide stuff, a lot of the new market stuff. But I just thought that we had to bend over backwards to maximize the opportunity for people with ideas to start new companies and get in and compete. And we fought that through, and it delayed the passage of the Telecom Act, but eventually we got what we wanted. And as I remember, while there were more Democrats than Republicans for our position, there were actually people on both sides of both parties. But we very much wanted to have a procompetition bias. The other night, interestingly enough, I was at dinner in New York with a friend of mine who was in the telecom business and then got in the venture capital business with telecom. He had a dinner for me, and I had dinner with like 40 people, all of whom headed companies that did not exist in 1996.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1157, "text": "I went out to UUP, which is an Internet connection company, which had 40 or 80 employees, something like that, in 1993, when I became President, and they have 8,000 now. And the second thing we did was to fight for the E-rate, which democratized the Internet and democratized the telecommunications revolution. We have got 95 percent of our schools have at least one Internet connection, and 90 percent of the poorest schools have an Internet connection. And then I also continued to push relentlessly these last 8 years for greater investment in science and technology. It was interesting; I have had an interesting relationship with the Congress since the Republicans won the majority, because they look around for things that they can spend more money on than me. They knew they would always be whatever defense number I proposed, they'd always be for more. And they liked to I am always for a balance between mass transit and highways, and they are always a little more on the highways side. And Harold Varmus did a brilliant job; when the Republicans won the Congress, he brought all these freshmen Congressmen out, showed them the NIH, showed them what they were doing, explained the genome project to them. And I think John Porter was the head of the subcommittee in the House that had this. He is smart, and he wanted to do the right thing. And so, anyway, I figured out after the first go-round that whatever I proposed, they'd propose more, which suited me fine because I basically do not think you can spend too much on those things. But the problem I had early on and the problem I still have is, notwithstanding how much money we have, the Republicans do not, in my view, spend enough money on non-NIH research. For example, they just took out all the money that I proposed for nanotechnology, this highly microscopic technology which could increase the power of computer generation by unfathomable amounts. Because as one night Hillary had we had all these millennial evenings at the White House. And then we had one the other day on outer space and the deep oceans; we did it in the afternoon. But we had one on the human genome project, and we had Eric Lander from Harvard, who is a biological scientist, and we had Vint Cerf, who was one of the developers of the Internet.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1158, "text": "He actually sent the first E-mail ever sent, 18 years ago or 19 years ago now to his then profoundly deaf wife, who now can hear because she is got a microdigital chip that is been planted deep in her ear. She heard, at 50 she said she is sure she is the only person who is ever heard James Taylor sing Fire And Rain at the age of 50 for the first time. But the point they were making is that the biomedical advances that would flow out of the human genome project, which the Republican majority will support lavishly, depended upon the development of the computer technology, and that without the development of the computer technology, you could never parse something as small as the human genome and get into all these genes and understand all the permutations. For example, there was a fascinating article the other day about one of the implications of the human genome, saying that talking about these two women who had a form of cancer, and that basically, if you look at the historical studies of all women in this category with this kind of cancer, diagnosed at this point in their illness, that you would say they had a 45-percent chance of survival. But now they can do genetic testing showing that they actually have very different conditions, and that one of them had a 20-percent chance of survival, the other had an 80-percent chance of survival. Now, the reason they can do that is because not only of the biological advances but the nonbiological advances that make it possible to measure the biological differences. And I could give you lots of other examples. And again, I owe a lot of this to Al Gore. He convinced me in 1993 that climate change was real. And he wrote that book in '88, and they are still making fun of his book. And I remember as late as last year we had a House subcommittee that treated climate change like a conspiracy to destroy the economy of the United States. But now, you have got all the major oil companies admitting that it is real, that the climate really is warming at an unsustainable rate. And that is why we pushed the Kyoto Protocol and why I want to spend a lot more money, and also have tax incentives, for people to keep making advances in energy technologies and environmental conservation technologies.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1159, "text": "So my frustration about where we are now is that I am really grateful that the Republican majority has embraced NIH, because it is been good and it is enabled me to present budgets under the old budget caps that I knew they would break, so I could get adequate funding for education, for example, and still know we are going to do a really good job on NIH. But I think we need a much broader commitment in the Congress to research in other areas of science and technology, going beyond the biological sciences. when it became clear to you I mean, I know this is prompting you to sound braggart, but so be it. This whole thing is taking off, and my larger sense of us moving from the industrial age to the information age is really true, and all of a sudden we have these surpluses. Was there a moment when the bolt of lightning hit and knocked you off the donkey on the way to the West Wing?  I spent a lot of '98 trying to dodge bolts of lightning. Well, that is the irony of this, I think, is that that was probably going to be the moment that the press was going to realize that there had been a coherence to this whole project all along, and we managed to work our way out of that. In '98, I spent a lot of '98 And I spent a lot of '98 sort of wrestling with three overwhelming feelings. One is, obviously there was a lot of pain involved because I had made a terrible personal mistake, which I did try to correct, which then a year later got outed on or almost a year later and had to live with. And it caused an enormous amount of pain to my family and my administration and to the country at large, and I felt awful about it. And I had to deal with the aftermath of it. And then, I had to deal with what the Republicans were trying to do with it. But I had a totally different take on it than most people. I really believed then and I believe now I was defending the Constitution. And while I was responsible for what I did, I was not responsible for what they did with what I did that was their decision and that I had to defend the Constitution.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1160, "text": "And so I felt that I still believe historically two of the great achievements of my administration were facing down the Government shutdown in '95 and '96, and then facing this back, and that those two things together essentially ended the most overt and extreme manifestations of the Gingrich revolution. And I still believe if we can get one or two things straight for the future, that a lot of the good stuff is still ahead. I am not going to let you off that so easily. Were there days, were there moments that you remember where you saw, hey, this is happening? I just was happy because I thought to be fair, I do not think any of us thought in '93 if you asked me in '93, What level of confidence do you have this economic plan is going to work, I would say very, very high. And if you asked me, What do you mean by 'working, ' when I started in '93, I would say we'd probably have between 16 million and 18 million new jobs. I never would have guessed 22.5 million and maybe more. I would have said I was fairly sure that we'd get rid of the deficit by the time I left office. I did not know in '93 that we'd be paying off nearly $400 billion of the national debt when I left office and we'd be looking at taking America out of debt, which is a goal I hope will be ratified by this election. And I hope the American people will embrace that, because I think that is quite important. So in '98 I began to imagine just how far we could go, you know, and to think about that. There is another aspect to this that we have not talked about that I think has really been central. In '93 would you have predicted that the state of race relations would have gotten to the point that it is gotten to now? I mean, I do not know whether you can sense I sensed it out on the trail this year. Bob Dole went to Bob Jones in '96 and did not pay any price at all, did he? This year you could not do it. And everywhere you go in this country, people of different races are having lunch together and holding hands. I confess, you know, I like Senator Dole very much, but I would have made him pay a price if I had known he went to Bob Jones University. You did not know about the dating policy?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1161, "text": "No, I did not know he went to Bob Jones University. I did not know about the dating policy, but I knew about Bob Jones because I am a white southerner. And I think the Bob Jones thing I think Governor Bush going there mattered more maybe to white southerners my age who supported civil rights than maybe to even other Americans, because it has a whole because of the history there. It was a big deal to me. But I do believe we have come a long way. And I think I hope I made some contribution to that, because I think it is really important. I have tried to get Americans to understand that how we handle this I still believe how we handle this is, in a way, the most important thing, because we are a great country and we are full of smart people and we nearly always get it right, unless we get in our own way. And it is just like me nations are like people, individuals, in the sense that very often all their greatest wounds are self-inflicted. And this whole state of racism, it is a self-inflicted wound. This was where I was wrong on affirmative action, I think, in the end, when I kicked you around on that. I never wanted it to last forever, and I think that we had to clean up some of the contracting policies and some of the other things. Well, we made some changes, and I hear a lot of complaining about it from people that have been affected by them. But I still believe that and to be fair to my critics or skeptics, it is a lot easier to sell an affirmative action in good economic times than in tough economic times. I believe what launched the assault on affirmative action in the beginning was that, number one, it did seem to be that nobody was ever reexamining it, its premises. But secondly, the big start was in California because California was suffering so much from a recession in the late eighties and early nineties. And people felt that they were being disenfranchised, and they felt that the circumstances were squeezing in on them anyway, and they did not want any other burdens that they lost just because they happened to be in the majority. So I think maybe the acid test of whether I was right or not will not come until there is another period of economic difficulty.  But I think there is enough evidence in on that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1162, "text": "I think if there are adversities coming out of welfare reform in the next economic downturn, or as far as there are now, it may be because it is largely because of decisions States have made about how to spend or not to spend properly the big extra money they got because we grandfathered them in at the amount of money they were getting when welfare rolls were at their height in February of '94. I think that is when we did that. I think we grandfathered them anyway, whatever month it was, we grandfathered their cash flow in when welfare rolls were high, on the theory that we wanted them to spend this money on education, on transportation, on housing assistance, on training people to not just take jobs but to be able to keep jobs, or find new jobs if they lost them. And there are some stories coming in which are troubling, but which have more to do with decisions that were made at the State level. The thing that some of the people who criticized me on the left for welfare reform never understood, I do not think they said, Oh, gosh, he is ending this national benefit. But that was a joke, because for more than 20 years, by 1996, States had been able to set their own rate. So you had the family support monthly support for a family of three on welfare varied anywhere from a low of $187 a month to a high of $665 a month on the day I signed the welfare reform bill. Nobody was going to go below $187 a month. And if there was a political consensus for a higher level, they were not going to go out and gut people. And the idea of spending this money to empower people to go into the workplace and then require people who could do so to try to get their personal act together and access the benefits and go in there, and then letting them keep their medical coverage for a while, is very, very important. The only thing I did not like about the welfare reform bill was not that; it was the immigrant thing. But the two I vetoed everybody acted at the time the only thing that really disturbed me, and I realized I had not succeeded in getting people into the intricacies of welfare policy, was that I had people, both liberals and conservatives, who said, Well, he vetoed two of them, but he signed the third one because it is getting close to the election, and he wants credit for that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1163, "text": "The thing we were fighting about was whether or not, if you required people on welfare to go to work and they refused to meet the requirement that is, they acted in a way that violated the responsibility portions of the law how do you minimize the impact on their kids? And what I was unwilling to do, because there was a uniform national benefit there, was to scrap the food stamps or the Medicaid coverage for the children, where we did have a uniform national standard and nowhere near the variations that already existed in the monthly cash payment. So I thought that finally when they agreed to put those back in, I believed, given the way the budget fights were unfolding and by then I was in my second one, in '96 that within a couple of years I would be able to restore most of the immigrant cuts. So I still think that some of them are not right and that we have not restored, but I think, on balance, the welfare reform bill was a big net advance in American social policy and the right thing to do. That is an interesting phrase, given the way the budget fights were unfolding. There seems to have been a pattern since '95, and I think that that may be part of the reason why people might not see the whole of what has gone on here Huge. And I have got to give a lot of credit to Panetta and Bowles, who was brilliant at it, and John Podesta and Ricchetti and all these people that worked the Congress, because they and the congressional leadership in our party. Keep in mind, any time that our support among the Democratic minority drops below a third plus one, I have no power in the budget process. So I think that but we have gotten enormous amounts done for poor people, for the cause of education we have gone from a million dollars a year in 3 years to $445 million a year, something like that, in programs for after-school. And my budget this year, if we get that, we will really be able to put an afterschool program in every failing school in America if we get what I asked for this year. I think that is one of the reasons that a lot of what we did in education has not been fully appreciated. Ten million people taking advantage of HOPE scholarships and lifelong learning credits this year, according to Gene. I mean, are you frustrated that this kind of stuff is not more known? But the main thing for me now is that it is happening.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1164, "text": "And the other thing that I think is really important I'd just like to mention, that I think almost no one knows, that I think is, over the long run, particularly if we can get it is interesting, the Republicans say they are for accountability, but they will not adopt my Education Accountability Act, which would require more explicit standards, more explicit turn around failing schools or shut them down, and voluntary national tests, which they are against, but we are working on it still. But just what we did in '94 in '94, in a little-known provision of our reenactment of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, we required States to identify getting Title I money to identify failing schools and to develop strategies to turn them around. States like Kentucky that have taken it seriously have had a breathtaking result. I was down at that little school in Kentucky, in eastern Kentucky, the other day. And it was a failing school, one of the worst in Kentucky, over half the kids on school lunches now ranked in the top 20 elementary schools in Kentucky, in 3 years. What did they do? Well, let me tell you the results they got. In 3 years, here is what happened. They went from 12 percent of the kids reading at or above grade level to 57 percent. They went from 5 percent of the kids doing math at or above grade level to 70 percent. They went from zero percent of the kids doing at or above grade level in science to 63 percent in 3 years. And they ranked 18th in the performance of elementary schools in Kentucky. I was in a school the other day in Spanish Harlem that in 2 years went from 80 percent of the kids doing reading and math at or below grade level to 74 percent of the kids doing reading and math at or above grade level below grade level, 80 percent below, to 74 percent at or above grade level in 2 years. And I know what they did there because I spent a lot of time there. They got a new principal, and they basically they went to a school uniform policy, one of my little ideas that was falsely maligned, had a huge impact. And they basically went to they established goals and results, and you either met them, or you did not . So one of the things I mean, I think one of the most important accomplishments of the administration was basically opening the doors of college to everybody with the HOPE scholarships and the direct loans.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1165, "text": "And if we could just get this tuition tax deductibility, then we have not made it possible for every person making $40,000 to send all their kids to Yale, but we made it possible for everybody to send all their kids somewhere. Not refundable, but it is deductible at the 28-percent level for people that are in the 15-percent income tax bracket. So it is a kind of semideduction. Yes, well, in our proposal you get to deduct up to $10,000 at the 28-percent level even if you are in the 15-percent income tax bracket. So it is not refundable, but for the people that need refundability, they have access to the Pell grants and to loans they can pay back now as a percentage of their income under the direct loan program. Let me ask you one last well, I am not going to guarantee this is one last. I might want to ask you if I have a few more over time, is there some way I can get in touch with you? You have interviewed 50 people. You have taken this seriously, so I want to try to Well, it is the last 8 years of my life, too, you know. And I have not even asked you about foreign policy, for God sakes. We will do two things. Let me ask you about foreign policy. It seems to me that if you look at what you did, there are two big things you did in foreign policy. One was raise economic issues to the same level as strategic issues, which was crucial, and the other was to demonstrate over time that America was going to be involved and use force when necessary in the rest of the world. The second one is, obviously, more messy and dicey than the first. The third thing you did was essentially not do anything wrong and do really right things when it came to the big things like Middle East, Russia, China. The messy part of it is the dustups in places like Bosnia, Kosovo. People have told me that you really feel awful that you did not do more in Rwanda. Let me back up and say, I had a when I came here, came to the White House, I sat down, basically, and made my own list of what I wanted to accomplish in foreign policy. I wanted to maximize the chance that Russia would take the right course. I wanted to maximize the chance that China would take the right course.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1166, "text": "I wanted to do what I could to minimize these ethnic slaughters, which basically the end of the cold war ripped the lid off. It is not that they did not occur before, but now they became the main problem with the world. I wanted to try to create a unified Europe, which included an expanded NATO, supporting European unification, and dealing with all the countries around. I wanted to try to get Turkey into Europe as a bulwark against fundamentalist terrorism. That required some progress between Greece and Turkey, and we made some, not enough to suit me. I wanted to try to minimize the turbulence the possibility of war and nuclear war between India and Pakistan, which is something that was not right for my involvement until rather late in my term. But one of the things that and I wanted to try to and I will leave this until last I wanted to try to broaden the notion in America of what foreign policy and national security was, to include health issues, to include like we made ENTITY a national security threat to include climate change, to include the globalized society, all these issues we started talking about. So the one thing I would say to you is that I think this has all occurred kind of under the radar screen I will come back to Rwanda but one of the things I think should be mentioned is, we have spent an enormous amount of money and time and effort focusing America on how to minimize the threats of biological warfare, of chemical warfare. What are we going to do? Will the miniaturization of the information revolution lead to small-scale chemical, biological, even God forbid nuclear weapons? How are we going to deal with that? So we have done a lot of work on that. And to come back to Rwanda, one of the things I have tried to do with Africa is to and Sierra Leone is giving us a good test case here is to increase the capacity of the African nations to deal with their own problems, to support the regional operations like ECOWAS or OAU. And I developed something called the African Crisis Response Initiative, where we would go in and train African militaries. When I was in Senegal, for example, I went out to the community to the training site there, on our trip to Africa, and saw the American soldiers training with the Senegalese to dramatically increase their capacity. What happened basically with Rwanda is, we were obsessed with Bosnia and all the other stuff, and it was over in 90 days.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1167, "text": "I mean, they basically killed hundreds of thousands of people in 90 days. And I just do not think we were any of us focused on it and whether we could have done something. But I made up my mind that we would certainly try to increase the capacity of Africans to deal with it and we would move in as quickly as we could. And like I said, what happens in Sierra Leone is going to be a little test of that.  You had it in principle. I think I had a very because I'd been interested in it since I was a student in college, and I'd always been fascinated by world affairs. So the fact that I had not been a Senator or served in a previous administration I do not think was a particular disadvantage. I think all the economic stuff I think I had right and the fact that there was a lot more in economics involved, and it was about democracy; it was about minimizing war; it was about lifting people's sights so they had something better to do than killing their neighbors, be they were of a different religion or ethnic group I think we had that right. I think we basically had the nuclear issues right, and the big power issues right with Russia, with China, what we tried to do in the Korean Peninsula. Where I felt I think where I felt some frustration is maybe where even a President with a lot of experience would have felt frustration, a lot of experience in this, which is building the post-cold-war alliances, which proved to be very frustrating. I mean, we had a lot of frustrations and we got panned a lot, and maybe we deserved some of it, and maybe we did not in '93 and '94, trying to put together some kind of coalition of our European allies to move in Bosnia. In Kosovo, having had the Bosnia experience, even though there were differences in the alliance, I have nothing but compliments for my allies. They were basically we had our arguments. Nobody has got a monopoly on truth. But basically, we got together; we moved quickly; we did the right things. And I think that the idea of how we might even go about mechanically, operationally, dealing with something like Rwanda just was not there. The French and others that had been more active in that part of Africa, I think they may have had a better sense of it, although they went in late. But you were acting with more confidence, too.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1168, "text": "But it was I think that some of that, when you have got to have some support from other countries and you can have an uncertain result but you think you have to try, it just takes a while until you get your sea legs and you get everything worked out, particularly when there are not sort of institutional structures and policies and rules of the road there. If you take another sort of sad moment of the administration, when we lost our soldiers in Somalia Almost at the same time as the ship turned around in the harbor in Port-au-Prince. When we lost our soldiers in Somalia, it was a very sad thing. But that happened, I think and I hope the Congress will never decline to put people in peacekeeping missions because of it, because basically our guys did a terrific job there. But there was an operational, I think, decision made there, which, if I had to do it again, I might do what we did then, but I would do it in a different way. I remember General Powell coming to me and saying, Aideed has killed all these Pakistanis, and they are our allies. Somebody needs to try to arrest him, and we are the only people with the capacity to do it. And he said, We have got a 50-percent chance of getting him, and a 25-percent chance of getting him alive. And so, he said, I think you ought to do it. But today, with that number of people there and then he retired. I am not blaming him; I am just saying that he was gone. So what happened was, we had this huge battle in broad daylight where hundreds and hundreds of Somalis were killed, and we lost 18 soldiers, in what was a U.N. action that basically, if I were going to do it again, I would treat it just like if we were going to do that, I'd say, Okay, I need to know what is involved here, and let us do this the way we planned out the military action we took against Saddam Hussein, for example, or the military action I took to try to get Usama bin Ladin's training camps, or anything else. It does not mean America should not be involved in peacekeeping, but it means if you go beyond the normal parameters that you decide on the front end, then the United States has to operate in a very different way. I think it is pretty hard, but I think you anyway, I will always regret that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1169, "text": "I do not know if I could have saved those lives or not, because I think what we were trying to do was the right thing to do, and the people who were there on the ground did the best they could. But I would have handled it in a different way if I had more experience, I think. The only other thing I was going to say about this is that we talked about earlier how I hope in the future that the Congress will give more support to science and technology, beyond NIH. I hope in the future the Congress will give more support to our national security budget beyond the defense budget. As well-off as we are, one real big problem, we should be spending much more than we are spending, in my judgment, to fight global disease, to promote global development, to facilitate global peacemaking and peacekeeping. I think that we need to succeed in getting the bipartisan majority in Congress with a much broader view, because people look at us, and they know how much money we have got, and they know what our surplus is. And all these other countries are struggling, and we should not be so begrudging I fight with the Congress all the time in our contributions to peacekeeping and to creating the conditions in which democracy and peace will flourish. I am encouraged by how Congress voted in this Colombia package because it is a balanced package, and it has a lot of nonmilitary, nonpolice stuff in it. And I am hopeful that we will have a more I saw Ben Gilman had a very good article somebody else he and a Democrat, I cannot remember who it was, wrote an article in the L.A. Times yesterday talking about the importance of the United States taking the lead in the international fight against global disease. That is one thing that I hope, after I am gone, I hope that the next President will be more successful at than I was. Let me ask you this is it after you are gone, you are going to be the youngest ex-President since Teddy Roosevelt. If there was one thing that Teddy Roosevelt did absolutely awful, it was be an ex-President. I mean, he was really terrible at it because he was so engaged, so involved, and he could not quit kibitzing. Well, he felt, to be fair to him, that the Republicans had abandoned his philosophy. He felt Taft had kind of let him down. You also have a restraining amendment in the Constitution that he did not . But do you worry about that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1170, "text": "Well, I do, because but not in the way you think. I do not think that the next President, whoever it is, will have problems with me acting like I wish I were still President. And I do not want to complicate that. So the challenge I have is to figure out how to have a meaningful life, how to use all this phenomenal experience I have got and what I know and the ideas I have in a way that helps my country and helps the things I believe in around the world and does not get in the way of the next President. And that is what I have to do. I have got to figure out how to do it. I have thought about it, but I am not ready to talk about it yet. You have talked about everything else today. Yes, but the one thing that I the reason I wanted to spend so much time with this interview if you want to talk to me anymore, just call, and we will talk more on the phone is that you always knew and even when you got mad at me, it was because you thought I'd stopped it that I would take this job seriously. I mean, the basic thing that I can tell you about this is, I will leave Washington, believe it or not, after all I have been through, more idealistic than I showed up here as, because I believe that if you have a serious Presidency, if you have ideas and you are willing to work and you are not so pig-headed that you think you have got the total truth and you work with other people and you just keep working at it and you are willing to win in inches as well as feet, that a phenomenal amount of positive things can happen. And you always thought that I was trying to have a serious Presidency. I got pretty pissed off at times. But at least but when you were mad, it was because you thought I was abandoning something I said I would do, that I was trying to do. I never had any my frustration was with the people in your line of work that I thought did not take all this seriously, that thought it did not matter one way or the other, that thought it was some game, or who was up or who was down, or where was the power equation, or something. There are consequences to the ideas people have. One of the worries I have about this election is all these people writing as if there is no differences and there are no consequences.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1171, "text": "The American people should make a judgment knowing that there are differences and there are consequences and it matters what you do. The thing that I think the last several years has shown is that a lot of these problems yield to effort. And if you are willing to just put in a few years of effort, you can push a lot of rocks up a lot of hills. People should feel really good about that. One of the things that I hope when I leave office that people will say is, I hope that there will be a greater sense of self-confidence about what America can achieve. But it requires you everybody has got to play politics, and I understand all that. I do not want to get sanctimonious about that just because I am not running for office for the first time in 26 years. That is part of the political system. And everybody will take their shots and do this. But in the end, the Presidency should be informed by a set not just of core principles and core values but ideas that there ought to be an agenda here. And you should not be deterred by people saying it is not big enough, or it is too big, or all that. There ought to be a broad-based view of where the world should go and what the role of the Presidency is in taking America where it should go. In that sense, I will leave office phenomenally optimistic. And everything I ever believed about the American people has been confirmed by my experience here. If they have enough time and enough information, no matter how it is thrown at them, in how many pieces and how slanted it is or whether it is inflammatory or whether it is designed to produce sedation, no matter what happens, they nearly always get it right. Democracy, if given a chance to work, really does. So, in that sense, I just I am grateful I have had the chance to serve. I have had the time of my life. I have loved it. Probably good we have got a 22d amendment. If we did not , I'd probably try to do it for 4 more years. Well, I will tell you something turning this off two things. One is, every last campaign I have covered since '92, I found myself judging against that one, in just big ways and little ways.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1172, "text": "And the other thing I promised my son I'd tell you he is just finishing up his first tour as a foreign service officer in Turkmenistan, and he said his proudest possession is his commission document with your signature on it. Well, if you go back to that '92 campaign, it just shows you, though the only other thing I would say is, I think I was so advantaged by having been a Governor for 10 years when I started running, or however long I'd been serving, and having had the opportunity to develop these ideas over time and then to measure them against the experience I have had. No President with an ambitious agenda will fail to make errors. Things happen in other people's lives. Maybe something will happen to the next President. God knows they will not go through what I did, but maybe their kids will get sick. Things happen in people's lives, and mistakes get made. And sometimes you just make a wrong call. But if you have got if you are serious and you have got a good agenda and you have good people and you work at it in a steady way, you get results. It really is a job like other jobs. I did not even get a chance to ask that question. And maybe that is not good, but I do believe that we need to demystify the job. And if you love your country and you have got something you want to do and you have thought it through and you have put together a good team and you are willing to be relentless and to exhaust yourself in the effort, results will come. That is what I would like the American people to know. They should be very optimistic about this. They are in such great shape right now. It is not just everybody is getting along, but they appreciate the thing that you always said way back when, which is that diversity is a strength. Sandy was telling me about your first G-7 conference, which I do not expect you to talk about on the record, but he was telling me about how the Japanese were lecturing you about how to run an economy. And when you took office, most people believed that we were going to get taken to the cleaners by the Japanese and the Germans, because they were homogenous and we were mongrels. And now most people you know, most of those Archie Bunkers out in Queens have a niece or a nephew who is dating a Puerto Rican at this point.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekleinthenewyorkernewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Joe Klein of the New Yorker in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-klein-the-new-yorker-new-york-city", "publication_date": "05-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1175, "text": "Friday afternoon I sat down with ENTITY in the Roosevelt Room at the White House. This is a critical moment in the healthcare debate. And you have been able to assess the landscape, you have got a bill now that is working its way through the Senate, you have spoken to Congress. As you assess the situation, I wonder whether you approach this with a minimum threshold of what you will accept for reform, or at this point have you said, I have laid out my plan, take it all or nothing ? You know, I, I think that my focus is on some core principles. I have to have a plan that is good for middle-class families, who we know last year ended up seeing a 5.5 percent increase in their premiums even though inflation was actually negative on everything else, that have seen a doubling of their premiums over the last decade, that are less secure than ever in terms of the insurance they can actually count on, and more and more of them cannot get insurance because of pre-existing conditions or they change jobs or they lost jobs. So it is got to be good for them. Now, the principles that we have talked about--making sure that there is an insurance exchange that'll allow people to buy in and get health insurance and negotiate as a big pool to drive down costs, making sure that we have insurance reforms that make sure you can still get health insurance even if you have got a pre-existing condition, cap out of pocket expenses and so forth--those core things that make insurance a better deal for American consumers; making sure that it is deficit-neutral both now and in the future, making sure that it is driving down healthcare inflation so that we can actually deal with our long-term budget deficits, those are the core principles that are critical to me. And I actually think that we have agreed to about 80 percent of that, if you look at all the bills that are coming through all these committees. The key is now just to narrow those differences. And if I do not feel like it is a good deal for the American people, then I will not sign a bill. Those narrow differences can also, in some cases, be very big differences. And as you were ENTITY-elect last year, you said to the nation--in light of the huge challenges that the country faces, you said, We are going to have to make hard choices. ... And not all of these choices are going to be popular.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgregorynbcnewsmeetthepress", "title": "Interview with David Gregory on NBC News' Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gregory-nbc-news-meet-the-press", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1176, "text": "What are the hard choices that you are now asking the American people to make? And who are you going to say no to in order to get health care done? Well, I, I have already made some pretty substantial changes in terms of how I was approaching health care. You effectively said to the left it is not going to happen. What I, what I have said is the public option I think should be a part of this, but we should not think that somehow that is the silver bullet that solves health care. What I have said, for example, on what is called an individual mandate--during the campaign I said, Look, if health care is affordable, then I think people will buy it. So we do not have to say to folks, you know what, you have to buy health care. And when I talk to healthcare experts on both the left and the right, what they tell me is that even after you make health care affordable, there is still going to be some folks out there who, whether out of inertia or they just do not want to spend the money, would rather take their chances. Unfortunately, what that means is then you and I and every American out there who has health insurance and they are paying their premiums responsibly every month, they have got to pick up the costs for emergency room care when one of those people gets sick. So what we have said is as long as we are making this genuinely affordable to families, then you have got an obligation to get health care just like you have an obligation to get auto insurance in every state. Who are you saying no to? Well, that--I mean, that is an example of a, of a hard choice, because that is not necessarily wildly popular, but it is the right thing to do. You know, I, I have said that it is very important that we take into account the concerns of doctors and nurses who, by the way, support our efforts. The people who are most involved in the healthcare system know that it is got to be reformed. But I have said that we have got to take into account their concerns about medical malpractice. Now, that is not popular in my party, never has been. But I have talked to enough doctors to know that even though it is not the end-all, be-all of driving down healthcare costs, it is very important to providers to make sure that their costs are going down.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgregorynbcnewsmeetthepress", "title": "Interview with David Gregory on NBC News' Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gregory-nbc-news-meet-the-press", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1177, "text": "So I think there are going to be a whole series of Republican ideas, ideas from my opponents during the campaign that we have incorporated and adopted. And, and, you know, one of the things I have always said is if this had been easy, it would've been taken care of by Teddy Roosevelt. But you are not really taking on--I mean, you are not saying to the left they have got to accept malpractice reform or, or caps on, on jury awards. You do not even think that that contributes to the escalating costs of health care. What do you--what are you really doing to say to the left, Look, you may not like this, but you have got to get on board and we have got to do this ? Maybe you have not been paying attention to what both the left and the right have been saying about my speech to Congress. I laid down some pretty clear parameters. And what I said was we are going to take ideas from both sides. The bottom line is that the American people cannot afford to stay on the current path, we know that, and that both sides are going to have to give some. Everybody's going to have to give some in order to get something done. We would not have gotten this far if, you know, we had not been pretty insistent, including to folks in my own party, that we have got to get past some of these ideological arguments to actually make something happen. This healthcare debate, as you well know, can sometimes be about bigger things. is the view somehow that government is out of control. And in some cases, it is gotten very personal. Your election, to a lot of people, was supposed to mark America as somehow moving beyond race. And yet this week you had former president Jimmy Carter saying most--not just a little, but most of this Republican opposition against you is motivated by racism. Do you agree with that? Look, I said during the campaign, are there some people who still think through the prism of race when it comes to evaluating me and my candidacy? Sometimes they vote for me for that reason, sometimes they vote against me for that reason. I am sure that was true during the campaign, I am sure that is true now. But I think you actually put your finger on what this argument's really about, and it is an argument that is gone on for the history of this republic. And that is what is the right role of government?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgregorynbcnewsmeetthepress", "title": "Interview with David Gregory on NBC News' Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gregory-nbc-news-meet-the-press", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1178, "text": "How do we balance freedom with our need to look after one another? I talked about this in the joint session speech. This is not a new argument, and it always invokes passions. And I--there--it was a passionate argument between Jefferson and Hamilton about this. You know, Andrew Jackson built a whole political party around this notion that somehow, you know, there, there is populist outrage against a federal government that was overintrusive. And so what, what I think is going on is, is that we have got a healthy debate taking place. The vast majority of people are conducting it in a very sensible way. I think that every president who is tried to make significant changes along these lines, whether it was FDR or Ronald Reagan, illicit very strong, passionate responses. But I do think that we all have an obligation to try to conduct this conversation in a civil way and to recognize that each of us are patriots, that each of us are Americans and that, by the way, the--my proposals, as much as you may not like them if you are a Republican or on the right, recognize that this is well within the mainstream of what Americans have been talking about for years in terms of making sure that everybody in this country gets decent health care and that people who have health care are protected. There are others in the Congressional Black Caucus, other thinkers who have said that they agree, that there is racism out there in that opposition to you. Are you, are you saying to the former president and others to speak this way is counterproductive? Well, look, ENTITY, here is what I am saying. I, I think that the media loves to have a conversation about race. I mean, this is, is catnip to, to the media because it is a running thread in American history that is very powerful and it invokes some very strong emotions. I am not saying that race never matters in, in any of these public debates that we have. What I am saying is this debate that is taking place is not about race, it is about people being worried about how our government should operate. Now, I think a lot of those folks on the other side are wrong. I think that they have entirely mischaracterized the nature of our efforts.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgregorynbcnewsmeetthepress", "title": "Interview with David Gregory on NBC News' Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gregory-nbc-news-meet-the-press", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1179, "text": "And I think it is important that we stay focused on solving problems as opposed to plucking out a sentence here or a comment there and then the entire debate, which should be about how do we make sure that middle-class families have secure health care, does not get consumed by other things. House Speaker Pelosi worried about the opposition, the tone of it perhaps leading to violence as it did in the '70s. Do you worry about that? Well, look, I think that we have an obligation in Washington as leaders to make sure that we are sending a strong message that we can disagree without being disagreeable, without, you know, questioning each other's motives. When we start caricaturing the other side, I think that is a problem. And unfortunately, we have got, as I said before, a 24-hour news cycle where what gets you on the news is controversy. What gets you on the news is the extreme statement. The easiest way to get 15 minutes on the news or your 15 minutes of fame is to be rude. And it starts with me, and I have tried to make sure that I have sent a clear signal and I have tried to maintain an approach that says, Look, we can have some serious disagreements, but at the end of the day I am assuming that you want the best for America just like I do. You get a lot of airtime too, though, and you--yours are not rude. Well, you know, the--I, I do occupy a pretty special seat at the moment. But, but I do think that--look, I mean, let us face it. If, if you look at the news cycle over the last, over the last week, you know, it, it has not been the sensible people who, you know, very deliberately talk about the important issues that we face as a country. That is not the folks who've getting a lot of coverage. Let me ask you about another important issue facing you and your administration, and that is Afghanistan. We have now been in Afghanistan for eight years. The Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan after 10 years. Are we committed to this war for an indefinite period of time, or do you think in your mind is there a deadline for withdrawal? I do not have a deadline for withdrawal, but I am certainly not somebody who believes in indefinite occupations of other countries. Keep in mind what happened when I came in.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgregorynbcnewsmeetthepress", "title": "Interview with David Gregory on NBC News' Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gregory-nbc-news-meet-the-press", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1180, "text": "We had been adrift, I think, when it came to our Afghanistan strategy. And what I said was that we are going to do a top to bottom review of what is taking place there. Not just a one-time review, but we are going to do a review before the election in Afghanistan and then we are going to do another review after the election. al-Qaeda. How do we dismantle them, disrupt them, destroy them? Now, getting our strategy right in Afghanistan and in Pakistan are both important elements of that. But that is our goal, and I want to stay focused on that. And, and so right now what is happened is, is that we have had an election in Afghanistan. It did not go as smoothly as I think we would have hoped, and that there are some serious issues in terms of how that--how the election was conducted in some parts of the country. But we have had that election. We now finally have the 21,000 troops in place that I had already ordered to go. Are you skeptical about more troops, about sending more troops? Well, can I just say this? I am--I have to exercise skepticism any time I send a single young man or woman in uniform into harm's way, because I am the one who is answerable to their parents if they do not come home. So I have to ask some very hard questions any time I send our troops in. The question that I am asking right now is to our military, to General McChrystal, to General Petraeus, to all our national security apparatus is, whether it is troops who are already there or any troop request in the future, how does this advance America's national security interests? How does it make sure that al-Qaeda and its extremist allies cannot attack the United States ' homeland, our allies, our troops who are based in Europe ? That is the question that I am constantly asking, because that is the primary threat that we went there to deal with. And if, if supporting the Afghan national government and building capacity for their army and securing certain provinces advances that strategy, then we will move forward. But if it does not , then I am not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan or saving face or in some way, you know, sending a message that America is here for, for the duration. I think it is important that we match strategy to resources.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidgregorynbcnewsmeetthepress", "title": "Interview with David Gregory on NBC News' Meet the Press", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-gregory-nbc-news-meet-the-press", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1184, "text": "ENTITY, you are being given worldwide acclaim for your foreign policy programs or foreign policy initiatives, but your critics are crying a lot. I mean, I am sure you have heard that crying recently that you, during the last 3 years, have not looked homeward and have not taken care of business at home. How do you respond to that? I think they are not telling the truth. I think that in the first place, I see the world as one great big market. And I think every time we export, we are doing something good. So, when I go like the other day to an EC meeting in The Hague and try to expand our agricultural sales, that are very important in Missouri; try to expand those around the world, I think that is in the American interest. Secondly, I think world peace is in the interest of your kids and mine and our grandchildren. And I am going to continue to work on that. Thirdly, I have a good domestic agenda program. But my problem is the liberal Democrats that control both Houses of the Congress want to try it some other way. The crime bill, the transportation bill, and these other growth measures that I have talked about. In foreign affairs, when we went to win a war I did not have to ask the leadership of the Democratic Congress whether it is okay. Hey, is it all right if I move this division there? Is it okay if we send Schwarzkopf here or there? I did not have to do that. It is different on domestic affairs. You are always fighting some tired, in my view, tired, old ideas up there. Speaking of tired, old ideas, do you detect a swing in voters' mood in the country? Well, in the first place, the Buddy Roemer was a terrible blow because it gave rise to a very tough choice in Louisiana. I could not be silent in the face of a man who is an ex-Nazi, who is a bigot, whose past is full of racism. So, I have spoken out on that. And the only worry I have got on that one is will that help Duke or hurt him, because Louisianians are proud. They do not like people coming in from outside telling them what to do. But when you have a man that denies the Holocaust or is bigoted against minorities, I have got to speak out. I owe the country that kind of moral leadership.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuliushunterkmovtvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Julius Hunter of KMOV - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-julius-hunter-kmov-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1185, "text": "On the Thornburgh matter, yes, I am concerned, but I also was delighted when Governor Florio of New Jersey said, This is a referendum on President Bush, the elections here. And we swept both Houses. Do you think you might have to take the unprecedented step of backing David Duke's opponent, the Democrat? Well, I have done that. Yes, I have said that, that if I were down there I'd vote for Edwards. But, again, the risk on that is that you are counterproductive. But I feel so strongly that we must speak up against racism and bigotry, that I was pleased to do that in the sense that it is the principled thing to do. But I am not sure of the election effect. You are in an area with extremely high unemployment, and there are a lot of people who are struggling to make ends meet right now. There are the homeless and the hungry in this country, those who are in despair. Might you be getting a picture painted for you by your chief economic advisers that is rosier than it actually is out there in the jungle, in the real world? I do not think that is the case, but I think there is a danger of when you say the recession is over that people who are out of work -- and it is 6.8 percent or something of that nature -- misunderstand that. We had a period of growth in the third quarter, and the definition of recession is two negative quarters in a row. Well, we had a positive quarter. And what we ought to do is pass some of the growth measures that I have got before this Congress to stimulate growth and move forward on things like home-ownership and tenant management and a whole new approach. But I am having difficulty with the leadership in the Congress, frankly. They are thinking old, tired thoughts. And the American people see this. I will take my share of the blame, but the American people are right when in survey after survey they blame Congress, as many as four times as much as the President. But this is not a question of blame; it is a question of trying to help somebody. And I will continue to reach out to Congress, but I cannot accept bad legislation that is going to hurt everybody in the country. And the plan that is been recently offered by business and labor leaders, you are opposed to that plan.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuliushunterkmovtvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Julius Hunter of KMOV - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-julius-hunter-kmov-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1186, "text": "What would you say to those 34 million Americans who might seem to think that you are not interested in them getting health care? I'd say we are going to have a health care program. We have got some good programs under HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan. There is another one, maybe that is the one you are referring to today that came out, that Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford were on. The price tag on some of these are enormous. And we have got to have a comprehensive program where we do something about the costs that have accelerated so much and try, at the same time, to provide health care for all. The program, as I see it, that was proposed today looks very much like the one that they proposed in Massachusetts. And they put it in, and then the voters rebelled because it cost everybody way too much money. And we simply have got to be sure that when we get one, and we are going to have a proposal, that it is not going to bust the back of everybody else or put people out of work. You are concerned; so am I, about jobs. And you do not want to say to every small business, You are going to be rendered uncompetitive because the Federal Government is going to impose mandates on you. I know you do not want to aid and abet the enemy, but is there any Democrat that you would be loathe to run against in the next election? If there was I probably would not tell you about him. But, no, look, I have always said I will have a tough race. But I do not go along with the common wisdom as to who is the toughest or not. The media frenzy back in the East I expect -- I hope it is kind of been avoided out here in this very sensible part of the country -- but they have picked some that they think are the toughest. But let the American people decide this. And let the Democrats sort it out in their own primaries, and then I will take on whatever they offer up. And I have said, though, and not being cute about it, that the only reason that I can foresee would be if I had some health problem. That came up last year, but I feel like a million bucks right now -- before taxes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuliushunterkmovtvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Julius Hunter of KMOV - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-julius-hunter-kmov-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1187, "text": "It is great to be with you. You are trying to pressure Senate Republicans to consider Judge Garland. But Senate Republicans, the GOP, is applying pressure of its own. And just this week, two Senate Republicans, Moran and Murkowski, reversed themselves, and said they no longer support even holding confirmation hearings. Well, I think that things will evolve as people get familiar with Judge Garland's record. As it becomes apparent that the overwhelming majority of the American people think that the President nominates somebody to the Supreme Court, and the Senate should now do its constitutional job and give him a hearing. And originally, the Republicans said they would not meet with him at all. Now, a number of them have already had meetings. And the questioning that they are having privately with Judge Garland is something that should be done publicly. Through a hearings process, so the American people can make their own assessment. But I recognize there is pressure on the other side. Our goal is just to make sure that the Senate does its job and treats him fairly. Now, you talk about the Senate doing its job. You are calling for an up-or-down vote on Judge Garland. But back in 2006, Senator Barack Obama joined a filibuster on Sam Alito, a Bush appointee, which would have prevented an up or down vote. I think there is no doubt that Democrats and Republicans have gotten into a fix inside the Senate, in which the confirmation process becomes too much of a tit for tat, or becomes politicized. I will point out though, Chris, that never has a Republican president's nominee not received a hearing, not received a vote. He may be an excellent judge, but I just disagree with him philosophically on a whole range of issues, so I am going to vote against him. So, you'd be OK if he got defeated, as long as they go through the process? I think that if they go through the process, they will not have any rationale to defeat him. So my point is, go through the process, go through the hearings. I think if you do that, the American people and the majority of senators will determine that, in fact, he is qualified to be on the Court. Some Republican senators say, Look, if a Democrat wins in November, well maybe we will consider Garland in a lame duck hearing. Have you made a commitment to Garland that you are going to stick by him through the end of your term?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchriswallacefoxnewssunday3", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chris-wallace-fox-news-sunday-3", "publication_date": "10-04-2016", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1188, "text": "Or perhaps, let us say Hillary Clinton is the newly elected president, would you pull him and let her make the pick? As more senators meet with him, I think they will recognize the qualities of this individual. What I think we cannot have is a situation in which the Republican Senate simply says, Because it is a Democratic president, we are not going to do our job, have hearings, and have a vote. Because if that happens, Chris, then it is almost impossible to expect that the Democrats -- let us say a Republican president won -- that the Democrats would not say the exact same thing. They will say, Let us wait for four years, and we will take our chances on the next president. Are you saying you will stick with Merrick Garland through the end of your term? I want to ask you about an interview, and extensive interview you did with the Atlantic Magazine recently. It says that you think that the fear of terrorism among politicians, among the press, among the public, is exaggerated. And then the article goes on to say, quote, Obama frequently reminds his staff that terrorism takes far fewer lives in America than handguns, car accidents, and falls in bathtubs do. Do we make too big a deal of the terror threat? I do not think we make too big of a deal of the terror threat. My number one job is to protect the American people. My number one priority right now is defeating ISIL. My number one priority throughout my presidency has been going after terrorist networks that would attempt to do harm to -- My point is that, how we do it is important, that we have to make sure that we abide by our laws. We have to make sure that we abide by our values. And we have to make sure that what we do does not end up being counterproductive. Ted Cruz. that is not a productive approach to defeating terrorism. When I hear people suggesting that we should ban all Muslims from entering the country, that is not a good approach to defeating terrorism.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchriswallacefoxnewssunday3", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chris-wallace-fox-news-sunday-3", "publication_date": "10-04-2016", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1189, "text": "when you say more people die in bathtub accidents, and I understand you are not saying it is not important, but you are saying we cannot overreact to it, is bathtub manufacturers are not trying to kill us, and they are not trying to up the body count -- I think it is fair to say that some of the sharpest criticism of you, from both sides during your presidency, has been the way that you have responded -- personally, not necessarily in policy -- to terror attacks. After James Foley was beheaded, you went out and played golf. After Paris, you said it was a setback. Even as we grieve with our French friends, however, we cannot lose sight that there has been progress being made. After San Bernardino, you talked about gun control. Right now, people on the no fly list can walk into a store and buy a gun. And some people wonder, I think the concern is, do you worry about terrorism and feel the threat of terrorism the way they do? And I would say this -- there is not a president who is taken more terrorists off the field than me, over the last seven-and-a-half years. I am the guy who calls the families, or meets with them, or hugs them, or tries to comfort a mom, or a dad, or a husband, or a kid, after a terrorist attack. So, let us be very clear about how much I prioritize this. and we have been doing it effectively. Well, I think part of it is that, in the wake of terrorist attacks, it has been my view consistently that the job of the terrorists, in their minds, is to induce panic, induce fear, get societies to change who they are. And what I have tried to communicate is, You cannot change us. You can kill some of us, but we will hunt you down, and we will get you. And in the meantime, just as we did in Boston, after the marathon bombing, we are going to go to a ballgame. And do all the other things that make our life worthwhile. And you have nothing to offer. That is the message of resilience that we do not panic, that we do not fear. We will hunt you down and we will get you. Last October, you said that Hillary Clinton's private e-mail server did not jeopardize national secrets.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchriswallacefoxnewssunday3", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chris-wallace-fox-news-sunday-3", "publication_date": "10-04-2016", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1190, "text": "I can tell that you this is not a situation in which America's national security was endangered. Since then, we have learned that over 2,000 of her e-mails contained classified material, 22 of the e-mails had top-secret information. Can you still say flatly that she did not jeopardize America's secrets? I have got to be careful because, as you know, there have been investigations, there are hearings, Congress is looking at this. And I have not been sorting through each and every aspect of this. Hillary Clinton was an outstanding Secretary of State. She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy. And what I also know, because I handle a lot of classified information, is that there are -- there is classified, and then there is classified. There is stuff that is really top secret top secret, and there is stuff that is being presented to the president or the secretary of state, that you might not want on the transom, or going out over the wire, but is basically stuff that you could get in open source. And the question is, can you still say that? I continue to believe that she has not jeopardized America's national security. Now what I have also said is that -- and she has acknowledged -- that there is a carelessness, in terms of managing e-mails, that she has owned, and she recognizes. But I also think it is important to keep this in perspective. This is somebody who has served her country for four years as secretary of state, and did an outstanding job. And no one has suggested that in some ways, as a consequence of how she is handled e-mails, that that detracted from her excellent ability to carry out her duties. ENTITY, when you say what you have just said, when Josh Earnest said, as he did -- your spokesman -- in January, the information from the Justice Department is she is not a target, some people I think are worried whether or not -- the decision whether or not, how to handle the case, will be made on political grounds, not legal grounds. Can you guarantee to the American people, can you direct the Justice Department to say, Hillary Clinton will be treated -- as the evidence goes, she will not be in any way protected. I can guarantee that. And I can guarantee that, not because I give Attorney General Lynch a directive, that is institutionally how we have always operated.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchriswallacefoxnewssunday3", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chris-wallace-fox-news-sunday-3", "publication_date": "10-04-2016", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1191, "text": "I do not talk to the Attorney General about pending investigations. I do not talk to FBI directors about pending investigations. We have a strict line, and always have maintained it, previous president. I guarantee it. I guarantee that there is no political influence in any investigation conducted by the Justice Department, or the FBI, not just in this case, but in any case. Nobody gets treated differently when it comes to the Justice Department, because nobody is above the law. Even if she ends up as the Democratic nominee? How many times do I have to say it, Chris? Yes. Yes. from the decisions that affect their lives? Well, there is no doubt that I feel frustrated about it. My whole, you know, operating assumption, in terms of our democracy, is the more people are involved, the more they know, the more they are involved, the more responsive our government is. Yes, I think that, I think it comes out of a couple things, Chris. Number one, we are still shell-shocked from what happened in 2007, 2008. We have now had more than six years straight of job growth, and cut the unemployment rate down to 5 percent. But, people lost homes, lost jobs, lost life savings. And they still do not fully know how that happened, and was the system fixed in a way that they can have confidence in. So, have you fixed that in eight years? Well, actually we have done a better job than I think most people give us credit for. I do not mean fixed the system. I mean fixed the perception. Well, the perception is going to be changing over time, as people see results, as they get more confident. But, and this is the big but, nobody's going to be 100 percent satisfied -- in a democracy like ours -- with every outcome. And I think the danger, both among Republicans, and among Democrats, who increasingly just listen to each other. Or they just listen to people who already agree with them. Republicans, they have their own TV station. You can say FOX News. They have got their own publications, their own blogs. Increasingly what happens is, we do not hear each other. And so what happens then is, when Republicans promise to repeal Obamacare, and it does not get repealed, they are outraged. If Democrats get frustrated, they say, Well, why did not we have a public option in our healthcare system?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchriswallacefoxnewssunday3", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chris-wallace-fox-news-sunday-3", "publication_date": "10-04-2016", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1192, "text": "Well, it turns out that 85 percent of people get healthcare through their jobs. They are pretty satisfied with it. They do not want big change on them. It was not necessarily because there was some, you know, corruption, or venality, or that people were unresponsive to democracy. I want, occasionally, people to step back and take a look. America's got the best cards. We are the envy of the world. We have the most powerful military on earth, by a mile. Our economy right now, is stronger than any other advanced economy. We have the best workers, we have the best universities. We have the most advanced scientific community. We have an incredibly diverse and talented population. This can be our century, just like the 20th century was, as long as we do not tear each other apart, because our politics value sensationalism or conflict, over cooperation, and we do not have the ability to compromise. And if we get that part right, nobody can stop us. I enjoyed it. Later in the program, we take a walk with the president as he discusses the highs and lows of his eight years in office. Up next, we will bring in our Sunday group to discus what the president had to say. Plus, what would you like to ask the panel about whether the Clinton case will be handled fairly by the Justice Department? Just go to Facebook or Twitter and we may use your question on the air. Hillary Clinton was an outstanding secretary of state. She would never intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy. President Obama in our exclusive interview doubling down on his defense of Hillary Clinton in the private e-mail scandal. A look outside the beltway at the University of Chicago Law School, where we sat down this week with President Obama. And we are back now with more of our exclusive conversation with the president. We talked with Mr. Obama in the library at the law school where he taught for 12 years. He reminisced about that and a presidency that is winding down. Since I am sure this is a sentimental journey for you, I'd like to do a lightning round -- The day that we passed health care reform. And we sat out on the Truman Balcony with all the staff that had worked so hard on it and I -- I knew what it would mean for the families that I'd met who did not have health care. The day we traveled up to Newtown after Sandy Hook.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchriswallacefoxnewssunday3", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chris-wallace-fox-news-sunday-3", "publication_date": "10-04-2016", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1193, "text": "Probably failing to plan for the day after what I think was the right thing to do in intervening in Libya. What you are going to miss most when you leave office? Well, you miss -- what I will miss most is the breadth of interactions you have with the American people. When you are president, you meet people from every walk of life, every region and it gives you a unique appreciation for this unbelievable country of ours. What you are looking forward to most when you leave office? I -- I have to ask, with all due respect, when you look at yourself in the mirror, and you have got a little bit more gray hair than you had, and you look back over these last eight years, has it been a tough job? Has it aged you? You know, I do not think it has aged me spiritually or mentally. But I suspect that in some ways the job may keep you younger just because every day is a new challenge. I, you know, I -- I have no doubt that when I leave the office, after a day, a week, a month, maybe six months, you will start realizing that day to day burdens that you are carrying and you will probably be a little bit lighter. But, on the other hand, the degree to which every part of you is tested and engaged, that keeps you young. Barack Obama, president of the United States, senior lecturer at Chicago Law School, wrote 'Dreams From My Father' in this office. It is true that I -- I got an offer to come. I could write and teach a seminar and eventually I end up teaching here at the university. I will tell you that it was pretty Spartan then. The Oval -- the Oval has better light. It is got more room too. It is got a little more room. I do not even think I had a -- a plant. Partly because I do not have a green thumb and I -- I was sure -- Unlike Michelle with her garden, I was pretty sure that -- Given what Dreams From My Father, what was your dream back then? Because I was -- I was a -- I was past the deadline. So what would you tell -- if you could go back 12 years in time -- that law professor? What would you tell him that he did not know about how the world works? Well, first of all, that law professors back then would think I was crazy saying that somehow you might end up being president.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchriswallacefoxnewssunday3", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Chris Wallace of Fox News Sunday", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chris-wallace-fox-news-sunday-3", "publication_date": "10-04-2016", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1194, "text": "I am in Germany, so this is how I roll this week, I guess. I guess I have got some business back home in between doing my business out here. Yeah, I guess it is about 10 o'clock at night over there. I just figured that after all our conversation before the election, and then in the wake of the election, that you might need a very brief follow-up question. And I wanted to make sure that you had a chance because I know that you had to finish that story. Yeah, I appreciate that, and I did not think of this as a very long conversation, either. If you do not mind, I have three questions. All right, well, I will try to get through this. I will see what I can do here. The first thing I would ask is, we had this conversation very early in our session, and you talked about the belief that what the American people most want from a candidate is an optimistic vision. And I believe you were referencing Donald Trump at the time, and it was your thought that it was hard to get elected with a gloom-and-doom message. And I just wonder what you take from this election given what happened, and how your theory reconciles with that. Well, look, I think I am absolutely, you know, surprised like everybody else with the outcome. So, you know, I do not want to pretend like I was anticipating the results. I do think, though, that when you look at the specifics of this race, it is hard to, I think, draw a grand theory from it, because there were just some very unusual circumstances. We ended up having a situation in which both candidates had very high negatives. I think the caricature of Hillary Clinton that developed as a consequence of all kinds of stuff, compounded in that last week with more news about emails, meant that people never really got to hear a positive, optimistic message. Hillary Clinton had all kinds of terrific policies, but that was just not the focus of coverage. And as a consequence, you ended up having not just a polarized electorate, but a fairly dispirited electorate. It meant that a lot of the people who voted for me did not turn out to vote-that a lot of people who, if the surveys are correct, approve of my work and my presidency did not vote or decided, You know what, let us just shake it up this time .", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates0", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-0", "publication_date": "17-11-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1195, "text": "And you know, it is just an indication of the structural challenges that progressive politics have always faced in this country. You know, we are a country that makes it harder to vote than most countries. We are a country in which the campaigns are so long and so expensive that by the time you get to the end of it, negative campaigning dominates as opposed to a proactive set of proposals. We have an electoral college that mirrors, you know, the states' power that was preserved in the design of the Senate, where, you know, small states, or more rural states, or states with, you know, large rural or less diverse populations have significantly more influence in some cases than massive states like California. And so, you know, you add all that up and you ended up getting the specific result that we got. But as I have said publicly in all the interviews that I have conducted since the election, to be optimistic about the long-term trends of the United States does not mean that everything is going to go in a smooth, direct, straight line. And, you know, the important thing that I am hoping everybody draws from this is anybody who thinks that opting out of the system is a smart protest move, anybody who thinks that disengaging from the political process because both parties are the same or both candidates are the same or none of them are getting at the structural issues that are ultimately going to make the biggest difference -you know, those approaches can result in Donald Trump being elected president. I am going to skip to my third question, because it is important I get to it. I would not actually-but I appreciate that you took it seriously. One of the things I wanted to ask you-and this really comes personally from my own concerns-we have this history in our country where national-security policy is directed at a certain foe-for instance, earlier in the 20th century at communism during the Cold War-and sometimes, when in the wrong hands, it expands out. And in the '60s it expanded out into the civil-rights movement. In the post-9/11 world, the office of the presidency has accumulated quite a bit of powers in terms of national security. Are you concerned at all about that stuff-now that there is somebody else-being directed at activists, at Black Lives Matter, people like that? Are you worried about that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates0", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-0", "publication_date": "17-11-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1196, "text": "Yeah, I have to say that this is an argument that I know was made in a New York Times article and you have heard in some progressive circles, and it is just not accurate. Keep in mind that the capacity of the or other surveillance tools are specifically prohibited from being applied to U.S. citizens or U.S. persons without specific evidence of links to terrorist activity or other foreign-related activity. And those laws have been in place and have been strengthened, and the capacities that have been developed over the last eight years of my presidency mainly derive from changes in technology, not because we have somehow weakened oversight or expanded executive power. It just has to do with the fact that everybody is using a cellphone, everybody is using emails. In terms of domestic surveillance of any sort, it is probably harder to surveil or use these tools with a smartphone than it was getting a wiretap for a land phone. And both would be illegal without probable cause. So you know, I think this whole story line that somehow Big Brother has massively expanded and now that a new president is in place it is this loaded gun ready to be used on domestic dissent is just not accurate. Now, I think it is absolutely important to be concerned that our criminal-justice system, the FBI, the Justice Department, law enforcement take seriously civil liberties. Because the possibility of abuse by government officials always exists. The issue is not going to be that there are new tools available; the issue is making sure that the incoming administration, like my administration, takes the constraints on how we deal with U.S. citizens and persons seriously. And that is not a technical issue; that is the degree to which we abide by the law. In one of your speeches you made this very explicit appeal to black voters, and you mentioned if we did not come out, this would be an insult to your legacy. And at least in the early numbers, it looks like we did not-we certainly did not come out in the numbers that we came out in in 2008 or 2012. Or what are you left with? No, you know, I mean, I think that I was trying to make a very specific point, which is that you cannot rely on inspiration to take care of your business.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates0", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-0", "publication_date": "17-11-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1197, "text": "If you were a strong supporter of me, and loved Michelle, and believed in everything we were doing, and stood in line for four hours to vote for us in '08, and put up with some more lines in '12, then you cannot stay at home in '16 because we are not on the ballot. That there is a direct line between the work we did and the handoff we needed to make to the next administration to ensure that that progress was sustained. That was not just among African American voters. It was among young voters, and, you know, those were costly in the places where it really mattered in some of the swing states. It just reflects the nature of our political process, where we do not think of voting and political participation as a routine responsibility and duty, but rather think of it as something we do when it is exciting. Now, look, I do not want to make generalizations across the board, because the truth is, the African American vote actually exceeded the white vote in terms of percentage-not absolute numbers, obviously, but the percentage who voted-in 2012. On the other hand, we have got more ground to make up. We have got more schools that are underfunded. We have got more youth that are unemployed. We have got more people who are struggling to pay the bills. And, you know, one of the difficult truths of democracy is that the people who would benefit most from progressive policies like raising the minimum wage, and investment in infrastructure, and strengthening unions, and affordable child care, and help on college access and affordability-those are the folks also that, for a whole variety of reasons, are less likely to vote. And it requires an enormous amount of energy to overcome that historical fact. We were able to do it in 2008 and 2012, but it is hard to sustain. How do we change those habits? How do we make our engagement and involvement and interest an everyday thing rather than an every-four-years thing or an every-eight-years thing? I appreciate you taking this time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates0", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-0", "publication_date": "17-11-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1200, "text": "Hope you had a nice weekend, hot as it was. Before I take your questions, let me tell you that on Thursday, June 6th, as part of his Middle Class Jobs and Opportunity Tour, the President will travel to Mooresville Middle School in Mooresville, North Carolina to deliver remarks and experience firsthand the school's cutting-edge curriculum through digital learning. In his State of the Union address, the President laid out his belief that the middle class is the engine of economic growth in our country. jobs, skills, and opportunity. We need to build on the progress we have made over the last four years, and that means investing in those areas that are already creating good-paying, stable jobs that can support a middle-class family. With that, I will take your questions. I wanted to get the White House's response to what is happening in Turkey right now, particularly Erdogan questioning the legitimacy of the protestors in what seems to be an increased police reaction to those protests. We continue to follow the events in Turkey closely and with concern. As we stated from the outset last week, the United States supports full freedom of expression and assembly, including the right to peaceful protest, as fundamental to any democracy. We believe that the vast majority of the protestors have been peaceful, law-abiding, ordinary citizens exercising their rights. The United States has serious concerns about the reports of excessive use of force by police and large numbers of injuries and damage to property. We call on these events to be investigated and to urge all parties to refrain from provoking violence. Has the President spoken with Erdogan since these protests started? I have no calls to report. I refer you to the State Department for any outreach that they might have had with the Turks, but no calls from here to report. And just more broadly, given Turkey is important to so many of the issues that the U.S. deals with in that part of the world, how key is stability in Turkey to the President? And look, all democracies have issues that they need to work through and we would expect the government to work through this in a way that respects the rights of their citizens. I think that we continue to work with Turkey on a range of issues -- as a NATO ally and as a key player in the region -- and we look forward to doing that. And just on a totally separate topic -- Darrell Issa over the weekend called you a paid liar for the administration.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1201, "text": "I wanted to give you an opportunity to respond to his comment. I had not heard that. I am not going to get into a back and forth with Chairman Issa. I think that what our focus is and has been is the need to find out all the inappropriate activity that occurred; make sure, as the President insists, that those who are responsible for inappropriate, outrageous activity be held accountable; that processes are put into place at the IRS so that something like this cannot happen again. The President acted, as you know, in response to the independent Inspector General's report by making clear that he was outraged by the behavior; by acting quickly to install new leadership at the IRS; by instructing that new leadership to conduct a thorough review that would examine the behavior, hold those accountable who were responsible for it, and to examine the overall culture at the IRS to make sure that these kinds of things cannot happen again. I would note that when I spoke about the situation I was referring to the findings of the independent Inspector General, who -- let us be clear -- said that he both in testimony and in his report found no evidence that outsiders -- those outside the IRS -- influenced the behavior that took place there. That is the conclusion of the independent Inspector General, and we certainly have seen no other evidence to contradict that. However, the President is interested in getting all the facts, and that is why he has instructed that the new leadership at the IRS conduct this review. We are interested in legitimate congressional oversight. That is an important component in a situation like this to finding all the facts and making sure that remedial action is taken. And, as you know, there is a criminal investigation that is being undertaken by the Department of Justice. So I think there is ample demonstration of this administration's interest in getting all the facts and holding those who are responsible accountable. To follow up on Turkey, does the unrest in Turkey make it harder to deal with the Syria situation? Well, we work very closely with Turkey on the situation in Syria, with our allies and partners in the region, and we will continue to do that. I believe, as I said, that the -- we expect and we believe that the Turkish government will appropriately work through this situation. We call on the events that occurred to be investigated and urge all parties to refrain from provoking violence. And we think that the right of free expression and assembly, those rights are fundamental to democracy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1202, "text": "And we have concerns about some of the response, but we certainly expect the Turkish government to work through this. It is important to note that, I believe in the article you are referring to, the Chief of Staff was quoted on the record, and in that statement he spoke for the President and he spoke for all of us. And he said that, The President and his team at the White House believe that the Attorney General has the intellect, experience, and integrity to efficiently run the Department of Justice and not get distracted by the partisans who seem more interested in launching political attacks than cooperating with him to protect the security and constitutional rights of the American people. And I think I could not say it any better, so I quoted the Chief of Staff saying it. Just to button down the Issa thing, finally -- they point specifically to two instances in the briefing where you said on May 21st, referred to apparent conduct by our IRS officials in Cincinnati; and on May 20th, line IRS employees in Cincinnati improperly scrutinized 501- organizations. Those are the findings of the audit conducted by the independent Inspector General, correct? I was citing -- and perhaps there are issues that the Chairman has with the IG. I was citing the findings of the independent Inspector General. The President responded I think with appropriate concern and took immediate action, and is continuing to direct those who are responsible for these matters to take action. Again, the Inspector General concluded in his report and testified to this before Congress that he found no evidence of outside influence on the behavior that was of such great concern to all of us at the IRS. It is also important to note the President has instructed the new acting commissioner of the IRS to conduct a review that looks at this activity; holds responsible those who were responsible for it -- holds accountable those who are responsible for it; and takes measures to ensure that it cannot happen again. Separately, we are cooperating with legitimate congressional oversight. Separately, the Department of Justice has launched a criminal investigation. So I think it is important to stick to the facts, look at the work that has been done and build on it -- which is what this President wants to do, what the new acting commissioner wants to do, the Treasury Secretary wants to do. And we certainly hope that that is what the congressional oversight committees hope to do. Robert Gibbs, this morning, called on Darrell Issa to apologize to you. Do you expect or want an apology? And is this the kind of language you think is productive?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1203, "text": "I appreciate those who have spoken in my defense, but I would simply say that I am not interested in having a back and forth with Chairman Issa. I am interested in what the President is interested in, in this matter, which is that we take action to ensure that this activity does not happen again; we take action to hold accountable those who are responsible for it; we cooperate with legitimate congressional oversight; and we obviously cooperate with any investigation that the Department of Justice is undertaking. And, again, I do not want to get into a back and forth. And just finally, this weekend, David Plouffe sent out a Tweet that is pretty inflammatory in itself, bringing up old allegations against Darrell Issa. Is that the kind of back and forth that is actually productive, moving the agenda forward? I would simply say that I am not interested in that back and forth -- or having a back and forth with the Chairman. I, again, as I think we have just discussed, spoke very carefully and specifically about the findings of the independent Inspector General in his lengthy review of the conduct at the IRS. I spoke, in fact, quite clearly that we have seen no evidence that contradicts the findings of the independent Inspector General. I would point you to the testimony of the former IRS Commissioner that makes clear the lack of involvement of people outside of the IRS, to his knowledge and in his view. And, again, we have no information that would contradict that. The President's focus is on taking action to hold accountable those who are responsible for this behavior, taking action to ensure that it never happens again, because it is very important that the American people have faith that the IRS applies our tax laws fairly across the country. And that is why he was so outraged by the actions that were reported by the Inspector General, and that is why he has acted in response in the way that he has. So, ENTITY, on a different IRS subject -- has the President seen the IG report -- it was supposed to come out tomorrow -- which talks about waste at the IRS and it talks about, in fact, the IRS employees using presidential suites at conferences. Well, in answer to your question, we have not seen the report, but, no, he does not think that conduct is appropriate. I would point you to statements released by the acting IRS Commissioner, Danny Werfel, who says, This conference is an unfortunate vestige from a prior era.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1204, "text": "Taxpayers should take comfort that a conference like this would not take place today. Sweeping new spending restrictions have been put place at the IRS, and travel and training expenses have dropped more than 80 percent since 2010, and similar large-scale meetings did not take place in 2011, 2012, or 2013. And, second, I would point out that the President has made creating an efficient and effective government a priority, a cornerstone of his administration. He believes that everyone in this administration must take their role as stewards of the taxpayer dollar very seriously. That is why in May of 2012 the administration outlined a series of actions for reining in spending and increasing both transparency and oversight of federal conference and travel activity. The federal government spending on travel, which includes conference activity, was reduced by more than $1 billion in fiscal year 2012 as compared to fiscal year 2010. On travel spending, agencies have lowered their spending on travel -- compared to FY 2010 levels -- by roughly $2 billion. The Department of Agriculture, for example, reduced travel costs by over $125 million. The Drug Enforcement Administration implemented mandatory policy guidance requiring employees to use lowest-available fares for air travel, and due to this policy alone, DEA achieved over $6.5 million in savings in fiscal year 2012. These are examples that illustrated a commitment the President has to wringing out waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars. And it is important to note that Danny Werfel, who is now the acting commissioner over at the IRS, oversaw that process at the OMB when he was at the OMB. How important is this to the White House, a report like this, because of the confidence that is needed in the IRS in order to perform its duties? It does not have enough agents to investigate all of us. It depends upon public trust. Are you concerned that public trust is, in fact, being hurt by both of these scandals? And especially, is, in fact, the IRS a broken agency at this time that needs a thorough review? The answer is the President is very concerned by the activity that has been reported by the independent Inspector General with regards to the targeting of conservative groups applying for tax exempt status. He is concerned by -- and has been -- excessive spending by the IRS and other agencies when it comes to conferences and travel, and has taken action accordingly. It is very important, and your question implies this, that the American people have faith that the IRS in particular is applying our tax laws in a fair and responsible way.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1205, "text": "And that is why he has ordered a review after installing new leadership at the IRS, and he expects that review to be unsparing and to hold accountable people who are responsible for inappropriate conduct. And we will also cooperate with congressional oversight, and we, of course, will cooperate with the Department of Justice's criminal investigation into this matter. But it is precisely because of the President's concern that he articulated right away after the IG report was released that these actions are being undertaken. Do you believe that Chairman Issa is contributing to trust in the IRS with his oversight by insisting he believes the orders to target conservative groups came out of Washington? Again, I do not want to get into a back and forth. We believe that there is an important role to be played by Congress through legitimate oversight. We take this matter very seriously, which is why the President has ordered the actions that he has ordered, and why the new acting commissioner of the IRS is proceeding with the review that this President and the Secretary of the Treasury committed him to perform. It is why we will cooperate with both congressional oversight and Justice Department investigations -- because this is a serious matter and it needs to be addressed. And I think that when it comes to getting the facts, we need to get them and not make judgments before we have all the facts. And I think that that is why we made the decision to wait for the publication of the independent Inspector General's report. Even though the issue itself had become public and there was a great demand for comment on it, we believed it was the right thing to do not to comment on it before it was public because it would have been inappropriate in our view to in any way intervene in a process that was not complete. And that is what we did. And when that report became public, the President acted very quickly and he spoke very clearly about his outrage over this conduct. Is the Congress exercising legitimate oversight? Do you see legitimate oversight? Again, I am not going to get into a play-by-play or a review of congressional activity day by day, but I believe that congressional oversight -- we believe that congressional oversight is important when it is legitimate, and we think that this is a matter that should be looked at by Congress through the process of legitimate congressional oversight.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1206, "text": "But we think it is important to stay focused on what we know, what the facts are, the information we know from the report conducted by the independent Inspector General, and then to build on that through the review being overseen by the new commissioner at the IRS, through the congressional oversight role and through the investigation undertaken by the Department of Justice. On another subject -- can you comment on Ezra Klein's book indicating that the President has agreed to support his former Secretary of State in 2016? I confess that I was not aware of that report, but I will run out and buy the book or purchase it online. I can assure you the President is not thinking about the next presidential election, having just recently won the last one. If I could ask you quickly, ENTITY, about the -- considering the White House's fierce efforts to try to stop leaks in terms of national security secrets and the like, today, Bradley Manning's trial begins and I wanted to get a sense from you. His attorney said just a short time ago -- he described him as a young, nave, but well-intentioned man. What is the White House's perspective on Bradley Manning, given the fact that you guys are prosecuting this -- the administration is? Inherent in your question is the recognition that there is an ongoing trial, so I could not comment on an ongoing trial. I would refer you to the prosecutors in the Department of Justice on that matter. It is certainly our view -- broadly speaking, not referring to any specific case -- that leaks of national security -- sensitive national security information, classified information, can be very harmful to our national security interests. I want to ask you quickly about the comments we heard from the President a short time ago as part of this mental health conference taking place today. He said that the VA is partnering with 24 communities in nine states to help, among other things, reduce wait times, to provide better access to mental health care for veterans; that they have recently hired 1,600 mental health providers and there are going to be, I think, 150 summits that he referred to today. I would have to refer you to HHS and to the VA. I do not have that information for you. It is a component of our gun violence problem. That is why this conference was a piece of the executive action, a portion of the report that the Vice President put together and the President has acted on when it comes to reducing gun violence in America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1207, "text": "But, obviously, it touches on a range of issues that -- not just limited to gun violence, but a range of issues. And then on that topic, is the White House concerned that furloughs that we have now learned are taking place already at Walter Reed, I think at Fort Belvoir, that 3,500 civil employees are going to be furloughed at those places? That accounts for like 94 percent at Walter Reed. Are you concerned about the impact that will have on services for veterans, including mental health? Well, I do not know enough about the specific breakdowns of the furloughs and the effects or impacts in different areas to say with any specificity about what harm might be done. It is certainly the case that the furloughs caused by sequester are having effects across the country -- real consequences for real people. We have seen it in reports about the elimination, in some cases, of Meals on Wheels programs or the sharp reduction in the provision of Meals on Wheels programs for seniors. We have seen it in the elimination of slots for Head Start children. And certainly we are seeing it in areas affected by the Defense budget. And we knew that this would be the case, and that is why implementing bad policy was always a bad idea -- not something to be celebrated, not something to call a political victory for the tea party or any party, because there are real people who suffer the consequences of these arbitrary, across-the-board cuts -- unnecessary cuts in the sense that we can and should do better by making wise decisions about how we reduce our deficit, reducing it in a balanced way, the way that the President has been forward again and again in his budget proposals and in his offers to Republican leaders on Capitol Hill. And the President certainly hopes that we can reach a compromise on budget issues that prevents this from continuing to happen. Chuck Schumer said, I think on Meet the Press , that he basically predicted by July 4th that as many as 70 senators would pass a bipartisan immigration bill through the Senate, acknowledging there are going to be some challenges when it reaches the House. Marco Rubio, though, today said that the immigration bill needs improvements to pass. So I am curious what improvements the President thinks need to be made to help this pass. I'd say a few things. One, the President continues to be encouraged by the progress being made in the Senate on comprehensive immigration reform.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1208, "text": "That process has now passed through committee, and we look forward to a robust debate and expect the legislation to move forward in a timely manner. As we have said, the Senate legislation may not contain every specific element we have called for, but it does represent an important step towards the broad principles the President has made clear need to be part of common-sense immigration reform. And so we look forward to continuing to work with Congress as the bill moves forward, and we will continue to advance the President's priorities as part of that process. But that process is ongoing; a lot of work remains to be done. We believe that the bill that emerged from committee reflects the President's principles, and we believe that the bill that passes through the Senate, with bipartisan support, should and needs to reflect the President's principles. And we will be engaged in that process as it moves through the Senate and beyond. But I think it is important to note that there is a lot of work to be done here, and we have seen with a variety of issues over time that victory can be declared early. And this is real work because it is something that requires bipartisan broad support. That support exists, the President believes, but it requires some elbow grease and some real grit and determination to get from here to completion. ENTITY, a minute ago you mentioned the reductions in government travel costs. Well, broadly speaking, the White House, as you know, has been affected by this sequester, and measures have been taken both to reduce costs here, as well as we have had to have furloughs in the White House Office. The President is President of the United States 24 hours a day and 7 days a week, as was the case with every one of the President's predecessors. And the nature of -- the way that he travels is very much a part of the office that he holds and is a requirement of that office, and he needs to be able to conduct his presidency in order to fulfill his obligation to the American people and the oath he took. So we are, in a variety of ways that I think OMB and others have spelled out, and I can -- and we can get you more information on that if you'd like -- taking action to reduce costs to deal with the sequester and some of that action includes furloughs. But I do not have anything more specific for you on that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1209, "text": "Later this week, the President meets with the President of China out in California. It is supposed to be partly a getting-acquainted session, but the President is also going to be bringing up hacking -- computer hacking and so forth. Does the President want to come away from that meeting with some deliverables? Well, I would, first of all, make the point that the President is acquainted with President Xi. They met prior to President Xi's accession to the presidency. But it is important now that he holds that office and President Obama has recently been reelected for this meeting to take place. And President Obama very much looks forward to it. There is a broad array of topics that the two leaders will discuss, and certainly, cybersecurity will be one of them. I would say that this is a discussion, and we are not trying to telegraph specific actions or so-called deliverables. The relationship that we have with China is broad and complex, and it is very important for these kinds of meetings to take place for that relationship to be developed, for us to work on greater cooperation where we have been able to cooperate, find new areas to cooperate, and also confront directly those areas where we disagree. And that has been the approach of this administration in our relations with China from the time the President took office. Did he come back saying it is going to be really tough on -- talking on this subject? National Security Advisor Tom Donilon had an excellent visit to China where he met with an array of top government officials and military officials and obviously reported back to the President on that meeting. And the President's meeting with President Xi will build upon the meetings that National Security Advisor Donilon had. Is he going to be asking Congress to do something specific? I do not want to preview the event or the President's remarks more than I just did except to say broadly that, yes, the President believes Congress should be focused on what the American people are focused on. Again, I am not going to preview specifics from the President's event or the remarks, but there are a variety of actions that we believe Congress ought to join us in moving on. You heard the President address some of those, I believe, in his weekly address. And there is ample room for bipartisan action on an agenda that would strengthen the middle class, provide it more security and help it expand.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1210, "text": "And the middle class -- middle-class opportunity is the absolute cornerstone of our economy, and it has been the primary focus of the President's domestic policy since the day he took office. It is the primary focus of his economic and domestic agenda in his second term. And it is an important thing to remember that even as we deal with an array of issues here in Washington, that this is the thing -- this is the set of issues that the American people broadly care most deeply about because it affects their capacity to have and keep a job that can sustain a middle-class life; their capacity to send their children to college; their capacity to take care of their mothers and fathers as they grow old. And the President is deeply concerned about and focused on the need to make the middle class more secure and to create more opportunity for the middle class. So that is why this event is taking place on Thursday. It is part of a series that he will be engaged in, and he absolutely expects Congress to join him in taking action to assist and empower the middle class. To that end, could you tell us if the shrinking of the deficit is making it harder for the President to get the bipartisan deal that he wants with Republicans in order to make all the investments that he talks about on these trips? I mean, he is been searching for people to negotiate with him, but the deficit is coming down without either side doing anything. So is that having an effect? Let me take issue with that last sentence, because the deficit is coming down as sharply as it has been because the President and Congress did do something. They took direct action in 2009 that prevented a catastrophic recession from becoming a depression. They took direct action to pass the Affordable Care Act, which has, by any measure, helped bring down the growth in the cost of health care. They took direct action to write and pass a Wall Street reform law that will ensure that the kind of financial crisis that so battered our economy and the global economy cannot happen again. They took direct action to save the American automobile industry, an industry that is very much a part of American history and our sense of who we are, and also a great engine for economic growth and job creation. So let me be clear about that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1211, "text": "But the President thinks we need to continue to take action to invest in our economy so it grows -- to ensure that the jobs we need for the 21st century are created here; to ensure that we are taking action to enhance our energy independence; and to reduce our deficit in a responsible way -- to continue to reduce our deficit in a responsible way. And he has had a number of conversations with Republican lawmakers about the need to find common ground on achieving just that. But he has always looked at it as part of an overall approach to economic policy that is focused first and foremost on economic growth and job creation; and as part of that project, responsible deficit reduction. So he believes that we can do that. He believes that there are Republicans who want to do that, and we just have to see if there is a coalescing of will to make it happen. You have seen the President's offers. They were very explicit in his budget -- very explicit in his budget as a reflection of the offer he made at the end of last year. And the offer is on the table, and it demonstrates the President's willingness to compromise, demonstrates the seriousness with which he approaches these issues, and he hopes that he will find partners in moving it forward. Earlier this spring, a lot of attention was paid to the so-called charm offensive . The President took Republican lawmakers out to dinner and had meetings with them and called them on the phone. Well, first of all, it cannot be one time if there were a series of meetings and conversations and dinners. It was fairly recently that Senator McCain -- who is obviously a leading Republican in the Senate and a major player on a variety of key issues, both domestic and national security -- was here visiting the President. And we will continue to have those engagements both at the presidential level and at the sub-presidential level. The President is sincere in this effort. He believes that we can find common ground, both on deficit reduction and budget issues as well as on immigration reform -- because some of these conversations and meetings the President has had with Republican lawmakers have not just been on deficit reduction and budgets, they have been on immigration reform. They were and will continue to be, hopefully, on ways we can reduce gun violence. They will be on and have been on ways that we can invest in our economy and build out our infrastructure to create jobs now and help our economy grow in the future. Are there some more recent engagements you can tell us about?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1212, "text": "You mean in the last few days? You cannot declare something over after a few days, Phil. I think that we need to -- everybody needs to take a breath. And I know that the media cycle is what it is, but the President is fully engaged with members of Congress in both parties and will continue to be. And he has pressed with -- in every one of these meetings, for a willingness to find common ground. He has shown his willingness to compromise, and he has been encouraged by the sentiments expressed by some Republican lawmakers to do the same. And where there are opportunities to find that compromise and get something done on behalf of the American people, the President will seize them, and he will continue to have those conversations in search of them. I want to go back to China. It was not clear to me from your answer to Roger's question whether there will be deliverables come out of that. And just what would you expect to come out of it? Can you tell us anything about the format over Friday evening and Saturday? Well, we will have more details about the specifics of the engagements and the conversations. But the two Presidents plan to discuss the full range of diplomatic, economic and security issues on the U.S.-China agenda -- from the perspective of identifying shared interests and finding ways to work together to solve regional and global challenges, and discussing how to manage differences in a manner that ensures a stable and productive bilateral relationship. They will talk about their domestic economic situations -- these are the two largest economies in the world -- and the steps that each will take to promote sustained international -- sustained, rather, and balanced global growth because of the impact that these two economies have on global growth. I think it is important, while I wanted to assure Roger that it was not just a get-to-know-you session, that this is more -- it is deeper than that; that this is not a 1970s-style summit where there are pre-negotiated outcomes. This is very much part of an ongoing engagement that we have with the Chinese leadership at the presidential level and at all the levels in government. And it is very important, because of the size of our economies, the interdependence that we have as engines of global economic growth, the various issues where we cooperate, and the various issues where we do not see eye to eye on all things. I am not sure that we have announced anything yet.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1213, "text": "We have been working through that, and hopefully we will have more specifics for you in the near future. How might this redefine the whole Asia pivot? Because up until now, it is been really a -- seemed to be that the United States reasserting itself in the Pacific Rim region, reassuring the other Pacific Rim nations that it stands as a bulwark against China. So how does this fit this effort to sort of reset relations with the two leaders more personal? How does that fit into the more general Asia policy? We have made clear, or tried to, that our rebalancing, our pivoting to Asia has not been against any nation, not against China, but for the important role that the United States has traditionally and needs to continue to play in that region. The President made clear as a candidate and after he took office that he felt that we had, as a nation, turned away from Asia because of our largely understandable focus on the Middle East, but that that came at a cost to long-term U.S. interests. And he was determined to rebalance our foreign policy and our international economic policy in a way that made clear the importance that Asia -- the importance of Asia and the role that Asia plays in the 21st century, both economically and on security matters. But this is not a zero-sum thing; it is not against China at all. And that is why our engagement with China is part of the overall rebalancing, part of the focus on Asia that we need as a nation because of the explosive economic growth in the region, because of the huge potential in the region, because of the need to maintain stability and foster the expansion of economic growth and human rights in the region. So we -- it does not contrast with the effort we have been making; it complements it in our view. And I would note that, throughout this period, we have -- the President has engaged frequently with his Chinese counterpart, President Xi's predecessor. And we have, as an administration, have engaged with Chinese leadership all along, even as we have engaged in Asia and deepened our presence in Asia in a variety of different ways with a variety of different nations. Does the President have a view on this issue? The Supreme Court decided today whether the police have a right to take DNA samples from people who are being booked, who have been arrested as opposed to having to wait until they have been -- I have not had that conversation with him.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1214, "text": "The decision had come down before the meeting I had with him or that I was in with him, but it did not come up in the meeting, so I do not know. I do not know that we will have a comment on the case from here, but if we do, we will be sure to get it to you. Following up on Supreme Court issues and matters -- the Supreme Court is supposed to make a decision on voting rights, whether to uphold certain portions of voting rights. Is the White House expecting -- bracing for disappointment on that? Because as late as February, some persons within the administration were saying that they did not hold out a lot of hope. Well, I do not want to prejudge a decision that has not been produced yet by the Supreme Court, so I will not do that. But this is obviously an issue that we consider very important and we will look with interest upon the decision. But before we see it, I think I will refrain from commenting on it. This weekend was very loud with that quote, paid liar. I did not know what you meant by very loud, but okay. That quote was very loud -- I am just telling you -- and it brought you into focus, and you are the mouthpiece for the President and his White House. Did the President talk to you about that? April, I will not get into my personal conversations with the President. I can just tell you that I am not interested in a back and forth with the Chairman. I am interested in what I believe most who in Washington are looking at this issue are interested in, which is what the President's focus is on, which is that we need to get -- make sure we know everything that happened here and that those who were responsible for inappropriate conduct are held accountable, and that actions are taken so that it does not happen again. So I appreciate the effort to get me to get into a back and forth , but I am not going to do it. That is not bringing you into a back and forth. I mean, you talked about the back and forth in the front row. I am now asking you, as the person who is the speaker for the White House beyond -- I mean, you are the first line, I guess, before the President, and you have now been brought into the fray with this with your spin. Did the President discuss this with you after that quote became so loud this weekend?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjaycarney234", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jay Carney", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney-234", "publication_date": "03-06-2013", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Jay Carney"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1221, "text": "Let me ask you, first of all, when you heard the story of a 6year-old boy in Michigan, a first grader bringing a gun to school and shooting to death his 6year-old classmate, what was your reaction? Well, first, I think I had a normal human reaction. I was just as a parent I was heartbroken, and then I was angry. I thought, you know, how did this child get the gun in the first place? What is a 6-year-old doing with a gun? When something like this happens, politicians often jump on it as an excuse for more gun control. But I know that, ENTITY, you are very proud of pointing out that gun deaths have dropped to their lowest levels in more than 30 years in this country. So should we view this more as a tragedy than a reason to call for more gun control? The gun death rate has dropped to its lowest point in 30 years, but it is still by far the highest of any advanced nation in the world. And if we had passed the child trigger lock provision and we applied it to all new guns, then at least those guns would not be used by 6-year-olds to kill other 6-yearolds. That is a part of this bill, which also closes the gun show loophole in the background check law, bans the import of large ammunition clips, that the Congress has had for 8 months now with no action. So I am going to call the leaders of both parties in both Houses and ask them to come down here and break the logjam. There is been a House version and a Senate version of this bill for 8 months, and they have done nothing, and meanwhile, 13 kids every day every single day there are 13 children who die from guns in this country. So I do think we need more legislation. Well, why is it locked in committee, why has it been stalemated? And when would you like them to come to the White House? Well, I think it is been locked in committee because the Senate the Vice President cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate, so we got a tough bill in spite of fierce lobbying against it by the NRA. And the two Houses cannot resolve their differences. We need these child trigger locks on the new handguns. That will begin to make a big difference.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkatiecouricnbcstodayshow", "title": "Interview With Katie Couric of NBC's Today Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-katie-couric-nbcs-today-show", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1222, "text": "And then in this year's budget, I have asked them to fund some more research into smart gun technology, which would enable us to have guns that could only be fired by the adults who own them. One of the things that is being debated in Michigan is whether there should be parental accountability provisions. We had provisions in our law for that, so that all States would have these laws several do, but most do not and those were taken out, so maybe they will be revisited in the conference as well. But the main thing is, if we can just get the child trigger locks and fund investment in the smart gun technology, I think we will be a long way down the road. Of course, I think ultimately what we ought to do is license handgun owners the way we license people who drive cars. And I hope that we will consider that, as well. Now, this guy stole a gun, apparently that is the allegation in the house where the child took it. But it would clearly make a big difference in the future to people's lives. What about registering guns? All Americans are required to register their cars. You could do that, but the problem is there are over 200 million guns out there; some say 250 million guns out there now. And most of the experts with whom I talked before I made my proposal believe that if we required all handgun owners to be licensed, we could achieve the same results. That is, whether you have got an old gun or you are buying a new gun, if people could come in when they do get new guns and get a license, then I believe we'd have the same result. I am not sure, practically, that we could get all the guns registered in this country because there are so many out there already. So I'd like to begin with that. You know, keep in mind, we had all those kids die at Columbine, and when I fought for the Brady bill which has kept a half a million felons, fugitives, and stalkers from getting guns and the assault weapons ban, about somewhere between 8 and 12 Members of Congress were defeated in the next election by the NRA because they voted for that. And then when all those kids were killed at Columbine, I thought, surely, we can close the gun show loophole, have the child safety locks, and maybe have the parental responsibility provisions and ban ammunition clips. And those bills have been just lingering up there for 8 months.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkatiecouricnbcstodayshow", "title": "Interview With Katie Couric of NBC's Today Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-katie-couric-nbcs-today-show", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1223, "text": "I do not think most Americans have any idea what a stranglehold the NRA has had on this Congress. And the people in our party have taken the lead, with a few brave Republicans, in trying to fight for sensible legislation. But we need the public aroused on this. I would not be opposed to registering guns, as well, but I just want you to understand there are practical problems with that, and you get most of the benefit if you license the gun owners. So I would like to see us start with that. When it comes to licensing, ENTITY, Wayne LaPierre, who you know is the executive vice president of the NRA, said, quote, Criminals are not going to stand in line to get their photos taken. They are not going to stand in line stand, rather, for licenses. You are walking way out on a limb. Well, you could say that about people with automobile licenses, too. But when people do not have gun licenses and they are found with guns and they are in violation of the law for that, very often you can get them before they commit a crime. If the facts, as they have been reported, are true about the tragic circumstances in which this 6-year-old boy lived and have the even more tragic consequence of killing that totally innocent young girl this man apparently stole that gun. But the point is, he could never get a license to carry a handgun. But meanwhile, is it practically possible to check every gun owner in America to see if he or she is carrying a license? Well, none of these things will happen instantaneously, overnight. But yet, they will begin to make a difference. Look, when we passed the Brady bill, ENTITY, let me remind you, people said, Well, this will not make any difference, because criminals do not get their guns at gun stores. It turned out, a lot of them did. It turned out we were able to deny 500,000 people who were trying to buy handguns the right to do so because they were felons, fugitives, and stalkers. Now, there are a lot of kids alive and there are a lot of adults alive in America because we did that. Now a lot of them are using the gun shows or these urban flea markets.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkatiecouricnbcstodayshow", "title": "Interview With Katie Couric of NBC's Today Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-katie-couric-nbcs-today-show", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1224, "text": "If we close that loophole, do the background check there, license new handgun owners license excuse me handgun owners, and put safety locks, these trigger locks on the guns to protect the kids and then the next big step is to technologically develop guns that can only be fired by their lawful owners we can turn this situation around. But like I said, we have got over 200 million guns out there. We are losing 13 kids a day. The accidental rate of children that is another thing I'd like the American people to think about. The rate of kids being killed by accident with guns is 9 times higher in America than that of the next 24 biggest countries combined combined. So we have not done nearly enough, and we need to identify these things and just systematically go do them. None of them interfere with the right of any lawful citizen to hunt or to engage in sport shooting. And it is an unbelievable thing, after what we saw clearly at Columbine and all the problems that were there, that 8 months have gone by, and the Congress cannot act. And the reason they cannot act is because of the heat the NRA has put on them. ENTITY, why have not you publicly asked gun manufacturers to produce these so-called smart guns voluntarily? Let me say, we are getting some support from responsible gun manufacturers. Many of them have already said they want to put the child safety locks on their new guns. Many of them are engaged in this technology. But what I want to do is to have the Government also fund some of the research, just as we funded the initial research that led to the Internet, just as we fund the initial research that is leading to the sequencing of the human genome. A lot of this basic research to solve big national problems often starts with Government funding. So I'd like to see the Government do its part. But I have asked the gun manufacturers to do so. And some of the responsible manufacturers have already said, Yes, we are going to go with the child safety locks, and we want the smart gun technology. All the Presidential candidates seem to agree on this point, so you would think it could be accomplished. What is the NRA's biggest beef, in your estimation, about the technology that would enable only the person who owns a gun to actually fire it? Well, first of all, I do not think that is accurate, that all the Presidential candidates do. Well, George W. Bush favors trigger locks, I understand.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkatiecouricnbcstodayshow", "title": "Interview With Katie Couric of NBC's Today Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-katie-couric-nbcs-today-show", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1225, "text": "Senator McCain voted against the Brady bill. But he says he favors technology that would enable the gun user to wear a special bracelet. He said that last night. They were against the Brady bill. They are against extending closing the gun show loophole. They are against the licensing of handgun owners. But nobody could be against technology. So I hope that we can get 100 percent of the Congress to at least vote for the research and the new technology. What is the NRA's biggest beef about smart guns? I do not know that they will be against smart guns, but they are basically against anything that requires anybody to do anything as a member of society that helps to make it safer. That is, if they were making this argument on car licensing or licensing of car drivers, they would say that everybody has an individual right to drive a car, and therefore, no lawful car owner should be required to undergo the terrible burden of getting a car license because there are some people who are irresponsible and should not be driving cars. They are saying guns are special, guns are different than cars, and the rights of individual citizens are far, far more important than the safety of society as a whole. That is their argument, and I just disagree with them. An NRA spokesman actually told us last night that this is not about making guns safer, it is about prosecuting criminals, and that your Justice Department has not done enough in that area. Well, we have increased gun prosecution since I have been here, and we have a lot of people in jail for it. All I can tell you is, we have a higher percentage of people in jail than all the other advanced countries, and they have a lower gun death rate. That is because they do not have an NRA in their country, and they take sensible steps to protect children and society as a whole from people having guns who should not have them, doing things they should not do with them. You have got to keep guns away from criminals and children if you want a safe society. Look, if the NRA were arguing years ago in this vein, they'd be against airport metal detectors because, after all, everybody most people that go through airport metal detectors are innocent. Why should we burden them with having to go through and empty their pockets and take out their money clips and all that because there is just a few criminals around? And you know, you are interfering with their individual rights to walk on an airplane.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkatiecouricnbcstodayshow", "title": "Interview With Katie Couric of NBC's Today Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-katie-couric-nbcs-today-show", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1226, "text": "You should not burden an individual law-abiding handgun owner, because most of them are lawful, just because there are a few criminals. But the point is that society takes steps with speed limits, with licensing laws, with airport metal detectors, and any number of other ways, where we all make a little bit of sacrifice in time and effort to comply with a system that makes us all freer. And we still get to do our lawful activity. So I just think they are wrong about that. They are saying that guns are different guns are different than cars, guns are different than any other area of our national life where we seek for common safety, we protect ourselves from the people who would abuse our liberty, abuse our freedom, and abuse our safety. And I just think they are wrong about this, and I hope that a majority of the Congress will agree. And I hope that more and more members of the Republican Party will agree. As I say, we have had some few brave members of the Republican Party that have joined the vast majority of Democrats in trying to responsibly deal with this without in any way undermining the right of people to do legitimate hunting or sport shooting activities. And we can do this. ENTITY, before we go, in closing, when do you plan to invite congressional leaders to the White House to discuss the juvenile justice bill? Well, I'd like them to come down next week, as soon as we can set it up, because we are running out of time, and we need to get out of this terrible logjam. And I hope that these tragedies will give a little impulse, a profound sense of obligation to do that. As again I say, nobody is trying to interfere with individual rights here. What we are trying to do is to promote the common safety of the American people, and we are not nearly safe enough. All you have got to do is look at these incidents. Can we eliminate every problem? Is there a silver bullet that will solve it overnight? Can we save a lot of lives, including a lot of children, 13 every day 13 funerals a day? We really appreciate it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkatiecouricnbcstodayshow", "title": "Interview With Katie Couric of NBC's Today Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-katie-couric-nbcs-today-show", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1247, "text": "Talking about your trip specifically to Singapore, how happy are you with the measures that Singapore has taken, specifically regarding terrorism? And what are your concerns about the residual threat in the region? First, I am very happy with the Government of Singapore's response to terrorism. They understand the task at hand, and they understand the dangers. Prime Minister Goh and I have had some great conversations about the region. He keeps me abreast of his views of different players in the region and what is going on. Of course we are concerned about terrorism in the region, because, after all, there is been attacks in the region. I remind our own citizens here that we are still focused on September the 11th as kind of the defining terrorist moment, but there have been a lot of attacks. And the Bali bombing is a classic example of the terrorist activities, and that happens to come in Southeast Asia. The Prime Minister and the Government are concerned, obviously, about those kind of attacks. We will have a good discussion about it. He is got a lot to offer, a lot of advice to offer, a lot of wisdom, and I listen to it. ENTITY, have your APEC partners done enough to help the United States in Iraq? Well, we can always use more. And as a matter of fact, the Japanese are going to make an announcement. We are out there working hard to convince others to participate in the reconstruction effort in Iraq. It is in their interests that Iraq be free and peaceful. And the reason it is, is because the region needs democracy. The region needs an example of what can happen in a peaceful society. The region needs something alternative to a type of society which breeds terrorism. Clearly, the region is also concerned about North Korea. You have described Saddam Hussein as a madman and a danger, and he was deposed by force. You have also said that you loathe Kim Chong-il, and he has a known nuclear program. Because, first of all, remember in Iraq, we spent 11 years' or so worth of resolutions and discussions and diplomacy trying to convince Saddam Hussein to disarm. I believe we can solve the issue on the North Korean-with the North Korean issue on the Korean Peninsula peacefully. As a matter of fact, we are making great strides toward that. You might remember, up until recent history, the whole issue is the United States and North Korea. And the Government signed an agreement with North Korea, and they did not tell the truth.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmalcolmbrownsingaporeschannelnewsasia", "title": "Interview With Malcolm Brown of Singapore's Channel NewsAsia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-malcolm-brown-singapores-channel-newsasia", "publication_date": "14-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1248, "text": "So I have decided to come with a new strategy, and that is, rather than just the United States being the interlocutor with North Korea, we convince others in the neighborhood, like the Chinese and the Russians and the Japanese and the South Koreans. This will be a major part of our discussions in APEC, to keep this group together, to speak with one voice, and that is, to Kim Chong-il, Get rid of your nuclear ambitions. It is in all our interests we do so. And we are making progress. Now he is hearing at least five voices, not just one. Force is the last resort for the United States, not the first resort. It is the last option, and I am very hopeful that we can make good progress on this issue. On China, how do you see their space program? Is it a threat to the U.S.? I do not necessarily see it as a threat. I think it is a country that is now beginning to emerge as a sophisticated country, and it is got great potential. I hope that they are able to make discoveries in space, like we did, that will-the technology that will come out of that will help mankind. No, I do not view it as a threat. Finally, on a regional trade issue, with New Zealand, you will meet Prime Minister Helen Clark on the sidelines, I understand, at APEC. Why does Australia have negotiations on a FTA , and New Zealand does not ? Is it to do with their nuclear policy? I mean, we have not gotten started with New Zealand. The nuclear policy, obviously, makes it difficult for us to have a military alliance, but we are friends with the New Zealands. We respect the New Zealand people. But Australia is farther along the road when it comes to trade discussions. Prime Minister Howard and I discussed trade at my ranch in Crawford. We hope to get it done by the end of this year. The people of New Zealand should not read anything into it other than, we just have not gotten started. And I respect the people of New Zealand. I respect that great country. I am going to have to call it a day. I think you did a fine job.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmalcolmbrownsingaporeschannelnewsasia", "title": "Interview With Malcolm Brown of Singapore's Channel NewsAsia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-malcolm-brown-singapores-channel-newsasia", "publication_date": "14-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1256, "text": "I appreciate it. I have known you a long time. You have known me a long time. And we have done many of these, but a little bit different position. So, the America First president comes to Davos. globalists, elitists. What will you say when you address not just the globalists and the elitists, but everyone? When you address them, what will be your message? So when I decided to come to Davos I did not think in terms of elitists or globalists. I think I thought in terms of lots of people that want to invest lots of money, and they are all coming back to the United States, they are coming back to America. And I thought of it much more in those terms. After I said that I was going there were massive stories about the elite, and the globalists, and the planes flying in, and everything else. It is not about that. It is about coming to America, investing your money, creating jobs, companies coming in. We are setting records every week, every day we are setting records. Apple now with $350 billion. Most people thought they meant $350 million, which would build a nice plant. But I spoke with Tim Cook and I was very honored. But you remember my campaign, I used to say, I will not consider this great unless Apple starts coming in and really investing big money doing the plants. They are gonna do a lot. You have moved a little towards the center. But so Macron's saying that globalism does not solve problems. Suddenly other countries are saying, you know, We need to take care of, you know, our own country to some extent. So it is almost like the differences between America First and Davos. I think there is plenty of room for you And we love global, but we love home. We have to take care of our home. Now, we have the disadvantage of having spent, as of about a month ago, $7 trillion in the Middle East. And we are still there, and I have beaten ISIS, I have done we have done a good job. Let me tell you about the difference of Davos this year. We have done three three-hour shows, we have about eight guests per hour, so that is , like, 50 or 60 guests.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekernencnbctheworldeconomicforumdavosswitzerland", "title": "Interview with Joe Kernen of CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-kernen-cnbc-the-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland", "publication_date": "26-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1257, "text": "But the one thing most are bringing up and then I want to tell you about if you did not see the Jamie Dimon and the Lloyd Blankfein interview, I want to just tell you what they said about the potential for GDP growth Because those guys might know what they are talking about. But the tax plan has been brought up almost without exception in a positive way by not just the CEOs, but by leaders from other countries even. They maybe they need to look at maybe they need to invest in the United States now because it is a better environment for business. To a large extent, that is why I am here. What did happen that nobody considered is that AT&T started, but they immediately followed Hundreds of companies are giving thousands and thousands of dollars to their workers. And now you have almost 3 million workers that are receiving thousands of dollars. Nobody ever thought that was not, like, in the plan    By the way, the ones that are not doing it, those employees are going like, How about us? They are gonna be doing it, too. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, I know you know him. Not only did he say he thought 3 percent was possible, he said we could get to 4 percent in 2018. Lloyd Blankfein, and I pressed him a little because I said, That was not the outcome the election that you were, I think, hoping for. Now that you have seen what is happened to the stock market, up 40 percent since Election Day, how businesses are growing confidence, are you happy with the outcome?  I do not think they cannot do that. He cannot do it   Maybe the polarization would be less, but he had to concede that the benefits probably outweighed any of the downside of ENTITY Jamie and Lloyd also said 3 percent is possible long term, which we have not heard from all the economists that supposedly I think it'll be much higher than that. So I said and let us see what happens, because as you know, we are getting a report very soon, so we are going to see what that is. But I just happened to ask what we were doing. Because you know, if you look at the real numbers, had I not won, had the Democrat won I am going to be nice the Democrat, I say, won I would consider their last quarter my first quarter. So let us say the first quarter of '17 you had a 1.2 GDP.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekernencnbctheworldeconomicforumdavosswitzerland", "title": "Interview with Joe Kernen of CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-kernen-cnbc-the-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland", "publication_date": "26-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1258, "text": "In the fourth quarter, which is the Obama quarter, you had a 1.8. Before that, you had a 2.8, a 2.2. And it was the worst recovery I guess do they say ever, or since the Great Depression? Now, in my first quarter, which I consider to be the second quarter because I was there now long enough to have made an impact and do not kid yourself, regulations are just as big as the tax cuts. I have cut more regulations than any president in history and I have been here for one year. You can take their term whether it is eight years or 16 years in one instance but you can take anybody you want, in one year, we have cut more regulations. And by the way, there is going to be regulation but they are good, solid, sane regulations. But in quarter two, we had 3.1, and in quarter three, as you know, we had 3.2. But in quarter one, which is the Obama quarter really the last, I would say, Obama quarter, you had 1.2. We were going in the wrong direction. Had the Democrat won the stock market is up almost 50 percent since my election had the Democrat won, I believe you would have been down 50. And you know, a lot of that, regulation. You could not do anything. You could not build I approved immediately the two pipelines, 48,000 jobs Can we talk about the year? So the year, all these things that you have pointed out. But you have been dealing, negotiating now in government instead of in the private sector. And it is been I think lovingly referred to as the swamp by certain And have you learned are you approaching it differently now? Would you give your what would you give yourself in terms of dealing, negotiating with the government versus business? Well, a lot of people have given me an A. Somebody gave me an A-plus. So look, I got the biggest tax plan in our history approved. Have you learned anything? I got rid of the Would you do anything different now? I got rid of the individual mandate, the most the biggest part and the most unpopular thing in Obamacare, which really repeals Obamacare, because it cannot live without the mandate, because that is where a lot of the money came. It was very unfair to people. And we did ANWR . ANWR, Ronald Reagan tried to do it 40 years ago.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekernencnbctheworldeconomicforumdavosswitzerland", "title": "Interview with Joe Kernen of CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-kernen-cnbc-the-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland", "publication_date": "26-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1259, "text": "I mean, everybody's been trying to do ANWR, and I got ANWR done as part of that same bill. So on top of the biggest tax cuts, great reform and the money is coming in. We probably take in $4 trillion from overseas that would never have been able to be here because of regulation. Well, can we talk trade real quickly while we are doing it. So we had solar panels, washing machines. You will they are grown-ups and I think they understand that maybe we had some We have some legitimate right. Would you you going to stick with bilateral or would you ever go back in the multi would TPP, would that ever be possible to look at that again? I like bilateral because if you have a problem, you terminate. When you are in with many countries, like with TPP so you have 12 if we were in you do not have that same, you know, you do not have that same option. But somebody asked me other day would I do TPP. I will give you a big story. I would do TPP if we made a much better deal than we had. We had a horrible deal. NAFTA's a horrible deal, we are renegotiating it. I may terminate NAFTA, I may not. But NAFTA was and I went around and I'd tell stadiums full of people, I will terminate it or renegotiate it. So you might re-enter are you opening up the door to reopening TPP? I would do TPP if we were able to make a substantially better deal. If we did a substantially better deal I would be open to TPP. Are you surprised to hear me say that? But we have to make a better deal Can you give me any indication which way you are leaning? Because there is a lot of people, lot of the CEOs that have been on here, they all seem to acknowledge that it is 30 years later and there is a lot of changes that make a lot of sense, but to not abandon the deal. Hey ENTITY, we have a trade deficit with Mexico. We have a trade deficit with Canada of a substantial amount of money. I have a number but they keep arguing, they keep saying no so I will not say it. I will not tell you it is $17 million, OK? We have a trade deficit with Canada. We have a massive trade deficit with Mexico.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekernencnbctheworldeconomicforumdavosswitzerland", "title": "Interview with Joe Kernen of CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-kernen-cnbc-the-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland", "publication_date": "26-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1260, "text": "Are you leaning towards staying in or would you really go out of the   I have always said during the campaign and as you noticed and as you have actually said a couple of times, which I have always appreciated, I have fulfilled a lot of what I have said. You know, I think I have four years and maybe another four years, OK, if we keep going We will see what happens. But ENTITY, we have a $71 billion a year trade deficit with Mexico. We got to do something. We cannot have that. We are trying right now with Bob Lighthizer and the whole group. I think we have a good chance but we will see what happens. I get the feeling that Senator Schumer is taking a lot of flak from his flank, from the far-left flank. He made a mistake in shutting down. People of this country want security, they want safety, they want their military to be taken care of. What is going to happen on Monday with DACA?  Well, we have already started the process   I think Cotton, and Perdue and Goodlatte, and the people that I have been dealing with Cornyn, so many of the people these are great people. You said 10n to 12 years for citizenship, right, for the Dreamers. Will Cotton go along with that? If we make the right deal. These are people that have very strong opinions on DACA and on immigration generally. Look, we are going to try and make a deal on DACA. We have a good chance of making it. What we need is we need the wall, we need security, we need security at the border. We have to stop the drugs from coming in. We need safety and we need a strong military.   We need almost more than ever before I mean, we have been in wars so we needed it then but we need to be sure that our military is properly funded, and it would be really great to get rid of the, you know, we'd like to have a regular budget. Will you ask for $25 billion, ENTITY? and did Chuck Schumer offer $1.6 billion? We agreed to $25 billion Did he take it back? Did he how much did he agree to? But he did not really take it back. If you see numerous senators on the other side they said, We'd give the wall in two minutes if we could do something with DACA. Everybody wants to solve the DACA problem.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekernencnbctheworldeconomicforumdavosswitzerland", "title": "Interview with Joe Kernen of CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-kernen-cnbc-the-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland", "publication_date": "26-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1261, "text": "They have been wanting to solve it for a long time. It should've been solved by President Obama. It would've been easier to solve it, especially when he had the House and the Senate. They could've solved it in a day. But they did not solve it, he did not solve things. And he did something that he did not have the right to do. You understand, he did an executive order and that was no good. And by the way, the court it was not me. The courts were not upholding that executive order. You have to do it through Congress. I want to solve the DACA problem. I will consider that a great achievement to solve the DACA problem. It is been out there for a long time. These are good people, these are people that should be able to stay in this country. We are going to solve the DACA problem. But we also want to solve a tremendous problem on the southern border, which is crime. We need a wall, we need the drugs to stop flowing in. They are coming in like well, they are coming in less now than they were because we have a very strong we have great Border Patrol agents, great ICE we have great people and they are really doing a good job. And you see what is happening at the border, it is much better. But we need a strong border. And to do that you need a wall. And they did agree to a $25 billion wall, of which I will have a lot of money left over. Because I do not need $25 billion to build a wall. We will build a great that is what I do. We will build a great wall and we will have a lot of money left over, and we will spend it on other things. But we need great security. And yes, Senator Perdue, Senator Cotton, Cornyn, this one, that one, we have tremendous support to get something done. I want to ask you a Davos question, just because we are here and I do not know, I even get taken over by this. But whenever we are here, we talk about wealth disparity and income inequality, not just globally but everywhere. A resurgent United States, a strongly growing United States makes a world of difference not just for the United States but for the world in general.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekernencnbctheworldeconomicforumdavosswitzerland", "title": "Interview with Joe Kernen of CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-kernen-cnbc-the-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland", "publication_date": "26-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1262, "text": "But I am just wondering if you did if you were able to keep GDP or if the United States grows at 3 percent or 4 percent and we have the coffers, that we can do a lot with 3 percent or 4 percent. It is totally different than when we do not have money. Do you have a way of addressing the skills gap and education? As a businessperson, you solve problems. Now you are in government We need vocational schools. We need the community colleges in many cases Oh, I think it is a big factor for us. But I also want these great companies that are coming in Toyota's now coming in. We talked already about Apple. Apple's coming in with a very big presence. We had many companies Chrysler's coming in, leaving Mexico and coming back to Michigan. When was the last time you heard that? And without me being here and without what we have been doing including regulation, by the way, because I happen to think that regulation is as big as the tax cuts, OK? But I think the regulations, the cutting of regulations because the businesses could not even they could not do anything. You'd have to get 16 different approvals from 15 different agencies. Hey ENTITY, it was impossible to do business. And I think you know that maybe better than anybody. The cutting of the regulations was every bit as important as what we did with the tax cuts. But you put them both together and we have a dynamic country again. I just came out and some really wonderful people said, Davos has never been like this. This is like walking into the Academy Awards, except we have more photographers. The Journal this morning, lead editorial was that and they gave a lot of credit to the Trump administration for where economic growth is right now. But then they said, Why would a Cabinet member bring up the idea of a weaker dollar when things are going so well? And I am wondering whether you saw Secretary Mnuchin's comments yesterday. Do you agree with those? Were they taken out of context? So let me tell you, I think they were taken out of context because I read his exact statement. I will tell you where I stand, which ultimately is very important. 1, I do not like talking about it because, frankly, nobody should be talking about it. It should also be based on the strength of the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekernencnbctheworldeconomicforumdavosswitzerland", "title": "Interview with Joe Kernen of CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-kernen-cnbc-the-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland", "publication_date": "26-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1263, "text": "We are doing so well, our country is becoming so economically strong again and strong in other ways too, by the way that the dollar is going to get stronger and stronger. And ultimately, I want to see a strong dollar. But ultimately the dollar, because our country is going to get so much stronger economically, if you look at what is happened to our country over the look, I have been talking about this with you for 25 years. It started with Japan, morphed into China, now it is China, Japan, it is everybody. And everybody has taken advantage of our country. They have ripped our country off. You look at what they do. I saw something on motorcycles today with a certain country. But they sell motorcycles into our country, no tax. We sell motorcycles into their country Harley-Davidsons, the greatest, right? We sell them into their country, 100 percent tax. The word reciprocal is the most important word with Donald Trump when it comes to what the subject that we talk about and the subject that CNBC covers so well especially you, by the way, because I do not agree with all of you people, but that is OK. I want reciprocal. If they are going to charge us 100 percent for a motorcycle, it should be 100 percent the other way, too. And you know, when you mention a tax at the border, a 10 percent tax on the border for everything coming in, I am a free trader. I am all kinds of trader, but I want reciprocal. Because when China's charging us a fortune to send products in and making it impossible for the product to get there and many other countries, by the way, not just China. And then we charge them nothing to sell their stuff here. When you use the word reciprocal everybody understands that. If they do it to you, you do it to them and everybody understands it, ENTITY. And you are going to see a lot of that in my administration. And you are already seeing it. Well, we are going to have to end it there. Will we have another shutdown? Will you move more to the center on immigration I do not think the Democrats would shut it down again. You do not think they will do it Because you look at every poll, it said they made a mistake. Why should I do that? I am negotiating with someone I am not going to say he got badly beaten. The people want security and they want DACA taken care of.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjoekernencnbctheworldeconomicforumdavosswitzerland", "title": "Interview with Joe Kernen of CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-joe-kernen-cnbc-the-world-economic-forum-davos-switzerland", "publication_date": "26-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1264, "text": " I know it. They told me that one of the girl on my right that pretty looking she claims to be the 250th in the world in tennis. And she is struggling and trying to it is so wonderful practices 8 hours every day. on red clay? And then the kids they train for what they call their national games or something there. The one that spoke the English, her dad was a coach in Kuwait. And she learned her English over there, and she is a high-jumper. This visit to Hungary well, Poland also but both of them were very, very moving. And I just come away with this real acute sense now of the change that is taking place in Eastern Europe and a determination to play a constructive role in that change. The meetings with these Hungarian leaders the most recent visit were very good, very frank. I have been to, what, 77, 79 countries, or something, as Vice President; and these talks were more than just diplomatic. I mean, you did not rely on the printed card, and they did not . I mean, they spoke right from the heart. They said what they thought; they made clear the difficulties that they were facing. And I tried to do the same thing. Do you think you made a difference? I realize it would not have been diplomatic for any of those leaders to say so, but did you hear any complaints in either place about the sufficiency of the packages you brought? But I heard none at all, not one. And in fact, Walesa , who had been reported to be asking for $10 billion, moved off of that and said that what they wanted were more banks to come in that would loan those kinds of money. There was a paper written by a Solidarnosc economist that had the figure of $10 billion and had broken it down into x-number of dollars from the World Bank, x from the IMF, x -- and it added up to $10 billion. But there was no pressure of that nature, and then I see that subseQuently Walesa was in the paper today or yesterday saying that there had not been a disappointment. But I think they understand that we are restricted in what we can do in terms of aid, or dollars of support, for some very worthy project. The thing that is impressive is the determination on the part of all these leaders to move towards economic freedom and political freedom. It was so clear in Poland.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps0", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-0", "publication_date": "13-07-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1265, "text": "General Jaruzelski -- who has had an image in the States earlier on that was not a very favorable one -- is really out front in the reforms. And conversations were very warm and very frank with him. We'd talk about differences, but we'd also talk about common objectives. And he went out of his way to be hospitable. And then the same thing on the -- what you'd call the private sector side -- Lech Welesa down there. And the same was true here; we met with the leaders and then, again, the opposition. And then they were all together at a reception. It is -- change is absolutely amazing that is taking place in Eastern Europe. Do you think that you have made a difference? Well, I think the very fact that they can sit and talk to an American President in a reasonable way and I could tell them what I thought we would be able to do, how much we shared their desire for change -- I think was fruitful to them. And I think they saw the friendship and respect for the United States from their people -- the crowds on the street and the -- any time there was interaction with the people it was dramatic. And I am sure that makes a difference to the leaders. I think it shores up their desire for change because I think it shows all of us the genuine affection for the United States that exists in these countries and, I would say, in the rest of Eastern Europe, too, although I cannot speak as authoritatively. Is Poland going to get a government soon? We discussed that very openly, but it is just something I cannot predict the outcome. Well, I think it takes some time after their elections for the Parliament, and I think that they are now trying to sort out, in an arrangement, who to support for President. And you have got several different options. But that is their business; that is the internal affair of Poland, and I ought not to try to get involved in that. Did Walesa express any concerns about calling upon workers to make the kind of sacrifices required? He did not express concern about that, but I had an opportunity to make clear in private that and publicly that reforms were essential. There is no point going there under false colors and to try to have everything sweetness and light as a message that but it is not going to be easy. But that is part of the message.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps0", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-0", "publication_date": "13-07-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1266, "text": "The rest of it is that change is in the winds, and I sense it so much more clearly from having been there. Do you feel the general I mean, you could see a man almost totally resigned Do not you feel that the general sees something besides the inevitable? I do not think it is a question of resignation. You see, as you see change take place in the Soviet Union, this opens the way for change vital change, vibrant change in the rest of Eastern Europe. And so, I did not sense a dejection on his part; I sensed somewhat of an upbeat feeling that, yes, that these changes were possible now. And I certainly sense that in Hungary.  Well, you want to be careful not to conduct yourself in such a way as to encourage a backlash. But I would think that this visit in the neighborhood would be watched by countries where economic and political change are lagging behind Poland and lagging behind Hungary. That is not true of the Soviet Union, and it is not true of Yugoslavia. I am firmly convinced that this wave of freedom, if you will, is the wave of the future. And I would expect that this visit has been watched by the people of other Eastern European countries and, hopefully, giving encouragement to those who want to go the path of reform political change, economic change -- that these other countries are now following. Do you think they will feel that talk is cheap from the United States, and what about a little more aid to encourage their reform movement? I did not sense that. That was their early question, and I did not sense it. I expect everybody would like to have as much aid as everybody possibly can attract. But when you are tying your position into economic reform and incentive and ownership and private sector and entrepreneurship, it seems to have at least negated the public cry or diminished the public cry for more funds. I just did not encounter that. We did not expect you to come here with a bag full of money was the way they put it. Are you going to tell the summit leaders that communism is dead? I am going to tell them that there is dynamic change taking place in Eastern Europe, and I expect each one of them will want to tell me about their experiences with that. But I want to be sure that they know of our commitment to foster this change in a prudent way. I have not set up any yardsticks for that, Brit . I do not think that there is a way to measure success at an economic summit.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps0", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-0", "publication_date": "13-07-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1267, "text": "There are problems on the agenda, but I expect at the conclusion of the meeting you will see seven countries in harmony, pulling together on matters like the environment and, you know, the economies of the various countries, and trade. All these are contentious matters bilaterally, but I think we can reach common understanding. Gorbachev to what is going on in Eastern Europe approach seems to be development in Eastern Europe and that you are a partner, but a limited partner. Is not it Gorbachev's revolutionary approach to the East-West relationship that has given these people license to move forward? I would think so, and maybe you missed what I said about Poland and giving them the flexibility to move forward. So, no, I would certainly say, and I mentioned four countries one of them was the Soviet Union. I do not think you were here when I started talking about that. So, we are very pleased to see the perestroika. I want to see it succeed. When are you going to tell him that personally? I do not think there is any misunderstanding on his part about the position of the United States in terms of his reforms. I think maybe if there is ever any doubt about it those doubts have been dispelled; and if there was any recent doubts about it, those doubts will be dispelled by his friends in Poland and in Hungary because I made very clear to them that, you know, we are not there to poke a stick in the eye of Mr. Gorbachev. Just the opposite to encourage the very kind of reforms that he is championing and more reforms. convinced that he understands what you are doing? Because there are so many contacts with him and because some of these leaders told me that. And they told me that in terms of our approach to arms also. There has been some suggestion we were dragging our feet on arms control, which is pure nonsense. And I am convinced from talking to these people that Gorbachev knows that we are serious. Indeed, we have an opportunity now to encourage him to move along faster on conventional force reductions. The idea that some Soviet spokesman yesterday says they cannot meet these timetables I do not want to believe that that is Mr. Gorbachev speaking. And I am not going to believe it until I hear from him or until I hear authoritatively that that is who it is. Should we not believe Marlin? You can believe Marlin, yes, because he speaks with great authority.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps0", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-0", "publication_date": "13-07-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1268, "text": "He is a couple of beats behind the pace here, because I do not think Gorbachev wants to slow down an agreement on conventional arms. If he does, he is wrong on that. I think he wants to move forward there and on the strategic arms talks, and so do we. From your conversation, did you get any sense of what the bottom line is in Eastern Europe as far as political change? I mean, what are the two or three points that you cannot cross? No, there does not seem to be a bottom line, because when you go to open, free, fair elections, who knows what is going to happen? Take a look at Hungary I mean at Poland. So, the change is so rapid and so devastating to old ways that I do not think you can put a bottom line on the thing. Perhaps Gorbachev is also looking at the elections? Probably looking at the elections at home, and that is a good thing. I tell you, the excitement of all this, you just feel it in talking to the leaders and feel it from the people. specific with both leaders that further economic reform for example, did you discuss with them the sale of state-owned business or getting private enterprise to the people in both Poland and Hungary? And the talks with Mr. Jaruzelski we got into that. Mainly we were talking about joint ventures and partnerships, but also I had the opportunity to emphasize our conviction that state ownership is less productive than private ownership. And similarly, in a couple of the meetings maybe we did in all but in a couple of the meetings yesterday there was discussion of privatization. No resistance, incidentally, it seemed like, in Hungary. But we had a very frank discussion about what percentage of their gross national product was in government and what in private sector, and Hungary still has a long way to go until it achieves privatization. I met people that are caught up in this wave of historic change. Are they changing their whole philosophy? You asked whether one of the leaders made a big distinction between a Communist and a Socialist. And one of them pointed out that European socialism could well be the model of the future as opposed to the socialism that we equate with communism. Did you get into 2 years ago, the Poles would not get the votes they needed, and then you talk about belt-tightening. But did they talk to you about what they would do?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps0", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-0", "publication_date": "13-07-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1269, "text": "And do you have any qualms that this might backfire that if these supports are removed, the Poles may not get the candy they need to keep supporting the system? I had some feeling after some of the talks that the reforms that would be required would be very difficult for them. Would you have any plans to contact him Well, we have regularized contacts with the Soviet Union now, and we will continue on those. Did Lech Walesa tell you about the powder-keg situation in Poland, as he told TV interviewers? Well, as I said, some of the interlocutors made clear that the kinds of reforms that are going to have to be taken will not be easy. It was not put in the context of powder keg. privatization, openness, free elections. And to the degree those things take place, why, we will be able to do more. I'd met him before, and it is funny how you just meet one time and it establishes a certain personal warmth there. ENTITY, you talked about the changes, and you used the word amazing. Were you surprised by the things you saw? Not textbook surprised, but surprised at the feeling: the feeling and the emotion of it all and the frankness with which the leaders -- in Hungary particularly; well, and also Jaruzelski and Walesa -- talked about the change. I mean it was with emotion, and it was not your traditional I will read my cards, and you read your cards kind of diplomacy. It was very special in that regard. There is an intensity to it, a fervor to it that moved me very much. You mean like in Eastern Europe? Well, I think without the change in the Soviet Union it would have been highly unlikely that Eastern Europe would be achieving the kinds of changes or aspiring to the kinds of changes that it is aspiring to. I do not ever look for disputes, I look for calming the troubled waters. You know that. I do not know that either. Well, I want to go to Africa, but there is no doubt -- I would not say that would be the next, would you? I do not think it is the U.S. role to keep the change alive. I mean, I think this is something that is the business of the Poles and of the Hungarians. I think it would be rather arrogant to suggest that it is the United States that has the sole responsibility.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps0", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-0", "publication_date": "13-07-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1270, "text": "But it, to the degree we can encourage change without intervention in the internal affairs -- why, I am all for that. The people's aspiration for liberty and for free choice is too fundamental. And they can look to our system, look to our country, as a beacon for all these good values. But it is not our role to go in and dictate to any of these countries how they are going to run their business. I know that struck you the most about it, because you did not have to stand out in the rain. He said they liked that. Well, I mean, I had plenty of opportunity to pay my formal respects, which, in essence, was what that was about. I told them the next day one of the leaders was very complimentary of that. And I said it reminds me of an old adage that the United States the speech that you do not that was the one in the rain. Who are you going to send to Israel as an emissary? Have you had any contact at all with the Soviets on that question? Well, we chose to stop there because Wallenberg is a great international symbol of human rights. And I do not know -- what do you mean about contact about -- -- I mean, it is a constant issue that U.S. officials are regularly asking of the Soviets I have not personally asked of the Soviets that. Are you saying that the Secretary of State might send an emissary? Well, I am saying that we have people go to Israel all the time and to other countries in the area. But when you say, Who am I sending as an emissary? -- I was putting that in the context of past high-level shuttle diplomats or something of that nature, and there are no plans for that. I reserve the right to send people anytime I think it is in the interest of the United States, but there are no plans for that kind of level -- diplomacy. But if somebody felt it was worthwhile, somebody over there would welcome a special emissary from ENTITY, I'd be very openminded about that. You asked me whether there are plans. find out what is going in terms of  We have got a very able Ambassador over there who knows a great deal about what is going on and has excellent contacts with the Government. Why is the U.S. so shook up over this?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps0", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-0", "publication_date": "13-07-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1271, "text": "I do not know that the U.S. is so shook up, but they know the United States policy. And the United States policy on settlements, for example, has not changed, and it is not going to change. And so, we might as well be frank with our friends, because that is what friendship is about. And so, I want to see things go forward in terms of the peace process over there, and we want to see the election process go forward. And if anybody can make a case for me that the recent deliberations in that party will enhance the election process, then I'd say, Great! But I am afraid other people are looking at it, saying, What is happened does not enhance the possibilities of election. And I am President of the United States, and Israel is a friend and will remain a friend, but I have to say what our policy is -- and so, I do not think there is great heartburn here, but I want to just continue to articulate what we believe. Shamir said -- what should be important from the very start -- so I am trying to figure out why the United States is so distressed. Well, you go ahead and talk to the State Department about that. You are talking to the President. I set the policy, after a lot of input from the State Department, and I want the U.S. policy to succeed. We have thought out very carefully what we think is best, and our support is for our principles. And they have got great difficulties inside of Israel. I understand that. I understand the political pressures. But I cannot be varying U.S. policy every day to accommodate political change. I am not going to do that. Keep encouraging them to do what they ought to do: to participate in this election process -- absolutely -- and deplore the kind of violence that we see when a bus is carried over a cliff and carrying a lot of innocent people to their death, or innocent people getting killed in other ways -- on both sides. I mean we have to stand for something. And I am going to continue to try to do that. When did it hit you? Experience never hurt anybody, did it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorps0", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-0", "publication_date": "13-07-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1285, "text": "Well, you have spent, perhaps, more time than any previous American President with our Queen, and I was wondering what interested you most about her. Nancy had, as you know, been in her presence a great deal. She was there for the wedding. And then her gracious invitation to us at Windsor, our ride together and all there, so it was not any surprise that-it was only just reinforced and strengthened as to what a truly fine and gracious lady she is. But I think so unlike what most people would have of a concept of royalty. If I may switch to a different subject-your Orlando speech. In your Orlando speech you talked about the confrontation of the United States and the Soviet Union as a confrontation of good and evil, and darkness and light. And that gave the impression, at least, that there is really no logical conclusion except war and that reconciliation would be very difficult between the two powers. And I am just wondering how you reconcile that outlook with your aims for peace. Well, ENTITY, I do not think that those who were there and heard the entire speech would take it that way. I think it is somehow lifting that out of context-of this line and this description as the focus of evil and so forth. Certainly their entire beliefs, beginning with the disbelief in God-their entire beliefs are so contrary to what we accept as morality. But no, what I was pointing out there, and I still believe is time-tested and proven, is not the inevitability of war, but a recognition and a willingness to face up to what these differences are in our views and between us, to be realistic about it. But let me just point out a couple of things. We have seen, under the guise of diplomacy and detente and so forth in the past, efforts to kind of sweep the differences under the rug and pretend they do not exist. I have stated, very frankly, what I believe the differences are, but at the same time, I have expressed my determination and my belief that peace is achievable. I am very concerned with those people who somehow seem to think-without their realizing they are thinking them-that they are building in their mind a kind of war is inevitable . I cannot subscribe to that at all. They have already come down to a lower figure for weapons than was supposed to be the great triumph in SALT II-several hundred, they have agreed to, less than the SALT II treaty.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhenrybrandonthelondonsundaytimesandnewsservicedomesticandforeign", "title": "Interview With Henry Brandon of the London Sunday Times and News Service on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-henry-brandon-the-london-sunday-times-and-news-service-domestic-and-foreign", "publication_date": "18-03-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1286, "text": "In the INF, they came immediately to the table, no objecting, no protesting, to negotiate, and while their offer was not acceptable because of some other terms, from some 350-odd SS-20 missiles they made a proposal that brought them down to 162. So, I think that this just proves that maybe being willing, frankly, to recognize the differences between us and what our view is has proven that it is successful. Talking about missiles, a number of European leaders, from Mrs. Thatcher to Chancellor Kohl, have been trying to persuade you to put forward a new initiative of an interim solution-still with the zero option as the ultimate goal-but to come forward with an interim solution. I gather that you are very seriously considering such a move. And I am sure they know this also. Because we do stay in constant consultation, and we are not going to do anything without continuing consultation with them. And I must say they have all expressed great appreciation for the fact that unlike some previous times when we acted unilaterally, that we do recognize our responsibility as allies. The difficulty in answering is, when you are at a negotiating table-and off and on I spent about 25 years in labor-management relations at a negotiating table-you cannot talk openly about your strategy or what you are going to do. But I can only point to this fact, that from the very beginning when I announced the total elimination, the zero option, I said at the same time we will negotiate in good faith any legitimate or reasonable proposal, and that remains true today. But to get into a discussion of where you are going or what you are going to do, that just is bad negotiating strategy. Yeah, but have not these European leaders already, more or less, laid their cards on the table? Except that all of them are still openly supportive of our deployment of missiles, our own missiles there, as was originally decided in 1979. So, that is a little different than advocating a position and wanting an open agreement. If you ever did such a thing, that, then, becomes the beginning point for negotiation. Our beginning point for negotiation is total elimination.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhenrybrandonthelondonsundaytimesandnewsservicedomesticandforeign", "title": "Interview With Henry Brandon of the London Sunday Times and News Service on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-henry-brandon-the-london-sunday-times-and-news-service-domestic-and-foreign", "publication_date": "18-03-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1287, "text": "Well, I understand that there are two views, more or less, two views in the administration-one that feels that you should wait until the missiles are beginning to be put in place in Europe, because then the Soviet Union will be under pressure to make concessions, or that you should come forward with your own initiatives-take the lead and come forward with something that proposes equality but is something less than zero-zero option. Well, again, as I say I mean, ENTITY, I do not think that there are any divisions in the sense that splits here, and one faction against another faction on this. There is one thing in which we are in total agreement on, and that is that the ultimate goal should continue to be the zero base, the elimination of that whole class of weapons, for the sake of the world if nothing else. We are also in agreement on the fact that there must be no change in our plan to begin deployment on schedule. But can you tell me in which direction you lean, for instance, because the Dutch Foreign Minister--the Dutch Prime Minister, who saw you the other day, and made some-after he had left you, indicated that you are going to come forward with a new initiative. Well, no, what I said then, and what I have just said here, is we have announced our ultimate goal and we will, as I said from the very first-we are ready to negotiate in good faith any reasonable proposal or suggestion on the way to the ultimate goal. I understand that you are beginning to come under pressure to-I am now talking about U.S.-Argentine relations-to give the kind of certification that would be necessary for the United States to sell arms to the Argentine again. No proposal or no discussion has been held with me at all on any such subject. We are watching, of course, very closely. From the very first, as we have always hoped, we'd hoped that there will be a peaceful resolution of that problem. What would you advise now in terms of the next step? I think this is-as a result of the action taken there, this is something to be determined between the United Kingdom and Argentina. But you are not planning to play the role of the mediator as you did during the war? Only to the extent that someone would ask our help-if we could be helpful. We'd be pleased to, anytime, if we might lend aid to bring about peace.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhenrybrandonthelondonsundaytimesandnewsservicedomesticandforeign", "title": "Interview With Henry Brandon of the London Sunday Times and News Service on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-henry-brandon-the-london-sunday-times-and-news-service-domestic-and-foreign", "publication_date": "18-03-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1288, "text": "You have now had talks with King Hussein, with the Foreign Ministers of Israel and Lebanon. Do you foresee that negotiations of your own plan will perhaps begin soon? I think that we have made some progress toward the first step that we believe is absolutely necessary, in getting into that, and that is the withdrawal of all the foreign forces, the PLO, the Syrians, and the Israelis from Lebanon and give the new Government of Lebanon a chance to establish its own sovereignty and heal the wounds that have been open there for so long-the factionalism and so forth. I think that is absolutely vital, and we want to cooperate in any way we can to help bring that about. As I say, Foreign Minister Shamir has been here, and then the Foreign Minister of Lebanon, Salem, and the really senior statesman, elder statesman there, Salaam, the former Prime Minister. And we continue-Phil Habib 1 is going back now again-we continue to try and help them work toward an elimination of the differences. And then I believe that once that is accomplished, that Hussein will offer himself as the negotiator to then continue the peace negotiations involving all the other Middle East problems. You know there are a lot of Middle Eastern experts, or so called, who believe that unless you put certain pressures on Israel, there will be no moratorium on the building of settlements in the West Bank. How do you feel about that? Well, the West Bank-there certainly is no illegality to the building-that based on the Camp David agreement and the period of discussion that was supposed to then take place, with no one having a claim for or against doing such things. This, of course, would be where the negotiations then would begin toward the real peace negotiations with, presumably, King Hussein involved in those negotiations. And I think, as I have said before, that what really has to be resolved is the-an arrangement involving, on one side, land-territory-and on the other, the need for security. That one can find the Israel-have the security-that they do not have to remain an armed camp at the great expense that it has been to their economy. And this is going to take compromise with regard to territory-on the other side-and resolution of the Palestinian problem which-you have got a great many human beings there that you just cannot pretend they do not exist.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhenrybrandonthelondonsundaytimesandnewsservicedomesticandforeign", "title": "Interview With Henry Brandon of the London Sunday Times and News Service on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-henry-brandon-the-london-sunday-times-and-news-service-domestic-and-foreign", "publication_date": "18-03-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1289, "text": "I mean, do you think that, in spite of what Prime Minister Begin has said in public, that, as you say, a compromise is possible without your exerting sufficient pressure? that is the reason for the negotiations. And again, just as I was talking about our own negotiations, with regard to arms, negotiations sometimes in labor-management may describe it. They have been presented as one side asks for the moon and the other side offers green cheese. And they then talk their way to a point between those two extremes and settle it. ENTITY, I know you are not talking about your future plans, but if you decided to run for another term, what would be your objectives-that you feel you have not been able to achieve in the first 4 years-for the next round? Oh, I think we have a long way to go in two major departments. One of them, the restoration of our ability to be secure nationally, field a national defense and so forth, and the other, however, is the economic situation. Now, so far, we have not begun to get all that we asked for in our plan. But I think that now, after all of the criticism and all of the sniping and all of the sneering at what they called Reaganomics, there is so much evidence that the plan, even partially employed, was successful, that I am beginning to wonder if they will not decide to look for another name, rather than Reaganomics, now that it is going to be a successful plan and not a failure-but that the economy is looking ahead for the balance of this decade to get back to a balanced budget. And I would still like to see that then affirmed in the Constitution, so that we can never again go down that road that we have in these last few decades. That we can begin paying back on the national debt, reducing that-when you stop to think that the interest alone on our national debt is greater than the total cost of the United States Government not too many years ago. To do that, and to recognize that there is a certain level as to the percentage of gross national product that government takes for itself and takes from the people in taxes, that if you go beyond that level, you then do disrupt the economy and cause the kind of problems that we have had. To eliminate totally inflation-the world has been going through the longest sustained period of inflation in the history of mankind. This country can actually affect the economy worldwide.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhenrybrandonthelondonsundaytimesandnewsservicedomesticandforeign", "title": "Interview With Henry Brandon of the London Sunday Times and News Service on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-henry-brandon-the-london-sunday-times-and-news-service-domestic-and-foreign", "publication_date": "18-03-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1290, "text": "And I think our conquering, so far-not completely conquered, let us say our winning over inflation so far-to take it down from double digits, from 12.4, sometimes reaching as high as 13-14, to where for the last 6 months it is only been running 1.4 percent. But the job is not going to be finished for awhile. As you look at the projections out through the years, there is a lot yet to be done. But we have embarked on a different course. I can remember when the people on our side, the Republicans-and you realize I am talking the party not personal-over these years what needs to be done, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, the debate they engaged in was kind of a rearguard action on the part of the Republicans against the ever-increasing desire of government to spend, to intervene in the marketplace, to become even more powerful, and thus eventually oppressive on the people-much of what you have seen happen in your own country. The debate today in government is not that debate anymore-of the trying to hold back on that increase. The debate is both sides agreeing to reduced spending and reduced government, and the argument is only about how much to reduce it. I wondered, because of the decline in the oil price that would be little will benefit to the majority of countries in the world, but it will be to the detriment of two or three countries, like Mexico, Nigeria. I wonder whether you have at all considered the possibility of taking the advantages that the majority of the countries have accrued to them-could be used to sustain and help the countries that are suffering from the decline of the oil price. Well, we have been of help, and we have been with our contributions to the international banks, those funding agencies, but also in direct help. For example, as I told our friends and allies in the summit meeting at Versailles-the discussion of the Third World and our view is that you help them develop their own economies, not constantly be mendicants with their hands out waiting for someone to give them something. We, every year, buy more of the production of those countries than all the rest of the world put together. We think, also, that if we are able to alter the economic situation, that some of those same countries have the highest rates of inflation in the world, and thus even though it is going to be-there is going to be a temporary readjustment with those reduced revenues.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhenrybrandonthelondonsundaytimesandnewsservicedomesticandforeign", "title": "Interview With Henry Brandon of the London Sunday Times and News Service on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-henry-brandon-the-london-sunday-times-and-news-service-domestic-and-foreign", "publication_date": "18-03-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1291, "text": "But if on the other hand, for the whole world economic picture-they see their own costs going down, this will serve to make that adjustment for them, and they too will wind up better off. But, no, we are not going to retreat from the help that we have been able to give, and as we resolve some of our own problems we are able to help more. Do you think there is a need for reviewing the possibility of a new international monetary system? I cannot say that I have a hard and fast view on that. I think it is something for all of us to look at. Maybe that'll be one of the subjects of discussion in the Williamsburg summit this spring. But do you think that the world situation makes such a revival of some new system desirable? I can only say that I think we need to look at it. I do not believe that the monetary system has been the disruptive factor in bringing on this economic recession we have been in. I think inflation is what led to the high interest rates. The lender has to get back-when the loan is repaid-he has to have gotten back, in interest, all the depreciated value of the money that he loaned that is going to be repaid-paid back in inflation in money of lesser value than when he had loaned it. I think what we are seeing, because of our own rate of inflation-they should be much lower-but I think what we are seeing is timidity. They are not quite sure yet that we are going to stay the course and that this is going to continue. They have been through, well, in our own country, seven recessions-I guess this one's number eight-since World War II, and every one of them, as they came out, resulted in higher inflation and each time higher than the last, so that we have been on an ever increasing scale that way. I think that there is beginning to be this confidence that this time the recovery, that we are bringing about, is based on sound economic policies and not artificial stimulants. When they are aware of that, I think we will see further reductions in the interest rates and, as a result of that, we will see further prosperity. You, after 3.5 years in office, you look younger than perhaps when you entered. And I was wondering, what is the secret of your pacing yourself?.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhenrybrandonthelondonsundaytimesandnewsservicedomesticandforeign", "title": "Interview With Henry Brandon of the London Sunday Times and News Service on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-henry-brandon-the-london-sunday-times-and-news-service-domestic-and-foreign", "publication_date": "18-03-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1292, "text": "Well, for one thing I recognize that it would be awfully easy-I have always been an outdoorsman, to use that expression, always, living in California, been able to get to our ranch, ride a lot, and so forth. But it would be very easy here to sit at that desk, and you go home in an elevator--at the end of the day, and come back to work in an elevator. And we have a little gymnasium upstairs there, and I have a daily routine that we work out at the end of every day. And, frankly, I have to say physically I think I feel better than I did a couple of decades ago. Do you feel, I mean as you have described it a little now, do you feel a bit insulated here in the White House? You are insulated in the sense that if you decide to leave the grounds you are a group--quite a group. You cannot just go out and walk down the street and drop in at a drugstore for a bottle of aspirin or something. But on the other hand, you have much more contact with people than anyone is inclined to believe. First of all, you are surrounded not just by senior staff but by an awful lot of people who work in here in different capacities, and you get to know about their families and their problems and so forth. But also the effort that I make to get out, when you go out on, say, a speaking engagement or something like the Orlando trip that you mentioned, you have a contact with people. I stay in touch with all the people that I knew, and having a ranch is another way, because there is a whole circle of acquaintances and people and workmen and so forth that How many telephone calls do you take a day? Maybe I make more than I take. People that I have known back over the years and former schoolmates and so forth, I stay in touch with both by correspondence and the other. And then I have done something that I did when I was Governor. I realize I cannot read all my mail-several hundred thousand letters a month. But I instructed there, and I have instructed here-a very wonderful lady there in charge of that mail department does a good job of knowing the kind of mail that I want to see-and not just the friendly letters; the ones that've got a challenge in them and so forth, letters from young people and so forth-and constantly sends me a representative sampling of the mail.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithhenrybrandonthelondonsundaytimesandnewsservicedomesticandforeign", "title": "Interview With Henry Brandon of the London Sunday Times and News Service on Domestic and Foreign Policy Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-henry-brandon-the-london-sunday-times-and-news-service-domestic-and-foreign", "publication_date": "18-03-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1293, "text": "This week we have as our very special guest, our esteemed ENTITY, . In this trip last week Hazard, Kentucky; Appalachia; the Delta; East St. Louis; Pine Ridge Indian Reservation; south Phoenix; Watts; Anaheim what stuck out in your mind the most? That in all those places where our prosperity has not reached, there are good people, smart people, people with dreams, and good opportunities for American business. This is a moment when we can do what is morally right, to give everybody a chance to walk into the 21st century together, and do it in a way that will actually be good for the American economy and good for the people who invest there. They have missed this booming prosperity. Is something wrong with the people? I would not say something's wrong with the people. A lot of them do not have as much education as they need, and that is part of our strategy to do better, and they are going to have to have specific job training skills. But what happened is that all these places either never had a self-supporting economy, or the basis of economic life which once was there moved away, and nothing was ever brought in to replace it. And now, we have got a chance just to keep our own economy going, just to keep our own economy going with no inflation, we have a chance to bring investment to these areas, put these people to work, give them better lives, and in the process, help everyone else in America. They seem to have found a common accord on this idea of new markets. poverty, reaction; affirmative action, division, reaction . But new markets seem to have bound Appalachia and Delta, black, white, red. What is kind of magic about this notion of new markets initiative? Well, first of all, it is not charity; it is a hand up, not a handout. Secondly, the people who are being asked to invest in these new markets should do so with the expectation that they will actually make a profit out of it, that by helping people in areas which have not participated in this prosperity, by starting businesses, giving people jobs, having these job training programs, they will actually make money. So it is a kind of war for profits, not just a war on poverty? And therefore, you incentivize broadening the base of investment? We are not asking anybody to do anything that is not a good business decision.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1294, "text": "It is a good business decision, and that is one of the things you know, we saw that everywhere. Every place we went do you remember that little that first place we visited in Appalachia, a guy starts out with 40 employees; a few years later, he is got 850. And yes, you know, Appalachia's fairly isolated, but he makes those parts and those various component electronic parts and he is got 850 people. He is fixing to expand again because of the incentives that he has in our empowerment zone program that the Vice President's run for us for the last 6 years. That is the kind of thing we want to go nationwide with. We believe if we give, in the new markets initiative, if we give the same tax credits and loan guarantees to Americans to invest in America's new markets we give them to invest in new markets in Africa, Latin America, Asia, or the Caribbean, that our people will do very well. You take, for example, the black and brown market alone is maybe $800 billion in consumer power. How have they missed these markets markets, money, talent right under their noses? I think, first of all, they have been doing very well by doing what they are used to doing and expanding in ways they are used to expanding, so our economy's grown quite a lot in the last 6 years. Even though they have missed markets? Yes, by taking the nearest thing at hand, the thing they are used to doing. Secondly, I think that there is something that the economists would call, in purely economic terms, imperfect knowledge. That is, I think that a lot of people really do not know how well they could do if they gave people in inner-city America, in rural America a chance. Which is one reason that it was so important that these business leaders went on the trip. You know remember, when we started out, the chief CEO of Aetna life insurance company said, You know, I may not be happy about this, because I had this deal figured out, and now all my competitors are going to know there is money to be made out here. So something about imperfect knowledge and our cultural blindness, we just do not even look toward those unexplored markets.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1295, "text": "Well, when you see a place so depressed for so long, or you see the figures and the education levels low, or you look at the maps in and out of a place and you realize it is physically isolated, and you think, I have got all these other ways to make money that are near at hand, you do not get around to it. But now, the unemployment rate in America has been under 5 percent for 2 years. Everybody is wringing their hands, you know, from Wall Street out here to California, about how can we keep this economic growth going without inflation. The answer is invest in these places. It is interesting, in politics there is a zero-sum game. You have 435 Congress seats; you might change faces, but the seats do not change, and so it is forever tight and competitive. But in economics, inclusion leads to growth. And it seems that they have missed growth. In baseball, for example, we thought we had a great major leagues before we let Jackie Robinson and Campanella and Hank Aaron and Willie Mays in. But once they opened up the market, they now will go to Cuba; they will go to the Dominican Republic and find Sammy Sosa; they will go to Japan. The basketball team, now we will go to Yugoslavia, go to Croatia that the baseball owners seem to have gotten it; the basketball owners seem to have gotten it; now the rest of corporate America must get that inclusion leads to economic growth. And the important thing in your sports analogy is that as we have broadened the pool of talent, we have had more teams. More people get interested as you broaden the pool of talent, and you get more people in. So that if somebody invests in these new markets, they do not have to quit investing where they were. You are right; we will just widen the circle of opportunity. But why are they so much more likely, say, to invest in Indonesia, Taiwan, South Korea, Eastern Europe, than in Appalachia or East L.A., in south Phoenix? I think that we look at Indonesia let us just take Indonesia. We look at Indonesia, and we say, Gosh, there is a market of 200 million people. It is the biggest Muslim country in the world, fairly moderate country historically, although they have had some problems lately, and we will invest there and we will sell to that market.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1296, "text": "What we miss in America is that if you put people who are unemployed to work in distressed areas, you create a new market, first. Second, as you just pointed out, even in places with very high unemployment if you go into an inner-city neighborhood with 15 percent unemployment, that is high; that is 3 times the national average plus. That still means 85 percent of the people are working there; they have got money to spend. In almost every city in America in the inner-city areas, the people have more money to spend than they can spend in their neighborhoods. That means breaking down stereotypes. For example, if you look at Hazard, Kentucky, you look at Watts, most poor people are not on welfare. So perhaps when you speak of markets, you kind of transcend the color/cultural barriers that divide and make people terribly anxious. One of the things that we have felt, I think, all of us in this week, is that like there in the Mississippi Delta, we were walking down the street in Clarksdale you have got an African-American Congressman and a white mayor, and they are working together. I met in a store with an African-American woman and a Chinese grocer who had been in that community for 40plus years. This is a way of bringing people together. It is about much more than money. It is about cementing a quality and fabric of life that is absolutely essential. What is it about this period that allowed this mission to go from Hazard, Kentucky, Appalachia, to Clarksdale, Mississippi, to the reservation, and yet there was no evidence of racial rancor or division? What was it about this period that allowed at least that body of people to look toward another agenda, another formation of problem solving? First of all, I think the American people it is a great tribute to the people in those areas that they have kind of gotten beyond that, and they understand that if they can build a common economic framework, they can build a home together in their communities. Secondly, I think the business leaders who went, the political leaders who went were genuinely intelligent, savvy, and human people who saw that they could do the right thing and do very well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1297, "text": "You know, when you were speaking to the Native Americans in Pine Ridge, and one of the corporate business leaders looked out, and he saw the 7,000 people, and he said, I have always just seen Indian reservations which meant something but he said, Now, I see two supermarkets. I see a car dealership. I see 7,000 people wearing clothes. I see a market. He had never seen them as a market; he'd just seen them as Indians. Yes, and a lot of these people, if we put more stores, for example, in these Native American areas and hired the people there to work in the stores, then even in and they are the poorest parts of America; they have the highest unemployment rate but if you get their unemployment rate just down to 20 percent, then you have 80 percent of the people working and you make a whole market. So by creating the jobs, you create the market to buy the products that the jobs provide.  We did that. and you, on one of your sleepless nights, decided we were going to go to the Lorraine Motel. We went through this whole museum, Lorraine Motel in Memphis, Tennessee. We ended up in the spot that Martin Luther King was killed, and there you stood, and we prayed, and there was a somber spirit. But what struck me about it was that what you did this past week was to fulfill Dr. King's last great mission. He knew that slavery was the race gap; denial of public accommodations, the race gap we won that public accommodations bill the lack of the right to vote, the race gap. So his last great movement was to pull together people from Appalachia, Al Lowenstein, Jewish allies from New York, Hispanics from the farm workers, from Chavez; he pulled all these groups together, and that was his last great mission, was to tour these areas to focus on a shared resource gap. So in some sense, this week, you have fulfilled that last leg of his journey. If we can make that so, I would be very proud, because he was right about that. You know, it is funny how much time we lost as a country after he and Senator Kennedy were killed, because both of them were trying to I remember when Bobby Kennedy went to Appalachia, went to the Indian reservation in Pine Ridge in '68.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1298, "text": "They understood that the last shreds of our racial problems would be mired forever in our economic insecurities until everybody has a chance to make it. Sow profits, not fear. Now that you have put the light on it I mean, a Presidential entourage creates that you put focus on America's underserved markets, its underutilized talent, untapped capital. Yes. Very talented people, and that was they found a niche there. But now, you put light. What must the Congress do to make this real? And then what must the business sectors we have focus; we need legislation, and we need business. Congress should do two things. First of all, they should fund the second round of these empowerment zones, because in the empowerment zones, we give special tax incentives for people to put business there and to hire people from there, and we give the communities extra money to educate and train people first thing. And the Vice President's done a great job of managing that program. In addition to that, we have some more money for these community development banks. They give capital to first-time business people who could not get it other places. The second thing that Congress should do is to pass the new markets legislation which, as I said, basically gives American businesses the same incentives to invest in poor areas, urban and rural, in America that we today give them to invest overseas. What do we give them overseas? Well, we give them tax credits; we give them loan guarantees; we give them other things to try to lower the cost of capital. American Private Investment Companies, and here is how it would work. I mean, the Republicans ought to love it because it is a tax incentive thing, you know, it is not a big Government program. Suppose you and I were trying to build a shopping center development in East St. Louis, where we visited, and suppose the costs of that were I am making this up about $300 million, and suppose we could raise $100 million in capital. Well, if we could do that, we could get a 25 percent tax credit with that $100 million investment, which takes our risk down to $75 million right off the bat. We have only got $75 million at risk, not $100 million. We could then go borrow the other $200 million from the bank with a Government guarantee on the borrowing, which would dramatically cut the interest rates and save us another several million dollars over the life of the project.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1299, "text": "So you have got tax incentive, investment incentive, and loan guarantees and markets. So, first of all, you have got a profit opportunity. We are not asking anybody for charity here. But if there is an opportunity but you are worried a little about the risk, we will cut the relative risk of this investment, as compared with others, with the tax incentives and loan guarantees. We have found, in each of these markets, invariably two new buildings, a new ball park and a new jail. In all of these schools where we visited, the schools were unwired. Those in the jails, 90 percent are high school dropouts; 92 percent are functionally illiterate. The question of lack of education can breed the crime thing. Senator Bradley put an article in the Post this week about proposals to reduce guns. Just briefly, he says that we should ban the distribution and sale of Saturday Night Specials, registration for all 65 million handguns, a licensing and safety course for everyone who owns guns, ban gun dealers from selling guns in residential neighborhoods, insist on mandatory gun locks. Are these commonsense measures from your point of view? You know, we have got the gun locks provision in the Congress, and that still might pass. But I have said, we ought to have registration. We register our cars. If your car gets stolen while you are doing this interview with me, and somebody drives it halfway across the country and leaves it in a parking lot let us say in Lincoln, Nebraska and the police find it, as soon as you report your car stolen, it will go into an international computer system. As soon as he, the person who finds your car in Lincoln, Nebraska, says, Here, I have found this stolen car, and here is the license plate and the registration, within 30 seconds, the local police in Chicago will be able to call you and say, Reverend Jackson, we found your car. And so, of course we should do these things.  And I think it is interesting I think the NRA ought to support this. I do not think it is in their interest what they are doing, because nobody's trying to say we should not have hunting and sport shooting. And if I were, they never listen to me, obviously, but I used to work with them sometimes in Arkansas. One of the best things they ever did were their hunter education programs, and they really try to teach young people to safely use firearms.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1300, "text": "Why should not we say, if you are going to have a gun and you are a young person, you ought to be licensed and you ought to be taught how to use it; they would teach it. But you do not hunt rabbit with AK-47's. Well, we ought to ban those. You know, I am in favor of getting rid of all that and all those big clips and all that kind of stuff. But if they have those guns, they ought to be able to use them, and NRA ought to be out there certifying teachers to teach them. If somebody steals your gun, you ought to be able to find it, just like your car. Then the other thing I disagreed with them about, we ought to close the loophole on selling these guns at gun shows and flea markets in big cities so that the same background checks are done. These background checks work; we keep those guns out of the wrong hands by doing that. In this dialog, we have talked about all of the easy stuff, I mean, how to wipe out poverty without wiping out the poor, how to begin to close the resource gap and the skills gap. Is Hillary going to run for the Senate? She is having the time of her life in New York this week, and the people have been very good to her. And if she decides to do it, I will strongly support her in every way I can. She would be a fabulous Senator if she decides to do it. I honestly do not know what she is going to do, but she is obviously interested in it. If the people of New York were to vote for her and elect her, she would be magnificent. So you do not think the Presidential issue will last in the heat of the campaign? No, I did not say that. I think that she believes that it is a legitimate issue; at least, she believes that if she presents herself as a candidate, she would have to demonstrate to the voters of New York that she understands the State, that she is capable of learning about all the local issues, that she cares about them as well as the big national things on which she and I spent our lives. And so that is why she is up there on her listening tour. How do you think she has done this week on her listening tour? Because she is had to do some talking while listening.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1301, "text": "I come back at night from our tour I'd come back at night and flip on the TV and see what she had done, and I think she is done really well. I am really proud of her. If this is what she wants to do, I am 100 percent for it. I think she wants to complete this I think she at least wants to complete her summer schedule and listen to these folks and assess where she thinks it is. But I am happy for her. Let me say to you, I thank you for this interview. This trek around America was most historic this week because we measure our strength politically by following opinion polls about how well Wall Street is doing, but you made the point over and over again that in the end you measure character by how you treat the least of these. And your dissatisfaction with 15 million children in poverty and 40 million without health insurance, your discomfort level with the poverty-stricken is a great moral statement and challenge for all of us. I hope that in this season that we can, in some bipartisan basis, move from the bickering racial battleground to economic common ground, a kind of I lived in Mississippi and saw whites and blacks on a shared economic security agenda, you know, Patients' Bill of Rights and increased teacher pay and cut the infant mortality rates. I mean, it seemed that is this is a certain pregnant moment with possibility that all of us should seize. You know, the thing that was so touching to me and we got out there in the country you know, there were a lot of Republicans with us as well as Democrats, and in these areas we went, we met a lot of Republicans as well as Democrats. These issues, these sort of common ground economic issues I do not think there are partisan issues out there in America, and if we can keep them from becoming a partisan issue in Washington, then I am going to reach out to the leadership of the Republican Party in Congress next week to talk to them about this trip and ask them to help me pass something that will really make a difference out there. So beyond the historic economic petitions and political petitions and racial petitions, you see this bridge building as ultimately your legacy, building bridges to the underserved, the unutilized, and the untapped. I think that this country ought to go whole into the new century, and we cannot do it if not everybody has a chance to make a living, get an education.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjessejacksoncnnsbothsidestorrance", "title": "Interview With Jesse Jackson of CNN's Both Sides in Torrance", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jesse-jackson-cnns-both-sides-torrance", "publication_date": "09-07-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1302, "text": "So you had a friendly crowd out there but a pretty fierce Republican reaction in Washington. The Speaker this morning says you are acting like an emperor and you are damaging the presidency. Well, my response is pass a bill. You heard me out there today and you heard me yesterday. The truth is that the Senate did a good job in crafting a bipartisan bill that would have greatly improved our immigration system, and my preference is for a legislative solution to this problem. It did not happen because the Speaker would not call the bill for a vote in the House. And he still has several weeks to call that bill in the House or he can work with me and Democrats to craft a new bill. And the point is that ultimately, Congress has a responsibility to deal with these issues. And there are some things that I cannot do on my own. What I do have is the legal authority to try to make the system better, given the resource constraints that we have, we have to prioritize But you have done more than you used to think you can do. You know several times over the last couple of years you were asked can you do more and you said nope, I am out of administrative flexibility, what changed? Can you just halt deportations?' And I said, 'No I cannot do that.' No, but I have it right here- On a Google Hangout, you were asked specifically, 'What can you do to prevent families from being broken apart' and you said, 'I am not an emperor, I am out of administrative flexibility.' I-I-George, what is absolutely true is that we could not solve the entire problem and still cannot solve the entire problem. But what we can do is to prioritize felons, criminals, recent arrivals, folks who are coming right at the border, and acknowledge that if somebody's been here for over five years, they may have an American child or a legal permanent resident child, it does not make sense for us to prioritize them when we know that we need more resources- But do you have the right to make that decision on your own? If you look, every president - Democrat and Republican - over decades has done the same thing as I mentioned in my remarks today. George H. W. Bush, about 40% of the undocumented persons, at the time, were provided a similar kind of relief as a consequence of executive action-", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek13", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-13", "publication_date": "23-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1303, "text": "But you know the response of both Reagan - but in that case, there were bipartisan bills passed, they were acting after the bills were passed, not because Congress did not act. Well George, I am not sure that argues in favor. If Congress acted specifically and left something out and then a President goes ahead right afterwards and does more than Congress agreed to, it is actually not different. The fact is is that we exercise prosecutorial discretion all the time. And, you know, the primary response that I have to Speaker Boehner and others is go ahead and pass legislation. In fact, I encourage them to act but in the meantime what we have got to make sure of is, number one that our borders are secure and what I am doing is going to allow us to put more resources there, number two it is going to allow us to focus on the people that we really want out. Number three, what it allows us to do is to say to folks who have been here for a while, register, we are gonna submit - you are going to submit to a criminal background check and you are going to pay taxes. Why we would prefer a system in which they are in the shadows, potentially taking advantage of living here but not contributing makes no sense. How do you respond to the argument, a future president comes in, wants lower taxes. Congress will not do it - he says I am not going to prosecute those who do not pay capital gains tax. Well, the truth of the matter is, George, that the reason that we have to do prosecutorial discretion in immigration is that we know we are not even close to being able to deal with the folks who have been here a long time. The vast majority of folks understand that they need to pay taxes, and when we conduct an audit, for example, we are selecting those folks who are most likely to be cheating. We are not going after millions and millions of people who everybody knows are here and were taking advantage of low wages as they are mowing lawns or cleaning out bedpans, and looking the other way - but then you got politicians suddenly going out there saying, suggesting somehow that we should be deporting all of them. Everybody knows, including Republicans, that we are not going to deport 11 million people. So you do not think it'd be legitimate for a future president to make that argument?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek13", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-13", "publication_date": "23-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1304, "text": "But what is true - what is true today is we do not audit every single person, but we still expect that people are going to go ahead and follow the law. And we have limited resources, we have to make sure that we prioritize those folks who are most dangerous and we should acknowledge what everybody has already acknowledged through their actions - and Congress acknowledges through their budget - which is we are not in the business of deporting millions of people or breaking up families. Ted Cruz says that now Republicans should block every nomination going forward. Your friend Senator Tom Coburn is wondering about possible violence. What do you think about those reactions? Well, you know, there is often a lot of rhetoric coming out of Congress, uh, and in Washington. What the American people expect is that if we disagree on one thing, then we disagree on that thing. And then we work on everything else. One of the habits that we have seen in Congress over the last four years since the House Republicans took over, is that everything becomes hostage to one disagreement. So a couple of years ago it was Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act. And they decided, We are gonna shut down the government because we disagree with this one law. They say they are not gonna do that this time. Well, if they are not gonna do that then we should not have a problem, because we should be able then to work on a whole host of other issues that is how our democracy has always worked. How much has your view of executive power changed over the years? I remember when you were a senator you used to warn about presidents over-reaching, yet a lot of your critics now say you are doing it more than anyone else. Has your view of executive power changed? If you look - the history is that I have issued fewer executive actions than most of my predecessors, by a longshot. The difference is the response of Congress. But if you ask historians, take a look at the track records of the modern presidency, I have actually been very restrained. And I have been very restrained with respect to immigration. I bent over backwards and will continue to do everything I can to get Congress to work. Let us talk about Ferguson. Everyone's waiting for the grand jury to hear, what the final word from the grand jury is. Your FBI has warned about possible violence in the wake of that decision. What is your message to the people of Ferguson and others who are looking to protest?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek13", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-13", "publication_date": "23-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1305, "text": "Well I think, first and foremost, keep protests peaceful. You know, this is a country that allows everybody to express their views. Allows them to peacefully assemble to protest actions that they think are unjust but using any event as an excuse for violence is contrary to rule of law and contrary to who we are. You know, part of what I have asked Eric Holder to do is to not just engage with the folks in Ferguson, but to engage nationally in a conversation between law enforcement and communities of color that often times feel as if they not being treated fairly by law enforcement officials. Law enforcement has a very tough job. But what is clear is that that lack of trust between communities and law enforcement crops up not just in Ferguson but in places all across the country- You know, we saw during the summer the possibility of even overwhelmingly peaceful crowds being overrun by a few thugs who might be looking for an excuse to loot or to commit vandalism. What I have done is called Jay Nixon, the Governor of Missouri, to make sure that he has a plan to respond in a careful and appropriate way to any potential violence. To be able to sort out the vast majority of peaceful protesters from the handful who are not. But - over the - in the end, what I have confidence in is that if we do a better job of training our law enforcement to be sensitive to the concerns of minority communities, then over time trust can be built in part because minority communities typically are subject to more crime. They need law enforcement more than anybody and there are a lot of communities in my hometown of Chicago, for example, who want to actually see more police in but they want to make sure the police are trained so they can distinguish between a gangbanger and a kid who just happens to be wearing a hoodie but just otherwise is a good kid and not doing anything wrong. One of your heroes, John Lewis, has suggested that if there is no indictment in this case, it would be a miscarriage of justice, and another turning point like Selma. Do you agree with that? You know, I love John, I did not see the quote, so I do not want to comment on what John specifically said. But I will say this - that the kinds of ongoing problems we have with police and communities of color around the country are not of the sort that we saw in Selma. We are not talking about systematic segregation or discrimination.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek13", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-13", "publication_date": "23-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1306, "text": "They are solvable problems if in fact law enforcement officials are open to the kind of training and best practices that we have seen instituted in lot of parts of the country. One of the things I was proudest of when I was in the state legislature, way back when I was in Illinois, in Springfield, was to pass both a racial profiling law and a law governing police interrogations. And in each case I worked with the police, and - both state police and local police organizations, and what they found was that they actually ended up doing better police work, had more trust, you started seeing a reduction in complaints about the behavior of the law enforcement. So we know how to do this, but there is got to be a commitment on the part of law enforcement to do it. And the community has to then give law enforcement that is operating in good faith a chance to improve its practices. Do you think it would make sense for you to go to Ferguson after this decision? But what does makes sense is for not just me but my entire administration to work with willing partners at the state and local level to see how we can address some of these systematic issues. I was struck by a poll I saw recently that said since 2009 the number of African Americans who think that race relations are getting better has actually gone down. Well, you know, we go in sort of ebbs and flows. I think that my own experience tells me that race relations continue to improve. If you think about just in our lifetimes - we are about the same age - where we have traveled, there is no way to say that somehow race relations are worse now than they were 10 years ago, 20 years ago, or 50 years ago. Part of what happens is that they get a lot more attention today - occasionally problems that used to be pretty common 20, 30 years ago were not videotaped everybody knows it instantly Now, you know, somebody's got a camera and people see it and, you know I mean, a good thing in the sense that it lays bare - and I have said this before as an African American male, there have been times where I have experienced discrimination as a young man - it is been a while since it happened - and, you know, I think that folks on the other side of it might not understand why there are concerns or mistrust. Not because they are in denial, just they have not experienced it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek13", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-13", "publication_date": "23-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1307, "text": "And so when people start seeing these instances, then they start saying okay, maybe we understand what we are talking about. Or to suggest somehow that we have not made progress. One of the things that I think the presidency drives home is - in a democracy, progress is incremental. You know, and it goes in stutter-steps and sometimes there is some backsliding. Big deadline coming up on the Iranian nuclear negotiations - on Monday. I know that Secretary Kerry and the Foreign Minister Zarif of Iran are in some pretty intensive discussions right now. The good news is that the interim deal that we entered into has definitely stopped Iran's nuclear program from advancing, and in some cases has actually rolled back some of the things that they were doing - their stockpiles, for example, how they enriched uranium. So it is been successful, and Iran has followed the terms of the deal. The deal would require rollback, would not it? Well, so, now the question is, can we get to a more permanent deal. I think that our goal has consistently been to shut off a whole bunch of different avenues whereby Iran might get a nuclear weapon, and at the same time make sure that the structure of sanctions are rolled back step for step as Iran is doing what it is supposed to do. I think Iran would love to see the sanctions end immediately, and then to still have some avenues that might not be completely closed, and we cannot do that. Russia and China, you know where we often have tensions - you know, with Russia big tensions lately - nevertheless they have acknowledged that our position is a fair one, and the question now just becomes, Can Iran say yes, and they have got their own hardliners. Well, the difference is I have got the entire international community on my side, and they are sort of on their own. Are you willing to extend if there is no deal by Monday? You know, I think that what we are going to do is take a look at what emerges over the course of the weekend. You know both you and President Rouhani have some constraints. you have Congress. Are you confident that if you reach a deal, Congress will back it? I am confident that if we reach a deal that is verifiable and ensures that Iran does not have breakout capacity, that not only can I persuade Congress, but I can persuade the American people that it is the right thing to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek13", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-13", "publication_date": "23-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1308, "text": "our goal is to solve a particular problem here, which is making sure Iran does not trigger a nuclear arms race, cannot threaten the United States, cannot threaten allies like Israel. If we are able to accomplish that goal, if I am confident of it, and my experts and the technical people can say here is the science behind why they cannot break out and we have verifiable mechanisms in place, then I am confident I can sell the deal to the country. And then Iran joins the fight against ISIS? Well, you know, Iran is already fighting ISIS through its various surrogates. We are not going to be I think anytime soon, you know, coordinating military activities with Iran, because keep in mind even if we solve the nuclear problem, we still have the problem of Iran sponsoring terrorist activities in the region, we still have problems in terms of their attitude towards friends like Israel. What a deal would do is take a big piece of business off the table and perhaps begin a long process in which the relationship not just between Iran and us but the relationship between Iran and the world, and the region begins to change. I think ultimately that would be good for the people of Iran. You know it is a big country with a lot of talent, a lot of sophistication. You know, Iran's not like North Korea, a country that is just completely isolated and completely dysfunctional. So they have the opportunity, I think, to really thrive. I suspect President Rouhani would like to seize that opportunity, but in the end he is going to have to deal with his politics at home, and he is not the ultimate decider inside of Iran; the Supreme Leader is. Secretary Clinton tweeted out for support for your executive action last night and it just made me think of it. How- how is this gonna work over the next- couple years, your relationship with the secretary, as it certainly appears she is planning on running for president. Does she have your blessing to kind of separate when she needs to? It- well, she has not announced so I do not wanna jump the gun. I can tell you a couple things. Number one, she was an outstanding secretary of State. Number three- I think- she- and- and a number of other- possible Democratic candidates, would be terrific presidents- And I am very interested in making sure that- I have got a Democratic successor.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek13", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-13", "publication_date": "23-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1309, "text": "So I am gonna do everything I can, obviously, to make sure that- whoever the nominee is is successful. And she is not gonna agree with me on- on everything And, you know, one of the benefits of- running for president is you can stake out your own positions. You are - and- and have- a clean slate. You know, when you have been president for six years you- you know, you have got some dings and- you know and- and- No. You know, I think- I think the American people, you know, they are gonna want- you know, that new car smell. You know, their own- they- they wanna drive somethin' off the lot that- that does not have as- as much mileage as me. You think you will be itchin' to get back out there or glad to let someone else? I- I tell you- when I think about the next two years, I just wanna every single day be making- this government work a little bit better for ordinary folks. And, you know, I told- my- cabinet this- and my White House staff the day. You know, it was- it was- it was a tough- election for us on the midterms and people were understandably down . And I said, Folks, all of you collectively are in charge of the single most powerful institution in the world. And it is responsible for delivering on behalf of millions of Americans and billions of people around the world when you start looking at some of the- security and- and development assistance we provide. I said, Even if Congress does not do another thing, even if- you do not get a dime's more money or no new program is set up, you can figure out over these next two years how to make this thing work just a little bit better so that some kid out there who right now is not - able to afford a college can get college. So that somebody who does not have a job out there- has a better chance of getting a job or job training to prepare them for a job. So that somebody, you know- who- you know, is- is- is worried about- losing their home- has a chance to keep it. And if- if I am able to do that over the next two years- then not only will I be serving the American people well, I think I will be serving a potential successor well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek13", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-13", "publication_date": "23-11-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1320, "text": "I am sure Prime Minister Koizumi is looking forward to have you over there. Actually, he is preparing a package for Iraqi reconstruction which includes $5 billion aid for the next 4 years and sending a couple of hundred Japanese self-defense forces over there for the humanitarian operation. Do you think Japan fulfilled her responsibility with this package? I admire him a lot, and I spoke to him about Japan helping in Iraq, just like Japan helped in Afghanistan. And he assured me he would work hard to develop a good package. We have got great relations between America and Japan. We will keep them that way. And part of good relations is we see problems, and we work together, and see opportunities. And a free Iraq is a-a peaceful Iraq is a wonderful opportunity for Japan and the United States to work together to achieve because a free and peaceful Iraq will change the world in a positive way. Another subject, ENTITY, that the Prime Minister will bring up is the North Korean problem. And he is working very hard to resolve the issue of abductees, Japanese. What could your administration do to help him realizing the reunification of the abductees' status? The primary objective of the five countries who are now engaged with North Korea is to get rid of nuclear weapons on the Korean Peninsula. A major issue with the Prime Minister, of course, is the abductees. I have always said that the fact that North Korea kidnaped or abducted these people talks to the nature of the administration in North Korea. And of course, we will send strong signals that we object to that kind of behavior, that that is not a civil behavior. But the first objective is for all of us to work together for the sake of peace and security, particularly in your part of the world, to get rid of any nuclear weapons and/or ambitions for nuclear weapons. For example, do you think it is possible that your administration demand North Korea to include this abduction program in whatever the comprehensive package-- I will talk to the Prime Minister about this, of course. I know this is a very sensitive subject, and I have spoken out about this terrible practice, a terrible part of history, that the North Koreans abducted. But the first thing we got to do is focus on our overall objective, and that is to make sure that the peninsula is nuclear weapons-free. And that is in Japan's interest, of course. I understand-or I read Bob Woodward's book.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtarokimurajapansfujitv", "title": "Interview With Taro Kimura of Japan's FUJI TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-taro-kimura-japans-fuji-tv", "publication_date": "14-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1321, "text": "And you have said you loathe Kim Chong-il. When I know a leader starves his people, allows his people to starve, and know there is detention camps and it is not a free society-it is a very, closed totalitarian society-he and I do not agree, obviously, on freedom and peace. And I hope that Kim Chong-il realizes that when five nations speak, we are very serious, and that it is in his country's interest to get rid of nuclear weapons and/or programs to develop nuclear weapons. Because the five countries that are now speaking in one voice are saying as clearly as possible to Mr. Kim Chong-il, You need to change for your good and for the good of the country. There is speculation in Tokyo that you will speak to Mr. Koizumi to let dollar-yen rate float and not let the Japanese financial institute to intervene in the market. Well, I will talk to him about, one, our Government's strong dollar policy. And I will remind him that our position when it comes to currency exchanges is that the market ought to decide the relative values of currencies based upon the fiscal policy of each government, the monetary policy of each government, the future economic picture of each country. And that is what I will remind him. This will not be the first time that we have discussed dollar policy and/or trade matters. Lastly, I remember you have enjoyed yakitori when you were in Tokyo, the barbecued chicken. And I wonder whether you will bear tasting sushi this time. I know you are not really particularly in favor of the raw fish. You know I like good beef. Japan's got some of the greatest beef in the world. And- but I am also, hopefully, a good enough guest not to demand a particular menu from my host. The Prime Minister and I have eaten a lot of meals together. And I am confident that he will put together a good meal for both the First Lady, Laura, and me. And I really am looking forward to seeing him. I really enjoyed being around him. You know, one of the- he came to my ranch. And he and I sat down apart from the house in a beautiful part of the ranch and had a very long discussion just on a personal basis. And it meant a lot to me. He is a leader of a great country and a great friend of the United States. And I am grateful for our relationship.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtarokimurajapansfujitv", "title": "Interview With Taro Kimura of Japan's FUJI TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-taro-kimura-japans-fuji-tv", "publication_date": "14-10-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1322, "text": "ENTITY, the German Presidency of the G-8 has put the focus for the next meeting on climate change and what to do about it. Europeans want fixed caps. You have been opposed to that all the time. Now you announced a new proposal. Have you changed your position? First, let me, if I might- I think that my friend Angela Merkel, for whom I have great respect, wants to discuss a lot of matters, whether it be ENTITY/ENTITY or malaria or hunger, depravation, as well as climate change. And I am looking forward to it, I really am. I have been to this beautiful part of Germany before. It is a beautiful part of your country. No, I have always taken the issue seriously. I have told the American people and those who are willing to listen that I take climate change seriously. And today I talked about a post-Kyoto framework in which the world can discuss this issue in a serious fashion. Angela was concerned at one time whether or not I'd be willing to accept a post-Kyoto framework, and today I expressed my keen desire to work with her and other leaders on such a framework. And I also suggested that a good first step toward achieving serious accomplishments would be to have the major emitters gather and set a goal, an international goal by the end of 2008. And I am very serious about that. I am looking forward to working with G-8 partners and others. I think one of the breakthroughs that I hope we can achieve in Germany at this G-8 is to get India and China as participants in setting an international goal. And what that goal is, that will be determined as a result of these meetings. But Angela should be proud of leading the international community toward these kind of breakthroughs. Though this is the beginning of a process, at the end of which there could be fixed goals? And that would be determined by the major emitters, the major greenhouse gas emitters. Generally, sometimes people-some sit around the table and come up with what they think is the best solution. My view is, is that they need to get the United States, China, India, the EU, Russia, other countries as well around the table and say, okay, we agree on a goal. And each nation needs to come up with a way to achieve that goal.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheberhardpiltzzweitesdeutschesfernsehengermany", "title": "Interview With Eberhard Piltz of Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-eberhard-piltz-zweites-deutsches-fernsehen-germany", "publication_date": "31-05-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1323, "text": "And listen, the truth of the matter is, the best way to achieve, in our case, a couple of national objectives-energy security and economic security, as well as being good stewards of the environment-is a strong push for technologies. And I will bring a very good record to the G-8. We have spent a lot of money here in the United States on developing clean technologies. We are driving a lot of our automobiles now with corn-based ethanol. That gets us off of oil, which is good for economic and national security, and it helps with the environment. Missile defense, sir-the harsh Russian reaction on U.S. plans on missile defense signals some sort of deterioration in relations. Are we headed back to colder times? Our message to-and my personal message to Vladimir Putin is, there is no need to try to relive the cold war. And we do not view Russia as an enemy, we view Russia as an opportunity to work together. We do not agree with every decision Russia has made. She does not agree with every decision I have made. But I have worked hard to make sure that we can find common ground on issues like proliferation and dealing with Islamic radicals and Iran or North Korea. You know, Vladimir Putin has spoken out very strongly on missile defense. And so frankly, it-I visit with Angela quite often, and one of the things she talked to me about, is there not a way to open a dialog with President Putin on missile defense? So I sent Bob Gates, our Secretary of Defense, there, and my message to Vladimir Putin-and it will be when I see him at the G-8 in Germany as well as here in the States-is, you do not have anything to fear. As a matter of fact, this system is aimed at protecting NATO allies, and if you want to participate, we would like you to participate with us. We will be totally transparent in the technologies that we are deploying. We want you to come and inspect our sites. We want you to talk to our military. We want to be wide open because this system is not geared toward Russia; it is geared toward a rogue state that may be able to acquire a nuclear weapon. You mentioned Angela Merkel's role. Well, it sounds like to me, Angela has had some pretty difficult dialogs herself as the leader of the EU.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheberhardpiltzzweitesdeutschesfernsehengermany", "title": "Interview With Eberhard Piltz of Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-eberhard-piltz-zweites-deutsches-fernsehen-germany", "publication_date": "31-05-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1324, "text": "And I think the key thing is for Angela and me to work closely together to have a-when we can in dealing with Russia. But each nation has to deal with Russia in her own terms. I do not need any help dealing with Vladimir Putin, and he does not need any help dealing with me. We are sovereign nations; we have our positions. One of the things that I have worked hard to do is to-and received some criticism here in the States-is, I have worked hard to have a personal relationship with Vladimir Putin so that when I discuss things with him, I can find areas of agreement, but I have also got a relationship such that I can bring up areas of concern without rupturing relations. And it is -you know, some have suggested, well, there is no need to have relations with Russia. Well, I strongly disagree with that. I think it is important for the U.S. and Russia to have relations. Sir, how satisfied are you with international burden-sharing in the war on terror? As a matter of fact, the coalitions are much bigger than anybody could have envisioned. You know, one of my concerns, however, is that, just in general, people do not take the threat seriously. Well, there have not been many attacks; there is been a few attacks; but we should not be that worried about it. I am deeply worried about it, and I really strongly believe the free world ought to be worried about radicals and extremists who will kill in the name of an ideology. See, I view this as an ideological conflict between people who are willing to murder and want to spread their vision, and those of us who believe in liberty and the universality of liberty. And so my main worry is complacency over the long run. I am pleased with the cooperation at this point in time. We have got great relations with Germany. Obviously, if we know of a plot that may be taking place in Germany, we will share information on an instant basis, and vice versa. And that ought to be comforting to the German citizens. That was my next question, the state of the relationship between America and Germany. Are we back to, as your father put it, partners in leadership ? First of all, I had a decent relationship with Gerhard Schroeder. I never bore any- look, there was a difference on Iraq, obviously; it was a clear difference on Iraq.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheberhardpiltzzweitesdeutschesfernsehengermany", "title": "Interview With Eberhard Piltz of Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, Germany", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-eberhard-piltz-zweites-deutsches-fernsehen-germany", "publication_date": "31-05-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1325, "text": "You face many tough issues as Commander in Chief, for instance, drawing down forces in Iraq and ramping up in Afghanistan. What goes through your mind when you are in front of these marines here at Camp Lejeune and you have to tell them that they are going into harm's way? in your role as Commander in Chief. And my main goal is to make sure that any time we are deploying our men and women in uniform, that the civilian leadership has done everything that it needs to do to make the best decision possible. And that means consulting with our commanders on the ground; it means talking to every level of Pentagon leadership, from the Joint Chiefs of Staff to my Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates; it means also consulting with a wide range of people outside, so that you are not just listening to one voice, you are listening to a whole bunch of them and then arriving at some sort of consensus. And I am confident that with respect to our drawdown in Iraq, it is done in a way that General Odierno is comfortable with, General Petraeus is comfortable with, that our diplomatic efforts can be ramped up to accompany that drawdown. With respect to Afghanistan, I think that all of us believe that the situation has deteriorated somewhat there, and that is why I immediately made a decision for us to send additional troops, including marines from Camp Lejeune. But I also think that we have got to refine our goals and our strategy more effectively. I think in Afghanistan we have seen that strategy drift a little bit. And, you know, my most important job as Commander in Chief is to make sure that if we are sending folks there, we have a well-thought-out strategy, clear goals, and that they are achievable and that I can marshal and maintain the strongest support possible from folks back home. And to sort of continue with that topic, you said that the U.S. will forge a new and comprehensive strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan to defeat Al Qaida and to combat extremism in the region. What will this mean for our men and women in Afghanistan now and in the future, sir? Well, first of all, by sending an additional 17,000 troops, we are obviously going to be bolstering our forces in Afghanistan, and that will obviously be important to the folks that are already there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmastersergeantrustybarfieldthepentagonchannel", "title": "Interview With Master Sergeant Rusty Barfield of the Pentagon Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-master-sergeant-rusty-barfield-the-pentagon-channel", "publication_date": "27-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1326, "text": "If you talk to General McKiernan, our commander in Afghanistan, he will tell you that especially in the southern regions of the country you have seen brazen attacks from Taliban forces, extremist forces, and we want to make sure that we have the force necessary to meet that. I also think that because you are going to see that additional engagement, there is the risk of greater additional casualties, at least in the short term, just as there was in Iraq. And, you know, that is something that, you know, we will have to monitor very carefully. The key, though, is to understand that we are not going to win in Afghanistan or get an acceptable outcome in Afghanistan if we are only dependent on our military. Our military does everything that is asked of them, but anybody who knows the region knows that if we do not have a Afghan Government that can deliver for its people, if we do not have an economic development strategy where farmers do not have to grown heroin poppy but instead can grow other crops so that they are not feeding narcoterrorism if we do not have Pakistan providing us support on the other side of the border that cleans out some of these areas where Al Qaida and the Taliban are using as safe havens, then this is not going to work. And my goal is to have a comprehensive strategy of not just force, but also diplomacy and development that is all moving in concert to get the kind of outcome we want. You just talked about your plan for drawing down combatant forces in Iraq by the end of August 2010. Why is this timeline so important to you, sir? Well, because I think it is important, first of all, to send a very strong, clear signal to the Iraqis that they are going to need to be taking these responsibilities, that we mean it when we say that we are not going to be a permanent occupying force in Iraq. And we already have an agreement, a security agreement that was signed by the previous administration and by the Maliki Government that says we have got to be out of there by the end of 2011. We do not want to have 140,000 troops there the day before we have to be out of there; we have got to have a glide path that is responsible in pulling our troops out. And so what we have done is we have set a point of August 31, 2010, as a transition point, after the Iraqi elections have taken place, where there is , obviously, potential vulnerability.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmastersergeantrustybarfieldthepentagonchannel", "title": "Interview With Master Sergeant Rusty Barfield of the Pentagon Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-master-sergeant-rusty-barfield-the-pentagon-channel", "publication_date": "27-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1327, "text": "After that point, you are looking at maybe six brigades, 35,000 to 50,000 troops overall, who are providing logistical support, training, are providing protection for U.S. civilian as well as military personnel, and some counterterrorist counterterrorism striking capability. That then gets phased down over the next year and a half or so, until finally at the end of 2011, we should have no troops there. I think it is a responsible plan that meets our objectives, and it is one that was created in close consultation with our military commanders on the ground. And in continuing on with that topic, what will be the major measuring stick, if you will, when we talk about the 35,000 to 50,000 troops? What is it that is going to really sway you in terms of, is it 35,000, is it 40,000, or is it 50,000? Well, you know, I think that all these decisions have to be made based on what the situation is at the time, and it is very hard to anticipate exactly what things are going to be like in 18 months. If we continue to make strong progress in training the Iraqi security forces, if the elections are peaceful, if we have seen resolution of some of the issues that are creating sectarian tension in Iraq, like the oil laws and how much power the national Government has versus the Provincial governments, if those issues are getting resolved peacefully through a regular political process, then that probably means that we are going to be able to have less troops support there, as of August 31st of next year. If some of those things have not happened, then that will put more of a burden on us, as well as the Iraqis. So our hope is, is that we are doing everything right leading up to that point so that by the time we get to that transition period, we are well prepared to start phasing our entire operation out of Iraq. ENTITY, how does your plan for Iraq and Afghanistan deal with the issue of relieving the pressure on the fighting force and their families? Well, this is one of the most important issues that we face. so many people I meet on repeated tours three, four tours of duty; the stop-loss policy that is hit a number of our fighting men and women; the burden on military families, something that my wife, the First Lady, Michelle, has taken very seriously and talked to a lot of families about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmastersergeantrustybarfieldthepentagonchannel", "title": "Interview With Master Sergeant Rusty Barfield of the Pentagon Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-master-sergeant-rusty-barfield-the-pentagon-channel", "publication_date": "27-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1328, "text": "So first of all, obviously, as we start drawing down, that puts less pressure on military families. That means that we can start ending we can end stop-loss policy. We can start getting back to the kinds of rotations where, you know, after a year of service, then people have a lot more time back home than they have had over the last several years, which is good for everybody. In addition, my budget has also called for an increase in the force structure, the size of the Marines and of the ENTITY. So that will also relieve some of the pressure, and it will allow us to meet some of the strategic needs not just in Afghanistan and Iraq, but around the world. I mean, there is a big world out there, and right now we do not have the kind of strategic capability that we should to meet other emergency situations that might arise. Along those same lines, one big piece of relief, I think you heard during the speech today, is that we are going to have a pay increase for our troops. But beyond that, in the recovery plan that I got passed through Congress we have a whole slew of steps that we are taking that are going to provide some immediate help to the military families. In my budget, we have got additional money for daycare, additional money for training, making sure that the GI bill that was signed last year by Congress, that that is adequately funded and implemented. So one of the things that is very important to me is improved quality of life, making sure that our troops and their families are supported, honored, and that our veterans, when they come home, are treated with the respect and the care that they need. I have a final question for you, sir; I know you have a full plate today. If you could sit down and speak to each military member and their family, as Commander in Chief, what would you tell them, and how would you convey your commitment to them, sir? Well, first of all, what I'd tell them is thank you. And you know, just yesterday, I had the mother and father of a fallen marine, who actually was stationed here at Camp Lejeune I had written them a letter of gratitude and condolence. They actually got a ride on Air Force One down here because their grandchildren, their son's children, are still down here. And what I told them was, first of all, thank you; that all of America is grateful.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmastersergeantrustybarfieldthepentagonchannel", "title": "Interview With Master Sergeant Rusty Barfield of the Pentagon Channel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-master-sergeant-rusty-barfield-the-pentagon-channel", "publication_date": "27-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1329, "text": "My pleasure, I read the ENTITY before other people read the ENTITY. Now it is trendy and everybody carries around a ENTITY. Let us talk about the G-20. What will be your benchmarks for success? The most important task for all of us is to deliver a strong message of unity in the face of crisis. Number one, all the participating countries recognize that in the face a severe global contraction we have to each take steps to promote economic growth and trade; that means a robust approach to stimulus, fighting off protectionism. Next, we have to make sure that we are all taking serious steps to deal with the problems in the banking sector and the financial markets and that means having a series of steps to deal with toxic assets and to ensure adequate capital in the banking sector. Third, a regulatory reform agenda that prevents these kinds of systemic risks from occurring again and that requires each country to take initiative, but it also requires coordination across borders because we have a global, we have global capital markets, and that will include a wide range of steps, additional monitoring authority coordination of supervisors and various countries dealing with offshore tax havens. I know that in my discussion I think there is a concern that we do not want people to be able to game the system or circumvent regulated capital markets and making sure our regulations are targeting not just banks but any institution that could pose a potential systemic risk to the system. A final area of concerted action involves international financial institutions and their capacity to assist emerging markets in developing countries at a time when those markets could be under even more severe strain then some of the more wealthy nations and I think making sure that institutions like the IMF have the resources to provide such assistance that world food supplies are not imperiled as a consequence of the break down in global trade, those are all issues that I think have to be addressed. Now, I am confident based on conversations that I have this week with Angela Merkel, Sarkozy, as well as with Kevin Rudd as well as conversations that I have had previously with Gordon Brown and others, that there is already a rough consensus there that by the time we arrive in London we will have taken, we will have made significant progress in moving in the right direction. Let us just talk about the stimulus for a moment. There are concerns among economists that you need a sustainable stimulus and therefore 2010 is key. Will you get secure commitments from say, the Europeans, for action if necessary in 2010?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlionelbarberchrystiafreelandandedwardlucethefinancialtimes", "title": "Interview with Lionel Barber, Chrystia Freeland, and Edward Luce of the Financial Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lionel-barber-chrystia-freeland-and-edward-luce-the-financial-times", "publication_date": "27-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1330, "text": "The press has tended to frame this as an either or approach . There are some G20 participants that are arguing fiercely for stimulus, others for regulation. What I have consistently argued is that what is needed is a both and approach . We need stimulus and we need regulation. We need to deal with the problems right in front of us and we also need to make sure we are taking steps to prevent these types of breakdowns from happening again. With respect to the stimulus, there is going to be an accord that G20 countries will do what is necessary to promote growth and trade. I think there is a legitimate concern that, would most countries already having initiated significant stimulus packages that we need to see how they work. Obviously, I admire economists. I have a bunch of them on my staff. But to start making a whole host of plans about next year, without having better information on how the current stimulus efforts are working, is something that I think is of concern. So, what we are going to see is what the United States has led on this. We have been very aggressive in terms of our recovery package. The way our recovery package is structured, money is going out both in 2009 and 2010. But each country has its own constraints, its own political rhythms and what we want to just make sure is that everybody is doing something, everybody recognizes the need to make progress on this front and that we are prepared to step into the breech should current efforts prove to be inadequate. I mean that is really the great challenge, in managing this crisis - bridging the gap between what is economically absolutely necessary and what is politically possible. How do you bridge that? Then there is a gap in ideas about how to approach a crisis like this, especially among economists - although on the issue of the stimulus there seems to be much broader consensus among both conservative and liberal economists that stimulus is appropriate. You know, the financial crisis hit the United States first; it is now being experienced around the world. Not surprisingly we took some very aggressive action earlier than some other countries because its impact had been felt most immediately on Wall Street. As other countries start experiencing these drastic declines in GDP and in their exports, I think that the sense of urgency has grown, and you are going to start seeing a convergence.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlionelbarberchrystiafreelandandedwardlucethefinancialtimes", "title": "Interview with Lionel Barber, Chrystia Freeland, and Edward Luce of the Financial Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lionel-barber-chrystia-freeland-and-edward-luce-the-financial-times", "publication_date": "27-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1331, "text": "In all countries there is an understandable tension between the steps that are needed to kick start the economy and the fact that many of these steps are very expensive and tax payers have a healthy skepticism about spending too much of their money, particularly when it is perceived that some of the money is being spent not on them but on others who they perceive may have helped precipitate the crisis. So that is always going to be a challenge and what is also difficult is the fact that the policies we initiate all take time to take effect and by its very nature politics looks for more instantaneous gratification. But I am confident that the American people, and I think people around the world, are looking to its leaders to lead and that some of the steps we have already taken are starting to bear fruit. We are seeing glimmers of stabilization in the economies and we have not yet seen... Here in the United States for example, you are starting to see pockets of stabilization in the housing market. Our housing plan has led to the lowest interest rates, mortgage rates in a very long time and you are starting to see a huge number of refinancing in the banking sector. In certain select markets, like the market for auto loans or the market for student loans, Secretary Tim Geithner's efforts to provide a market for asset-backed securities has helped and so we still have a long way to go, but I am confident that if we are persistent and we do not approach this with a thought that there is a silver bullet out there but instead are willing to try a range of methods to deliver on the economic growth in jobs that we will get out of this current crisis. You mentioned the risks and dangers of protectionism. 73 separate measures have been identified by the World Bank since the last G20 summit so what again in practical terms can your administration do at the G20 to stop this - and I am thinking to whether there are real risks that people worry in Europe a lot about what is going on, on Capitol Hill, with Buy American provisions. Well first of all, I think it is important to note that here in the United States, despite some protectionist rhetoric and very real economic frustration growing out of the collapse of the financial markets and the huge rise in unemployment that the Buy American provision that was in the stimulus package was specifically written that had to be consistent with WTO. That the Mexican trucking provision is now subject to negotiations to ensure that we do not see an escalating trade war.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlionelbarberchrystiafreelandandedwardlucethefinancialtimes", "title": "Interview with Lionel Barber, Chrystia Freeland, and Edward Luce of the Financial Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lionel-barber-chrystia-freeland-and-edward-luce-the-financial-times", "publication_date": "27-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1332, "text": "I have sent a very clear signal that now is not that time to offer hints of protectionism and I will continue to discourage efforts to close off the US market. I think that in a democracy, there are always going to be some loose ends out there. That is true here, that is true around the world but overall I do not think that we have seen a huge rush to protectionism that that is not the rhetoric that is emanating from the leaders that will be gathering in London. And to the extent that the American people or Europeans or Asians, Africans, Latin Americans all feel confident that their leaders are doing everything that they can to encourage and promote economic and that they have their populations interests at heart, I think we are going to be able to hold the line on any significant slippage. I wondered ENTITY whether you are concerned that, particularly following the AIG bonus controversy, there is some danger that confidence that business has in the rule of law in the United States has been shaken and that could hinder some of these recovery measures? I think it is a source of concern in some quarters. To the extent that the captains of industry recognize very legitimate frustrations that the American people feel when they read about huge bonuses going to members of firms that are receiving large tax payer bailouts. I think they can take steps to lessen that danger and I met with some bankers today and it was a constructive conversation but one of the points that I made is that a time when everybody is needing to sacrifice there has to be a similar sense of sacrifice on the part of those various sectors of the economy that helped to precipitate this crisis and to the extent that they are showing restraint that compensation packages are structured so that there is some deferral until money is returned to tax payers and the economy recovers that will be good for everybody. That will put in a stronger position to help them. But you know, keep in mind that although there are going to be, I think, emotional reactions to and legitimate grievances around some of these issues, the United States has been the world's most successful economy precisely because of a long-standing respect for legal contracts and orderly transparent and open market operations and that is not going to change. ENTITY, given the rising tendency to populism on Capitol Hill and elsewhere, do you feel confident that at a time like this you can go to Congress and ask for the kind of backing of capitalization that most economists say will be required in the near future?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlionelbarberchrystiafreelandandedwardlucethefinancialtimes", "title": "Interview with Lionel Barber, Chrystia Freeland, and Edward Luce of the Financial Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lionel-barber-chrystia-freeland-and-edward-luce-the-financial-times", "publication_date": "27-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1333, "text": "Yes, I'd just say two quick things before we go to questions. One is just to piggyback on something ENTITY said. Both candidates, as you know, have made public their commitment to signing the BSA, and reiterated that commitment today. And they continue to pursue a conclusion to their election process based on the audit that was agreed to and the commitment to form a government that can bring together Afghanistan's different political factions. And so that is ongoing, and we have urged them to conclude that as soon as position so that we can conclude the agreements that ENTITY referenced. Just two quick scheduling things that I left out from today. This was also in that window between the Ukraine meeting and the ISAF meeting. In addition, to seeing King Abdullah, the President was able to check in with the NATO Aspirant countries, and that includes Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Macedonia, Montenegro. And then he was able to have a check-in with NATO's Enhanced Partners. This is something that we focused on in terms of making NATO a hub of a truly global security architecture. And those are just brief check-ins, but they are a key priority to the United States that we reiterate NATO's open door and to build these Enhanced Partnerships. I just want to quickly clarify the President did, in fact, go to that meeting on Ukraine, correct? He was just late for it? Yes, he went to the meeting. And can you talk a little bit more about these sanctions that you are looking at, kind of what sectors are they going at and really where are they going to target? I do not want to get ahead of the process of developing these sanctions -- or sorry, in the process of finalizing these sanctions. They have obviously been worked on steadily for some time now. Clearly, the last round of sanctions that we did focused on sectors of the Russian economy that would have maximum impact. And so we did sanctions on the arms and financial and energy sectors. We have broad authorities to look at a range of different sectors. So the United States is preparing our own additional sanctions. We have very active discussions with the Europeans that have been ongoing for months now so that we can share our thinking and have an understanding of their thinking. They are working at the European Council on their own measures. I think the key point is that Russia must continue to face costs for its own escalation. If Russia escalates, we stand prepared to escalate our pressure.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1334, "text": "And that is I think what the leaders are committed to in the face of Russia's continued support for their proxies and to separatists in Ukraine, as well as their personnel moving overtly into Ukraine. So, again, we are working this in coordination with the Europeans. At the same time, if there can be a peaceful de-escalation, that is preferable. And that is something we would support, provided that President Poroshenko and the Ukrainian government is committed to an agreement. And we'd of course have to see follow-through from all sides, including Russia and this effort that it is been backing. Prime Minister Cameron earlier today mentioned that he would be willing to consider paying a ransom, given the imminent execution of a British citizen. Obviously, President Obama has been very clear in saying that he is not willing to pay ransoms. How will he respond to the Prime Minister this evening? Prime Minister Cameron has been very firm in sharing our view that it is the wrong thing to do to pay ransom to an organization like ISIL for a number of reasons. One, that it incentivizes additional kidnappings; two, that it provides them with a key funding source. And, frankly, part of what has allowed ISIL to grow in the last several months is access to funding in part through very large ransoms that have been paid. And, three, we just as a general matter do not provide funding to terrorist organizations. So we believe we are in agreement with Prime Minister Cameron on that issue. And at the same time, we have urged other governments to adopt a similar approach -- because, tragically, we fear that ransoms incentivize further kidnappings. And so while we certainly understand the sentiments of families and loved ones who want to do whatever is possible to gain the freedom of those who are held hostage, we do that through every resource we have -- military intelligence, law enforcement, diplomacy -- but we do rule out the payment of ransom. And that is a position we have shared with the United Kingdom. I wanted to go back to the ISIL response that you talked about. You said Prime Minister Cameron and the President had a chance to talk about a range of ways in which countries could contribute. Did they talk specifically about military action and whether the British would support the United States if President Obama decided to expand airstrikes into Syria or elsewhere? And what was the response to that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1335, "text": "And then also, on Ukraine, could you talk about whether, specifically, direct assistance in the form of weapons for the Ukrainians was discussed and what the response was of the Allies for that? On the discussion with Prime Minister Cameron, I do not want to get into specific operational details that may have been discussed, and I certainly do not want to speak for the United Kingdom. However, I think it is fair to say that the President discussed the range of different tools that it is going to take to confront ISIL. And we are already doing that through our military action in Iraq, through the strikes that we are taking, but also through intelligence, through the provision of humanitarian assistance, through efforts to crack down on the transitive foreign fighters, through political support for the Iraqi government, and through arming and equipping and training and advising security forces on the ground -- the Iraqi security forces and the Kurdish forces in Iraq. And, of course, we have been engaged in support for the moderate Syrian opposition. Thus far, the United Kingdom has been with us in a range of ways in Iraq. They have done humanitarian airdrops with us on Sinjar Mountain, for instance; and most recently, in Amerli. They have provided important intelligence support. And so we are discussing the full range of options. Prime Minister Cameron spoke to this himself today, and he was looking at the full range of options. So I will let them speak for their own decision-making process. But as you saw in their joint op-ed this morning, and as was reflected in their conversation, he is very seized with the threat and committed to working as a part of a broad coalition that works in many different ways to confront the threat from ISIL. On Ukraine, the capabilities discussion has focused on, well, both short-term assistance to Ukraine that can fill immediate needs. And we have been focused on non-lethal in our efforts to do so, although things like body armor, night-vision goggles are filling direct requirements that help the Ukrainian security services. The NATO discussions have also been very focused on supporting the professionalization and modernization and greater capacity of the Ukrainian security forces in both the short and long term, and what can we do in training and exercises and equipping to meet that goal. And that is the focus of the discussion today. ENTITY, I do not know if you want to add anything about NATO's partnership with Ukraine on the security side.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1336, "text": "Yes, so let me just add that after hearing from Poroshenko today and going around the table among 28 Allies, I think we will be prepared tomorrow to make some announcements about steps that NATO is actually prepared to take with regard to supporting Ukraine. But there is a range of things NATO can do. Most security assistance, weaponry, body armor and so forth comes from nations, not the Alliance as a whole. But the Alliance can perform a very useful and efficient clearinghouse role, both for humanitarian assistance and for security assistance. And I would expect that we may have more to say about that tomorrow. But more broadly, NATO has had a something like 17-year partnership with Ukraine, as it has with about 40 other countries. And Ukrainian forces have served with NATO in Afghanistan, in Kosovo and so forth. So one thing we can do going forward is, based on that partnership, continue to build the capacity of Ukrainian forces not for the purposes of working together in Afghanistan and Kosovo now, but actually for the purpose -- the fundamental purpose of defending their own country. So NATO's existing relationship by way of this partnership really gives us the platform with which to continue our support to Ukraine. And I expect there will be news on that tomorrow. And again, I should just note that, given the summit is ongoing, tomorrow we would expect a range of announcements on issues related to NATO capabilities, support to Ukraine, and other issues on the agenda. So we are checking in midway here, so that is the important context that ENTITY gave. To go back to the Islamic State, in the Obama-Cameron op-ed this morning, it seemed like they were speaking directly to NATO members. And I am wondering if you are seeking any kind of concrete deliverables or statements from NATO on the Islamic State threat. And then also, if you could talk about anything that they are asking of individual countries on the sidelines of the summit. I'd say a couple of things, and ENTITY may want to add. With respect to individual countries, we will be able to have conversations on the margins of this summit as the President did with Prime Minister Cameron about contributions that they can make on an ongoing basis to an effort to confront ISIL. A number of NATO members have already stepped up -- countries like France and Italy, as well as the United Kingdom, Germany -- in things like supporting the Kurds and the ISF with arms and equipment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1337, "text": "A number of them have conducted airdrops; Canada, for instance, as well. So we will be exploring with individual NATO members what contributions they can make to a broad effort to degrade and ultimately defeat ISIL, which, again, will cover many different aspects. At the dinner tonight, which is a wide-ranging discussion, I would expect the threat from ISIL to be subject, as well as tomorrow as NATO is discussing the current threat environment more generally. So I think there will be additional opportunities for the President to engage the leaders on the issue. And they will be able to have discussions with their counterparts on this issue. So that is an essential area of cooperation. Although, again, when we talk about a more --a broader, multi-faceted effort to confront ISIL, clearly different member states would bring to the table different resources. And so those will be discussions that we will be having individually with different heads of state and foreign and defense ministers. But, ENTITY, I do not know if you want to add anything to that. The only thing I'd add, ENTITY, is that this is an Alliance where summit after summit for the last 10 years or so the discussion has been very much focused on Afghanistan. And as that mission is about to transition over completely to Afghan lead, while we are prepared to continue in Afghanistan, what you see the Alliance doing at this summit is looking in more than one direction at a time. So it is looking east to the challenges presented by Russian aggression, but it is also looking to its southeast, where Syria and Iraq border the Alliance immediately with the international border with Turkey. So you have got NATO doing more than one thing at a time and looking in more than one direction at a time. So this is a pretty intense discussion as we move through the agenda. I think the diagnosis of those problems will really culminate at dinner tonight. I will just add one thing to that. I know there was a lot of talk last week about sort of the President's comprehensive strategy for confronting ISIL. And a core component of that strategy was engaging in conversations with our allies and with regional governments, all of whom have a role to play in confronting this threat. And, obviously, the kinds of conversations that are happening at the presidential level over the course of today and tomorrow are a core component of that aspect of the strategy. Thanks, we will take the next question. Let me ask you a little bit more about the idea of a diagnosis.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1338, "text": "I do not think there is any question, as we have heard expressed from everybody -- from the President to David Cameron and throughout many of the leaders -- about the problems and how they exist. But when you talk about a diagnosis, what are you sort of drilling down on? I think as a general matter, across a range of issues today, we are looking at challenges and threats. And the nature of the summit is then tomorrow there is focus on outcomes associated with that threat. And the diagnosis of the current threat from terrorism has clearly shifted. NATO has been focused on Afghanistan. That tracks with our focus over the last decade on al Qaeda core in Afghanistan and Pakistan. And we have been able to significantly degrade al Qaeda core in Afghanistan and Pakistan, decimate its leadership ranks, reducing the threat that they pose. At the same time, we have seen the threat of terrorism evolve as different groups emerged in places like North Africa. And then, with ISIL, you have an organization that is the legacy of the al Qaeda and Iraq organization, which changed to ISIL. And they represent an acute threat in Syria and Iraq today. So essentially, we have to step back and make decisions based on threat assessments and where the threat is coming from. And we have been able to dramatically reduce the resources dedicated to Afghanistan and Pakistan as our troops have come home. That brings up additional resources as necessary to deal with other threats. But the Alliance has to weigh a variety of demands. They, too, have removed a lot of resources from Afghanistan, so a lot has been freed up. But there is a need to reassure eastern allies, and we have done that through our own initiative to have more rotational deployments and have a continuous presence in the frontline states. They have to look south to the threat of terrorism, as well. So, I mean, ENTITY actually said it well. This is really an inflection point for the Alliance. So after 10 years of doing basically the same fundamental big chore, which was Afghanistan and the fight against al Qaeda -- which, by the way, NATO went to Afghanistan in the wake of 9/11, and it is the only time in the 65-year history of the Alliance that its mutual defense clause, Article 5, has been invoked. So NATO has been all about that now for more than a decade. But as that mission winds down, this is a step back and a reflection and a diagnosis of opportunity for the Alliance, because it faces new challenges.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1339, "text": "Six months ago, we were not worried about Crimea and Ukraine in the way we are today. ISIS, obviously, has gained prominence. And instability across North Africa continues, sustained. So this is a bit of a point of, step back, look at what is happening immediately on NATO's borders, and then let us figure out what we can do about it. There will be a series of -- we believe leaders will take a series of concrete decisions about what is next for the Alliance. And you saw a bit of a preview of that several months ago when the President was in Warsaw, but then most prominently yesterday in Estonia. And this is going to feature NATO taking on these challenges that it now faces and adapting to new realities. And it will have something to do with the way NATO postures itself; something to do with how responsive NATO is; something to do with how NATO deals with its partnerships, and how it deals with these problems immediately on its periphery. This is a summit where NATO really has to do some reflection, look at new realities, and adapt. ENTITY was talking earlier on the call about how different NATO nations may be able to bring different resources to dealing with ISIS. That kind of suggests that you are getting sort of a receptive attitude when it comes to dealing with that broadly, with NATO partners. Are you feeling that these NATO partners are receptive to this type of mission? Yes, Jim, I think the evidence for that is what has already been done in Iraq because of the threat from ISIL. So, for instance, you have seen NATO countries join us in humanitarian airdrops, you have seen NATO countries join us in providing arms and equipment to Kurdish and Iraqi forces. That includes a range of countries, even Germany, for instance, which has not been as involved in Iraq over the last decade as, say, the United Kingdom has stepped forward to do that. So I think when you look at the bigger NATO countries, they are seized with the threat, in part because there is a foreign fighter flow that has led many European citizens and passport holders into Syria and Iraq to fight with ISIL, and then that could, of course, put a threat back into Europe if they return home. So we do believe that there is a receptivity of nations that provide support and to play a role in efforts to confront ISIL. We believe that is manifested in what is already taken place in Iraq.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1340, "text": "And as we are working to build a broad coalition to set in place a type of effort that will shrink ISIL's space; take the fight to them, including partners on the frontlines like the Iraqi security force and the Kurds; degrade their capacity; and then ultimately defeat them -- that is a project that is going to require regional buy-in from the neighbors and international buy-in from some of our key allies. And so I think that that is the message that is well understood here at NATO. At the same time, different countries are going to make different types of commitments, and that is very clear. So there are some NATO member states who will be focused on intelligence and law enforcement support. There are some who can do more in working in coordination with us on efforts to go after ISIL, or to do the type of humanitarian airdrops that we have done in Iraq which require military coordination, because obviously that is dependent on intelligence, ISR, and aircraft. So these are all conversations that we will have over the next couple of days. Again, importantly, you have Secretary Hagel, Secretary Kerry, and Susan Rice all here. Then you are going to have Secretary Kerry and Secretary Hagel traveling on to the region for discussions with key partners there. Lisa Monaco, the President's counterterrorism advisor, is also going to be traveling to the region. So there is a significant amount of consultation that is taking place. And all of that will inform the President's approach to building the type of coalition that can confront this threat not just in the coming days, but as is necessary going forward beyond that. We have got time for a couple more questions. On the subject of airstrikes in Syria, this time last year Prime Minister Cameron and the President were on the same page before the House of Commons vote forced the Prime Minister to sort of back away. So I am wondering now if you think the U.S. and the U.K. are back in sync, or maybe moving back in sync on the question of the way forward in the region. And I know you get asked this question periodically, but it seems like a good time for a check-in. There is no country that we are more in sync with in terms of our values and our foreign policy and our security cooperation around the world than the United Kingdom. And I think that is the spirit that illuminates the discussion that the President had with the Prime Minister.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1341, "text": "And that is why coming into this summit hosted by the United Kingdom, the President and Prime Minister staked out the agenda for the summit in that op-ed this morning. With respect to the subject of last year versus this year, first of all, I will leave it to the United Kingdom to define their efforts in this space. Clearly, Prime Minister Cameron has engaged his parliament in discussions of the threat. And so you saw him put forward a presentation about the threat that ISIL poses. He has not made decisions about things like airstrikes. That is something that they will have to review as they consider the different ways in which they can contribute to this effort. But clearly, he is engaged in that discussion here. And I think that there is a unique nature to this situation given the fact that you have foreign fighters from -- including from the United Kingdom, who have been with ISIL in Syria and in Iraq. And tragically, you have heard the Brits confirm that they believe a British national was involved in these barbaric beheadings of the two Americans that we tragically lost. That speaks to the fact that this is a threat that could potentially impact them, as well as the people of Syria and Iraq, just as it could potentially impact U.S. interests and the United States. In terms of last year, it is always worth noting that, look, the United States made clear our willingness to use military force. On the specific issue of chemical weapons, the United Kingdom and France joined with us in that determination. But at the end of the day, with that threat on the table, the Syrian regime went from denying it had chemical weapons to agreeing to remove them, and their declared weapons have since been destroyed. This is a different beast because it is been a threat of terrorism that crosses two borders -- it is Syria and Iraq -- and that could pose a threat beyond those countries. And that is what illuminates the discussion here at NATO. ENTITY could I just add on that one -- on ISIL. One thing that is amazed me as an American living in Europe is that they are seized with this question of the potential of returning foreign fighters from ISIL and other extremist groups in the Syria-Iraq theater back to Europe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1342, "text": "And they actually cite very prominently the attack on May 25th at the Jewish Museum in Brussels as the first solid example, proven example of a European fighter who went to Syria, gained his -- had his training, gained his sort of street cred, returned and committed an act of -- at least a crime -- act of terror on European soil. They are very seized about this because they understand there are thousands more who are on that path. Now, it does not mean they will all come back and commit acts like this, but even if a fraction of them do, they know they have got a serious security threat. I just wanted to clarify -- one thing you have not mentioned in trying to get deliverables is trying to get direct military action from NATO partners to fight ISIL in Syria or Iraq, and I wanted to see if tomorrow you are hoping for some concrete commitment from the countries here for direct military action against ISIL? So, look, on that question, we are engaged in discussions with different countries about what role they can take. Direct military action is obviously the far-end of that spectrum in terms of engagement. I think this is something that is going to be ongoing over the next several days as we talk here and we talk to countries in the region. So in terms of those types of pronouncements, that is not something we are seeking as an outcome of this summit. This summit I think is more a chance to get a sense of the commitments countries will make. They will then have the ability to make decisions and announcements about their own commitments. But we also feel like it is a very important piece of this puzzle to talk to the countries in the region. We have been consulting with them, but with Secretary Kerry, Secretary Hagel and Lisa Monaco all traveling to the region, that can also give us a sense of additional countries that could contribute in a variety of ways. And then we can get a sense of what is the picture across this coalition of what nations are prepared to do. And again, that spectrum includes direct action, it includes arms and equipment and training for security forces on the ground -- including Iraqi security forces, Kurdish forces, the moderate Syrian opposition. That includes support to the Iraqi government and its government formation process, and diplomatic support for an inclusive Iraqi government, which is essential to getting a buy-in from Sunni tribes and others inside of Iraq to work to evict ISIL from a territory that they have claimed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentstherecordconferencecallpresssecretaryjoshearnestdeputynationalsecurityadvisor", "title": "Barack Obama On-the-Record Conference Call by Press Secretary Josh Earnest, Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes, and U.S. Ambassador to NATO Doug Lute on the President's Meetings at the NATO Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-record-conference-call-press-secretary-josh-earnest-deputy-national-security-advisor", "publication_date": "04-09-2014", "crawling_date": "04-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1343, "text": "ENTITY, you are going to Italy very soon. What are your aims, your expectations, visiting our country? Well, first of all, I am very excited about going to Italy because of the great reception and hospitality that has been extended to the members of my family who have been there, both on official visits and just visits to meet with friends. Secondly, we will be having extensive discussions with the Italian leaders and with some of the representatives of the Italian private sector, to strengthen the bilateral relationships between our two countries and also to prepare for the conference in Venice involving seven international leaders. Third is that we consider the relationship between our Nation and Italy to 'be extremely important to us and to world peace and to economic stability and to future progress. This will give me a chance to follow up on the meetings that I have had already this year with your Prime Minister Cossiga and also, of course, with your Foreign Minister, who was here just this week. And I look forward to paying my respects to President Pertini, who is a close friend of my mother's and whom I admire very much. And I will be visiting again with the Pope at the Vatican to discuss international matters and also matters of morality and the spirit. ENTITY, then it will be on to Venice, and Venice will be a summit meeting of the Western Alliance. I wonder if I can ask a question about the state of the Western Alliance as seen by you, by the White House? There have been in recent months quite a few misunderstandings-at least that is what the papers have written-we sometimes get it wrong; sometimes we get it right. We Europeans complain of not being consulted enough by America, not being listened to enough. Americans-sometimes we read they complain about being betrayed by their allies. Do you feel that is the state of affairs, the state of the Alliance? Is that as bad as all that? In my judgment, the Alliance is much stronger now than it has been in many years, perhaps even since the Alliance was first formed. We have initiated in the last 3 years, a long-range defense program to revitalize the NATO Alliance. This will extend over 15 years. It is a common commitment that all of us have made over very difficult obstacles. We have also pledged ourselves to strengthen the defense commitments in our nations. We have agreed among ourselves, again in a difficult way, to meet the growing Soviet threat, with their SS-20 missiles, with the theater nuclear force commitment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwiththepresidentquestionandanswersessionwithamigolevilastampaand", "title": "Interview With the President Question-and-Answer Session With Amigo Levi of La Stampa and Sergio Telmon of RAI-TV.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-the-president-question-and-answer-session-with-amigo-levi-la-stampa-and", "publication_date": "12-06-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1344, "text": "And in my judgment, we have got a very fine interrelationship among us in close consultation, not only on matters that relate to defense but also economic progress. The attendance and the achievements in London in 1977, in Bonn in 1978, in Tokyo last year, and now this year in Venice, in my opinion help to bind us together in a very strong, structured fashion. We recognize that in a conference of democracies that there must be a recognition and an honoring of individuality, of national commitments and priorities. This is not a Warsaw Pact where there are dominant forces there from the Soviet Union; this is a matter of free exchange. Obviously, in a democracy an open discussion of issues quite often creates the impression of disharmony. We are extremely forceful in our own Nation in condemning and working to oppose the present and the future possibilities of Soviet aggression, exemplified in the invasion of Afghanistan. Some of the allies in Europe have not been quite so forceful as we in imposing sanctions against the Soviet Union and in moving to boycott the Olympics and so forth, but we recognize that there are reasons for them not to pattern their actions specifically after ours. What you mean is that you do not share the feeling which sometimes is voiced in America, that the allies are betraying America? Sometimes they do not support us strongly enough, as judged from our perspective, but we recognize the difference that must exist between us. I am sure sometimes some of our actions are not completely pleasing to our allies. But that is inevitable in an alliance of free and independent nations who are democratic in nature and who do not conceal differences with suppression of the press and suppression of free speech. Obviously, we have nations that are attractive-there are no walls built around West Germany to keep people from escaping that nation. And if you look at the 4 million, roughly, refugees around the world, three-fourths of them are trying to escape from Soviet-inspired Communist domination. So the attractiveness of a free world is patently obvious, and the disharmonies that exist within a free world are because we believe in free speech and the importance of individuals. So that will not be one subject for discussions in Venice? You will not be discussing improvements in methods of consultation- We do not claim that the Alliance is perfect, and we also probe for ways to strengthen the Alliance and to create more harmony and better consultation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwiththepresidentquestionandanswersessionwithamigolevilastampaand", "title": "Interview With the President Question-and-Answer Session With Amigo Levi of La Stampa and Sergio Telmon of RAI-TV.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-the-president-question-and-answer-session-with-amigo-levi-la-stampa-and", "publication_date": "12-06-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1345, "text": "But one of the reasons for that commitment is my visit to Rome and also the subsequent meeting of the Alliance leaders, some of them in Venice. The European Community is considering an initiative and, on the other hand, the United States is trying to get together again the Israelis and the Egyptians. What do you think at this point the situation will be? It is important, very quickly, to look at this Mideast effort in perspective. Two years ago, it was inconceivable that Israel and Egypt would be sitting down together working on ways to alleviate tensions between them, with open borders and diplomatic recognition, exchange of ambassadors, tourism, trade being established. The Camp David accords have brought that progress into being. Both Israel and Egypt will be meeting with us shortly, here in Washington, to resume the talks. The Camp David accords outline a way to resolve the Palestinian issue, to give the Palestinians a voice in the determination of their own future, to resolve the Palestinian question in all of its aspects. These phrases that I have just quoted to you have been approved specifically not only by myself and President Sadat but also by Prime Minister Begin and, subsequently, ratified by the Israeli Knesset. So, we have a basis here for progress. It is obvious to everyone that the relationship between Israel and her neighbors is crucial to the stability and the maintenance of peace in the Mideast. And this Camp David process is the only one in the last 30 years that has made any progress in guaranteeing to the Palestinians the realization of their own rights. So, I am committed to the Camp David process. If the European nations-the Community wants to take actions that are constructive, we will welcome this. But to subvert or to cancel or to bypass the Camp David process, we believe, would be a very serious mistake. Do you really hope in a breakthrough at this time? We have had them before. When we went to Camp David there was no prospect then of an assured success, but almost miraculously, the Egyptians and the Israelis reached an agreement on basic principles, under which we are presently working. And later, when I went to the Mideast, it was to salvage what seemed to be a hopeless breakdown in their relationships, and from that came the peace treaty between Israel and Egypt with the return of the Sinai to Egypt and the establishment of these good relationships.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwiththepresidentquestionandanswersessionwithamigolevilastampaand", "title": "Interview With the President Question-and-Answer Session With Amigo Levi of La Stampa and Sergio Telmon of RAI-TV.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-the-president-question-and-answer-session-with-amigo-levi-la-stampa-and", "publication_date": "12-06-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1346, "text": "Now we do face difficulties and I cannot guarantee success, but I guarantee that we will continue to work for success with the best possible avenue being the use of and the building upon the Camp David accords. Will you personally be involved again in it? I am personally involved almost on a daily basis in directing the Secretary of State and our negotiators and in dealing directly with the Prime Minister of Israel and the President of Egypt. And I will be meeting with other leaders from time to time. We have a good correspondence with the Saudis, for instance, who have a beneficial influence on occasion. The King of Jordan will be here to meet with me for 2 days prior to the time that I come to Italy. So, we are exploring every possible avenue of success in the Mideast and trying to provide stability there while the nations involved search for peace. Do you expect a meeting with Sadat and Begin? Not any time soon, but they are always willing and eager to join me in discussions when it is necessary to meet at that highest level. ago, 12 months ago, in Vienna, you met Chairman Brezhnev and restated the principles of detente. There is a general feeling that detente in the meantime is more or less over-rightly or wrongly, I do not know. That is what most people say. They feel there is a new cold war fear and an unlimited arms race, and some people fear war. Do you still believe in detente? Do you still believe there will be peace in the nuclear age? And what are you planning to do-I mean, to improve the sort of relation with the Soviet Union-these two superpowers having such a heavy responsibility for maintaining peace in the world? Are you planning some initiative? We are still at peace. We have a continuing, deep commitment to the control of nuclear weapons. The SALT process is still a viable process which we will continue to pursue. The problem is that the Soviets have interrupted the arms control process and also have damaged the progress in detente by their unwarranted and vicious invasion of a peace-loving nation, of Afghanistan. The Soviets have made a serious mistake. One hundred and four members of the United Nations have condemned the Soviet Union's aggression and have demanded that the Soviets withdraw. The Afghan people, heroically, are still fighting for their own freedom against the Soviet invading forces.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwiththepresidentquestionandanswersessionwithamigolevilastampaand", "title": "Interview With the President Question-and-Answer Session With Amigo Levi of La Stampa and Sergio Telmon of RAI-TV.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-the-president-question-and-answer-session-with-amigo-levi-la-stampa-and", "publication_date": "12-06-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1347, "text": "And we believe that when and if the Soviets do make any contribution toward the restoration of international stability by withdrawing their forces, that we can continue to make good progress on arms control and on the enhancement of detente. There will always be a relationship of competition between the Western World and the Soviet-dominated or influenced nations, but there'll also be a commitment on our part for maximum cooperation in building on detente, on controlling nuclear weapons, and in cooperation with the Soviet Union every time they are willing to join with us in the maintenance of peace. We will see a new embrace between President Carter and Chairman Brezhnev as we saw in Vienna? That is up to the Soviet Union. I would welcome nothing more than peace and harmony between us, as leaders, and between our nations. I am convinced that the Soviet people do not support the war-like activities which the Soviets have demonstrated in their invasion of Afghanistan, and I am convinced the Soviet people do not support the war by surrogates which the Soviets are encouraging through the use of Vietnam forces in Kampuchea, and also the Cuban forces in several places in Africa. ENTITY, I know that your most important preoccupation is the release of the hostages from Iran. No, we have tried, in every way since the hostages were taken, to protect the lives and the safety of the hostages and also to protect the principles of our Nation and to secure the hostages' release. We have explored in every way, direct relationships with the Iranian Government officials and others. Now, I think the best avenue is through a multitude of diplomatic and economic efforts, being made through the United Nations and through other countries, to convince the Iranians that it is counterproductive for them to continue to hold these innocent people. This is an act of international terrorism, and it is condoned and supported by the official Government of Iran. And for other nations like Italy and the Europeans allies, Japan, and others, to join in with us to convince the Iranians that they are making a mistake and that the bringing of Iran back in to an acceptable position with other nations of the Earth, with an end to this act of terrorism, is very important. That is why we consider a peaceful approach to Iran, but with some economic sanctions being imposed to encourage them to act is important.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwiththepresidentquestionandanswersessionwithamigolevilastampaand", "title": "Interview With the President Question-and-Answer Session With Amigo Levi of La Stampa and Sergio Telmon of RAI-TV.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-the-president-question-and-answer-session-with-amigo-levi-la-stampa-and", "publication_date": "12-06-1980", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1349, "text": "Well, I think Merrick Garland is one of the best judges, not just in the country, but of his generation. And it is a testimony to how good he is that, you know, he has cropped up as a potential Supreme Court justice for a very long time. I have always been a huge admirer of his. I have always felt that the way he approaches cases the intellect, the care to follow precedent, the consensus building were qualities that would make him an outstanding Supreme Court justice. This moment in our history a time when judicial nominations have become so contentious, a time when our politics is so full of vitriol I think particularly benefits from a man who by all accounts is decent, full of integrity, is someone who tries to hear the other side's point of view, and can build bridges. And so although I have always believed that he would make an outstanding Supreme Court justice, it is my belief that now more than ever his voice would serve the court well, would help to burnish the sense that the Supreme Court is above politics and not just an extension of politics, and would set a good tone for restoring or at least increasing the American people's confidence in our justice system. Did you talk to him about being a piata, as Sen. Cornyn put it? We had a very candid conversation. He is chief judge of the D.C. Circuit, so I assume that he either reads The Washington Post or listens to NPR, and I think had a pretty good sense of the posture that Majority Leader McConnell took immediately after Justice Scalia's passing the notion that the Republican senators would not consider any nominee, no way, no how . I am sure that he is aware that, these days, massive advertising campaigns are mounted in opposition to candidates not just for Supreme Court, but for appellate court judges. And so we discussed that, and I wanted to make sure that not only he felt comfortable with it, but his family felt comfortable with it. You know, for those of us who are more often in, you know, the scrum of politics, we are we call folks like Judge Garland civilians. And so suddenly being placed in a war zone like this is something that you want to make sure they are mindful of. But, you know, I think the way he described it and I will let him, as he makes the rounds with senators, describe it himself the way he described it is that he has loved the law for a very long time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithninatotenbergnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview with Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nina-totenberg-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "18-03-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1350, "text": "He has loved being a judge for a very long time. He occupies the most honored position in what is often considered the second most powerful court in the land. He is got a great job. And he is at a stage in his career where, given his confidence in his record, given the reputation that he is built in the legal community, that he is prepared I think to take on whatever unfair or unjust or wildly exaggerated claims that may be made by those who are just opposed to any nominee that I might make. And I think he is convinced that he can do a really good job, partly because he has relationships with the judges that are already on the court, and he is shown himself to be a consensus builder. And he believes, rightly, that we are at a time where the more consensus we can forge, the better off we are going to be. By the way, when did you offer him the job? Well, he is a very good actor because I had dinner with him Sunday night , and he looked like he kept just was saying he was not going to get it. Well, you know, I I that just shows his wisdom once again, because when it comes to things like getting being nominated for the Supreme Court, it is probably always wise to not count your chickens before they are hatched. But you just told me they were hatched. Well, I am not sure about that. I might have called him right after dinner. ial campaign, how do you keep this nomination front and center, alive and prominent in the face of Republicans saying that they will not give your nominee a hearing? They clearly do not want to look rude, so they will meet with him and tell him that they do not want to meet with him. But but how do you keep it up there? When the Supreme Court, frankly I have written more pieces in my life saying, This year it may be an issue, and then it never really is. In fact I think it is, in part because of the circus that has been ENTITY ial campaign season so far. I think people already are troubled by some of the extreme rhetoric that we have seen in ENTITY race. I think people already are troubled by the extreme gridlock in Washington. I think people already are concerned about excessive obstructionism that goes beyond principled disagreements, but becomes a systematic no to everything.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithninatotenbergnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview with Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nina-totenberg-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "18-03-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1351, "text": "And when you then have add to that a situation in which for the first time in anyone's memory you have the head of the Senate saying, I will not meet with a nominee; I will not provide a nominee a hearing; I will not provide a nominee a vote, and that, if, in fact, was maintained, would be the first time in the modern court where we would have a seat unfilled for over a year. That matters to people. And so, you are right, Nina, that generally speaking, people are not closely following Supreme Court cases unless you have a big seminal case like same-sex marriage come down. But people are following the fact that, increasingly, our political institutions are broken and it troubles them. And this becomes I think a symbol of a process that, if Republicans stick to their current posture, promises a tit-for-tat process in which we will never have a clean nomination process on the merits, and ENTITY whether they are Democrats or Republicans are only going to be able to get their nominees through when they have their own party controlling the Senate. At that point, the judiciary becomes a pure extension of politics. And that damages people's faith in the judiciary because everybody understands that there is some politics involved in appointing judges, but we also expect that the judicial system can rise above the political process. And so I we have seen already the surveys that say, number one, people are paying attention to this; and number two it is not just Democrats, but a sizable number of Republicans who vote against me, have said this is this cannot be the way we run our government. And what is particularly ironic is the degree to which a number of people who say they are not going to nominate somebody, claim to be people who want fidelity to the Constitution, respect for our founders' intentions. There is nobody who would suggest that our founders anticipated that a new rule is read into the Supreme Court nomination process in which for an entire year, we do not do that because there is an election going on. George Washington nominated a couple of Supreme Court justices in his last year. And obviously George Washington had better poll numbers, I am sure, than I did, but nevertheless if you care about original intent, I think, you know, you do not want to see this becoming degenerating into just a pure political battle.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithninatotenbergnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview with Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nina-totenberg-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "18-03-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1352, "text": "OK, if you appoint Merrick Garland, we we still will oppose him now, but we would confirm him in the lame-duck session after the election if there is a Democratic ENTITY. Did that play any role in your decision? I have not had conversations like that. What I have seen are the public statements of leading Republicans like Orrin Hatch broadly complimenting Judge Garland as a brilliant, fair jurist, who should be confirmed to the Supreme Court. So did that play a role in your choosing him, the fact that Republicans really do like him? Well, there is no doubt that what played a role, as I said earlier, was that, number one, I think he is the best person for the job. And the court would benefit from that at the moment. Justice Scalia was a larger-than-life figure, and he helped to shape the dialogue and the debate. But if you think about when the Supreme Court has been held in the highest esteem and has moved the country forward in the most powerful of ways, generally it has not been divided just along 5-4 votes. And Judge Garland, if you look at his work on the D.C. Circuit, has been able to bring together conservatives, liberals and move them to find common ground. And I think that is a valuable quality that has been reinforced by the statements that were made by Republicans. It certainly told me that this is somebody who is widely respected. And I said at the outset I would not use this appointment as a political symbol, as a way to score points, as a way to gin up my base. I said I would play it straight that my goal was to actually confirm a justice who I thought could do an outstanding job. And Merrick Garland fits that bill. Your base, some of them quietly said, you know, everybody on that list, except Merrick Garland, was a minority or a woman; some of them were both. You picked the oldest person by far, the only white guy, and he is sort of a centrist liberal. He is not, you know, he is not going to this is, this is our shot to really change the debate at the Supreme Court. What do you say to that those folks? Well, first of all what I would say is take a look at the appointments I have made since I have been ENTITY of the United States.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithninatotenbergnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview with Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nina-totenberg-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "18-03-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1353, "text": "I have appointed as many African-Americans to the Circuit Court as any ENTITY ever; more African-American women on the federal courts than any other ENTITY; more Hispanics, more Asian-Americans, more LGBT judges than any ENTITY in history. We actually now have a majority of women and/or minorities on the Circuit Courts, something that is never happened before. So my record of appointing a judiciary that reflects the country is unmatched. When it comes to the Supreme Court, I have appointed two women, one Hispanic. And in each case, the good news is that I appointed the person who I absolutely thought was the best person for the job. In this case, Merrick Garland is the best person for the job. And I have confidence that without knowing how he is going to decide any particular case he is going to be somebody who understands the law, understands precedent, understands the Constitution; and possesses the values that recognize the unique role of the court in preserving our rights, preserving our liberties; and making sure that the powerful get a fair hearing, but that the powerless also are heard and have access to justice. What do you ask these folks in your interviews? I mean, you cannot say, So, what do you think of Roe v. Wade? I do not do that. So, I am Judge ENTITY I am here for my interview. What are you going to ask me? What kinds of things do you ask? Well, sometimes I just ask about family and background and what made you want to be a judge. You learn a lot just by talking to people about what their story is. And when you hear Judge Garland's background when you hear that story about him as a valedictorian speaker standing up for a fellow student who was about to be censored by the parents, when you hear about the care with which he dealt with the victims and the families who had been affected by the Oklahoma City bombing you get a sense of who that person is. And I spent a lot of time on that. With respect to judicial philosophy, I have the advantage of having taught constitutional law, so I do not need to get into the weeds on their thinking on a lot of these cases because I can just read their opinions and the quality of their work and I have a pretty good sense of how they approach cases. One thing I, I do ask them is how do they generally approach a problem where the text of the Constitution might be ambiguous.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithninatotenbergnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview with Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nina-totenberg-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "18-03-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1354, "text": "What do they do to to understand either the meaning of the text, to what extent do they draw on historical data, to what extent do they draw on their sense of how society is dealing with that problem today? You know, so you will get some sense of their judicial philosophy. But most of the time, by the time they get to me, you know, they have probably gone through a confirmation process before. And they have a pretty good sense of what they can talk about and what they should not talk about. Let me conclude by asking you sort of a devil's advocate question. You have said that neither party comes to this process clean. And you voted to not end debate on the Alito nomination. And if I understood you correctly at your press conference, what I thought I heard you say was, You know, I knew that it was a meaningless vote. You got a pass from the leadership. You can do this. But can you blame the Republicans who look at this nomination and say, There is going to be a shift in the court if we approve this nominee, and we do not like that shift in the court. ial nomination. And if the shoe were on the other foot, would not the Democrats do the same? They called they are all already calling it the Biden rule. First of all, this speech that they continually quote from Joe Biden when he was on the Judiciary Committee if you actually read the speech, number one, he was speaking hypothetically. Should we start that one over? Yeah, let us do that. Wow, ENTITY You are supposed to turn off your phone. I am assuming you can just splice the question and I will just answer it, so ENTITY does not have to answer ask it again. Well, first of all, if you look at what Joe Biden actually said many years ago, he was saying if, hypothetically, there were to be a Supreme Court opening, then his advice to a ENTITY in his last year would be to not make the nomination unless he had consulted widely and arrived at a consensus candidate. That is exactly what I have done. And so there is no contradiction between what I am doing and what Joe Biden suggested a ENTITY in my circumstances should do. Number two, with respect to my actions when I was a junior senator, you will recall that I never said that a nominee should not get a hearing. I never said that a nominee should not get a vote.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithninatotenbergnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview with Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nina-totenberg-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "18-03-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1355, "text": "And what I also said at the time was that I was concerned about some of Judge Alito's views that I considered more troubling. But in the case of Merrick Garland, we have not seen a substantive argument against his jurisprudence. We do not want somebody who is been nominated by a Democrat a claim that I would have never made at the time. Now what is true, ENTITY, is, is that, you know, we have a divided court on a lot of important issues. Justice Scalia was a big figure who was viewed as providing a majority on conservative positions on some of the cases that came before the court. And so I understand the politics that Republican senators are dealing with, and the price they would pay if in fact they confirmed a nominee. If in fact we have gotten to the point where they cannot confirm somebody because a Democratic ENTITY is nominating them, what is to stop them from saying next year, We have got another excuse for not confirming a Democratic ENTITY's nominee ? And at that point the process has broken down. Democrats have not been blameless in this process. You cannot point to me a circumstance in which Democrats have left a seat open when a Republican ENTITY was in office simply because they did not like the possibility that it would change the makeup of the court. Justice Kennedy was confirmed by Ronald Reagan, and I am quite certain that there were a whole lot of Democratic senators who understood at the time that he was unlikely to favor their positions on a number of issues. And he was confirmed in the last year of ENTITY Reagan's office. So we actually have evidence we have proof, not that Democrats are perfect, but that they do at a certain point recognize that the process and the sanctity of the Supreme Court, and the integrity of the institution, not just the Supreme Court, but the integrity of the Senate, and the office of ENTITY, requires them to do their job. And my simple pitch to them is, be fair not to ignore politics. I am not demanding that Republicans vote for Merrick Garland, but do not stop the process in its tracks because if you do, then the ever-escalating, ever-worsening problems behind not just judicial nominees, but nominations generally, are going to continue to make our government more and more dysfunctional. And at some point, it is got to stop.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithninatotenbergnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview with Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nina-totenberg-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "18-03-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1356, "text": "A good place for it to stop is when we are talking about a Supreme Court seat, and we have an impeccably qualified candidate who the Republicans themselves have acknowledged is deserving of being on the court. Are you taking this on the road? Well, you know, I am going to make the case I am going to make the case for a fair process. That is what the American people expect. And, you know, one of the most puzzling arguments that I have heard from Mitch McConnell and some other Republicans is this notion that the American people should decide we should let the American people decide, as part of this election, who gets to fill this seat. Well in fact, the American people did decide, back in 2012 when they elected me ENTITY with sufficient electoral votes. And they also decided that the Republicans would be in the majority. They did not say, We are going to decide that you are in charge for three years, and then in the last year you all take a break. They said, No, you are ENTITY for four years, and Mr. McConnell, you are going to be the leader, because we have given you a majority in the Senate. They will have another opportunity to weigh in, so that if there is another vacancy that comes up, the next ENTITY will fill that vacancy. The real argument is the one that you made, Nina, which is that they do not want a Democrat filling the seat, and they are worried and scared about their political base punishing them if they allow a Democrat to fill the seat. But one of the things that is broken down in our politics is a recognition that you do not always get your way 100 percent of the time. And sometimes in the integrity of the institution and the process and governance, and the interests of the American people actually matter more than your short-term politics. And there have been a number of times where, as ENTITY, I have had to do things that I knew were bad politics but I understood were important to the country or important to the institution of the presidency. And I would expect that the senators who've been elected by their constituents will find in themselves the kind of respect for this incredible democratic experiment that our founders crafted, that they are not going to want to see it continue to degenerate into just a bunch of poll-driven, negative-ad-driven, polarized name-calling, because that is not what made us the greatest country on Earth. We appreciate it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithninatotenbergnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview with Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nina-totenberg-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "18-03-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1367, "text": "You are going to Tokyo at a time when there is been some signs of division and strain in the Western alliance, I think over Libya and, certainly, over trade and other foreign policy issues. And I was wondering if you see that there will be a need at Tokyo to make some sort of fence-mending with your European allies to keep the alliance in good shape. Well, I am confident-after having gone to several of these summits and having now a long, relatively long relationship with the people involved, I am not concerned that we have any serious differences between us or anything that we cannot work out. That is really the purpose of the summits, is to see that we meet regularly and are able to talk out any problems that arise. And I do not think the differences between us are all that great. So, I am optimistic that when we get there we are going to talk about, as we have before, the things that we believe can be mutually beneficial-better understandings. I know that some of the things that'll be discussed is the need for another GATT round of talks to see how we can improve that tariff arrangement. And I think very definitely we will be talking about terrorism and how we can, cooperatively, work closer together to rid the world of this menace, this plague. ENTITY, are you going to press the allies for further sanctions against Libya? Also, you did not follow very strictly through with your own oil companies. I think that what we are going to do is take the subject of terrorism and all that we all know about it-we have made great progress with regard to our sharing of intelligence information, and that resulted last year in the aborting worldwide of 126 known, planned terrorist actions. And so, I think we are going to start with what can we find that we can all agree upon as a means of dealing with this problem. The American oil companies still in Libya. Yes, there is a problem there that I have seen some critics now in the media saying, How can this go forward? The alternative would simply be that Qadhafi would confiscate them, and then he'd be better off than he is now. He'd own the whole thing instead of simply getting a royalty from oil being produced there. ENTITY, the Prime Minister of Italy, Mr. Bettino Craxi, disagreed with the American bombing on Tripoli. But at the same time he condemned the Libyan state-sponsored terrorism.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists5", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-5", "publication_date": "22-04-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1368, "text": "Craxi said, We need a cease-fire in the Mediterranean Sea. Otherwise, the situation gets out of control. What do you think about this statement? And I have noticed-if he is been quoted correctly-I will be looking forward to talking to him there about this. He has made it plain that if Italy is the victim of such terrorism, Italy will respond. So, we seem to have something in common there. ENTITY, we Japanese people are very, very honored and we look forward to welcoming you and other leaders to Tokyo for the summit. But actually, we are very much interested in your visiting Indonesia and meeting the ASEAN leaders before coming to Tokyo. And we feel that it is going to be somewhat of a historic summit in the sense that you and Mr. Nakasone had talked about this summit quite recently. And Mr. Nakasone has said that he and you share the view that you two work together to send the message of bright future for the 21st century in the coming summit. Could you share some of your views or some of these messages to us? Yes, I do, and will, because he and I have discussed this, and it is true. I think that the new frontier, the next frontier in the world is the Pacific Basin. And having been a Governor of a State that for 1,500 miles borders on that Pacific, I have long been interested in the development there. And they have made more gains in development than any of us. They are coming along faster in their economic growth than any other part of the world. So, I think it is most important that all of us should be looking there for how we can cooperate with them and be of help in their further development and so forth. ENTITY, for France, as you know, there would be President Mitterrand and the Prime Minister, Jacques Chirac. Will you consider the Prime Minister as an equal, as someone you can talk with, or will you just as before-the other summit-will you talk and speak with and negotiate with Mr. Mitterrand? I think that that is something to be decided by the French Government, that the manner in which they come and how they have arranged their own place in government will be accepted by the rest of us; and certainly we will cooperate with however they have chosen to do this. If it is separately or together or however, that is, we will respect France's right to determine that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists5", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-5", "publication_date": "22-04-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1369, "text": "ENTITY, I think you expect me to talk about free trade today with this in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. And it is been postponed, I gather, until tomorrow morning, but still chancy. Some of us think this is historic, an example for the world in terms of trade and liberalizing trade. But I think many people have the impression that the White House has not been very-it is not been a high priority for the White House. So, I'd like to ask, you know, how important is it to you? It is extremely important, and we have been-I have been on that telephone a great deal. And I will be very frank with you and tell you that I am concerned that the possibility-well, that some of the negative votes are not aimed at Canada but are based on certain political differences here within our own country and our government. And I have been urging and will continue to do everything I can. This delay of the vote was a part of our struggle to see if we cannot be successful. But do everything I can to see that we work this out, because here we are-we are the greatest trading partners of each other in the world. And I think that this is all-important and that we should continue this and go forward with these negotiations that the Prime Minister and I have talked of. And I regret very much that there are some in-house differences that are threatening this arrangement. Could I go back to Libya again, ENTITY? Maybe you can give me a ride. Your spokesman this morning said that-I think in your name-that the United States welcomed the action that the Europeans took yesterday in restricting Libyan diplomats further And I was wondering what sort of more that meant? Does it mean economic sanctions still? Is that the sort of thing you are going to ask in Tokyo? Again, as I say, I hate to dwell on one thing or another. We know that this is going to be discussed, and I want to see what we can all come together on. As a matter of fact, they have called it a war. And, granted, that they have aimed the war, according to Qadhafi's words, more specifically at us. But right now-and one of the things that we knew before we took our action against them was that we have definite information on at least 35 planned terrorist actions. And they are particularly aimed at Americans, but they take place in all of the other countries.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists5", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-5", "publication_date": "22-04-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1370, "text": "And, therefore, the violence is not going to be confined to just a target. For example, we know that in France the expulsion of those Libyan diplomats was because we knew of an action that had been planned and even the weapons distributed. And what that was going to mean was that when people-the only place where America was the target was the locale-our Embassy. But outside the Embassy where the people line up to come in to get visas-now, those will not be Americans, they do not need visas to come to America; so those would be citizens of France and other countries that would be there. And that action was simply to mow down with grenades and small arms fire these people-men, women, and children that would be lined up there seeking visas. So, there is not any one of us that is free from the threat. In the Rome and Vienna airport slaughters, which I think Mr. Qadhafi called a noble deed, well, there was only a minority of Americans there. They happened to be in front of American Airline ticket offices, but-or ticket counters, but these were people of several other countries. And I think that we can continue the cooperation we have had and enlarge upon it and bring this to an end. ENTITY, concerning economic policy, the main issue of the Tokyo summit should be, perhaps-the German economy grew faster than the American last year and is expected to be the fastest growing among the big industrial countries this year. So, do you have still any complaints about German economic policy? We are delighted to see this. We are pleased about our currencies coming more into line with each other. I think it is fair to say, and true to say, that in the economic recovery, which all of us were suffering-or the economic decline, we seemed to take off first, and we were the first in bringing about the recovery and the expansion that we have had. And so, we are delighted to see now that the recovery has spread around to the other nations in the world and to our other trading partners. And I think it is all to the good. Would you like to see the deutsche mark and other European currencies arising still further in comparison to the dollar, because you just told us they are now coming in line? And if it is done as the result .", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists5", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-5", "publication_date": "22-04-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1371, "text": "Yes-so, yes, you would like the rise Yes, if it is done as just the result of the economic growth and the recovery of the economies of the other countries. I do not think anyone can predict where it will come to, but I know the same thing has happened with the yen in comparison to our dollar. It, I believe, now is at the highest point it has ever been. But this makes for better trade for all of us. ENTITY, again on terrorism, Italy is, as you know, on the frontline in the Mediterranean. This morning in the New York Times, in the column, someone said that the Italian Government, before the strike on Tripoli, was saying, and Mr. Craxi was saying, strike harder; we cannot say it publicly, but do it. Well, I do not think I should be commenting on what someone might have said confidentially or not. And, as I say, I think that we probably will find in Tokyo that we all are in more agreement than some of the impressions that have been given. ENTITY, we have produced a huge problem, the so-called Japan Problem, in a form of nearly $50 billion current account surplus, balance-of-payment surplus. And maybe there are some disagreements even among the Western allies-I mean, between the United States and Europe about the efficacy of the policy, new policy which is now being propagated by Mr. Nakasone and his Cabinet. And what would you expect the Tokyo summit-deal with this huge current balance-of-payment surplus problem, so-called Japan problem? And on the other hand, you see, there is another huge problem in the form of the accumulating deficit-or rather debts in the Third World countries. So, I would rather, you know, expect, or I would even hope, that you, ENTITY, have some nice sort of Reagan Plan up your sleeve- -to solve these sort of things- I think we are all better off if we go forward with helping the lesser developed nations, and they are the debtor nations now. But the manner in which they should be able to pay their debts is to have, again, an increase in their economy and have them become more self-sustaining, self-sufficient.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists5", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-5", "publication_date": "22-04-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1372, "text": "And I think that your Prime Minister and I are agreed on the need for the nations like those in the summit to help-and not help just in the old way of hand-outs but to help them develop their economies so they can be more self-sufficient. And I think we are very much agreed on that. Now, the other part of your question, if I understood correctly, were you talking about the plan for Japan to become more an importing nation? And, also, in a form of the, you know, financial aid and something like that to the Third World countries who are suffering from the accumulating debts? Well, Japan has been in the forefront as a nation in, say, such help. And I think all our nations have tried to do this. And to the other problem about more of an importing nation, yes, I think this makes for, actually, better economics for your country as well to do this. Because as it is now, and probably as a result of some of your taxing policies, the incentive is more to saving than it is to consuming. Well, as the standard of living goes up and there is more consumption and more need to consume, then there is more industry both ways. And you have to remember that if that means Japan buying from outside and importing, but then that makes those they import from better able to buy in turn, and we all benefit. Going on, ENTITY, on those trade matters, how do you see the trade talks with your European partners in Tokyo, with this trade war starting here in the States against European Community? On this trade issues, you know, U.S.A. has started, since 2 or 3 months now, a kind of war against EC countries on trade issue. And I really wonder how you can be really optimistic on the trade issue in the Tokyo summit with this background between European Community and U.S.A. Well, the thing that we believe in and were trying to sell worldwide is the need for free trade and open markets. If you are trading with a trading partner who has protective tariffs or limits and quotas and so forth-that is not free trade, because it is not fair trade. And we had an experience-the world did, as a matter of fact, due to us. Back in the thirties, the 1930's, in the Great Depression-and some in our country here thought that a great protective tariff was the answer to our Depression.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists5", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-5", "publication_date": "22-04-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1373, "text": "So, a thing called-for the two authors of it-the Smoot-Hawley tariff was put into effect. And it spread the Depression worldwide. And we never want to make that mistake again. I am opposed to protectionism. Now, it is true the European Community does practice some; for example, by Spain and Portugal's entry into the European Community. What happened there was under their rules. Their rules violate the GATT agreement, because those rules say that now Spain and Portugal must buy the agricultural products they have been buying from the United States, they must buy them from other members of the Community. Well, this is like taking $1 billion in trade away from our American farmers. And we feel there is got to be some compensation for this so that we can-and the best way would be for us to all review, and that is what we keep trying to do at the economic summit-to all review where we are restricting trade; at the same time that we want to sell, we do not want to buy. And much of this-we have made a number of bilateral agreements, we are working bilaterally with Japan on this. But I think-I just-my own feeling is that every bit of economic history shows that free and open commerce is beneficial to all. And when you get in trying to adjust it and restrict it with various agreements, that is when you get in trouble, because protectionism is a two-way street. You may say, well, like I vetoed a bill that our Congress passed. And it was a bill that would have had some protectionism here in our country for two or three different products. And they were trying to say that, Well, this would mean more jobs in those industries for Americans. But nobody counts the jobs over here in the other industries that you lose when the other country retaliates. So, that is why I vetoed the bill; and they did not override my veto. But this is what we need to talk about with the European Community, and we are going to be discussing with them. What do you hope to accomplish in Tokyo? And specifically, if you cannot get a free trade agreement with Canada, how can you hope to have this kind of liberalization that you have just been talking about? Well, I am not going to quit on one vote. We are going to keep trying for this. It is the right thing to do, and we will keep after it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists5", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-5", "publication_date": "22-04-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1374, "text": "And I will be pleased if you will quote me correctly on that to your people. Give it to me and I will quote it. No, I mean we are not going to give up on it. ENTITY, by supporting you on the attack on Libya, Mrs. Thatcher has got herself into quite a lot of domestic political problems. In fact, one of the opposition has accused her of turning the British bulldog into a Reagan poodle. And I was wondering what you would have to say to her if you can help her in any way on that in Tokyo-for example, by discussing the future, possible use of American bases in Britain? Oh, yes, you bet I will be discussing it. But you know something? I have to tell you that I have never known of a time when the English bulldog is safer than it is with Margaret Thatcher where she is. And she is not allowing anyone-anything in England to become an American poodle. I remember one of your countrymen said something and I have come to agree with it above all, and that was on my last trip there, when he very enthusiastically hit his fist in his hand and said to me, Margaret Thatcher is the greatest man in England. I do not mean that to offend the ladies. But, no, I have the greatest respect for her. And I am sorry that her very courageous action caused her the problems that it did. But at the same time that she has my sympathy, she also has my conviction that she is well able to take care of herself and her country. ENTITY, this morning's Wall Street Journal reported that you would like to encourage kind of a Marshall fund for the Middle East in Tokyo. Is that correct, and who should come up with the money in your opinion? I do not know that we actually call it that, but in all the efforts to bring about peace in the Middle East, this idea that Prime Minister Peres broached to us of why do not we enlarge the circle. And why do not we bring in all the countries of the Middle East-all the moderate Arab States themselves-and look at the underlying problems there, economic and otherwise And", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalists5", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-5", "publication_date": "22-04-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1385, "text": "Well, Mr. ENTITY, we know you are busy, so perhaps if we could just go ahead with a few questions. It is been suggested you have only 6 to 18 months to accomplish your agenda before your postelection honeymoon with the Congress ends. What is your strategy to capitalize on your victory with an even more recalcitrant Congress, particularly after the 1986 congressional elections? Does not this threaten the completion of the ENTITY revolution? Well, I have never thought that the completion of what we have been trying to accomplish is going to be easy, particularly as long as there is in the House a definite majority of the other side. On the other hand, we have accomplished, I think, a great deal. We'd be much further ahead if we'd gotten all that we'd asked for from the very beginning, but we are going to keep right on with those things and see what we can do. First of all, I think we have to go after some budget reforms. The budgeting process is just a kind of a chaotic thing and, finally, you get a package of appropriation bills. Until we can have a budgeting process where you start out and set a figure as to what overall can be spent and, then, within that, negotiate out as to which program gets how much and arrive at a consensus on that, we are going to be in trouble. We need to do that. We need the balanced budget amendment; we need the line-item veto if we are to do those things. We need economic growth for that. We have got to have the tax simplification program that we have been studying and working on. We have got to have such things as enterprise zones-everything that will help stimulate the growth of the economy, because that is the sure way back to sensible running of the Government. And we have got the-it goes without saying-the defense and the security assistance measures and so forth. That we have to have. That is the top priority of government in the sense that that is the main constitutional requirement, is the security of the people. And then there are social things that I think we want, having to do with abortion, school prayer, tuition tax credits, things of that kind. And what we are going to do is try to work with the leadership of the Congress. If it is, and if it simply tries to throw roadblocks, then, yes, we take our case to the people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1386, "text": "ENTITY, the deficit has been described as a debt that the people, the American people, owe themselves. As such, does the deficit really matter, or has the slowdown in the economy forced you to reconsider whether growth can substantially reduce the deficit? Well, of course, we had this example this year in which some $20 billion came out of the deficit as it had been projected by ourselves for this present year, and that was almost entirely due to the economic growth. But when you say the deficit and does it really matter, well, for 50 years that is what the Democrats have been telling us, that it did not , that we owed it to ourselves. I think to look at just the deficit ignores the real problem. What you have to get at is the problem, and that is government is spending too much, and it is spending too big a share of the private sector-that is why my opposition to those who think that the only answer to deficit spending is higher taxes. Well, we have done that in the past, and all it did was take the burden off the backs of those who wanted to spend more, so they could just go ahead and spend more. If you look at about the 5 years before we came here, taxes just about doubled, and the deficit came to over something like $318 billion. In fact, just a little while ago I was citing some figures. If you go back to '65-and in the years following '65 was when the Great Society got underway-'65 to '80, in those 15 years, the budget, the overall spending, increased about 4 1/2 times. So, we go back to what the classical economists used to say at the turn of the century, that when we had, as they put it, business cycles and hard times, it was usually when government spending crept up to above-they never told you what the percentage was, but above a certain percentage of the gross national product, took that much more money out of the private sector. That is when you had hard times. Well, I think that is what we have been seeing. ENTITY, how far are you prepared to go to support the Treasury's modified flat-tax plan, and are you fully committed to pushing a comprehensive tax reform through Congress in this year? And if you want a balanced budget, why do not you submit one? I have not been able to get the budget I wanted as low as I wanted it without going that far.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1387, "text": "I do not think there is anyone that would suggest that at this point you could suddenly come back and say, Here, we are -not without hurting an awful lot of people. What I think you have to do is look down the road and say, Let us aim at a target here that we are going to get this budget on a declining pattern. And then maybe you cannot exactly foretell the day at which it would happen, but if you can get the spending level, the share of private level coming-or even if it is not coming down, if your budget continues to increase to meet needs and whatever inflation there is, but if it increases at a lower rate than it has been and if the growth of the economy you can bring up, those two lines are going to meet someday, and when they meet, you have balanced the budget. And as this one goes on past, you begin to get the surplus that you should use to reduce the national debt. And this is what we are trying to do. Excuse me, but the earlier part was, how far are you prepared to go to support the flat tax? Well, you kind of got me. There on my desk is the printed version of the whole study of the Treasury Department. We have just had a briefing of the Cabinet on it; everyone is now studying it. I think it has come with a recognition that there are some options in there, that it is not a hard and fast plan. And so, I want to study this. And then, when you say about Congress-we have got two tax proposals in Congress, and one from the Democratic side, one from the Republican side, not too far apart-as I do not think this one is too far apart. Well, I think that it shows that the climate is there, that if we get going-and we want to take this up with the Democratic leadership; we also want to make it available to the public, to all the various groups out there, so that they understand what it is we are trying to do. And I think that with all of that pot there of three, you might say, proposals, I think we can come up with a plan that calls for simplification and lower tax rates in the areas that will make it more fair than the tax system is; certainly simplified.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1388, "text": "And I know that there are some very interesting proposals the Treasury Department has come up with to do that with regard to easing the burden at the bottom, lowering the rates for everybody, and simplification, making it far more simple. Now it looks like there is not a senior foreign policy post in the White House for a woman who dazzled them in Dallas, Jeane Kirkpatrick. How can you let her leave the Cabinet, and what will you offer her to induce her to stick around? Well, she and I are scheduled for a talk this week. We have talked off and on, and I have known about her feelings now about the U.N. job. But I do not know when she talks whether she is determined that she wants to return to her previous profession in the academic world or whether she is still interested in government. And believe me, I want to find something for her in government if I can, because I count on her a great deal, and I value her abilities and her great intelligence too much to just sit there and let her go if there is a way to keep her. So, I am going to try to keep her. She is turned us around at the U.N, our position in the United Nations, and she did it. But there is not any way she can function in the White House, is there? I do not see anything there that would be worthy of her. So, I am going to-but it depends, first of all, on what are her desires-what is it, how strongly does she feel about whether she wants to leave entirely. But you would like her to stay on up at the U.N.? You would like her to stay on up at the U.N.? Well, except that I cannot ask her to do that. That assignment has a way of kind of burning people out, and I think she is - I think she is had about all of that that she wants. Are you above a little arm-twisting to keep her? I did that to keep her there as long as she has. But I have to-no, it is difficult for me, when someone really has served and done the job and you know that they have kind of had it, it is very difficult for me to try to persuade them to do it. ENTITY, why, after an overwhelming electoral victory, has arms control become such a high priority for you and that there is now a rush to the negotiating table?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1389, "text": "Is not the evil empire evil any longer, or are not you still concerned about the Soviet disdain for treaty obligations? I have been as critical as anyone of previous agreements in many instances where I thought somebody just made an agreement to have an agreement. I have all the quotes of Brezhnev and others with regard to detente and what they thought of it. I do not know whether you are aware that Mr. Brezhnev said that detente was serving their purpose and that by 1985, they would be able to get whatever they wanted by other means. So, I have no illusions about them. But I do believe that the Soviets can be dealt with if you deal with them on the basis of what is practical for them and that you can point out is to their advantage as well as ours to do certain things. Now, I think they have seen that if it is to be an arms race, if we are determined that we are not going to let them maintain or enlarge their superiority in weapons-and they know our industrial power and might-and they see that we are determined to not let them maintain or continue that lead, then, rather than an arms race, I think there is an advantage to them in saying, well, maybe we'd better find a different way. And believe me, I would not hold still for a deal that simply makes a deal. Evil empire, the things of that kind, I thought-I was not just sounding off; I figured it was time to get their attention, to let them know that I was viewing them realistically. They-you know, everyone says about the horrible relations between the two of us, but they have not gained an inch of territory in these 4 years. And in the 4 years before, there was Afghanistan and there was Ethiopia and South Yemen, and there they were, advancing down through Africa. Why do you think they have dropped the preconditions to the arms talks at this time? Well, I think they were kind of stalling until the election, also, and then decided, well, now they know who is going to be around for a while longer. They have made a proposal, and we have said fine. ENTITY, Congress has prohibited support for the contra forces fighting against the Government of Nicaragua. How can you live with this restriction? And does not it send a message to the world that it might be risky to be a friend of the United States, as it was when ENTITY Carter was here?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1390, "text": "Well, this is one of the things where I think the Congress, up till now, has been shortsighted and, in fact, irresponsible with regard to that situation down there. And we know that there was a kind of a consensus of feeling just recently among them, when they believed, as we all did, that possibly that ship was bearing high-performance planes, Mig's, to Nicaragua. We cannot prove that it was; we cannot prove that it was not , because of some maneuverings that went on. But there are six more Russian ships, as nearly as we can count, that are on their way to Nicaragua now with more arms. I think that maybe, if they remember that feeling that they had with regard to the possibility of high-performance planes, that they will see that there is value in our carrying on. What we have are revolutionaries that only a short time ago they and the Sandinistas were all on the same side, fighting the same revolution-and fighting it ostensibly, and by their own claim, for democratic processes. Now, they got in and, a la Cuba under Castro, the one faction took over, has created a totalitarian Marxist state, and the others are still in the revolution, still trying for the democratic principles that they'd fought for in the beginning. And the very fact that the Sandinista element is continuing to support revolutionaries who are trying to overthrow a duly elected government, this is of itself of great interest to us. Sir, have you drawn a line that says if there are high-performance aircraft introduced into this theater, that there will be a reaction from us that- Well, we have let them and we have let the Soviet Union know that this is something we cannot sit back and just take, if they do that, because that is so obviously, then, a threat to the area. Their whole military is greater than all the combined countries of Central America put together, and it is so obviously offensive in nature that we cannot ignore that. And that would be just the crowning thing to have those high-performance planes representing a threat to the area and to the hemisphere. And we have made it plain that we are not going to sit by quietly and accept that. Do you think, sir, that the Mig crate episode and the six ships that are believed on their way now is any way an attempt by the Soviet Union to test your resolve on this issue? I know they do things like that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1391, "text": "And so, we are keeping watch on what is there. We are not going to raise Cain over a purely domestic type cargo, or anything of that kind, but we are in contact with the Soviet Union. Do you know if weapons, or Mig's specifically, are on any of those six ships you mentioned? We do know that in several of the ports where those ships have touched down, there have been evidence of those aircraft and crates that could contain them. I would be guessing now, because my memory does not tell me. Of all the reports we have had, I do not know whether-I could not tell you specifically. Speaking of Libya, Mr. ENTITY, your administration's taken a strong rhetorical line against state terrorism. What are you going to do about Colonel Mu'ammar Qadhafi of Libya, the world's most prominent practitioner of terrorism? Well, again, it is one of those things that you can know and he can talk, but you could not go into court and prove that actually they were responsible for it, anymore than you could've a couple of other governments that we feel are apparently supporting terrorist movements. Can you, in some way, find or get access to information that would let you know where and when operations are planned. Can you get information that really ties a terrorist group to a certain force or a certain government. Among the things that we are trying to do is if-and we are having some reasonable success with getting together with the other nations to do what we did some years ago with regard to hijackings, so that we all pool our information; we all inform each other of everything that we know. And we take action so that there are no safe harbors for terrorists, that they cannot cross a border and find that they will not be troubled. Excuse me, sir, I would have thought there was overwhelming evidence that Qadhafi was involved in terrorism everywhere, from Northern Ireland to Mindanao. Yes, sometimes you get those phone calls of somebody claiming credit. But when you get two or three different outfits claiming the credit, you say, Well, which ones are just bragging? The other thing is when it comes to if you cannot intercept-punish, to retaliate, there again, you have got to be able to get some evidence as to where are the bases from whence come these terrorists that you could strike at.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1392, "text": "And at the same time, you have to recognize that you do not want to just carelessly go out and maybe kill innocent people. Then you are as bad as the terrorists. Well, if the terrorists are in a village living amongst people who are innocent, are they then safe from retaliation? Well, you know, that is a decision that I think you have to make on each particular case. I do know of one instance in which we thought we had pretty good evidence of the locale. You would have wiped out a lot of innocent people who had nothing to do with it. Well, if you ever get a clear-cut case, where you know exactly where the terrorists came from and that there is no question of their responsibility, what, then, is the nature of the retaliation? I think there what George Shultz said in his speech-that caused a little hoopla for a time-what he was saying to our people was that you must recognize that in this whole thing, if you are going to try to defend against terrorism, there are going to come some times when military action will be called for. And you need the public understanding of that and their awareness so that they will know it is necessary if you are to conquer this problem. ENTITY, why is Assistant Secretary of State Chester Crocker negotiating with all sides in the Angola crisis to get the Cubans out and reach a settlement, except for Jonas Savimbi, who is one of the strongest anti-Communist leaders in the region there? And will you recognize Marxist Angola if the Cuban troops leave? What Secretary Crocker's been doing is actually having to do with Namibia-Namibia and its independence. Now, South Africa is willing for Namibia to become independent, but not while on the northern border of Namibia sits Angola with the Cubans and the possibility remains of Namibia becoming another satellite of the Communist bloc. So, what he is back and forth negotiating is that-for to create Namibia, for Angola to agree to remove the Cuban troops, and South Africa has agreed that they will move out, and they will be helpful in making this a state. And he is made quite a bit of progress. For the first time, Angola has made a declaration that they are prepared to bring about the withdrawal. They want to phase it, and they have some conditions on doing this. And at least that is the first time in all the years that this has been going on that Angola has said, yes, they will remove Cuban troops.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1393, "text": "If the negotiations are successful, would you then recognize Angola, the Government of Angola, if the Cuban troops leave? I think that that would be a part of the negotiations that are going on. Does not that risk throwing someone like Jonas Savimbi to the wolves, in effect, though? Well, this is another problem, and I cannot talk about that. No one wants to do that. But certainly that has to figure in the whole negotiations. No, we are not going to turn on him. But, somehow, there has to be a negotiation that involves that situation domestically in Angola. ENTITY, the Syrians seem now to have become the serious focus in the Middle East, and with your September 1982 peace plan at least grievously wounded, if not dying, do you think it can be revived, or, if not, do you have another initiative that you are going to pursue there? Well, no, I think that was the proper course to take, and I think that it is a little closer than it is been for some time. The very fact now that King Hussein has recognized Egypt, which kind of strengthens Egypt's position as being accepted back in the Arab community even though it has the peace treaty with Israel-the recognition the other day or the restoring of relations with Iraq is a step forward. I think that there has been some trust built up by the moderate Arab States in the United States as an intermediary in trying to bring about-see, we are not trying to negotiate the peace. They have to negotiate the peace. So, I think that some things are coming together now which, if anything, including the fact that the PLO held its meeting in Amman instead of Damascus-I think these things are all leading toward the possibility again of getting the Arab States to agree to negotiate. You see, they have been sitting there with the position that they refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist as a nation. Well, you cannot negotiate with someone until that is removed. Well, Egypt did it. And now I think the attitude of Hussein shows that-Jordan cannot be alone in doing that, but I think that what they are saying is that if the others can come together on this and enter into negotiations-the PLO; we now see them taking on the radical faction in their own midst that was pro-Syrian. And we are going to do everything we can to hopefully encourage this. And I want to thank you for being so generous with your time to us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewashingtontimes", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Washington Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-washington-times", "publication_date": "27-11-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1394, "text": "As of this moment, any sign Gadhafi wants out? Well, I think what we are seeing is that the circle around Gadhafi understands that the noose is tightening, that their days are probably numbered and they are going to have to think through what their next steps are. But, as I have been very clear about throughout, there are certain things they can do that will send a signal that he is ready to go. Until that time, we are going to keep on applying pressure and hopefully he is going to be getting the message soon. If Gadhafi ends up in a villa someplace in Zimbabwe with no war crimes trial, is that okay with you? I will tell you, though, that the first step is for Gadhafi to send a signal that he understands the Libyan people do not want him ruling any more, that 40 years of tyranny is enough. Once he makes that decision, I think the international community will come together and make a determination as to what the most appropriate way of facilitating him stepping down will be. Have you made any - or would you make any calls to say, take him? We have not gotten to that stage yet. The U.S. must send munitions. You know, I would not speculate on that. I think that it is fair to say that if we wanted to get weapons into Libya, we probably could. We are looking at all our options at this point. But keep in mind what we have accomplished. We have instituted a no-fly zone that can be sustained for quite some time because it is an international effort. Can we say that we could have it in there in a day, in two days? Well, I am not going to talk about operations like that at that level. I want to try to clarify what you are saying today to the people of Syria. We specifically asked ENTITY, is he saying to the protesters in Syria that if they meet the five criteria he laid out last night - Are you saying to them, we will be there for you as we were there in Libya? I am not saying that. What I am saying is that those are the criteria that I consider in making a very difficult decision about whether to apply military force. Those are the kinds of criteria that I examine, but I am not going to start - right as we are in a very complex operation in Libya, start projecting out about all the other countries in which this would apply.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdianesawyerabcworldnewstonight", "title": "Interview With Diane Sawyer on ABC World News Tonight", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-diane-sawyer-abc-world-news-tonight", "publication_date": "29-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1395, "text": "What are the ground rules here, ENTITY, in terms of the American press? It is all on the record, but cannot be used until after these fine folks are able to publish. Yes, so delay your stories, will you? A couple of things-one, I am excited about going on the trip. I have never been to Saudi Arabia. I have never been to Bahrain. I have never been to Kuwait. I have been to Egypt. I have not been to the Palestinian Territories or Israel as a sitting President. one, the United States commitment to the peace process; that what happened in Annapolis is the beginning of serious discussions, a serious attempt by the United States to encourage the Israelis and the Palestinians to develop a vision of what a Palestinian state will look like. And I am very optimistic that such a vision will come into being by the time I leave office. And the reason I am is because I know the two leaders well, and I believe both are committed to a two-state solution, and both understand that in order for that state to come into being, subject to the roadmap, that there has to be more than just words; there has to be clarity in what a Palestinian state will look like. one is the vision; two is the implementation of the road-map-in other words, the United States chairs a committee with the Palestinians and the Israelis to deal with roadmap issues; and three, a commitment by the United States and others to build the institutions necessary for a Palestinian democracy to thrive. In other words, there is got to be a recognition that we need institution-building; there needs to be work. For example, the United States is very much involved in helping modernize their security forces and create a chain of command, so that when good men like President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad see a security situation needs to be taken care of, they can give a command and something happens, for the good of the Palestinian people. In other words, a state, in order to be credible and viable, must be able to provide security for its people. The EU is very much involved with institution building and basically enhancing the entrepreneurial spirit of the Palestinian people, which is very strong. So I will be visiting with Tony Blair, for example, when I am there to see the progress he is making.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1396, "text": "My only point is, is that it is going to be very important for the nations that I visit to be active participants in not only helping the Palestinians, but recognizing that a two-state solution recognizes Israel's right to exist. Thirdly, I will be also talking to our friends and allies about our strong commitment to regional security, that the United States is engaged and will remain engaged in the security of the region. And as I say, I am looking forward to it, I really am. We will start-Joyce, why do not you crank her up here? We will go a couple of rounds. If I can open up by asking you about Lebanon. The country is entering the second month, and the Presidency is still void over there. Who do you think is responsible for creating this situation and maintaining it? And what is your administration and maybe the French-Mr. Sarkozy, good friend of yours-doing to end this stalemate? First of all, the United States is strongly committed to Lebanese democracy. We believe that a Lebanon that is democratic and peaceful is in the interests of world peace. I have been very impressed by Prime Minister Siniora, by the way, as a man who is committed to the well-being of all the Lebanese people. Secondly, I am disappointed that the Presidency has not been selected and believe very much that Syrian influence is preventing the selection. Thirdly, part of my trip is to remind our friends and allies how important it is for Lebanon to succeed and how important it is for all of us to work to free that Government from foreign interference. My position has been that the March 14th coalition, if it had mustered a majority plus one, 50 percent plus one, should be allowed to go forward with the selection of the President. We are working with not only our friends in the region who share the commitment for Lebanon to be free of foreign interference, but also the European countries. And so there needs to be a clear message to the Syrians from all us that you will continue to be isolated, you will continue to be viewed as a nation that is thwarting the will of the Lebanese people. There needs to be a focused voice, and so our efforts diplomatically are to convince others that they must continue to pressure Syria so that the Lebanese process can go forward. Yes, again, Mr. President, I'd like to reiterate the remark of Joyce of thanking you for giving us this-- You talked about the regional security.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1397, "text": "And back in the Gulf States, the number-one issue nowadays, in terms of security of the region, is the Iranian nuclear profile and issue. And we'd like to know your position on that now, the development of that. The region is nervously-nervous about having another war, confrontation, on the one hand; yet they are also very nervous about the Iranians possessing the nuclear weapons. And I'd like to follow up on that. One, the Iranians had a covert military nuclear weapons program, and that international pressure caused them to suspend the program. one, the ability to enrich uranium that can be converted into the basis of a bomb; secondly, the know-how to be able to assemble that enriched material into a bomb; and third, the capacity to deliver the weapon through rocketry. As far as we know, two of those programs still are ongoing. And the danger of a civilian enrichment program is, once that knowledge is gained, that it could be easily transferred back to a covert military program. And therefore, the NIE should be a clear signal to all of us that Iran is a threat to peace. And they are a threat to peace because they have been nontransparent. They have not lived up to their obligations under the IAEA. They have not been truthful about their program. And so one of my messages is that I, too, take the Iranian issue seriously, and that we have a plan to deal with it in a diplomatic way. It is important for the people in the region to know that while all options remain on the table, that I believe we can solve this problem diplomatically. And the way to do that is to continue to isolate Iran in the international community. My message to the Iranian people is that there is a better way forward for you, that your Government has made decisions that have caused you to be isolated from the world, have caused there to be economic deprivation, because they refuse to be transparent and open about their enrichment programs. And so I understand this is an issue, and it is going to be an agenda item on my travel. It is not going to be the only item, of course. The Middle Eastern peace process is something that will be on the leaders' minds. The commitment of the United States to remain active in the region will be on their minds. I am sure that these leaders fear that the United States may become isolationist and basically throw up its hands and say, who cares what happens.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1398, "text": "I will remind them that what happens in parts of the world matters to the security of the United States of America, and that we look forward to being a constructive force and working with allies like allies should do. And so I am sure the subject will come up, and I am looking forward to clarifying once again our position. The American press feels the same way when they talk to me. You might want to clarify that. Some of them are very serious this morning. King Hamad of Bahrain has launched democratic reforms that included a new Constitution, and Bahrain now has an elected Parliament. How do you assess this experiment, especially in light of your drive to spread democracy in the region? I have complimented His Majesty on recognizing that Bahraini-style democracy, a democracy that reflects the traditions, customs of Bahrain, is a important part of dealing with real threats that we face in the world, which is extremism based upon hopelessness; and that there is a true threat to peace, and that is radicals who prey upon frustrations of people in order to convince them to become suicide bombers and to kill in the name of an ideology. And the best antidote to that is democracy. And I applaud his efforts. And we are very active in helping nations, if they so choose to receive our help, in moving forward through the MEPI program, for example. And it is a way to help people build the institutions necessary for a-I repeat- a democracy that reflects their traditions and history of the respective countries. And people go at different paces. And I do not expect Jeffersonian democracy to break out instantly, nor do I expect the forms of government to reflect that which we have in the United States. But I do hope that people recognize that popular sovereignty, that listening to people and responding to people, is how to build a stable and peaceful world. And so I applaud His Majesty. I am looking forward to bringing up the subject with the Amir of Kuwait as well. You know, women are now very active in the Kuwaiti Parliament. My friend King Abdallah of Saudi Arabia does not get enough credit for beginning to reform his society. It is important for the American President not to insist that countries do it our way. Extremists prey upon hopelessness, and forms of government can create hopeless people, people who are frustrated, people who do not feel like the government is responsive to their needs. The people that we-that kill the innocent have no positive vision.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1399, "text": "The only thing they can do is prey upon frustration-and that a way to deal with this ideological conflict is to defeat the ideology of hate with one of hope. And that is what is happening in the Middle East. And I am looking forward to discussing that with the various leaders. Sir, you are talking about the Middle East peace. I just would like to see, how do you see the role of King Abdallah in promoting the peace process and stability in the Middle East? And also, how do you evaluate the SaudiAmerican-comparing the terror in the region? First of all, I admire King Abdallah. I admire him because he is a man who commands a lot of respect from me personally and a lot of respect in the region. It is not to say that other people do not listen as well, but Saudi Arabia is geographically important, is the guardian of holy sites, and he is a well-respected man. And so in terms of the Middle Eastern peace process, the fact that he sent his Foreign Minister to Annapolis sent a very strong message that Middle Eastern peace is going to require the participation of more than just the United States and Israel and the Palestinians, that a true peace is going to require a commitment in the neighborhood of supporting two states living side by side in peace-two democratic states living side by side in peace. So he has laid out his own initiative in the past. It commanded great respect. It is a commitment to a process. And so I value him as-I view him as invaluable in the process. Secondly, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia recognized that murderers threaten not only other parts of the world, but threaten the Kingdom's own security. And the security forces there have done a magnificent job of using intelligence to find the few that would murder the many. I have been impressed-and any objective observer would be impressed-by Saudi Arabia's commitment to finding those people that use murder as a weapon. And so I-to answer your question, I am satisfied with our cooperation. I am appreciative of the efforts that the intelligence community inside Saudi has been making to deal with these extremists, some of whom conduct murder in-within the Kingdom, some of whom leave the Kingdom to conduct murder. And the King is fully aware that this is a-such a presence is a threat to his own internal securities, as well as recognizing an obligation to prevent those from going outside the country to murder.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1400, "text": "President, I wanted to ask you, your visit to the region will not include the Maghreb Arab. Those countries actually played a very important role in the peace process in the past, and I think that they are willing to do it again. Only because I ran out of time. It is certainly not as a result of any lack of respect or understanding that the contribution of those-of that area would be a significant contribution to achieving peace. And I appreciate very much the leadership in the King of Morocco as well as President Bouteflika. I just-I do not want to make excuses, but I will. I have got to prepare the State of the Union Address. And so I am leaving for a lengthy period of time and need to get back home. And having said that, one of my great trips as a civilian-I guess you'd call me a civilian-non-President, nonpolitical fig-ure-was when I went to Morocco. I had the great pleasure of going to Marrakesh, for example. And I will never forget drinking crushed almond milk, and enjoyed the wonders of the desert and then was able to see snow-capped mountains shortly in the distance-in the short distance. And so it is -I threw snowballs in Morocco one time in the Atlas mountain range. So I had a wonderful experience there. Not to be kind of nostalgic, looking back, but-you know, it is interesting-for example, there are a lot of Moroccan Jews in Israel. Yes, and in Morocco, which provides the King an interesting opportunity to be a healer and a unifier. And I believe he is committed to that. So I view these three countries as important, and I am-wish I could have gone, but I was unable to do so. I want to ask you about the peace process. You voiced confidence that there might be a deal before the end of your second term. However, previous attempts to broker such a peace between Palestinians and Israelis have not succeeded. President Clinton, when he tried with Camp David, the intifada broke. And today, with the situation on the ground, with Syria and Iran not being fully engaged in the process, what makes you more confident that this might really go through? First of all, the Annapolis meeting was able to happen because of a lot of work we had done prior to the meeting with the parties.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1401, "text": "Step one is for there to be a recognition that the two-state solution was necessary for the security of both peoples. Secondly, leadership had to emerge on both sides that was committed to the two-state solution and leadership that was committed to recognizing that extremists are trying to undermine that solution and must be dealt with, particularly the Palestinian leadership. President Abbas understands that there are people, sometimes inspired by foreign government, that will do everything in their power to stop the advance of a democracy. He is committed to dealing with that. Sometimes you have got to make sure, though, that the commitment is coupled with the capacity to deal with it, and that is one of the concerns that we are helping them deal with. In other words, the Palestinian leadership as well as the Israeli leadership has to know that when they negotiate a vision, it will be supported by people in the region. One of the failures of the past is that people attempted to lay out a state- lay out the vision of a state, and yet there was not regional support, which made the political-the politics on the ground much more difficult for the leadership. And so I-those three issues have been addressed in the runup to Annapolis. Finally, this really is a leadership issue that we are talking about. The United States can help, and I will help, and the State Department under Condi Rice's leadership will help, and the National Security under Hadley's leadership will help. We will help them make hard decisions. But these decisions must be made by the leadership in order for there to be lasting peace. And when those decisions are made, they must be supported by the region. And so I think those ingredients are now in place, and I am optimistic that it will get done by the time I leave office, and more importantly, so is President Abbas and Prime Minister Olmert. Now, what is going to happen is, is that there will be moments-there will be issues over settlements or Katyusha rocket attacks. These are going to be opportunities for those who do not want the vision to go forward to keep the process mired. We have a way to deal with that, and that is through a trilateral-the roadmap group to deal with these issues. My job is to remind people that laying out a substantive, real vision around which people of good faith can rally is instrumental to peace.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1402, "text": "Now, keep in mind, when we define the state, it will be implemented subject to the roadmap. That is why the roadmap-the trilateral committee on the roadmap is important. The entrepreneurial spirit, which is strong amongst the Palestinians, can be tapped into. It is hard to get capital to invest, however, unless there is certainty- or more certainty about security and a vision. And so we are working a three-pronged strategy, and I believe all three of those prongs have come together in such a way as to give me confidence this deal can be done by the time I leave office. President, allow me to communicate to you a Kuwaiti sort of question or hope or plea. Needless to say that Kuwait is a true ally of the United States. There is so much gratitude for the role the United States played in the liberation of Kuwait back in 1991. Kuwait was the only launching pad for Operation Iraqi Freedom. When push came to shove, we were true allies. Now, back in Kuwait, as your visit is approaching, the Kuwaitis are actually wondering if there will be an end to the four Kuwaiti detainees in Guantanamo. To be transferred back to-- To Kuwait. We will look at it. Our strategy, by the way, is to transfer as many Guantanamo detainees back to their countries of origin as possible, subject to the no torture agreement. I just will have to look into this. Okay, we will look into it. Well, some of the detainees are going to need to be tried in our court system. The crimes were such that we believe they ought to be brought to justice in a U.S. court system, which is-it is having a little trouble getting started because we have had a few court challenges for our court system. The whole purpose of the exercise was to send people home and try those who remain. And I just have to check on the four. That is very kind of you. Please. which is, also-I am here actually to reflect on some sort of a conspiratorial thinking back in the region. whose middle name is actually conspiracy -that everything seems to be going for the mullahs' regimes in Iran, over the past 20 years of the United States strategy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1403, "text": "The United States had eliminated the northern ideological enemy of Iran, U.S.S.R.; the eastern sectarian enemy of Iran, Taliban regime; the old-time foe, Sad-dam Hussein, in the west, without having- for the Iranians to resume the 8-long war- 8-year-long war-and everything seems to be going their way. And yet, at the same time, here we are. As true allies, we want to have sort of a clear strategy of what exactly are we to adopt with our main ally, the United States of America-- I appreciate that. in terms of the confrontation of the threat for peace that is coming from Iran What you have just described is one way to look at it. I look- let me look at it a different way, that now on the Iranian borderst exists a democracy, with a Constitution that is the most modern Constitution written in the Middle East; a democracy that is beginning to grow in confidence; a democracy that will recognize the rights of all citizens within its border; a democracy that will be responsive to the people, which stands in stark contrast to the system of government in Tehran that is not a democracy; it is in many ways a theocracy. Secondly, there is a-within Iran, there is-I mean, Iraq, there is a different attitude of the Shi'a. There is a quietus school; there is a school that says religion definitely has a part in society, but religion is not going to run government, which is a-it is just an interesting way to view the neighborhood. Democracy takes a while to grow and flourish. Thirdly, Russia is very much engaged in the region. Russia has been helpful with Iran. Russia has supported the U.N. Security Council resolutions. Russia put forth an interesting proposal, which I have supported, that said, if you want to have a civilian nuclear program, you say your program is civilian in nature, there is no need for you to enrich because we will provide the fuel for you. In other words, Russia has basically taken that argument away from the Iranians that said, we are-have the sovereign right to have a civilian nuclear program, and they said, fine. This, by the way, I have said publicly. Of course they have a sovereign right to have a civilian nuclear program.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1404, "text": "The problem is, because this nation did not level with the IAEA, they are to be not trusted with the capacity to enrich, because once you learn to enrich, you could easily transfer that to a covert military program. And so I view the situation differently, and I will be-I am looking forward to talking to the Amir about it. What he will want to know is whether or not we take the Iranian threat seriously. That is what he is going to want to know. And as my first answer to the question was, it should be clear to you, I do. And secondly, he is going to want to know, do we have a strategy to deal with it? And I will be glad to lay out again the strategy to deal with it. And thirdly, he will want to know whether or not the United States is going to remain active in the region, will we be working with friends and allies on developing a security plan? And the answer to that question is, absolutely, we will be. That is one of the main purposes of the trip, to talk about U.S. commitment to the region.  they signed in 2004. And how true are the reports which are saying that the United States will abandon its base in Bahrain? They are not true. You are right about the conspiracy theory. He is asking whether we are going to pull the 5th Fleet out of Bahrain, and the answer is no. And if that is a concern of His Majesty, it will not take long for me to allay his concerns. As a matter of fact, I am looking forward to not only dealing with the Bahraini officials and His Majesty, of course, but to talk to our troops there in Bahrain. I am looking forward to thanking them for their service to the country, which ought to be a very powerful signal that the answer is no. Bahrain is a very hospitable place for our Navy and other Armed Forces, and that in itself is a-should be a signal to people that we view Bahrain as a stable, strong country, which is all part of tracking investment. You asked about how do you enhance trade. Well, one way you enhance trade is to make sure that capital is-capital looks for secure places. Capital does not like to invest and have a high-risk component based upon instability. So that in itself ought to-that signal in itself ought to facilitate division of a free trade agreement.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1405, "text": "Sir, you are talking about civilian nuclear, and you do not have any objection for that if it is going to be under the supervision of the international arena. DCC recently approached to have a civilian nuclear facility for water desalinization for power. What is your stand on that? First of all, desalinization requires an enormous amount of power. And the best power source for desalinization, to make it more economical, is nuclear power. Secondly, I believe if the world is serious about dealing with global warming, emissions, then the best way to deal with it is for us to power up through nuclear power. And so therefore, I am a advocate for nuclear power, with proper safeguards to make sure that untrustworthy nations, nations that will not subject themselves to IAEA scrutiny, are called to account. So I would support nuclear power for the sake of desalinization. Well, you are awash with oil. Why do you need nuclear power? Well, nuclear power is environmentally sound, and nuclear power is really the best way to deal with issues such as desalinization. If I were in the Middle East and worried about water, which is a valuable resource, I too would be looking for economic ways to desalinize the water. If I give you, then I have to go around again. You will visit Egypt, sir, which has recently deployed troops in Darfur-- You also signed a bill against Sudan, which it seems from my point of view again to affect the people-the Sudanese people, but not the Government. If Darfur would be part of your agenda when you meet with President Mubarak? First, I will thank him for sending troops. Secondly, I am going to correct you on the sanctions. The sanctions were aimed at individuals within the Sudanese regime, people that were obstructing the peace process-including a rebel leader. They were aimed at the elite and companies owned by the elite, as opposed to the Sudanese people. In order for there to be the peace that we all want-now, this is dealing with Darfur-and as you know, the situation is very complicated because we are not only dealing with Darfur, we are dealing with the north-south agreement as well-in order to-well, let me do north-south very quickly.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1406, "text": "We have been working with the southern leaders to get them to participate in the Government of Khartoum, so long as the Government of Khartoum is forthcoming with their agreements, such as the sharing of oil revenues. Secondly, we have insisted that both parties not be provocative when it comes to military incursions upon an ill-defined border. Thirdly, we are providing aid to the people of southern Sudan. And it is interesting; one of the really interesting things about America is, total strangers are going to help total strangers all the time. And there is a lot of church and faith-based groups involved in southern Sudan trying to improve the lot of people living there-in other words, the great humanitarian outreach that takes place. Darfur-in order for there to be the peace that we all want in Darfur, there has to be, one, a united rebel group willing to sit down at the table with Khartoum in good faith. And one of the reasons I put the sanctions on individuals in Sudan- we did have sanctions prior to that, general sanctions, but these ones you are referring to are targeted at folks-is because there was a lack of effort by the Government on truly trying to promote the peace process. I recognize, however, that there has to be a more united effort by the rebel groups. In other words, the rebel groups cannot take advantage of-continue to take advantage of this notion that they can do what they want without being serious about the peace. one, to the Government of Khartoum; and two, to the rebels. When we first got going in the process, by the way, there was three major rebel groups, which made it easier to convince people to come to the table. one, to get troops in there as quickly as possible to be able to help the folks who are living in these dispersed camps have a normal life. And the United States, by the way, when you talk about direct humanitarian aid, has provided more direct humanitarian aid than any country in the world by far because we care about the human condition, we care about people's lives. Secondly, that we support the U.N. efforts to get the rebels to the table. There was one attempt in Libya, as you know, recently, and our efforts are to support Jan Eliasson-he was the former Ambassador for Sweden here-as he works to bring cohesion so that there is a cohesive unit of rebels to negotiate with the Government.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintmedia", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Media", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-media", "publication_date": "04-01-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1407, "text": "Canadians are very excited about your trip. When they watch you today sign your recovery bill into law, how concerned should they be that the Buy America clause is still there, even though you have given assurances international trade agreements will be respected. You know, I think that if you look at history, one of the most important things during a worldwide recession of the sort that we are seeing now is that each country does not resort to beggar thy neighbor policies, protectionist policies. They can end up further contracting world trade. And my administration is committed to making sure that even as we take steps to strengthen the U.S. economy that we are doing so in a way that actually over time will enhance the ability of trading partners, like Canada, to work within our boundaries. And my expectation is, is that where you have strong U.S. competitors who can sell products and services, that a lot of Governors and mayors are going to want to try to find U.S. equipment or services, but that we are going to abide by our World Trade Organization and NAFTA obligations just as we always have. You mentioned NAFTA. A year ago you were pretty critical of NAFTA. In fact, you even suggested at one point that the U.S. opt out if it could not renegotiate. Do you think that is the time now to be making that case, or is it something that is set aside now? As I said, I think there are a lot of sensitivities right now because of the huge decline in world trade. As I have said before, NAFTA, the basic framework of the agreement has environmental and labor protections as side agreements. My argument has always been that we might as well incorporate them into the full agreement so that they are fully enforceable. But what I have also said is that Canada is one of our most important trading partners. We rely on them heavily. There is $1.5 billion worth of trade going back and forth every day between the two countries, and that it is not in anybody's interests to see that trade diminish. Part of that trade involves the energy sector; a lot of oil and gas comes to the United States from Canada and even more in the future with oil sands development. Now, there are some in your country and Canada as well who feel the oil sands is dirty oil because of the extraction process. What do you think?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermansbridgecanadianbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Peter Mansbridge of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-mansbridge-canadian-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "17-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1408, "text": "Well, it what we know is that oil sands create a big creates a big carbon footprint. And so the dilemma that Canada faces, the United States faces, and China and the entire world faces is how do we obtain the energy that we need to grow our economies in a way that is not rapidly accelerating climate change. And that is one of the reasons why the stimulus bill that I will be signing today contains billions of dollars towards clean energy development. I think to the extent that Canada and the United States can collaborate on ways that we can sequester carbon, capture greenhouse gases before they are emitted into the atmosphere, that is going to be good for everybody. Because if we do not , then we are going to have a ceiling at some point in terms of our ability to expand our economies and maintain the standard of living that is so important, particularly when you have got countries like China and India that are obviously interested in catching up. So are you drawing a link, then, in terms of the future of tar sands oil coming into the U.S. contingent on a sense of a continental environment policy on cap and trade? Well, I think what I am suggesting is, is that no country in isolation is going to be able to solve this problem. So Canada, the United States, China, India, the European Union, all of us are going to have to work together in an effective way to figure out how do we balance the imperatives of economic growth with very real concerns about the effect we are having on our planet. And ultimately, I think this can be solved by technology. I think that it is possible for us to create a set of clean energy mechanisms that allow us to use things not just like oil sands, but also coal. The United States is the Saudi Arabia of coal, but we have our own homegrown problems in terms of dealing with a cheap energy source that creates a big carbon footprint. And so we are not going to be able to deal with any of these issues in isolation. The more that we can develop technologies that tap alternative sources of energy but also contain the environmental damage of fossil fuels, the better off we are going to be. I know you are looking at it as a global situation, in terms of global partners, but there are some who do argue that this is the time; if there was ever going to be a continental energy policy and a continental environmental policy, this would be it. Would you agree with that thinking?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermansbridgecanadianbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Peter Mansbridge of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-mansbridge-canadian-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "17-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1409, "text": "Well, you know, I think one of the promising areas for not just for bilateral but also trilateral cooperation is around this issue. I met with President Calderon here in the United States, and Mexico actually has taken some of the boldest steps around the issues of alternative energy and carbon reductions of any country out there. And it is very rare for a country that is still involved in developing and trying to raise its standard of living to stay as focused on this issue as President Calderon's administration has. What I think that offers is the possibility of a template that we can create between Canada, the United States, and Mexico that is moving forcefully around these issues. But as I said, it is going to be important for us to make sure that countries like China and India, with enormous populations and huge energy needs, that they are brought into this process as well. As you know, Canada has been there from the beginning, since the fall of 2001 and has suffered extreme casualties in its combat missions there. And the Canadian Parliament has decided, out of combat by the year 2011. When you go to Ottawa, will you have any suggestions to Canada that it should reconsider what its role in Afghanistan is? Well, first of all, I think the Canadian contribution has been extraordinary, and for all the families who have borne the burden in Canada, I think we all have a heartfelt thanks. I am in the process of a strategic review of our approach in Afghanistan. Very soon we will be releasing some initial plans in terms of how we are going to approach the military side of the equation in Afghanistan. But I am absolutely convinced that you cannot solve the problem of Afghanistan, the Taliban, the spread of extremism in that region solely through military means. We are going to have to use diplomacy; we are going to have to use development. And my hope is that in conversations that I have with Prime Minister Harper, that he and I end up seeing the importance of a comprehensive strategy and one that ultimately the people of Canada can support, as well as the people of the United States can support, because obviously, here as well, there are a lot of concerns about a conflict that has lasted quite a long time now and actually appears to be deteriorating at this point. But are you saying that you will or you will not ask Canada to remain in a combat role?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermansbridgecanadianbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Peter Mansbridge of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-mansbridge-canadian-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "17-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1410, "text": "Well, I think, you know, we have got until 2011, according to the Canadian Legislature, and I think it is important for the Canadian Legislature and the people of Canada to get a sense that what they are doing is productive. So what I will be communicating is the approach that we intend to take. Obviously, I am going to be continuing to ask other countries to help think through how do we approach this very difficult problem. But I do not have a specific ask in my pocket that I intend to bring out in our meetings. Well, I think Afghanistan is still winnable in the sense of our ability to ensure that it is not a launching pad for attacks against North America. I think it is still possible for us to stamp out Al Qaida to make sure that extremism is not expanding but rather is contracting. I think all those goals are still possible, but I think that as a consequence of the war on Iraq, we took our eye off the ball. We have not been as focused as we need to be on all the various steps that are needed in order to deal with Afghanistan. If you have got narcotrafficking that is funding the Taliban, if there is a perception that there is no rule of law in Afghanistan, if we do not solve the issue of the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, then we are probably not going to solve the problem. I am down to my last minute, a couple of quickies on Canada, your sense of the country. I mean, I think, as you may know, you carry Canada on your belt. You have been to Canada once. What is your sense of the country? Well, yes, I have been to Canada a couple of times. Most recently, it was to visit my brother-in-law's family who was from Burlington right outside of Toronto. Look, I think that Canada is one of the most impressive countries in the world, the way it has managed a diverse population, a vibrant economy. You know, the natural beauty of Canada is extraordinary. Obviously, there is enormous kinship between the United States and Canada, and the ties that bind our two countries together are things that are very important to us. And, you know, one of the things that I think has been striking about Canada is that in the midst of this enormous economic crisis, I think Canada has shown itself to be a pretty good manager of the financial system in the economy in ways that we have not always been here in the United States.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpetermansbridgecanadianbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Peter Mansbridge of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-peter-mansbridge-canadian-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "17-02-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1411, "text": "One of the things I wanted to ask you was I think that most Americans thought the job of being President was impossible when you took office, and I think things have changed, and they feel that you thrive on it. And I sort of wanted to ask you how you discipline yourself and how you plan your activities so that it will not overwhelm you? Well, maybe the 8 years as Governor gave me some advance training for this, because I do remember that when I first became Governor there was a period that I went through in which I thought the world had fallen on my head. And yet, I have to say hat I think that the Presidency-the nearest thing to it in the country is a governorship. You do not have a foreign policy, which does add some problems, but it is the same thing. And it used to be-if you will look back at earlier days, in which our Presidents were mainly found among the Governors. And I think that is a better training place than, for instance, serving in the legislature or something. You'd still recommend it? But the other thing- I have never felt better in my life, physically. I have a little gym upstairs that I get to every afternoon before the day is over. Tell me, would you recommend the job to a friend? He might not be a friend afterwards- -but, no, I have to say that for someone who really wants to do some things that he believes strongly in, this is the most fulfilling experience I have ever had in my life. Many times in the last 6 weeks you have been awakened from a deep sleep with a world crisis. How do you get the news'? Who brings it to you? Do you have to have coffee? Does Mrs. Reagan get up with you? No, I try to slip out without her, although-it is usually the phone. No, usually, just the bedside phone, that then-well, when we were-when it has happened-it happened at Atlanta, Georgia, when we were on that weekend there. And one of them was the phone, and, simply, it was Bud McFarlane asking could I come up in the living room and meet the Secretary of State there. So, I whispered that I was just going out in the living room for a little bit, hoping that she'd go back to sleep, and I put on a robe and went out there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgarrycliffordandpatriciaryanpeoplemagazine", "title": "Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-garry-clifford-and-patricia-ryan-people-magazine", "publication_date": "06-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1412, "text": "Then the second incident down there, one of the stewards, he just slipped in, tiptoed in and touched me on the shoulder and whispered to me, and I slid out and did the same thing again. Do you need coffee or anything? And then, more recently at Camp David, it was phone calls, not in the middle of the night in this case. I cannot say that I pick it up with dread, because many times it is just a correction or some information on something or other. I wanted to ask you, do you think the American people are behind the commitment of troops for military action, and do you think-this is a more serious question-do you think that the number of casualties influences how they feel about something? This has to be the hardest thing in all of this job, and certainly in my life, and that is committing these splendid young men and women to tasks where you know there is that threat. I have never been so proud of anything as I am of the people in our Armed Forces. Well, it is working, and there is an esprit de corps, there is a pride out there among them. And this puts a lump in my throat. And then to-even one of them, to have a horrible accident or incident such as the one in Lebanon, there just is no way to make that easy. But the thing is to try and-well, first of all, I think many people jump to events-not People such thing as the grassroots. But press and political figures that-on the Grenada rescue mission-that immediately jumped to the conclusion that this was some kind of a warlike thing that everyone would be angry at. It was kind of interesting to see so many of them have to try to crawl back in off the end of the limb when they found out that the American people understood very well what we were doing and supported it. Now it is harder for them to understand Lebanon, because in Lebanon, they were not sent there to fight; that, hopefully, there would be no combat. We knew there was a risk because of the kind of violence that had been taking place in the streets over there for a long time. But the whole idea of the multinational force was in connection with our own peace proposal for the Middle East. Lebanon was stalling that, if you remember. Israel had crossed the border because PLO terrorist units were attacking villages across their northern border from Lebanon.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgarrycliffordandpatriciaryanpeoplemagazine", "title": "Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-garry-clifford-and-patricia-ryan-people-magazine", "publication_date": "06-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1413, "text": "The Lebanon Government, as of several years ago, was virtually powerless in the face of what can only be termed warlords in their own country, of several factions, each with its own militia, fighting each other and fighting the Government. And you could not proceed with the peace mission until we resolved this problem. So, we sent a force in with the idea that-well, first of all, they'd gotten some 10,000 PLO out; now the idea was that both Israel and Syria get out, then a stabilizing force there while the Lebanese Government reformed and created a military force in which it could then take over jurisdiction of its own territory. And so our force there is there for that purpose. And there would not have been a shot fired by a marine or by our Navy or Air Force if they had not been shot at. And when that happened, I said wherever we send them, they are going to have the right to defend themselves and fire back. Your political godfather, or grandfather, if you will, Barry Goldwater, Senator Goldwater, is even calling for the boys to come back from Beirut. And I am wondering, how far are you willing to commit troops, or how far are you willing to escalate? That is up to the Syrians and to some of those rebel groups that are fighting the Lebanese military. And I am hopeful that after this last exchange that the Syrians will decide that they do not want to go on on that path. But, ENTITY, if they remain recalcitrant, if they remain-the Israelis have been bombing them and strafing them and have not really budged them. If they remain the same and they remain shooting at our reconnaissance flights and downing more fliers, what is the next step? Well, we are taking the next step right now. Don Rumsfeld1 is on his way back there, and we still are going to try for a political solution. We are going to try to negotiate with the Syrians and make them understand. But if they do not want to negotiate, if they find it in their best interests to be a thorn in your side, what do you do then? Well, that becomes a kind of a hypothetical question in which I almost have to wait and see what the circumstances are.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgarrycliffordandpatriciaryanpeoplemagazine", "title": "Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-garry-clifford-and-patricia-ryan-people-magazine", "publication_date": "06-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1414, "text": "Actually, the Lebanese military-which we have helped to train and have equipped and which is a very good military force-is supposed to be resolving the situation for themselves as we try to maintain a little stability in Beirut while they can go forward and do this. Do you see a day, either in your own-in your next term, for instance, or in the very near future, where President Assad could be as, sort of, the dominant-the present day dominant force in the Arab world; where he could become something like what Anwar Sadat became to us? I mean, do you ever see that kind of relationship ever being able to develop? I do not see any reason why not. We have made great progress with the other Arab States, the more moderate states. I think that they are very ready for a negotiated settlement, continuing on with the Camp David accords and the U.N. resolutions. Syria is the big kid and the bad kid on the block, and the other Arab States have been trying, themselves, to persuade Syria to join in this effort and to withdraw. And now a new element has been introduced by Syria. They had not mentioned this before when earlier they said, oh, yes, they would get out, too. They now are not pretending that there is any assault on them or that they are in any danger and that is why they are staying there; they are now claiming that Lebanon properly is a part of a greater Syria. This is outright armed aggression now on their part, hoping to expand their territory at the expense of Lebanon and-they have even indicated-at the expense of Jordan. ENTITY, moving off of that People Magazine question, how did you assess the film The Day After? And do you think movies have a way of forming political opinion? It is not successful unless it has or evokes an emotional response. If the audience does not have an emotional experience, whether it is one of hating something or crying or having a lot of laughter, then you have got a failure out there. But apparently it has not had a lasting impact; I have not seen very much reference to it any more. And maybe one of the reasons was because it was--it was a horror film, showing you what I am sure all of us all knew, that a nuclear war is unthinkable, it is sheer horror, it must not happen. But it left you with no idea or solution, no suggestion as to what to do about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgarrycliffordandpatriciaryanpeoplemagazine", "title": "Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-garry-clifford-and-patricia-ryan-people-magazine", "publication_date": "06-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1415, "text": "And I think that my own reaction to it was, look, if anything, if this can add to what we can say about the fact that there must not be a nuclear war, then maybe the people will understand why we are trying so desperately to get a reduction in those weapons worldwide. And I hope that if we start down the reduction road that the other side will see the common sense in eliminating them totally. Not since 1946 has there been such a suggestion, and that was made by this country. And even then, when we were the only ones, really, with a stock of such weapons, the Soviet Union refused. If Yuriy Andropov had been in the room with you watching the film that night, would you have said that very same thing to him? Yes, I would have told him that the only way there could be war is if they start it; we are not going to start a war. Do you have any second thoughts about calling the Soviet Union an evil empire? I think you called the Soviet Union that once. Do you have second thoughts about that? Do you wish you had not done it? I think that it was high time that we got some realism and got people thinking that for too long we have kind of viewed them as just a mirror image of ourselves, and that maybe we could appeal to their good nature. And we have gone through the experience in a number of years past of saying, well, if we cancel weapons systems, if we unilaterally disarm, maybe they will see that we are nice people, too, and they will disarm. So you see them as really a source of evil? Yes, because you have to look at the impact on what we were just talking about, with Lebanon. There they are with thousands of military advisers and technicians and so forth in Syria, have provided Syria with weapons that are not purely defense weapons-ground-to-ground missiles that can cover virtually every target from Syria in Israel. And they are the ones that seek, whether it is out of paranoia on their part-and, believe me, everyone's an enemy, and so they have to be aggressive-or whether it is the Marxist-Leninist theory, more than a theory-commitment-that was handed them, and that was that they must support uprisings wherever they take place in the world to bring about a one-world Communist state. Now, no Russian leader has ever refuted that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgarrycliffordandpatriciaryanpeoplemagazine", "title": "Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-garry-clifford-and-patricia-ryan-people-magazine", "publication_date": "06-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1416, "text": "As a matter of fact, he has not had time yet, but every Russian leader up to Andropov, at some time or other, has publicly restated his commitment to world conquest-world communizing. Let me ask you a question out of that. In the Jerusalem Post you were quoted-and I do not know if the quote was accurate-as saying that this generation might see Armageddon, that a lot of the Biblical prophecies are sort of being played out today, or could be. Do you believe that? I have never done that publicly. I have talked here, and then I wrote people, because some theologians quite some time ago were telling me, calling attention to the fact that theologians have been studying the ancient prophecies-What would portend the coming of Armageddon? -and have said that never, in the time between the prophecies up until now has there ever been a time in which so many of the prophecies are coming together. There have been times in the past when people thought the end of the world was coming, and so forth, but never anything like this. And one of them, the first one who ever broached this to me-and I will not use his name; I do not have permission to. He probably would give it, but I am not going to ask-had held a meeting with the then head of the German Government, years ago when the war was over, and did not know that his hobby was theology. And he asked this theologian what did he think was the next great news event, worldwide. And the theologian, very wisely, said, Well, I think that you are asking that question in a case that you have had a thought along that line. It was about the prophecies and so forth. I have talked conversationally about that. You have mused on it. You have considered it. Not to the extent of throwing up my hands and saying, Well, it is all over. I think whichever generation and at whatever time, when the time comes, the generation that is there, I think will have to go on doing what they believe is right. To ask you a serious question which comes out of this, I see around-since my last visit here-many more signs that the government is worried about terrorism, that it is -. Do you, yourself, think about dying, think about the fear of the position you are in?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgarrycliffordandpatriciaryanpeoplemagazine", "title": "Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-garry-clifford-and-patricia-ryan-people-magazine", "publication_date": "06-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1417, "text": "Well, you cannot help but be conscious, because the security measures are all so evident to you. But if you mean do I go around fearful and looking over my shoulder, no. I have confidence in the security people. Yes, and a touch of another. And I never second guess the security people. When they tell me they are going to do something or change some way of doing things that we are doing, I accept that that is . Is this something that you talk about, for instance, to Mrs. Reagan or your children? Yes, very much so, because I think it was harder for them when it did happen than it was for me, and much more difficult for her, especially to get over. It is a lot easier to worry about someone else than it is to worry about yourself, and so I know what must go through her mind when I set out on some expedition or some public appearance or something. Does your bullet-proof shirt or jacket or coat or whatever hang in the family quarters? Or do they keep it someplace else? They keep it. And they come, having it in hand, and they kind of come in flinching, because they know that I- What do you say? I do not accept it with good grace. What do you say, though, when they put it on you? But I also know that they would not be bringing it in unless they felt there was a reason for it. And I work so hard in that gym up there. And they say everybody out there in the audience will think I am getting fat. Did you cringe when you had to sign the order to have your own aides take a lie detector test? Have you ever taken one? But I did not sign an order for them to take it. This has been misconstrued, and I bless you for giving me a chance to explain it. We had a meeting that came up on national security-rules and regulations of the security of the information there. And it was a leak which could have cost some Americans their lives. And this is a criminal act when there is a violation of national security. And I called the Justice Department on this-I thought it was serious enough-and I said I want an investigation of how this happened, to guard against it in the future. Now, such an investigation, without my designating it as such-if it is a violation of national security, it is a criminal investigation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgarrycliffordandpatriciaryanpeoplemagazine", "title": "Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-garry-clifford-and-patricia-ryan-people-magazine", "publication_date": "06-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1418, "text": "If it is a criminal investigation, the FBI has the right to ask for lie detector tests. But, being a criminal investigation, the individual has the right to refuse them, and that is all. Well, have you ever taken one? I mean did they take them- I do not even know whether the FBI even asked for them or not. They determine that, and that is within the law. And then if somebody says no, they report that also in their investigating report that they asked and it was refused. ENTITY, who do you think the easiest Democrat would be to beat in 1984? If I answered that question I might be helping them to choose out of that octet they have got out there, and I am not going to help them in their choice. I have two questions that I would-not till Christmas. I'd like to ask two questions. What I was thinking, in this year of living dangerously, I wondered how in the world can you maintain the very obvious romance you have with Mrs. Reagan? I mean romance takes time, and it takes mood, and it takes not being harried. And what sort of special things do you do to maintain this togetherness in these tough times? We have always been very close, and there developed, as there would in 30-odd years, little things that kind of-traditional, or that have a meaning to us from times back. Can you cite any of them that-I mean, I think especially in your article in Parade, you showed how much you loved her and how much the romance continues and whatever. I just wondered if there is sort of small things you do to keep this touchingness together? Well, there are certain occasions when we leave notes for each other and things of that kind that we still do. Is there a special place you leave them, or Oh, no, it just depends on where-well, things like on the breakfast tray and, on certain occasions, cards-I always remember. Could I ask one more question for my mother, who you gave a story to last year, and we kept hearing from our readers about the peg-legged pig. Do you remember the story you told about the pig with the wooden leg? We thought that this has become a tradition for the magazine, and we wondered, do you have a good story to tell the readers and, indeed, my mother, who is now 84 this year-a very good story? Well, I cannot repeat that because I have done that story.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgarrycliffordandpatriciaryanpeoplemagazine", "title": "Interview With Garry Clifford and Patricia Ryan of People Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-garry-clifford-and-patricia-ryan-people-magazine", "publication_date": "06-12-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1419, "text": "Infrastructure and the Democrats' budget resolution from someone who was with the President today. I am joined now by New York Democratic ENTITY. I am wondering just from what you saw today, what you heard from the President, were you happy or satisfied with what you heard from President Biden today in terms of his commitment to battling climate change and providing help to New York? Well, I think in the immediate sense, we have been able to help facilitate in working with President Biden as well as FEMA in getting one of the fastest ever disaster assistance approvals from FEMA so that we could help people on the ground and start helping people recover as quickly as possible. Now, when it comes to climate change, we have to do so much more, and the President's agenda, yes, is important. We must pass the Build Back Better Act, but it is not done until it is on the President's desk, and we also need to make sure that we are continuing to fund these priorities. Right now, reconciliation is really embattled and we have to make sure that we actually bring this legislation home with the Build Back Better Act and making sure that climate is protected, because the fossil fuel industry and the interests of the fossil fuel industry are very much doing their best to try to shape both this legislation and making sure that they are trying to pit it, and frankly, tank it compared to the Infrastructure Act as well. When one talks to experts on climate change and what, in order to respond effectively, what would need to be done, when you actually start to look at the full scope of all the aspects of life that would be impacted and need to be impacted, I mean, the production of how concrete is made, how steel is made, farming procedures, the electrical grid, it is a huge societal shift. Do you think Americans are ready for that or been kind of prepared for that? I think we absolutely are because the question is not if our entire world and our entire society is going to shift because of climate change, it is a matter of how it is going to shift. So basically, if we do nothing to address climate change, we are going to see the continued destruction of our supply chains. We are going to see our crops not be able to grow in the same way. We will see the continuation and proliferation of other future pandemics as well. And so that is how our life could change if we do nothing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsrepalexandriaocasiocortezaoccnninterviewontexasabortionbilltranscript", "title": "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) CNN Interview on Texas Abortion Bill Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-cnn-interview-on-texas-abortion-bill-transcript", "publication_date": "08-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["AOC"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1420, "text": "It will change dramatically, but it could also change dramatically in a positive direction if we do something. We can create millions of union jobs by rebuilding our infrastructure, shoring up our cities, our rural areas and our suburbs in order to prepare for the climate catastrophes that could come to our shores, but also draw down our carbon output in order to make sure that we prevent future calamities from happening as well. You are obviously from a more progressive wing in the Democratic party than President Biden, who got elected in part by pledging to work across party lines. And as you clearly know, the bipartisan infrastructure bill seems stall because Democratic moderates in the Senate are balking at the price tag of a separated but related budget resolution that is key to the House even taking up the infrastructure bill. Is this split among Democrats, what do you make of it? I mean, is it healthy in your view? Well, I certainly do not think it is healthy that ExxonMobil lobbyists are bragging about how many senators, Democrat and Republican, that they get to have on speed dial and enjoy exclusive access to shaping the contours of this quote, unquote bipartisan infrastructure bill. I think the role of dark money and the fossil fuel lobby is extremely unhealthy for our democracy. But the fact of the matter is, is that we have got the people on our side, and this is what we continue to say. They have money, these lobbyists and special interests have money, but we have got people. The Build Back Better Act has popular support, and even going above and beyond that, the Green New Deal has popular support even among Republicans and Independents. And so what people I think are united behind is the acknowledgement that climate change is human caused, that the burning of fossil fuels and the continued construction of fossil fuel infrastructure like what we are seeing with Line 3 in Minnesota must be confronted if we are going to create a better future for ourselves. And we can do it while creating millions of union jobs. President Biden was just asked this evening about one of the key moderate, or often referred to as moderate Democrats opposing the $3.5 trillion reconciliation package, Senator Joe Manchin. I just want to play for our viewers what he had to say. Do you trust President Biden to strike a deal with Senator Manchin or do you worry about President Biden striking a deal with Senator Manchin?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsrepalexandriaocasiocortezaoccnninterviewontexasabortionbilltranscript", "title": "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) CNN Interview on Texas Abortion Bill Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-cnn-interview-on-texas-abortion-bill-transcript", "publication_date": "08-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["AOC"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1421, "text": "I mean, is there a deal that all Democrats will accept, including Manchin? Well, I think one of the interesting aspects of this situation is that it is not just Senator Manchin that has leverage. Frankly, the entire party also needs to quote, unquote, worry about that more moderate agenda in the House, because just as we have an extremely slim Senate margin, we also have a very slim House margin. And I, as well as many, many members of the progressive caucus, simply will not vote for Senator Manchin's infrastructure bill unless it is tied together with the Build Back Better Act so that we have an all of the above approach. So we are not saying it is either your bill or our bill, but that both of these bills must move forward together or neither will. And for the American people, that is the best case scenario, where we are able to address the needs of all communities, instead of just the needs of some communities that are represented by a very small sliver of that bipartisan group. I do not want to put you on the spot, but you mentioned fossil fuel industries. It reminded me of something you had tweeted actually when Senator Manchin voiced his opposition in an op-ed last week. You responded via Twitter. On September 2nd, you wrote, Manchin has weekly huddles w/ Exxon and is one of many senators who gives lobbyists their pen to write so-called 'bipartisan' fossil fuel bills. It is killing people. Sick of this 'bipartisan' corruption that masquerades as clear-eyed moderation. Fossil fuel corps & dark money is destroying our democracy, country, & planet. All day our community has been pulling bodies out of homes from the flood. And we are supposed to entertain lobbyist talking points about why we should abandoned people & do nothing? Are you suggesting that Senator Manchin is more interested in pleasing lobbyists than in saving lives from climate change? I think that in the year 2021, if any member of Congress, whether it is a member of the House or whether it is a member of the Senate, continues to aid the fossil fuel lobbyists in advancing their agenda over the consensus of science then they are disconnected from the reality on the ground. What we have been doing over the last four days, first responders in my community, have been pulling out bodies from apartments, basement apartments in New York City because of these flash floods.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsrepalexandriaocasiocortezaoccnninterviewontexasabortionbilltranscript", "title": "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) CNN Interview on Texas Abortion Bill Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-cnn-interview-on-texas-abortion-bill-transcript", "publication_date": "08-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["AOC"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1422, "text": "And the idea that we are going to continue building fossil fuel infrastructure, that we are going to continue, even in my backyard, continue to try to build things like peaker plants, natural gas, fracking, pipelines for fracked gas, it is unconscionable. We know that the science is in and it says the construction of new fossil fuel infrastructure will endanger people. We have the capacity to transition to clean and renewable energy and create millions of good union jobs in order to transition to both our infrastructure and our energy system, as well as our power grid. So I do believe that with all of that evidence that we have, with all of the opportunity that we have, economic opportunity that we have, if we continue to listen to the fossil fuel lobby and if we continue to allow them to have this infrastructure, have this influence in Washington, we are endangering our constituents, and we have to choose the science for once ahead of the lobbyist money. Do you support nuclear? Because there are a lot of people who will look at this issue and say the capabilities of transporting solar and wind power, I mean, our electrical grid needs to completely be altered and upgraded, but even then transporting it long distances and storing it, nuclear is the only answer, at least for in the short term. We have even addressed some of this issue, Senator Markey and I, in the drafting of the Green New Deal, which is that I do not think that There is no position in terms of whether we are pro or anti-nuclear. Can we get an energy mix that is constructed in a ten-year timeline in accordance with the IPCC results? And so it certainly does not rule out nuclear, but the issue is, is the construction, the timeline, and making sure that we can also focus on investments, for example, battery storage and energy storage in our power grid so that we are not completely reliant on continual generation, but that we can store energy in times when it is not available. Just lastly, I want to ask you about something that Texas Governor Greg Abbott just said. He was asked about the Texas abortion bill and why force a rape or incest victim survivor to carry a pregnancy to term? I want to play this for our viewers. I am wondering what you thought when you heard that? One, I do not know if he is familiar with a menstruating person's body.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsrepalexandriaocasiocortezaoccnninterviewontexasabortionbilltranscript", "title": "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) CNN Interview on Texas Abortion Bill Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-cnn-interview-on-texas-abortion-bill-transcript", "publication_date": "08-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["AOC"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1423, "text": "In fact, I do know that he is not familiar with a female or a menstruating person's body, because if he did, he would know that you do not have six weeks, is that quote, unquote six weeks, and I am sorry we have to break down biology 101 on national television, but in case no one has informed him before in his life, six weeks pregnant means two weeks late for your period. And two weeks late on your period for any person, any person with a menstrual cycle can happen if you are stressed, if your diet changes, or for really no reason at all. So you do not have six weeks. The second area of this, when he talks about going after rapists and this language that he uses about getting rapists off the streets, the majority of people who are raped and who are sexually assaulted are assaulted by someone that they know. And these are not predators that are walking around the streets at night. And when something like that happens, it takes a very long time, first of all, for any victim to come forward. And second of all, when a victim comes forward, they do not necessarily want to bring their case into the carceral system. They do not want to retraumatize themselves by going to court. They do not necessarily all want to report a family friend to a police precinct, let alone in the immediate aftermath of the trauma of a sexual assault. And so while some victims do use that recourse and that is something that is completely available, and if that is part of their process, that is great, but this idea that we are going to quote, unquote end rape when the same type of frankly rape culture and the same type of misogynistic culture that informed this abortion law to begin with is also Those beliefs are held by the Governor himself and the Texas State Legislature, frankly, there are many people in power, as we know from the MeToo movement, that commits sexual assault, that help their friends cover up these crimes. And some of them even serve in the same state legislatures that are voting on just these anti-choice bills. And he speaks from such a place of deep ignorance. It is ignorance that is hurting people across this country. You said rape culture and misogynistic culture are behind this Texas bill to begin with. Could you just explain that, how you feel about that to people?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsrepalexandriaocasiocortezaoccnninterviewontexasabortionbilltranscript", "title": "Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC) CNN Interview on Texas Abortion Bill Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/rep-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-cnn-interview-on-texas-abortion-bill-transcript", "publication_date": "08-09-2021", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["AOC"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1424, "text": "Well, we will see if we can put you on the hot seat here. How do you balance a cash award in this announcement today to one company with its potential negative job impact on a competitor? No, I disagree with that. For one thing, these awards are designed to develop defense technologies for commercial purposes. And they were the result of a competitive process. For those who were not picked, let me say we are coming back next year with over $500 million in new funds for these kinds of projects, and we will be doing more. But the reason it is important to do it this way is that we have all these defense technologies that need to be put to work in the commercial sector. And in terms of the award in San Diego, let me remind you that there are literally thousands of bridges in this country, thousands, that need repair and a lot of new ones that need to be built. So if this technology can be put to work in doing that, they should not be able to push anybody else with a genuinely competitive product out of the market, because there are so many thousands of bridges that need repair and cities and local governments and States are just beginning to face up to those responsibilities and because in the 1980's this country walked away from its infrastructure needs. So, I do not see that as a problem, particularly in this sector of the economy. You mentioned awards to Redondo Beach, Fullerton, I believe two others. Most of the awards, though, were out of State. We have 250,000 defense jobs that were lost here. What do you say to those people who need help? Most of the awards were out of State, but California got the lion's share of the awards, ran away with the contest, as well you would expect, because there are so many defense workers out of work and because there is so much technology capacity. So the State did very well on this first round, and I would expect that there will be more in the second, third, and fourth rounds. Keep in mind, this was just the first of four rounds between now and November, and then next year we will have another $500 million-plus to put in a whole new round of these projects. So I would say to them, I am going to fund as many of these projects as possible; I am working as hard as possible. I also would point out that in the San Diego area, two other things have been done which will help in the base closing and reorganization.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnculeakfmbtvsandiego", "title": "Interview With John Culea of KFMB-TV, San Diego", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-culea-kfmb-tv-san-diego", "publication_date": "22-10-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1425, "text": "There will be a net gain of 5,200 jobs in the San Diego area, and we just released from export controls $37 billion worth of computer, supercomputer, and telecommunications equipment, which will open new markets and create many thousands of jobs in California; many of them will be in southern California. So I am moving as quickly as I can on this, and I hope that the Members of the Congress will all be as supportive as Congresswoman Lynn Schenk has been of this project, because if we had more folks like her who were willing to fund this project at higher levels, we can move even more quickly and help even more California working people. This being a Navy-Marine town, there is concern that our military be prepared for anything in the future. What can you say to that as far as defense conversion and our ability to be prepared for future contingencies? The head of naval research was here today with me, Admiral Pelaez. He made the point that in a very profound way, this program we announced will help to keep our defense strong, because we know that the defense budget's going to be reduced. This program will help to use the commercial research and development sector to keep the defense technology strong, even as we are using defense technologies to create jobs in the commercial sector. That is, by putting the two together, we will be able to get a bigger bang for our defense dollar. So that even though there will be some reduction in defense spending, we will be able to keep ahead of all of the other countries in the world and as far as we need to be on technology. Could you give us an idea of the control of this money in some defense contractors? Jobs have been cut, profits go up, and then bonuses are given to top executives. Well, first of all, let me explain what happens now. We have announced the projects that were worthy and that won the right to participate in this project. Now, what will happen is the group of people from our Government's side who work in this area will negotiate with each and every company to make sure that they put up their share of the money and to determine how they will spend this money. This money, in almost every case, is not an overwhelming amount of money for these companies. What this money will be necessary for is to actually invest in developing this new product and marketing it commercially. So there will not be much of an opportunity for a rakeoff here, otherwise the whole thing will collapse.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnculeakfmbtvsandiego", "title": "Interview With John Culea of KFMB-TV, San Diego", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-culea-kfmb-tv-san-diego", "publication_date": "22-10-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1440, "text": "I have learned that President Mubarak sent you, recently, two important messages. I do not know, I mean, the contents of these messages, but I assume that of course it be linked by the situation in Iraq and Palestine. I would like to ask, in the beginning, one general question about how do you look at this vision of the Middle East. Well, first of all, I communicate with President Mubarak a lot, because I value his judgment, and we have got a frank relationship where if he thinks things are going badly, he will tell me. In other words, he does not gloss over. I think that things in the Middle East for the United States are difficult right now. I think they are difficult because people do not really understand our intentions. I think they are difficult because some people ascribe bad values and bad motives to the American people and the American Government. Our intentions are to work for free societies and peaceful societies. Our intentions are to protect our own security, on the one hand, but also enable people to live in peace. Obviously, our reputation has been damaged severely by the terrible and horrible acts, inhumane acts that were conducted on Iraqi prisoners. Today I cannot tell you how sorry I am to them and their families for the humiliation. I do not think a lot of people understand that, so I have got to do a better job of explaining to people that we are for a lot of things that most people who live in the Middle East want. We want people to have a living. We want people to send their kids to schools that work. We want there to be a Palestinian state at peace with its neighbors. We want people to have a chance to participate in the process. But I'd say right now times are tough for the United States and the Middle East. Iraq, the Israeli-Arab issue, the so-called greater Middle East, and bilateral-which one do you choose of them, ENTITY? Whatever you want to do, sir. Okay, I will shoot for the Arab-Israeli conflict. Many Arabs feel that after the letter of assurances you gave to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, any future Palestinian state would exist on less than half what the partition plan offered them in '47. How do you reconcile this with a moral concept of justice? One, that any final status would be negotiated by the parties-that would be the Israelis and the Palestinians-not the United States. We will not prejudge final status.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1441, "text": "Secondly, I made it clear that I supported what the Prime Minister had done, because I think it is a great opportunity for the establishment of a Palestinian state. I am the first President ever to have articulated the vision of a Palestinian state. I am writing here, and I wanted to appreciate that very highly. Well, I will tell you, and I am somewhat amazed, sir, that the debate has already started about what the end results are going to look like, when we have not even really begun yet to establish a state. I think the focus ought to be on putting the institutions in place for a Palestinian state that is peaceful and prosperous to emerge. I think it is very important for reform-minded Palestinians to step up and ask the world for help in order to build the security apparatus needed for a state to grow; ask for education help; ask for help to stimulate the entrepreneurial class so businesses will grow. In other words, when there is a state that is up and running and prosperous and has the confidence of Egypt and Israel and America and the EU and the rest of the world, it'll be much easier for these final- these tricky issues to be solved between the two parties. And so now is the time not to be arguing over what the world will look like down the road. We ought to be arguing about what the world can look like this year. The United States is firmly committed to the roadmap. I am sending a letter to the-I announced today I am going to send a letter to the Palestinian Prime Minister explaining that I am committed to the road-map, committed to two states living side by side in peace, but also reminding him it is now time to step up and show leadership, show leadership against the terrorists and show leadership in putting the institutions in place for a state to emerge. The right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland and to be provided with compensation is legally assured in several U.N. resolutions. The United States has also traditionally supported the right of refugees to return in recent major conflicts. How would you then justify making the Palestinian refugees an exception for accepted international laws under human rights conventions? My comment, again, was this, that-and the right of refugees is a final status issue. And that is to be negotiated on between the Palestinians and the Israelis. When I said what has changed and what will change is when there is a Palestinian state to which Palestinians can go.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1442, "text": "And my point was, was that when a state is set up and the institutions are in place and people have a chance to make a living and it is peaceful, the entrepreneurial class is growing, small businesses, people are participating in the political process, that that is going to change the dynamic on the ground. The rights of-you know, the rights of Palestinians to return to Israel will be negotiated, but what I am telling you is when a state emerges, it'll change the dynamic. And that is all I said in my comment. Again, I will repeat to you, people want to focus on the future, when I think we ought to be focused right now on the right now, which is what is necessary to put a Palestinian state in place so people can have a chance to live in a hopeful society. And I am frustrated, I must tell you, a little bit, because I think that there needs to be better leadership in saying, What can we do to help the Palestinian people develop a state? And there needs to be a new constitution, it seems like to me. And some of these reforms stalled. Heck, we have been talking about them for about 2 years, unfortunately, but now is an opportunity. And I think Prime Minister Sharon created an interesting dynamic, I really do, and that is withdrawal from the West Bank. You know, it was not all that long ago if an Israeli Prime Minister stood up and said, We are out of Gaza and parts of the West Bank, people would have said, That is fantastic. And so the Prime Minister makes the decision to get out and, of course, his own party rejects it, which speaks to-it speaks to his leadership, in my judgment, that he is willing to do what he thinks is right, in face of political opposition. But do you really agree that pragmatic realities mean annexation of other lands? Do you agree on that, I mean, that pragmatic realities which, I mean, being said repeatedly here in the States, pragmatic realities-pragmatic realities... You mean, with the conditions on the ground? Does it mean annexation of other people's land? I think what it means is, I think you are going to see over time with the emergence of a Palestinian state that the West Bank will be occupied by Palestinians. And to the extent to what the final border looks like is up for negotiations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1443, "text": "Again, we very much appreciate the fact that you were the first U.S. President to call for the creation of an independent Palestinian state. But in all the recent proposals that are being circulated, including the latest disengagement plan, we did not see any specific timetable. What happened to your pledge to create a Palestinian state by 2005? Well, 2005 may be hard, since 2005 is right around the corner. When I laid out the date of 2005, I believe it was around the time I went to Aqaba, Jordan. It was a very meaningful moment, where former Prime Minister Abu Mazen, myself, Prime Minister Sharon, and His Majesty, the King of Jordan, stood up and pledged to work together. But we hit a bump in the road-violence, as well as Abu Mazen was replaced, which changed the dynamic. I do not want to make any excuses, but nevertheless I think the timetable of 2005 is not as realistic as it was 2 years ago. Nevertheless, I do think we ought to push hard as fast as possible to get a state in place. And I repeat to you, sir, that part of my frustrations were alleviated with the Quartet making the statement it made the other day-the Quartet being the EU, Russia, United Nations, and the United States, working together. But there is a certain sense of responsibility that falls upon the Palestinians, reform-minded Palestinians to step up and say, Yes, we accept these institutions necessary for a peaceful state to emerge. Egypt has got, in my judgment, an important role to play to help make sure there is security in Gaza as the civil structure is put in place and as the Government structure is put in place. And President Mubarak, I think, is willing to assume that responsibility over time. I do not want to put him on a timetable, but I do believe he is committed to helping bring security to that part of the world. It is in Egypt's interest that there be security. You know, ENTITY, we did our best, I mean, getting all the factions together in Cairo, Egypt, to try to convince them to have one single opinion and that we are ready for training the police and security guards. President Mubarak has been a leader on the issue of security.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1444, "text": "As you say, he is convened a very important meeting to make it clear that in order for there to be a peaceful evolution of a state, there has to be security, and that he is willing to train police. Egypt plays a mighty important role. And it is a great country, and it should play an important role. You have said, ENTITY, in recent statements that the assurances you gave to Sharon did not differ from what was being discussed and what we mentioned now and previous final status talks. Why were these proposals absent from your recent letters? Look, I want to assure you once again that I understand the sensitivity of these final status issues. But they will be negotiated, not between the United States and the parties; they are negotiated between Israel and the Palestinian Government of a new state. It is what I told my friend President Mubarak. I just told that to His Majesty, the King of Jordan. And I will explain that consistent position of mine. People-I think some people are trying to read something into what I said or did not say. This is an opportunity that we cannot let go by. There is a lot of argument about final status issues, and they are very important issues, do not get me wrong. You have praised Sharon's proposal to withdraw from Gaza, which is an idea that does not represent more than one percent of--Palestine. Would you accept guarantee for granting Palestinians similar letter of assurances stating that any annexation of West Bank territory has to be minimal and that Israel has to pull out from nearly the entire West Bank, according to Security Resolution 242 and 338? No, I will write-I will say the exact same thing in a letter to the Palestinians that I have said publicly today, that I believe an opportunity exists, and it is essential that the Palestinian Authority find reform-minded leaders who are willing to step up and lead. You have repeatedly-repeatedly stated that Israel had the right to defend itself. But do you believe that by building walls and settlements and by assassinating Palestinian leaders, Israel is enhancing security and helping and reassuring peace talks? I think that any country has a right to defend herself. And you are looking at a President who is now in the process of defending my country against terrorist attacks. It is very difficult for the President of the United States to condemn anybody for defending themselves. My problem with the wall was not the security aspect of the wall.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1445, "text": "My problem with the wall was that at one point in time, it looked like it was trying to prejudge any final status, and that I hope-my hope is, at one point in time, the wall is unnecessary. The hope is, is that a peaceful Palestinian state, that-I keep saying that, but I think it is possible-but a peaceful Palestinian state must be a state in which youngsters are well educated and have a chance to make a living and have a chance to- parents have a chance to realize-raise their children in a peaceful setting. And I think that a peaceful Palestinian state will eventually change the dynamics on that which exists on the ground today. I thank you very much for your patience. I will move to the other topic, Iraq. You said yesterday that you first learned of the abuses of Abu Ghraib and other prison-and other prisons in Iraq generally. Why has it taken so long to adopt serious measures against those directly responsible and their commanders? First of all, I learned about the fact that there was an investigation going on. I did not know the extent of the abuse. And there was a report done as a result of those investigations, and what you are hearing here in America is, why did not I see the report? That is one of the questions I am asking, because I first saw about the pictures on television screens. But one of the things you have got to understand about our country is that, one, we reject this kind of treatment of people. We will investigate, and there is a procedure in the military that is necessary to make sure that the guilty are truly guilty. It is very important for the Commander in Chief not to prejudge. Your viewers have got to know that here in America, in our system, the judicial process will be fully transparent, and you are beginning to see the transparency. The press corps wants to know different questions, and those questions need to be answered. Tomorrow our Secretary of Defense, in whom I have got confidence and believe in, will go up and testify at the United States Senate. So you will see the process evolve as to-and the truth come out as to why the military needed to take the time necessary to fully investigate these horrible, horrible acts. And I repeat to you, sir, I am sorry for the humiliation suffered by those individuals. It makes me sick to my stomach to see that happen. I will tell you what else I am sorry about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1446, "text": "I am sorry that the truth about our soldiers in Iraq becomes obscured. In other words, we have got fantastic citizens in Iraq, good kids, good soldiers, men and women who are working every day to make Iraqi citizens' lives better. And there are a thousand acts of kindness that take place every day of these great Americans who really do care about the citizens in Iraq. It is an awful, awful period for the American people, just like it is awful for the Iraqi citizens to see that on their TV screens. Again, sir, do you feel like you need to apologize to the Iraqis and the Arab world after you said that, I am sorry ? Well, I am sorry for the prisoners. I think it is humiliating, and it is, again-what the Arab world must understand is a couple of things. One, under a dictatorship, these- this would not be transparent. In other words, if there was torture under a dictator, we would never know the truth. In a democracy, you will know the truth, and justice will be done. And that is what people need to know. How much control are you ready to cede to the United Nations and the future Iraqi Government? Well, I think the Iraqi Government wants the sovereignty. And I think that is the proper-the proper relationship is for the Iraqi-the sovereignty to be passed to the Iraqi Government with help from coalition as well as the United Nations. I will tell you, a very good role for the United Nations is to help set up the elections that will take place in January of 2005. And the United Nations Security Council resolution is important, because it says to members of the world, please participate in helping this Government grow. But the sovereignty-Iraqi people want to run the Government themselves. That is not to say they do not want help. Of course they want help. But they want to run their Government. Frankly, you hear frustrations about America there in Iraq. And I can understand that, because the Iraq-nobody wants their Government run for them. The people of Iraq want to run their own Government, and that is what will happen. How long do you think the United States will stay in Iraq? A recent Gallup Poll showed that 71 percent of Iraqis considered the United States an occupying power. Does this disappoint you?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1447, "text": "I mean, if I were an Iraqi and I saw people-was asked, am I happy that somebody is running my Government for me, which basically is what the question implies, the answer would be, No, we want to run our Government ourselves. And that is why we are transferring sovereignty. I will tell you, however, the Iraqi people understand that America needs to be around for a while to help make sure that the killers-the foreign fighters who are there, disgruntled former Saddamists- do not wreak havoc. And they are-and they need help right now, until security-Iraqi security forces are efficient, are formed in a way that will be able to be responsive to the dangers of these few people. It is essential that there be a secure environment as Iraq emerges from this period of tyranny, and they want our help there. They also want the reconstruction aid. I mean, there is some wonderful things that have happened in Iraq, which of course do not get mentioned very often. For example, I will tell you an interesting thing that is happened, is that the currency, the old currency was replaced by a new currency in about a 6- or 7-month period of time. And yet, it was done without a lot of arbitrage, a lot of counterfeiting, theft. There was no theft, and the currency is stable, which is a remarkable feat, when you think about it. The oil production, which is Iraqi oil production, it is not American, it is -Iraq owns the oil-it is up to about 2 1/2 million barrels a day. And then we had this period of fighting, where elements in society decided to fight because they saw freedom coming and they wanted to try and stop it, is what they are trying to do. And we took them on and are defeating them. What is happening now is that big projects are starting back up again because the security situation is a little better, and big companies are moving in with these reconstruction projects. It will start back up, and Iraq will be better for it. Yes. Do you care to share the details of that meeting with us? I did have the honor of welcoming a group of women to the Oval Office. I was told ahead of time that some members of the delegation did not want to come in the Oval Office because they did not want to get their picture taken, because they were afraid, not of American reaction but of reaction back home.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1448, "text": "I met with those ladies later. The door opened to the Oval Office, and the first woman that walked in looked at me, and she burst out in tears and said, You are my liberator. It touched my heart. And I, of course-I held her in my arms and tears came to my eyes as she cried out of joy. She said, Thank you, ENTITY. You liberated us. I said, No, the American people helped liberate you. We had about six of us in our office. These were people that were obviously somewhat taken aback that they were in with the President of the United States. And yet, when they were with me, it was deeply emotional. It touched my heart. I still remember it clearly today. It made me very joyous inside to think that people who had been enslaved to tyranny, fearful of torture, probably had friends in mass graves, would be so thankful for the chance to live in peace. And I will tell you what is really important for the people-those people, those women, and I think about them all the time, is for me to never show any weakness in the face of the dangers in Iraq. In other words, those killers want us to leave. But my attitude is, having met with these women, if we leave, they will be in jeopardy. And I have an obligation, no matter how difficult it gets, to stay strong on behalf of those women and their chance to raise their children in freedom. The other day I had the Olympic Committee from Iraq come, two members of the Olympic Committee. I love sports, for starters, and the head of the women's Olympic committee came. And she told me about her 2-year-old son and 1-year-old son. She had quit the Olympic team because she did not want to run for one of Saddam's sons, for fear of her life, and yet she was so grateful for the freedom she has. I met with Fulbright Scholars, young Iraqis that are here studying in the United States. I met with doctors from Iraq who are getting new training, all of whom are desperate for there to be a free society so they can live in peace, and that is why we share the same goal. On greater Middle East, ENTITY, has your vision on the greater Middle East initiative changed at all in light of recent reactions from Arab and European countries? What will be presented to the G-8 leaders in their meeting next month?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1449, "text": "My vision for the greater Middle East reforms were strengthened by the Alexandria Library Conference. You might have heard of that. I saw the spirit of that conference. There are people in the Middle East who understand the need for reforms. Now, when I talk about reforms, I fully understand the pace of reform will be different from country to country. I am as strong today on reforms in the greater Middle East as I have ever been. I fully understand criticism. I mean, I get criticized all the time in my job. I think the job of a leader is to have a vision, a vision that is hopeful and optimistic and one based upon certain principles, a principle like rule of law, a principle like human dignity by empowering individuals to make decisions in the political process, a principle that every person deserves respect, a principle that says that a peaceful society is more likely to be one that is a free society. And therefore, I will not abandon those principles, no matter how significant the pressure. Why does your administration insist on imposing sanctions against Syria? Because they will not fight terror, and they will not join us in fighting terror. We have asked them to do some things, and they have not responded. And Congress passed a law saying that if Syria will not join-for example, booting out a Hezbollah office out of Damascus-that the President has the right to put sanctions on. I have yet to impose a sanction yet, but the bill enables me to do so. And we have talked to the Syrian leader very clearly, and these are not -these are reasonable requests, and thus far, he has not heeded them. And that is why, if I make the decision to put on sanctions, it will be because he has not been a full partner in the war against terror. That would create another-more problems in the area. I mean, there is no need to harbor people who are expressing hatred. And if the world would join together to rout out terrorist organizations who want to kill innocent people, it would be a heck of a lot better off. We have got Muslims killing Muslims in Iraq. There are Muslims who will kill an innocent Muslim for the sake of trying to create fear. What they are trying to do is they are trying to shake our will, our collective will. For those of us who love freedom, they were trying to say, Well, do not work for freedom. Leave us alone so we can kill other people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithalahraminternational", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Al-Ahram International", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-al-ahram-international", "publication_date": "06-05-2004", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1450, "text": "ENTITY, Senator Paul Laxalt, your old friend, said that early on in your administration, not long after the assassination attempt, that he told you he thought that the Lord saved you out there on the sidewalk, not so much to save the economy but to save the world, and that what he meant by that-to reach some sort of an arms control agreement with the Soviets. And he said you did not disagree with that. Now, you have recently in the speech at Glassboro said that you are firmly committed to an arms reduction. I was just wondering, the Soviets have made a proposal now for deep reduction in offensive weapons in return for some restraint on deployment of the space-based defense. Can you accept that in principle? Well, almost all of them in principle-there have been, you know, like the figures and so forth, talking of the weapons. I think because of the mix that each of us sees, we have chosen a different way to go-with what we call the triad-than they have. They have placed more reliance on the intercontinental. Now, we are still in the process of studying their latest proposal. But I am encouraged because-not only this one but the first proposals that they began making-it is , to my knowledge, the first time that the Soviets have ever proposed actually reducing the number of weapons. Well, you may be able to accept that in principle, then-that proposal? Yes, but do not pin me down on this, because, as I say, we are still studying this and- The other thing is just what kind of priority do you give-I mean, how high a priority do you give on arms control or arms reduction? Would it be possible, for example, to raise the level of the Geneva talks from ambassadorial level to the level of foreign minister to accelerate the progress there? But whatever way is necessary to get an agreement, we will do. Eventually, of course, it has to come back to the top. And, therefore, if the General Secretary and I could in a forthcoming summit arrive at some agreements there, and then hand it over to our negotiators to put it down on paper and work out the details-but we agreed, as you say, in principle, then, on all the major elements-that would probably help shortcut it, instead of waiting for something to come back to us and then having to go through it, dotting every i and so forth.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheleanorcliffjacknelsonandjoelhavemannthelosangelestimes", "title": "Interview With Eleanor Cliff, Jack Nelson, and Joel Havemann of the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-eleanor-cliff-jack-nelson-and-joel-havemann-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "23-06-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1451, "text": "The previous efforts at arms-which have literally only been a kind of legitimizing of a continued arms increase-I have been critical of those. That was why I spoke as harshly as I did about a couple of those stories. Is it your highest priority for a second term? I think that this could be as important a thing for the world at large. If anything is to remove this menace-for the world to sit here with the MAD policy, as it is called-and it is mad, even though it means mutual assured destruction. The idea that we are going to base our hopes for peace on each being able to destroy the other and, therefore, hoping that no one will suddenly go mad and push the button. ENTITY, I would like to see if I cannot get you to be a little more specific on what it is you do not like about the latest Soviet offer. Is it the level of reductions? Is it the link to the ABM treaty? Can you tell us what is- It is things of that kind that have to be ironed out, that are not specific, and that we might, in some instance, find ourselves in disagreement. We have announced our willingness several times of changed figures to approximate theirs in which we are willing to buy any substantial reduction as long as we both are aiming eventually at the total elimination. So, you do have problems in all of those three areas-with the link to the ABM treaty? I mean, that is a crucial part of their latest offer. As I say, we are still studying those things. And I am waiting for some of the people who are dealing with the exact terms-for us to get together and sit down and see what our positions really are. As a matter of principle, is some sort of hold-down on SDI, some sort of delay in the deployment of the SDI-is that acceptable as part of the package? We know that this has been of great concern to them-the SDI. with the idea of making it possible for us mutually to depend more on defensive systems than on just the threat of overpowering offensive systems. And we have some ideas about that, too, which we think will be forthcoming when we start responding to their latest proposal. I just want to ask you, on a sort of a lighter", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheleanorcliffjacknelsonandjoelhavemannthelosangelestimes", "title": "Interview With Eleanor Cliff, Jack Nelson, and Joel Havemann of the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-eleanor-cliff-jack-nelson-and-joel-havemann-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "23-06-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1452, "text": "You have been mostly silent on the subject of the Middle East peace process for months if not more. You are not interested, you are pessimistic, you felt burnt the last time around. What accounts for the silence, and where do you think this is headed? The silence on my part is a direct result of my secretary of state, John Kerry, engaging in some of the most vigorous, active diplomacy that we have seen on this issue in many years. And John is not doing that by accident. He is doing it because as an administration we think that it is in the interest of the Israelis and the Palestinians, but also in the interest of the United States and the world to arrive at a framework for negotiations that can actually bring about a two-state solution that provides Israel the security it needs peace with its neighbors at a time when the neighborhood has gotten more volatile, and gives Palestinians the dignity of a state. I think John has done an extraordinary job, but these are really difficult negotiations. I am very appreciative that Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas have taken them very seriously. And you are keeping up to date on all of this? John reports to me almost weekly about progress and occasionally asks for direction. It does not serve anybody's purposes for me to be popping off in the press about it. In fact, part of what both the Israelis and the Palestinians and us agreed to at the beginning of these negotiations was that we would not be characterizing them publicly until we were able to report on success or until the negotiations actually broke down. We are coming to a point, though, over the next couple of months where the parties are going to have to make some decisions about how they move forward. And my hope and expectation is, despite the incredible political challenges, that both Prime Minister Netanyahu and Abbas are able to reach past their differences and arrive at a framework that can move us to peace. We are running out of time. We are running out of possibilities. If we do not succeed now and I know I am raising those stakes but if we do not succeed now, we may not get another chance. He has also suggested strongly that there might be a third intifada down the road and that if this peace process does not work, Israel itself could be facing international isolation and boycott. Do you agree with this assessment? And, obviously, this is a conflict that has gone on for decades. And humanity has a way of muddling through, even in difficult circumstances.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1453, "text": "So you never know how things play themselves out. But John Kerry, somebody who has been a fierce advocate and defender on behalf of Israel for decades now, I think he has been simply stating what observers inside of Israel and outside of Israel recognize, which is that with each successive year, the window is closing for a peace deal that both the Israelis can accept and the Palestinians can accept in part because of changes in demographics; in part because of what is been happening with settlements; in part because Abbas is getting older, and I think nobody would dispute that whatever disagreements you may have with him, he has proven himself to be somebody who has been committed to nonviolence and diplomatic efforts to resolve this issue. We do not know what a successor to Abbas will look like. I believe that President Abbas is sincere about his willingness to recognize Israel and its right to exist, to recognize Israel's legitimate security needs, to shun violence, to resolve these issues in a diplomatic fashion that meets the concerns of the people of Israel. And I think that this is a rare quality not just within the Palestinian territories, but in the Middle East generally. For us not to seize that opportunity would be a mistake. And I think John is referring to that fact. What we know is that it gets harder by the day. What we also know is that Israel has become more isolated internationally. We had to stand up in the Security Council in ways that 20 years ago would have involved far more European support, far more support from other parts of the world when it comes to Israel's position. And that is a reflection of a genuine sense on the part of a lot of countries out there that this issue continues to fester, is not getting resolved, and that nobody is willing to take the leap to bring it to closure. In that kind of environment, where you have got a partner on the other side who is prepared to negotiate seriously, who does not engage in some of the wild rhetoric that so often you see in the Arab world when it comes to Israel, who has shown himself committed to maintaining order within the West Bank and the Palestinian Authority and to cooperate with Israelis around their security concerns for us to not seize this moment I think would be a great mistake. With permanent borders? And has an opportunity also to take advantage of a potential realignment of interests in the region, as many of the Arab countries see a common threat in Iran.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1454, "text": "The only reason that that potential realignment is not, and potential cooperation is not, more explicit is because of the Palestinian issue. I want to come to Iran in a moment, but two questions about two leaders you are going to be dealing with pretty intensively. Abu Mazen all these things you say are true, but he is also the leader of a weak, corrupt and divided Palestinian entity that is already structurally semi-powerless. Do you think he could deliver anything more than a framework agreement? Is this the guy who can lead the Palestinian people to say, OK, no more claims against Israel, permanent peace, permanent recognition? What is lost by testing it? If in fact a framework for negotiations is arrived at, the core principles around which the negotiations are going to proceed is arrived at I have no doubt that there are going to be factions within the Palestinian community that will vigorously object in the same way that there are going to be those within Israel who are going to vigorously object. That for all that we have seen over the last several decades, all the mistrust that is been built up, the Palestinians would still prefer peace. They would still prefer a country of their own that allows them to find a job, send their kids to school, travel overseas, go back and forth to work without feeling as if they are restricted or constrained as a people. So I actually think that the voices for peace within the Palestinian community will be stronger with a framework agreement and that Abu Mazen's position will be strengthened with a framework for negotiations. There would still be huge questions about what happens in Gaza, but I actually think Hamas would be greatly damaged by the prospect of real peace. And the key question, the legitimate question for Israel, would be making sure that their core security needs are still met as a framework for negotiations led to an actual peace deal. And part of what John Kerry has done has been to dig into Israel's security needs with the help of General John Allen, the former commander in Afghanistan. And they have developed, based on conversations with the Israeli Defense Forces about their defense needs, they have come up with a plan for how you would deal with the Jordan Valley, how you would deal with potential threats to Israel that are unprecedented in detail, unprecedented in scope. And as long as those security needs were met, then testing Abbas ends up being the right thing to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1455, "text": "My impression watching your relationship with Netanyahu over the years is that you admire his intelligence and you admire his political skill, but you also get frustrated by an inability or unwillingness on his part to spend political capital in terms of risking coalition partnerships in order to embrace what he says he accepts, a two-state solution. When he comes to Washington, how hard are you going to push him out of his comfort zone? And I take him at his word when he says that he sees the necessity of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I think he genuinely believes that. I also think that politics in Israel around this issue are very difficult. You have the chaos that is been swirling around the Middle East. People look at what is happening in Syria. They look at what is happening in Lebanon. Obviously, they look at what is happening in Gaza. And understandably a lot of people ask themselves, Can we afford to have potential chaos at our borders, so close to our cities? So he is dealing with all of that, and I get that. What I have said to him privately is the same thing that I say publicly, which is the situation will not improve or resolve itself. And for Bibi to seize the moment in a way that perhaps only he can, precisely because of the political tradition that he comes out of and the credibility he has with the right inside of Israel, for him to seize this moment is perhaps the greatest gift he could give to future generations of Israelis. And as somebody who occupies a fairly tough job himself, I am always sympathetic to somebody else's politics. I have not yet heard, however, a persuasive vision of how Israel survives as a democracy and a Jewish state at peace with its neighbors in the absence of a peace deal with the Palestinians and a two-state solution. Nobody has presented me a credible scenario. The only thing that I have heard is, We will just keep on doing what we are doing, and deal with problems as they arise. And we will build settlements where we can. And where there are problems in the West Bank, we will deal with them forcefully. We will cooperate or co-opt the Palestinian Authority. And yet, at no point do you ever see an actual resolution to the problem. It is maintenance of a chronic situation. And my assessment, which is shared by a number of Israeli observers, I think, is there comes a point where you cannot manage this anymore, and then you start having to make very difficult choices.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1456, "text": "Do you resign yourself to what amounts to a permanent occupation of the West Bank? Is that the character of Israel as a state for a long period of time? Do you perpetuate, over the course of a decade or two decades, more and more restrictive policies in terms of Palestinian movement? Do you place restrictions on Arab-Israelis in ways that run counter to Israel's traditions? Well, I am being honest that nobody has provided me with a clear picture of how this works in the absence of a peace deal. If that is the case one of the things my mom always used to tell me and I did not always observe, but as I get older I agree with is if there is something you know you have to do, even if it is difficult or unpleasant, you might as well just go ahead and do it, because waiting is not going to help. If not now, when? This is not an issue in which we are naive about the challenges. I deal every day with very difficult choices about U.S. security. As restrained, and I think thoughtful, as our foreign policy has been, I am still subject to constant criticism about our counterterrorism policies, and our actions in Libya, and our lack of military action in Syria. And so if I am thinking about the prime minister of Israel, I am not somebody who believes that it is just a matter of changing your mind and suddenly everything goes smoothly. But I believe that Bibi is strong enough that if he decided this was the right thing to do for Israel, that he could do it. If he does not believe that a peace deal with the Palestinians is the right thing to do for Israel, then he needs to articulate an alternative approach. And as I said before, it is hard to come up with one that is plausible. You told me in an interview six years ago, when you were running for president, you said, My job in being a friend to Israel is partly to hold up a mirror and tell the truth and say if Israel is building settlements without any regard to the effects that this has on the peace process, then we are going to be stuck in the same status quo that we have been stuck in for decades now. It is been the official position of the United States for decades that settlements are illegitimate. If this process fails, do you see this becoming more than the rhetorical position of the United States?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1457, "text": "Whether that has impact on the way you deal with the United Nations questions, an impact on the aid that the U.S. provides Israel? The U.S. commitment to Israel's security is not subject to periodic policy differences. That is a rock-solid commitment, and it is one that I have upheld proudly throughout my tenure. I think the affection that Americans feel for Israel, the bond that our people feel and the bipartisan support that people have for Israel is not going to be affected. So it is not realistic nor is it my desire or expectation that the core commitments we have with Israel change during the remainder of my administration or the next administration. But what I do believe is that if you see no peace deal and continued aggressive settlement construction and we have seen more aggressive settlement construction over the last couple years than we have seen in a very long time if Palestinians come to believe that the possibility of a contiguous sovereign Palestinian state is no longer within reach, then our ability to manage the international fallout is going to be limited. And that has consequences. Look, sometimes people are dismissive of multilateral institutions and the United Nations and the EU and the high commissioner of such and such. There is a lot of hot air and rhetoric and posturing that may not always mean much. But in today's world, where power is much more diffuse, where the threats that any state or peoples face can come from non-state actors and asymmetrical threats, and where international cooperation is needed in order to deal with those threats, the absence of international goodwill makes you less safe. The condemnation of the international community can translate into a lack of cooperation when it comes to key security interests. It means reduced influence for us, the United States, in issues that are of interest to Israel. Let us go to Iran. Two years ago, you told me in an interview that, I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say. You know, I do not have to tell you, that many of your Arab and Israeli friends are worried, post-Syria the incident in which you drew a red line and there was no military enforcement of it they are worried about your willingness to use force under any circumstance. How do you think the Iranian regime saw your reluctance to use force against Assad? And does this have any impact on the way they are dealing with the current nuclear negotiations?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1458, "text": "I threatened kinetic strikes on Syria unless they got rid of their chemical weapons. When I made that threat, Syria denied even having chemical weapons. In the span of 10 days to two weeks, you had their patrons, the Iranians and the Russians, force or persuade Assad to come clean on his chemical weapons, inventory them for the international community, and commit to a timeline to get rid of them. And the process has moved more slowly than we would like, but it has actually moved, and we have now seen 15 to 20 percent of those chemical weapons on their way out of Syria with a very concrete schedule to get rid of the rest. That would not have happened had the Iranians said, Obama's bluffing, he is not actually really willing to take a strike. If the Russians had said, Ehh, do not worry about it, all those submarines that are floating around your coastline, that is all just for show. Of course they took it seriously! That is why they engaged in the policy they did. Now, the truth is, some of our commentators or friends in the region, their complaint is not that somehow we indicated an unwillingness to use military force in the region their complaint is that I did not choose to go ahead, even if we could get a deal on chemical weapons, to hit them anyway as a means of getting rid of Assad, in what has increasingly become a proxy war inside of Syria. You do not believe the Iranian leadership now thinks that your all options are on the table threat as it relates to their nuclear program you do not think that they have stopped taking that seriously? I know they take it seriously. How do you know they take it seriously? We have a high degree of confidence that when they look at 35,000 U.S. military personnel in the region that are engaged in constant training exercises under the direction of a president who already has shown himself willing to take military action in the past, that they should take my statements seriously. Now, that does not mean that that is my preferred course of action. There are always consequences to military action that are unpredictable and can spin out of control, and even if perfectly executed carry great costs. So if we can resolve this issue diplomatically, we absolutely should.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1459, "text": "And the fact that in painstaking fashion, over the course of several years, we were able to enforce an unprecedented sanctions regime that so crippled the Iranian economy that they were willing to come to the table and, in fact, helped to shape the Iranian election, and that they are now in a joint plan of action that for the first time in a decade halts their nuclear program no centrifuges being installed; the 20 percent enriched uranium being drawn down to zero; Arak on hold; international inspectors buzzing around in ways that are unimaginable even a year ago what that all indicates is that there is the opportunity, there is the chance for us to resolve this without resorting to military force. And if we have any chance to make sure that Iran does not have nuclear weapons, if we have any chance to render their breakout capacity nonexistent, or so minimal that we can handle it, then we have got to pursue that path. And that has been my argument with Prime Minister Netanyahu; that has been my argument with members of Congress who have been interested in imposing new sanctions. My simple point has been, we lose nothing by testing this out. If we were able to get Iran to operate in a responsible fashion not funding terrorist organizations, not trying to stir up sectarian discontent in other countries, and not developing a nuclear weapon you could see an equilibrium developing between Sunni, or predominantly Sunni, Gulf states and Iran in which there is competition, perhaps suspicion, but not an active or proxy warfare. I think I understand what you mean, but in the Gulf and this goes to the question of why our allies are uneasy in the Gulf you have a king of Saudi Arabia who has been asking for years for you to cut the head off the snake, referring to Iran. They are hearing this they are reading this and hearing you say, live with the snake. Do you understand why they are uneasy about your approach, or your broader philosophical approach, or are they overinterpreting this opening to Iran? Here is what I understand. For years now, Iran has been an irresponsible international actor. They have sponsored terrorism. They have threatened their neighbors. They have financed actions that have killed people in neighboring states. And Iran has also exploited or fanned sectarian divisions in other countries. In light of that record, it is completely understandable for other countries to be not only hostile towards Iran but also doubtful about the possibilities of Iran changing. I get that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1460, "text": "But societies do change I think there is a difference between an active hostility and sponsoring of terrorism and mischief, and a country that you are in competition with and you do not like but it is not blowing up homes in your country or trying to overthrow your government. And you feel there is a real opportunity to achieve a genuine breakthrough? And the new leaders are just for show. Let us assume all that. If we can ensure that they do not have nuclear weapons, then we have at least prevented them from bullying their neighbors, or heaven forbid, using those weapons, and the other misbehavior they are engaging in is manageable. If, on the other hand, they are capable of changing; if, in fact, as a consequence of a deal on their nuclear program those voices and trends inside of Iran are strengthened, and their economy becomes more integrated into the international community, and there is more travel and greater openness, even if that takes a decade or 15 years or 20 years, then that is very much an outcome we should desire. So again, there is a parallel to the Middle East discussion we were having earlier. The only reason you would not want us to test whether or not we can resolve this nuclear program issue diplomatically would be if you thought that by a quick military exercise you could remove the threat entirely. And since I am the commander in chief of the most powerful military on earth, I think I have pretty good judgment as to whether or not this problem can be best solved militarily. And what I am saying is it is a lot better if we solve it diplomatically. So why are the Sunnis so nervous about you? I think that there are shifts that are taking place in the region that have caught a lot of them off guard. I think there was a comfort with a United States that was comfortable with an existing order and the existing alignments, and was an implacable foe of Iran, even if most of that was rhetorical and did not actually translate into stopping the nuclear program. What I have been saying to our partners in the region is, We have got to respond and adapt to change. What is the best way for us actually to make sure Iran does not have a nuclear weapon? I am not big on extremism generally. I do not think you will get me to choose on those two issues. What I will say is that if you look at Iranian behavior, they are strategic, and they are not impulsive.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1461, "text": "They have a worldview, and they see their interests, and they respond to costs and benefits. And that is not to say that they are not a theocracy that embraces all kinds of ideas that I find abhorrent, but they are not North Korea. They are a large, powerful country that sees itself as an important player on the world stage, and I do not think has a suicide wish, and can respond to incentives. And that is the reason why they came to the table on sanctions. So just to finish up, the most important thing that I have said to Bibi and members of Congress on this whole issue is that it is profoundly in all of our interests to let this process play itself out. Let us test whether or not Iran can move far enough to give us assurances that their program is peaceful and that they do not have breakout capacity. If, in fact, they cannot get there, the worst that will have happened is that we will have frozen their program for a six-month period. We will have much greater insight into their program. All the architecture of our sanctions will have still been enforced, in place. Their economy might have modestly improved during this six-month to one-year period. But I promise you that all we have to do is turn the dial back on and suddenly Well, partly because 95 percent of it never got turned off. And we will be in a stronger position to say to our partners, including the Russians, the Chinese and others, who have thus far stuck with us on sanctions, that it is Iran that walked away; it was not the U.S., it was not Congress, it was not our new sanctions that jettisoned the deal. And we will then have the diplomatic high ground to tighten the screws even further. If, on the other hand, it is perceived that we were not serious about negotiations, then that ironically is the quickest path to sanctions unraveling, if in fact Iran is insincere. If sanctions got them to the table, why would not more sanctions keep them at the table? The logic of sanctions was to get them to negotiate. The logic of the joint action plan is to freeze the situation for a certain period of time to allow the negotiators to work.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1462, "text": "The notion that in the midst of negotiations we would then improve our position by saying, We are going to squeeze you even harder, ignores the fact that Rouhani and the negotiators in Iran have their own politics. They have got to respond to their own hardliners. And there are a whole bunch of folks inside of Iran who are just as suspicious of our motives and willingness to ultimately lift sanctions as we are suspicious of their unwillingness to get rid of their nuclear program. Even in the old Westerns or gangster movies, right, everyone puts their gun down just for a second. You sit down, you have a conversation; if the conversation does not go well, you leave the room and everybody knows what is going to happen and everybody gets ready. But you do not start shooting in the middle of the room during the course of negotiations. So the logic of new sanctions right now would only make sense if, in fact, we had a schedule of dismantling the existing sanctions. And we have kept 95 percent of them in place. Iran is going to be, net, losing more money with the continuing enforcement of oil sanctions during the course of this joint plan of action than they are getting from the modest amount of money we gave them access to. And, by the way, even though they are talking to European businesses, oil companies have been contacting Iran and going into Iran, nobody has been making any deals because they know that our sanctions are still in place. They may want to reserve their first place in line if, in fact, a deal is struck and sanctions are removed. But we have sent a very clear message to them and, by the way, to all of our partners and the P5 + 1, that they better tell their companies that their sanctions are still in force, including U.S. unilateral sanctions. And we are going to enforce them, and we have been enforcing them during the course of these discussions so far. I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. I was really struck by that last sentence. I am wondering at what point in Syria does it become too much to bear? I am not talking about the bifurcated argument, boots on the ground or nothing, but what does Assad have to do to provoke an American-led military response?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1463, "text": "If you could roll back the clock three years, could you have done more to build up the more-moderate opposition groups? I think those who believe that two years ago, or three years ago, there was some swift resolution to this thing had we acted more forcefully, fundamentally misunderstand the nature of the conflict in Syria and the conditions on the ground there. When you have a professional army that is well-armed and sponsored by two large states who have huge stakes in this, and they are fighting against a farmer, a carpenter, an engineer who started out as protesters and suddenly now see themselves in the midst of a civil conflict the notion that we could have, in a clean way that did not commit U.S. military forces, changed the equation on the ground there was never true. We have supported military assistance to a moderate opposition in Syria, and we have done so at a pace that stretches the limits of what they can absorb. But the fact of the matter is if you are looking at changing the military facts on the ground, the kind of involvement, the kind of involvement on the part of U.S. military forces that would have been required would have been significant enough that there would have been severe questions about our international authority to do so. You do not have a UN mandate; congressional authority we saw how that played out even on the narrow issue of chemical weapons. And there was the possibility that we would have made the situation worse rather than better on the ground, precisely because of U.S. involvement, which would have meant that we would have had the third, or, if you count Libya, the fourth war in a Muslim country in the span of a decade. Having said all that the situation in Syria is not just heartbreaking, but dangerous. Over the last two years I have pushed our teams to find out what are the best options in a bad situation. And we will continue to do everything we can to bring about a political resolution, to pressure the Russians and the Iranians, indicating to them that it is not in their interests to be involved in a perpetual war. I am always darkly amused by this notion that somehow Iran has won in Syria. I mean, you hear sometimes people saying, They are winning in Syria. And you say, This was their one friend in the Arab world, a member of the Arab League, and it is now in rubble. It is bleeding them because they are having to send in billions of dollars.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergbloombergsview", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of Bloomberg's View", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-bloombergs-view", "publication_date": "27-02-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1476, "text": "Were you surprised by the intensity of the reaction, and the hostility from the AIG bonus debacle? I was not surprised by it. Our team was not surprised by it. The one thing that I have tried to emphasize, though, throughout this week, and will continue to try to emphasize during the course of the next several months as we dig ourselves out of the economic hole that we are in, is we cannot govern out of anger. We have got to try to make good decisions based on the facts, in order to put people back to work, to get credit flowing again. And I am not going to be distracted by what is happening day to day. Well, I think that as a general proposition, you do not want to be passing laws that are just targeting a handful of individuals. You want to pass laws that have some broad applicability. And as a general proposition, I think you certainly do not want to use the tax code to punish people. I think that you have got a pretty egregious situation here that people are understandably upset about. And so let us see if there are ways of doing this that are both legal, that are constitutional that uphold our basic principles of fairness, but do not hamper us from getting the banking system back on track. You have got a piece of legislation that could affect tens of thousands of people. Some of these people probably had nothing to do with the financial crisis. And some of them probably deserve the bonuses that they got. Well, that is why we are going to have to take a look at this legislation carefully. Clearly the AIG folks getting those bonuses did not make sense. And one of the things that I have to do is to communicate to Wall Street that, given the current crisis that we are in, they cannot expect help from taxpayers but they enjoy all the benefits that they enjoyed before the crisis happened. You get a sense that, in some institutions that has not sunk in. That you cannot go back to the old way of doing business, certainly not on the taxpayers' dime. And we do not want to cut off our nose to spite our face. Your Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner has been under a lot of pressure this week. Has he volunteered to, or come to you and said, Do you think I should step down? And if he were to come to me, I'd say, Sorry, Buddy. You you have still got the job. He is got a lot of stuff on his plate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbsnews60minutes", "title": "Interview with Steve Kroft on CBS News' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-news-60-minutes", "publication_date": "22-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1477, "text": "And he is doing a terrific job. And I take responsibility for not, I think, having given him as much help as he needs. It is gotten tougher in the age of 24-7 news cycles. And a lot of people who we think are about to serve in the administration and Treasury suddenly say, Well, you know what? I do not want to go through some of the scrutiny, embarrassment, in addition to taking huge cuts in pay. Have you offered some of these high level positions the Treasury to people who would have turned them down? Your Treasury Secretary's plan... Geithner's plan, and -- your plan really -- for solving the banking crisis -- was met with very, very, very tepid response. And you had a lot of people criticize... a lot of people said they did not understand it. A lot of people said it did not have any -- enough details to solve the problem. I know you are coming out with something next week on this. But these criticisms were coming from people like Warren Buffett, people who had supported you, and you had counted as being your... And nd Warren still does support me. But I think that understand Warren's also a big player in the financial markets who is a major owner of Wells Fargo. And so he is got a perspective from the perspective of somebody who is part owner of a bank. You have got members of Congress who've got a different perspective. Which is, We do not want to spend any more taxpayer money. You have got a whole host of players, all of whom may have a completely different solution. And you know, one of the challenges that Tim Geithner has had is the same challenge that anybody would have in this situation. People want a lot of contradictory things. You know, the banks would love a lot of taxpayer money with no strings attached. Folks in Congress, as well as the American people, would love to fix the banks without spending any money. And so at a certain point, you know, you have got just a very difficult line to walk. You need the financial community... Do you think that the people on Wall Street and the people in the financial community that you need trust you, believe in you? Part of my job is to communicate to them, Look, I believe in the market. I believe in financial innovation. And I believe in success.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbsnews60minutes", "title": "Interview with Steve Kroft on CBS News' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-news-60-minutes", "publication_date": "22-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1478, "text": "But what I also know is that the financial sector was out of balance. People, if you went into investment banking, you were making 20 times what a teacher made. You were not making 200 times what a teacher made. There is a perception right now, at least in New York, which is where I live and work. And now I think there are a lot of people say, Look, we are not going to be able to keep our best people. They are not going to stay and work here for $250,000 a year when they can go work for a hedge fund, if they can find one that is still working-- I have told them directly. Cause I have heard some of this. they need to spend a little time outside of New York. Because you know, if you go to North Dakota, or you go to Iowa, or you go to Arkansas, where folks would be thrilled to be making $75,000 a year -- without a bonus -- then I think they'd get a sense of why people are frustrated. I think we have to understand the severity of the crisis that we are in right now. The fact is that, because of bad bets made on Wall Street, there have been enormous losses. I mean there were a whole bunch of folks who, on paper, if you looked at quarterly reports, were wildly successful, selling derivatives that turned out to be... Now you know, gosh, I do not think it is me being anti-Wall Street just to point out that the best and the brightest did not do too well on that front, and that you know, maybe the incentive structures that have been set up have not produced the kinds of long term growth that I think everybody's looking for. Were you surprised at the depth of this recession when you got here? I do not think that we anticipated how steep the decline would be, particularly in employment. I mean if you look at just, you know, hundreds of thousands, now millions of jobs being shed over the course of two months -- or three months, that slope is a lot steeper than anything that we have said -- we have seen before. Now, there is a potential silver lining, which may be that things are so accelerated now, the modern economy is so intertwined and wired, that things happen really fast for ill, but things may recover faster than they have in the past.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbsnews60minutes", "title": "Interview with Steve Kroft on CBS News' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-news-60-minutes", "publication_date": "22-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1479, "text": "That the financial system could still implode if you had a big failure at AIG or at Citicorp? And if we did nothing you could still have some big problems. There are certain institutions that are so big that if they fail, they bring a lot of other financial institutions down with them. And if all those financial institutions fail all at the same time, then you could see an even more destructive recession and potentially depression. Because I think we did learn lessons from the Great Depression. Is there some limit to the amount of money we can spend? And are we getting close to it? The limit is our ability to finance these expenditures through borrowing. And, you know, the United States is fortunate that it has the largest, most stable economic and political system around. And so the dollar is still strong because people are still buying Treasury Bills. If we do not get a handle on this, and also start looking at our long-term deficit projections, at a certain point people will stop buying those Treasury Bills. Do you have any idea when this might end? Well, we are already starting to see flickers of hope out there. That promises the possibility at least of the housing market bottoming out and stabilizing. It is not going to happen equally in every part of the country. I just want to say that the only thing less popular than putting money into banks is putting money into the auto industry. 18 percent are in favor. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people going to look at this and say, I mean, he is sitting there just making jokes about money-- How do you deal with -- I mean, wh -- explain - You know, sometimes my team talks about the fact that if you had said to us a year ago that the least of my problems would be Iraq, which is still a pretty serious problem, I do not think anybody would have believed it. But we have got a lot on our plate. And a lot of difficult decisions that we are going to have to make. Making sure that al Qaeda cannot attack the U.S. homeland and U.S. interests and our allies. And in service of that priority there may be a whole host of things that we need to do. We may need to build up economic capacity in Afghanistan. We may need to improve our diplomatic efforts in Pakistan. We may need to bring a more regional, diplomatic approach to bear. We may need to coordinate more effectively with our allies.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbsnews60minutes", "title": "Interview with Steve Kroft on CBS News' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-news-60-minutes", "publication_date": "22-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1480, "text": "But we cannot lose sight of what our central mission is. The same mission that we had when we went in after 9-11. And that is these folks can project violence against the United States' citizens. And that is something that we cannot tolerate. But what we cannot do is think that just a military approach in Afghanistan is going to be able to solve our problems. So what we are looking for is a comprehensive strategy. This should not come as news to anybody given its history. We need to be careful what we are getting ourselves into in Afghanistan. Because we have come to be looked upon there by people in Afghanistan, and even people now in Pakistan. As another foreign power coming in, trying to take over the region. I am very mindful of that. Afghanistan is not going to be easy in many ways. This is the assessment of commanders on the ground. Is Iraq was actually easier than Afghanistan. You have got a much better educated population, infrastructure to build off of. You do not have some of the same destabilizing border issues that you have between Afghanistan and Pakistan. But it is not acceptable for us to simply sit back and let safe havens of terrorists plan and plot I am sure you want to answer this. A week ago Vice President Cheney-- said essentially that your willingness to shut down Guantanamo and to change the way prisoners are treated and interrogator -- interrogated -- was making America weaker and more vulnerable to another attack. And that the interrogation techniques that were used at Guantanamo were essential in preventing another attack against the United States. I fundamentally disagree with Dick Cheney. You know, I think that Vice President Cheney has been at the head of a movement whose notion is somehow that we cannot reconcile our core values, our Constitution, our belief that we do not torture, with our national security interests. I think he is drawing the wrong lesson from history. The facts do not bear him out. I think he is -- that attitude, that philosophy has done incredible damage to our image and position in the world. I mean, the fact of the matter is after all these years how many convictions actually came out of Guantanamo? How many terrorists have actually been brought to justice under the philosophy that is being promoted by Vice President Cheney? What it has been is a great advertisement for anti-American sentiment. Which means that there is constant effective recruitment of Arab fighters and Muslim fighters against U.S. interests all around the world.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbsnews60minutes", "title": "Interview with Steve Kroft on CBS News' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-news-60-minutes", "publication_date": "22-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1481, "text": "Some of it being organized by a few people who were released from Guantanamo. Well there is no doubt that we have not done a particularly effective job in sorting through who are truly dangerous individuals that we have got to make sure are not a threat to us, who are folks that we just swept up. The whole premise of Guantanamo promoted by Vice President Cheney was that somehow the American system of justice was not up to the task of dealing with these terrorists. I fundamentally disagree with that. Now do these folks deserve Miranda rights? Do they deserve to be treated like a shoplifter down the block? What do you do with those people? Well, I think we are going to have to figure out a mechanism to make sure that they not released and do us harm. But do so in a way that is consistent with both our traditions, sense of due process, international law. And, you know, I am surprised that the Vice President is eager to defend a legacy that was unsustainable. Let us assume that we did not change these practices. Are we going to just keep on going until -- you know, the entire Muslim world and Arab world despises us? I do not know a lot of thoughtful thinkers, liberal or conservative, who think that that was the right approach. So have you gotten into a routine? You know, I typically work out in the morning. Michelle's often there with me. And then I come down here and talk to our National Security team. Then we talk to the economic team. After that, who knows? 00 I sort of know what I am doing. This is the living quarters, up on the second floor. We got a gym right over there up on the third floor. And the second floor is our bedroom's on this side, and we got a dining room on that side. How are you finding the job? It is challenging you know, I find that the governance part of it, the decision making part of it actually comes -- comes pretty naturally. I think I have got a great team. I think we are making good decisions. The hardest thing about the job is staying focused. Because there is so many demands and decisions that are pressed upon you. What is the hardest decision you have had to make in the last 60 days? Well, I would say that the decision to send more troops-- into Afghanistan. But it is a weighty decision because we actually had to make the decision prior to the completion of strategic review that we were conducting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbsnews60minutes", "title": "Interview with Steve Kroft on CBS News' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-news-60-minutes", "publication_date": "22-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1482, "text": "When I make a decision to send 17 thousand young Americans to Afghanistan, you can understand that intellectually - but understanding what that means for those families, for those young people when you end up sitting at your desk, signing a condolence letter to one of the family members of a fallen hero, you are reminded each and every day at every moment that the decisions you make count. What is the most frustrating part of the job? The fact that you are often confronted with bad choices that flow from less than optimal decisions made a year ago, two years ago, five years ago, when you were not here. A lot of times, when things land at my desk, it is a choice between bad and worse. And as somebody pointed out to me the only things that land on my desk are tough decisions. Because, if they were easy decisions, somebody down the food chain's already made them. How many decisions do you have to make a day? Every time somebody walks in your office. Otherwise, they do not get a meeting. And you are briefed for all that before it happens. I spend a lot of time reading. People keep on asking me, Well, what are you reading these days? You know, you get a little time to read history or you know, policy books that are of interest. But there is a huge amount of information that has to be digested, especially right now. Because the complexities of Afghanistan are matched, maybe even dwarfed, by the complexities of the economic situation. Do you take a day off? I will wander down to the oval office I will do some work, but I will still have time for the kids. I have to say that I was not the purchaser of this. The admiral, our chief usher, Admiral Steve Rochon, took great interest when we said that we should get a swing set, and found what I assume must be the -- Rolls Royce of swing sets. You did not have one of these when you were a kid? I thought we were going to get like two swings. Have the girls had kids over after school? And they have tested this out. And it got a thumbs up. Are they liking it here? You know, they are adapting remarkably-- in ways-- that I just would not have expected. Well it is cool, but what is interesting is actually how unimpressed they are with it. I mean they -- they are going to school. And they are having fun.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevekroftcbsnews60minutes", "title": "Interview with Steve Kroft on CBS News' 60 Minutes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-kroft-cbs-news-60-minutes", "publication_date": "22-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1489, "text": "ENTITY, the major focus of your Presidency has been the reactivation of the economy, and many would, of course, arguably say that you have been very successful at that. Why now with the project of tax reform? Well, what we have started with the economy and the growth that we have had-the increase in prosperity here-I think is only a beginning. I think there is further to go, and so the tax reform, I think, could contribute to economic growth. But the main thing is, even without that, our present tax system is unfair. It is so complicated that a great many people cannot determine how much they owe the Government without getting expensive legal help. And we believe it is long overdue that we have a tax system that is more fair; that is simpler, more easily understood by the people; and that, at the same time, can lower the tax rates in the simplification, removing some of the loopholes that have led to unfair deductions by some, the use of tax shelters to avoid, legally, a fair share of tax. If through simplification and through the new tax system the average amount of money that the individual is going to contribute to the IRS is going to diminish, how, then, is the Government going to compensate for the diminishing tax returns that it will take? Well, we are not going to diminish the total tax revenues the Government gets. It is true we will lower the rates; it is true that individuals will pay less tax than they are presently paying. The difference will be made up in part by what we think will be more growth in the economy, and the more the economy grows, the more tax revenues there'll be. But mainly it is because right now there are a great many people who have taken advantage of some well-intentioned tax loopholes, as we call them, to reduce their personal tax burden, and this has resulted in a great unfairness. For example, we have people today who are paying a higher income tax as individuals than the great corporations they work for are paying as their total tax. So, once we change that, the difference will mainly be made up by those tax revenues that are being avoided by some, and that is where the fairness comes in. Everybody will be paying their fair share. And we are also banking on the growth of the economy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithguillermodescalzithespanishinternationalnetwork", "title": "Interview With Guillermo Descalzi of the Spanish International Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-guillermo-descalzi-the-spanish-international-network", "publication_date": "13-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1490, "text": "Talking about the primary focus of this reform, many see the family as the main concern of yours, and I would like to ask you about which is the main focus of this project of yours. Well, we think it is aimed at the family, and we think that the family is the most important unit in our whole social structure. But what we are going to do in addition to lowering the rates, we are going to make the personal deduction for a wage earner $4,000. We are going to almost double the increase exemption-or deduction for dependents to $2,000 because it has not nearly kept up with inflation over the years-that deduction that used to be $600 and then came to $1,040. Well, now it is going to be $2,000 under our plan, and thus we feel particularly the families at the lower end of the earning scale-we could see an average family of four that would not have to pay a penny on the first $12,000 of earnings. Also we are going to see people that are near the poverty line that are going to be dropped from the tax rolls entirely. Now, ENTITY, tax reform is a very serious and complex issue, and there have been many attempts in the past. There is opposition in Congress, and I would like to ask you, in here, which are the political angles of tax reform, or are there any political angles to it? I think the main political angles have to do with specific changes we want to make-some of those deductions I am talking about removing-that there are special interest groups that will try to preserve those, and they will get here and there some congressional support in behalf of one or the others of those features. But I believe that overall this may be one of those times when we see there are no Democrats or Republicans, just Americans, because overall there is a bipartisan feeling that tax reform is necessary. Well, among the Americans, we have Hispanic Americans, and, of course, as you know, most of Hispanic America-not most, a large proportion of Hispanic America is in the modest-income category. You already talked a little bit about how people with a modest income would benefit, but talking specifically about Hispanic Americans, most of them in a modest-income category, how would modest-income and middle-income Americans benefit from this proposal? They would benefit most of all, particularly at the lower end of the earnings.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithguillermodescalzithespanishinternationalnetwork", "title": "Interview With Guillermo Descalzi of the Spanish International Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-guillermo-descalzi-the-spanish-international-network", "publication_date": "13-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1491, "text": "Right now, you know, there are 14 tax brackets that people, based on their earnings, fall into. We are reducing that to 3-a 15-percent bracket, a 25-percent bracket, and a 35-percent bracket. The people at the very lowest end and there around the poverty line will find they no longer have any taxes at all to pay. And elderly people that are in that particular bracket, some of the handicapped people, and then those that are just earning but around that location-they will not have any tax to pay at all. ENTITY, let me go to another major concern of your Presidency. I remember interviewing you in Los Angeles in 1980, and you mentioned as one of your big concerns the spread of communism in this hemisphere, in the Caribbean and Central America. Well, one of your most notable successes in foreign policy has been Grenada; however, we still have Nicaragua, and it continues unabated. What can you tell us that will give us confidence that the problems presented now by the Sandinista regime in Nicaragua will be solved in the future? Right now we have a totalitarian government-the Sandinista government-in Nicaragua. This came out of the revolution to overthrow the dictator, Somoza. But the people who are fighting as the contras against the Sandinista government now are mainly the people who were part of the revolution also against Somoza. They came together to overthrow that particular regime. In 1979 those revolutionaries, including the Sandinistas, went to the Organization of American States and asked that organization to appeal to Somoza to step down so the killing could stop. Well, what were the goals of their revolution? The promise was given that it was to have democracy, to have free labor unions, a free press, free speech-all the things that we associate with democracy and government by and of and for the people. They had been a pro-Communist organization for years back. They ousted from the revolution those who had fought with them. Some of the leaders had to flee into exile; some of them were imprisoned; some of them, I am afraid, were executed. And we have this totalitarian government. It is literally a satellite of Cuba, the Communist regime in Cuba, and that means it is indirectly a satellite of the Soviet Union. It has made it plain that its revolution knows no borders, that it is going to be the centerpiece here in the Western Hemisphere for spreading that kind of Communist regime throughout the hemisphere.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithguillermodescalzithespanishinternationalnetwork", "title": "Interview With Guillermo Descalzi of the Spanish International Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-guillermo-descalzi-the-spanish-international-network", "publication_date": "13-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1492, "text": "Their military has been furnished, and their weapons-well, they are furnishing weapons to the guerrillas in their neighboring country, El Salvador, where there is a democratic government. So, we think that in helping, as we have been trying to help, the contras-and we have seen them grow as the dissatisfaction in Nicaragua with the Sandinistas spread among the people; the forces of the contras have grown to around 20,000 in number. Deserters from the Nicaraguan ENTITY, the Sandinista army, are turning up and volunteering as contras. So, we think that those people who were simply striving for the original promises of the revolution to be kept should have our help. That does not mean, however, military forces from the United States. All of our friends in Latin America have made it plain to us-maybe with some memories of a far distant past-that, no, they have the manpower; they do not need American manpower. They do need our help in supplies and weapons and training and so forth, and that we are giving them. And, so, I know that the contras have progressed to the point that they have several times offered to lay down their arms and negotiate a settlement with the Sandinistas, their former allies in the revolution, and the Sandinistas have repeatedly refused. But we think they deserve our help. Well, you say that we are giving them help, and, yes, we are; however, Congress has wavered constantly on this issue. It is teeter-tottered between the Boland amendment and no aid to the contra& Has Congress been playing politics with the security of this hemisphere? Well, I hesitate to say that. I think maybe the rest were well intentioned, and they are suffering from something I call the Vietnam syndrome. I think too many of them, still remembering our entanglement there 10,000 miles away from our own land, in that that this might lead to our military involvement. And, so, they have been cautious about what we can do. As I have already explained, we have no intention of military involvement nor do I think it is needed. And I think as more of them come to see that, and also as more of them have come to realize the real nature of the Sandinista government-that it is a totalitarian, Communist government-that that opposition is lessening. ENTITY, another very important issue for Hispanic Americans is that of immigration.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithguillermodescalzithespanishinternationalnetwork", "title": "Interview With Guillermo Descalzi of the Spanish International Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-guillermo-descalzi-the-spanish-international-network", "publication_date": "13-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1493, "text": "As you know, there have been attempts in the past at immigration reform. This is the third time that Senator Simpson is pushing his own version of immigration reform through Congress-and Congressmen Rodino and Mazzoli in the House-do you support this? Are you behind this attempt? Would you sign into law a Simpson-Rodino-Mazzoli bill if it comes to be? I have to say that, beginning back in 1981, I supported the principle of reform in our immigration laws because we, in a way, have lost control of our borders. Right now, I have to say with regard to the Simpson bill that-and we have informed of this-that we support generally his bill, but there are some amendments that we think are necessary. For one, we very much need in any immigration bill-we need protection for people who are in this country and who have not become citizens, for example, that they are protected and legitimized and given permanent residency here. And we want to see some things of that kind added to the immigration bill. ENTITY, this is my last question, really, and I want to ask you simply if you have any messages for the Hispanic community in America that is listening to you. Our whole country is made up of people who came here from someplace else, either the individuals themselves or, like myself-in my case it was grandparents, others it is their parents-but we represent the cultures and the diversity of the whole world. And we have come together in what some people called a melting pot and created a whole new breed of human being called an American. And I have to say, I think America's great success in the world has been the result of this diversity and this understanding and coming together of such diverse peoples. And I just have to say that our Hispanic Americans-their contribution to America is not surpassed by that of any other people. They have brought a great warmth, and they have brought great traditions of family. In our wars, they have brought great service and great heroism and loyalty to this country. And all I would like to say to them is, God bless them all, and vaya con Dios.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithguillermodescalzithespanishinternationalnetwork", "title": "Interview With Guillermo Descalzi of the Spanish International Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-guillermo-descalzi-the-spanish-international-network", "publication_date": "13-09-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1494, "text": "When it comes to pacific trade this seems like this is fourth quarter, full court press, from you and your administration. It is the right thing to do for the American economy and the American people, and certainly the right thing to do for Seattle and the state of Washington. You know, since I have came into office, we have had very significant recovery and about a third of that has been driven by exports. We know that not only does it create billions of dollars in business and you know, millions of jobs depend on it, but what also is true is that typically wages for folks who work for exporting companies are about 18 percent higher than companies just focusing on the domestic market. So what we are arguing here is that globalization is here to stay, we have got to do everything we can to make sure that we are accessing other markets the same way that they are accessing ours, and that there is a level playing field on issues like labor standards and environmental standards. And that is what is reflected in this trade deal. Let me address that last issue. When Secretary Kerry was in Seattle area a couple weeks ago, some of the Boeing workers protested and some said they are worried about a trade deal that would adversely affect them, fearing that Boeing would build more plane parts outside of the United States, thus costing American jobs. What assurances can you give that worker from Boeing and any other big manufacturing plant that their job will be assured and stay put? Well let me just say this, other than maybe the CEO of Boeing, I do not know anyone who is done more to sell Boeing planes around the world than me and this administration. We have been very active in promoting some of our outstanding manufacturers and Boeing obviously is an iconic company. And what we know is is that when we have access to these markets then we are going to be able to compete and we also know that the U.S. has the best workers in the world, the best innovation in the world. And if Boeing was looking to relocate facilities than they would have already done so because under existing rules there is not much preventing them from doing so. Nothing in this agreement is going to induce other companies to move jobs, in fact it what it may do is bring some jobs back. I was at Nike, which like a lot of footwear companies, manufactures overseas.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdennisboundsking5", "title": "Interview With Dennis Bounds of KING 5", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dennis-bounds-king-5", "publication_date": "04-06-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1495, "text": "And what they said is look if this passes, we may bring ten thousand jobs back here to the United States because a lot of the production's moving into the high end production as opposed to low end, and we have more skilled workers here in the United States than we do in some of these other places. So you see no dislocation other than that would benefit the United States and American workers? You know, in an economy of this size, there is always going to be some dislocations. Companies that are reliant on a model of just low wage workers, they have already left. And what we are seeing, cause manufacturing has actually grown faster under my administration than any time since the 1990s. And it is grown faster than any other sector of the economy. What we are finding is is that companies want to move here because of low energy cost, high worker skills, access to the biggest market in the world. What they worry about is are they also going to be able to sell from the United States to other countries and if we can pry those markets open, we are going to be that much better off. Well it is not NAFTA partly because we have-one of the big problems with NAFTA is we did not have strong labor and environmental standards that were enforceable in the agreement. And we have corrected that. And in fact, the two countries that were involved in NAFTA, Canada and Mexico, has signatories that if they end up agreeing to this Trans-pacific Partnership, they'd actually now be subject to higher labor and environmental standards than they currently are. So it is more likely that a U.S. worker is going to be competing on a level playing field with a worker in Mexico than he is under current law. If the voting Congress in the House, which is the one we are anticipating perhaps as early as next week, does not go your way, is that a disavowal of the Pacific trade treaty? Well first of all I-I never hypothesize that we are not going to get this done because it is the right thing for the American people and- You must think about it though. I think it will-but understand, all this does is give me the authority to negotiate the deal. And once we complete the deal, before I sign the deal, I have got to give Congress and the American people and the press 60 days in which this every provision every page is posted on a website.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdennisboundsking5", "title": "Interview With Dennis Bounds of KING 5", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dennis-bounds-king-5", "publication_date": "04-06-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1496, "text": "Let us bring in the Speaker of the House, ENTITY. I know there is still a lot of votes to be counted and, anyway, we have a lot of news to get to. But before we get to that, I just wanted to ask, how is your husband, Paul, doing? He is one good day after another, he is improving. It will take a little while. But we have been so comforted by the outpouring of so many prayers and good wishes and even people saying, 'I was not going to vote, but now I am going to vote because this has gone too far.' I will convey that to him. You know, we last spoke in September. You were confident then that the Democrats would do well, kind of a lonely voice at that time, given high inflation and President Biden's low approval ratings. How did Democrats do it? Well, first of all, thank you for acknowledging that we had a different approach. It was not anything that we ever accepted when the pundits in Washington said we could not win because history, history, history. Elections are about the future. I am very proud of our candidates, both our incumbents as well as our Red to Blue candidates. They never accepted the punditry that they could not win, they had courage, they had purpose, and they understood their district. They also rejected calls from Washington about, 'Oh, your message should change.' No, our message was clear - People Over Politics, lower costs, bigger paychecks, safer communities. And they knew the value of a woman's right to choose, they knew how important it was to protect our democracy, they knew the contrast between themselves and their opponents, and that is what made them win. It was not about Washington said 'you should change your message,' Washington says 'you cannot win.' I hope that is a lesson, because really it depresses the vote sometimes when people say 'it is all over' eighteen months before the election. We never accepted that. Now the road to keeping the Democratic Majority is still quite narrow. Democrats have to run the table on the toss-up races still out there to keep control of the House. Do you see a realistic path to victory? And I give tribute, of course, to our candidates, I also give credit to our grassroots. This - they are our VIPs, our volunteers in politics, millions of doors knocked, millions of doors knocked.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonabcsthisweekwithgeorgestephanopoulos4", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-abcs-this-week-with-george-stephanopoulos-4", "publication_date": "13-11-2022", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1497, "text": "So they crossed a threshold. They leapfrogged over all the projections - the predictions and the rest. Whatever the outcome, we are on the path to taking our country to a better place than with being dragged down by the other side. I am disappointed with what happened in New York, that four votes could make the difference at the end of the day. But we have not - we have not given up, and we have not given up because the quality of our candidates, the purpose of our why, why this is important, and President Biden did a great job presenting about our democracy being on the ballot. So it took a great deal to get to where we are, and we will just see. I said before, and you have heard me say on our walk in the park, it is like the Olympics. In a half a second, you can be a gold, silver, bronze or honored to be an Olympian. But, again, we are very proud of the outcome, and we are very proud because it was a victory For The People, not the punditry, but For The People, as well as the success in Nevada is a personal joy for some of us because of Harry Reid. The President, we have the White House, we have the Senate, and we are going to have a big strong vote in the House, a very different outcome than some would have predicted. And if Democrats keep the Majority, will you run again for Speaker? I am not - right now, I have said I am not making any comments until this election is finished, and we have a little more time to go. I wish it - It is going to take some time to count those votes in California, I know. Your Republican counterpart, Kevin McCarthy, it looks like even if Republicans do prevail, we are going to be talking about 219, 220, maybe 221 votes in the House. Can he govern with that kind of a Majority? Well, it depends on their purpose. In our House, we had that kind of - those kinds of numbers. But we were united - we were very united in terms of being there for the - America's working families, that dominated our discussion - although we have our differences of opinion on certain issues, when it came down to the main purpose of the Democrats, America's working families, there was no question that we would win every vote that we would - took to the Floor.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonabcsthisweekwithgeorgestephanopoulos4", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-abcs-this-week-with-george-stephanopoulos-4", "publication_date": "13-11-2022", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1498, "text": "And this new - the new Members coming in, again, a constant reinvigoration of the Congress that our founders intended. They will be speaking so clearly to it. We have one of the youngest Members, Congressman-to-be Frost, coming in, and it is - it is pretty exciting for us. It is about what the message and purpose will be demonstrated to the American people. And, again, it is about our democracy. Our democracy was on the ballot. Our planet was on the ballot. Personal freedom was on the ballot. These three issues very important to young voters, and they were very important in our success in this election. Whatever the outcome, you said this week, quote, 'We need to unify, I think it is really important to restore unity to Congress.' What steps do Democrats need to take to bring the country together? Well, we have always been taking that step because we honor our oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, and that should be a unifying principle for us. The - when, many of our bills, we worked very hard to make it bipartisan, bipartisan, bipartisan. With it, you can accomplish almost anything. And the point I want to make is, when the public knows what is at stake and what is happening there, I think we will see more cooperation, again, working together to produce a bill, but not having people vote no, take the dough, and make it look like we do not have bipartisanship, when, in fact, in the bills we do, but in the votes, not necessarily. Before the new Congress is sworn in in January, you have a lot of work in what would be a lame duck session in December. Probably at the top of that list, extending the debt limit because Republicans have said, if they get the Majority, they are going to try to force concessions from Democrats in order to extend the debt limit. Do you believe you can get a permanent or a very large extension of the debt limit during the lame duck session? I think it is important to note that what the Republicans have said is they are going to use the vote on the debt limit as leverage to cut Medicare and Social Security. I think the public should know that. It is a difference of opinion, and I think the public should know who is on their side on all of this. We cannot allow them to cut Social Security.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonabcsthisweekwithgeorgestephanopoulos4", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-abcs-this-week-with-george-stephanopoulos-4", "publication_date": "13-11-2022", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1499, "text": "People paid into it, and the Republicans cannot use it as leverage to say, 'We will only lift the debt ceiling if you will reduce the benefits for our seniors and others on Medicare and Social Security.' But our best shot I think is to do it - to do it now. But again, winning the Senate gave us a lot of leverage for how we go forward if we do not do it in the lame duck. But my hope would be that we could get it done in the lame duck. The Constitution removes all doubt. The full faith and credit of the United States of America should not - is not in doubt. But this is a practice that we have engaged in. And so, we will have to, again, lift the debt ceiling so the full faith and credit of the United States is respected. When the Republicans did this before, it lowered our credit rating. It lowered our credit rating - even though it did not eventually happen, but just the discussion of it. So this is - this is dealing with fire when we are talking about the stability of our credit rating. In the face of all this news, we see that Donald Trump is planning to announce for President again on Tuesday. Is that good news for Democrats? I do not go into any discussion of his plans. I mean, I think it is bad news for the country, let us put it that way, because this is a person who has undermined the integrity of our elections, has not honored his oath of office, who has encouraged people, strange kind of people to run for office, who do not share the values of our democracy. They have said it very clearly in their statements. So he is not been a force for good. So, I do not think his candidacy is a force for good for our country. But that is up to the Republicans to decide - to decide who they will choose. Understand this, we have very vast differences. Republicans do not support science, so they disregard what we are saying about climate. They do not support governance, so they do not want to honor what science tells us in terms of the planet, in terms of health care and the rest. So, we have some very big differences. There is - the main event of it all is the Presidential.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonabcsthisweekwithgeorgestephanopoulos4", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-abcs-this-week-with-george-stephanopoulos-4", "publication_date": "13-11-2022", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1500, "text": "As important as our races are, if we were in Las Vegas, we are the lounge act, they are - the Presidential is the main event, and this will be a very important election, very dispositive of the direction our country will go in. I mean President Biden has been a great President for our country. He has accomplished so much. He has just done so many things that are so great. We need a lot more show to tell it. But he is put money in people's pockets, vaccines in their arms, children back to school, people back to work, for starters, creating 10 million jobs. He has made America independent by passing the CHIPS bill that says we are no longer reliant on those who would withhold products that enable us to manufacture in our country. The IRA - I just saw him make the speech in Egypt where he spoke about America's commitment to preserving the planet with the legislation, the IRA, $368 billion in good-paying green jobs, clean air, clean water for our children, national security issue to stop migrations and competition for habitat and food, as well as honoring our responsibility to future generations. The PACT Act, honoring our veterans, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill, all of it with justice, with equity, with inclusiveness, with diversity, taking us to a new place. He has been a great President, and he has a great record to run on. Finally, ENTITY, if you do decide to step away from Congress, how do you want your Speakerships to be remembered? Well, I do not have any plans to step away from Congress. I do not - you asked me about running for Leadership. The - well, my flagship issue has - from the start of my being in Congress has been the climate issue. But in the course of things we - when we had the opportunity to expand health care for all Americans, that has to be my major accomplishment. I take great pride in that. I take great pride in saving it from those who wanted to repeal it. You'd have to ask them. That - Martin Luther King said, 'Of all the inequalities, the inequity in access to health care is the most inhuman,' he said, 'because people can die.' So I thank God for giving me the opportunity to play a role in that. And it is an ongoing role to pass it, to protect it, to expand it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonabcsthisweekwithgeorgestephanopoulos4", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-abcs-this-week-with-george-stephanopoulos-4", "publication_date": "13-11-2022", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1501, "text": "You said that the war was ended in Iraq. And what we have is a situation in which, in part because of growing mistrust between Sunni and Shia, some of the forces that have always possibly pulled Iraq apart are stronger now. Those forces that could keep the country united are weaker. It is ultimately going to be up to the Iraqi leadership to try to pull the politics of the country back together again. Would you have moved differently in Syria, given this eruption in Iraq and given that the chaos has spilled over now? You know, if what you are suggesting is that there was a simple solution in Syria that would have avoided the civil war and chaos there, that is just not true. You know, you had a ruthless dictator that started killing his own people, and you had the makings of a moderate opposition that still exists and that we still work with, but not an opposition that was going to be in a position anytime soon to be able to compete with an army, Hezbollah, Iran and Russia supporting the regime. They just were not going to be able to do that. And they certainly were not going to be able to immediately compete with a bunch of hardened jihadists who had moved into the vacuum in some of these areas. So, you know, I think that one of the things that the American people, at least, understand is that these societies are going through these enormous transformations. There was a long period after World War II in which authoritarian regimes were able to maintain national boundaries, despite the fact that internally there were all kinds of sectarian divisions. As those regimes have begun to collapse or break apart, in part because of corruption, in part because of, you know, changes in society generally and economic pressures, you know, there is going to be this long, difficult transition moving to a different kind of society in the Middle East. And what we can do is work with the best impulses there. Folks who understand moderation, tolerance, are trying to deliver for their people. We are going to have to deal with some of the worst impulses there, the extremism that ISIS represents. What we are not going to be able to do is to play Whac-A-Mole and chase wherever extremists appear, occupy those countries for long periods of time, and think somehow that we are going to solve those problems. That is something that, even as the world's lone superpower, exceeds our capabilities.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmikabrzezinskimsnbcsmorningjoe", "title": "Interview with Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC's Morning Joe", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mika-brzezinski-msnbcs-morning-joe", "publication_date": "23-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1502, "text": "Does the situation in Iraq at all make you consider Afghanistan differently, especially as it pertains to taking the troops out by 2016? I think that what we have done, assuming that the Afghans sign a security agreement that gives our troops immunity, which the Iraqis declined to do, we are prepared to have a residual force that helps to continue to train their forces, to continue to help stabilize the situation as you have a new government coming in. But keep in mind that our goal in Afghanistan was to decapitate al-Qaida, which had carried out 9/11. Now Afghanistan is, you know, a sovereign country that is going to have to deal with its own security. That does not mean that there could not potentially be problems there, just as there are in Iraq. Unless we are prepared to stay indefinitely in all these various countries, something that we cannot afford and would involve, over time, accusations that we were occupying these countries, you know, at some stage they are going to have to take responsibility for working together. Is this part of reality, going back into Iraq? Because you said that the war was ended in Iraq. It is ultimately going to be up to the Iraqi leadership to try to pull the politics of the country back together again. In the meantime, we have got an organization, ISIS, that has the ability to, you know, at least right now in western Iraq, cause a lot of havoc and violence, and over time could pose a serious threat to the United States. That does not mean that we reoccupy Iraq. It does mean that we are going to have to do our best to work with partners in the region, including hopefully a coherent Iraqi government, to slowly chip away at some of the advances that they have made. Would you have moved differently in Syria, given this eruption in Iraq and given that the chaos has spilled over now? You know, if what you are suggesting is that there was a simple solution in Syria that would have avoided the civil war and chaos there, that is just not true. You know, you had a ruthless dictator that started killing his own people, and you had the makings of a moderate opposition that still exists and that we still work with. I think that one of the things that the American people, at least, understand is that these societies are going through these enormous transformations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmikabrzezinskimsnbcsmorningjoe", "title": "Interview with Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC's Morning Joe", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mika-brzezinski-msnbcs-morning-joe", "publication_date": "23-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1503, "text": "And what we can do is work with the best impulses there, folks who understand moderation, tolerance, are trying to deliver for their people. We are going to have to deal with some of the worst impulses there, the extremism that ISIS represents. What we are not going to be able to do is play Whac-A-Mole and chase wherever extremists appear, occupy those countries for long periods of time, and think somehow that we are going to solve those problems. That is something that, even as the world's lone superpower, exceeds our capabilities. Do you think Prime Minister Maliki has demonstrated the ability to bring Iraq together, given what we have seen him do since 2006? And what I said yesterday still holds, which is an election has just taken place. And the test now, not just for Mr. Maliki but for all the leadership in Iraq, is are they able to set aside their suspicions, their sectarian preferences, for the good of the whole? The one thing I do know is that if they fail to do that, then no amount of military action by the United States can hold that country together. Equal pay kicked off your presidency; two of the champions here in the room with us. It is become really a theme, one of the themes of your time here. Do you think there will be a day in our lifetime where women are paid equally across the board? I think there is a whole series of actions that we can take that empower people to make sure they are being treated fairly, but also to give information to employers about what is good for their business. Keep in mind that issues like equal pay for equal work, issues like child care, issues like workplace flexibility and paid family leave, those are not just women's issues. Women now account for 40 percent of the primary breadwinners among American families. You have got men who recognize that they'd like to spend time with their kids too. There are very few families who have not gone through this. And when I think back to when Malia and Sasha were young, the biggest source of stress for us and we were a lot luckier than most was these issues surrounding work and family. You know, I am away down at the state capitol. She is got her own job. Then how do you deal with that? And that is the kind of thing that everybody, I think, can relate to.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmikabrzezinskimsnbcsmorningjoe", "title": "Interview with Mika Brzezinski of MSNBC's Morning Joe", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mika-brzezinski-msnbcs-morning-joe", "publication_date": "23-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1509, "text": "Many Americans woke up to the news today that the Whitewater independent counsel is investigating an allegation that you, or you and Vernon Jordan, encouraged a young woman to lie to lawyers in the Paula Jones civil suit. And I have told people that I would cooperate in the investigation, and I expect to cooperate with it. I do not know any more about it than I have told you and any more about it really than you do, but I will cooperate. The charges are not true, and I have not asked anybody to lie. ENTITY, where do you think this comes from? Did you have any kind of relationship with her that could have been misconstrued? ENTITY, I am going to do my best to cooperate with the investigation. I want to know what they want to know from me. I think it is more important for me to tell the American people that there was not improper relations; I did not ask anybody to lie; and I intend to cooperate. And I think that is all I should say right now, so I can get back to the work of the country. But you are not able to say whether you had any conversations with her about her testimony, any conversations at all? I think, given the state of this investigation, it would be inappropriate for me to say more. I have said everything I think that I need to say now. I am going to be cooperative, and we will work through it. But is the fact that in this case, as we understand it, a close friend of this young woman was outfitted with a wire, with a microphone to record conversations with her at the instruction of the Whitewater counsel, does that disturb you? Do you regard that Mr. Starr is playing the inquisitor here in this case? But it is inappropriate for me to comment on it at this time. I just have to cooperate, and I will do that. I understand that you do not want to comment on this. There are some commentators on our network, it would be Kevin Phillips, who said that the moral leadership of the Presidency justifies the kind of scrutiny that you are receiving. Do you agree with that? Well, I think there is a lot of scrutiny, and there should be, and I think that is important. I will leave it to others to define whether the kind we have received in volume, nature, and accuracy, and sometimes downright honesty, is appropriate. I just have a certain number of days here. I came here as not a Washington person.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmaraliassonandrobertsiegelnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Mara Liasson and Robert Siegel of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mara-liasson-and-robert-siegel-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1510, "text": "I came here to try to change the country and to work to build the future of America in a new century. And I just have to try to put this in a little box like I have every other thing that has been said and done, and go on and do my job. That is what I am going to work at. , earlier today you said you tried your best to contain your natural impulses and get back to work. Is that what you were referring to? And what were you furious about? 30 last night; I am getting ready for Mr. Arafat; I am working on the State of the Union; and we have got a lot of big issues out there within and beyond our borders. And I do not think any American questions the fact that I have worked very hard at this job. And anything that is a distraction I dislike. Do you see this as a partisan attack? I did not say that. I do not know enough to say any more about this. I do not want to get into that. You know at least as much about it as I do. 30 last night on something else. That is why I have given the answer that I have given to your questions today. Moving on to the matter you were working on late at night last night. First, it seems the message to Mr. Netanyahu from the U.S. was, we want to see you withdraw from some part of the West Bank. First, what is the message to Yasser Arafat, if you could sum it up? Well, first of all, let us talk about what they want. I think what Israel wants is a peace process that moves immediately to final status negotiations and gives them a stronger sense of security. I think what the Palestinians want is a peace process that gives them a stronger sense of self-determination and possibility and dignity. So what we have tried to do for 12 months now, ever since the Hebron redeployment, we have been out involved in the region, talking to all the players that is not the royal we, I mean me, the Secretary of State, Mr. Ross, Mr. Berger, others involved trying to analyze what it would take to get the peace process back on track. And we have formulated some ideas and we talked to the Israeli Prime Minister about them yesterday; we are going to talk to Mr. Arafat about them tomorrow.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmaraliassonandrobertsiegelnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Mara Liasson and Robert Siegel of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mara-liasson-and-robert-siegel-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1511, "text": "We hope that by the time we finish the talk that both sides will be closer together than they were before we started. But I think there may be circumstances under which we could take a real leap forward in the Middle East peace process if we get a break or two. It is going to take a while. We have to work with the Palestinians tomorrow, then we have to analyze where we are with both and whether we can go forward. And we may not make any progress at all. And if we do not , I will tell you that. I'd like to ask you, though, after spending so much time with Mr. Netanyahu on this visit and on other visits, some people regard him as a man who always opposed a land for peace settlement to the conflict with the Palestinians, certainly would not have negotiated the Oslo accords had he been in office then, has never liked them particularly. Some would say he is really trying to thwart that process and contain the damage from his standpoint. No, I cannot say that based on what I have seen. I do believe he is made no secret of the fact that he has principle differences with the Oslo process, which he has pledged to support. And we all know he has a different political coalition, and that indeed, the political forces in Israel itself are different than they were even a few years ago in terms of the composition of the population, the rise of these small parties and immigrant-related intense groups and all that. I think that, historically, there is been a little bit of difference in the kind of the texture of the relationship between the Likud Party and the Palestinians and the Labor Party and the Palestinians. But the bottom line is, I think, Mr. Netanyahu is an intelligent man who wants to make peace and understands that there has to be some formula where some marginal increase in territorial insecurity by giving up land is more than offset by a dramatic increase in security by changing the feelings of the people, the climate, the capacity for growth and opportunity. So we are just trying to hammer out what each side will have to do to take another step. ENTITY, in Iraq, diplomacy has not worked yet. UNSCOM is still barred from doing its job the way it sees fit, getting into the sites that it wants to inspect. Yet on the other hand, military action also has downsides. It might upset any progress you are making with allies on other issues.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmaraliassonandrobertsiegelnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Mara Liasson and Robert Siegel of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mara-liasson-and-robert-siegel-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1512, "text": "Do you think the U.S. has any good choices on Iraq? If we define good as easy, the answer is no. The problem is the weapons of mass destruction program, chemical and biological weapons, primarily. And that means that Saddam Hussein cannot determine when, where, and who, when it comes to the UNSCOM teams. So now he says that he is going to determine that, and there is not going to be any when for a couple of months, during which time he will be free to move whatever he wants wherever he wants. I think that this is a big mistake, and I believe that the United Nations will see it as such, and a real thwarting of its position. Do you feel that to even wield the threat of military action, possible military action, that you have to be able to point to some progress in the Arab-Israeli negotiations in order to maintain the support of U.S. friends in the region? It may affect the atmospherics, just, you know, the attitude about America. The main thing is every country in the region and throughout the world has a vested interest in seeing that no one who would either use or sell weapons of mass destruction especially chemical and biological weapons which could be carried around in small amounts, in little valises that no one who would use or sell them has a big program of them, which is why the whole United Nations is against the Iraqi program. They need to think long and hard, these countries that have been a little squeamish about being firm, whether or not it is possible that they could be the victims of this, if not directly from Iraq, from some group or another that Iraq sells to in the future. So I think we need to be firm, and I am going to do my best to keep rallying support and keep working ahead. I prefer the inspections. I prefer the diplomatic pressure. I have not been triggerhappy on this; some here in our country think that we should have acted before. But I do not think we can rule out any option. ENTITY, moving to domestic policy and the budget surplus, Republicans and Democrats on the Hill have already said what they want to do with it, either cut taxes or pay down the debt or spend more money on social problems. But so far, you have been silent on this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmaraliassonandrobertsiegelnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Mara Liasson and Robert Siegel of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mara-liasson-and-robert-siegel-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1513, "text": "And I am wondering if you are ready to make a commitment to using whatever surplus there might be to shoring up the Social Security Trust Funds, making sure that safety net is there for the baby boom generation when it retires. Well, I will make a commitment that in my State of the Union Address, I will announce what I think should be done. I need to have something to say in the State of the Union that is new. But let me say before I say that, I would like to just caution we have had 5 great years, and we have always done better than we were predicted to do on the deficit. But I think I would still caution the Democratic and Republican leaders of Congress from passing some big 5year program to spend money through spending programs or tax cuts that has not yet materialized. We do not yet have a balanced budget. We have worked so hard for so long to get this done; I sure hate to start counting our chickens before they hatch. So I would like to start with that. And then when I speak at the State of the Union, I will say what I think ought to be done. Would you like to caution equally against shoring up the Social Security fund in that case? Well, in general, I believe my position on Social Security is that we need a bipartisan and fairly rapid process to work through the options and prepare for the long term health and viability of the Social Security system, along with the efforts that are going to be made by the Medicare commission, which I am very hopeful about. One of the big things I hope to achieve before I leave office is entitlement reform in both major systems. So I tell you, I think that that needs to be done, and we are exploring how best to do that. Well, we do not want to let you off the hook too easily. You are not saying you are against using the surplus to shore up the Social Security Trust Funds? I am not saying one way or the other. I am saying I'd like to have something to announce on State of the Union night. That would achieve the aims in theory of raising the cost of a pack of cigarettes by so much that it would be beyond the reach of teenagers, achieve your major aim, and not take companies off the hook for future liability. Are you in favor of such a bill? You'd have a children's only bill that did what? I am sorry, you had a lot of points there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmaraliassonandrobertsiegelnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Mara Liasson and Robert Siegel of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mara-liasson-and-robert-siegel-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1514, "text": "Yes, well, first, it would raise the price of a pack of cigarettes simply to deter teenage purchasers of cigarettes. Well, I would favor doing something like that without committing to the specifics if we fail to get a global settlement. But I think we owe it to the attorneys general and the others who worked with us on this in good faith to try to achieve one, because I think, long term, we need to deter teen smoking with more than just a higher price tag for cigarettes. I think there are lots of other things that can be done. And I think that we ought to have certain benchmarks of performance for the tobacco companies, too, which in my view will help because then they will be free to do more that they even have to spend a little more money than they are obligated to under the agreement if they are not meeting the targets, they may decide they ought to do that to save even more money down the road. So I am going to look for a global settlement in the tobacco case for the benefit of our children. If we fail, then I will look at something else. ENTITY, following up on that, you have cautioned Congress not to spend the surplus until they have it. Yet you have committed $60 billion of some projected tobacco settlement bill before it is even passed to new spending. And if you do not get a tobacco settlement, are you committed to those programs? Will you cut elsewhere in order to keep that new spending? I will not, under any circumstances, favor funding anything I have recommended with the surplus with the projected surplus. So, if you do not get the tobacco settlement, you will cut elsewhere? If I do not get in other words, if we do not get the tobacco settlement, we will either have to cut the size of the child care initiative or cut elsewhere, or do something else, because I will not just, on my own, get up and propose that we spend the proposed settlement, or part of it, on these programs. I think they are terribly important, but right now we have got other fish to fry. And we have got to make sure the most important thing is to keep this economy growing, to keep disciplined, to keep strong, to do what makes sense. And that is what has gotten us here, 5 hard years of that, and we do not want to forget that. So we do have new spending in our programs, but it is new spending within a context of fiscal discipline.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmaraliassonandrobertsiegelnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Mara Liasson and Robert Siegel of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mara-liasson-and-robert-siegel-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1515, "text": "It is new discipline with the smallest Federal Government since Kennedy was President and the size of it continuing to go down. Federal prosecutors reportedly rejected a plea bargain agreement not long ago with Theodore Kaczynski, with his lawyers at least, that might have guaranteed his imprisonment for life. Evidently they want the death penalty. Is it important to you, say, if he is convicted, that there be an exercise of the Federal death penalty? If he is guilty, he killed a lot of people deliberately, and, therefore, I think it is something that the jury should be able to consider. From my point of view, I approve of the laws that we have in America now, the sort of two-tiered trial where you determine guilt and then you determine penalty, and I would want to hear all the testimony before I decided how I'd vote in that case. But I do think it should be presented to the penalty phase. Even if you had a guilty plea that as there is no parole in the Federal system guaranteed none and spared any possibility of an acquittal, you would still prefer to reject that plea, to offer the jury the option of the death penalty? I think the jury should have the option. Now, also, as a practical matter, there are not many inmates perhaps he would be one that actually do get life without parole. That is, in a prison system, where you do not want prison riots, you have to reward people who do an extraordinarily good job of being good inmates within the prison system, perhaps the practice of allowing people who have life sentences to be paroled after quite a long period of time is a good one, or, at least, defensible. But juries know that, too. But this was a case where, based on what I know, I would consider it appropriate to present that to the jury. ENTITY, on the Asian financial crisis, a lot of Americans do not understand why taxpayers should help bail out banks and investors in the U.S. or Japan or in Europe who took a risk and made some mistakes. Do not they bear some responsibility? Do not they have to take some of the hit? They do bear some of the responsibility, and they should not all be bailed out. And that is one of the most frustrating things about this. On the other hand, what this is about is about rebuilding confidence in the investment climate of these countries.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmaraliassonandrobertsiegelnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Mara Liasson and Robert Siegel of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mara-liasson-and-robert-siegel-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1516, "text": "I do not think they ought to get one red cent unless the governments commit to do things for the future that will mean these banks will have to take a bigger risk, and get their act cleaned up, unless the International Monetary Fund plan is implemented, and then the U.S. and Japan and these other countries come in as a backup. But if we refuse on the front end to do anything, the problem is it could hurt us a lot worse than it could hurt the odd banker that does not get his money back, because if a lot of people start not getting any of their money back, then other people say, Well, I am going to get my money out, and then others say, Well, I am not going to put my money in ; and then all of a sudden the value of the currency goes way down. They do not have any money to buy American products and all their products are cheaper, competing against ours and other countries. So we have a big economic interest as well as a huge interest in a stable, democratic Asia. And that is why I think we are doing the right thing. I hope in the State of the Union I can persuade the American people that it is the right thing. I want to ask you about Clintonism. We have been hearing a lot about Clintonism lately, a coherent political philosophy that may or may not be identified with you. I think, first of all, it is a very it is a future-oriented political philosophy that attempts to break the logjam between the 1980's and early nineties debate of the Republican position that Government is the enemy and the Democratic position is, sort of, Government is the solution if we do more of the same; we just need to do more. My position is we need a different kind of Government for a different kind of society and a different kind of world. And we need to focus more on giving people the tools they need to make the most of their own lives, more on being a catalyst for good ideas, more on empowering the disadvantaged, and creating opportunity, enforcing responsibility, building community. I think that is what Clintonism is about. And I think it will get us to the 21st century.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmaraliassonandrobertsiegelnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Mara Liasson and Robert Siegel of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mara-liasson-and-robert-siegel-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "21-01-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1517, "text": "I do not think I am betraying any confidence when I say that I checked with the VH1 people and I said, How did you get ENTITY involved in this campaign? And they threw their arms up and they said, He kind of volunteered I mean, he is called many times and said, 'What can I do? ' Why is this so important to you? Well, Hillary and I both spent a lot of time on this, and it is important for two reasons. One is, I was in music when I was the age of these children, and I know what it can do. And secondly, I have been very disturbed over the years over the last 20 years, more and more, as schools have come under financial pressure, they have tended to drop their music programs. You know, the principals have a lot of problems. They have a lot of challenges they have to meet, and many times the money is not there. And the school districts have cut a lot of these music programs out all over the country. And when I heard what VH1 was doing, I did kind of volunteer to get involved. I wrote John Sykes a letter and said, Look, I am for this, and I think we have got to get music back into these schools. A lot of young children we know that a lot of our young children learn better if they have access to music education. Not everyone learns in the same way. Not everyone's brain is stimulated in the same way. And the schools that have vigorous music programs tend to have higher academic performance. What do you say, though I mean, let us say, devil's-advocate it for a second I am a member of the local school board, and I sit down, and I look at the budget, and it is shrinking. And I say, I have got choices. I have to make cuts. I have got school lunches over here. I have books for the library here. I have music education over here. How do you stop me from cutting music education? And that is what that wonderful movie about music education here in New York City, Music of the Heart, was about. But what this program tries to do is to encourage the schools to put some money into music education by giving them extra help with instruments and sometimes with other support.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshownewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-new-york-city", "publication_date": "16-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1518, "text": "And what we have tried to do at the national level, with the National Endowment for the Arts and the President's Commission on the Arts and Humanities that Hillary's the honorary chair of, is to constantly support music education, to emphasize that the schools that have good music education programs see positive other academic advancements as a result of it, and of course, try to get some more funds for the lower income schools out there. I mean, you had music education as a kid; so did I. We took it for granted. We are now in a time of unprecedented economic prosperity, and still today, only 25 percent of schools across this country offer music education as a basic part of the curriculum. See, what a lot of people do not know is, over the last 20 years and particularly in the last decade or so, while our school populations have been growing again, a smaller percentage of property-tax payers have kids in the schools. And an awful lot of our schools are funded primarily through the property tax. So the schools have had all kinds of financial problems. A lot of them have substandard physical facilities. They have the need to hire more teachers to teach various academic requirements that may have come in. And they do not want to stop any of their competitive athletic proposals. So the two things that have suffered most in the schools are the music programs and the art programs, on the one hand, and the physical education programs for people who are not in competitive team sports. I mean, when people like VH1 come in and they donate money like this, it is great, but it is private and public partnership. Why cannot we find a way, even through the Federal Government's assistance, to make sure that this is a basic part of education? I think we should do that. But the main thing we have to do is to build broader public support for doing it. Let me say, interestingly enough, you asked me the budget question. Well, what would you do if you had all these tough budget decisions? Our research indicates that the number one factor in whether music education programs stay or come back to schools is strong community involvement pushing for it. In other words, where people at the grassroots want it, the people who make the budget decisions tend to find a way to provide it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshownewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-new-york-city", "publication_date": "16-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1519, "text": "And so, what we can best do, I think, is to point out consistently what the overall educational benefits are, number one, and number two, to try to get more Federal assistance out there to the schools to help deal with their big problems. That is why I am trying to get the Federal Government to help with school construction and school repair, to help the school districts hire teachers to lower class sizes so they do not have to cut out music to hire that extra teacher when the population goes up, and to get the overall aid to low income schools up. So if we do those things and we get the kind of grassroots support we need, then what VH1 will be doing is supplementing a growing trend, instead of trying to fill a huge hole. Is it possible to take it a step further? From what I understand now, the Federal Government supplies about 9 percent of funding for schools; local and States provide the rest. Can you offer States incentives? Can you say to them, Look, we will provide more funding if you take it upon yourselves to make music education part of your basic curriculum? We could do that. I had not thought of that, exactly in that way. What we tried to dolet me just say this. What we have tried to do for the last 7 years, since I have been ENTITY, is to say, Look, here are the Nation's education goals. They include music and the arts. And if you come up with a plan to meet those goals, we will give you some help to implement the plan, which included music and the arts. Basically, the specific targeted dollars we have for schools go to schools that have greater financial need, because they have got a higher percentage of low income kids, or to hire more teachers, generally, because the school population is going up. I think if we will stay with the position that we are going to help all the schools that have these goals, which include music and the arts, and then we come in with the big ticket items, which are personnel and school building and repair, and we can build the kind of grassroots support we need, then these music programs will be able to survive. But one of the things that really happened is a lot of folks just took the music programs for granted. A lot of people who were making tough budget decisions assumed nobody would care if they were eliminated.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshownewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-new-york-city", "publication_date": "16-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1520, "text": "So I think what is going to happen you will see a big infusion of public money going back into these programs because of what VH1 has done and because more and more parents will insist on the music being there. And I will be glad to do whatever I can to help. We are going to take a little break. When we come back, I understand we are joined by another special guest, and we will talk more about music education. And we are back with President Bill Clinton at P.S. 96 in East Harlem. Let me ask for a couple of quick answers to some questions in the news. Congress is holding hearings on security breaches there. Two hard drives containing nuclear secrets disappeared. It is not clear, but I think it is very important to get to the bottom of it. The FBI is investigating it, and we have got Senator Baker and Congressman Hamilton, who have agreed to take an independent look. It is a serious issue, and I think what we ought to do is just see the investigation through and see where the facts lead us. But we need to do what we can to find out what happened, whether there was a security breach, and if so, how we can change it so it will never happen again. You and I were both watching the news earlier about gas prices. People in Chicago, Milwaukee, in particular, paying 40 cents a gallon more than the rest of us. It is been very frustrating to me. I am quite concerned about it. Let me tell you what we know. We know that the prices were affected by the shutdown of a refinery, which is coming back up, a leak in a pipeline, which is the cheapest way to transport gas, and an unusual increase in demand in the Chicago-Milwaukee area. And all that affected it. Also, they used the cleaner gasoline, which is more expensive to produce, but that is only about 5 or 6 cents a gallon. So we know that it would be more expensive for a little while until the transportation and the refinery problems are solved. What we do not know is whether there was any price gouging. So we have got the Federal Trade Commission looking into that, and we have also had the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency looking into it. I am very worried about it. But I am hoping that we can break the logjam on it soon.  If you will stay with it long enough, until you like to hear yourself play, then it will be easier for you to keep practicing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshownewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-new-york-city", "publication_date": "16-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1521, "text": "But if you play one of these reed instruments, you will squeak a lot. If you play a string instrument, it'll hurt your ears in the beginning. And when you reach the point where you like to hear yourself play, then it is all downhill from there. Maybe it is a good time for you to relate to them also. You had a music teacher in your early life who had a pretty strong impact on your life. I had a well, my high school band director, Virgil Spurlin, is still a friend of mine, still writes me to this day. My grade school band director was a man named George Grey, who had a big impact on me. My vocal my choir teacher when I was in elementary school, I still remember vividly. All the kids I knew had access to choir and could be in the band if they wanted to. And I am so glad that John Sykes and VH1 and all these people are trying to make it possible for you to do this, because it is something you do not have to I was not as good as Billy Joel, see, so I did not get to be a professional musician. But I had a wonderful time. It changed my life for the better. And it still benefits me, and I still play. you have to be thinking a lot about legacy. And you look at young people in the third and fourth grade how do you want them to be a part of your legacy?  And I want them to grow up in a country that is a more just and decent country, where there is less discrimination and where people work together more. But it is really important that kids are not deprived of opportunities like music, just because of where they happen to live and whether their parents have money or not. That should not be what determines this. You have got some free time coming up in January, and Billy, you have got a little free time. I am thinking, you go to the garage in Chappaqua; you get a little amplifier like you used to do in high school aggravate the neighbors, and put together a little band here. Billy Joel, it is always good to see you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmattlauernbcstodayshownewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With Matt Lauer of NBC's Today Show in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-matt-lauer-nbcs-today-show-new-york-city", "publication_date": "16-06-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1523, "text": "In your speech last night you said that drugs were wrong and deadly. But on MTV a couple of years ago, someone asked you if you could inhale-if you could do it over again, would you inhale, and you said, Yeah, I tried the first time. Because Republicans are planning on using this to attack you. Oh, they are using it, but all I said was-I was just trying to make the point that I had never-when I answered the question I told the truth. I just told the truth about the question. The question was, in context, it was a light-hearted-- It was a light-hearted question, and it was not in the context of some sort of endorsement of drug use, and they know that. If you look at the record I established as Governor, the record I have established as ENTITY, the things I have worked on, and if you look at the terrible price my own family has paid and my brother's problem which literally nearly killed him, I think that my position on this is clear. I am very concerned about it really because every so often, you know, years go by and we see drug use going down. We still see drug use going down among adults; that is the interesting thing. In the last 4 years, drug use among people 18 to 34 has gone down because people have begun to think more about their own lives, their responsibilities then when they have children, and they began to be concerned about the risks. The risks of, let us say, cocaine, heroin, and hallucinogens and marijuana are different kinds of risks, but there are real risks associated with all of them. And I am very hopeful, now that General McCaffrey has come on and agreed to be our drug czar and we are focusing now- I would not say exclusively but clearly primarily on people under 18, that we and people around the country will be able to do something about this. I wanted to ask you another question about the convention. I think a lot of people were confused by what they saw at both conventions; they saw singing Senators and delegates macarena-ing. Obviously it is a party, you know, but many people did not hear the message coming from the conventions. For instance, obviously Christopher Reeve has done a lot of good for people who suffer from his disability, but why is his disability an argument to vote for you? One is, Christopher Reeve made an impassioned plea for research.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1524, "text": "In my budget we have consistently invested more in research, both in health care areas like spinal cord disease, breast cancer, ENTITY, and ENTITY, and also in science and technology. We are now building with IBM a computer, a supercomputer that will do more calculations in a second than a person with a handheld calculator could do in 30,000 years-30,000 years. And I believe that it is very important to vote for ENTITY who believes in the future and who is really committed to science and technology and research. The second reason is, as Christopher Reeve so eloquently told me when we were visiting in the Oval Office, not everyone who gets a serious injury and becomes disabled is wealthy; most people are not , and even wealthy people can quickly be bankrupted by the cost of care. The Medicaid program which the Federal Government has maintained for 30 years contains a guarantee of aid to families with disabilities who are middle class or below, to enable them to maintain a middle class life, to keep their jobs, and still give their disabled family member some help. In the budget-which I vetoed-of the Republican Congress, which Senator Dole and Mr. Gingrich led through Congress, they would have removed that guarantee, just sent some money to the States, put a lid on it, and then let the States decide what to do. And I think it is highly likely that the first people to be sacrificed would have been people with disabilities. So those are the two reasons that his being there embodied the human connection to ENTITY and his actions, the Congress, and what happens to people's lives. And every other person that was there on Monday night, the same thing. The Brady bill, it was obvious because they talked about it. Mike Robbins, the Chicago police officer, was riddled with bullets by an assault weapon. The young AmeriCorps girl was important because the Republicans have tried to abolish AmeriCorps twice. The educator is important because they wanted to cut back on educational aid; I wanted to invest more money in education. So everybody there-the Toledo autoworker was important because we have opened new markets to Japan and other parts in the world and America is number one in auto production again. So we started our convention in a very different way. We had a whole series of citizens speaking to establish the connection between their vote and their lives.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1525, "text": "Speaking of Senator Dole and the Republicans, the Republicans are accusing you of theft of their values agenda, stealing their ideas and making them your own. Well, the Republicans tried for years to convince the American people that only one party had values. And unfortunately-I believe it was unfortunate-they were too often rewarded for that. But I never believed that only Republicans could stand up for the American family. I never believed that only Republicans could be tough on crime. The first bill I signed was the Family and Medical Leave Act. My predecessor, my Republican predecessor, vetoed it twice, and Senator Dole led the fight against it. I fought the crime bill through, which put 100,000 police on the street, banned assault weapons, and had tougher punishment programs and prevention programs for young people. The bitterest, I mean really, literally, bitterest opponent of the crime bill in the entire Congress was Senator Dole. Now, who is strong against crime? We have got 4 years of declining crime. So I did not steal their values. On welfare reform, long before they ever passed a bill, 3 months into my Presidency I granted the first waiver to a State to try a welfare-to-work experiment. We now have 1.8 million fewer people on welfare than we did the day I took office- before this welfare bill takes effect. So I did not steal their values agenda. I believe they are American values, and I did something about it. And I think they are angry because they made so many votes for years just by talking about it and not doing anything about it. So we did something about it, and they are complaining about it. Are you afraid of being seen as sort of-are you afraid of your politics being perceived as sort of Republican-like, a less radical approach to their ideas? Let me just take one other example. The only reason I ask is because people are wondering if you are the same person they elected in '92. If you look at what we talked about at the convention, if you look at what we have done over the last 4 years-including in the last 2 years-the budget that I passed, I put the Democrats on the side of deficit reduction and balancing the budget, because I believe that. That is what I ran on. But all the Republicans voted against our budget because it also made the Tax Code fairer.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1526, "text": "It lowered taxes on 15 million working people, asked those of us in the highest income groups, the top one percent of us, to pay a little more. They opposed me on family and medical leave, most of them did. They opposed my education reforms, all progressive things. They opposed the crime bill. Then when we finally got some action out of this last Congress, there was-the health care reform proposal was a big part of my health care reform bill that I signed. The minimum wage bill, the pension relief for small businesses, was legislation that I always advocated. But what was the biggest thing I did in the last 2 years? I vetoed their budget. I just think that they like saying, We are for a balanced budget; the Democrats are big spenders. We are tough on crime; the Democrats are weak on crime. We are for work instead of welfare; the Democrats are for welfare instead of work. And even some of our own commentators kind of got hung up in that. If we protect children and we give families the right to and the tools they need to make the most of their own lives, we should be for a balanced budget, a growing economy, work instead of welfare, and tough on crime. So I feel very good about it, and I do not think it is inconsistent. Dick Morris helped you make a political comeback over the last 2 years, and he is been running, according to just about everyone, a phenomenal campaign. Will you still be talking to him on the phone about politics? I do not plan to do that, no. But we do have a good team, and we all work together. No, because we have a good team. And everybody had a role to play, and we all agreed early on on a strategy. And then when we-we had a decisionmaking process which I think is very good, which I am just going to keep in place. I am going to keep the team I have got. I am going to keep the decisionmaking process in place. So you will not be communicating with him anymore? I do not have any plans to do that. I do not say I will not communicate with him. My wife and I and the Vice President all called him and just had a purely personal conversation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1527, "text": "But this campaign is now the product of a record we have made and the proposals we have out there and the fact that we-our administration stood against what Mr. Gingrich and Mr. Dole tried to do in '95 and early '96. And those will be the salient elements that the American people will have to decide on, and we will do the best we can. But I feel good about it. There is talk in Republican circles of renewing character attacks on you because of their opinion that you surround yourself with questionable people. I am going to keep doing my job. I think the reason that talk is there, though, is that way they do not have to talk about over 10 million new jobs; they do not have to talk about the fact that my Democratic administration is the first one to reduce the deficit in all 4 of its years, since before the Civil War; that our budget would be in surplus today if it were not for the interest we pay on the debt run up in the 12 years of the Republican Presidencies before me; that we have made college loans more available and more affordable, and they tried to cut back on it; that the crime rate has come down under our strategy, and they opposed it. They do not have to talk about those things, but I am going to talk about what is right for the American people. The American people will make their judgments about-and probably already have made their judgments about that. And I do not intend to respond in kind. I like Senator Dole. I have had a good relationship with him. I honor the 35 years he gave this country in Congress, and I respect him for the way he fought back from his injury in the war. And I just do not think that it is good for America, and I am going to try to make this election about big things that touch the people we just saw on the side of the road there. Or little things that touch them, too. And the little things that touch them. You captured the imagination of young people in 1992, along with their votes. I saw young people at the MTV Inaugural Ball weeping when you arrived. Maybe their expectations were too high, but even with national service and all your educational programs, a lot of them feel just as disconnected today as they did 4 years ago. Do you feel like you have let people down? Have you not gotten your message out as clearly as you could have?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1528, "text": "But if you look at what happened on this train trip, that was my first real-I do not think polls can tell you these things. I do not think you can poll this. But when we were out there, and on this train trip we stopped-most of our rallies were in very small towns. We only had 2 stops where there were fewer than 10,000 people there. There were more than 150,000 total people who came to our rallies in those 3 days on the train. And then there were hundreds and hundreds of people, place after place after place, just on the side of the road as we were going. We had 30,000 in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, today, our first bus stop. Look, I think they feel like they are part of something bigger than themselves. I do believe in the first 2 years that-one of the things that I have learned over many years is that there is a time lag between when ENTITY or a Governor or a Congress takes an action and when it can be felt in the lives of the American people. So that we saw real economic growth coming from 1993 on, but there was no evidence until really about 8 months ago that the American people were beginning to feel it in their own lives, when paychecks finally started to go up again, when people saw that there were enough new jobs to make a difference in the local economy. It is the same thing with education. Now we are beginning-we have got a critical mass of young people who have been either in national service or even many, many more are getting the new college loans, the direct loans that they can pay back as a percentage of their income. We have reduced the welfare rolls by enough now that people are beginning to perceive it. The crime rate has come down now 4 years in a row so that people are finally beginning to perceive it. Their streets are safer, even though the crime rate in America is far too high still. I think that is a part of it. And so I think that my obligation is to go back to the young people of America and say, here is what I said I'd do 4 years ago; here is what we have done; here is what we are going to do in the next 4 years. And that is a lot of what we tried to do at our convention. Young people are alienated from politics. Young people think politics is rigged by money, and they are right.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1529, "text": "Democrats received tens of millions of dollars in corporate contributions. What are those corporations getting for their money? Well, I think it is fair to say that most of the corporations that contribute to either party agree with their policies. But keep in mind, almost all the wealthy individuals and some of the corporations that contributed to the Democratic Party are doing so even though their tax bills went up, because only the top 1.2 percent of individuals and corporations with incomes over $10 million a year had an income tax increase under our tax bill. And a lot of them supported us anyway, first of all because they knew I was right, that to get the deficit down, get interest rates down-they'd all do better with a healthier economy. I do not believe that any of them have supported me for some sort of bad or unseemly reason. On the other hand, I think it would be better if we had a campaign finance reform system that would enable people in public life to spend less time raising money and to be less dependent on it. But the only way you can do it is to give greater access to the airwaves, to candidates or parties, because it just costs so much to communicate. No, no, I do not mean it that way. Look, here is a country with a $1.5 trillion budget, an annual income of over $6 trillion. So you talk about a party raising and spending $150 million in a year and a half for an election, it sounds like a lot of money. Against that, it does not sound like so much money. It just costs a lot of money to communicate. The communications costs-not just on television-radio, print, mail, travel, it is very high. Do you think-so corporations are not getting access? I read a report that they get to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom once in a while, CEO's or-- Well, the people who sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom are people I personally invite, who have been my friends, and a lot of them have supported me. But I do not think any President has made a habit of inviting his opponents to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom. I mean, I think you normally invite your supporters. There is never been any attempt to raise any money with the promise that you can spend the night in the Lincoln Bedroom. I have invited people who have been helpful to me to spend the night in the Lincoln Bedroom, but it was never a quid pro quo there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1530, "text": "No, I am not trying to imply that. You are doing really well in the polls, but there is a certain percentage of people who not only do not support you but they seem to actively dislike you. Why do some people dislike you so much? Well, I think-there is a sign on the side of your bus; it is a quote of Bill Cosby's that I just love. He says, I do not know the secret of success. But I know the secret of failure is trying to please everybody. And I have always believed that in public life, when you were given an office, you should outline the major challenges and go after them and really try to get something done. And you should enlist the energies of people and try to bring them together and do it. And I have always had a certain core of people who have opposed me. When I was Governor of my State, I got elected five times and would regularly get nearly two-thirds of the vote. There would always be a core of people who were intensely opposed to my policies. But people did not necessarily like Reagan's policies, either, but it did not seem to get as personal. Do you think it has to do with your generation? It may have more to do with the comparative tactics of the two parties. I have no idea. It may have more to do with the way people are talked about now. One of the reasons I have tried so hard- especially since the Oklahoma City bombing, which I say had a profound impact on our country and on me-I have really tried hard to bring a sense of civility and decency back into public discourse. I went back and read some of my own speeches in '92, and while they are not rough at all by the standards of today, I thought, well, I want to elevate what I am saying and how I am saying it a little more now. And if you go back to the early 1800's, for example, it is a period of real tumult in our country, what was said and done and how much people had it pretty rough. I mean, when Thomas Jefferson was elected President, the John Adams party-because Mr. Adams was trying to hold onto the Presidency-said that he would kill religion in America, he would end godliness among the American people. So we have always had some of this, but I think we need to resist it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1531, "text": "I remember a very proud group of your inner circle of friends at the convention 4 years ago walking around boasting FOB pins. Jim Guy Tucker, Vince Foster, Webb Hubbell, even the First Lady? Well, I feel very badly, obviously, about Vince Foster because he was my longtime friend, and it is always tragic when someone commits suicide. And I do feel that a lot of people were targeted just because they were from Arkansas. Governor Tucker, for example, had-he was my Lieutenant Governor, we had been friends for a long time, but he'd never been part of my political life. But he was targeted, and I feel badly about that. And the country is going to have to evaluate, when this whole thing is over and there will be time for a fair accounting, whether they think it was the right thing to do. And I feel very badly about Hillary and a lot of her staff have been subject to, because it was just pure naked politics from the get-go. But that is what I am talking about. That is sort of the way of the cycle. It is the cost of doing business in Washington. I mean, the people-- Was that a surprise to you, that it was as harsh as it was? It is been deteriorating over time. Yes, it surprised me that you could be exonerated from one thing after another and it would never be noticed and then just another set of charges just to keep these going. That bothered me. But you know, the thing I think is important that I'd ask the American people to look at is that all these folks in our administration sustained all these hits, and we kept producing for the American people. We said, we cannot control this, we cannot do anything about it; all we can do is get up tomorrow and try to do our job. We came here to help move the country forward and bring the country together, and that is what we are going to do. And our convention showed how productive our administration had been and our country had been in the last 4 years. And I think the fact that we could do it while having people like Senator D'Amato on us day-in and day-out I think is a tribute to the character and the public devotion of the people in this administration. I am proud of them. That is what I wanted to ask you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1532, "text": "If you can just-try to take this in the way that I mean it, but you have suffered incessant character assassination over the past 4 years. You get up, there is another funeral; you have probably only had a couple hours of sleep that night. Between the funeral, a scandal, another country maybe going to war, why do you want 4 more years? I mean, what are you thinking? It is the most rewarding thing in the world for a citizen of our country, who loves our country and believes in the promise of its people, to be ENTITY. To look back on the last 4 years and to go out here as I did on the train ride or on this bus trip, and you look into the eyes of people and you go through these crowds, and somebody will say, I have got a home because of one of your programs ; I have gotten a job since you were here ; I am on one of your college loans ; I am an AmeriCorps student -when you see how the country is changing for the better, it is immensely rewarding. And in this day and time-you know, as I said, we have had periods like this in our politics before. In the early 1800's, Mr. Jefferson faced many of the same things. When you live in a time which is really rough, with no holds barred, and a lot of people seek personal advantage by what I call the politics of destruction, you have to be always, always, always defining yourself and the quality of your life by what is inside. And you cannot confuse who you are and the quality of your own life with whatever is going on in the day-to-day headlines. ENTITY should always be trying to be bigger than he is and lifting the country up. And you just have to keep putting that out of your mind; you just have to let it go. I cannot do anything about anything that happened yesterday or even an hour ago; you just have to let that stuff go and keep trying to lift the country up.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv", "publication_date": "30-08-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1563, "text": "ENTITY, we are delighted to join you here today in the Solarium on the third floor of the White House, a charming and homey room. As you now round out your first year in the White House, do you feel at home here? Do you find that you enjoy the splendid misery of the Presidency, to use those famous words of Thomas Jefferson? It is a magnificent home, of course. It can get a little lonely at times. It is big, but there are so many wonderful things here that you can enjoy. It also gives you an opportunity to focus in on the problems, and it is the problems that come with the house that make it somewhat difficult at times to really relax and enjoy yourself. Speaking of those problems, ENTITY, I think many people regarded you as something of an interim ENTITY when you first assumed office. Do you feel now that a year later, that you have established a ENTITY Presidency? I think we have gradually put together a domestic program and a foreign policy that can be identified as a ENTITY Administration. As we move in the next 12 to 14 months, I think it will become more and more evident, which, of course, gives us an opportunity in the next election to lay that record out so the public can judge it against any alternative programs submitted by the opposition. I do not think there will be any problem in identifying what we have done, what we have tried to do, and it will be known as a ENTITY policy or a ENTITY program, so to speak.  What would you pick out as the things you have done in this first year that make it indeed a ENTITY Presidency, both in domestic and foreign policy? Before getting into foreign and domestic policy, ENTITY, I think it is entirely proper to say that I have tried to restore public confidence in the Government and, particularly, in the Administration, in the executive branch, in the White House. I do not mean to criticize anybody else, but all the polls showed that roughly a year ago there had been a great loss of confidence on the part of the American people in their Government. We, the new Administration, with our appointments, with our openness, with our attempt to be frank and honest with the American people, I think we have turned the corner, and there is a restored confidence on behalf of the American people in their Government. Now, let us turn to the policy areas. We inherited a very difficult economic situation. The rate of inflation was somewhere between 12 and 14 percent, the highest in a good many years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1564, "text": "That was our immediate economic problem, and we undertook some activities both fiscally and in a monetary sense to correct the situation. I am glad to report that it is now somewhere between 5 and 6 percent per annum. That is too high, and we had a little setback the last announcement on the CPI, the Consumer Price Index. In fact, it indicates it is going to go up 14 percent if it continues at this rate. But if you annualize the last 6 months of the Wholesale Price Index, it shows it is almost zero, because we had 5 months of, as I recall, negative increases in the Wholesale Price Index. So, I think you have to look at it in the broad span. We have made significant progress in the field of inflation, and we are going to continue to do so. Then, of course, we were faced in January with a precipitous drop in employment and a tremendous increase in unemployment. We adjusted our economic policies to meet that problem without sacrificing our effort against inflation. We did have an increase of unemployment up to 9.2 percent much, much too high but the last 2 months the unemployment figure has gone down from 9.2 to 8.4, and the most encouraging part is the fact that we have had an increase in employment of about 600,000, as I recall the figure. We are putting people back to work even though the unemployment figure is still too high. Now, this is a very narrow line to follow of still .trying to control inflation and at the same time reduce unemployment. I can just assure you we are going to follow a steady, firm, I think, correct policy to meet these two challenges. When you referred to a correct policy, ENTITY, I would like to remind you that it seems to us that in the past 2 or 3 weeks we have had an awakening, new concern that inflation may take off again, that unemployment is going to remain quite high through the election year of 1976. So, do you plan any new measures to deal with the economy? If we were to go along with the Congress that wants to spend a great deal more money I drew the line at a deficit of $60 billion the Congressional figures are up to $70 billion or $80 billion deficit for the current fiscal year if we were to go along with that kind of a deficit figure that the Congress proposes, I think we would be in serious trouble on the reigniting of inflation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1565, "text": "So, we are still going to veto bills that accelerate expenditures in the Federal Government beyond a reasonable figure. On the other hand, with the restoration of public confidence by our, I think, responsible action, I believe that we are going to regenerate industrial activity, which means more jobs. Now, let me take one aspect of the last 6 months. We have had the most rapid inventory sell-off in the history of the United States. The net result is that current inventories in many, many areas of the country, in industries in the country, are down. So, they have to come up with additional production to meet current daily demand. With consumer confidence coming back the way it has and all the pollsters show that I think our steady, firm, responsible course is going to meet the challenge of inflation and unemployment. They will not be as good as we would like I am very honest and very frank about it but we will be moving in the right direction. Let us take the direction in which we are moving, which we are in today, leaving percentages aside. We have got better than 8 million Americans who do not have jobs. We reckon now that there are something like 24 million Americans 12 percent of the population of this country that are at the poverty level or below. And many of your critics make the point that while you are a good man and a decent man, you do not show a sufficient amount of compassion, in their opinion, for the people who are unfortunate in that sense, for the people who are on welfare and people who live on food stamps. A good many Americans think that there are too many abuses both in welfare and food stamps, and I think there are too many abuses. If we could correct the abuses, we could be more compassionate to the people who have a real need for both welfare and/or food stamps or both. Now, you know, inflation,ENTITY, hits the unemployed even more drastically than it hurts the people who are employed, so my compassion is across the spectrum. It is not just aimed at the people who are employed. We want to control inflation to help all Americans, including the unemployed. If we do not control inflation, the ones who are hurt the most are the people who are unemployed and the people on fixed incomes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1566, "text": "ENTITY, no one would argue that inflation is not a threat, but the concern is that you seem to be more worried, really, constantly and it is a conscious decision on the part of your Administration with inflation than you have been with unemployment. ENTITY, I must respectfully disagree with you. This Administration has extended the unemployment compensation program to, I think, 65 weeks. We have broadened the eligibility of unemployment beyond what it ever was in the United States. We have paid more money out in unemployment benefits than any administration has ever done. So, we have shown in dollars and in programs a deep concern for the unemployed. We have gone along with a public service employment program up to the maximum authorized by the Congress. But yet you have also vetoed an effort for a job bill that was passed by the Congress. Martin, that was, I think, a poor label for a bad piece of legislation. The facts are, I sent up a request for $1,900 million for public service employment or a jobs bill that included $450 million for a summer youth employment program and the remainder for the public service employment. That shows my interest in the youth who wanted employment this summer, and it shows my interest in the people we could hire in the public service area. Now, what the Congress did was to take my recommendation and add $3 billion in pork-barrel programs that would not have solved the problem of the people unemployed today. It was pure Congressional politics of a pork-barrel kind, and that is the reason I vetoed it. After I vetoed it, the Congress recognized they were wrong and they sent back a bill that included my public service employment, my summer youth program, and added a few hundred million dollars just to satisfy their ego. Now, the truth is we got a good program through and we did not get a pork-barrel program shoved down the American people. Let me take this to a somewhat different plane, ENTITY There are critics who suggest that you have not provided the kind of broad roadmap for the country's future which this Nation with its many problems desperately needs today. Does it disturb you that you do not appear to have captured the hearts and minds of a great many Americans? I read both of those articles, and they are very able columnists. I think we will, with the next State of the Union message, have some areas that will point the direction in the long run for our country. I instituted this year what we call a no new program approach.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1567, "text": "Why did we do that? We had to solve our current problems first in order to get our fiscal situation under control. Once we have achieved that result and I think we have made substantial headway then we can take a look at and make recommendations for the long range that will meet some of the problems that are raised by Scotty Reston and Dave Broder, and by others. How do you deal with this perception that people have about the lack of leadership, and not only for you but for the Republican Party? For example, Senator Brock of Tennessee, of your party, said the Republican Party must come to stand for something and until it does that the word Republican will be associated with Watergate and big business, hard times . Well, I, of course, deny that this Administration, the ENTITY Administration, is in any way whatsoever connected with Watergate. The ENTITY Administration is going to be known, in my judgment, for a successful implementation of economic policy that will provide jobs in the private sector in the long run and in foreign policy will expand our efforts for peace throughout the world. That is what this Administration will stand for. I think those are good things for an administration to be remembered over the years. If you achieve them. I think the record is going to be good, and I think right now the public, if you look at the polls, is beginning to perceive that. The polls show that, on a personal basis, I am doing much better. It is not as high as I would like, but not many people in public life are doing very well in the polls. But also, ENTITY, the polls show that only 7 of 100 Americans-by one pollster who happens to be from your home State, Robert Teeter-that only 7 of 100 Americans today regard themselves as strict Republicans. I think this relates additionally to the fact that rightly or wrongly, many Members of Congress and elsewhere, your critics, detect a negative quality about your leadership. And does not that do damage perhaps to your own Presidency and to the Republican Party? Well, let me quote, if I might, some other statistics. Most polls that are taken today indicate that a majority of Americans are in the middle of the road or conservative. Now they do not label themselves as Democrats or Republicans. They are talking about a philosophy. And maybe labels today are not the right way to identify people's views, whether it is Democrat or Republican. I believe the American people want a healthy economy, a firm and successful foreign policy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1568, "text": "That is what we are going to give them, and that is what we are giving them at the present time. When you talk about a healthy economy, ENTITY, there are other problems as well. What do we do about the rising cost of medical care, what do we do about the 12 percent of the population which ENTITY referred to which is now at the poverty level in this country? What do we do about the enormous problems of the cities which seem to be accelerating? Well, let us take the last one first. I think the cities have to recognize that they have a responsibility in the fiscal area as well. The Federal Government has done a substantial amount for cities through the general revenue sharing program, through a multitude of categorical grant programs. The cities have to realize that they have a fiscal management problem, too, and many of them have. Many of our cities are well managed; a few are not. I think the record speaks for itself. Well, ENTITY, in one area, the welfare area, your outgoing Welfare Secretary Weinberger suggested the other day that we should now be giving thought to some kind of negative income tax, in effect, a guaranteed annual income. Is that in the future as far as your Administration is concerned? Sometime this fall, there will be conducted under our Domestic Council and the Vice ENTITY is acting Chairman, Vice Chairman, but the actual acting Chairman of the Domestic Council and he and his associates are going to conduct some public hearings around the country where a number of areas will be examined by that Council, where people in various communities will have an opportunity to testify, proponents of one approach or another approach . Some people say we should modify the present welfare program. Some say we should junk it and come in with a new one. What we are going to do through the Domestic Council is give people throughout the country, not just the Washington complex, an opportunity to express themselves, to tell us what they think is the answer to the welfare problem. There is an awful lot of wisdom out in the country on what is right and what is wrong about welfare, what we today ought to do about medical care and the costs and the program. And as a result of those hearings on a nationwide basis, we will formulate our recommendations in those areas that need change. The decision has to be made ultimately in the Oval Office.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1569, "text": "Is it your thinking that the welfare system in this country is now in such a chaotic mess that some new system must be devised, and it is likely that some form of guaranteed annual income which was a concept that was put forward by Richard Nixon? There is no doubt that the present welfare program either ought to be junked and a substitute put in its place or the present welfare program has to be tightened up very, very greatly. Now, you can get proponents on either side. When I was in the House of Representatives, I voted twice for the program that was submitted by the previous administration, because I believed then and now that welfare reform was mandatory. Unfortunately, even though the House of Representatives passed that legislation twice, the United States Senate refused or did not act on it. Now, it is my judgment that we will come out of these public hearings, we will come up with either some tightening of the existing welfare program or will offer a substitute, and there are a number of alternatives. I am not going to prejudge what the public is going to tell us. We want the public to be a participant in this process. ENTITY, could we return to the question of confidence, which is a real concern. You have been ENTITY for a year, and looking back, would you agree with the conventional wisdom, as far as Watergate is concerned, that the system worked? I think the system did work, Martin. It went through a very traumatic period, but if you look back through what happened before August 9 and what has happened since, I think you must come to the conclusion that the system did work. And looking ahead beyond that, do you think that in this year that you have been in office that safeguards have been put into effect that would ensure that we would not have another Watergate? Do you feel there is a sense in the country that you have achieved that? Certainly what I have tried to do precludes a Watergate from happening under a ENTITY Administration, and I believe through the press, through the public, through the Congress, there would never be an opportunity for another Watergate to take place. Let me ask you to deal then with a rather remarkable and startling observation that was made to me by the Special Watergate Prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, a few days ago. I asked Mr. Jaworski, if your predecessor had destroyed the Watergate tapes, would he be sitting today in the White House, and he answered Yes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1570, "text": "I would not undercut any judgment by Leon Jaworski. He knew intimately the content of many of the tapes, and he had a special responsibility. So, if he made that judgment, I am certainly not going to contradict it. Let us carry it, not only the judgment but its implications-and you know the famous observation of Congressman Mann, Next time will there be a watchman in the night? What concerns everyone in the country is that after Watergate, we now have a crisis of confidence, in the CIA, for example, a feeling that it is out of hand, that it is not sufficiently accountable. How do you feel about the revelations of CIA? How do you relate them to the crisis of confidence? As a result of some of the revelations, I appointed the Rockefeller Commission. That Commission conducted a very thorough investigation of the allegations concerning the CIA. That Commission has recommended to me certain administrative actions that I should take and some legislative proposals that I should submit to the Congress. My staff has taken the Rockefeller Commission recommendations and the Murphy Commission recommendations-and that Commission got into the CIA to some extent and I intend to submit to the Congress specific proposals that I think will maintain the CIA and our total intelligence-gathering community so they can do the job which is essential for our national security on the one hand and at the same time preclude our intelligence-gathering agencies from violating our constitutional rights as individuals. That is a point that I would like to raise with you.   Now, those fellows in the CIA do not just report on wars and the like. They go out and make their own and there is nobody to keep track of what they are up to. They spend billions of dollars on stirring up trouble so they will have something to report on. They do not have to account to anybody. That is a very dangerous thing in a democratic society. Well, the recommendations that have come from the Rockefeller Commission and from the Murphy Commission and the result of the investigations in the House as well as the Senate, I think, will give to the Congress and to the ENTITY the tools to correct the abuses that Mr. Truman spoke of in his conversations. And that you perceive? And that I think have to be done in the future to eliminate any possibility of abuses such as Mr. Truman mentioned. ENTITY, the feeling is that perhaps you yourself as ENTITY, in terms of the record of the Presidency versus the CIA, may not even be aware of many areas in which the CIA operates.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1571, "text": "I can assure you, Martin, of two things. One, as a Member of the House and a member of a committee that had some jurisdiction over the CIA, but more specifically as ENTITY, I have probably gotten into the operations of the CIA and other related intelligence agencies in greater depth than any other ENTITY. And as a consequence, the proposals that I will submit and the administrative actions that I will take will correct those alleged and actual abuses. I think I know more about the CIA than any other ENTITY, certainly since 1945 or 1946 when it was established, and either in the rules and regulations or the law or the personnel, we are going to make certain that the CIA does its job in the gathering of foreign intelligence and the analyzation of that intelligence for the benefit of the ENTITY, the Department of State, and the Secretary of Defense, and at the same time will not abuse the proper constitutional rights of 214 million Americans. We are going to do that. Well, ENTITY, you served in Congress for a long time and Congress is the people's instrument that was really supposed to be protecting us against the excesses of the CIA. It is obvious now that Congress never did its job adequately. Did you ever have any inkling when you say you have been familiar with the CIA since 1946 did you ever have any inkling that these things were going on? I must admit, ENTITY, that I was not familiar with some of the details that have been brought to light. I was among a very limited number of Members of Congress, House and Senate, Democrats and Republicans, who analyzed the CIA budget and their overall programs. But I must admit that that kind of control by the Congress, in retrospect, was not adequate. Do you feel that members of the CIA lied to you as a Member of Congress? No, I do not think they lied to me. I will not pass judgment on what they said to others. But I do believe that the control of the CIA by the Congress over a period of years was not as sufficient as it should have been. Do you feel this is now essential for the future, that Congress must exercise greater control over the CIA? I think there has to be some improvement in this area, but I am not passing judgment on this program as to the specific recommendations I will make. We are now analyzing various proposals, and what the Congress does, of course, is their decision.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1572, "text": "But I can make recommendations as to how we can tighten up the control and at the same time give to the ENTITY and other people who have an interest the information on foreign intelligence which is so essential to our national security. You have to balance the two, and that is a very fine line. And I think we can do it. The Attorney General, Mr. Levi, in reading the material which you sent over from the White House which has not been released to the public about CIA activities, said he was appalled by some of the things he read. I think some of the things were improper, but I must say, Paul, people can judge what others have done and unfortunately sometimes do not put themselves in the position of a previous ENTITY or put themselves in the position of a previous Secretary of Defense. I think we can recognize the areas of mistake, but I do not like to be a Monday-morning quarterback. I think we ought to deal with the facts and we ought to deal with what we should do in the future and learn from the past, and I think we can correct these things. What we learned from the past, even despite your dislike of being a Monday-morning quarterback, is that your predecessors accepted proposals which called for the assassination of a foreign chief of state, for one thing, and brought about the overturn of a government in Chile, for another thing. ENTITY, I am not going to pass judgment on whether there was an order or was not an order about assassination. I do not want to point a finger at any other ENTITY or ENTITYs. I have looked at all of the material. We have given the material to the Church committee, and it is their obligation to, I think, analyze it but not do any finger-pointing. Now, the CIA has two kinds of operations one covert and the other overt. Their covert operations, under the procedures we have under this Administration, are carefully monitored carefully monitored, and I can assure you that every one that is done is in the national interest of the United States. But your predecessors might well have thought the same thing. The concern is the use of the CIA covertly, if you like, as an instrument of policy and foreign policy by your predecessors. ENTITY, I think we have to understand we live in a real world. Every nation, either a friend or an adversary, has a comparable intelligence-gathering, intelligence-operating organization in their government. And they do it for their own national security.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1573, "text": "Now, the United States has to compete in this real world. It is a tough world, and our national security on many occasions involves doing things in a covert way. I can only assure you that if and when we undertake them under this Administration, they will be carefully monitored and they will be directly related to the national security of this country. I am not going to pass judgment on what other ENTITYs did. I can only pass judgment on what I want us to do, and those are the guidelines that we will follow. Speaking of national security and foreign policy, ENTITY-and I must say parenthetically that you look very fit and relaxed for a man who just came back from Europe nonetheless, your trip to Helsinki has encountered a substantial degree of hostility in this country, as you perhaps well know, and, rightly or wrongly, some people are suggesting that the Russians were the winners at Helsinki and we were the losers. What is your response to that criticism? I think that is a completely inaccurate interpretation concerning the CSCE Conference in Helsinki. I think it is a judgment some people make, but I thoroughly disagree with it. Let me just put this in perspective, if I might. We predicated many of the decisions involving borders on what? No border was agreed to in Helsinki that was not previously agreed to by previous American ENTITYs or by previous governments in other countries. We provided in that Helsinki agreement for peaceful change of borders. We made it far less likely that there will be military intervention by one country against another. What we have really done is to make it possible for people in the East as well as in the West in Europe to communicate, to reestablish family relationships. I will come to that in a minute, ENTITY. We have made it possible for the news media to have greater freedom in all of the 35 countries. In my speech before the Conference, I said, on paper this is good. We have 2 years between now and the next meeting in 1977, and the test will be, have all 35 countries lived up to the agreement? It offers a hope. The reality will depend upon the execution. I happen to believe that world pressure will force all countries, Communist countries and other countries, to live up to the agreement. But let us just take one example, ENTITY. You talk about a peaceful change in borders being in the agreement. Now realistically speaking, do you think that the Russians would give up the Baltic territory, which they took over at the end of World War II?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1574, "text": "Do you think they would give up the Eastern European countries? Do you think that they would negotiate to give back these countries their independence? Let me put it the other way around. If we had not gone to Helsinki, do you think the Russians would have permitted any of the things you are talking about? In Helsinki, they at least signed an agreement that says you can change borders by peaceful means. But does it mean anything, ENTITY? Well, they have signed something that says you can change borders by peaceful means. ENTITY, you used a very good phrase at Helsinki. You said Peace is not a piece of paper, a very memorable phrase, and it conveys this idea that we are talking about now. Many of your critics and let us take it all of the way from Solzhenitsyn 1 to George Ball, a former Under Secretary of State-have voiced concern about legitimizing what, for example, George Ball calls the Soviet stolen empire, and asks, how do you reconcile that with Western ideals? that it is our obligation to follow policy that is more concerned with morality and principle than the acceptance of these borders would indicate. Well, Martin, I go back to the peace treaties of Yalta and Paris and Potsdam and the agreement by the Germans themselves to establish those borders. Those were peace treaties that established borders for all of Eastern Europe and all of Western Europe. Those are factual things done in the forties, the fifties, et cetera. The Conference on European Security and Cooperation did not change any of those, but it did say and every one of the nations did sign something that is different, that there can be peaceful adjustments of borders. But despite what you are now saying, ENTITY, there is in this country, as you well know, a rising amount of criticism about detente itself, people questioning the value of detente. What is your feeling about this criticism, and do you think this is endangering detente? I hope it is not endangering detente because I think there are many pluses to us and, yes, to the Soviet Union. I believe that SALT I was an outgrowth of detente. Does anybody want to tear up SALT I? Anything that puts a lid or a limitation on the development of nuclear weapons, the expansion of nuclear weapons any agreement that puts a lid or controls, that is good. So, detente helped achieve SALT I.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1575, "text": "Detente may help I hope it will SALT II, where we will put an actual cap on nuclear weapons and other nuclear weapons systems. One of the happiest dividends that detente could possibly produce would be a reduction of forces by the Soviet Union as well as the Western allies in Western Europe. Was that raised at Helsinki? Did you get anywhere at all with that with Brezhnev? As you know, historically, when CSCE was originally agreed to as a program, it was also agreed to that there would be negotiations for mutual and balanced force reductions in Europe MBFR. Those negotiations have been going on now for about 2 years. They are presently stalled, but now that we have the Helsinki agreement, it is my judgment that we have opened up encouraging prospects for additional movement in the MBFR negotiations. I think the Allies and the West are getting together for perhaps a new position. I believe that the Soviet Union and its allies are taking a look at the current stalemated negotiations and may come up with some agreement. The prospects for a mutual and balanced force reduction in Europe have been enhanced by the Helsinki agreement no question about that whatsoever. Well, ENTITY, to go back to SALT I for a moment, you said at a recent news conference that according to your investigation the Russians had not cheated on the agreement limiting the use of certain strategic weapons. Your old friend, Melvin Laird, had written an article suggesting they had cheated. Since then, you have talked to Mr. Laird. Have you changed your mind about what you said earlier? I naturally investigated the allegations that were made by a number of people, including Mel. And after a thorough investigation, I have come to the conclusion that a person might legitimately make the charge there had been violations, but on complete and total investigation I think any person who knew the facts as I know them would agree that there had been no violations of any consequence. There are some ambiguities I want to be frank about it but all of the responsible, knowledgeable people in the Pentagon or in any of the other responsible agencies would agree with me there have been no serious violations, and any that have been called to their attention have been Stopped. Very minor, but we have what we call a consultative group where if we think they are violating something, we make that point. It is investigated, and in the cases where there was any instance that might be an honest charge of a violation, they have been stopped.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1576, "text": "The Soviet Union has raised some questions about certain activities that we have undertaken, and we have investigated them. And I think that arrangement of the consultative group has been very effective in making sure that SALT I was lived up to. Let me turn now to the Middle East, ENTITY. You beat me to it. We have had intensive negotiations going on now for about 2 months to try to get a peace treaty moving in this area. I am optimistic on an increasing basis, but I have learned that until it is signed in black and white that I should not predict that it will be finalized. Let me ask you - I want to just ask you one more question in this area. Do you find the Russians are now less troublesome in the Middle East in the efforts to achieve a peace agreement? They have acted in a very responsible way, during my time, in the Middle East. Let me just turn to the question of these negotiations that are going on between Israel on the one hand and Egypt on the other. Both of those countries have to understand that flexibility at this crucial time is important for the peace of that area of the world and possibly peace in the world. If there is not movement in the Middle East right now, the potential for war is increased significantly. And a war in the Middle East today has broader potential ramification than any time in the past, and we have had four wars in the Middle East since 1946 or 1947. A fifth one not only means that Israel will be fighting the Arabs but the potential of a confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union is a possibility. You must have raised that with Brezhnev. How did he react to it? We talked about the Middle East. We told them, or I told him, what we were doing. Secretary Kissinger had had a previous meeting with Foreign Minister Gromyko. I repeat what I said a moment ago, ENTITY. The Soviet Union has acted in a very responsible way. I think they understand the potential consequences of no progress for continued peace and understanding in the Middle East. What do you see, sir, as our future policy toward South Vietnam? Do you think that we will recognize that Communist regime in the foreseeable future? Their current actions certainly do not convince me that we should recognize South Vietnam or North Vietnam. We have taken a very strong stand that we would not agree to the admission of South or North Vietnam unless and until South Korea is admitted. We believe in universality across the board.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1577, "text": "We do not believe in kicking nations out kicking Israel out, for example. Did Mr. Brezhnev say he agreed with you on that they were supporting that movement? We let it be known very, very strongly that we believe Israel should be permitted to be a member of the United Nations. But on the other hand, we also believe that if you believe in universality, which includes South and North Vietnam, you have to have South Korea. ENTITY, when you first took office, you obviously relied a great deal upon Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. Do you now make more of the decisions on your own? Do you rely less upon Mr. Kissinger? I am not going to get into that discussion. Henry Kissinger and I have the closest possible rapport, personally and professionally. I see him every day for roughly an hour. We talk about the Middle East. We talk about SALT. We talk about our total foreign policy. It has been from the very first day. It is now, and I expect it to continue in the future. And I do not want to get into whether I do more or do less. We are a good team, and I think we have made some good decisions. Are you aware, ENTITY, of the criticism at the Capitol - ENTITY.from Republicans and not just Democrats, that in the Turkish aid fight, for example, that Mr. Kissinger was responsible for your losing that battle to lift the ban against military aid. I have heard those arguments but I do not think they are valid. I think the Congress, or the House of Representatives in this case, made the most serious wrong decision since I have been in Washington, which is 27 years. The Congress was totally wrong or the House of Representatives. Why do I say that? First, they have not solved the Cyprus problem. Number two, they have weakened NATO. Number three, because of the Turkish aid embargo, they have lessened our own national security capability by preventing us from using intelligence-gathering installations in Turkey. Are you saying Congress is harming our foreign policy? The decision of the House of Representatives to continue the Turkish arms embargo has seriously jeopardized our foreign policy and undercuts in a significant way our own national security, including that of NATO, and it has not solved it has not solved the Cyprus problem. There was a law that said that aid that was given to Turkey could not be used as it was used against Cyprus. We have lived up to the law.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1578, "text": "We have stopped, because Congress told us to, the shipment of military hardware that the Turks bought and paid for. And incidentally, they bought and paid for the hardware, and because of Congressional action, the Turks are now being charged warehouse storage fees for equipment that they own that Congress said they could not get. But anyhow, aside from that, which is, I think, a ridiculous development, we have lived up to the law. We are not sending them any military hardware, and unfortunately, the net result is what I told you. But, Martin, I think you have to recollect a little bit. Who started the problem in Cyprus? It was the Greek Government, it was the previous Greek Government that tried to throw Makarios out and assassinate him, and the previous Greek Government wanted to move in with Greek troops and take over Cyprus. And as a result of Greek violations, the Turks moved in and have, unfortunately, dominated the situation. But the whole program or the whole problem arose by the unwise action of the previous Greek Government. ENTITY, our time is almost out, and I must bring up a subject with which you are obviously quite familiar, namely, the rumors in this town that Nelson Rockefeller may not be your running mate in 1976. Is he going to be back on the ticket? I have read the various reports, and frankly, I think it is a tempest in a teapot. That is what he said. I happen to agree with him. Nelson Rockefeller was selected by me because I think he would make and has made a first-class Vice ENTITY. The realities of the political situation are I am going to go out with my campaign people to get my delegates. He, of course, will seek his delegates in the interim. I think the team of ENTITY and Rockefeller has done a good job, and at this time, I do not see any reason to change it. Is the position you take one that might finesse Mr. Reagan out of the picture, too? I only talk about the affirmative things, Martin. I do not want to get into who did this or who did that or what is going to happen. The realities are Nelson Rockefeller has done an excellent job as Vice ENTITY He works hard. He has taken every job I have given him and done really a great job. When you have somebody that works on a team with you, why do you want to change?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukeandmartinagronskythepublicbroadcastingservice", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke and Martin Agronsky of the Public Broadcasting Service.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-and-martin-agronsky-the-public-broadcasting-service", "publication_date": "07-08-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1587, "text": "In front of the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, you said that negotiating with Iran is pointless. Were you referring to Senator Barack Obama? People need to read the speech. What I said was, is that we need to take the words of people seriously. And when, you know, a leader of Iran says that they want to destroy Israel, you got to take those words seriously. And if you do not take them seriously, then it harkens back to a day when we did not take other words seriously. It was fitting that I talked about not taking the words of Adolph Hitler seriously on the floor of the Knesset. But I also talked about the need to defend Israel, the need to not negotiate with the likes of Al Qaida and Hizballah and Hamas, and the need to make sure Iran does not get a nuclear weapon. It was a but I also talked about a vision of what is possible in the Middle East. Repeatedly, you have talked about Iran and that you do not want to see Iran develop a nuclear weapon. How far away do you think Iran is from developing a nuclear capability? You know, ENTITY, I do not want to speculate, and there is a lot of speculation. We need to prevent them from learning how to enrich uranium. And I have made it clear to the Iranians that there is a seat at the table for them if they would verifiably suspend their enrichment. And if not, we will continue to rally the world to isolate them. You have been rallying the world. Have you had some success on this Arab tour to try and and Israeli tour to mobilize this community against Iran? Is that part of your mission? No, it is not so much; actually, the place where I am spending time, in terms of dealing with serious economic isolation, is with our European friends. They are the ones who have had significant trade with the Iranians. We are dealing with it not only in goods and services, trying to convince them to hold back goods and services until there is a verifiable suspension, but also dealing with the Iranian finances. I do not have to spend too much time in the world in this part of the world creating concerns about Iran. There is big concern about Iran, given the fact that Hizballah is destabilizing Lebanon, Hamas is trying to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state, and, of course, Iranian action inside of Iraq.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardengelnbcnewssharmelsheikh", "title": "Interview With Richard Engel of NBC News in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-engel-nbc-news-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1588, "text": "A lot of Iran's empowerment is a result of the war in Iraq. that Iran is its position in the world is rising because of your actions in Iraq? See, I am not so sure I agree with that. As a matter of fact, I think Iran is troubled by the fact that a young democracy is growing in Iraq. I you know, this notion about somehow if Saddam Hussein were in power, everything would be fine in the Middle East is a ludicrous notion. Saddam Hussein was a sponsor of terror. And can you imagine what it'd be like to see an arms race between Saddam Hussein and Ahmadi-nejad, in terms of creating instability in the Middle East? As a matter of fact, the way to ultimately defeat those who use terror to destabilize young democracies is to help the young democracies succeed. I have watched Iran's influence grow in Iraq. It is been very steady over the years. Yes. Well, Basra, for example, is we stood by the Prime Minister's decision to move into Basra and to continue to encourage the Prime Minister to go after Shi'a criminals and Shi'a armed militias that are doing harm to the average Iraqi and, at the same time, encourage him to use some of the Iraqi wealth to improve conditions of life. Basra is it is still obviously got work to be done, but it was a successful operation, as you know better than me. He is now heading into Sadr City he, the Iraqi Govern-ment all aiming to protect innocent people from people who are operating outside the law. And to the extent that those are folks who are supported by Iran, it will serve as a defeat to Iran. You know it better than anybody; you have been spending a lot of time there. And it is in the interest of the United States that we help it continue to change to the better. You talked about Iran being a major threat to American policies in the region, with Hamas, Hizballah, militia groups in Iraq. Do you intend to finish your term in office with a military action of some kind against Iran? I have always made it clear that options are on the table. But, you know, the biggest weapon we have against those who cannot stand freedom is the advance of freedom. I am going to give a speech here in a minute that talks about the need to advance the freedom agenda in the Middle East.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardengelnbcnewssharmelsheikh", "title": "Interview With Richard Engel of NBC News in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-engel-nbc-news-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1589, "text": "And my you know, Iran is a threat to people who want to live in peace. That is what they have clearly shown. I mean, the interesting thing in Lebanon is that Hizballah, which had sold itself as a protector against Israel, all of a sudden turned its weapons on the people of Lebanon and all the the true colors. And sometimes in life there needs to be clarity in order for people to rally to solve a problem. And so the best way to deal with the Iranians in the Middle East is to help the young democracy of Lebanon survive, is to stand up a Palestinian state obviously, subject to the roadmap which we intend to do before my Presidency, and succeed in Iraq. How are you going to prevent Hizballah from taking over in Lebanon? They had a small coup. The army did not do anything. And they proved that they are clearly in control of the streets when they want to be. And obviously, one thing to do is to help strengthen the Lebanese ENTITY, which I sent General Dempsey to Beirut I do not know if he was there when you were there, but he was there precisely to help inventory the Lebanese ENTITY is to make it clear to Prime Minister Siniora, we stand strongly with you. We will see what happens out of this agreement and how whether it sticks or not. But we strongly support the March 14th Coalition. Perhaps one way to help deal with the situation is to get the U.N. tribunal up and running that is investigating the death of Hariri. I mean, this is and yet the Lebanese people deserve a peaceful democracy, and our aim is to help them. It sounded like, when you were addressing the Israeli Knesset, you gave a green light to Israel to take action against Hizballah and Hamas. I do not ENTITY, you can read into it what you want to read into it. My intention was to say that all of us need to understand that radical groups are the threat to peace, whether it be Al Qaida or Hamas or Hizballah. Negotiations with Iran is that appeasement? My position, ENTITY, all along has been that if the Iranians verifiably suspend their enrichment, which will be a key measure to stop them from gaining the know-how to build a weapon, then we they can come to the table, and the United States will be at the table.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardengelnbcnewssharmelsheikh", "title": "Interview With Richard Engel of NBC News in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-engel-nbc-news-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1590, "text": "That is been a position of my administration for, gosh, I cannot remember how many years, but it is a clear position. We have stated it over and over again. But I have also said that if they choose not to do that verifiably suspend we will continue to rally the world to isolate the Iranians. And it is having an effect inside their country. There is a better way forward for the Iranian people than to be isolated, and their leaders just need to make better choices. In Iraq, I recently met a soldier. He was medevaced out on his first tour. He is now back on his second tour was already medevaced to the green zone. How many more tours do these soldiers have to do? Well, first of all, the fact that this person volunteered again speaks to the great bravery of our troops. And we need to honor them and will honor them. in for 12, out for 12. The other thing is to take care of their families, and when they are veterans, take care of the vets. You know, the fact that you told me about a guy who got medevaced twice only says to me that we have got a courageous military. In terms of success, we are returning troops on success. You might remember, I had to make a difficult choice to put more troops in. Those troops are coming home by July. And then, of course, General Petraeus and his successor will assess the situation on the ground, and we will end up having the troops necessary to help the Iraqis succeed. It just sounds like we need to support them as much as we can and keep them there for as long as we can. I think the end, ENTITY, is, I told you, return on success. The more successful Iraq is, the fewer troops we will need. The security situation has changed; the political situation is a lot better; the economic situation unlike other parts of this world are pretty strong. And now the question is, are they going to be able to get the resources in an efficient way to the people, so the people see the benefits of democracy? And they are doing a better job of that. You still view Iraq as a success. Because on the ground, it looks very bleak. People still want to leave the country, and people are Well, that is interesting you said that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardengelnbcnewssharmelsheikh", "title": "Interview With Richard Engel of NBC News in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-engel-nbc-news-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1591, "text": "That is a little different from the surveys I have seen and a little different from the attitude of the actual Iraqis I have talked to, but you are entitled to your opinion. The Iraqi Government, I think, has one position, which is that it is seeing a lot of progress. But Sadr City has been up in revolt. I was just in a major firefight in Sadr City, hit by an EFP. But there is no question that the Iraqi Government are dealing with the violent people. It is like this attitude about Basra. What you are watching is an Iraqi Government take care of extremists in their midst so that a democracy can survive. And it is essential that this democracy survive for our own security as well as the stability of the Middle East. You have talked about having a Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement by the end of this year. What gives you hope that that is not overly ambitious? Because, first of all, people in Israel understand that in order for them to have long-term security, there has to be a democratic state. People in Palestine want a democratic state. Secondly, I know their leaders. I spent a lot of time with Prime Minister Olmert and ENTITY Abbas. They are dedicated to doing the hard work. And yes, Hamas was elected, and they have done a disaster in of running Gaza. And it is that vision, the competing visions that will be put forth to the Palestinian people at some time. And I believe a state will exist, and I know it is necessary for peace in the Middle East. And I think I feel good that we can get it defined during my Presidency and implemented subject to roadmap. Going back to your vision and the message you have been pushing about democracy and supporting moderates across the region, if you look back over the last several years, the Middle East that you will be handing over to the next ENTITY has is deeply problematic. You have Hamas in power, Hizballah empowered, taking to the streets, more stronger than the Government, Iran empowered, Iraq still at war. What we are handing over is a Middle East that, one, recognizes the problems and the world recognizes them. They have been that is why we put them on the terrorist list before my Presidency. And what you are beginning to see is new democracies. You will see a Palestinian state. The freedom movement is a challenge to a system that said, the status quo is acceptable, when underneath was brewing all kinds of resentments.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardengelnbcnewssharmelsheikh", "title": "Interview With Richard Engel of NBC News in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-engel-nbc-news-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1592, "text": "We have taken on Al Qaida in the Middle East. It was from here that they recruited people to launch attacks. Do you believe that Iran is now more of a threat in Iraq than Al Qaida? I believe yes, I bet I think they have both been seriously hurt in Iraq. And you know, Al Qaida thought they were going to have a stronghold in Anbar Province. They proudly proclaimed this was going to be their capital from which they were going to launch missions around the world and throughout the region, and they failed. And in Iran , * Shi'a groups funded by Iran have tried to take on the Government. And the Government is succeeding, and it is but it is going to take a while. The war on terrorism has been the centerpiece of your Presidency. Many people say that it has not made the world safer, that it has created more radicals, that there are more people in this part of the world who want to attack the United States. That theory says, by confronting the people that killed us, therefore, there is going to be more; therefore, we should not confront them. Or creating more people who want to kill us, one could also say. Well, you can say that, but the truth of the matter is, there is fewer Al Qaida leaders; the people are on the run; they are having more trouble recruiting in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, our partner, has gone after Al Qaida. People now see Al Qaida for what it is, which is a group of extremists and radicals who preach nothing but hate. We should have just let the beehive sit there and hope the bees do not come out of the hive. My attitude is, the United States must stay on the offense against Al Qaida two ways. But have not you just smashed the bees two ways in the hive and let them spread? One, find them and bring them to justice what we are doing; and two, offer freedom as an alternative to their vision. And somehow to suggest that bees would stay in the hive is naive. They did not stay in the hive when they came and killed 3,000 of our citizens.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardengelnbcnewssharmelsheikh", "title": "Interview With Richard Engel of NBC News in Sharm el-Sheikh", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-engel-nbc-news-sharm-el-sheikh", "publication_date": "18-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1594, "text": "although it is good evening for Russian audience because of the time change. So how important the D-day is for you, personally, and for your family? He is he was alike many in America and in Russia that were called upon to defend the world against nazism. And today, the celebration in Russia will remind us all about the sacrifices of, in my case, an individual I love, but also a generation, a generation of men and women who made extraordinary efforts, inRussia's case to defend the homeland, in America's case to work with allies to defeat Adolf Hitler as well as the Japanese. And so it is a special day for me, personally, because it reminds me of the willingness of a young kid to go fight. But it also reminds me of the duty of my generation to work together to make the world a better place. The after-war Europe has been reshaped according to the Yalta Conference of 1943, by the decision of three very important personalities of this time, Mr. Roosevelt, Mr. Churchill, and Mr. Stalin. How fair is it to hold only Russia responsible for all the misfortunes of Eastern Europe and Baltic States over the last? Obviously, it was a decision made at the end of the war. I think that the main complaint would be that the form of government that the Baltics had to live under was not of their choosing. But no, there is no question three leaders made the decision. So not only Russia the bad guy of history? Well, I think everybody ought to bear theas historians look back at Yaltagot to recognize that it was you are rightly so in pointing it outit was not only the Russian leader but the British and American leader were at the table and agreed on the agreement. In Russia, we are very concerned on the rise of neo-nazism in Baltic States when Russian war veterans are humiliated publicly, when monuments to Russian soldiers are vandalized, and at the same time, where, on May 8th, there is a plan to open the monument to Nazi Brigade, that is well known only for fightingnot only for fighting against Russians but also for quite ugly things that were common for SS troops. Well, look, there is I have got a message when I go to the Baltics, and that is it is important to respect democracy but, also, the respect of democracy is respect for minority rights.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithntvrussia", "title": "Interview With NTV of Russia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ntv-russia", "publication_date": "05-05-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1595, "text": "In other words, a true democracy is one that says minorities are important and that the will of the majority cannot trample the minority. And as to whether or not nations are honoring nazism, I mean, of course that should be rejected. We are celebrating the defeat of nazism. It is an extremist point of view that believes that you should be able to trample the rights of minorities. It was the Nazis who annihilated millions of Jews, for example, and there is a classic example of the rights of minorities being trampled. And we must never forget the lessons of why we fought together in World War II. And so I am looking forward to delivering that message of tolerance. There is a question that has nothing to do with your visit to Russia but is very important to our country as an oil-producing country. Once you mentioned that you will be happy to find a magic wand and to cut the price on oil. So what oil price will be acceptable for the United States, and what do you think is the chance of finding this magic wand? A soldier asked me, he said, Why do not you lower gasoline prices, as if the government controlled price. And in our country, the Government does not control price. And I told him, I said, If I had a magic wand, I would wave it and lower your price. This is a world based the price based upon supply and demand. And demand has been going up relative to supply, which has been beneficial for oil-producing countries like Russia. Obviously, the lower the better for our economy, because every time the money the dollars go up on the gasoline price, money leaves the pocketbooks of the working people. Hopefully, higher price will stimulate more production. More production will then help the price reach an equilibrium. I would hope that Russia would encourage a lot of investment, to open up the vast reserves she has. We need to do more exploration here. I spoke to the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia who assured me that he is trying to put moreto find more oil. And that is what high prices do. But people who have got oil have got to understand if the price gets too high, it could wreck economies, which will mean there is less purchasing power for the product.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithntvrussia", "title": "Interview With NTV of Russia", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ntv-russia", "publication_date": "05-05-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1596, "text": "What an honor for me to say I am live at the White House, and I am joined by ENTITY of the United States. Michael, it is great to be on the show again. Every time we'v been on, it is been a great time, so I appreciate the opportunity. They are anxious to pose some questions about health care to the President of the United States. More than 5,000 e-mail suggestions have flowed through my web site in just the last 24 hours alone. If it is all right, I will start by posing a couple of questions and some of the things that I continue to hear from folks, and we will welcome phone callers as well. Allow me, sir, to begin with this. You know, a great deal has been made as to what she said pertaining to the so-called public option. The surprising thing is, she'd been saying this all along. She said the same thing a month ago. We have consistently talked about the need for health care reform because family premiums are going up three times faster than inflation and wages. The costs of Medicare and Medicaid will bankrupt this country if we do not reduce the cost inflation of health care. You have got families who cannot get health care because of preexisting conditions, or they bump up against some lifetime cap if a family member gets really ill. So what we have said is, there are a number of components of health care. One is that for people who already have health insurance, they can keep their health insurance, but we are going to have some consumer protections to regulate how insurers operate. For example, they cannot prohibit people from getting it-health insurance-because of a preexisting condition. They cannot have lifetime caps or yearly caps that prevent people from getting the care that they need. We are also going-for people who do not have health insurance-to set up a system similar to what Congress has, where you can buy into a bigger pool, get better rates, have better protections around you. You would be buying that insurance from private insurers. But one of the options we talked about was a public option, where there would not be a profit motive involved; it would be non-for-profit. And that public option would give you affordable health insurance. Now, what we have said is, we think that is a good idea. But we have not said that that is the only aspect of health insurance.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1597, "text": "And what she essentially said was, is that all these other insurance reforms are just as important as the public option. The press got a little excited, and some folks on the left got a little excited about this. We think that the key is cost control, competition, making sure that people have good, quality options. If we are able to achieve that, that is the end that we are seeking. And the means-you know, we can have some good arguments about what the best way to achieve it is, but we have got to change, because the status quo is unsustainable. ENTITY, there is a mindset among many folks in my audience who say that the endgame, it is all about single-payer, that it is a public option or it is a cooperative. And, sir, you know that there is a perception out there that you want it all. You know, you want to be in the banks, you want to be in the automotive industry, and now you want to be in health care. Can you address that mindset? First of all, look, the intervention in the banks was not started by me; it was started by a conservative Republican administration. And rightly so, because our banks were on the verge of meltdown. The only thing that we have done is said let us put in place some financial regulations to make sure that this does not happen again. The auto interventions were not started by me; they were started by a conservative Republican administration. The only thing that we did was rather than just write GM and Chrysler a blank check, we said, you know what, if you are going to get any more taxpayer money, you have got to be accountable. They went through a record bankruptcy, and now GM for the first time is actually hiring folks back. So I know that there is this perception that somehow we have engaged in these extraordinary interventions. Part of it had to do with the worst financial crisis in history. And the fact that both the auto bailout and the bank bailout were started under a previous, conservative Republican administration indicates the fact that this was not ideological; this was a matter of necessity. Now, as far as health care goes, I have consistently said I would love the private marketplace to be handling this without any Government intervention. What we are seeing is about 14,000 folks lose their health insurance every single day. We are seeing health care inflation go up about twice as fast as regular inflation. Businesses are being crippled by it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1598, "text": "Small businesses especially have almost no access to the marketplace because they have got no leverage with insurance companies. So all we have said is, let us keep the private system intact, but let us make sure that people who right now cannot get health insurance-about 46 million-that they are able to buy into the market. And number two, let us have some consumer protections to make sure that those of us who have health insurance do not end up getting a bad deal because we did not read the fine print and we think that we have coverage; when we finally get sick and we need it, it turns out that we are vulnerable because insurance companies are not operating in the interests of their customers. I like to drive an MDX and an F-150, and I have communicated by e-mail in the last 24 hours with the woman who sold me the MDX and the guy who sold me the F-150, and each of them, ENTITY, are saying that Cash for Clunkers has been a great idea and a wonderful initiative, and they have closed a lot of deals, but the payments are late. And I am hearing from a number of folks who say, Come on, if the Federal Government cannot get it together relative to Cash for Clunkers, I do not want to entrust my health care to the Federal Government. Well, let me first address Cash for Clunkers. It has been successful beyond anybody's imagination. And we are now slightly victims of success, because the thing happened so quick, there was so much more demand than anybody expected that dealers were overwhelmed with applications. Now, this program has only been going on for a few weeks, and we have hired three times as many people to process this stuff as we originally had. I understand dealers want to get their money back as soon as possible, but the fact of the matter is, this is a good-news story; they are seeing sales that they have not seen in years. And they will get their money, but we have got to process it properly, because if we were careless about it, if we were just sending out checks where applications were incomplete and so on, first of all, we'd be breaking the law because there are statutes set up in terms of how this is supposed to go. And secondly, there'd probably be some story-you'd be asking me about scandals, where there were a whole bunch of checks of taxpayer money being wasted, going out to people who had not actually bought cars.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1599, "text": "So I think this is actually a high-class problem to have, that we are selling too many cars too quickly and there is some backlog in the application process. ENTITY, Ernie is a listener of mine on WTKK in Boston and wishes to pose the following question. I understand you have said that the Federal health care plan for Government employees is a pretty good plan. And Congress has voted, to my understanding, not to join the public plan once it passes because they want to keep their good Federal plan. Would you be willing to either urge Congress to have the Federal employees join the public plan, or would you be willing to urge Congress to somehow open up the Federal health plan to all Americans? I hear this all the time, ENTITY. First of all, understand that currently, Federal employees have a very good health care plan because they are able to leverage the insurance companies. There are so many members of their-of the Federal workforce that they can get the best rates possible, for every insurance company wants to do business with the Federal Government. The same concept is what we are trying to do in setting up what is called a health insurance exchange. Essentially, it'd be a marketplace where people who currently do not have health insurance or small businesses could pool their numbers so they have leverage over the insurance companies. And they could go on a web site and look at the various options, the types of various private health insurance plans that are being offered, and choose the one that is best for their families. So we are actually trying to duplicate what exists for Federal employees. We want to make that available to everybody else. Now, what we have said is, let us make a public option one choice of many choices that are available to people who are joining the exchange. And I see nothing wrong with potentially having that public option as one option for Federal employees as well. Nobody would be obligated to choose the public option. If you went on that web site and you said, you know what, Aetna or Blue Cross Blue Shield are offering a good deal, and I would rather choose that plan than the public plan, you'd be perfectly free to do so. Nobody would be saying, you are obligated to go into a public plan.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1600, "text": "I think what folks are saying is that they'd love it if you'd stand up and say, whatever it is that we are creating, be it a co-op, be it a public option, whatever name ultimately might be ascribed to it, we in the executive branch, we in the Congress, we will live with exactly these parameters. I think there would be-I think it would make perfect sense for us to make the public option available to Federal employees as well. But keep in mind, it would just be a choice. Tracy listens on WXNT News Talk 1430 in Indianapolis. Until I heard you say that a private option is just a sliver of your health care proposal recently, I think myself and many Americans thought that pretty much was your proposal. So my question is, could you please quickly list five or six bullet points of what legislation must include for you to be willing to sign it? Must it include a public option? First of all, you mentioned illegal immigrants. This has been an example of just pure misinformation out there. None of the bills that have been voted on in Congress and none of the proposals coming out of the White House propose giving coverage to illegal immigrants-none of them. That has never been on the table; nobody has discussed it. So everybody who is listening out there, when you start hearing that somehow this is all designed to provide health insurance to illegal immigrants, that is simply not true and has never been the case. Because there is a 1986 law on the book that says if you show up at an ER, you have got to be treated. Well, that will continue, because we do not want a situation in which some child, even if they are an illegal immigrant, shows up in an emergency room with tuberculosis and nobody is giving them treatment, and then they are going back to the playground and playing next to our kids. So there-I think there is a basic standard of decency where if somebody is in a death situation or a severe illness, that we are going to provide them emergency care. But nobody has talked about providing health insurance to illegal immigrants. Now, Tracy, you had a good point about what are the bullet points that I want. This has to be paid for, because in the past, some of the health care plans that we have put forward have not been paid for. A good example of this was the prescription drug benefit for seniors.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1601, "text": "That was a important thing to do, but we never actually figured out how to pay for it. That just went directly into the deficit and the national debt. We cannot afford to do that. Point number two, it has to bend the cost curve. What that means is that we have got to create a plan that experts credibly say will reduce health care inflation, because if all we are doing is adding more people, but we are not controlling costs, that will blow up the deficit over the long term, and it will blow up the burdens on individual families and businesses. We have got to get control of our costs. We spend $6,000 more than any other advanced country per person on health care. Number three, we have got to have the insurance reforms I talked about for people who already have health insurance. And that means making sure you can get health insurance even if you have got a preexisting condition, making sure that you are not burdened by lifetime caps, making sure that insurance companies cannot drop you just because you get sick or because you are older or because you are not as healthy; so making sure that there are basic insurance protections, that is very important. Number four is I want to make sure that we have a health exchange, as I just described, that is similar to what Members of Congress have, where you will have a set of options. If you are a small business, if you are an individual, self-employed, you have trouble getting health insurance right now, you can go and look at a bunch of options. And we have got to make it affordable for middle class families, so part of the plan has to be that if you cannot afford a market-based premium, that we are giving you a little bit of help and you are able to get health insurance. Choice, competition, reducing costs-those are the things that I want to see accomplished in this health reform bill. Where, ENTITY, does personal responsibility factor into all this? There was a front-page story in USA Today recently that talked about obesity being the single most significant factor. How about rewarding those who get on a StairMaster every day? Well, the interesting thing is, you are already starting to see this happen among a lot of private companies. Safeway, for example, is a company that has done a great job in helping encourage its employees to get fit, and they actually give them an incentive.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1602, "text": "They say, Look, we are -you are going to save X amount on your insurance premiums; you will see that in your paycheck if you are taking steps to take care of yourself. And I think that creating incentives like that for prevention, for wellness, creating cash incentives for people who-where it shows up they are saving money on their health insurance because of it, I think that is something that should be part of this. listens to me at Home Base, which is the Big Talker 1210 in Philadelphia. Oh, I am scared out of my mind talking to you here. I am a supporter, worked hard for you last year. You have an overwhelming majority in both the House and the Senate, and you own the whole shooting match. And I am just not getting-it is very frustrating to watch you try and compromise with a lot of these people who are not willing to compromise with you. Well, look, I guarantee you, Joe, we are going to get health care reform done. And I know that there are a lot of people out there who have been hand-wringing, and folks in the press are following every little twist and turn of the legislative process. You know, passing a big bill like this is always messy. It is -FDR was called a socialist when he passed Social Security. JFK and Lyndon Johnson, they were both accused of a Government takeover of health care when they passed Medicare. This is the process that we go through, because, understandably, the American people have a long tradition of being suspicious of government until the government actually does something that helps them, and then they do not want anybody messing with whatever gets set up. And I am confident we are going to get it done, and as far as negotiations with Republicans, my attitude has always been, let us see if we can get this done with some consensus. I would love to have more Republicans engaged and involved in this process. I think early on a decision was made by the Republican leadership that said, Look, let us not give them a victory, and maybe we can have a replay of 1993, '94 when Clinton came in. He failed on health care, and then we won in the midterm elections, and we got the majority. And I think there is some folks who are taking a page out of that playbook. This is a issue for the American people. There are a bunch of Republicans out there who have been working very constructively.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1603, "text": "One of them, Olympia Snowe in Maine, she is been dedicated on this. Chuck Grassley, Mike Enzi, others-they have been meeting in the Senate Finance Committee. I want to give them a chance to work through these processes. And we are happy to make sensible compromises. What we are not willing to do is give up on the core principle that Americans who do not have health insurance should get it, that Americans who do have health insurance should get a better deal from insurance companies and have consumer protections. We have got to reduce health care inflation so that everybody can keep the health care that they have. A bit off message, today the Scots released the Lockerbie bomber due to-actually, maybe it is health care-related. He is got terminal cancer. We have been in contact with the Scottish Government indicating that we objected to this, and we thought it was a mistake. We are now in contact with the Libyan Government, and want to make sure that if in fact this transfer has taken place, that he is not welcomed back in some way, but instead should be under house arrest. We have also, obviously, been in contact with the families of the Pan Am victims and indicated to them that we do not think this was appropriate. ENTITY, in each of our prior three conversations, I spoke with you extensively about the need for closure, and we agreed relative to bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri. And as a matter of fact-and this is well documented; I have written and spoken about it extensively-things that you said during the course of the campaign played a critical role in my personal decisionmaking pertaining to the 2008 election. So I feel I'd be derelict in my duty if I did not come here today and say, where are we? I know we had a major victory recently with the number-one individual for the Taliban in those tribal regions. But pertaining to bin Laden and Ayman Al-Zawahiri, where is it? Well, here is where we are at. We are continuing to ramp up the pressure in Afghanistan. And we had a-what appears to be a successful election in Afghanistan despite the Taliban's effort to disrupt it. You have got General McChrystal now over there and more troops who are putting pressure on the eastern and southern portions of Afghanistan. Right. the top Taliban leader in Pakistan, who was also one of bin Laden's key allies.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1604, "text": "So the goal here is essentially to have a pincer, where we are squeezing them on both sides. We are eliminating their allies. It is making it more difficult for them to communicate, making it more difficult for them to operate safe havens, and over time, what we hope to do is to flush them out. We are going to keep on putting pressure on them, and I know that it is at great cost. I mean, I have to sign letters to family members who have fallen, and a lot more are falling in Afghanistan than in Iraq. And as a consequence, we have got to make sure that we are really focused on finishing the job in Afghanistan, but it is going to take some time. ENTITY, Susan listens to WOR News Radio 710 in New York City. We all want reform. And a lot of us feel that the Federal Government is just not equipped or it is their role to be getting involved in delivering health care services. And we are very concerned that most of the money will actually go-instead of taking care of people, it will go to, you know, the cost of administering a huge Government bureaucracy. Like here in New York, we already have free health care for people who cannot afford it. And you know, it should only be for people who cannot afford it, not for the 20- and 30-somethings that choose to spend their money on SUVs and the latest electronic gadgets. And it is not free, because we all know that we are going to be paying for it, and it should be only for the people who cannot really afford it. And we want to have our own health care decisions locally, and we do not want the Federal Government making those decisions for us. Well, look, first of all, Susan, I think that it is important to understand that part of the health reform proposal that we have put forward would involve the States. The States, in some cases, would be empowered to expand Medicaid to cover more people the same way that they have been able to cover more children under the Children's Health Insurance Program. So a sizable portion of the people who are currently uninsured would in fact be getting their insurance through the States. That is how the current Medicaid program is able to allow States to cover more people. Keep in mind that nobody is talking about the Government administering all of health care.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1605, "text": "What we are talking about here is a public option that people could sign up for, but in that situation, they'd have to operate like any private insurer. They'd have to be collecting premiums and so forth. The track record for Government administering health care actually is surprisingly good. Medicare, for example, a Government program, has much lower administrative costs than private insurers do. Now, part of it is, is because they do not have-either somebody is qualified or they are not, and so signing them up is a lot more automatic. But that points to one of the big problems that we have. In private insurance, huge amounts of insurance companies are spending a lot of money and a lot of effort and a lot of staff just trying to cherry-pick people who are healthy and sign them up and then eliminate people who are sick. And part of what we want to do here is just reform the system so that insurance companies are operating more fairly to all people. If you are young, actually, it is easier to get health insurance these days. The really tough population are folks who are from 50 to 64. They have a whale of a time trying to buy health insurance, and we want to make sure that there is a market for them. Last point that I would make is that, you mention the fact that a lot of young people opt out. One of the things that we would do under reform is to say, if you want, you can stay on your health insurance-or your parents' health insurance up to the age of 26. That would cover a lot of young people who they-fall in that gap. Their first job does not necessarily offer them insurance. It gives them a way of having coverage until they get that job that has a little bit more security. You are needed across town. I appreciate very much the privilege of coming to the White House. And I want to thank all your listeners, terrific questions. There is a great dialogue that takes place on this show, and I just hope that we can continue that dialogue in the same spirit to solve some of America's big problems. I will be back in just a moment from the White House.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmichaelsmerconishthemichaelsmerconishmorningshow", "title": "Interview With Michael A. Smerconish of the Michael Smerconish Morning Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-michael-smerconish-the-michael-smerconish-morning-show", "publication_date": "20-08-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1606, "text": "ENTITY, let me thank you first on behalf of the Voice of America, on behalf of the Persian News Network for giving us your time. We really appreciate that, sir. As you know, ENTITY, this is the eve of Nowruz, the Iranian New Year. What is your message to the Iranian people as they face tough economic circumstances and infringement on their freedoms? Secondly, that the people of the United States respects the people of Iran, that we respect the traditions of Iran, the great history of Iran. We have differences with the Government, but we honor the people. And we want the people to live in a free society. We believe freedom is a right for all people and that the freer the world is, the more peaceful the world is. Please do not be discouraged by, you know, the slogans that say America does not like you, because we do, and we respect you. What do you say to the regime, sir? What would you say to the regime? I'd say to the regime that they have made decisions that have made it very difficult for the people of Iran. In other words, the Iranian leaders, in their desire to, you know, enrich uranium, in spite of the fact that the international community has asked them not to, has isolated a great country. And that is, verifiably suspend your enrichment, and you can have new relationships with people in the U.N. Security Council, for example. And it is just sad that the leadership is in many ways very stubborn because the Iraqi-the Iranian people are not realizing their true rights. And they are confusing people in Iraq, as well, about their desires. And you know, it is a tough period if-in history for the Iranian people, but it does not have to be that way. On the nuclear issue, sir, is there a solution to the problem that would both satisfy the United States concern and, at the same time, allow Iran to proceed with nonmilitary nuclear energy research? Well, part of the problem is that it is very hard for people to trust the Iranian Government because they have not told the full truth, and that is why the people of Iran have got to understand there is great suspicions right now, not only in the United States but around the world.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsetarehderakhsheshvoapersiannewsnetwork", "title": "Interview With Setareh Derakhshesh of VOA Persian News Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-setareh-derakhshesh-voa-persian-news-network", "publication_date": "19-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1607, "text": "And I thought, for example, the Russians proposed an interesting way, that says-and I have said publicly, and the Iranian people need to know that I believe Iran has the right to have civilian nuclear power. I believe in civilian nuclear power. Iran is a sovereign country, and they should have it. The problem is, we just do not trust the Government because they have not been forthcoming about their enrichment of fuels to go into the reactor. And therefore, Russia's offer to provide fuel on a contractual basis and provide fuel on a consistent basis would help solve the problem. And that is, the Iranians would not need to enrich; they would have fuel for their reactor; and the people would have cheaper electricity. And I support that idea. Sir, would you allow enrichment inside Iran if there are guarantees and international supervision? In other words, I- you know, once you-once a nation has not told the truth, it requires a lot of work to convince people that they will be telling the truth in the future. And my problem is, is that the Iranian Government has not been forthcoming, has not fully disclosed their programs like the IAEA asked them to. And the better way forward is for there to be a contractual, solid obligation to provide fuel for a nuclear reactor, and then the Iranians can have their civilian nuclear power. At a time when Iranians are going through very difficult economic circumstances-there is high employment, high unemployment; there are high prices; there are unfilled promises-the United Nations Security Council just passed a new set of sanctions against the regime. Is the United States concerned, sir, that the regime might exploit these circumstances to whip up anti-American sentiments, and also to use those and misuse them? No, I appreciate that. We are always concerned about the individual. You know, I am concerned about the mom trying to raise her child in a hopeful environment. And I am concerned about a child wanting to gain the knowledge so that he or she can realize her God-given talents. And of course, we are worried about the human condition. And any time a government is failing to meet the needs of the people-or a lot of times, not any time-but a lot of times governments have failed to meet the needs of their people, particularly in relatively nontransparent, nonfree societies, they always look for somebody to blame.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsetarehderakhsheshvoapersiannewsnetwork", "title": "Interview With Setareh Derakhshesh of VOA Persian News Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-setareh-derakhshesh-voa-persian-news-network", "publication_date": "19-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1608, "text": "And I am not surprised that, you know, the leaders would blame the United States for the problems they, themselves, have created. And so yes, I mean, it enters my mind. On the other hand, the people of Iran must understand that the conditions exist in large part because of either mismanagement by the Government or isolation because of the Government's decisions on foreign policy matters, such as announcing they want to destroy countries with a nuclear weapon. I mean, it is irresponsible remarks like that which cause great credibility loss with the Iranian Government and the actions of which will-are affecting the country. ENTITY, if I may, I want to ask you about Iraq also. Today is the fifth anniversary of the start of the Iraq war, and you had a speech on the war on terror. Are you satisfied with the political situation in Iraq in view of the improving security situation? And also, has Iran played a role in this? I am pleased because there is a modern Constitution in Iraq. I am pleased because people have voted in Iraq. I am pleased because there is , you know-they are heading toward Provincial elections in Iraq. One of the problems we do have in Iraq is the-there is been some negative Iranian influence, such as the exportation from Iran of certain weapons that have been used by extremists to murder and to kill people. Now, look, I understand Iraq and Iran are going to have relations. After all, they have got a long border. But from my perspective, Iran has not been helpful in terms of helping this young democracy survive. I would think it would be in Iran's interests to have a peaceful neighbor. They had been at war at one time with Iraq. I would believe that a peaceful Iraq would be in the long-term interests of the Iranian people. And yet it is hard to have a peaceful Iraq if there are elements inside the country that are trying to use violence and murder to continue to stir up sectarian doubts and raise concerns which will cause more violence. Yes. and they feel that this will undercut their position and that would strengthen the regime's hand. What are your thoughts on that, sir? My thought is, is that the reformers inside Iran are brave people. They have got no better friend than ENTITY and I ask for God's blessings on them, on their very important work. And secondly, that I would do nothing to undermine their efforts.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsetarehderakhsheshvoapersiannewsnetwork", "title": "Interview With Setareh Derakhshesh of VOA Persian News Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-setareh-derakhshesh-voa-persian-news-network", "publication_date": "19-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1612, "text": "Can we assume, sir, that tomorrow night in the State of the Union, you are going to declare the state of the Union to be in pretty good shape? It is in good shape. But I am also going to challenge the Congress and the country to make it better. The things that are good about this country right now, how much of that do you believe you deserve credit for? Well, I think most of the credit, as always, goes to the American people. This is a country where citizenship is the most important job anybody can have, and I think we should start with that. I think the Members of Congress who have worked with us deserve a lot of credit. But if you look at where we are now, compared to where we were 7 years ago, I think the fact that we got rid of the deficit and are running surpluses; the fact that we changed the philosophy of the National Government on welfare, on crime; the fact that we have formed unprecedented partnerships with people in the private sector to deal with all kinds of social problems teen pregnancy, which is down, adoptions, which are up; the fact that we have protected more land than any administrations in the country's history, except those of the two Roosevelts I think that those things are things that our Government did. I also believe that people have a lot more confidence now, that we can actually do things as a nation. In '92 we did not just have economic distress and social decline. We had this political gridlock and discredited Government. The national Republicans had badmouthed the Government for 12 years, and they'd done a pretty good job of convincing America that it could not do anything. Now we have cut the size of Government by over 350,000. It is the smallest it is been since John Kennedy was here, and it really works to empower people and to create these partnerships. So I think that we have played a role in the recovery of the economy and in the improvement of the situation with crime, with welfare, with education. We have opened the doors of college to virtually all Americans. And I think all these things count for something. And of course, our country has been a great force for peace and freedom around the world. And I am very grateful for the chance we have had to all of us to serve here. Do you believe that history is going to give you credit for all those things you have just enumerated? Well, I think that is up to the historians.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1613, "text": "I think that history will be very much more that people who do serious histories of this administration will be amazed at the amount of energy and effort that went into the wide variety of areas that we worked in. And I think that it will show that in virtually every area we had progress, from helping to reduce poverty to improving the plight of our children, to creating an environment with the reform of telecommunications, the reform of banking, and getting rid of the deficit and major investments in science and technology, to this exploding new economy. I think it will show that we helped America to make this major transition into a new economy and an era of globalization. Are you worried about what the historians are going to write about you? No, I cannot control that. But I think time will tend to accelerate the positive and put what negative there is into proper perspective. And I feel quite comfortable about that. But the main thing is, I do not think too much about it because I know that the only thing I can do to impact on it is to do the right thing today by the American people. I mean, my philosophy has been, ever since I got here, is that in the modern political world, the most important thing you can do is get up and go to work and concentrate on your job and always keep thinking about tomorrow. And all the pressures that operate on you are designed to prevent you from doing that, to hobble you, to distract you, to divide you, to get you to obsess about what somebody said or wrote or is doing. And so my whole theory has been from the beginning that if we could start and give first 4 years and then 8 years of unbridled, concentrated effort, no matter what else happened, the American people would be all right. Let me read what the New York Times said in its lead editorial on Monday. They are talking about you, your legacy, and your Presidency as you go into this last year. It said, historians are beginning to categorize Mr. Clinton as a politician of splendid natural talent and some significant accomplishments who, nonetheless, missed the greatness that once seemed within his grasp. What is your reaction to that what might have been kind of thing? I think that well, first of all, I think it is not productive to talk about what might have been. But I think if you the question is how you keep score, what is this time like, how will you measure it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1614, "text": "The time that this is most like is the turn of the last century. Did we manage the transition of America in the new economy and an era of globalization well, or not? Did we make social progress? Did we actually change the way we approach social issues? Were we good stewards of the environment? And then, what were the forces you stood against, and what did you stop? And if you look at the forces we stood against from 1994 forward and what we stopped, I think the answer is, what we did was, A, successful, and B, good for America. And then, did we work with contending forces when we could to reach common agreement? So I believe that, first of all, there is no such thing as history, because this is still going on. We should not worry about that. You know, in 5 years, 10 years, 20 years I got a book the other day on President Nixon's Presidency, and then I got one a week afterward on President Kennedy's Presidency that are still being written. I just read a new book, a great book, on Theodore Roosevelt's Presidency. And I think the further away you get from it, the more perspective you get and the more you are able to look at all the evidence. So all of us frankly, my view is not much better than the New York Times' on this. Neither one of us really can properly evaluate how this will be viewed in the light of history. I think that we have, given what we could have accomplished within the framework of possibility that was there and the job that was there before us, I think we have done pretty well. But all I can tell you is, I have worked every day, and I did the best I could, and I am going to let the historians make their judgment after I give it one more hard year. All right, let us talk about the one more hard year. Is there one particular thing that you really want to do before you leave this office? Well, there are many things that I really want to do before I leave this office. Obviously, I am still heavily engaged in the search for peace in the Middle East. But whether we can do that or not depends ENTITY I think the main problem is they have not talked in a long time. And the decisions which have to be made will require of both parties actions which will cause difficulty for them with some constituencies in their country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1615, "text": "But let me say, I am convinced that both the leaders of Syria and Israel want peace, and I am convinced that substantively they are not that far apart. So we have a chance to do that. But you asked me what I wanted to do. That is something I would like to be involved in if they want to do it. I want to continue to do everything I can to protect the natural treasures of this country. I want to lay the foundation for America dealing with climate change. And I want to lay the foundation for America dealing with what I think will be the biggest security challenges of the 21st century. I believe you know, all the attention today is on whether we can develop a missile defense and, if so, whether we can deploy it without falling out with the Russians and our friends and other countries who question this. But the likeliest threat, in my view, is brought on by the intersection of technology and the likelihood that you will have terrorists and narcotraffickers and organized criminals cooperating with each other, with smaller and smaller and more difficult to detect weapons of mass destruction and powerful traditional weapons. So we have tried to lay in a framework for dealing with cyberterrorism, bioterrorism, chemical terrorism. Now, this is not in the headlines, but I think it is very, very important for the next 10 or 20 years. I think the enemies of the nation-state in this interconnected world are likely to be the biggest security threat. I am going to try to get a lot done in education, in health care, in bringing opportunity to poor people and reducing poverty in this country. What is it that you would like your legacy to be on health care? Well, I wish I could have given health insurance to all Americans, because I still think it is inexcusable that we are the only advanced country in the world that does not do that. But I feel good about many of the things we have done, in medical research, in letting people keep their health insurance when they change jobs, in providing much more preventive screening for older people with illnesses or potential illnesses, and of course, in the Children's Health Insurance Program. So I am going to focus now on what I think I can get done this year. I want to try to increase the number of people with health insurance dramatically by letting the parents of children in the Children's Health Insurance Program buy into it, by letting people between the ages of 55 and 65 buy into Medicare.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1616, "text": "And I want to have another big investment in biomedical research. What mark can you leave in this next year on education? Well, let us first of all, if you look at what we have done we have already helped almost all the States to develop higher standards. And we have got test scores in reading, math, and college entrance exams are up. And you feel you have done that? You feel the administration has done that? No, I I think our administration has contributed to it. No, the people that did it were the kids and the parents and the teachers. But I think, consistent with our philosophy, which is to be a catalyst for new ideas and to be a partner to help people achieve it, there is no question we have had an impact. Now, one thing we have had a really direct impact on is we have done more than any administration ever has to open the doors of college to everyone we with big increases in Pell grants; the direct student loan program, which lets people borrow money at less cost and pay it off at a percentage of their income. We have got a million work-study grants. We have got AmeriCorps, 150,000 young people there. And the HOPE scholarship tax credit and the lifetime tax credit really means people have no excuse for not going to school. Now, I have also proposed this time, for the first time in history, that we make college tuition tax deductible, up to $10,000 a year, which will mean that we have guaranteed access to 4 years of college for all Americans. Since I became President, the number of the percentage of high school graduates going to college has gone up to 67 percent. That is an increase of 10 percent. Now let us go back to the beginning. The next big challenge, besides making this is the last piece, making college universally available. The next big challenge is to make sure that everybody's diploma means something. And we have been working on this all along, starting in early childhood, the increases we made in Head Start. We now have 1,000 colleges sending mentors into grade schools to make sure kids learn to read by the third grade. And I think we have increased the emphasis on that you probably noticed that Jim Barksdale gave $100 million to the University of Mississippi, to do nothing but focus on how we can teach grade school kids to read. So what else do we need to do?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1617, "text": "I think we need a national strategy to turn around failing schools or shut them down. I think we need to institutionalize reform with more charter schools. And I think we ought to make preschool available to everybody. And everybody that needs it ought to have access to after-school. I think if you get those things done, and we continue to train the teachers, especially in how to use the computers as you hook up all the schools to the Internet, I think you are going to see really big, continuing improvements in education. But you cannot do all that this next year, can you? We can no, but we can take big steps toward it. If you look at the whole history of our country I read something President Johnson said the other day, and he got through Medicare and the Medicaid and the first steps of major Federal aid to education. He talked about how most of our big progress comes in deliberate, discrete steps. And if you take enough steps in the right direction, you turn back around, you see you have come quite a long way. So what I am going to try to do in my speech tomorrow night is to outline what I think the long-term goals for the Nation in the 21st century should be and then what steps I think we can realistically hope to achieve in this year and urge the Congress to join me in it. Now, you are doing this, of course, in a Presidential election year. In whose interest is it to help you do this, in terms of simple politics of getting it done, to help you improve your legacy or get things done before you leave office? Well, first of all, it is in none of their interest to help me improve my legacy. That is not why they should do it. It is in their interest to do the job they were hired to do, which is to help the people they represent. And I think the people that they represent, whether Republicans or Democrats, would find it amazing that someone could suggest they ought to take a year off. I mean, anybody who wants to take a year off ought to give up their paycheck and say, I am sorry. I am not going to work this year, but I am not going to take your money. Secondly, in a more mundane way, it is clearly in the interests of all the people in Congress to do things that are good for America, because the American people will appreciate it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1618, "text": "I think it helps the Democrats, but I do not think it hurts the Republicans I mean, a bunch of them have to run next time, too. And people are going to know want to know, what did you do last year? We had a very good year in '96, where I had to veto the welfare reform bill twice because the Republicans would not agree with me to guarantee child care and health care and more nutrition and medical care and transportation for the welfare families. And then they did it at the end, and we got this big welfare reform. And now we have got 7 million fewer people on welfare. In '98 we passed a lot of very important legislation at the end, because it was election year. So what you might see in terms of Congress now is not an enormous amount of activity at the beginning, although I do believe there is a good chance we can fairly early pass my proposal to help Colombia fight off narcotrafficking and preserve its democracy and work with its neighbors along the border. And I think there is a good chance they will pass the China trade normal trade relations bill; I hope that is true. But I think at the end of the year, when people will be held accountable by the voters, I think there is a chance we will get quite a lot done. We did in '96. We did in '98. ENTITY, what do you make of Governor Bush's comment the other night after he had won the caucuses in Iowa? He said, this is the beginning of the end of the Clinton era, and everybody in the room cheered. I think if he were I think if he said that he would reverse what we were doing, I think he would. And I think that is the choice before the American people. I mean, he is offered a $1.4 billion tax cut. And the only thing I'd ask the American people is to remember, you know, we have now had 20 years of experience. We tried it their way for 12 years, and they quadrupled the national debt. And when I took office, we had high unemployment, a massive deficit, a huge debt, and totally neglected our domestic affairs. We had rising crime, rising welfare rolls, all the social indicators going the wrong way. Now, we have tried it our way for 7 years. We have got the biggest surpluses in history, the first back-to-back surpluses in 42 years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1619, "text": "We can get this country out of debt now in 13 years out of debt for the first time since Andy Jackson was President in 1835. And all the social indicators are going in the right direction. So it seems to me that he was being honest with the people, that he said that he will reverse this course. And I do think the American people ought to vote for change in this election, because things are changing so fast around us in this globalized world, we have to keep changing. You have given kind of your definition of the Clinton era, and he has his. Now, what he is the interpretation of what he is talking about is that it is just a continuation of what all the Presidential candidates have mentioned to some degree, that Republicans like Governor Bush, more than the Democrats, but even Vice President Gore and Senator Bradley have said about returning the Presidency back to a nobler office, to words like promising to restore dignity and respectability, decency and trust to the Presidency. They are talking about you, are not they, ENTITY? Well, first of all, I made one mistake. I apologized for it. I paid a high price for it, and I have done my best to atone for it by being a good President. But I believe we also endured what history will clearly record was a bogus investigation, where there was nothing to Whitewater and nothing to these other charges, and they were propagated, and tens of millions of dollars were spent, and we got a clean bill of health on that. And in terms of trust, let me just tell you a story. I went back to New Hampshire for the seventh anniversary of the New Hampshire primary in 1991 or the eighth anniversary, excuse me, last year in 1992 so it was the seventh anniversary. And it was raining, and there were children standing in the rain and people standing in the rain. And the thing that meant the most to me not the Democratic Party event, just going around, because they heard the campaign in the most detail was people saying, you know, We are so much better off now, but the thing that really matters is, you did exactly what you said you would do. And it seems to me that all of us in life, we can spend all of our time pointing our finger at other people and saying we are better than they are, or we can work as hard as we can on our own character, on our own lives.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1620, "text": "And if we are in public life, we need to tell people what we are going to do and then we need to do it. And if we do not do it, it ought to be because we tried and could not . I think that is what people know about me and this administration. We laid out the most detailed set of commitments anybody ever had in '92. We have accomplished virtually everything we set out to do. What we have not accomplished, we tried and failed to accomplish. And even there, in the health care area, we made a lot of progress. And people know that. So I am satisfied that the American people will make a judgment in this election based on what is best for them and their families, on whatever factors they choose. They are in control again. We are back into the biggest job interview in the whole world. And whatever they decide and however they decide it, I think they will get it right. Do you get angry, though, when somebody like Alan Keyes said recently, We are coming to the end of the most disgraceful, the most immoral Presidency in the history of this country ? No, because he is a far rightwinger who probably thought Iran-contra was a good thing for America. And you know, there is just no evidence to support it. How could you take that seriously? This is about one of the things that I had to learn when I moved to Washington is, before I ever got angry at anybody anything anybody said, was to ask myself whether it was about the subject they were discussing or whether it was really about power. And I remember once, I had a conversation with a Republican Senator in the middle of the D'Amato hearings when he was trying to convince people, or at least the Republican Senators were, that my wife had done something wrong in this Whitewater thing, which was totally absurd. And so I asked this Senator, I said, Do you think either one of us did anything wrong? He said, Of course you did not do anything wrong. That is not the purpose of this. The purpose of this is to convince the American people you did. It is all about power. Now, I made a mistake. I acknowledged it. I have done my best to atone for it. But all this broad-brush stuff, you know, people see that for what it is.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1621, "text": "And when I am criticized now, I try to remember Benjamin Franklin's admonition that our critics are our friends, for they show us our faults. I do not know what else to do. And I am trying not to let this stuff get in the way. Again let me say, the job of a President is to have a vision and a strategy and pursue it; to show up every day and, insofar as possible, to think about the American people and their welfare, and to not think about himself. The environment in which a President operates is designed to prevent him from doing that as much as possible, to make him torn up and upset, full of recriminations and anger, and have his attention divided. So what I have tried to do is to create a frame of mind and a climate around here with our people, so we could do our job. I think the results speak for themselves. Difficult question on a matter of history that I feel compelled to ask you, ENTITY. We sat, you and I, 2 years ago almost to the day, and I it was the day that the Monica Lewinsky story broke in the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. And I and you denied that you had had an improper sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky. In retrospect, if you had answered that differently right at the beginning, not only just my question but all those questions at the beginning, do you think there would have been a different result and that, in fact, you might not have even been impeached? I wish I knew the answer to that, but I do not . But the thing I regret most, except for doing the wrong thing, is misleading the American people about it. I do not regret the fact that I fought the Independent Counsel. And what they did was, in that case and generally, was completely overboard. And now rational retrospectives are beginning to come out, where people have no connection to me, talking about what an abuse of power it was and what a threat to the American system it was. And I am glad that our people stuck with me, and that the American people stuck with me, and I was able to resist what it was they attempted to do. But I do regret the fact that I was not straight with the American people about it. It was something I was ashamed of and pained about, and I regret that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1622, "text": "There was another interview that we did before that, in which I asked you if you agreed with Susan McDougal that Kenneth Starr was out to get you. And your answer was interpreted by Mr. Starr and others that, well, the facts speak for themselves, is what you said. Do you think the facts have spoken on that? And more and more, there will be people who did not have a vested interest in trying to promote some view they had previously taken who will evaluate this and come to the same conclusion. And as I said, even though I am sorry about what I did and sorry about the developments there, I really felt, once the last chapter of this played out, that I was defending the Constitution and the Presidency. And I feel that more strongly today. I think they knew for a long time there was nothing to Whitewater. They knew it was a bunch of bull. They had no evidence. In fact, if even the law we had, or the one we had before the independent counsel law had been in place, there never would have been a special counsel because it did not meet the standard. The only reason I agreed to ask Janet Reno to appoint one in the first place was I really believed that the people that were talking about it wanted to know the truth, and I knew that they'd just look into Whitewater and find out it was a big bunch of bull and go on. And what I found out was that a lot of the people who wanted it did not want to know the truth. And they wanted somebody that could hang on until they could find something that they could find about me or Hillary. But they knew for a long time. You know, they knew before 1996 that there was nothing to it, which is why they had to get rid of Mr. Fiske and get Mr. Starr in there, so it would drag past the '96 election. And I think history will show that, too. So I am relaxed about that, and I do not spend much time thinking about it. Again, to me, I had to make amends to the American people, and to my family and to my friends and my administration. I have done my best to do that. Now, the only way I can do that is just keep looking toward the future, to stay excited, to stay upbeat, and to stay focused. And that is what I am trying to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1623, "text": "Do you have moments, private moments, of pleasure and satisfaction knowing that if, in fact, there was a conspiracy to run you out of office, it did not work, you are still sitting in the Oval Office? I do not spend much time thinking about it like that. I am grateful that for whatever reason, my friends and my family stayed with me; the American people stayed with me. I believe I defended the Constitution against a serious threat. I am sorry I did something wrong, which gave them an excuse to really go overboard. I am very sorry about that. But mostly what I try to do is to focus on trying to be a better President, trying to be a better person, trying to be a better husband and father, just trying to do the things that I can do. You know, you cannot none of us ever gets ahead in life, I do not think, by taking big satisfaction in victories or looking down on other people or keeping our anger pent up. One of the things I learned in this whole deal is you have got to let all that go. Life will always humble you if you give in to your anger or take some satisfaction that you defeated somebody or some satisfaction that, well, no matter how bad I am, at least I did not do this, that, or the other thing. Life will always humble you. And I have just tried to be grateful and to keep serving and to just worry about myself and not think about other people I mean in terms of whether you are doing right or wrong. But I am actually what I feel every day is just, I am just happy. My family was all here at Christmas. We had this fabulous Christmas. My administration, I have been fortunate by having all these people stay with me. The ones that leave are going off to do exciting things. And we have got I feel that when I took office, the country had so many problems in it. It is like we have turned it around now, and we are going in the right direction. And now we have got a chance to really dream big dreams for our children. And that is a great thing to be doing in your last year in office it is great and not only to dream those dreams but actually take some big steps toward achieving them. I just you know, I cannot be mad or it is hard for me to think about all that stuff. I have come to terms with it, and I am just trying to go on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1624, "text": "When this next year is over, you will leave office, and you will be the youngest former President since Teddy Roosevelt. You will be in your fifties. You will still have a lot of time and energy. Are you worried about that at all, about staying connected? No, I am excited about it. No, no, I am so excited about it. I have I mean, I am worried I will have to go back to learning basic things. You know, I will but I am excited about that, too, driving a car, shopping for food, paying the bills when the house the pipes freeze, you know, all that kind of stuff. You have got to go back to living your life like an ordinary person. But Theodore Roosevelt had an interesting life when he left office. And I of course, I have said this many times; I think President Carter has basically set the standard for what Presidents should do in terms of his public service at home and around the world. And that shows you that there is just worlds of possibilities out there. I am very excited about it. There are all kinds of things that I will have to do. Of course, I will have to make a living, and I hope I will have to make a living to support a wife who is continuing our family's tradition of public service. You know, you get all these elections, where you have got to bad-mouth one candidate to like another, and you'd think I'd certainly be there in the race involving my wife. They have impressive achievements in their lives that relate to public service. But I think that she is much better suited for the work of a Senator and this whole legislative process. And I think that the passions of her life, 30 years of work and achievement in education and health care and the challenges that children and families face, and the whole philosophy she has about community are more consistent with where New York is today and what they need in the future. But I think that New York will believe that, in the end, that what she represents and where she wants to go and what her skills are and what she knows and cares most about is a little closer to where they are than what he his whole approach. So I will have to worry about that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimlehrerpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview With Jim Lehrer of PBS' NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-lehrer-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "26-01-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1625, "text": "Ten days ago in this very room, Judy Woodruff and I spoke with you about Syria. And you said you were hoping to make a shot across the bow. John Kerry talked today about a limited, targeted, unbelievably small effort. Right. Is that something that you have had any conversations at all with President Putin about when you were in St. Petersburg last week? I did have those conversations. And this is a continuation of conversations I have had with President Putin for quite some time. As I said to you the last time we spoke, this chemical weapons ban matters to us, to the United States. It is a ban on the worst kinds of weapons, that are indiscriminate, that do not distinguish between somebody in uniform and an infant child. And for that reason, the overwhelming majority of the world has said you cannot use these. And my intentions throughout this process has been to ensure that the blatant use of chemical weapons that we saw does not happen again. If, in fact, there is a way to accomplish that diplomatically, that is overwhelmingly my preference. And, you know, I have instructed John Kerry to talk directly to the Russians and run this to ground. And if we can exhaust these diplomatic efforts and come up with a formula that gives the international community a verifiable, enforceable mechanism to deal with these chemical weapons in Syria, then I am all for it. But we are going to have to see specifics. And I think it is reasonable to assume that we would not be at this point if there were not a credible military threat standing behind the norm against the use of chemical weapons. Charlie Rose had a conversation in Damascus today, as I am sure you are aware, with Bashar al-Assad. And one of the things he said is that there might be repercussions if there were a U.S. attack. Well, I -- I think you always have to take all precautions and recognize that any military action, even a limited one, is a significant piece of business. And you know, we have looked very carefully at all the possibilities. I think it is important to recognize that Assad does not have significant military capabilities relative to us. He has significant capabilities relative to, you know, nonprofessionals, soldiers in the opposition. He has obviously significant capabilities relative to those women and children who were gassed, but not with respect to us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgwenifillpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview with Gwen Ifill of PBS NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gwen-ifill-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1626, "text": "They could carry out asymmetrical attacks against our embassies, for example, in the region. But we do not actually think that they want to do something like that. Keep in mind that Iran was the country probably last subjected to large-scale chemical weapons use, by Saddam Hussein. I do not think either Iran or Hezbollah thought that what Assad did was a good idea. And, you know, for us to take a limited, proportional, although significant strike on Assad's capabilities to degrade them, I do not think would prompt them to get involved. Having said that, you know, we take all precautions and, you know, we do not go into anything without having thought through the various measures that are required. Assad says the U.S. is lying about his possession -- or if not his possession, his use of chemical weapons. Well, you know, I think that Mr. Assad has been making claims that proved to be untrue for quite some time. There is nobody in the international community who credibly thinks that chemical weapons were not used on August 21st. And there is very -- there are very few folks out there who seriously think that the opposition had the capabilities to kill over a thousand people using rockets that came from regime-controlled areas into areas that were opposition- controlled. So, you know, we have made a very compelling case about Assad's use. I do not think people consider Assad to be a real credible person on the international stage. But, you know, as I have said before, if there are ways for us to resolve the situation so that nobody's using chemical weapons on the ground in Syria, that is the goal that we want to accomplish. And what is true is that the longer this conflict goes on with chemical weapons on the ground, after having seen the barbaric attacks that took place, you could end up with a situation where some of the more dangerous and unsavory members of the opposition, you know, got their hands eventually on these chemical weapons. Now, I am pleased to say that the opposition that we work with, that we have been in conversations with, the international community supported, they have been very clear, in statements, they do not want chemical weapons. They do not believe in them. They think it is a terrible crime to have used them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgwenifillpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview with Gwen Ifill of PBS NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gwen-ifill-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1627, "text": "And -- and so I think that if we can come up with a mechanism to get these under control, verify and enforce that they are not being used, then we should do everything we can to pursue that. But we are -- that is not going to happen if Assad thinks that he can lie his way through this and eventually the world forgets the images of those children who were gassed. How do you persuade members of Congress -- and the American people, who are overwhelmingly, in new polls out today, not in favor of this idea? Yeah. said that she does not see the end of this. She does not know what the purpose of it is. And Democrats like Jim McGovern say you should withdraw your request for an authorization. How -- I know there is a full-court press under way. How do you change their minds? Well, you know, I am not sure that we are ever going to get a majority of the American people, after over a decade of war, after what happened in Iraq, to say that any military action, particularly in the Middle East, makes sense in the absence of some direct threat or attack against us. You know, if you -- if you talk to my own family members, or Michelle's, you know, they are very wary and suspicious of any action. So tomorrow I will speak to the American people. We are not talking about -- not boots on the ground. We are not talking about sustained air strikes. We are talking about a very specific set of strikes to degrade his chemical weapons capabilities in terms of delivery. And you know, I will continue to brief Congress on this. But I knew, when I said I was going to present this to Congress, that this would be challenging. I also want to make the case, though, that it is in our long-term national security interest to make sure that this chemical weapons ban is enforced. Absolutely I do not, because I -- you know, I believe that every president has the authority to act on behalf of the national security interests of the country and that, under the War Powers Act, we have to consult with Congress and inform them after actions are taken.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgwenifillpbsnewshour", "title": "Interview with Gwen Ifill of PBS NewsHour", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gwen-ifill-pbs-newshour", "publication_date": "09-09-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1628, "text": "Yesterday somebody very familiar to the administration, Lewis Scooter Libby, was found guilty of the charges of perjury, lying, obstruction of justice. What is the impact of your administration of this verdict, or your personal feelings? A jury of his peers analyzed the data very seriously and rendered a verdict that must be respected. I am sad for Mr. Libby and his family. There was a sense of sadness to hear the verdict read for me. And finally, this is an ongoing legal matter, there is more to be done in the courts, and therefore, at this time, it is inappropriate for the administration to be commenting beyond just what you asked me. Some Senators, one in particular, Mr. Kennedy, is suggesting that you would pardon him. There is a lot of-if you listen carefully, the lawyers are talking about different avenues to approach this particular case. And so I am pretty much going to stay out of it until the course-the case has finally run its final-the course it is going to take. Some critics think that the administration, your administration has neglected-or prior administrations have neglected our Latin American neighbors. This is your fourth trip to Latin America. What do you plan to accomplish? Well, first of all, I think I plan to accomplish, one-the main thing is to kind of disabuse people of the notion that America does not care about the neighborhood. And it troubles me to think that some people in our neighborhood believe we do not care. We do-I care deeply, personally, about Latin America, and our country does. And what I am going to do is remind people, when I go down, that the American people have been very generous on bilateral aid. We have increased the aid since I have been ENTITY from $800 million a year to $1.6 billion. And the important thing for people to understand is that the aid primarily goes for social justice programs-for education programs or health programs. And the second thing I want to talk to people about the importance of trade. The United States is a big market, and if you are a poor farmer in parts of Central or South America, it seems like it makes sense to be able to sell your product into this market. Because you may get a better price, and it means you can make a better living. And so trade, in my judgment, is positive, and it is a way to help people be lifted out of poverty.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithenriquegratasunivision", "title": "Interview With Enrique Gratas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-enrique-gratas-univision", "publication_date": "07-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1629, "text": "To summarize, a prosperous and peaceful Latin America is in the interest of the United States. I am sure you are aware of some protests in the countries that you will visit, mainly because of the war in Iraq. Are you concerned about those demonstrations? I am proud to be going to a part of the world where people can demonstrate, where people can express their minds. It happens quite frequently when I travel around the world. I understand people's concern about war. Nobody likes war. But I have had to make the decisions I made in order to not only secure our people but to deal with threats and to help people be free. It is a part of life when you are ENTITY. ENTITY, in the last 15 months, leftist governments have been elected in many countries-I will mention three, for example-last ones, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua. Are you worried about this tendency in Latin America? You know, the thing-first of all, I like the fact that the countries in our neighborhood are free and people get to decide who the governments-who is in the government. I like that. I would be worried if there are policies which ruin economies. That would worry me-in other words, if these governments make decisions that end up making it very difficult for people to make a living and/or for there to be more wealth throughout the society. I would be worried if there is no free press-in other words, if institutions that are necessary for a free society were undermined. I would be worried, of course, if just the basic needs of the people were not met. And so I applaud elections. I look forward to these governments responding to the real needs of the people. on many occasions, has called you names; for example, liar, devil, terrorist-things like that. What is your opinion about him? And how do you respond to those insults? Well, I think it is really important for the people who are observing U.S.reactions and U.S. policy to understand that our policies are not aimed at creating tensions, but our policies are aimed at improving people's lives. There is a lot of anticipation about what my trip means, and it is nothing more than to say, we want to be your friends, and we have got a very strong policy of improving the lives of others. I have been in politics a long time; there is a lot of name calling in politics.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithenriquegratasunivision", "title": "Interview With Enrique Gratas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-enrique-gratas-univision", "publication_date": "07-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1630, "text": "I have always found the best thing to do is to do what you think is right and move beyond the name calling. ENTITY, the United States-and this concerns Latin America in general, because most immigrants come from that continent-never before in this country have so many raids against immigrants. Are you planning before you leave office support a plan to legalize so many millions of undocumented workers? A better way to describe this is-in the Oval Office, I gave a speech about comprehensive immigration reform. And comprehensive immigration reform says that we ought to have a temporary-worker program that recognizes the fact that people are coming to do jobs that Americans are not doing so they can do so on a legal basis, but not forever. Secondly, we got an issue with 12 million people that are here illegally. Now, we are a country of law, and we should expect people to recognize our laws. But I also recognize, we cannot kick people out of the country. And so I am going to work with Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, and devise a way that is rational and fair. It needs to be changed for the good of our country, and it needs to be changed for the good of the people that are in our country. ENTITY, I have to ask this question. How are you going to resolve the difference between the construction of the wall on the border? I will explain to him that our Congress was very worried that not enough was being done on both sides of the border about preventing people from sneaking in. I will explain to him that the border is going to be secured two ways- one, by modernization-but it is more than fence. We are going to have Border Patrol agents, but instead of having a system that encourages people to sneak in, we ought to have a system that says, you are welcome to come in on a legal basis to do work America is not doing. I mean, it makes no sense to have a system that does not recognize reality. Now, that does not mean automatic citizenship. But it does say, there are people who are hungry in our neighborhood who want to do work that Americans are not doing, and there ought to be a legal process to do it so they do not have to sneak across the border. So the best way to secure the border is to have a comprehensive immigration plan. And it is controversial here in America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithenriquegratasunivision", "title": "Interview With Enrique Gratas of Univision", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-enrique-gratas-univision", "publication_date": "07-03-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1651, "text": "I am glad you could take some time to talk to us today. Let me start by asking you whether or not-let me rephrase that. I know I am preaching to the choir when I tell you that African-Americans still lag far behind white Americans in every single leading economic indicator category. As you well know, some of your African-American critics have accused you, so to speak, of talking the talk but not walking the walk when it comes to your budget priorities. I am wondering specifically what is in this budget that you are set to sign tomorrow, I suspect, specifically for African-American families that will help them shrink that economic gap. Let us look at a few of them. First of all, this budget has $24 billion in it for health insurance for families, for children, for families of modest means-disproportionately minority families. We are talking about people here who are working for a living but do not make much money, do not get health insurance for their children at work, but are not poor enough to be on Medicaid. And it is the biggest expansion of health care for needy people since Medicaid passed in 1965-the single biggest one. Second, the bill has a $500-per-child tax credit that goes even to working families that get the earned-income tax credit, that is, that make modest incomes, that make under $30,000 a year, which are the vast majority of African-American families-have children in the home- police officers, nurses, firefighters, folks like that, they will get $500 a year per child. Third, this bill has the biggest increase in spending for education from Head Start through college since 1965, in over 30 years, and the biggest increase in help for people to go to college since the GI bill passed 50 years ago, the biggest increase in Pell grants in over 20 years-and that is going to really help-college tax credits, all kinds of other financial provisions to help people to go to college. Fourth, the bill remedies everything I promised to fix in the welfare bill. It restores benefits to legal immigrants who are hurt through no fault of their own. It keeps children who are no longer classified as disabled eligible for Medicaid. It expands food stamp benefits to single men who are looking for work. It provides $3 billion to the cities, to help the cities put people who are on welfare to work.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision0", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television-0", "publication_date": "04-08-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1652, "text": "And finally, the bill has a huge, broad array of economic incentives for people who invest in the inner cities. It triples the number of empowerment zones. It more than doubles the funds for community development banks to loan money to people who start businesses in the inner cities. It provides tax incentives and other investments to clean up 14,000 so-called brownfield sites in urban areas that are otherwise attractive for development but have environmental problems. It is been at least 30 years since a budget this good for working Americans, lower income Americans, and minority Americans has passed. My time with you is limited, and there is so much I want to talk to you about, but let me follow up very quickly if I can. Since you mentioned welfare, I suspect tomorrow around here at the White House there will be handshakes and smiles tomorrow as the Republicans and Democrats come together to watch you sign this bill. But I am wondering what specifically you are going to do to follow up on what the Republicans have already threatened to do; that is to say, they want to, on Wednesday, I suspect, come after you in terms of gutting the welfare provisions that you insisted be a part of this bill. They specifically do not want to pay minimum wage to welfare workers who you want to move from welfare to work. How are you going to deal with what their next strike is going to be? Well, I think some of them are upset because of the stories which indicate that we got about a 100 percent of what we were looking for out of this budget. But they got what they wanted. They got a capital gains and the changes in the estate tax and things of that kind. I believe that everybody who works ought to get the minimum wage. And I am going to hang tough, and unless they can get enough votes to override a veto, then the people that go to work are going to get the minimum wage. I do not think there is a problem with that. Now, to be fair, they say that the Governors are saying that some employers, even community nonprofits, which you might consider liberal employers, are reluctant to hire people off welfare who may be hard to place and may have- take time to train, if they also have to pay all the accompanying costs of employment like the unemployment tax and the Social Security tax and all of these other taxes. And they say they are looking for help on that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision0", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television-0", "publication_date": "04-08-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1653, "text": "Well, I expect we will have some dialog about that, but I simply do not think that they ought to be able to take the minimum wage away from working people. You have said, and you have of course undertaken-put together a commission to undertake getting this country to have a conversation about race, the issue that you have called America's constant curse. In the first public meeting of your race commission, a small dispute erupted in that the commission Chairman, Dr. John Hope Franklin, and commissioner Angela Oh, a Korean-American commissioner from Los Angeles, had a dispute about what the focus, what the mission, the work of the commission ought to be. Franklin believes that the focus and the mission ought to be around the black-white conflict, which he sees as the nucleus for every other race problem this country has endured and continues to endure. Angela Oh, commissioner Oh suggests that the work of the commission really ought to be about multiracialism and multiculturalism. As the leader, ENTITY who put this commission together, what kind of leadership are you going to provide? How are you going to get them on the right track? If the commission cannot have a clear-stated mandate, how do we talk about it as a country? First, I agree with John Hope Franklin that if you do not understand the black-white issue, you can never understand how race works in America. If you do not understand the history and if you do not know what the facts are now, you can never understand the rest. I think we have to deal with our unfinished business, if you will. If you do not understand that Mexican-Americans first came to this country, if you will, by annexation because of the war we had with Mexico, it is hard to understand the unique history of the United States with its Mexican-American population. But there is something special about the whole legacy of slavery and all of that, and we have to understand that. So I agree with that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision0", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television-0", "publication_date": "04-08-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1654, "text": "On the other hand, I also believe that one of the most important things this commission can do when there is no riot in the cities, when there is no real social dislocation, when unemployment is coming down and incomes are finally going up again, and we seem to be making some progress on crime and other issues, I think that it is time that we say, Gosh, we are going to be in this new century in only 3 years; within 5 years, California will have no majority race; within 30 to 40 years, the United States will have no majority race. What does that mean? What do we want America to look like in 35 years? How are we going to avoid these problems that have so bedeviled other countries when they did not have a majority race, these tribal fights in Africa or the religious-based conflicts of the ethnic groups in Bosnia? Or what is going on in the Middle East; how are we going to get around that? I think that if we think about it now and we sort of make it a part of our project as we start the new century and we kind of empower our young people especially to talk about it and work through it, my guess is that when we do become the first truly multiethnic, multiracial democracy in the world, it will turn out to be a huge advantage for us, a huge advantage, because of the global society we are living in, as long as we say we respect, we even celebrate our differences, but we are still one America. And I think that ought to be the future focus of this. You mentioned California. As you well know, you gave a race relations speech at UC-San Diego. And as you probably know, 200 African-Americans have applied to med school in San Diego; none were accepted. In Texas, at the University of Texas, admissions of African-American students are down 26 percent. It is an ugly picture, and I can make it uglier if I had more time, but I will not do that. They should not have passed that 209. I totally agree with you on that. The question I want to ask is, there is a bill that is pending in the Texas Legislature that suggests that if scores-test scores are going to be the sole criteria for all students being admitted to college, why not include athletes in that regard? I am wondering how you feel about that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision0", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television-0", "publication_date": "04-08-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1655, "text": "I actually think it may help the Razorbacks, because the kids that cannot go to school in Texas may go up to Arkansas. Well, no, I just-it may help the program. But what do you think about including athletes, though, seriously? I think if you did it, people would bring back affirmative action. I mean, that would make the point. I could not help thinking, when they explicitly excluded athletes, that you could have, let us say, an Hispanic young athlete who was a C student out of high school get in the best university in the State, and another young Hispanic who was an A-minus student in high school that wore Coke-bottle glasses and was an academic, who could not get in. You think it ought to include athletes? Well, I think universities ought to have a right to develop their athletic programs, but I think that it is ridiculous to say that a great university needs to have different academic standards for athletics so you can have diversified athletics but does not need a diversified student body when it comes to race and ethnicity. So I would say you have got to-you can pick one. You can have it one way or the other, but you cannot have it both ways. That is kind of what I-it is like these people who put this together saying, Well, if these folks can entertain us, we will let them come to school. But if they are not entertaining to us, never mind that they are going to be a big part of our future; they cannot come to school. Of course, I believe-I do not think there was ever a constitutional problem with affirmative action in college admissions and professional school admissions, as long as no one who was unqualified-that is, someone that clearly could not meet high standards and could not do the work-was admitted, because there are measures other than test scores and grades which are pretty valid indicators of whether people can do good work in high-quality institutions. And you want the students themselves to have valid experiences when they are going through school. And I personally believe, since we are going to live in a multiracial, multiethnic, multireligious society, if I were running a private university, I'd certainly want one to be like that. And I think it is a cruel irony that in some of these States they seem to be moving toward putting it all on the private universities to have a diverse student body, at least in the graduate level.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision0", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television-0", "publication_date": "04-08-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1656, "text": "Now, Texas is trying to overcome this now with their so-called 10 percent solution-you may know about that-saying that anybody who graduates in the top 10 percent of any high school can go to any State university. The problem with that is it does not deal with the professional schools, number one, and number two, it might work for Texas because of the racial distribution of people throughout the State in high schools. It would not necessarily work in other States. I think-you know, my own view is we need an effective, constitutional affirmative action program. Let me get to a couple of other quick areas before my time runs out here. You recently recommended-your administration recommended that the disparity between the crack and cocaine-powder cocaine sentencing be reduced from 100 to 1 to 10 to 1. I am wondering, why not 1 to 1? On the second issue, I do not know about that, and I was surprised because I had just had a very long meeting with the Black Caucus in which we'd gone over a huge number of issues. And we had given them good followup on everything, and I was personally stunned to understand that they had not been consulted on this. What I think happened was someone involved in this in one of those departments leaked the decision before it was ripe to be made and kind of cut off all the consultations before it got in the newspaper. Now, on the merits, let me say, we came to 10 to 1 for two reasons. One is all the senior people at the Justice Department and in the office of drug control believed that there had to be some difference because of the difference in violent crime associated with powder and crack. None of them believe that the 100 to 1 was justifiable. So they recommended 10 to 1. And it was-the conclusion was reached that if they recommended anything lower, what Congress would do in reaction would be to try to raise the minimums for everybody and leave everyone worse off. And so I think we need to take a hard look at that Federal prison population anyway to see whether there are too many nonviolent offenders in there. And I think this should be viewed for just what it is, a major step forward. Hopefully, we will be permitted to implement it, and if we are, we will see if it works. Your challenge to America to have a conversation about race has certainly spun off a number of conversations, including conversations about slavery and reparations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision0", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television-0", "publication_date": "04-08-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1657, "text": "And I am wondering whether or not, since you have had more time to reflect, you think an apology to African-Americans is warranted. And more specifically, what do you think of at least having a commission to study the feasibility of reparations, regardless of what your opinion is? Well, I do not believe that- what I think I should do now is let this advisory board do its work and see what they have to say about the apology issue and all the related issues. The one thing I did not want to do is to define the work of this commission, which I hope will be quite broad, as I explained, in terms of any particular issue early on. I just do not think I should do that. So I am going to let them have their hearings. I am going to go to some of the hearings with them. We are going to go around the country. I am going to keep announcing special initiatives like our big scholarship fund to move teachers into the inner cities and pay for their college if they go back to inner cities and teach. I am going to keep doing those things and just see how it comes out. And if the board wants to recommend that-and Dr. Franklin, I think, is in about as good a position to judge that as anybody in America-I will wait and see what they say. I am wondering whether or not you think that an apology to African-Americans might reenergize this debate. I am talking to some African-Americans over the last few days who think that since your speech in San Diego, the conversation has kind of gotten quiet. You do not really hear a lot about this race discussion. Do not you think that apology might reenergize this debate? I keep trying to do something about every 2 weeks to juice it up. Today I talked to-I gave a speech to the Urban League, in terms of what was in the budget for African-Americans and minorities, just like I did with you a few moments ago. And I previously gave a speech saying that we were going to offer scholarships to people and pay their way through college if they'd go teach in distressed areas. I will keep trying to do that. But I think there will be a lot of interest in it. It is hard to keep the media's interest all the time unless there is conflict. You know that. But I will keep trying to find innovative ways to do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision0", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television-0", "publication_date": "04-08-1997", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1658, "text": "You were talking about your all of the above energy strategy But I wonder whether Americans are not more interested in a one of the above energy strategy and that is gas not at $4 a gallon. Well, look ultimately what Americans care about is the huge burden that it is placing on families right now. If you have to drive 50 miles to work, and I hear from a lot of folks who do, then this is a real strain on budget. So their most immediate concern is gas prices, but it is interesting when you talk to Americans across the country, what they also realize is that there is no silver bullet. They want to make sure we have got strong oil and gas production, and they are glad to hear that we are starting to make progress on natural gas on additional oil production here in the United States. They also understand that if we only have two percent of the world's oil reserves but using 20% of the world's oil, then the math is not going to add up unless we also develop the kinds of new technologies that are represented by this solar panel field out here. Acknowledging there is no silver bullet, you get criticized by republicans on their campaign trail, your response has been We are drilling as much as we can, more oil than any time in the past 8 years. Is there more you can do so that it does not cost $55 to fill up your tank? Well the main reason that you are seeing the kind of gas spike that we are seeing right now has to do with the uncertainty in the Middle East. So a lot of this has to do with the risk premium that is being tacked on, people are not certain about what gonna happen with Iran. There is also been some tightening in the market because some unlikely places like Sudan and Yemen, they may only produce a 100,000 barrels or 200,000 barrels, but when you add it all up, you have see about a million barrels taken off the market. And what that means is is that even if we produce as fast as we can, we are still not going to see gas prices where we'd like them to be, unless we are also focused on being more efficient with the oil and gas that we have. So as you said, we are producing more than any time in the last eight years, we have actually reduced oil imports to under 50%, and they are as low as they have been in a long time over the last couple of years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkairyssdalthemarketplacethecoppermountainsolarplantbouldercity", "title": "Interview with Kai Ryssdal of The Marketplace at the Copper Mountain Solar Plant in Boulder City, Nevada", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kai-ryssdal-the-marketplace-the-copper-mountain-solar-plant-boulder-city", "publication_date": "21-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1659, "text": "What we now need to do now is open up additional sites for drilling, and we are doing that. We are actually even on public lands, we have increased permitting by about 13%. But what we have also got to do is double fuel efficiency standards on cars, we have we are slighted right now by the next decade to see fuel efficiency standards to go up to 55 miles per gallon, that can save families about $8,000 during the life time of a car. We are going to have to make sure that we are using oil in our businesses a lot more efficiently. So if we add improved production with increased efficiency, then over time we can regain control over our our energy supplies. With all respect, it was kind of a gutsy move, I think, to come to a solar facility. Your administration has staked a lot on clean technology The biggest item most people know about that strategy is of course a company named Solyndra, which your administration gave loan guarantees to, that then went bankrupt, that has been the subject of many investigations. Are you doing your all of the above strategy right if that is what we have to show for it, Solyndra? We are doing the all of the above strategy right, obviously we wish Solyndra had not gone bankrupt, part of the reason they did was because the Chinese were subsidizing their solar industry and flooding the market in a ways Solyndra could not compete. But understand this was not our program per see, Congress, Democrats and Republicans, put together a loan guarantee program because they understood historically that when you get new industries, it is easy to raise money for start ups, but if you want to take them to scale, often times there is a lot of risk involved. And what the loan guarantee program was designed to do was to help start up companies get to scale. And the understanding is is some companies are not going to succeed, some companies will do very well, but the portfolio as a whole ends up supporting the kind of innovation that helps make America successful in this innovative, 21st century economy. Absolutely not, and obviously it is heartbreaking to happen for the workers who were there. When you look at the overall portfolio, is it right for us to make sure that we are not just cashing in our chips and letting the Chinese or the Germans develop the technologies that we know are going to be critical in the future?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkairyssdalthemarketplacethecoppermountainsolarplantbouldercity", "title": "Interview with Kai Ryssdal of The Marketplace at the Copper Mountain Solar Plant in Boulder City, Nevada", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kai-ryssdal-the-marketplace-the-copper-mountain-solar-plant-boulder-city", "publication_date": "21-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1660, "text": "You said when you were campaigning in 2008 that you were going to 150 billion dollars on green tech and clean energy and create 5 million clean energy jobs. We had the worst financial crisis And the housing market, obviously, the bottom fell out of it. And so we have spent a lot of time digging our way out of that hole, part of it has been a clean energy strategy and investments that we made because of the Recovery Act. The investments that are being made as we speak help to account for the kind of solar facility that we are seeing right here that is creating jobs right here in Boulder City. Let me ask you about the labor market. Unemployment is down from it is high during this administration, it is now at 8.3%. Long term unemployment is becoming a structural problem in this economy as people lose the skills. What more can you do and what more should the government do to create jobs in this economy? Well there are a bunch of things we should be doing. You are right, we have made progress. The fact is is that over the last 24 months we have created almost about four million jobs. We have seen more growth in the manufacturing sector than any time since the 1990s, about 400,000 jobs created over the last couple of years. And so the trend lines are good, and one of the most important things that we needed to do was to make sure the economy was growing. But you are right, we still have way too many people unemployed, there are still some head winds that we have got to deal with. I will give you a couple of examples. Number one the housing market is still probably the biggest drag on the economy, now what we have done administratively is allow people to start refinancing their homes to take advantage of historically low rates if their mortgages is held by one of the FHA programs, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac. The problem is is that that only captures a portion of people that could be refinancing, saving 3,000 bucks, putting more money into the economy and creating more jobs and getting the construction industry back up and running. So we have called on Congress to make a change that would allow everybody to refinance right now. That is something that would create jobs. We have got couple of trillion dollar of improvements that need to be made right now all across the country. Interest rates have never been lower, contractors have never been more desperate for work, construction workers are idle at home when they want to be working.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkairyssdalthemarketplacethecoppermountainsolarplantbouldercity", "title": "Interview with Kai Ryssdal of The Marketplace at the Copper Mountain Solar Plant in Boulder City, Nevada", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kai-ryssdal-the-marketplace-the-copper-mountain-solar-plant-boulder-city", "publication_date": "21-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1661, "text": "For us to engage and embark on a major infrastructure development program right now not only would put people to work as we speak, but it would also pay huge dividends in terms of economic growth over the long term. So the issue here is not that there are not things we can do to put people back to work, retrain them for jobs that currently exist. The challenge is that Congress is going to have to think a little more boldly than they have been and get past some of the partisan name calling that has become a habit in Washington. If we do, then there are a bunch of things we can do to put people back to work. Let me use that as a pivot then and ask you about the Republicans who are currently campaigning for your job. I do not know if you watched the TV last night after the Illinois primary, I am sure you got a briefing this morning. Both Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum made the case that their platforms of economic freedom are the way to go. They say you are not doing enough, they say you have not been doing enough, you shrug but that I mean you you know what they are saying. So the question is make the close the sale, right? Because you keeping the job in November is gonna be depending on how people feel about whether you did it or you did not do it as you promised three and a half years ago. Look, you know, I think at a time when people are still out there struggling around the country, where unemployment is still to high, and a lot of folks are still worried about their mortgage, their home being underwater, nobody I think can claim that we are where we want. But I think when the American people think back to the last three years and where we have been and where we are moving towards now, when you ask them, what has more likelihood of succeeding, a policy in which we are providing additional tax cuts to the very wealthiest of Americans who are the only folks who have benefited from any significant income growth over the past decade, stripping away regulations that help keep our air and water clean, defunding things like education that we know are going to help us to be competitive, when you ask them is that a recipe for long term economic growth their answer is going to be no.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkairyssdalthemarketplacethecoppermountainsolarplantbouldercity", "title": "Interview with Kai Ryssdal of The Marketplace at the Copper Mountain Solar Plant in Boulder City, Nevada", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kai-ryssdal-the-marketplace-the-copper-mountain-solar-plant-boulder-city", "publication_date": "21-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1664, "text": "It is great to see you. One of the centerpieces of your foreign policy has been the so-called pivot to Asia... the idea of moving toward that part of the world where all the dynamism, economically certainly, exists. One of the architects of the pivot says that the sine qua non of the pivot is TPP, and it looks as though that pact is in trouble. Hillary Clinton is now against it. Donald Trump is against it. Paul Ryan is even against it. But the, look, the politics of trade have always been complicated. Let me back up and say that the idea of the rebalance was not to neglect other parts of the globe in favor of Asia, it was rather to recognize that, for a decade, we have not been paying attention to Asia at a time when it was undergoing this enormous transformation, that it was going to be the world's most populous region, the most dynamic market. And that we had to make sure that we reminded ourselves as well as the region that we are an Asia-Pacific power. And the Trans-Pacific Partnership is a historic agreement cobbled together among a very diverse set of countries. And if we are not setting the rules out there, somebody else is. And what we have been able to do is not just establish a trade agreement among these countries, because many of them we already have trading agreements with. What this does is it raises the standards for trade so that there is greater protection for labor rights, a greater protection for environmental rights, greater transparency, greater protection for intellectual property, which is so important to a knowledge-based economy like ours. It removes 18,000 taxes, effectively, tariffs. Because we are a relatively open market and many of our trading partners the have been closed, it gives us a huge lever to open up markets for American goods and services. And so there is no serious economist who has not looked at this and said this is actually not only a smart trade deal, but it actually, makes up for some of the failures of previous deals to have fully enforceable labor or environmental components. But what is true is that there have been, in the past, always, a vocal, you know, set of interests that are opposed to trade inside my party, the Democratic Party. And what is been new is some populist anti-trade sentiment inside the Republican Party.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnn", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnn", "publication_date": "04-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1665, "text": "Having said all that, it was said that we could not get the authority to even get a trade deal done and we got it done. There is a similar pact for Europe that is being negotiated. And the vice chancellor of Germany just said that is dead, implying that trade is just not a -- are we at a turning point where trade is -- free trade is no longer popular in Western societies? But what is absolutely too true, Fareed, is that the combination of globalization and automation have integrated the world economies like never before. And what I think has been the fault of those in charge of that integration process has been to not pay attention to the winners and the losers. Overall, it has created enormous growth, prosperity and wealth for all the countries involved. And, you know, part of the reason that we have seen billions of people rise out of extreme poverty during our lifetimes has been because of that integration. But what is also true is, is that there has increasingly been, because of this integration, a tendency toward those of us who are highly skilled, highly resourced, have access to capital, to be able to get a bigger and bigger share of that growth. People who are low skill, low wage, not mobile, have had trouble getting leverage in this system. And so that divergence has created more and more inequality within advanced economies, whether it is the United States, countries like Europe. And so part of the argument that I have been making consistently, part of the argument that I will be making when I go to my last G-20 meeting is that if advanced countries do not pay attention to inequality, if we do not pay attention to not just growth in the aggregate, but how is that growth distributed? And do people have ladders of opportunity in this new global economy? Then yes, there is going to be a reaction against globalization and against trade, even though -- whether that resistance is coming from the left or the right, the prescriptions that they are describing, somehow cutting off global trade, are not really viable. And so, you know, the argument I make to my progressive friends is you are absolutely right to worry about inequality, but the answer is not to pull up the drawbridge. The answer, rather, is to make sure that everybody has high labor standards, that all countries are accountable to their citizens in terms of things like minimum wages, workers' standards, making sure that there is an education system that people can access.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnn", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnn", "publication_date": "04-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1666, "text": "And unfortunately, we have not done enough of that. When you are in China, are you going to be having a different series of conversations with the Chinese leaders? By which I mean a lot of China experts look at what is happening in China and say you are seeing a new form of nationalism, you are seeing a new specifically anti-Western and anti-American nationalism, whether it is in regard to cyber theft and cyber crime, cyber attacks, the way Western companies are treated, the business in the South China Sea where China is doing what apparently violates international law and is worrying its neighbors. Is it time to get tougher on China? Well, first of all, I do not think any of that is new. Remember, China has been run during our lifetimes by a communist party that has been much more anti-Western in the past. We went through a period over the course of 20 years, in the '90s and on through maybe the onset of my presidency, where, because state-sponsored capitalism and an export-driven model was very successful, China was less interested in making waves. But, you know, you have got over a billion people, one of the largest economies now in the world. And so it is to be expected that they will want a bigger seat at the table when it comes to international affairs. And what we have said consistently is we welcome the peaceful rise of Chin, consistent with international norms. That is good for everybody. An impoverished and collapsing China would be dangerous for everybody. And, you know, we should want China to take on more responsibilities, not only for its own people, but also for a wide range of international problems and conflicts, whether it is climate change or disaster relief or dealing with things like Ebola. But what we have said to the Chinese -- and we have been firm consistently about this -- is you have to recognize that with increasing power comes increasing responsibilities. You cannot pursue mercantilist policies that just advantage you now that you are a middle income country, in many ways, even though you still have a lot of poor people. You know, you cannot just export problems. You have got to have fair trade and not just free trade. You have to open up your markets if you expect other people to open up their markets.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnn", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnn", "publication_date": "04-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1667, "text": "When it comes to issues related to security, if you sign a treaty that calls for international arbitration around maritime issues the fact that you are bigger than the Philippines or Vietnam or other countries, in and of itself, is not a reason for you to go around and flex your muscles. You have got to abide by international law. And part of what I have talked to communicate to President Xi is that the United States arrives at its power, in part, by restraining itself. You know, when we bind ourselves to a bunch of international norms and rules, it is not because we have to, it is because we recognize that, over the long-term, building a strong international order is in our interests. And I think over the long-term, it will be in China's interests, as well. So where we see them violating international rules and norms, as we have seen in some cases in the South China Sea or in some of their behavior when it comes to economic policy, we have been very firm. And we have indicated to them that there will be consequences. But what we have tried to emphasize to them is, if you are working within international rules and international norms, then we should be partners. There is no reason that we cannot be friendly competitors on the commercial side and important partners when it comes to dealing with the many international problems that threaten both of us. I got to ask you one question about the campaign. As you watch the support that Donald Trump has... and you watch where it comes from, I am wondering what you make of it, because, you know, you have written in the past that you are -- the Kansas side of your family is white working class, Scotch-Irish. These are the people who support Trump. These are the people who seem to have the most suspicion about you. What do you make of that? Well, look, there is a long tradition in the United States of inclusion, immigration diversity, but also people, once they are included in what they consider to be the real America, worrying about outsiders contaminating, polluting, messing up a good thing. That dates back to you know, the beginning of this country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnn", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnn", "publication_date": "04-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1668, "text": "And what I am always reminding people is that, although you will see bumps, whether it is the Know-Nothings or, you know, other of anti-immigrant sentiment directed at the Irish or Southern Europeans as opposed to Northern Europeans, or the Chinese, or today, Latinos or Muslims -- the long-term trend is people get absorbed, people get assimilated, and we benefit from this incredible country in which the measure of your patriotism and how American you are is not the color of your skin, your last name, your faith, but rather your adherence to a creed. And I do not expect that that is going to change simply because Mr. Trump has gotten a little more attention than usual. And I think if you look at the current polls, they are -- you know, he is been able to appeal to a certain group of folks who feel left out or are worried about the rapidity of demographic change, social change who, in some cases, have very legitimate concerns around the economy and feeling left behind. But that is not the majority of America. And if you talk to younger people, the next generation of Americans, they utter -- completely reject the kinds of positions that he is taking. So, you know, we have to take it seriously. I think that any time we hear intolerance, any time that we hear policy measures that are contrary to our values, banning certain classes of people because of who they are or what they look like, what faith they practice, then we have to be pretty hard about saying no to that. And I think that America will do that this time, as well. But, you know, I think we have to pay close attention to what is going on. When you look at the news that has come out of Turkey over the last few weeks and months, the coup attempt, but then the purges afterwards... very -- the issues around Turkish foreign policy, are you confident that Turkey is a liberal democracy, a staunch NATO ally, where we have nuclear weapons, and is a force for stability in the region? Well, they have gone through a tumultuous event. You had members of the military engaging in treasonous acts against a democratically elected government. And what was encouraging was the degree to which the Turkish people, including those who are opposed to President Erdogan, stepping up and saying this is unacceptable.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnn", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnn", "publication_date": "04-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1669, "text": "And that was, I think, the -- the ray of hope that came out of what was a really challenging event. You now have a reaction by the Turkish government that understandably is scared and concerned. Imagine if something had -- like that happened here in the United States, the challenges that we would have in figuring out how to re-stabilize our country. I have long said to President Erdogan directly, even prior to this coup, that he began his career as a democrat and a reformist, and the danger, I think, of any leader is the longer you are in here, you have to constantly remind yourself of the values that you came in with. And that if Turkey cracks down on journalists in ways that are inconsistent with democratic practices, if dissidents' voices and civil societies lose more and more space. That, you know, the mere act of voting is not the only part of democracy. Rule of law, free press, freedom of assembly, those are all part of it as well. I think the Turkish people are going to be debating this and working through this over the next several months. We have not seen a diminishing effect on our security relations. They are working with us to defeat ISIL and are an important partner on a whole range of security issues in the region. But, you know, no doubt what is true is that they have gone through a political and civil earthquake in their country. And how they rebuild is going to be important and what we want to do is indicate to them the degree to which we support the Turkish people. But like any good friend, we want to give them honest feedback if we think that the steps they are taking are going to be contrary to their long-term interests and our partnership. ENTITY, it is become a GPS tradition that when we have you, we have the honor of having you on the program, rather than me making a book recommendation, you do. You have just come back from a vacation. You must have taken a pile of books. Which among them would you recommend? Discussing some of the issues that we discussed here today around race and American history. The other book that I really enjoyed a book by an Israeli author, Yuval Harari, called Sapiens. And it -- it is a sweeping history of the human race from 40,000 feet.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnn", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnn", "publication_date": "04-09-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1673, "text": "I am looking forward to going to Pakistan. I appreciate the courage of your ENTITY I am looking forward to my visit with ENTITY Musharraf. I am trying to think of the number of times I have met with ENTITY Musharraf since I have been ENTITY. I would say five or six, seven times. I remember our visit to Camp David. I appreciate his courage. I appreciate the difficult job he has. I appreciate his commitment to joining the world in dealing with Islamic radicals who will murder innocent people to achieve an objective. I appreciate the fact that he has stood strong in the face of several attempts on his life. I also appreciate our relationship with Pakistan and his vision for a democracy in Pakistan. And so I am looking forward to the trip. We had a very good talk. And he was laying the groundwork for what I think will be a constructive visit. ENTITY, I will start with the cartoon controversy. You and your allies work very hard on bridging the gap between the Islamic and the Western world, but the publication of a few cartoons in a remote newspaper seems to have undone everything. First of all, I think it is very important for people around the world to know that a free press is important for a democratic state; a free press for peaceful states as well. Free press holds people to account. Free press makes sure that there is a check and a balance on people in power. Secondly, I fully understand people taking not liking the cartoons. On the other hand, I do not believe that people should use that as a pretext for violence, nor do I appreciate the fact that some are using manipulating the anger over the cartoons to achieve political ends. And therefore, it is very important for governments to not allow policy to be set by those who are cynically manipulating the anger that some have felt over these cartoons. ENTITY, you have announced this global nuclear energy initiative, and this is the one that you have offered to India also. And you have spoken about the countries countries like India can also get a benefit of this initiative. Do you have Pakistan in mind Pakistan already saying that this offer to India is India-specific? Is it India-specific, or Pakistan can also be included in this initiative? Well, we are starting with India, and one of the primary reasons why is that India is in need of a diversification away from fossil fuels. India is consuming a lot of fossil fuel. That is driving up the price of a part of the reasons why the price is rising.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistanijournalists", "title": "Interview With Pakistani Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistani-journalists", "publication_date": "22-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1674, "text": "America uses a lot of fossil fuels. China is using more fossil fuels. India is using more fossil fuels, and it is affecting the price of energy in the United States and in India and in Pakistan. And so therefore, to the extent to which we can get these fast-growing, developing nations to use something other than fossil fuels, it is in the world's interest, and it is in Pakistan's interest as well. Now and so I would not view some say, Well, this is a zero-sum attitude by the United States, quite the contrary. It is the beginning of a policy that says, there will be a suppliers group of people who are capable of providing fuel stocks for a civilian nuclear power industry, countries that will then collect the spent fuel, reprocess it to be able to burn it in new types of reactors. The purpose of this whole initiative, and beginning with countries like India, is to recognize that alternative sources of energy are going to be important for the development of a clean world and a world that becomes substantially less reliant on nonrenewable sources of energy. But Pakistan cannot be included in that? Well, as I said, this is just the beginning of a very long process. ENTITY, in your speech, you talked about Kashmir dispute, and you said that you would like India and Pakistan to take bilateral steps to resolve the dispute. Pakistan has made certain proposals, but they are not reciprocated by India. And it seems that this bilateral is not going anywhere; there is need for a third-party mediation or some sort of help. Do you have any specific proposals for that? First, I'd like to make sure I clarify my statement for all to read. America supports a solution that is acceptable to all sides since you are probably the only person in the room that paid attention to my speech the speech, as you know, I said, to both sides. The language should be all sides, because it recognizes that a solution must be acceptable to India, Pakistan, and those living within Kashmir. Our position is one that says a dispute that has been so long in a nation's history can best be resolved when two nations make the determination to sit down and come up with a solution that is acceptable to all sides. Of course, during my discussions, I will encourage that dialog to go forward.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistanijournalists", "title": "Interview With Pakistani Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistani-journalists", "publication_date": "22-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1675, "text": "I am convinced that history changes, and as history changes, attitudes can change, circumstances change, and that we have a possibility to see this issue resolved by strong and courageous leaders. I am pleased to see the amount of trade that is taking place between India and Pakistan. It is a substantial increase from July of '04 to July of '05. I thought that the the new transportation routes between India and Pakistan are hopeful signs. And so the role of the United States, in our judgment, is one that will help lead to a settlement that is acceptable to all sides. ENTITY, you also spoke about democracy in Pakistan; some distance has to be covered. And the Commonwealth has recently asked Mr. Musharraf ENTITY Musharraf that he must decide by 2007 whether he wants to continue as the Chief of ENTITY Staff or as the ENTITY, one decision. Is the United States comfortable with a leader who is also the Chief of ENTITY Staff in a democracy? Does it bother you that he his contribution as the Chief of ENTITY Staff? I have had discussions with the ENTITY quite frequently about his vision for a democratic Pakistan. And I am I believe that he is headed for a continue to head for on the road of reform. And he understands the pressures being put on him. As you said, the Commonwealth spoke, and I believe that he is committed to having a reform process come to fruition, and I believe he is committed to free and open elections. ENTITY, there is another issue that is particularly sensitive for both India and Pakistan, which is that Iran India-Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline. As we said, India need alternative sources of energy. So is it possible that decision, allow the construction of the pipeline? What is important is that India, Pakistan, and the United States work together to send a firm message to the Iranians that a development of a nuclear weapon is unacceptable. You know, we energy supplies are important for India, and they are important for Pakistan. I fully understand that. But a country which has been unwilling to adhere to treaties that it is agreed to, a country the ENTITY of which has said the destruction of Israel is in part of foreign policy, a country which has not told the truth when it comes to whether or not they are enriching uranium or not, is a country that free nations need to deal with in a diplomatic way. And the best thing that the Iranians can hear is a unified message from all of us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistanijournalists", "title": "Interview With Pakistani Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistani-journalists", "publication_date": "22-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1676, "text": "Does it mean that at some date you could decide to take military action against Iran? ENTITY, the recent incident in which U.S. military made a strike in the Pakistani tribal area in the Bajaur area. This has happened before also, and there was some outrage in Pakistan that there was no remorse from the U.S. Government on the action. These actions, when they are taken, is it because the unilateral action that the folks on the other side do not trust their colleagues on the side of the border, or it is the timing, is it intelligence, or the lack of operational capabilities on the side on the Pakistani side, that such actions are taken? We are we are partners in the war against terrorists, some of whom tried to kill your ENTITY. We are allies, and we coordinate nor do we talk about sensitive antiterror operations. Of course, the United States mourns the loss of innocent life. ENTITY, in your speech, you also you spoke about importance of prosperity, and you talked about offering business industry in Pakistan. Do you have anything specific in mind, such as Pakistan has been trying for some time to get an FTA? First step is a BIT, and we will discuss that we will continue to discuss that. We discussed that during the Prime Minister's trip, and we will continue to pursue this avenue toward opening up additional opportunities, commercial opportunities between our respective countries. We think it makes sense to have a discussion. Such an agreement, if a commercial arrangement, investment arrangement would be beneficial not only to Pakistan but to Afghanistan as well. And so there is a variety of discussions we are having to continue to open up ways to encourage investment and commerce. I must I applaud the ENTITY's economic reform package. It is yielded some strong results. You know, one of the key things is that people see the benefits of democracy the tangible benefits of democracy, besides being able to express themselves. Today I also referred to the Pakistan press, you might recall. I think I referred to you as lively, meaning that at least the Pakistan press I have been exposed to has never been afraid to ask any questions, or never been intimidated, particularly with the open press conference. So I want to talk about reconstruction aid right quick before you finish. It is very important for the people of Pakistan to and this is where trade matters as well, and commerce matters as well, that they see that the United States is interested in the lives of the citizens.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistanijournalists", "title": "Interview With Pakistani Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistani-journalists", "publication_date": "22-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1677, "text": "You know, sometimes in the way things get reported, our policies get disconnected from people's lives improving. And we want that to happen, because a prosperous Pakistan is will be a great example, a country that believes in markets and educating people to fill the jobs of the 21st century, and a country that continues to deal with rules and regulations that make investment difficult at times, will show what is possible. When the disaster struck, it took our Government no time to move. And we moved a lot of equipment and a lot of manpower and a lot of aid, because we cared about the people that were suffering. I remember ENTITY Musharraf calling me on the phone at one point to thank me. And it was a genuine thanks, because we were as you know, we transferred a lot choppers, which were necessary to be able to move manpower and aid into remote regions of your country. He also asked, would we make sure that beyond the recovery effort, that there was a commitment to help rebuild. And the reason it is important for your readers to understand, I said, yes, because this country cares about the families whose lives were turned upside down by this disaster. When we heard 73,000 people lost their life, it touched our hearts and our conscience. When we realized over 2 million people lost their homes, we cared about those who had been displaced. And so our commitment is to the people of Pakistan, and it is a genuine, real, tangible commitment that the people of the country can see. I understand there is politics, and there is there is people expressing their opinions. But one thing they cannot argue with those who want to be critical of the United States cannot argue with a genuine, heartfelt commitment to the improvement of the lives of those folks in Pakistan who suffered a suffered mightily as a result of the natural disaster. We captured the top lot of the Al Qaida, and 300 Pakistani soldiers died. There is a lot of expectation in Pakistan you spoke about bilateral investment treaty and stuff, access to the market more on access to the market. Are we moving towards free trade? And that is very important folks not getting to the U.S. for education, and can you help us? A couple of points one, there is no question that the Musharraf Government is committed to working to get Al Qaida brought to justice. It was Al Qaida that tried to kill him more than one time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistanijournalists", "title": "Interview With Pakistani Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistani-journalists", "publication_date": "22-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1678, "text": "Al Qaida does not care about the people of Pakistan. They do not care about helping people get a good education, realize the vast potential of Pakistan. They are there to create chaos and murder. And so I appreciate that, and I appreciate his firm resolve. Secondly, we have been there is a tangible benefit for the Government and the security of Pakistan in dealing with using sharing with, providing equipment. We resolved a long-simmering issue in the F-16s. I recognize it has been put on hold, but the Government's commitment is a real commitment. It changed policy, as you recall. It reversed something that took place in the past. The BIT is a beginning of it is a step toward what you talked about, advancing additional trading. I agree with you on the issue of education. First of all, there are a lot of Pakistan citizens here, and a lot of Pakistani Americans that are making vital contributions to our country, proud United States citizens who honor their heritage. I agree with you that there ought to be more student exchanges. But this is not an issue just for Pakistani students; this is an issue for students from other parts of the world as well. We had a very restrictive visa policy right after 9/11. It was a our visa policy was a natural reaction to a terrible event that took place. But by it did not take me long to realize that we were missing a great opportunity to have students from Pakistan see the real America. And there is no better place, no better way in many ways to see America than to come as a student, study at our institutions, but more importantly, interface with people the same age and realize that ours is an accepting culture. And we welcome Muslims. And we welcome people that may be different, and that there is no better ambassador for the American way of life and the attitudes the true attitudes of the American citizens than to have somebody here who has seen firsthand what America is like and then go back home. Word of mouth is a pretty significant antidote to some of the propaganda that is being played out for others to hear. And so I agree with you, and we are Condi Rice is very much involved with constantly revisiting the visa issue student visa issue, in particular, and not only encouraging students to come here, but once they are here, not making it difficult for them to complete their education. In other words, there are some restrictions even after the students got here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistanijournalists", "title": "Interview With Pakistani Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistani-journalists", "publication_date": "22-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1679, "text": "Finally, we are also along these lines announced a very strong language initiative so that more people are capable of will be capable of conversing with people in parts of the world where, frankly, we have not had that much conversation in their native language all aimed at creating a hospitable world. One, we are proud of the Pakistani Americans who live here; two, we want this relation to continue on. And as I say, I am pleased with my personal relationship with ENTITY Musharraf. I try to put myself in his shoes. He is he is got a tough assignment. On the one hand, he is got people trying to kill him, and on the other hand, he is taking this country toward further down the road of democracy, and in so doing, is dealing with as we speak, dealing with people who are taking advantage of a free press. And as I mentioned to you, I understand why people are reacting to that. It is very important, however, that they react in a way that does honor to the process and not resort to violence and destruction and, in some countries, to death. See you all there, I hope. About the visit, can you state if you ever think of canceling the visit No, I am not going to never thought about canceling it. So we are a good word for the students, they may get visas? Well, I think we are working it very hard to make sure. I will pass this on to Condi when I talk to her just to make sure that she is she is constantly calibrating and looking at the issue. We hear believe we have had a lot of there are a lot of folks here that in America, and a lot of Embassies around the world hear from respective governments when there is backlogs and slowness. These voices that are concerned about whether or not there is access to our universities are heard loud and clear.  ENTITY, best antidote is exposing people to American people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistanijournalists", "title": "Interview With Pakistani Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistani-journalists", "publication_date": "22-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1694, "text": "And it is a privilege having the opportunity to talk to you. I have got a couple of questions that I hope you have not heard thus far this morning. Yesterday it was announced that the First Lady was stepping aside as the administration's main point person on health care reform. Sir, is this a concession on your part that maybe she was just a little too visible in her efforts to get the health care package through Congress? What happened, I think keep in mind, we took this health care debate further than it had ever been taken in American history. For 60 years, Presidents have tried to solve the health care problem, to secure the health insurance of people who had it, and to cover help people who did not and to bring costs in line. And for 60 years, they failed because of the power of the organized health care interests. This is the first time we ever got a bill to both Houses of the Congress. We could have passed the bill this year if the Republicans had been willing to work with us in a bipartisan manner. But they abandoned their commitment to health care reform and decided to play politics with it instead. Are you going to let it rest for awhile, or are you going to go right back at it? No, we are going to try to what I have to do now is to figure out how we can go at it in a way that will make our plan less vulnerable to the $200 million or so that was spent to characterize it as a big Government plan that reduces choices for people who have health insurance. The truth is, our plan lets you keep what you have. It relies on private insurance, not the Government, and it protects people from losing their insurance. It covers people who do not . And then it gives small business people and farmers and individual people the opportunity to buy health care on the same basis as people who are in big businesses or Government. That is what we need to do. And I just need to go back at it in a way that is less vulnerable to the interest groups attacking it. But let me say, it is come out just since we stopped our health care efforts, because we could not pass it through Congress, another million Americans in working families lost their health insurance last year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimdunbarkgoradiosanfranciscocalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jim Dunbar of KGO Radio, San Francisco, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-dunbar-kgo-radio-san-francisco-california", "publication_date": "04-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1695, "text": "We are the only advanced country in the world, the only one, where people under the age of 65 are losing ground in health care coverage, where every year a lot of folks are paying more and more for less coverage, every year more and more people are losing their coverage. And we are also spending more for health care by far than anybody else. The money is going primarily to people in the middle, to clerical costs and insurance companies and what the doctors and hospitals and the others have to spend to keep up with the mindless paperwork of the way we finance the health care system. So we cannot walk away from it. It is killing the budget. It is bad for the economy. It is hurting working people. We are going to have to face up to it. I just have to find a way to do it that makes it less vulnerable to the insurance company attack that it is a big Government plan. ENTITY, I only have 5 minutes here, and I do have a couple more questions. You hear a charge in California we know you are heading here and going to be here over the weekend, and we are glad to have you but you hear a charge that Michael Huffington is buying his way into the Senate. But I point out that Dianne Feinstein, Senator Feinstein, has spent about $15 million in her efforts to keep that seat. And both would argue that they are doing it because the other fellow is. Is there some way we could put a cap on that so that being elected to Congress does not come down to the guy with the most money? But to be fair, Senator Feinstein's had to raise a lot of money because Mr. Huffington said he'd spend however much of his personal fortune he had to to buy the seat. And the really terrifying thing is that since people are awash in information these negative ads have an incredibly disproportionate influence over what they should. And people have no way of knowing whether the information's even true or not. I tried to pass a campaign finance reform bill through Congress, and the Republican Senators killed it at the end of the last legislative session. We could have had campaign finance reform, but they had the power to filibuster it, delay it, and kill it. The Supreme Court has said that we cannot legally stop a wealthy person from spending all the money that he or she wants on a campaign.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimdunbarkgoradiosanfranciscocalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jim Dunbar of KGO Radio, San Francisco, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-dunbar-kgo-radio-san-francisco-california", "publication_date": "04-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1696, "text": "So the only way to discourage a wealthy person from doing that is to put limits on spending and then say if you go over these limits, we are going to set aside a fund, and your opponent gets a dollar for every dollar you spend over it. That would remove the incentive to do that and encourage people to be more efficient and to spend more time answering questions and being more positive. I mean, these campaigns have just turned into nothing more than multimillion dollar negativead slugfests, and they do not have very often they do not have a lot to do with what is going to happen the day after the election. I mean, I think the best case for Feinstein, for example, is that as far as I know, she is the only Senator in my lifetime who in only 2 years in the Senate, her first 2 years in the Senate, has sponsored three major legislative initiatives, the assault weapons ban, the requirement that there be a zero tolerance for kids having guns in schools, and the California desert bill, the biggest wilderness preserve in the history of the country. I know of no Senator in my lifetime who is done that. Now that, it seems to me, ought to be an argument for giving her a 6-year term. She did something in 2 years nobody else has ever done, and she ought to get 6 to keep on helping California. So to me I would like to see these races be more positive, talk about what ideas people have to build the future and help people and empower people to take responsibility for their lives. That seems to me to be what we ought to be talking about. We started our egg timer here 5 minutes ago, and it just went bing. And I agreed with your folks to let you go. You are welcome any time you have got a little time to devote to answering questions. You are welcome any time on KGO. I'd love to do that. I will be at the Kaiser Center in Oakland tomorrow at 2, and I hope some of your listeners will come out and see me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimdunbarkgoradiosanfranciscocalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jim Dunbar of KGO Radio, San Francisco, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-dunbar-kgo-radio-san-francisco-california", "publication_date": "04-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1697, "text": "You have been very busy these days; not much time for the saxophone, I guess, which happens to be my favorite instrument, by the way. I love it myself. I did get a chance to play a couple of weeks ago with a group that was in the White House, but I do not play enough. Well, your message seems to be getting pretty strong, seems to be playing pretty well with the American people. I see where your personal approval rating is up quite a bit, and Democrats in general seem to be a bit more secure for reelection. Well, I hope so, not for partisan reasons but because I think it is good for the country. You know, I came in with a commitment to try to make this country stronger, with more jobs and stronger families and safer streets and to make us stronger abroad. And we have still got some problems in this country, but we are plainly moving in the right direction. If you just take Delaware, for example, there have been 5 times as many new jobs coming to Delaware in 20 months of our Presidency as during the previous 4 years. And we were able to pass the family and medical leave law, which protected 147,000 families in Delaware, if a worker needs to take a little time off when there is a baby born or a parent sick. We have reorganized the student loan program to provide more affordable college loans to more middle class students. It made almost 42,000 students and former students in Delaware eligible for lower costs on their loans. So we are making progress. We passed the crime bill, thanks to Joe Biden's unbelievable leadership. And I have to say, that was an example of bipartisanship. You had Congressman Castle there coming in at the end and trying to help us to get through the crime bill. It is going to make a difference. It is going to empower local communities to reduce crime and violence. So we are moving in the right direction. And I do not want to see the country go backward in this election, even though there are a lot of people who are upset. I suppose you will be here to campaign for Attorney General Charles Oberly, trying to unseat Republican Senator Bill Roth. But Oberly is seen as something of an independent Democrat. No, I like Oberly. I think he is an exciting character to me. You know, the Democrats are not like the Republicans; we do not mind a little independence in our party. I think it is good for people to exercise independent judgment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnwatsonwilmradiowilmingtondelaware", "title": "Interview With John Watson of WILM Radio, Wilmington, Delaware", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-watson-wilm-radio-wilmington-delaware", "publication_date": "04-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1698, "text": "I have just come from Iowa where a retiring Congressman, Republican Congressman Fred Grandy, was complaining about how the Republicans did not want any independence and that he pointed out how they were ordered not to work with me on health care. So I think Oberly has the kind of characteristics and character and ability and energy that would be very good at this time. Sir, what is your game plan, just in case the Republicans are successful, as they think they will be, and win control of the House? Could this work in your favor at all? Some people think it could work politically for me personally, but I am not interested in that. I am interested in moving our country forward. And the thing that bothers me is that the Republicans have committed to a program which would take us right back to the 1980's and what got us in trouble in the first place. I mean, their contract says that if they win control of the House and the Senate, they are going to they want to promise huge tax increases, almost all of it to wealthy individuals. They want to have an increase in defense again, and they want to bring back Star Wars. They promise to balance the budget. Now, one of two things that costs a trillion dollars. So if the Republicans get a hold of the Congress, one of two things is going to happen. They are going to do what they say, which means they will have to cut everything in the Federal Government besides defense and Star Wars by 20 percent, including Social Security We are almost out of time And on Social Security that is a lot. If they do not do that, they are going to explode the deficit, start shipping our jobs overseas again, like they did in the eighties, and we will be in big trouble. So I hope the American people will take a look at people like Oberly. He is an aggressive, independent, progressive person, the kind of person I think that can bring new ideas, new energy, and keep this country going forward, which is what I think we need to do. You are just about out of time, but you mentioned Congressman Castle is helping you. So how do you see the Republican Castle versus Democrat Carrie DeSantis? Well, I mentioned that Castle helped on the crime bill because I think it is important for me not to be as partisan as they have been, and I want to give him credit for that. But the reason that I am supporting the Democrats in these races is that even Mike Castle voted against our economic plan.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnwatsonwilmradiowilmingtondelaware", "title": "Interview With John Watson of WILM Radio, Wilmington, Delaware", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-watson-wilm-radio-wilmington-delaware", "publication_date": "04-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1699, "text": "It sounds like you are having a nice time back there watching the game. I cannot hear you, I am sorry. We made a lot of unforced errors, and as you were saying, UCLA had very quick hands. They played great defense, and I am looking forward to an exciting second half. But you have got to give it to UCLA. They played great defense, and they got a lot of very good shots on offense. I know you have tried to watch a few of Arkansas' games this season. Do you have any fingernails left? The games have been such nail-biters throughout the tournament. Yes, they always give us a lot of thrills. Basketball is exciting enough on its own, but they give us a little extra every game. We try to have a cardiologist at every watching party that we have. ENTITY, ENTITY Did you fill out your brackets this year? Did you get a chance to fill out the brackets at the beginning of the tournament? But I would have been wrong on all accounts except I expected these two teams to be in the finals. ENTITY, we know you are very athletic and earlier this week, on Friday I think, you were in Haiti. And we have some film, a tape of you shooting buckets out there on the grass with some of our good troops down there. And there you put up a bank shot. I do not know if you called it or not. You have got to call that one. Then you shot around at Arkansas State with Arthur Agee, from the documentary film Hoop Dreams. And ENTITY, who you rooted against last year, is going to go over your form on this. He is going to telestrate your form. This is his chance to get even. ENTITY, I am sure you are accustomed to some criticism, so I am going to critique you. And he puts it through. What do you think, ENTITY? What do you think? I think the feet were on the floor. You know, quite honestly, sir, what did you take away from your visit with Arthur Agee today? And I what I took away from it is, here is a young fellow that made up his mind he was going to make something of his life and try to live out his dream. He is committed to continuing his education until he gets his degree. He still wants to play pro basketball. But whatever happens to him, he is going to have a good life.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpatobrienmikekrzyzewskiandquinnbucknercbssports", "title": "Interview With Pat O'Brien, Mike Krzyzewski, and Quinn Buckner of CBS Sports", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pat-obrien-mike-krzyzewski-and-quinn-buckner-cbs-sports", "publication_date": "03-04-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1708, "text": "ENTITY, as we speak to you in the Oval Office, you are really one of only two individuals that can view the Presidency through your dad's eyes and your own. What has surprised you about this job? I agonized for my dad. When they would say things about him that I did not think were fair, I agonized, because I love him so much. I mean I would get angry at whoever said it and, you know; anyway, I was frustrated. ENTITY is a much different role, and therefore, I mean, I understand it comes with the job when people say things about you. And so we have got kind of a role reversal. My dad agonizes when he reads stuff about me. So I found that being ENTITY is actually easier than being the son of the President in many ways. You took the job with a Florida recount, a shortened transition period, and as you reflect on that time 8 years ago, were you in any way at a disadvantage in taking over this office? I do think it-the Florida recount set kind of an ugly mood amongst some in the electorate. In other words, the election was-in their minds, was in doubt. That made it harder to come as a-to unify the country after the election. In terms of the transition, we had-I had a lot of experienced people that were ready to hit the ground. And they did a remarkable job of getting us ready to assume office when we did. Right. And this is an idea that President-elect Obama suggested here in the Oval Office when he came to visit me. And I am going to follow up on it. I will be the host, and I am looking forward to it. What will you talk about? I am sure he is going to ask us all questions, I would guess; if not, we will just share war stories. Will you deliver a farewell address in this office? Yes, I am thinking about it. I am thinking about it. A lot of Presidents have, and I am giving it serious thought. If I give it, it is going to be trying to leave behind some lessons learned. Well, let me share with you what two former Presidents have said. Crises will continue; . In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small, there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. And then he talked about the industrial-military complex.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1709, "text": "And obviously, each farewell address is going to be tailored to the circumstances under which the President had to make decisions. And I suspect if I do one, and I really have not figured it out yet, but I have talked to a speechwriter about-should I decide to do it, what would we say? And one thing, of course, is going to be we have to be vigilant and cannot let our guard down, because a terrorist threat still exists. Ronald Reagan had said, Are we doing a good enough job teaching our children what America is and what she represents in the long history of the world? In his statement of saying there is a great tradition of Presidential warnings as they leave the White House. I have not really viewed the farewell address in terms of Presidential warnings, but I can-it makes sense to say, I have learned this, and I wish my successor all the best, and America needs to be on the lookout. One option for me is to talk about isolationism and protectionism, and that it is very important for us to resist those isms. The world needs our presence. The people dying of ENTITY on the continent of Africa need a robust response by the United States to save lives. We need voices calling upon coalition members to stay in the fight against the terrorists. And protectionism is rearing its ugly head; witness the fact that we had trouble getting good free trade agreements through the Congress with Panama and Colombia and South Korea. And so maybe that is what I will warn about as well. How should we use former Presidents? How do you want to be used, in what capacity, as you leave this office? One thing I do not want to do is stay on the stage. The spotlight needs to shift to President-elect Obama, and it needs to stay on President-elect Obama, because he is the President. And therefore, I will not try to get it to shift to me. And I will be very respectful of him during his Presidency. I think each President is going to have to chart his own way. I am going to build a policy institute at Southern Methodist to talk about, for example, the isms -isolationism and protectionism, and the need to resist them-or the transformative power of freedom. President-elect Obama, I am confident, will call upon Presidents to take on a mission. I will be happy to do it, particularly if I agree with the mission.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1710, "text": "For example, I asked Dad and President Clinton to help on the tsunamis. But, you know, each role will be defined according to the comfort level of the ex-President. Are there some things that you want in your library? Well, I do want to have a policy center. You mean in terms of how it is going to function? There will be the classic library, you know, rotating exhibitions to keep it relevant so people will be interested in it. They tell me that we moved 25,000 boxes full of files and memos, and I think they said, like, 30 million e-mails-or 300 million e-mails. I mean, a huge number of e-mails; none of which are mine, by the way, since I have not been e-mailing. And this is a place of debate, discussion, a place to herald freedom, a place to continue some of the initiatives that we have started, like the malaria initiative on the continent of Africa, or PEPFAR. And Laura is going to be wanting to be involved with women's movements around the world, the freedom movement in Burma. And that-the policy center and the museum are going to take a lot of time. You have had a tough couple of years. Most second Presidents have had tough second terms. Well, in my case, I was a wartime ENTITY, and war is very exhausting. War is hard for a country. And you know, I made the decision that we were going to win. And there has been some critical moments where I guess I could have taken the popular way out and retreated, like in 2006, but instead went with 30,000 more troops, because I felt strongly that defeat in Iraq would be terrible for the security of the country, it would be terrible for the morale of the military, and it would be really hard for me, the Commander in Chief, to face a mother who lost a son in combat. The other part of my Presidency that is been hard is we have had, you know, huge economic turmoil recently. But it is happening, and therefore, I have made the decision not to let there be a massive collapse, which would hurt the average guy in the street. And what is hard about this one is, a hard-working taxpayer is making his mortgage, wonders why ENTITY is using his money to save firms that got a little over-got a little excessive in their desire to make money. And I understand that complaint.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1711, "text": "And my answer, of course, is, is that if I thought they could fail without causing the average guy real economic hardship, I'd have let them. Anyway, so it has been a-it is been an interesting Presidency from that perspective. the auto industry. Are you looking for concessions from the unions in order to try to figure out how this is all going to come together? Yes, you see, there is two principles that is driving me on this. In other words, I am concerned about a shock to the system. I am also concerned about putting good money after bad. And therefore, it is going to be very important that whatever we do, that there be a plan that the autos-that would be management as well as dealers as well as labor-show how they could be viable for the future. You know, this is just a very difficult economic time for the country. I am concerned about joblessness. But I made the decision that my team and myself will not let the economy go down. When you took office, did you expect to have the biggest expansion of the Federal Government under your watch? I knew the mandatory spending-that would be Social Security and Medicare-were going to rise substantially because baby boomers like me were getting ready to retire. I did not realize we'd be in war and-because, you know, the attacks of September the 11th came out of nowhere. But once we were in war, I darn sure was going to make our troops-make sure our troops had what they need to succeed. And most of the growth in non-entitlement spending came on the military and homeland side. And you bet I was going to fund the troops, and you bet we are going to make sure the homeland is protected. Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan in their 8 years used the veto pen three or four or five times as often as you have. You have used it about a dozen times. Well, primarily because I was working with people in my own party. In other words, for the first 4 years of my Presidency-see, up to '06, we ran the Congress, except in the beginning. And so therefore, I would sit down with colleagues-not colleagues, but party members and friends, and we'd work out our issues. And we got a lot done that I was satisfied with. Toward the end I had to veto because I did not agree with what Congress was doing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1712, "text": "And one area where it was very difficult for me was on the budget. See, you sit here in the Oval Office, and we'd agree with the-I'd agree with the Speaker and the leader of the Senate on the size of the pie. Here is what we need to spend, and here is this much for military and this much for education, this much for health. We all agreed to that. The problem was the slices of the pie got to be a problem because of earmarks. But I did not have the line-item veto. And therefore, once you agree to the size of the pie, you are pretty well stuck with what is in the pie until ENTITY gets the line-item veto. In terms of the institutions, do you think that the checks and balance work between this end of Pennsylvania Avenue and the other end? I mean-and there is constant back and forth between the executive branch and the legislative branch, and of course, the judiciary weighs in a lot. But yes, we got a great system. How often, if at all, do you talk to the Supreme Court Justices? You know, Laura and I hosted a dinner for the Justices and their spouses and-but yes, I may see them socially or, you know, at some of these banquets that you go to where the comedian makes fun of ENTITY, then ENTITY makes fun of himself, and everybody has a jolly time, except ENTITY. But yes, the Justices will be at some of these dinners, and I will just chitchat with them, but never talk policy, of course, with them. First of all, do you watch the programs? And have the media treated you fairly? I mean, I will tell you, my relationship with the media is-with the individuals in the media has been very good. Of course, I read what is written, and I, a lot of times, do not like what is written. Then I realize they may not like what I am saying. But I have no complaints. In other words, I am not one of these guys who'll say, Oh, man, everybody misunderstood me because of the media. I am a little disappointed at some of the platforms that encouraged harsh rhetoric. And there is a-it seems like to me that there is such competition for air space that some people feel like if they can yell louder, with harsher rhetoric, then they will get noticed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1713, "text": "And the tone has not been good in Washington, and I have been disappointed in that, and I bear some of the blame for that. I am optimistic that we can change the tone in Washington. I believe things happen for a reason, and I hope the long wait of the last 5 weeks will heighten a desire to move beyond the bitterness and the partisanship. That was a hopeful person saying that. In other words, the tone did not -it changed some initially. Remember, we got No Child Left Behind done; we got some-we worked together on PEPFAR. I mean, this is a- some people here in this town use the politics of personal destruction to advance their agenda. But no, I was hoping for a better tone, and it did not happen. So what would you tell President-elect Obama? He will have a Democrat in the House and the Senate, like you did in 2001, and he is talked about trying to unite the country again. I wish him all the best. He may be in a position-maybe he will not have to deal with quite as contentious as issues as I did, or maybe he will, who knows. He came in with a strong vote, and he is got good majorities in the House and Senate, and maybe he will get some things done. You have talked about your faith. In those quiet moments of prayer, do you want to share what you are thinking about, what you are praying for? Probably not, but I can tell you the effects of prayer have made this a very-my life is joyous, believe it or not; some days happy, some days not happy, every day joyous. I pray for a lot of things. I mean, I pray for my-I pray for strength, and I pray for comfort; I pray for friends; I pray for my family's safety. My relationship with the Almighty is a very personal relationship, as is yours. Do you think this job has aged you? I do not know, what do you think? I mean, I think I am wiser, and that I have seen a lot more. But you tell me, has it aged me? I cannot -I am not one of these guys that kind of, you know-- You are biking on weekends. Would you say you are among the healthiest Presidents to serve in this job? Would I say that? So how do you do it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1714, "text": "I work out every day except for one day, and I make sure my scheduler knows this. Early on in the Presidency I said, I want time to work out, because I think it is -I know part of being a-doing this job is to be a disciplined person. Like, I start meetings on time; I end them on time. I have got a routine that obviously varies depending on the moment, but a routine that is pretty well set. You know, I get here early in the morning and meet with the Chief of Staff and the National Security Adviser, then meet with the intelligence people. And the reason why is, is that I think it is important for ENTITY to be predictable among the people with whom he works, so that there is not a sloppiness in the organization. And anybody can find time to exercise if they put their mind to it. What in your life created the schedule that you now carry out? I was undisciplined at times. But you know, I used to drink too much, which is a sign of being undisciplined. And it took discipline to quit and maybe a little help from a higher authority. But I was not a knee-walking drunk, but I was-you know, I was drinking, and alcohol was beginning to compete for my affections. One night I had too much to drink in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and have not had a drink since. I do not know where it comes from, maybe my mom and dad. I have not sat around and tried to figure it out; I can just tell you it is true. How much time do you spend reading? I do not really watch a lot of TV, in all due respect. Of course, if I did, I'd be watching you. But I read a lot. I read a lot on airplanes; I read a lot upstairs at the White House; I read on the exercise bicycle. What do you take away from books? I mean, how do you translate what you read into how you make decisions or how you go about your business? Well, sometimes books are just to escape, like mysteries, and it is just a chance to get your mind off the moment. Sometimes I read books to-a lot of history books, and I can take lessons away from the books, like Abraham Lincoln. I just finished a James McPherson book on Abraham Lincoln and his relationship with his generals, which is an interesting topic for a Commander in Chief.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1715, "text": "One of the lessons of Abraham Lincoln that all Presidents ought to understand, particularly at times of war, is that the President must pay attention to the troops. And Lincoln went out of his way to be with the sergeants and the enlisted personnel as well as the generals. And he-you know, he visited the wounded a lot, and he visited with widows a lot. And it is a good lesson for any President. And the lesson is, pay attention to your military and work with your military and show your military that you care for them. And you go to a hospital and see these wounded kids and word gets out all across the-you know, all across the system, where-and I have met with a lot of the families of the fallen, which is my duty, but I think the troops appreciate that, that ENTITY cares enough about their comrades' families that he would meet with them. And yes, it is an interesting experience to do that. The comforter in chief is the person who usually gets comforted. You have had a number of events here as we begin to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln's bicentennial. His picture is here, obviously, his bust in this office. That is one example about the Lincoln Presidency. But what else in the 17 or 18 books that you have read on Lincoln do you take away from what he meant for this office and the country? Well, he spoke with moral clarity on certain truths. And one basic truth was, all men are created equal under God; 1864, he could have easily have said, well, maybe not all of us are created equal. But Lincoln spoke with certainty. And I think Presidents need to do that, need to speak moral truth, have a set of principles that are inviolate. Why do I have to carry this burden? And first of all, I do not believe it is a burden to be ENTITY. I do not believe there is -it is not a burden to deal with problems. But Lincoln keeps things in perspective. If you think you got a lousy time, think about what Abraham Lincoln went through. 600,000 people died; he lost his son up-stairs-Willie died in the White House; his wife was not happy. And yet he was a man who stuck to principles and stayed strong and died not having any earthly idea of where his standing would be in history.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1716, "text": "My question is, whether it is Scott McClellan or Paul O'Neill or others, does that affect the way a President deals with his Cabinet, his staff, and does that worry you? It is interesting you said that. That is a very interesting question, because I had staff members walk up to me and say, How can you trust me? Trust is a very important part of the White House. Every President is going to have to deal with that. And it is essential that the President assure the people-and when these books come out, assure the people here that- I trust you a lot. And I think my words calmed some of the folks I work with down, that they did not feel alienated. First person who is asked me that. In our remaining minute, let me ask you about this office. It is based upon a Methodist hymn called A Charge To Keep I Have, that was sung when I was first inaugurated Governor of Texas. And my friend O'Neil, Joe I. O'Neil, from Midland, Texas, said, I got a painting based upon that hymn. Would you like to use it? And I looked at it and said, absolutely. It is by W.H.D. Koerner. The thing about O'Neil that is important is he introduced me and Laura in his backyard. He and Jan had a little barbeque out there, and there was two other guests, me and Laura. The importance of that painting is that it is obviously a religious painting. And I tell people ENTITY should never promote a religion. But ENTITY always ought to jealously guard and defend the right for anybody to worship or not worship, that we are all equal, if we are Hindu, Jew, Muslim. The greatness about America is you can choose and worship the way you want to worship. I entertain people here quite a bit. I said, What are you talking about? Well, it turns out the Resolute is famous in National Treasure, which I have not seen yet. But it is even more famous because Presidents have used it. Roosevelt put the door on there. Out the door John-John Kennedy poked his head in the most famous Oval Office photo. And President Reagan put the bottom there to lift it up. The desk was given to us by Queen Victoria. The wood is from a ship called the Resolute, HMS Resolute, that we rescued in the Arctic.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithstevescullycspan", "title": "Interview With Steve Scully of C-SPAN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-scully-c-span", "publication_date": "18-12-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1717, "text": "Right now, I'd like to bring in the Speaker of the House, ENTITY. thank you so much for joining us and, I want to say thank you. You set aside $322 billion in emergency loans for small businesses. People across this country need it. But, already today, the head of the Consumer Bankers Association said that we would need a trillion dollars to meet small business demand. Well, this is $322 billion on top of the $350 that we had done a couple of weeks before. I think it is all in the execution. As the Secretary of the Treasury says, let us see how this works and where our needs are. But first, let me just say, watching your report and the rest, how much we pray for everyone in our country, those who have lost their lives. When businesses are opening, I think that is unfortunate because we are not protecting the investment that we have made, but that is a choice. And I pray for those people, too, that they do not get sick. And we have the lives at stake and we have the livelihoods at stake. the entrepreneurship of America, the optimism of it all, the courage to start a small business. And we really need to help them. So, we are all committed to that. We were very pleased in our last bill that we expanded that opportunity. The so-called underbanked, those who would have less possibility of being first in line with some of the banks. And so, in any event, let us see how this goes. But, we have to do other things. It is about jobs, jobs, jobs. And the issue is that we have to have state and local. the health care workers, the first responders, police, fire, emergency services, people transportation, food, the postal service and the rest. Those are jobs, too, and when you open up your business, you want to have customers. You can have the rent paid and employees paid and electricity - the utility bill paid, but you still have to have customers. So, we want to, again, make sure that these people who are risking their lives to save other people's lives are not risking their jobs as well because the state and localities cannot pay them. It is not about bureaucracy. It is about delivery of service to the American people. So, we want to have a vitality throughout our economy. We may have to think in terms of some different ways to put money in people's pockets.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonmsnbcslivewithstephanieruhle", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-msnbcs-live-with-stephanie-ruhle", "publication_date": "27-04-2020", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1718, "text": "But we know that the needs are massive in terms of economically. From a health perspective, we are preparing people to live without a vaccine for a year, but from an economic perspective, look at PPP. Even with all this money, we are only creating solutions for two months. Two months from now, when the majority of these businesses do not open back up, then what? Well, I think we should extend the time. I think we should extend the time. I think what you suggest makes all the sense in the world. what is operational and what needs other attention. Others have suggested a minimum income for - a guaranteed income for people. Is that worthy of attention now? Perhaps so, because there are many more people than just in small business and hired by small business, as important as that is to the vitality of our economy. And other people who are not in the public sector, you know, meeting our needs in so many ways, that may need some assistance as well. But we are talking about the lives of the American people. And, again, the pull and push of should we open up or not, if it jeopardizes the lives of the American people, we have to handle it with care. What is the execution of it? And what is - what are we getting our money's worth on? I think we have to look at that, too. With all the best intentions in the world, but nonetheless, we want the money to go where it needs. there are three things that I hear from the American people, from - by way of my constituents, but also the constituents of hundreds of Members of Congress. They know they are risking their lives to save other lives and, now, they are risking their jobs, as I mentioned. Secondly, they want their check. They want their direct payment check, their unemployment check or they want their small business - their PPP check. They want their check. And, third, they do not want any of this hundreds of billions of dollars that we are injecting into the economy, that some of which goes to major corporations, any of that money to be use for anything other than keeping people in their jobs. They do not want any buybacks, corporate whatever, dividends, bonuses, CEO pay, the rest of that. That really angers the American people. It is sort of a hangover from the Great Recession. So, it is important that we have oversight to see exactly how all of this is spent.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonmsnbcslivewithstephanieruhle", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-msnbcs-live-with-stephanie-ruhle", "publication_date": "27-04-2020", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1719, "text": "Not in a pointing a blame - point the fingers, but just to make sure everybody knows that there will be transparency and there will be accountability. I agree with you wholeheartedly, but then I have to impress upon you, it is the government's responsibility to do that. As it relates to PPP, it is the media who has outed all of these companies who took the money. It was the media who talked about hedge funds and private equity firms and law firms taking the money. The government sets the rules, ma'am. And we passed the law, but the Executive branch puts forth the advisories and the regulation. So, when I suggested to the Secretary of the Treasury some of the concerns we have about what you have just described, he said, 'Well, I am the one who put out the list. They would not have known that had I not put out the list.' So, I guess that was his way of saying, 'Let us all take a look at this as we go forth.' They make a world of difference, life and death to the survival of a company, for some companies, and others really do not need it that much. And we have to take a look at how banks are compensated. They get a higher percentage for a small loan. But if you get five percent on a $50,000 loan, that is a lot less than getting one percent on a $5 million loan, and again, is that right? And others - just to subject everything to the scrutiny that needs to be done for the taxpayer dollars and how they are spent. I think we have to do what we need to do. Others are talking about the deficit - 'Oh, the national debt.' Well, they never talked about the national debt when they spent nearly $2 trillion for a tax bill to get 83 percent of the benefits to the top one percent in our country. I do not like building the national debt, but a lot of what we are doing is stimulus. Food stamps are stimulus, even though we cannot get them to agree with us on that. Then let us break down all of these issues because the idea last week that angered so many people was that bigger companies with other access to capital were using PPP. But the idea of PPP is the Paycheck Protection Program, and if you no longer want some of these larger businesses in there, what are you going to do, A, to help them?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonmsnbcslivewithstephanieruhle", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-msnbcs-live-with-stephanie-ruhle", "publication_date": "27-04-2020", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1720, "text": "And, B, you know they are going to lay off thousands and thousands of workers, especially restaurant chains. Well, look, I come from a city of San Francisco. Hospitality - we have a diversity in our economy in San Francisco, hospitality being a very important part of it. But it is important in many places throughout the country, actually throughout the whole country as I am finding out. And we really do have to address that, as if they are not being able to get the same kind of small business loan, perhaps in some cases, again, as you said, we have to extend the time. But in some cases, we have to also perhaps expand it to 1,000 people rather than just 500. That would help some non-profits, which we hope would be able to participate in all of this. But they are larger in number and lower in pay that they pay people. There is some limitations on what can be done in that regard. I have spoken to the Chairman of the Fed about that and, of course, to the Secretary of the Treasury. where are these dollars are going and what is it in there that is, in a sense of decency, that the banks and the bigger businesses who really do not need it have deeper pockets, a longer survival capacity than some of the small businesses which will be gone, as you said, longer than two months. Many of them will disappear, never to return from what they are telling me. So again, we all join together for PPP. We believe in that, but, again, we want to make sure it works. If we scrutinize it after the fact when time is so essential, we could lose businesses, and right now we are arguing over which businesses need it most. With the exception of just very few businesses, most industries across the country are in desperate need. Do we have to start to focus and say, does the federal government need to just take over payroll, create mortgage deferment or just say we need to create a national economic holiday until it is safe? Because right now, we are bickering over who is suffering more. I think it is a legitimate discussion of, again, when we passed - I saw you had the leader of their Floor debate on our bill we passed the other day, on there saying, 'We could have done this two weeks ago.' They could have agreed to the additional - they had $250 . We brought it up to $480 .", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonmsnbcslivewithstephanieruhle", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-msnbcs-live-with-stephanie-ruhle", "publication_date": "27-04-2020", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1721, "text": "And when we brought it up to $480 , it had $100 billion for hospitals and testing in there, which is essential to our opening up. But we also had $120 billion for smaller businesses, which are getting left in the shade, and that just was not right. So, it is not a question of bickering. It is about establishing priorities, and we have a differences between our parties. The gentleman that you interviewed, Mr. Brady, he said on the Floor of the House, 'We could have done this two weeks ago, except they had extracurricular stuff.' Extracurricular stuff? 120 billion for small businesses, more in terms of the EIDL loans, which are flying out the door because they are easier to get for businesses. They have a longer - a long-term and a low interest rate, so they are very appealing. And the grants and aid that never do have to be paid back, in addition to $250 billion more for PPP. So, we have to be smart about this. What they rejected two weeks before, they passed unanimously in the Senate and overwhelmingly, in a bipartisan way, in the House. Every bill we have passed has been bipartisan, but we have had to make the case about lower-income, smaller businesses, again, women, minority - we do not want to put any - prioritize anybody over anybody else because it is about jobs. You know it is about jobs. No matter where you work, it is about jobs. So, if that business needs the infusion to keep people on the job, then that is what this is about. But it also has to not ossify any disparity of access to credit in our country, which does exist. So, we want everybody to enjoy the vitality of it all. you had said on Friday that you were disappointed that the banks did not act as better stewards. Banks are going to protect themselves because that is what they have to do, and they asked the government to release them of some of their risk review requirements because, if what the banks did was give loans very quickly to borrowers who they did not know, if those were not good loans, those banks could be on the hook months from now. If the government wanted it done differently, why would not the government do it itself? The IRS, they know how to collect our money. They could give the money out.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonmsnbcslivewithstephanieruhle", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-msnbcs-live-with-stephanie-ruhle", "publication_date": "27-04-2020", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1722, "text": "Well, it was a decision that Secretary of the Treasury made to go through the banks for facilitation, that perhaps it would be faster to do than to go through a SBA - a Small Business Administration process. In my - I do not want banks to be made villains in this. They are facilitators, and this should be something we go forward with in a very positive way. It is interesting, though, that they make a lot of money off of it and, therefore, it could affect their behavior in all of it. But what I had said is, with the fact the SBA has kissed this loan, there is no risk. And as well as the Fed enabling them to not have this count. If I may, the reason for the delay, if I may, the reason for the delay, the banks need to do a risk review process. After they do that, they then go to the SBA. One of the main reasons for the hold-up, banks did not have to do a very long risk review for clients that they already knew. That is one of the reasons it went so quickly. For new borrowers, it took some more time. So they are on the hook before they go to the SBA. These banks lived through this in 2008. They did not make good decisions and they paid for it after. If they did that again, they'd get annihilated. Well, I would say that in 2008, they were part of the problem. I do not see that this time. But let me say that that is why it was hard to understand why our Republican colleagues were not embracing our initiative of $60 billion that would go to community development financial institutions. So those institutions who know the neighborhood, who know the community, know the customers, know the businesses, know the culture would be able to make loans, smaller loans, into the community. I thought it was really something that they would welcome because, therefore, those who know that community better would be meeting their needs. Will they get to go before the big banks to make sure the money goes to the small borrowers? And the Secretary has been very - working very hard in my view, when I talked to him about it, he said, 'We are working it, we are working it.' So that these portals, or whatever, are for that community. The $250 is already going to the PPP. This is additional and specific to that community.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonmsnbcslivewithstephanieruhle", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-msnbcs-live-with-stephanie-ruhle", "publication_date": "27-04-2020", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1723, "text": "But also, $50 billion in EIDL loans, the Emergency Injury Loans, and that is $50 billion leveraged to over $300 billion in loans. No matter how big you are or how small you are, people like the long-term, low interest and the immediacy of getting that. So, that was a very important part of this as well. And then we have the grants that every small business can apply for. But you have said it very clearly. Is it number of employees? Is it length of time? Is it in terms of non-profits, the 501, , ? Let us see how we can expand this. Because we could actually, with the combination of all of these things, be reaching maybe 90-something percent of all the small businesses in America. And that would be a wonderful thing because, again, the entrepreneurship, the vitality, the courage, the optimism to start a small business. And then people have them for a number of years and then you see their hopes just fade because of something so beyond their control. So, make no mistake, this is central. That is why we made it the centerpiece of the first - of the first distribution of funds into the business community. We also had a big program for those aerospace industry, airline industry, which, again, in order to keep people on the job, they received - the Secretary has the discretion to spend a great deal of money there, but we do not want to see any of that money squandered on anything other than job retention because that is what the point of all of this is. And that is how people are going to be able to spend in the economy, have consumer confidence, be able to meet the needs of their families, as we deal with the suffering that is going with this. So, in this next bill, we will be supporting vote by mail in a very important way. We think it is a health issue, at this point. And I did not want to leave this conversation without mentioning the importance of the life, the livelihood - the life of our people, the livelihood of themselves and our economy and the life of our democracy. American business needs it. I appreciate all that everyone in our government is doing right now to help us in this trying time. Well, thank you for your objective view of it all because that is all very helpful.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "pelosihousegovnewspressreleasestranscriptofpelosiinterviewonmsnbcslivewithstephanieruhle", "title": "Transcript of Pelosi Interview on MSNBC's Live with Stephanie Ruhle", "source": "https://pelosi.house.gov/news/press-releases/transcript-of-pelosi-interview-on-msnbcs-live-with-stephanie-ruhle", "publication_date": "27-04-2020", "crawling_date": "28-06-2023", "politician": ["Nancy Pelosi"], "gender": ["F"]}}
{"id": 1724, "text": "As the country knows, we are in a great deal of turmoil. When you think about the names of Mike Brown, of Tamir Rice, of Eric Gardner, and even now of this young man in Phoenix, the country is concerned about can we trust police, are we safe with police. My first question for you is, in the midst of this and all that is going on you did not start this. This problem did not begin under your watch. But how much of it does your administration feel you are responsible for making an impact on? Well, I think an enormous amount. Not just because, as President, you are always responsible for what happens in this country and you have got to be part of the solution, not part of the problem, but because of my particular experiences that I bring to this office. I had a group of young people come before we met, a wider group of civil rights leaders and law enforcement. Most of them were somewhere between 18 and 25. A couple of them were from Ferguson. And when they described their own personal experiences of having been stopped for no reason, or having generated suspicion because they were in a community that supposedly they did not belong, my mind went back to what it was like for me when I was 17, 18, 20. And as I told them, not only do I hear the pain and frustration of being subjected to that kind of constant suspicion, but part of the reason I got into politics was to figure out how can I bridge some of those gaps and understanding so that the larger country understands this is not just a black problem or a brown problem, this is an American problem. So we take this very seriously. Eric Holder obviously takes it seriously. He is got a similar set of stories and experiences he can share. And in some ways, we have made progress over the last six years on a wide range of criminal justice issues, making sure that we looked at how are drug laws being enforced; making sure that we are shifting how at least federal prosecutors think about the charges they bring against low-level drug offenders. And we have had some success. I mean, that is part of the reason why we have seen, last year, for the first time in 40 years, the incarceration rate in federal prisons actually went down 10 percent at the same time that crime was still going down by 10 percent. And that showed we can have good policing and good law enforcement and be fair and be smart.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffjohnsonblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Jeff Johnson of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-johnson-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "12-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1725, "text": "But the fact is that what we have seen now on videotape because it used to be folks would say, well, maybe blacks are exaggerating, maybe some of these situations are not what they describe. But we have now seen on television, for everybody to see. It gives us an opportunity I think to finally have the kind of conversation that is been a long time coming. And with that conversation, I think JFK said that those who stand in the way of peaceful revolution make for violent revolution inevitably. He was not talking about the states, but it is relevant now. And so how necessary are the protests that we are seeing all over the country? How necessary are they to the process of moving the ball, the policy ball, the legislative ball? Absolutely. And that is why I had them in the Oval Office, some of these folks who've been organizing these protests. Because the old adage, power concedes nothing without a fight I think that is true. But what is also true is that a country's conscience sometimes has to be triggered by some inconvenience, because I think a lot of people who saw the Eric Garner video are troubled, even if they have not had that same experience themselves. I think there are a lot of good, well-meaning people I think there are probably a lot of police officers who might have looked at that and said, that is a tragedy what happened, and we have got to figure out how to bring an end to these kinds of tragedies. And the value of peaceful protests, activism, organizing is it reminds the society this is not yet done. And part of what I said when we convened a meeting on Monday here at the White House was not only that I was announcing a task force that has to report in 90 days with specific, concrete steps around training, around how we are equipping police, how we are holding police officers more accountable, not only were we going to put more funding into some of the training and technology that can prevent these things from happening, but I am going to stay on this. And not only am I going to stay on it; by virtue of this staying in the news because of some of these protests, hopefully the entire society says let us finally try to make some real progress on this. And progress means different things to different people. So there are those that want body cameras. There are those who want civilian review boards. And much of this is not a federal mandate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffjohnsonblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Jeff Johnson of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-johnson-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "12-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1726, "text": "Most of it is not federal, but the federal government can have an influence. We fund a lot of jurisdictions all across the country. And if we can identify best practices, then for us to be able to say, you need to adopt these best practices, and if you do not , then perhaps some of the funding that is available around some things that law enforcement cares about become less available. We are going to provide more to folks who are doing the right thing and we are going to be investigating folks who are not doing the right thing. I think that becomes an important part of the leverage that we can exert. And does that happen through federal legislation, or does that happen through utilizing the DOJ as a we saw Eric Holder in Cleveland yesterday, and the decision, the supervision agreement I think was a good one that said to the city of Cleveland, here is what you have been doing wrong, systemically, and now we are going to hold you accountable. Let us look at what the task force generates. I mean, I have confidence we have got a police chief, we have got a criminologist, we have got civil rights leaders, we have got activists as part of this task force process. Let us see the specifics that they generate. But I will tell you that the Department of Justice already has authority. So in the Eric Garner case, Eric Holder, I think properly, said we are going to initiate a civil rights investigation. We already have the ability to take a look. Now, the standards at the federal level are higher, and there are so many local municipalities, local police departments that doing it at the local level, doing it at the state level is going to be a lot more effective, because to bring federal cases, it is a high bar. It is got to be not just something that happened where there is some questions; there is got to be a sense that maybe justice has not been served by the existing process at the state and local levels. But I think that everybody should feel confident that this Justice Department is taking this very seriously, has taken it very seriously. What I'd like to do, though, is to change what happens on the ground, because that is going to be more lasting. And I will just give you a couple examples.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffjohnsonblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Jeff Johnson of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-johnson-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "12-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1727, "text": "When I was in the state legislature in Illinois, we had problems with racial profiling when it came to traffic stops, and we had problems repeatedly with confessions in crimes that later on there were suggestions maybe they had been coerced. So two of the things I am most proud of was passing a law requiring videotaping of interrogations so that my argument was this protected the police as well as the accused because there is not going to be any question. If they confessed, it is all there on tape. If they did not , then the suggestion that they did is not going to make sense either. On racial profiling, it was a simple matter of just keeping data. You have to record who it is that you are stopping. The minute somebody knows they are being watched, somebody is looking over their shoulder, then they are a little more intentional about is this a legitimate stop? Is this a stop that I am making because somebody is really breaking the law, or because I just do not like the looks of the person who is driving through this neighborhood? And what we saw was not only a reduction in the disparity on traffic stops, but my argument, again, to the police department was, this will make you a more effective police force, because instead of wasting your time with folks who should not be stopped you can focus on the folks who should be stopped. And one of the things that I want us to make sure we understand is that, communities of color need good law enforcement. I mean, there is a lot of crime, and one of the things that we talked about on Monday here was you have got young people who end up getting caught between police that they do not trust and folks on the streets who are trying to rough them up. And they should have confidence that the police are on their side. And if they have that confidence then the police are going to have an easier time doing their job, and they are more likely to come home safe. And when they do not have that confidence and we are seeing that with young people all over the country. There are a lot of people that in many cases do not think that you have been aggressive enough in talking about the numbers of African American men that are overwhelmingly shot versus white. Are there ever times when the responsibilities and obligations of President get in the way of how you want to respond as a human?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffjohnsonblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Jeff Johnson of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-johnson-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "12-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1728, "text": "Well, sometimes people's concerns are not based on fact, because if you look at after what happened with Michael Brown, if you looked at what happened after Trayvon, if you looked at the decision after Eric Garner, I am being pretty explicit about my concern, and being pretty explicit about the fact that this is a systemic problem, that black folks and Latinos and others are not just making this up. I describe it in very personal terms. I think what sometimes people are frustrated by is me not simply saying, this is what the outcome should have been. And that I cannot do, institutionally. It is my Justice Department that is investigating these cases. And part of the rule of law is that I am not putting my fingers, my thumb on the scale of justice. And it could compromise investigations if it appeared that I was trying to steer to a particular outcome. So I am sure that there is some folks who just want me to say, in such-and-such a case, this is what I think should have happened, and if I had been on a grand jury this is what I would have said, and so forth and so on. I will leave it to people to speculate on what I am saying to myself or Michelle when were alone at night. But what I can say is that this country is at its best when everybody is being treated fairly. We have a history and a legacy of people not being treated fairly in all kinds of walks of life. It is particularly important for people to feel like they are being treated fairly by law enforcement and police, because the consequences when they are not treated fairly can be deadly. The vast majority of law enforcement officers are doing a really tough job, and most of them are doing it well and are trying to do the right thing. But a combination of bad training, in some cases; a combination in some cases of departments that really are not trying to root out biases, or tolerate sloppy police work; a combination in some cases of folks just not knowing any better, and in a lot of cases, subconscious fear of folks who look different all of this contributes to a national problem that is going to require a national solution. And when I told the young people who I met with and we are going to have more conversations like this over the coming months is this is not going to be solved overnight. This is something that is deeply rooted in our society; it is deeply rooted in our history.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffjohnsonblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Jeff Johnson of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-johnson-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "12-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1729, "text": "But the two things that are going to allow us to solve it number one is the understanding that we have made progress. And if you talk to your parents, grandparents, uncles, they will tell you that things are better. And the reason it is important for us to understand progress has been made is that then gives us hope that we can make even more progress. The second thing that I insist of these young people is we have to be persistent, because typically progress is in steps, it is in increments. When you are dealing with something as deeply rooted as racism or bias in any society, you have got to have vigilance, but you have to recognize that it is going to take some time, and you just have to be steady so that you do not give up when we do not get all the way there. I said to somebody, we are not going to make it perfect, but we can make it better. And better is good, because over time, you have enough better, 10 years, 20 years from now, our kids are safer, the community is more confident about its place, the police officers are going to be in a position to do a better job. We talked about having 15-year-old daughters. And at one point those daughters may have children. What is the vision that you have not necessarily as President of the United States, but as ENTITY , the man for those children that is different than what Mike Brown, Tamir Rice and others have had to face? I want my children to be seen as the individuals that they are, and I want them to be judged based on the content of their character and their behavior and their talents and their gifts. I do not want them to be objects of fear simply because of misguided attitudes. Part of what I think is so heartbreaking and frustrating for a lot of folks when they watch this is the recognition that simply by virtue of color you have got less margin for error. And that is particularly true for black boys. Young men, teenage boys sometimes they are going to do stupid stuff. You did stupid stuff. I did stupid stuff. Most of the time it is harmless. And then we grow and we progress, and we become, hopefully, solid citizens and men who are contributing to our society.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffjohnsonblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Jeff Johnson of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-johnson-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "12-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1730, "text": "We also want a boy who is a boy, or a young man who maybe is a little confused, maybe makes a mistake we want them to be given the same benefit of the doubt as any other man would, or any other boy would be given. Because this does not just begin on the streets. We have been working with the Department of Education on the fact that you have got black kindergartners being kicked out of school at significantly higher rates. By nature, they are disruptive. And if we are already making judgments at that early age in a school system then what can we expect when those kids get older? And they are on the street. And they are on the street. And that is that attitude, the mindset that we have got to change. You have got when you talk to the white friends of your daughter or my daughter, they have got a better attitude and a clearer mindset and a greater empathy for what is going on. And I think each successive generation, as it gets more understanding, more familiarity, more comfort with people of other races and other cultures, then some of this dissipates. But we cannot just wait for that process to happen on its own. It also requires policy changes. It requires training. It requires specific steps by police departments, starting from the top, in order to change some of these mindsets. I mean, there are police departments that do a better job and police departments that do a worse job. I want my grandsons to be treated like anybody else's grandsons. If they are messing up, I think they should be corrected they will first be corrected by me or their mother or their father. But I do not want them to be subjected to the kind of constant bias that makes them feel as if this is not their home, and that they are not safe in their own neighborhoods, or that they cannot trust the institutions that are put in place supposedly to serve and protect them. It is interesting, having conversations with a lot of white staffers and friends of mine just over the last several days as these issues have come up, I think there is a clear understanding that there is a problem here. I do not get a sense that this society is simply ignoring this or suggesting this is not a problem. I think people also recognize that police officers do have a tough job, that, in some cases, it is a very dangerous job, and they have got to sometimes make split-second decisions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffjohnsonblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview with Jeff Johnson of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeff-johnson-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "12-12-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1731, "text": "Can you hear me all right? I can hear you fine, thanks. You know, I wanted to start this out with kind of a lengthy question. 4.1 million new jobs in the economy in the first 17 months of the administration; 2 consecutive years of budget reductions; new tax cuts to 90 percent of small businesses; a low inflation rate, lowest in 20 years, in fact; the signing of the student loan reform act; the passage of the crime bill, including the assault weapons ban, millions of dollars for local law enforcement; the victories that you have scored in foreign policy affairs, in Haiti, the Persian Gulf, North Korea, the Middle East, and all that do you ever find yourself sitting back at the White House and wondering, What the heck do I have to do to have high approval ratings? I think what you have to do is, the people have to know it. They have to know it, and they have to believe it. And I think that we had lots and lots of evidence that even now not all these things have been known. But as people know more and believe more, then they tend to want to support what I am trying to do for our country and the Members of Congress who are supporting that direction as well. I think that if you look at just the things you mentioned, when I ran for ENTITY, I said that if I were elected, I'd try to make the Government work for ordinary Americans, empower people through education and training to compete in a global economy, get the economy moving again, and make the world safer and more prosperous. On those scores, we are in better shape than we were 21 months ago. Now, there are a lot of people, to be fair, ENTITY, who have not felt that. They are insecure in their job, or they are afraid they will lose their health care, or they have not gotten a raise. But our country's moving in the right direction, and I think as more people know it, there will be more support for this direction and for these candidates. And I have just got to make sure that insofar as I can effect it, that people know about it and believe it by next Tuesday. Maybe we can just ignore that. I'd like to speak with you as a parent. Now, I have two small boys myself, a 3-year-old and a 2-year-old, and I am frightened for them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkenherreraandjaynebowerwwjradiodetroitmichigan", "title": "Interview With Ken Herrera and Jayne Bower of WWJ Radio, Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ken-herrera-and-jayne-bower-wwj-radio-detroit-michigan", "publication_date": "01-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1732, "text": "My oldest celebrated his first birthday in Los Angeles as the city was burning. We are hearing about two kids in Chicago accused of dropping a third child out of a window. Now, the crime bill may be a step in the right direction, but I think I speak for a lot of parents when I ask you, how do we give our children some hope? And what is in the future for them? Well, first let me say, you gave the right answer yourself. The crime bill is a move in the right direction. And if the people in the local communities around the country use it, they can lower the crime rate and lower the rate of violence. They can do it by using the police, the punishment, the prevention, and the prisons, all four. But in the end, what we have got to do in this country is to get back to the basics of childrearing. And those children who are not getting the support they need at home, who are growing up in very mean neighborhoods, still have to have somebody to look up to and someone to learn from. And what is happening is, you talked about those two kids that dropped that 5-yearold out of a high-rise what is it that makes the heart of a 10-year-old turn to stone, feel no guilt, feel no remorse? What is it that makes an 11-year-old shoot another 11-year-old for gang reasons? We have got to have a system that Government cannot provide alone, that people in every community deal with to reach out to these kids and make sure that they have somebody to look up to, someone to learn from who is a good, positive role model, and a future out there for them. I am doing what I can as ENTITY by trying to get the economy in shape, trying to provide educational opportunities, trying to support working families on modest incomes with things like family leave and income tax cuts and other supports. But we really have got to have a grassroots sea change in America in every neighborhood in this country. People who can do it have got to be willing to step in and help these kids that are not getting the support they need at home or that are spending too much time on the streets because they are , say, the children of single parents who have to be out working to try to support them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkenherreraandjaynebowerwwjradiodetroitmichigan", "title": "Interview With Ken Herrera and Jayne Bower of WWJ Radio, Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ken-herrera-and-jayne-bower-wwj-radio-detroit-michigan", "publication_date": "01-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1733, "text": "And if we will do that, we can then take the prevention programs, for example, in the crime bill we can take the police programs in the crime bill and use them to actually build up people's lives and turn this situation around. It is in many ways the most significant challenge facing our country. We cannot expect to do well over the long run if we continue to lose massive numbers of our children to this kind of lifestyle. Again, we are speaking live with ENTITY on WWJ. ENTITY, following along those same lines, last August you signed the student loan reform act. In fact, you talked about it a little bit earlier today, authorizing the implementation of what is known as the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program. How does this differ from previous efforts to make sure that all those who want a higher education can, in fact, get a higher education in this country. Well, what this student loan bill does is to enable people to borrow money to go to college at lower cost, either lower fees or lower interest rates or both. And then it allows them four different options about how to repay the money. For example, if someone gets out of school, and they decide to become a teacher, then the teacher let us say the teacher starts and he or she has a low wage in salary in the early years, you can pay back the loan as a percentage of your income. Then let us suppose at some point in the future you get a higher paying job, and you want to pay the loan off quicker so your interest payments would be lower, you can convert to a different system and repay it in that way. Now, in addition to that, we have taken huge amounts of the bureaucracy and paperwork out of this, and we have strengthened the ability of the Government to collect the loan when it is due by involving the IRS and other Federal agencies in the process. And we also cut out a lot of the middle men in the process so that we saved $4 billion in Government money over 5 years and saved the borrowers $2 billion over 5 years. And today I was at the University of Michigan Dearborn campus. A lot of the students were talking there about how this was going to be better for them and their lives and their classmates. You will get more people coming to college. You will have fewer dropouts. And you will have a higher repayment of the loans when they get out.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkenherreraandjaynebowerwwjradiodetroitmichigan", "title": "Interview With Ken Herrera and Jayne Bower of WWJ Radio, Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ken-herrera-and-jayne-bower-wwj-radio-detroit-michigan", "publication_date": "01-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1734, "text": "It is one of the best things we have done long-term for the United States since I have been ENTITY. ENTITY, we heard you urging people to get out and vote next Tuesday when you were at Cobo Center this afternoon. Does that low voter turnout of course it concerns you, but what can be done to change that, and more importantly to change the image of politicians? Well, if you looked at the '92 campaign, you see what can be done. If you have a vigorous debate on the issues and if you have a real hopeful campaign, if you are trying to build up not tear down, then people come out and vote. If these campaigns are totally dominated by the negative, not the positive, and by people trying to tear down, not build up, then a lot of voters just stay home. They turn it off. And then the election tends to go to the person with the most extremist support, which is why a lot of these extreme Republicans have worked so hard on their negative campaigns and to raise so much money. They want to drive down voter turnout, diminish confidence in the political process, and give the election to the extremist element in their own party. But I have to tell you, I think in the last couple of weeks, Americans are getting more realistic and more hopeful about their country again. They see that we are improving the economy, that we are making this Government work for ordinary people. We have got a smaller Government and a smaller deficit but a more active approach to facing the problems of this country. They see other people in other parts of the world, from the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, to Korea, to Haiti, to Northern Ireland, looking to us for energy and support. And I think they are feeling better about themselves and their country. And if that happens, we will have a higher voter turnout. We know you are getting ready to leave Detroit now for Ohio, ENTITY. We'd like to thank you very much for joining us this afternoon. Thank you, I have enjoyed it. And I remember the interview I did back during the campaign when your station was supposed to be interviewing my wife, and she was asleep on the bus, so I took the interview. We got you instead. So, I finally got one in my own right today. I appreciate that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkenherreraandjaynebowerwwjradiodetroitmichigan", "title": "Interview With Ken Herrera and Jayne Bower of WWJ Radio, Detroit, Michigan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ken-herrera-and-jayne-bower-wwj-radio-detroit-michigan", "publication_date": "01-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1735, "text": "Okay, we will jump right into it here. what do you intend to do about the House Democrats who have said that they are not going to bring your plan to a vote in its current form? that nobody -- Democrat or Republican -- wants to see people's paychecks smaller on January 1st because Congress did not act. And I think that the framework that we have put forward, which says not only that people's taxes do not go up on January 1st, but also that we extend unemployment insurance for a year, that we make sure that key provisions like the college tax credit, the child tax credit, the earned-income tax credit are included -- that that framework is going to serve as the basis for compromise. But Democrats have said they are willing to let that go if they do not get some changes to this plan. Well, what I suspect is that there are going to be some discussions both between the House and the Senate. My understanding is that the Senate's going to vote on the package over the next several days and that at the end of the day, people are going to conclude we do not want 2 million people suddenly without unemployment insurance and not able to pay their rent, not able to pay their mortgage, not able to pay their house note. I think that people are also going to understand that the single most important thing we can do for all of our constituencies is to make sure that the recovery that is taking place right now gets stronger. And over the last 48 hours, a range of independent economists -- both left and right -- have concluded that this package would, in fact, increase potential economic growth by as much as 1 percent and could end up meaning an additional million and a half jobs. And that, I think, has got to be the highest priority for everybody. When you negotiated with Republicans, or after you finished, you compared the situation to negotiating with hostage takers. Now that your fellow Democrats, some of them, seem to be the hostage-takers, are you going to be able to give some ground to them? The bottom line is for everybody to act responsibly and to think not in terms of abstract political fights here in -- here on Capitol Hill, but to think about those families that in the middle of the holiday season, are trying to figure out -- are they still going to have unemployment benefits at the end of this month?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosmorningedition", "title": "Interview With Steve Inskeep on National Public Radio's Morning Edition", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-morning-edition", "publication_date": "10-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1736, "text": "But can you accept some changes to this plan or is it the kind of deal you cannot change -- My sense is, is that there're going to be discussions between both House and Senate leadership about all the final elements of the package. Keep in mind, we did not actually write a bill. We put forward a framework. I am confident that the framework is going to look like the one that we put forward. Meaning maybe you could add something to it, but not subtract. That is what I am hearing you say. That is -- that is not what I said. What I am saying is, is that I am confident that we are going to be able to get this resolved by the end of the month. Let me ask you about something that we heard from one of our listeners. We told our listeners we were going to have this conversation today. We got many questions for you. One came from a man named Tom Pluck of Montclair, New Jersey -- a man who describes himself as a supporter. Please ask him how keeping the tax rate for the richest the same as it has been for a decade creates one single job. It does not , which is why I was opposed to it -- and I am still opposed to it. The issue here is not whether I think that the tax cuts for the wealthy are a good or smart thing to do. I have said repeatedly that I think they are not a smart thing to do, particularly because we have got to borrow money, essentially, to pay for them. The problem is, is that this is the single issue that the Republicans are willing to scotch the entire deal for. either I allow 2 million people who are currently getting unemployment insurance not to get it; either I allow the recovery that we are on to be endangered or we make a compromise now, understanding that for the next two years this is going to be a central battle as part of a larger discussion about how do we reform our tax code so that it is fair and how do we make sure that we actually are dealing with the deficit and debt in an intelligent way? You mentioned having to borrow money to do this. Let me ask you about something that both Democrats and Republicans have raised. If you are going to allow these tax cuts to continue, if you are going to approve the other tax cuts, why not make corresponding spending cuts to finance it so they do not add so massively to the deficit?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosmorningedition", "title": "Interview With Steve Inskeep on National Public Radio's Morning Edition", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-morning-edition", "publication_date": "10-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1737, "text": "Well, we are going to have a long discussion next year about spending. I put together a fiscal commission -- over the resistance, I should note, of a number of Republicans who originally had supported it. I think that Bowles-Simpson did a good job of sparking a conversation about how we need to move forward to deal with our medium- and long-term deficits. There have been other commissions that have been put forward over the last several weeks. And I am going to have to put a budget out that shows how I think we make some -- a serious dent in our debt and our deficit. I think every economist -- and by the way, the commissions who looked at this as well -- realize that because we have got a recovery that is still not as strong as we'd like it to be. The vast majority of economists, as well as both the chairman of the Bowles-Simpson commission, as well as other commissions, have suggested that because the recovery is just taking off and is still not producing as many jobs as it needs to, that it actually makes sense for us not do anything that contracts the economy right now because the single most important thing we can do for deficit reduction is actually expand economic growth. That 1 percent of additional economic growth brings in a whole lot of revenue even with no changes in the tax code. And so the payroll tax provision that is included in this package is going to help spark economic growth that will help. Now, it does not solve our medium- and long-term problems, so we are going to still have to make some very tough decisions -- and these too are going to be unpopular. I am going to get criticism from Democrats and Republicans throughout the year in terms of the choices that I am going to be forcing Congress to take a square look at. Because look, the fact of the matter is that for a decade now, we have had the tendency to think that we can keep on having all the services we want and we keep them -- can keep cutting taxes as much as we want and that somehow things are going to magically balance out. What are the programs we do not need, that do not contribute to growth, do not contribute to competitiveness, do not make sure our kids are -- are not contributing to making sure that our kids are learning and able to compete in this 21st century economy, and which things are vital investments that we have to make?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosmorningedition", "title": "Interview With Steve Inskeep on National Public Radio's Morning Edition", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-morning-edition", "publication_date": "10-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1738, "text": "And that conversation is going to be one that cannot just happen in Washington; it is going to happen all across the country. And I am looking forward to leading that conversation. Will not Republicans argue -- and, in fact, will not reality argue -- that any cuts will have to be even deeper because this package that you are pushing for now will mean there is even less government revenue? Actually, I think that if you talk to economists, both conservative and liberal, what they will say is the problem is not next year. The problem is, how are we dealing with our medium-term debt and deficit, and how are we dealing with our long- term debt and deficit? And most of that has to do with entitlements -- particularly Social Security and Medicaid. We have made some progress as a consequence of my health-care bill in identifying areas where we can start bending the cost curve on health care. But we are going to have some more work to do across the budget. But there are very few people who think that we would be better off if we have got a contracting economy or economy that is growing very little over the next year -- that that somehow is going to be good for our deficit. Let me ask you about two or three years out. I am thinking of the 1990s when President Clinton famously said, The era of big government is over. Because of the medium- and long-term need to restrain or cut spending, are you going to be in a position where the era of big government is going to be over again; there is going to have to be a fundamentally different approach to things? I think there is going to have to be a fundamentally different approach to things. It is not an issue of big government versus small government. It is an issue of smart government. You know, when -- when families sit around the kitchen table, they say to themselves, what are the things we have to have -- College education for our kids, paying our mortgage, getting the roof repaired, a new boiler. And if they can afford it, they'd buy things that they'd like to have, but the first thing they do is take care of the things that we have to have. And under that category, I'd put things like research and development, education, making sure that we are sending our kids to college, rebuilding our infrastructure to compete on the 21st century, making sure that this country is safe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosmorningedition", "title": "Interview With Steve Inskeep on National Public Radio's Morning Edition", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-morning-edition", "publication_date": "10-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1739, "text": "The other stuff then we have to debate and figure out, can we get by with a little bit less in some of these other spending categories? You will -- when -- when we look at the deficit and the debt, I -- I think it is important to understand this does not need to be Armageddon. This -- this is not a situation where we have got to slash and burn everything. It does mean we have got to make choices. And it means that discussions have to be serious and they have got to be based on fact. We -- we are not going to be able to deal with our deficit just by eliminating foreign aid, for example, which some people suggest. That only accounts for 1 percent of our budget. It is not going to happen just because we eliminate earmarks. I happen to think that that is a bad way of doing business, but earmarks account for 1 percent or less of the federal budget. We have got to look at a whole range of things -- where the money goes. And that includes entitlements; that includes defense; that includes a whole host of discretionary spending where we can probably do more and do it smarter with less money, if we are actually making some tough choices. Because this plan projects extending the Bush tax cuts for two years, it is been widely presumed that in two years or less, you are going to have another big fight over whether to extend these tax cuts. This week, my colleague Scott Horsley asked you if there was a different possibility here. He asked if you were going to use this two-year window to push for a broader overhaul of the tax code. I want you to expand on that yes. What do you plan to do to the tax code in the next couple of years? Well, I think we are going to have to have a conversation over the next year. And if you think about the last time we reformed our tax system back in 1986 -- it did not happen right away, by the way. It required a lot of conversations among a lot of different parties. But people of good will came together and realized that if we eliminate what happens to the tax code every decade or so -- loopholes get built in, special interest provisions get built in -- the nominal rates end up high, but the actual tax rates that well- connected folks or people who have good accountants pay end up being a lot lower; ordinary people end up getting squeezed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosmorningedition", "title": "Interview With Steve Inskeep on National Public Radio's Morning Edition", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-morning-edition", "publication_date": "10-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1740, "text": "So typically, the idea is simplifying the system, hopefully lowering rates, broadening the base -- that is something that I think most economists think would help us propel economic growth. So what I believe is, is that we have got to start that conversation next year. I think we can get some broad bipartisan agreement that it needs to be done. But it is going to require a lot of hard work to actually make it happen. Your deficit commission talked about lowering everybody's tax rate and eliminating deductions, such as changing the home mortgage deduction and many other deductions as well. That is the kind of plan you are talking about. Well, I have not specifically endorsed that plan. What I am saying is, is that the general concept of simplifying -- eliminating loopholes, eliminating deductions, eliminating exemptions in certain categories -- might make sense if, in exchange, people's rates are lower. That may end up being a more efficient way of doing business. Does that completely change this debate over the Bush tax cuts? And that is that people like myself who have been incredibly blessed and who have a lot more income and wealth can afford to pay more than we currently are paying. I strongly believe that. I believed that during the campaign for ENTITY. I believed it when I was campaigning during these midterms. I still believe it. And so the fight about what the top 1 percent or 2 percent of America should be contributing as part of our contribution to rebuilding America and putting it on a competitive footing -- that basic principle is one that I continue to believe in and I will be fighting for over the next two years. By making this agreement with Republicans on taxes and on the economy, is it your understanding -- and do you have any understanding with the Republicans -- that if you are able to act quickly on that agreement, you will then get a vote on many other things you are hoping to get by the end of the year, particularly the START nuclear treaty -- the arms deal with Russia? Well, the START treaty is something that I absolutely think has to get done before Congress leaves for Christmas vacation. It is good for our national security; it allows us to verify what is going on with respect to nuclear weapons in Russia.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradiosmorningedition", "title": "Interview With Steve Inskeep on National Public Radio's Morning Edition", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radios-morning-edition", "publication_date": "10-12-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1746, "text": "I will tell you what, are those two guys telling you the truth tonight? They are telling the truth Have you read the full book, ENTITY? I have read it. I read it twice, as a matter of fact. I think she did a terrific job. I want to thank Jim for all the work he did on it. And after Mother died, I had to do a little work just checking some of the facts, but I was amazed at how candid and forthright she was. I think a lot of folks will really enjoy reading it, and we will see a portrait of a remarkable person during an important time in our country's life. I was really proud of her for doing it. Last time we were together, we spoke about your loss. Wasn't it difficult to read it? Or the first time, before it was actually published in book form, it kind of helped me deal with the loss. But I tell you, it still makes me a little sad. Last week when I finished reading it the second time, I found myself fighting back the tears a little bit, but that is one of the things that makes the book so wonderful. I have even had total strangers come up to me and say that they cried when they read it, too. What was her most, ENTITY, remarkable aspect to you? I think her resilience. You know, she was just a person driven by love and loyalty and an incredible desire to keep living. When Dick asked her to marry him, she reminded him that she'd been widowed three times and asked him if he had considered odds of what he was trying to get into. But no matter what happened to her, she just bounced back. And I think that is probably the most important lesson she imparted to me and to my brother, just do not give up. They have discussed the difficulty of when Roger had his troubles and how she held up during that time, during your only defeat, how she held up during that time. Was she a strength source, was she a place most people figure their mothers as a safe place to go. Well, I think she really plainly was not only a safe place to go, but she really did always convince us that we could do better tomorrow. When I lost that race in 1980, I had the distinguished record of being at that time the youngest former Governor in the history of the entire United States.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking0", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-0", "publication_date": "28-04-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1747, "text": "I was out of a job; I did not know where my next nickel was coming from. And within 3 or 4 days she decided that I could be reelected Governor. And when my brother had his drug problem, it was awful for her, much tougher, of course, than any election loss. And she, as she says in the book, had a lot to learn about drug addiction, about what those of us who were in the same family had done by not confronting my brother. And she finally came to understand, as Dick said earlier, that getting arrested and actually being forced to go to prison may well have saved my brother's life. And I think a lot of that happened because my mother never quit believing in him and was brave enough to face the truth about what happened and then, at her age, was willing to learn whatever it took to learn to help get him over it and working him through it and do her part. And she sure would have had a good time touring for this book, would not she? I was thinking about that today. This thing would be a stomp-down bestseller if she'd lived, because she'd have had so much fun promoting it. She had a good time doing everything she did. She learned to be a politician rather late in life. You know, before I got in politics, she voted, but that was about it. And then by the time I'd been through a campaign or two, she was the best organized person I knew. She had 300 to 400 names on a file card in our hometown, and all the local politicians were half afraid of her. She just got into things, and her enthusiasm took over. I really regret that she is not stomping around the country selling this book and not on your program and not answering questions. Do you remember the night when you were running for office and you and Al Gore were on, and she called in from Vegas? You asked her, Where are you? She loved Las Vegas, and she loved those race tracks. Everyone is complimenting you today on the eloquence yesterday at another tragic day in the lives of all Americans, the death of a President. Was that a difficult moment for you? It was in some sense because, you know, the other people who were speaking, Secretary Kissinger and Senator Dole and Governor Wilson, they'd all played an important role in President Nixon's life.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking0", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-0", "publication_date": "28-04-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1748, "text": "From what we understand, Prime Minister Netanyahu is going to ask you for some specific enunciations of red lines, for specific promises related to the Iranian nuclear program. What is your message to the prime minister going to be? What do you want to get across to him? First of all, it is important to say that I do not know exactly what the prime minister is going to be coming with. We have not gotten any indication that there is some sharp ask that is going to be presented. Both the United States and Israel have been in constant consultation about a very difficult issue, and that is the prospect of Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon. This is something that has been one of my top five foreign-policy concerns since I came into office. We, immediately upon taking over, mapped out a strategy that said we are going to mobilize the international community around this issue and isolate Iran to send a clear message to them that there is a path they can follow that allows them to rejoin the community of nations, but if they refused to follow that path, that there would be an escalating series of consequences. Three years later, we can look back and say we have been successful beyond most people's expectations. When we came in, Iran was united and on the move, and the world was divided about how to address this issue. Today, the world is as united as we have ever seen it around the need for Iran to take a different path on its nuclear program, and Iran is isolated and feeling the severe effects of the multiple sanctions that have been placed on it. Does the problem get solved? And I think that Israel, understandably, has a profound interest not just in good intentions but in actual results. And in the conversations I have had over the course of three years, and over the course of the last three months and three weeks, what I have emphasized is that preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon is not just in the interest of Israel, it is profoundly in the security interests of the United States, and that when I say we are not taking any option off the table, we mean it. We are going to continue to apply pressure until Iran takes a different course. You have probably said it 50 or 100 times. And a lot of people believe it, but the two main intended audiences, the supreme leader of Iran and the prime minister of Israel, you could argue, do not entirely trust this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1749, "text": "The impression we get is that the Israeli government thinks this is a vague expression that is been used for so many years. Is there some ramping-up of the rhetoric you are going to give them? I think the Israeli people understand it, I think the American people understand it, and I think the Iranians understand it. It means a political component that involves isolating Iran; it means an economic component that involves unprecedented and crippling sanctions; it means a diplomatic component in which we have been able to strengthen the coalition that presents Iran with various options through the P-5 plus 1 and ensures that the IAEA is robust in evaluating Iran's military program; and it includes a military component. And I think people understand that. I think that the Israeli government recognizes that, as ENTITY, I do not bluff. I also do not , as a matter of sound policy, go around advertising exactly what our intentions are. But I think both the Iranian and the Israeli governments recognize that when the United States says it is unacceptable for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, we mean what we say. Let me describe very specifically why this is important to us. In addition to the profound threat that it poses to Israel, one of our strongest allies in the world; in addition to the outrageous language that has been directed toward Israel by the leaders of the Iranian government if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, this would run completely contrary to my policies of nonproliferation. The risks of an Iranian nuclear weapon falling into the hands of terrorist organizations are profound. It is almost certain that other players in the region would feel it necessary to get their own nuclear weapons. So now you have the prospect of a nuclear arms race in the most volatile region in the world, one that is rife with unstable governments and sectarian tensions. And it would also provide Iran the additional capability to sponsor and protect its proxies in carrying out terrorist attacks, because they are less fearful of retaliation. What would your position be if Israel were not in this picture? It would still be a profound national-security interest of the United States to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Why, then, is this issue so often seen as binary, always defined as Israel versus Iran?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1750, "text": "I think it has to do with a legitimate concern on the part of Israel that they are a small country in a tough neighborhood, and as a consequence, even though the U.S. and Israel very much share assessments of how quickly Iran could obtain breakout capacity, and even though there is constant consultation and intelligence coordination around that question, Israel feels more vulnerable. And I think the prime minister and the defense minister, feel a profound, historic obligation not to put Israel in a position where it cannot act decisively and unilaterally to protect the state of Israel. I understand those concerns, and as a consequence, I think it is not surprising that the way it gets framed, at least in this country, where the vast majority of people are profoundly sympathetic to Israel's plight and potential vulnerabilities that articles and stories get framed in terms of Israel's potential vulnerability. But I want to make clear that when we travel around the world and make presentations about this issue, that is not how we frame it. this is something in the national-security interests of the United States and in the interests of the world community. And I assure you that Europe would not have gone forward with sanctions on Iranian oil imports which are very difficult for them to carry out, because they get a lot of oil from Iran had it not been for their understanding that it is in the world's interest, to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. China would not have abided by the existing sanctions coming out of the National Security Council, and other countries around the world would not have unified around those sanctions, had it not been for us making the presentation about why this was important for everyone, not just one country. Is it possible that the prime minister of Israel has over-learned the lessons of the Holocaust? I think the prime minister has a profound responsibility to protect the Israeli people in a hostile neighborhood, and I am certain that the history of the Holocaust and of anti-Semitism and brutality directed against the Jewish people for more than a millennium weighs on him when he thinks about these questions. I think it is important to recognize, though, that the prime minister is also head of a modern state that is mindful of the profound costs of any military action, and in our consultations with the Israeli government, I think they take those costs, and potential unintended consequences, very seriously. Do you think Israel could cause damage to itself in America by preempting the Iranian nuclear program militarily?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1751, "text": "I do not know how it plays in America. I think we in the United States instinctively sympathize with Israel, and I think political support for Israel is bipartisan and powerful. How does this impact their own security environment? ultimately, the Israeli prime minister and the defense minister and others in the government have to make their decisions about what they think is best for Israel's security, and I do not presume to tell them what is best for them. But as Israel's closest friend and ally, and as one that has devoted the last three years to making sure that Israel has additional security capabilities, and has worked to manage a series of difficult problems and questions over the past three years, I do point out to them that we have a sanctions architecture that is far more effective than anybody anticipated; that we have a world that is about as united as you get behind the sanctions; that our assessment, which is shared by the Israelis, is that Iran does not yet have a nuclear weapon and is not yet in a position to obtain a nuclear weapon without us having a pretty long lead time in which we will know that they are making that attempt. In that context, our argument is going to be that it is important for us to see if we can solve this thing permanently, as opposed to temporarily. And the only way, historically, that a country has ultimately decided not to get nuclear weapons without constant military intervention has been when they themselves take off the table. That is what happened in Libya, that is what happened in South Africa. And we think that, without in any way being under an illusion about Iranian intentions, without in any way being naive about the nature of that regime, they are self-interested. They recognize that they are in a bad, bad place right now. It is possible for them to make a strategic calculation that, at minimum, pushes much further to the right whatever potential breakout capacity they may have, and that may turn out to be the best decision for Israel's security. These are difficult questions, and again, if I were the prime minister of Israel, I'd be wrestling with them. As president of the United States, I wrestle with them as well. Could you shed some light on your relationship with the prime minister? You have met with him more than with any other world leader. It is assumed that you have a dysfunctional relationship. What is it like? I actually think the relationship is very functional, and the proof of the pudding is in the eating.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1752, "text": "The fact of the matter is, we have gotten a lot of business done with Israel over the last three years. I think the prime minister and certainly the defense minister would acknowledge that we have never had closer military and intelligence cooperation. When you look at what I have done with respect to security for Israel, from joint training and joint exercises that outstrip anything that is been done in the past, to helping finance and construct the Iron Dome program to make sure that Israeli families are less vulnerable to missile strikes, to ensuring that Israel maintains its qualitative military edge, to fighting back against delegitimization of Israel, whether at the Human Rights Council, or in front of the UN General Assembly, or during the Goldstone Report, or after the flare-up involving the flotilla the truth of the matter is that the relationship has functioned very well. Do you talk about things other than business? You know, the truth of the matter is, both of us have so much on our plates that there is not always a lot of time to have discussions beyond business. Having said that, what I think is absolutely true is that the prime minister and I come out of different political traditions. This is one of the few times in the history of U.S.-Israeli relations where you have a government from the right in Israel at the same time you have a center-left government in the United States, and so I think what happens then is that a lot of political interpretations of our relationship get projected onto this. But one thing that I have found in working with Prime Minister Netanyahu is that we can be very frank with each other, very blunt with each other, very honest with each other. For the most part, when we have differences, they are tactical and not strategic. Our objectives are a secure United States, a secure Israel, peace, the capacity for our kids to grow up in safety and security and not have to worry about bombs going off, and being able to promote business and economic growth and commerce. We have a common vision about where we want to go. At any given moment as is true, frankly, with my relationship with every other foreign leader there is not going to be perfect alignment of how we achieve these objectives. In an interview three years ago, right before he became prime minister, Netanyahu told me that he believes Iran is being run by a messianic apocalyptic cult. Last week, General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, referred to the Iranian leadership as rational.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1753, "text": "Where do you fall on this continuum? Do you feel that the leaders of Iran might be so irrational that they will not act in what we would understand to be their self-interest? I think you are right to describe it as a continuum. They have a very ingrown political system. They are founded and fueled on hostility towards the United States, Israel, and to some degree the West. And they have shown themselves willing to go outside international norms and international rules to achieve their objectives. All of this makes them dangerous. They have also been willing to crush opposition in their own country in brutal and bloody ways. I think it is entirely legitimate to say that this is a regime that does not share our worldview or our values. I do think, and this is what General Dempsey was probably referring to, that as we look at how they operate and the decisions they have made over the past three decades, that they care about the regime's survival. They are sensitive to the opinions of the people and they are troubled by the isolation that they are experiencing. They know, for example, that when these kinds of sanctions are applied, it puts a world of hurt on them. They are able to make decisions based on trying to avoid bad outcomes from their perspective. So if they are presented with options that lead to either a lot of pain from their perspective, or potentially a better path, then there is no guarantee that they cannot make a better decision. It seems unlikely that a regime built on anti-Americanism would want to appear to succumb to an American-led sanctions effort. Now, what we have seen, what we have heard directly from them over the last couple of weeks is that nuclear weapons are sinful and un-Islamic. And those are formal speeches from the supreme leader and their foreign minister. Do you believe their sincerity? My point here is not that I believe the sincerity of the statements coming out of the regime. The point is that for them to prove to the international community that their intentions are peaceful and that they are, in fact, not pursuing weapons, is not inconsistent with what they have said. So it does not require them to knuckle under to us. What it does require is for them to actually show to the world that there is consistency between their actions and their statements. And that is something they should be able to do without losing face. Why is containment not your policy?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1754, "text": "In the sense that we contained the Soviet Union, North Korea It is for the reason I described because you are talking about the most volatile region in the world. It will not be tolerable to a number of states in that region for Iran to have a nuclear weapon and them not to have a nuclear weapon. Iran is known to sponsor terrorist organizations, so the threat of proliferation becomes that much more severe. We have applied a lot of pressure on North Korea as well and, in fact, today found them willing to suspend some of their nuclear activities and missile testing and come back to the table. But North Korea is even more isolated, and certainly less capable of shaping the environment than Iran is. And so the dangers of an Iran getting nuclear weapons that then leads to a free-for-all in the Middle East is something that I think would be very dangerous for the world. Do you see accidental nuclear escalation as an issue? Look, the fact is, I do not think any of it would be accidental. If Iran gets a nuclear weapon, I will not name the countries, but there are probably four or five countries in the Middle East who say, We are going to start a program, and we will have nuclear weapons. And at that point, the prospect for miscalculation in a region that has that many tensions and fissures is profound. You essentially then duplicate the challenges of India and Pakistan fivefold or tenfold. With everybody pointing at everybody else. With everybody pointing at everybody else. What I am getting at specifically is, let us assume there is a Hezbollah attack on Israel. Israel responds into Lebanon.   The potential for escalation in those circumstances is profoundly dangerous, and in addition to just the potential human costs of a nuclear escalation like that in the Middle East, just imagine what would happen in terms of the world economy. The possibilities of the sort of energy disruptions that we have never seen before occurring, and the world economy basically coming to a halt, would be pretty profound. So when I say this is in the U.S. interest, I am not saying this is something we'd like to solve. One of the aspects of this is the question of whether it is plausible that Barack Obama would ever use military power to stop Iran. The Republicans are trying to make this an issue and not only the Republicans saying that this man, by his disposition, by his character, by his party, by his center-left outlook, is not going to do that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1755, "text": "Look, if people want to say about me that I have a profound preference for peace over war, that every time I order young men and women into a combat theater and then see the consequences on some of them, if they are lucky enough to come back, that this weighs on me I make no apologies for that. Because anybody who is sitting in my chair who is not mindful of the costs of war should not be here, because it is serious business. These are not video games that we are playing here. Now, having said that, I think it is fair to say that the last three years, I have shown myself pretty clearly willing, when I believe it is in the core national interest of the United States, to direct military actions, even when they entail enormous risks. And obviously, the bin Laden operation is the most dramatic, but al-Qaeda was on its well before we took out bin Laden because of our activities and my direction. In Afghanistan, we have made very tough decisions because we felt it was very important, in order for an effective transition out of Afghanistan to take place, for us to be pushing back against the Taliban's momentum. So aside from the usual politics, I do not think this is an argument that has a lot of legs. And by the way, it is not an argument that the American people buy. They may have complaints about high unemployment still, and that the recovery needs to move faster, but you do not hear a lot of them arguing somehow that I hesitate to make decisions as commander in chief when necessary. Can you just talk about Syria as a strategic issue? But it would seem to me that one way to weaken and further isolate Iran is to remove or help remove Iran's only Arab ally. What else can this administration be doing? The Arab Spring, as bumpy as it has been, represents a strategic defeat for Iran, because what people in the region have seen is that all the impulses towards freedom and self-determination and free speech and freedom of assembly have been constantly violated by Iran. But more directly, it is now engulfing Syria, and Syria is basically their only true ally in the region. It is a matter not of if, but when. Now, can we accelerate that? We are working with the world community to try to do that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1756, "text": "It is complicated by the fact that Syria is a much bigger, more sophisticated, and more complicated country than Libya, for example the opposition is hugely splintered that although there is unanimity within the Arab world at this point, internationally, countries like Russia are still blocking potential UN mandates or action. And so what we are trying to do and the secretary of state just came back from helping to lead the Friends of Syria group in Tunisia is to try to come up with a series of strategies that can provide humanitarian relief. But they can also accelerate a transition to a peaceful and stable and representative Syrian government. If that happens, that will be a profound loss for Iran. Is there anything you could do to move it faster? Well, nothing that I can tell you, because your classified clearance is not good enough. This is part of, by the way, the context in which we have to examine our approach toward Iran, because at a time when there is not a lot of sympathy for Iran and its only real ally is on the ropes, do we want a distraction in which suddenly Iran can portray itself as a victim, and deflect attention from what has to be the core issue, which is their potential pursuit of nuclear weapons? That is an example of factors that when we are in consultation with all our allies, including the Israelis, we raise these factors, because this is an issue of many dimensions here, and we have got to factor all of them in to achieve the outcome that hopefully we all want. Do the Israelis understand that? There have been disagreements between Israel and the U.S. before, but this is coming to a head about what the Israelis see as an existential issue. In your mind, have you brought arguments to Netanyahu that have so far worked out well? I think that in the end, Israel's leaders will make determinations based on what they believe is best for the security of Israel, and that is entirely appropriate. When we present our views and our strategy approach, we try to put all our cards on the table, to describe how we are thinking about these issues. We try to back those up with facts and evidence. We compare their assessments with ours, and where there are gaps, we try to narrow those gaps. And what I also try to do is to underscore the seriousness with which the United States takes this issue. And I think that Ehud Barak understands it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1757, "text": "I think that Prime Minister Netanyahu, hopefully when he sees me next week, will understand it. And one of the things that I like to remind them of is that every single commitment I have made to the state of Israel and its security, I have kept. Why is it that despite me never failing to support Israel on every single problem that they have had over the last three years, that there are still questions about that? That is a good way to phrase it. there is no good reason to doubt me on these issues. Some of it has to do with the fact that in this country and in our media, this gets wrapped up with politics. And if you have a set of political actors who want to see if they can drive a wedge not between the United States and Israel, but between Barack Obama and a Jewish American vote that has historically been very supportive of his candidacy, then it is good to try to fan doubts and raise questions. But when you look at the record, there is no there there. And my job is to try to make sure that those political factors are washed away on an issue that is of such great strategic and security importance to our two countries. And so when I am talking to the prime minister, or my team is talking to the Israeli government, what I want is a hardheaded, clear-eyed assessment of how do we achieve our goals. And our goals are in sync. And historically, one of the reasons that the U.S.-Israeli relationship has survived so well and thrived is shared values, shared history, the links between our peoples. But it is also been because it has been a profoundly bipartisan commitment to the state of Israel. we have got Israel's back. And that is something that I constantly try to reinforce and remind people of. Wait, in four words, is that your message to the prime minister we have got Israel's back? That is not just my message to the prime minister, that is been my message to the Israeli people, and to the pro-Israel community in this country, since I came into office. It is hard for me to be clearer than I was in front of the UN General Assembly, when I made a more full-throated defense of Israel and its legitimate security concerns than any president in history not, by the way, in front of an audience that was particularly warm to the message. My message will be much more specific, about how do we solve this problem.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeffreygoldbergtheatlantic", "title": "Interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeffrey-goldberg-the-atlantic", "publication_date": "02-03-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1765, "text": "ENTITY, you are the first ENTITY to visit Lithuania. What is your message to Lithuania's people? Secondly, I am really looking forward to it. Freedom is precious, and we welcome our friends the Lithuanians into the-as a free nation into the brotherhood of nations. I will also say to the world that the Baltic countries know what it means to live under fear and the lack of freedom, and to have these countries be allied with the United States and other nations is important to our soul. It is important to have that sense of freedom as a source of vigor and strength, and a very important alliance. That is what I want to say. What are America and Lithuania going to do after the Prague, together? Well, we are going to work to fight terror. It is most evident here in America because we have been under attack, and we are still under attack. People still want to hurt us because of what we stand for. But countries which love freedom are not immune from these people. These are coldblooded killers, and we have got a charge to keep for a long time coming. And the best way to do that is work together. So the NATO mission is one of defending freedom by fighting against those who would try to defeat freedom, which means we have got to share intelligence, work together militarily in a way that complements everybody, cut off the money of the terrorists. But that is the true threat that we face. After Prague, I am going to Russia. And I am going to say to the Russian people, You should not fear expansion of NATO to your border. These are freedom-loving people that are now on your border. You ought to welcome them. It should help Russian security - that the cold war is over, that the United States does not view Russia as a threat and neither does NATO. So we have got to address our sights to the new threats. Relationship between Western democracies and Russia seems to be very friendly. But do you really trust President Putin? I press any leader that does not believe 100 percent in freedom, and of course I do-I am -freedom of the press or Chechnya or issues that indicate that there might not be a whole-hearted commitment to freedom of the people. I do it in a way that is a friendly way. I believe the best way to work together is to do it in a spirit of cooperation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlnktvlithuania", "title": "Interview With LNK TV of Lithuania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lnk-tv-lithuania", "publication_date": "18-11-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1766, "text": "I believe the best way to make sure we have got good relations is to make it clear that there is no animosity. But of course I do. I work very closely with him. And we want Russia to be a country based upon the values which we share, because we believe those values are the best values for the human condition of everybody. I like to tell people, freedom is not an American gift; freedom is a gift from the almighty God. And I firmly believe that. And freedom is important in any country in the world. Some people wonder why the United States, the superpower of the world, pays so much attention to the small Baltic state Lithuania. What could you tell those people? Well, I can tell those people everybody matters. See, our country believes in the worth of every individual. We believe everybody is precious; everybody counts; and that we are rooted, our whole history and our very being is rooted, on the notion of people being able to realize their dreams. And that is what we believe. That is why we never recognized the Soviet domination of the Baltics. We called Lithuania independent for all those years. How do you imagine the future of NATO Alliance after new members will join? Better-better because the-NATO will have this new spirit. Listen, if you lived under slavery and subjugation and you are free, there is a spirit. There is a remembrance of what it is like. That is an important spirit in NATO. Lithuania brings a wonderful spirit of strength of purpose, of endurance. Secondly, as we change the military strategy to reflect the new threat-see, Russia is not a threat militarily. The threats that we now face come from a global terror network. And we will change our military capabilities to meet the strategies necessary to defeat terrorism. And Lithuania will have an important contribution to make, as will all countries in NATO. So the expansion of NATO will make it easier for us to defend the peace. It was a great pleasure to talk to you. We will see you in Vilnius. It is going to be exciting for me. We are waiting for that. Yes, we will do our best.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlnktvlithuania", "title": "Interview With LNK TV of Lithuania", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lnk-tv-lithuania", "publication_date": "18-11-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1776, "text": "Well, I think we will start with the host country. And again, we want to thank you very much for granting us the interview, ENTITY. And I am sure you will enjoy Venice and you will enjoy Italy. You will be in Italy a few days just before the elections. Do you consider Italy a country so politically stable that the elections do not worry you, or is your administration worried about the Communist participation in the Government and about repercussions on NATO? Well, I cannot deny wherever in the world I find a Communist movement their conduct has been such that it is of concern. But, no, and I think it would be improper for me to inject any opinions into your election there. But I have great confidence that the Italian people will do what is right, as they have for quite some time now. ENTITY, can you conceive any circumstances on which the United States would go to war with Iran as a result of military actions against the United States warships in the Persian Gulf, and what part would you expect the allies to play? that the Persian Gulf is international waters; it must stay open. It is vital to most of the countries of Western Europe because of the oil from there, as well as Japan. And it is important to us, although not quite as vital with regard to the amount of oil that we bring out of there. I do not see the danger of a war. I do not know how it could possibly start, except that it is true this is not the first place or the only place in the world where we have felt it necessary to maintain a military force. And always, we have followed the rule that we are not going to send our people anywhere unless they are permitted to defend themselves if attacked. And we are not out to attack anyone, but we will, if fired upon, will fire back. ENTITY, I am the Canadian reporter, so you will not be very surprised with this first question I have for you. Just before leaving Ottawa in April, you told Mr. Mulroney that you would consider a bilateral accord to reduce the pollution that causes acid rain. When we got back in Washington 2 weeks later, your top environmental official, Lee Thomas, said that such emission controls were not justified. So, I am asking you, ENTITY, are you willing to negotiate an accord that would set goals and timetables and controls or not?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "26-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1777, "text": "I have told our people that I think we should use the pattern that Canada and the United States used with regard to polluted air-or polluted water along our borders. And we were very successful in cleaning up the lakes and the streams that either crossed our borders or that were very close to them. And we worked together on that. And that is the pattern that I said I thought we should follow here. And we are in consultation. And we have a great deal of work to do ourselves on pinning sources and so forth. But all of that is going forward. It is not something that you can just say that we will do it at 10 a.m. in the morning. But we intend to work closely with Canada and find an answer to the problem. Many Japanese people are hoping that the United States will lift the sanctions as a result of the semiconductor codes prior to the Venice summit. Is there any chance that the United States will lift the sanctions prior to the summit? We are looking forward to doing that as quickly as we can, but it depends on those Japanese concerns agreeing to the-or abiding by the terms that were agreed to earlier. And then that agreement was violated, and this is what brought about our retaliation. I do not know that it can be done as quickly as our going to the summit, which is almost upon us, but it will be done as soon as, as I say, all those conditions are met. And I know that Prime Minister Nakasone is doing his best and is being most cooperative in trying to arrive at a settlement. ENTITY, you have always emphasized that progress in arms control should be linked with progress in human rights. You are making progress in arms control at the moment, and as you are going to Berlin next month and as you are going to see the wall which divides the city, do not you think that the time has come for a new initiative on human rights? Well, I do not know what his message might be, but I am quite sure that I will make reference to the wall and what it represents. I believe that we have made progress, some progress in human rights, not as much as we would like or as fast as we would like. There is a greater distance to go, much more to be done, but at least we are seeing the signs of improvement in that field of human rights. I think another thing also has to do-that is tied into arms reduction, must be the regional aspect.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "26-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1778, "text": "And there, I think the Soviet Union-they have expressed their desire to get out of Afghanistan, and I think we all should be encouraging them to make good on that statement and move as fast as possible to end an assault that has seen almost 5 million people have to flee their country as refugees and live in neighboring countries. And it is a brutal assault on the people who remain. We are seeing attacks on children-deliberately aimed at children by the use of weapons that are made to look like child's toys, but which, when picked up, cause either the death or the severe injury of the children. I recently had five children in this office right here who'd been brought to our hospitals from Afghanistan. And one of them, a small, tiny girl, was horribly disfigured by burns. But the other four were either missing a leg or an arm. Over the years, Britain, irrespective of which political party is in power, has enjoyed a strong, special relationship with the United States, including an American military presence with nuclear weapons on British soft. Irrespective of the result of the general election now being fought in Britain, will you do everything in your power to maintain this relationship in general and specific terms? It is difficult for me to conceive of a time when we would not have the almost family relationship that we have between our two countries. I have admired your Prime Minister and the progress that has been made in many fields there, but I know that I cannot go beyond that, because I am not going to, again, intervene or express an opinion with regard to your politics. But the relationship between our two countries does go back many, many years, and I think it would take more than an election in either one of our countries to change that. ENTITY, may I go back a moment to the Persian Gulf?. People say, especially in Congress, that there is a danger of war. And in any case, confrontation with Iran could cause a resurgence in terrorism and dampen the peace process in the Middle East. Do you think these objections are true, and what do you expect the Europeans to do to help you there? Specifically, what do you expect Italy, for instance, to do to help you? Well, in the economic summit last year in Japan, we came to quite some sizable agreements with regard to terrorism and the cooperation between all of our countries on that. There is no question but that the Iranian Government does support terrorism.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "26-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1779, "text": "And I would think that the issues, as I expressed them earlier, about simply defending ourselves with regard to our own ability to maintain trade in the open waters-I do not see that as bringing on a war. As a matter of fact, we are doing everything we can, working with other countries to try and bring about an end to the war that we have. Now, Iraq has already expressed a willingness to simply end the war, both sides retreat to their own borders, no one gain any territory or suffer any penalty, just simply end the war. Iraq has expressed a willingness to do this, and the only holdout is Iran. We are going to continue to try and press for peace there. It is my understanding that war has taken about a million lives so far. I do not think that they would like to take on the United States in addition to Iraq. And we are not going to start a war, so it would have to be them if they tried to start one. In case of an agreement about the double zero option, what will you answer to those who fear denuclearization of Europe? Well, I think we are a long way from denuclearization of Europe. You have really three sets of weapons. The ones that we are talking particularly about in having a zero option are the intermediate range. But even if that should be done, you have that third group which, in the case of the allies, would number someplace in 4,000 warheads. These are the battlefield weapons, the airplane-carried weapons and so forth, and some nuclear submarines that are dedicated to our agreement with the European nations. Then I would have to point out that as you proceeded-if you did-into that field that is where it would absolutely have to include conventional weapons. conventional weapons. ENTITY, you just talked a moment ago about freedom of navigation in the Gulf. Ottawa is planning to buy 10 to 12 submarines from Europe to force your Navy to ask permission when you send ships in the Northwest Passage. Are we going towards a confrontation of some kind? I see a great deal of merit on Canada's concern with regard to the islands north of Canada, which throughout much, if not all, of the year many of them are connected by permanent ice connections with people living on that ice-that this is somewhat different than most of the other points in the world where there could be the same type of concern as to whether a water is international or territorial.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "26-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1780, "text": "We have to worry about an action that could set a pattern, a precedent, that then in other parts of the world we would find-what is it, about 16 chokepoints in the world that must be kept open if the free world, not only ourselves but others, are to be able to get the necessities of life. And someone that wanted to attack the free world-obviously their naval strategy would be to close those down.  You seem to be saying that Canada had some legitimate claim to sovereignty for that- And I am hopeful that we can-and the good neighbors that we are-that we can find an answer to that and that will, at the same time, will not set a dangerous precedent with regard to other international waters. ENTITY, I would like to ask concerning the value of the dollar. Is the United States Government planning any measures to maintain the value of the dollar, and will you make an announcement at the summit on this? Now, wait a minute, I missed out there at the first. I'd like to ask regarding as-in the value of dollars.- So, is the United States Government planning any measures to maintain the value of the dollar? Well, I do not think we want any more precipitous nosediving of the dollar. We do think that there was a readjustment that was needed, that our dollar, in relation to other currencies, was overpriced. And it was making competition a little unfair in worldwide trade; we were being priced out of the market. Sometimes when we see the dollar adjust as it has, I have often wondered if we are describing it accurately or if we should not be saying that other currencies that have so far been undervalued have gained some value that is more realistic worldwide. Are you going to reappoint Mr. Volcker as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board? We have not even met or discussed that as yet. I know that I am going to be faced with that decision down the road, or perhaps he has a decision he wants to make himself. But we just have not made a decision. But I think that out of the economic summit also, in the whole field of macroeconomics, we will be touching on the need for some stability with regard to currencies worldwide and cure any runaway volatility. If I may ask you a more personal question, you have experienced the worst political crisis of your life during the last months.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "26-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1781, "text": "Your wife has been criticized by some American columnists. You lost your Chief of Staff. Did it ever occur to you during this crisis to resign? And what gave you the strength to carry on? Well, I think the strength to carry on was because there was not any truth, and is not any truth, in the charges that are being leveled at me. I did not know that there was money deposited with regard to our arms purchase in accounts or that any of that money was then going to be used for the contras. We had sold $12 million worth of arms. We got our $12 million. And it was not until the covert operation that we were-or meetings that we were having-not with Khomeini's government. These meetings were with people who were looking forward to what might be the Government of Iran in the absence of the Khomeini and wanted to establish better relations with the United States. They could probably get executed for what they were doing. But anyway, when the whole thing did leak and burst in all the press of the world, it was only then that word was brought to me that apparently someone in the go-between in the arms transaction had raised the price and there was excess money and it had been put in a Swiss bank account. Now, I still do not know who did that, how much, where it went, who is gotten any of it; and I am still waiting for these investigations to reveal it. So frankly, I sleep very well at night. There was information that had evidently been withheld from me by some of those who are testifying. And I do not feel that I am faced with any crisis, and, no, I never considered resigning. ENTITY, Secretary Shultz, before the House Appropriations Committee last March, was talking about the impossibility of the United States living up to any undertaking of confidentiality. He said that the result is that other countries are increasingly hesitant in dealing with us and they even hesitate to communicate with us because as soon as they put anything down, somebody will leak it. How big is the problem of leaks in the American Government, and does it affect the allies in Europe? During these last several years, I was not prepared for how much leaking does go on from the White House or from-let us just say in Washington. It is not just confined to the White House.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "26-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1782, "text": "Many times, if there is something in which you have to give information to the Congress, you know you are going to read about it in the paper almost immediately. As a matter of fact, may I say something here that might sound a little critical? A great deal of the leaking is not the leaking of valid information, it is the leaking of a rumor, an unsubstantiated statement. And yet our press goes all out, including the headlines with it. Now, I recognize the right of the free press; I do not want censorship. And I know also that the press, at least in our country, has a tradition of protecting its source. So, when I see those stories that are written with according to a White House source -no name. But since many times they print as fact this statement by this unnamed source, does not the press have a responsibility, if they want to protect their source, of at least before they go with the story checking out to see if the story is true? Would it kill them to make a telephone call and find out is this true, did you say this, or did you do that? And it is destructive to our relationship with other countries. As I say, a number of times I have had to pick up the phone and call one of my counterparts in another country because of embarrassment caused to them by a leak. And we have done, and continue to do, everything we can to try and find out who is responsible for these leaks, and we have not been able to determine them, to pin them down. Was there a leak, or is not just the attributing of the story to an unnamed source a way of writing a story someone wants to write, particularly among columnists? When are you meeting Mr. Gorbachev, ENTITY? It is up to him to tell us when he can come. He has agreed; he did agree to a summit in the United States; and that invitation is still open. And I am hopeful that, before the year is out, we will have that meeting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignjournalistspriortheveniceeconomicsummit", "title": "Interview With Foreign Journalists Prior to the Venice Economic Summit", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-journalists-prior-the-venice-economic-summit", "publication_date": "26-05-1987", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1785, "text": "We think that a lot of people responded to a theme, or at least I think so, in the presidential campaign of sacrifice to cut the deficit as long as that sacrifice is equal. The Btu tax was designed originally on the concept of equal sacrifice. But then all of these exceptions were added, and it really makes it appear that it is one of the most complicated proposals ever. Did you make a mistake allowing all the special exceptions to be included in the Btu tax? Some of them were included in the House of Representatives bill, and I did not agree with all of them. But let me say what I think was a good criticism of the tax and that is that we wanted the tax to restrain energy consumption in ways that promoted energy conservation and also supported fuel switching to more environmentally beneficial and more available natural gas. That bill, as drawn, would be a big boon to the natural gas industry in Texas and Oklahoma and throughout the United States. And that is one of the things we were trying to do. Now, some of the oil companies did not like it, but the people that were in the gas business liked it. We had a big Texas gas company, headed by a person who strongly supported President Bush in the last election, endorsed the economic program. ARCO and Sun Oil both endorsed the economic program, including the Btu tax. So Secretary Bentsen, who, as you know, has represented you in the Senate for a long time, offered the Senate a modified Btu tax which, instead of having all those particular exemptions, would basically have alleviated the burden of the Btu tax on industry and agriculture on the production sector but still given them an incentive to move toward natural gas wherever possible and would also have cut the Btu rate and would have replaced that with more spending cuts. From my point of view, unfortunately, we could not pass that through the committee because Senator Boren had said he would not vote for any tax based on the heat content of fuel. But I still think it was a good concept, and it will be interesting to see what happens if the Senate's version of the economic plan passes, to see what happens in the conference and what we come up with. What we have now is a gasoline tax that is been passed by the Senate committee, and you have called that regressive in the past. How can you sell that, if you have to, to House Members who did risk some political capital by supporting you on the Btu tax?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithphiladlerkrldradiodallastexas", "title": "Interview With Phil Adler of KRLD Radio, Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-phil-adler-krld-radio-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "21-06-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1786, "text": "I think anything that comes out has to be a combination of agreement between the House and the Senate. It is hard to get 218 House Members and 51 Senators to agree on anything that is tough. I mean, everybody can talk about cutting the deficit, but it is one thing to talk about it and quite another to do. But I think they will be able to do it. No one was particularly happy with the form of the Btu tax, or very few people were, that passed the House, but everybody thought that Secretary Bentsen could come up with a plan that would make it good for the economy and could achieve what we were trying to do in terms of promoting domestic energy, and I think he did. The Senate preferred a tax that was a gas tax and a tax on some other fuels. It, at least, is small enough so that it is not particularly unfair to people in rural areas. It is not as big as what some had wanted, and certainly I did not want just a big old gas tax. I also think it is important to point out in Texas, in light of the rhetoric in the recent political campaign, that it is simply not true that there is no spending cuts in this plan. There is $250 billion in spending cuts, and they affect everything. They affect agriculture and veterans and Medicare and the whole range of discretionary spending of the Government. They affect foreign aid; they affect defense. And the tax increases, two-thirds of them, fall on people with incomes above $200,000, three-quarters on people with incomes above $100,000. Families of four with incomes below $30,000 are held harmless, and people who work for a living 40 hours a week and have kids in the house who are now in poverty would actually be lifted above poverty by these tax changes in ways that promote the movement from welfare to work. It was developed, and in a very aggressive way, by Lloyd Bentsen and by Leon Panetta, who used to be chairman of the House Budget Committee, to be fair, to have equal spending cuts in taxes, and to drive the deficit down so we could bring interest rates down. That is good for Texas, and that is good for everybody in America. And also, it leaves some room for investments that are critical to our future. And as you know, I support you were implying this before I got on I support the space station and the super collider projects because I think they are good for America's future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithphiladlerkrldradiodallastexas", "title": "Interview With Phil Adler of KRLD Radio, Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-phil-adler-krld-radio-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "21-06-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1787, "text": "And if you are going to spend money on those things, you have to spend money on them. You cannot play games; they do cost some money. ENTITY, how long can you guarantee that support for the super collider and the space station? Will they fall if that is the only way to meet your overall deficit reduction goal? Well, my overall deficit reduction goals can be met in my plan with the space station and the super collider. I do want to emphasize that we have already shaved $4 billion off the 5-year budget for the space station and some money off the 5-year budget for the super collider by redesigning the space station, based on a team of exceptional national experts who analyzed the project and recommended that it be redesigned and also that NASA's management be changed rather dramatically. And we just delayed the implementation schedule on the super collider some, so that none of the opponents of the space station and the super collider could claim that there had been no spending cut there. So we have done that. But I strongly feel it would be a mistake to abandon those. Now, I would be less than candid if I did not tell you that there are a lot of people in other parts of the country who want to cut those projects. There was always a lot of opposition to them, and because of the last election and all of the rhetoric and all the claims in Texas that there were no spending cuts in this budget, that has given real energy to the opponents of the space station and the super collider. It was not true that there were no spending cuts, but there are a lot of people up there who have been wanting to kill these projects for years who are just gleeful at the way the rhetoric in the last election played out in Texas. They think that they have been given a license by the people of Texas to kill the space station and the super collider. And it is going to be very much harder for me to keep them alive. ENTITY, I am informed that our time has run out, by one of your aides, I believe. I enjoyed it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithphiladlerkrldradiodallastexas", "title": "Interview With Phil Adler of KRLD Radio, Dallas, Texas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-phil-adler-krld-radio-dallas-texas", "publication_date": "21-06-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1788, "text": "I am very pleased indeed to welcome ENTITY and his delegation, Mrs. ENTITY, and young Barbara. It is very important for us because of the importance of the United States to our future and the United States to the future of our continent. We have had very good discussions with ENTITY, able to cover quite a wide field. We are very pleased with the development of the bilateral relations, strong economic links, growing all the time. Continued attention by the U.S. corporate world on South Africa is very critically important for us. AGOA has had a very big impact in terms of the development of our economy, and we continue to work on all of these matters. It also gave us a chance to convey our thanks to ENTITY for the support with regards to meeting the African continental challenges. That includes questions of peace and security, the NEPAD processes, again, very important for the future of our continent. That, of course, also gave an opportunity to discuss some of the specific areas of conflict around the continent. I must say, ENTITY, that at the end of these discussions, we, all of us, feel enormously strengthened by your very, very firm and clear commitment to assist us to meet the challenges that we have got to meet domestically and on the African Continent. We-the visit will certainly result in strengthened bilateral relations and strengthened cooperation to meet these other challenges that we face together. It is a pleasure to be in South Africa. Your Nation's recent history is a great story of courage and persistence in the pursuit of justice. This is a country that threw off oppression and is now the force of freedom and stability and a force for progress throughout the continent of Africa. I appreciate our strong relationship, and it is a vital relationship. And ENTITY, I want to thank you very much for working hard to make it a vital and strong relationship. We have met quite a few times in the recent past, and every time we have met, I have -I feel refreshed and appreciate very much your advice and counsel and your leadership. I appreciate ENTITY's dedication to openness and accountability. He is advancing these principles in the New Partnership for African Development, the leader in that effort. ENTITY and I believe that the partnership can help extend democracy and free markets and transparency across the continent of Africa. ENTITY has shown great leadership in this initiative, and our country will support the leaders who accept the principles of reform, and we will work with them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentthabombekisouthafricapretoriasouth", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa in Pretoria, South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-thabo-mbeki-south-africa-pretoria-south", "publication_date": "09-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1789, "text": "South Africa is playing a critical role in promoting regional security in Africa, and we discussed ENTITY's leadership, for example, in Burundi. South Africa has helped achieve the peaceful inauguration of a new ENTITY. Or in the Congo, South Africa brokered an agreement on the creation of a transitional government. And in Zimbabwe, I have encouraged ENTITY and his Government to continue to work for the return of democracy in that important country. I also discussed with ENTITY the importance of the continued cooperation in the global war on terror. The United States and South Africa are working together to strengthen this nation's border security and law enforcement. And we are devoting $100 million to help countries in eastern Africa increase their counterterror efforts. We are determined to fight and to join our friends to fight terrorists throughout this continent, throughout the world. We are also committed to helping African nations achieve peace. In Liberia, the United States strongly supports the cease-fire agreement signed last month. President Taylor needs to leave Liberia so that his country can be spared further grief and bloodshed. Yesterday, I talked with President Kufuor of Ghana, who leads ECOWAS. I shared with the President our conversation. I assured him the United States will work closely with ECOWAS and the United Nations to maintain the cease-fire and to enable a peaceful transfer of power. We are also pressing forward to help end Africa's long-running civil war in Sudan. My Special Envoy, Senator Jack Danforth, is returning to the region. We are making progress there. And his efforts are making good progress. ENTITY also discussed our action to combat ENTITY/ENTITY. South Africa has recently increased its budget to fight the disease, and we noticed and we appreciate that. America is now undertaking a major new effort to help governments and private groups combat ENTITY. Over the next 5 years, we will spend $15 billion in the global fight against ENTITY. People across Africa had the will to fight this disease but often not the resources, and the United States of America is willing to put up the resources to help in the fight. We are committed to helping the people of Africa defeat hunger. We provided more than 500,000 metric tons of food aid to southern Africa over the past 18 months. This year we will provide nearly $1 billion to address food emergencies. We care when we see people who are hungry. We look forward to working with ENTITY to alleviate suffering. We are also working to expand trade, which I believe is the key to Africa's economic future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentthabombekisouthafricapretoriasouth", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa in Pretoria, South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-thabo-mbeki-south-africa-pretoria-south", "publication_date": "09-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1790, "text": "The African Growth and Opportunity Act is creating jobs and stimulating investment across the continent. Right here in South Africa, exports to the United States under AGOA have increased by 45 percent in the last year alone-significant progress. We are working with five nations of the Southern African Customs Union on a free trade agreement to help expand the circle of prosperity even wider. ENTITY, our countries have many common interests. We also share a fundamental commitment to the spread of peace and human rights and liberty. By working in close partnership, we are serving both the interests of the people of South Africa and the United States. I want to thank you for your friendship, appreciate the hospitality. It is been a great honor to be in your country. I understand that two U.S. journalists and two South African journalists will pose some questions. I'd like to direct the question to both Presidents, and it does concern the issue of ENTITY/ENTITY and the $15 billion grant. Did you manage to reach some kind of understanding or consensus on the issue of how South Africa will access that money, on what terms South Africa will be able to access that money? And ENTITY, did you give any undertakings in terms of using your influence to ensure that there will be cheaper access-access to cheaper drugs and medicines? And to ENTITY, sir, did you-- Did you give any undertaking in terms of the running out of the national treatment plan? Well, as ENTITY had indicated, we did indeed discuss this. The situation is that we received a request from the U.S. Government to say, can we make proposals as to how to access the fund, for what purposes-a program, a program that we would present. So we are working on that. We want to respond to that request from the United States Government as quickly as is possible. We will do that and convey it. So it will be out of that process of discussion that will result, out of that proposal between the U.S. Government and ourselves, that then will come a program, a particular concrete kind of action, with the necessary costing when we get to that stage. So the matter will be discussed in that way. And ENTITY had indicated in our discussions that of course the U.S. Government is taking a comprehensive approach to this, which would, therefore, include questions of awareness, questions of health infrastructure, questions of treatment, and so on. So we will look at the totality of those and-in the proposal that we would make.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentthabombekisouthafricapretoriasouth", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa in Pretoria, South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-thabo-mbeki-south-africa-pretoria-south", "publication_date": "09-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1791, "text": "We just named Tobias to be the Ambassador, nominated him to be the Ambassador, and he is -upon confirmation-will be working with the countries such as South Africa to develop a strategy-is what we need. We need a commonsense strategy to make sure that the money is well-spent. And the definition of well-spent means lives are saved, which means good treatment programs, good prevention programs, good programs to develop health infrastructures in remote parts of different countries so that we can actually get antiretroviral drugs to those who need help. The cost of antiretroviral drugs has dropped substantially. But we did talk about the pharmaceutical union in a broader context. As you may know, the United States supported a moratorium on the enforcement of patent laws concerning those drugs related to diseases that were causing pandemics. And we will continue to work with South Africa as well as other countries to see if we cannot reach a commonsense policy that, on the one hand, protects intellectual property rights and, on the other hand, makes, you know, lifesaving drugs or treatment drugs for, in some cases, lifesaving, in some cases that are proper for treatment, more widely available at reasonable costs. But one reason I felt emboldened to ask the Congress for a substantial amount of new money for the ENTITY Initiative was because of the cost of antiretrovirals, and it is significantly lower than it was a couple of years ago. So we are making good progress. And I look forward to working with ENTITY on putting together a sound strategy that saves lives. That is what our country is interested in. We are interested in dealing with this pandemic in a practical way. But whatever you do, do not fall into that bad habit of asking both of us three or four questions. ENTITY, you have an assessment team in Liberia now to help you decide whether to send in U.S. troops as part of a peacekeeping effort. U.S. troops are getting shot at increasingly in Iraq every day. We have troops in Kosovo, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Korea. What do you say to critics who suggest that our forces may be spread too thinly now to engage in further initiatives? And to ENTITY, do you think that the United States should play a more active role in peacekeeping, specifically in Liberia? Well, first, my answer to people is that we will not overextend our troops, period.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentthabombekisouthafricapretoriasouth", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa in Pretoria, South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-thabo-mbeki-south-africa-pretoria-south", "publication_date": "09-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1792, "text": "Secondly, we have made a commitment that we will work closely with the United Nations and ECOWAS to enforce the cease-fire, see to it that Mr. Taylor leaves office, so that there can be a peaceful transition in Liberia. We have made that commitment. I have said it clearly more than one time, like yesterday in Senegal, for example. So nothing has changed from about 12 hours ago on that question. We do have assessment teams there to assess what is necessary to help with the transition. And ENTITY brought up the question, and he can answer it his own way. And we are now determining the extent of our involvement. Yes, certainly, we discussed this question with ENTITY many years ago and agreed that it is critically important that we as Africans should, indeed, take responsibility for the future of peace and stability on the continent. So that is a principal obligation that falls on us as Africans. So as you would know, the West African states, ECOWAS, have agreed to send in troops into Liberia. And they are trying to move that process forward as quickly as is possible. We appreciate very much the point that was made by ENTITY of the commitment of the United States to lend sup-port-the assessment teams are there to assess that-to lend support to those processes, processes of restoration of peace, making sure people do not starve, making sure that there is a restoration of democracy in Liberia. So the U.S. will cooperate with the African troops that will go there. So it is not- we are not saying that this is a burden that just falls on the United States. It really ought to principally fall on us as Africans. Of course, we need a lot of support, logistics-wise and so on, to do that, but the will is there. I think our money has helped train seven battalions of peacekeepers amongst African troops. And it is a sensible policy for us to continue that training mission, so that we never do get overextended. And so one of the things you will see us do is invigorate this-reinvigorate the strategy of helping people help themselves by providing training opportunities. I think we have trained five Nigerian battalions, if I am not mistaken, one Senegalese. So we have got-but it is in our interest that we continue that strategy, Tom, so that we do not ever get overextended.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentthabombekisouthafricapretoriasouth", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa in Pretoria, South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-thabo-mbeki-south-africa-pretoria-south", "publication_date": "09-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1793, "text": "During the past week, the two Presidents or the Governments of-the Government of the U.S. and South Africa have expressed sharp differences about the best way to deal with the Zimbabwean question. And having met this morning, I wonder if the two Presidents have found the best approach or have agreed about the best approach to deal with Zimbabwe. Can we get from the smiles that you now have a formula to deal best with Zimbabwe? I did not know, ENTITY, that we'd expressed sharp differences. We are absolutely of one mind, the two Governments and ENTITY and myself are absolutely of one mind about the urgent need to address the political and economic challenges of Zimbabwe. It is necessary to resolve this matter as quickly as is possible. We have said, as you would know, for a long time that the principle is rooted- principal responsibility for the resolution of these problems rests with the people of Zimbabwe and, therefore, have urged them-both the ruling party and the opposition, the Government and the opposition-to get together and seriously tackle all of these issues. I did tell ENTITY that, indeed, the Government-ZANU-PF and the MDC are indeed discussing. They are engaged in discussions on all of the matters that would be relevant to the resolution of these political and economic problems. We have communicated the message to both sides that-indeed, as we agreed with ENTITY-that it is very, very important that they should move forward with urgency to find a resolution to these questions. Of course, again, as ENTITY was saying, that apart from these important political issues about democrats and so on, you actually have ordinary people who are hungry in an economy which cannot cope with them, and you cannot allow that kind of situation to go on forever. We had discussed this matter earlier, sometime back, with the U.S. Government that we have to find-we have got to find a way of getting a political solution, and we would indeed count very much on such economic, financial support as would come from the United States afterwards, in order to address the urgent challenges that face Zimbabwe. So we did not fight about any of what I have just said. We were smiling because we were certain a clever reporter would try to use the Zimbabwe issue as a way to maybe create tensions which do not exist. Look, Zimbabwe is an important country for the economic health of Africa.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentthabombekisouthafricapretoriasouth", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa in Pretoria, South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-thabo-mbeki-south-africa-pretoria-south", "publication_date": "09-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1794, "text": "A free, peaceful Zimbabwe has got the capacity to deliver a lot of goods and services which are needed on this continent in order to help relieve suffering. And it is a very sad situation that is taken place in that country. Look, we share the same objective. He represents a mighty country in the neighborhood who is , because of his position and his responsibility, is working the issue. And I am not-not any intention of second-guessing his tactics. We share the same outcome. And I think it is important for the United States, whether it be me or my Secretary of State, to speak out when we see a situation where somebody's freedoms have been taken away from them and they are suffering. And that is what we are going to continue to do. ENTITY is the point man on this important subject. He is working it very hard. He is in touch with the parties involved. He is-he is making-he believes, making good progress. And the United States supports him in this effort. Do you regret that your State of the Union accusation that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear materials in Africa is now fueling charges that you and Prime Minister Blair misled the public? And then, secondly, following up on Zimbabwe, are you willing to have a representative meet with a representative of the Zimbabwe opposition leader, who sent a delegation here and complained that he did not think ENTITY could be an honest broker in the process? Well, I think ENTITY can be an honest broker, to answer the second question. The first question is-look, there is no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the world peace. And there is no doubt in my mind the United States, along with allies and friends, did the right thing in removing him from power. And there is no doubt in my mind, when it is all said and done, the facts will show the world the truth. And so there is going to be a lot of, you know, attempts to try to rewrite history, and I can understand that. But I am absolutely confident in the decision I made. Do you still believe they were trying to buy nuclear materials in Africa? I mean, the statement you made-- One thing is for certain, he is not trying to buy anything right now. If he is alive, he is on the run. And that is to the benefit of the Iraqi people. But look, I am confident that Saddam Hussein had a weapons of mass destruction program.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentthabombekisouthafricapretoriasouth", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa in Pretoria, South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-thabo-mbeki-south-africa-pretoria-south", "publication_date": "09-07-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1795, "text": "Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan. What is your assessment of those three theaters? And looking back in perspective, would you do anything different? Well, that is an interesting question on doing anything different. Of course, history is going to be the judge of that. But the decision, for example, on Iraq, to remove Saddam Hussein, was the right decision then, and it is the right decision now. The progress in Iraq has been substantial. For a period of time, it-the democracy was in doubt, primarily because sectarian violence was really unacceptable. I decided to put more troops in, rather than pull back, and now the violence is the lowest it is been since March of 2004. So I am encouraged about Iraq. Afghanistan is also difficult because of new democracy emerging from the shadows of a brutal regime. Last year, of course, the Taliban announced they were going to go on the offense. In fact, our coalition went on the offense and, from a security perspective, made some progress against the Taliban. The best progress, though, is the advance of better trained police forces-and I thank the Italian Government for helping-as well as a better Afghan ENTITY, which over time needs to provide the security for the country. Iraq will probably-progresses quicker cause it is got wealth. Iran-the free world must continue to send a clear message to the Iranians that their ability to enrich, which could be transferred to a program to develop a nuclear weapon, is unacceptable. And so I will continue to work on this trip to talk about the dangers of a nuclear Iran-not civilian nuclear power, but a program that would be aimed at blackmail or destruction-and that we have got to work to stop them from learning how to enrich. Should Iran resist the international pressure, military option remains open? Italy wants to join the 5plus-1 group of contacts negotiating with Iran. Germany is skeptical; they do not want us. What do you say? I say that whatever is effective in terms of sending a clear message to Iran. I will be spending time talking to this with the Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi. I have talked to Condi about this issue. Italy can be an effective voice in sending a message to the Iranians. And that you do not have to choose isolation; there is a better way forward. And Italy can be a critical part of that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgianniriottaitalysraitv", "title": "Interview With Gianni Riotta of Italy's Rai TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gianni-riotta-italys-rai-tv", "publication_date": "06-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1796, "text": "And so we will work-I have not really taken the temperature that much, but my judgment is, Italy can be a very important contributor. The relationship between the United States and Europe has been strained sometimes in the recent past. During your trip, what do you suggest we can do together vis-a-vis the oil crisis, food crisis, and the recession coming? Yes, you know-first of all, let me talk about strained relations. Look, I have had great relations with many of the leaders. Do we agree on every issue? But do we agree on common values? We believe in human rights and human dignity and free press and free religion. And so what unites us is a heck of a lot stronger than those moments where we do not necessarily agree on every single issue. And so I will remind people of that. I will remind people that we have got a lot of work to do. In terms of the current energy issue, look, we are too dependent on hydrocarbons. World demand is such, relative to supply, that the price of energy is high. And therefore, we need to be spending monies on new technologies to enable us to become less dependent on oil. one, less dependency on hydrocarbons; and two, it will make us better stewards of the environment. I mean, if you are concerned about global warming, one thing you ought to be concerned about then is making sure that we have got power generated from a clean source of energy, a renewable source of energy, which is nuclear power. The food prices concern me, obviously. But the truth of the matter is, one reason why food prices are so high is because energy prices are high. fertilizer is an energy; driving a tractor is an energy; crops to markets require energy. And so the crux of a lot of the problem is the energy prices. Talking to Prime Minister Berlusconi, what areas do you-will you encourage Italy to work with the United States, especially? Well, Iran, of course, because I just happen to see it as a major threat. Afghanistan-and I will thank the Italian people for their sacrifices to help this young democracy. Silvio Berlusconi and I worked a lot of big issues together in the past. I know him well, I trust him, I like him. I am -I find him to be one of the really interesting world leaders.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgianniriottaitalysraitv", "title": "Interview With Gianni Riotta of Italy's Rai TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gianni-riotta-italys-rai-tv", "publication_date": "06-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1797, "text": "And I am really looking forward to seeing him again in his capacity, once again, as the Prime Minister. We ought to work on trade matters. We ought to work on diseases like ENTITY/ENTITY and malaria on the continent of Africa, for example. You met the Pope while in the United States, and how do you see his role in trying to reopen the dialogue between different civilizations and religions? And we had a fabulous visit here, and it was such an honor to welcome him to the South Lawn of the White House. I wish you could have seen it. But you-maybe you did see it. I wish your viewers could have seen the reception he was given here. I think it was one of the largest crowds ever on the South Lawn, like 13,000 people. And my own personal visit with him was so uplifting. And we did talk about the interfaith dialogue, that I think is really important for people to find common ground through religion to, like, deal with the violence that is used by some in the name of religion, to perpetuate an ideology, and to remind people that peace-religion is peace. I talked to the King of Saudi Arabia about his visit with the Holy Father, and those are two very important figures when it comes to obviously Christianity and Islam. Yes. How do you see vitality of the American democracy, looking at this? Well, look, I am for McCain, and everybody knows that. On the other hand, I thought it was a really good statement, powerful moment when a major political party nominates a African American man to be their standard bearer. And it is good for our democracy that that happened. So I think it is a good sign for American democracy. And I am in an interesting position. I ran hard for the Presidency twice; I campaigned hard in the off years, and now I will be passing the mantle on to Senator McCain, particularly at the convention when he becomes the official nominee of our party. Obviously, he is going to be the nominee, but there is a moment at the convention where it is , Here he is. And I will do my part to help him win, and- but it is going to be up to him. That is - he will be the man sitting in the Oval Office making the tough decisions for peace and security. You mentioned history at the beginning of this interview. And you know-you are aware that history will ask you about Iraq.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgianniriottaitalysraitv", "title": "Interview With Gianni Riotta of Italy's Rai TV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gianni-riotta-italys-rai-tv", "publication_date": "06-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1798, "text": "Republicans are already out saying what you are talking about so far, for Wednesday night, is not going to create any new jobs. You know, I would suggest that they save the rebuttal for after the speech -- -- since they have not really -- they have not really heard what we are proposing. But what is it going to be? We are going to talk about how we can, first of all, focus on job creation and growth. And I met with the Republicans, so I have their ideas. And some of the things we propose are things that actually should get some strong bipartisan support. Right. Over the next two years, this plan will save or create 3.5 million jobs. in infrastructure -- Here is what I said was that our number-one priority was stopping the economic contraction. And we did create or save several million jobs. But we still lost 7 million jobs. There are reports now of other potential suicide bombers coming out of Yemen. Osama bin Laden, as we know, has issued a tape championing the Christmas Day attempted bomber. Do you have any indication that they are already here? Since 9/11, we have put in a series of measures that make us much safer now than we were before 9/11. Al Qaeda itself is greatly weakened from where it was back in 2000. Bin Laden sending out a tape trying to take credit for a Nigerian student who engaged in a failed bombing attempt is an indication of how weakened he is because this is not something necessarily directed by him. Ever in the middle of all this coming at you, do you think maybe one term is enough? You know, I would say that when I -- the one thing I am clear about is that I'd rather be a really good one-term president than an mediocre two-term president. And I -- and I believe that. You know, there is a tendency in Washington to think that our job description of elected officials is to get reelected. I will not slow down in terms of going after the big problems that this country faces. I am not backing off the need for us to tackle these big problems in a serious way.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdianesawyerabcsgoodmorningamerica", "title": "Interview With Diane Sawyer on ABC's Good Morning America", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-diane-sawyer-abcs-good-morning-america", "publication_date": "25-01-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1799, "text": "Iwhat did you say, nice tie? I wore it for the national service signing today. It is interesting, we just had a lunch with a number of columnists Audience members. Would it make you feel better if I said I did not enjoy it? I mean anyway, and they knew you were all here, and we had 700 or 800 people out on the lawn for the national service signing. And four or five of these folks that have been covering Washington for 20 years said they had never seen the White House so busy. I did not know if they were happy or sad about it, but anyway, it is busy. I thank you for coming today. I hope this will be the first of a number of opportunities we have to provide people who have radio talk shows and who communicate with millions of Americans on an intimate basis, daily, to come to the White House to have these kinds of briefings. You have already heard all the basic approaches that the administration is going to take on health care and that will be hopefully crystallized in a compelling way in my address to the Congress and to the country tomorrow evening. So, I thought what I would do is make a general statement about how this fits into the overall approach the administration is taking and then answer your questions. I'd rather spend time just answering your questions. But let me just make a general comment, that I think you canthat runs through the thread of debate that we had on the economic program, on the health care issue, on NAFTA, on the crime bill that is coming up, on the welfare reform issue, on all the major things we are trying to come to grips with. It is now commonplace to say that we are living through a time of profound change, not only in our country but around the world. People are trying to come to grips with a rate and nature of change that comes along less frequently than once a generation. I mean, they are going through these things, trying to come to grips with what it means to be a democracy and what it means to try to change the economy. In our country, if we are going to continue to be the leading power of the world, not just militarily but economically, socially, the shining light of the world, this has to be a good place for most Americans to live. Most people have to know that if they work hard and play by the rules that they can make the changes that are sweeping through this country and the world their friends and not their enemies.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1800, "text": "They have to believe that as citizens they can work together and trust the major institutions of our society to function well, to meet these changes, to respond to them. the size of the deficit, the fact that we have an investment deficit, too, in many critical areas, the health care crisis, at a time when most people are quite insecure in their own lives and most Americans have worked harder for stagnant or lower wages for the last 10 to 20 years, when they are paying more for the basics in life, when they have lost faith in the fundamental capacity of political institutions to represent them and to solve problems. I think you can see that in the 700,000 letters we got on health care. The number of people who would say, you know, What is wrong with me? I worked hard all my life, and I lost my health insurance, or My child got sick, and now I can never change my job, or My wife and I spend 60 hours a week running our business. And our health insurance was $200 a month 4 years ago, and it is over $900 a month today, you know that things are out of control. I say that because I believe providing security in the health care area and in meeting the other objectives we talked about, quality and choice and cost controls and all, is a necessary precondition, not only to improve the health care of the American people but to help root the American people again in this moment, to make them freer to face the other challenges that we face. I see in this debate over NAFTA which I have wrestled with in my own mind, that is, the whole nature of our trade relations with Mexico and other countries and where we are going for far longer than I have been ENTITY, I had to deal with it when I was a Governor. I see people, some of them looking ahead with confidence in the future that we can triumph in the world of the 21st century, that we can compete and win, that we can create tomorrow's jobs, and others so uncertain about it, just trying to hold on to today and to yesterday's jobs. So, what I am trying to do is to give the American people a greater sense of security over those things that are basic to their lives that they can control and at the same time challenge our people to assume responsibility for dealing with our problems and for marching confidently into the future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1801, "text": "That is what this national service issue is all about that we celebrated today on the White House lawn. And therefore, the health care issue is about more than health care. It is about restoring selfconfidence to America's families and businesses. It is about restoring some discipline to our budget and investment decisions, not only in the Government but in the private sector. It is about giving us the sense that we actually can move forward and win in the face of all these changes. I cannot underor I guess I cannot overstate how important I think it is, not only on its own terms but also for what it might mean for America over the long run. Does anybody really know whether this will work, from the administration? Have you parsed the numbers that fine, that you can say if this is passed in toto, it will indeed do what you say, cut costs, maintain quality of care, cover everybody? We know it will do that, but that is not exactly what you asked. That is, we know that if this plan is adopted, it will provide universal coverage, that it will achieve substantial savings in many areas where there is massive waste. Koop, who was, you know, President Reagan's Surgeon General, who was with us yesterday, and the doctors that we had, said that in his judgment, there was at least $200 billion of waste, unnecessary procedures, administrative waste, fraudulent churning of the system, at least, in our system. So, we know that those things will achieve those objectives? No we do not know that because nobody can know that exactly. But I would like to make two points. Number one, our administration has gone further to get good health care numbers than anyone ever has before. Until I became ENTITY I did not know this, but the various Agencies in the Federal Government responsible for various parts of health care financing and regulation had never had their experts sit down in the same room together and agree on the same set of numbers and the same methodologies for achieving them. No wonder we had so much fight over what something was going to cost and the deficit was going crazy. The Government had never gotten its own act together. Then the second thing we did was to go out and solicit outside actuaries from private sector firms who made a living evaluating the cost of health care and asked them to review our numbers.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1802, "text": "Now, that is very important that you understand that, because there is going to be there should be a debate over whether the course I have recommended is the best course to achieve the goals we all want to achieve, whether there is a better course, whether we can achieve the Medicare and Medicaid cuts that we say we can achieve without hurting the quality of care. But I want you to understand that we really have killed ourselves at least to get the arithmetic right, to give people an honest starting point, a common ground to start from, so that we can have the arguments over policy. Do you feel that your plan places undue hardship on business with the employer mandate versus an individual plan that has been proposed with other proposals? First of all, let us just look at the employer mandate. Most employers cover their employees. I like your question in the sense that the question assumes that we should have universal coverage, and that is a good assumption. If you do not have universal coverage, you can never really slow the rate of waste in cost, because you will always have a lot of cost shifting in the system. That is, people who are not covered will still get health care, but they will get it when it is too late, too expensive, somebody else will pay the bill, and it will have real inefficiencies and distortions, as it does today. If you want to cover everybody, there are essentially three ways to do it. You can do it the way Canada does. You can abolish all private health insurance premiums, raise taxes to replace the health insurance premiums, and have a single-payer system, just have the Government do it. That is, the Canadian system has very low administrative costs, even lower than Germany and Japan. The problem is, it is not very good for controlling costs in other ways, because the Government makes all the cost decisions. The citizens know they have already paid for this through government. So they make real demands on the system. Whereas if you have a mixed system where employers and employees are actually in there knowing what they are spending on health care and lobbying for better management and to control costs, like in Germany, you do not have costs go up as fast. So the Canadian system, even though it is administratively the cheapest, is the second most expensive in the world. We are spending 14 percent of our income; they are spending 10 percent of theirs. Everybody else is under 9.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1803, "text": "The problem with the individual mandate is that it couldand again, I want a debate on this. I think the Republicans are entitled to their day in court on this, and I want them to have it. I mean, I want an honest, open discussion on this. I am so impressed with the spirit that is pervading this health insurance we had 400 Members of Congress show up for 2 days at our health care university just trying to get everybody to have enough information to be singing out of the same hymnal when we talk to one another. The dangers of the individual mandates are that it could cause the present system we have for most Americans, which is working well for most Americans, to disintegrate. That is, you have to have some subsidies with an individual mandate. So will companies that now cover their employees basically start covering their upper income employees or not their lower income employees? Will they dump all their employees and make them go under the individual mandate system? How are you going to keep up with all these individuals when you realize who you have got to subsidize or not? In other words, we believe it has significantly more administrative burdens, and it has the potential to cause the present system to come undone. But they deserve their day in court on it, and we will debate it. Let me just say this.  We propose to keep lower the premiums of small businesses with fewer than 50 employees, including all those that are just starting up. And they get more if their wages of their employees are low, and low-wage workers also get a subsidy to try to make sure nobody goes out of business. But the point I want to make is, most small businesses who do cover their employees, and that is the majority of them, are paying too much for their health insurance. They are being burdened by it. That is one reason 100,000 Americans a month permanently lose their health insurance, as well as at any given time in a year, as many as one in four may be without it. So what we propose to do will actually help more small businesses than it will hurt. And over the long run, they will all be better off, because if you put everybody under this system, then the rate of increase in health care costs will be much lower. And it is just not fair, at some point, for anybody who can pay something to get a free ride, because keep in mind, we all get health care in this country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1804, "text": "But if we are not insured, we get it when it is too late, too expensive. Usually we show up at the emergency room, the most expensive of all, and then somebody else pays the bill. That is one of the things that is driving these costs out of sight. We have heard a lot about every group today, except for the doctors. And from the doctors that I am hearing from, they are saying that this is going to hit them in their pockets. In my experience before in being in operating rooms and seeing doctors after the diagnostic related groups started setting some prices of procedures back in the eighties, a lot of doctors that went into business for themselves were either multiusing single-use items or resterilizing items that were made for single-use so that they would not lose any of the money that was going to be coming to them, so they would not take a personal hit out of it. How does your plan guarantee us an uncompromised medical plan? Well, for one thing, the quality standards that govern medical care today will still be in effect. That is, most of them are professional standards, and they are not enforced by the Government today. They are talking about doing more procedures to make up the money. They are saying, Well, I am going to have to see more patients and spend less time with them. I mean, the truth is that as we have tried to control the costs of Medicare and Medicaid, particularly Medicare, by holding down costs, you see dramatically increased numbers of procedures. What we want to do is to remove the incentive for having large numbers of procedures by having big blocks of consumers pay for their annual health care needs in a block, so that you will not have so much fee-for-service. I would also point out to you that one of the big problems we have had with doctor costs going up is that doctors are having to negotiate their way through the mine field of 1,500 separate health insurance companies writing thousands of different policies, having to keep up with it in ways that no doctors anywhere in the world but our doctors have to deal with. We have already had the American Academy of Family Practice and a lot of other doctors groups have endorsed our plan. The AMA has been quite interestingly supportive in general terms. They say they want to see all the details. Koop has agreed to come in and sort of moderate this discussion. But we had a couple hundred doctors here yesterday, most of whom were extremely supportive.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1805, "text": "And let me just give you one big reason why. This is the flip side of the argument you made. In 1980, the average doctor was taking home 75 percent of the money generated by a clinic. In 1990, the average doctor was taking home 52 cents on the dollar, 52 percent of the money generated by a clinic. Twenty-three cents on the dollar increase in the amount of money the doctor was having to spend on people, basically to do clerical work in the clinics. The Children's Hospital at Washington told us last week that the 200 doctors on staff there spent enough time in non-health-care-related paperwork every year because of the administrative cost of this systema dime on the dollar more than any other system in the worldto see another 500 patients each a year, 10,000 more kids a year. So, a lot of doctors are going to feel very liberated by this because they are going to be freer to practice medicine, and the incentives to churn the system just to pay for all their paperwork will be less. I guess I have the opportunity, I will make it a two-part question because it is a rare opportunity, and I appreciate it. First of all, if you receive everything that you want, that you are hoping for, and we hear about the 37 million uninsured and the many underinsured people, I am wondering if there is anybody that will be disappointed with the new system if you get everything you want, and who those people might be? And secondly, I hear very little about medical fraud and medical malpractice problems, as if it is not a major problem, and we are led to believe that it is. Maybe I should answer that question first, because it is a quicker one. Then let me try to tell you how to sort through the winners and losers. First of all, in this system if you put consumers of health care, employers and employees, particularly the small businesses, in large buying groups where they will have more market power and more oversight authority, you will inevitablywe are going to change the economic incentives as well as the private sector oversight to reduce fraud and abusewe are definitely going to see big savings there. Secondly, what was the other thing you asked me? One of the things that we do not know is how much extra excess procedures and tests are done as defensive medicine or to churn the system, to go back to your other question.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1806, "text": "The economic incentives to churn the system will be dramatically reduced under these kind of payment plans. It will be more like the way the Rochester, New York, system works, the way the Mayo Clinic system works. More and more people will be in a system where they pay up front, and then they take what they need. And the doctors are going to get paid out of that. We will propose some significant reforms, including limiting the percentage of income lawyers can get in contingency fees in lawsuits. But I have to tell you, what I think the most significant and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms but I think the most important one will be permitting the professional associations to draw up medical practice guidelines which, when approved, will protect the doctors to some extent, because if they follow the guidelines in any given case, it will raise a presumption that they were not negligent. And that will be a real protection against just doing an extra procedure because you are trying to hedge against a lawsuit. The State of Maine pioneered this because they wanted more general practitioners in rural Maine to do more things for people like help deliver babies because they did not have anybody else to do it. So, the idea of giving people practice guidelines I think is very good. Can we talk through that? I will tell you who will have to pay more. You know, there will be some people who will have to pay more. The news magazines this week did a pretty good job of analyzing this. If we go to community rating, so that we can allow people, for example, who have had a sick child not to be bankrupt by their insurance costs and to move from job to job, and you put everybody in a broad community, it means young, single, super healthy people will pay more in the first year of this than they would have otherwise. Now, here is why I think that is a good deal for young, single, super healthy people. So even though they might pay more this year, within 5 to 8 years, if this plan goes through, everybody will be paying less than they would have. So, they would pay more. They will have to pay something. There are others who insure but only for catastrophic. They will have to pay more, but they will get much better benefits, and their rates will go up less. So, there will be some people who will pay more now than they were paying.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1807, "text": "But I believe that if we cankeep in mind, if we can stop the cost of health care from going up at 2 and 3 times the rate of inflation, if we can get it down where the rate of increase is much lower, by the end of the decade everybody will be way better off than they were. ENTITY do you approve ofBoris Yeltsin's announcement that he is going to dissolve the Parliament, and does the United States support him in his power struggle with his opponents? Well, first of all, let me say I have had only a sketchy briefing about this, and I have not talked to President Yeltsin yet. I would like to reserve the right to issue a statement after I attempt to talk to President Yeltsin. In any case, I will issue a statement before the end of the day, but I think at least I should have a direct briefing. ENTITY Clinton, tomorrow you will be speaking before a joint session of Congress and there are 535 people, individuals, in Congress that will have their own specific plans of what they want If you could say that you could put your name on one or two or three specific parts of this that you want to say, This is my health care plan, that you want to see no matter what 535 other people want to see, that you feel you want to be part of your Clinton health care program, what two or three items, specifically? Number one, every American would have security in their health care system. You would be able to get health insurance, there would be adequate benefits, and you would not lose them. Number two, the system would impose a far higher level of responsibility for managing costs than it does now on all the players, including the consumers. Number three, people would keep their choice of physicians and medical providers. And number four, we would guarantee adequate access to preventive and primary care so we could stop some of the big things that are happening to us before they get going. And five, we would have market incentives to bring costs down. Those are the things that I want to be the hallmark of our program.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithradiotalkshowhosts", "title": "Interview With Radio Talk Show Hosts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-radio-talk-show-hosts", "publication_date": "21-09-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1808, "text": "I have been sports director of WHO Radio since 1944. And obviously we are honored and excited today to have the President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, who sat behind this microphone on many occasions from 1933 to 1937 when he had my job. He was sports director here at WHO. Now, the memories that this microphone right here evokes in you what are they? It is like a film montage there of everything, the various events and the I remember probably one outstanding occasion the microphone of that kind out at Birdland Park, and they were having the Olympic tryouts out there, the AAU tryouts for the Olympic team. And we were feeding network going to feed the NBC network, and that was really tops. We had half an hour to fill. And some of the Olympic officials got in an argument, and I was on the air for 30 minutes, nationwide and they did not run off one single swimming event. I think I described every drop of water in the pool everyone that was warming up, and what they were doing, and talking about, what events were going to be held. Went off the air and 2 minutes after we were off the air, they had the first event. But your ad-lib ability was really put to a super test with that machine right there, the old Western Union ticker tape that used to bring in the Chicago Cubs re-creations to you. And you had a stick one time in that famous story you fouled it off 34 times, 35 times. Curly Waddel was the operator, sat on that side with the headphones, and he would type and slip it under the window to me. And they used to keep track because there'd be seven or eight stations competing and broadcasting, and most of them live, right at the park and we were within half a pitch of right up with the live ball game all the time. To do that, he had to abbreviate things down, like in would come the paper, and it would say, Out 4-3. Well, that meant out from second base to first base, that meant it had to be a grounder. So, you'd take it, and you'd say, And Dean comes out of the windup, and here comes the pitch, and it is a hard hit ground ball down toward second base. So-and-so going over after the ball, picks it up, flips it over to first, just in time for the out.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimzabelwhoradiodesmoinesiowa", "title": "Interview With Jim Zabel of WHO Radio in Des Moines, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-zabel-who-radio-des-moines-iowa", "publication_date": "20-02-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1809, "text": "And by this time you are waiting for the next one. Or he would send you S-1-C. So, you'd say, He is got the sign, comes out of the windup, here is the pitch, and it is a called strike, breaking over the outside corner just above the knees. But the thing that you are talking about was the time that it was the ninth inning, the Cards and the Cubs, tied up 0-0, and he was typing, and I thought there is a play coming. And he kept shaking his head when I had and it was Dean on the mound and I had Billy Jurgess at the plate. And I had him getting a sign from the catcher, and finally here comes the slip of paper, and it said, The wires have gone dead. And I knew in that ninth inning if I suddenly said, Well, we will have a little interlude of music while we get back connected with the ballpark, we'd lose every they'd all turn on some of those other stations. foul ball. So, I had Jurgess foul one, and then I had him foul another. And then I had him foul one that missed a home run by a foot. Then I described two kids down back of third base that were in a fight over the ball that had gone into the stands there. And pretty soon I know I am beginning to set a world record for somebody standing at the plate and hitting successive fouls, if anyone ever kept those figures. And I was beginning to sweat a little, because I knew now that if I told them we'd lost the wire they'd know I had not been telling the truth. Who finally did get the hit in that game? And I had him throw another pitch, and in came the slip, and I had trouble getting it out, because the slip said Jurgess popped out on the first ball pitched. Charlie Gross, let us bring you in here. You were known as kind of a meticulous perfectionist at the time. Did he live up to your standards when you were here? You kind of made him toe the line? This was the source of all sports news around here that is, by way of radio this gentleman here, The President. Did you project in him at that time, when he was 22, 23 years old, the qualities that enabled him to become President of the United States? He belonged to the wrong party at this time, but The President.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimzabelwhoradiodesmoinesiowa", "title": "Interview With Jim Zabel of WHO Radio in Des Moines, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-zabel-who-radio-des-moines-iowa", "publication_date": "20-02-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1810, "text": "Yeah, but I outgrew that. Yes, but he outgrew it. No, I never thought, of course, that he would become President of the United States and that I would be here at his side tonight. ENTITY, this microphone brings back you were selected Wheaties Sportscaster of the Year one time.  the Wheaties commercial, you did the Kentucky Club commercial Yeah, they sponsored an awful lot of baseball, Wheaties did. And when you came into Des Moines today, down Fleur Drive from the airport did you notice some changes about the city of Des Moines? Well, long about the time we got here by the time that I got here, I was just prepared to turn right and go to 914 Walnut Street. And here I am in a whole new institution.  I want to hear one that you have got down here.- Well, let me just tell you, he is a pioneer, and a true pioneer. Under the Fair Trade Practices Act back in the those depression days, radio was not allowed to do news, because it would be unfair. They thought that you could just go and put it in a microphone instead of having to have it put in print and out on the streets. And B. J. Palmer, who was then the head of the central broadcasting, decided that he was going to challenge that and we were going to have news. And only one news service would provide us with a newswire. And Charlie was the whole news department, including the writing and rewriting of the stories. And we went on the air with news, and it was a first in radio. It became a daily twice-a-day feature for his news. And then, of course, he was a pioneer in another thing, as you know when he went to Congress. It was no surprise to those of us that knew him that he would be known as the conscience of the Congress, that his colleagues would go to him because they knew he had read the bills, and they'd go to him before they voted to find out. Okay, ENTITY, you told me when I did an interview with you in 1974 on the 50th anniversary of WHO Radio that the 5 years you spent here were 5 of the happiest years of your life. Do you still look back on those that fondly? They were really those were foundation years, and I think everything that happened came out of this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimzabelwhoradiodesmoinesiowa", "title": "Interview With Jim Zabel of WHO Radio in Des Moines, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-zabel-who-radio-des-moines-iowa", "publication_date": "20-02-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1811, "text": "Well, it is the true American hero story hitchhiking to Davenport, I believe, to get the job in the first place. Had a rather unusual audition from Pete McArthur, who was the program director then. I had been told that in looking for a job in those depression days and I'd hitchhiked all the way around the country quite a bit I'd been told that you should ask an employer not for what you wanted to be a sports announcer just tell him you'd take any job to get in the station and then take your chances on moving up from there. So, I made my usual pitch of that kind after a number of turndowns to Pete. We auditioned 90 people and hired an announcer. And on my way out the door, I said, How do you ever get to be a sports announcer if you cannot get in a station? , and went on down to the elevator, which, fortunately, was not there. And Pete, who was badly handicapped with arthritis and on two canes I did not know until I heard him thumping down the hall yelling at me and he asked me what that was I said about sports. And I told him that is what I'd like to be. And he said, You know anything about football? And I said, I played it for 8 years. He said, Do you think you could tell me about a game and, if I was sitting there listening, I could see the game? And he took me in a studio, put me in front of one of these. And he put me in front of that, and he said, When the red light goes on, you start broadcasting an imaginary football game. And I did for about 15 minutes. I knew I had to have names. So, I picked a game that I'd played in in college, the previous fall-which we'd won in the last 20 seconds by a 65-yard touchdown run I did not make the run. So, I chose that game and said, when the light came on, started that we were in the 4th quarter. You know, I had everything. The famous long, blue shadows ENTITY Yes the chill wind coming in through the end of the stadium-we did not have a stadium, we had bleachers. And I did it for about the 15 minutes and made that winning touchdown.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimzabelwhoradiodesmoinesiowa", "title": "Interview With Jim Zabel of WHO Radio in Des Moines, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-zabel-who-radio-des-moines-iowa", "publication_date": "20-02-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1812, "text": "As a running guard, coming out and around and leading the interference on that play, that day, Eureka College, I missed my man, the first man in the secondary. And I do not know how Bud Cole got by and reversed the field, because I missed him. In the broadcast, I nailed him. It was a magnificent block key to the whole success of the play. And he came in and told me to be there on Saturday, that I was broadcasting the Iowa-Minnesota game, and he would give me $5 and bus fare. No, I am saying that facetiously. Well, ENTITY, obviously we are just thrilled and happy to have you here to reminisce about the old let me ask you one question, from sportscaster to sportscaster would you have stayed a sportscaster if the telegram had not come from Warner Brothers, do you think? Well, we have about eight to ten thousand people, I think, a full house waiting up at the auditorium. Can you tell us what you are going to tell them up there tonight? Well, I do not think anything that I say has been said by any of the eight other candidates who've been running around the State. I might have a little different twist on things than that. But I am going to talk about this recovery that we have going and what I think is needed to keep it going. How does it feel to be back in Des Moines? It is too short, as always, but give me another 7.5 minutes, and I'd be so far down nostalgia lane .- Let me ask you one question a lot of people ask of me about you. What type of sportscaster were you? I mean, how do you categorize your style? I always thought I always had in mind a listener out there, and I thought that I was painting a word picture. If I was in the stadium over at University of Iowa broadcasting an Iowa football game, I always tried to use references like saying not just that they are on the 20-yard line, 15 yards in from the side of the field; I would say, They are down here to the right on their own 20-yard line, 15 yards in from this side of the field or place them. I always figured that he that viewer out there he or she must be able to get a picture in their minds of what it looked like. Well, you gave them a lot of pictures, ENTITY.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimzabelwhoradiodesmoinesiowa", "title": "Interview With Jim Zabel of WHO Radio in Des Moines, Iowa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-zabel-who-radio-des-moines-iowa", "publication_date": "20-02-1984", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1829, "text": "Well, I am happy to have a chance to say welcome, and particularly when there are at least six here from California. But all of you are just as welcome. I know you have been briefed on a number of subjects, and so almost anything that I might say would be plowing ground that is already been plowed. And yet I will do that, just to put emphasis on one, and that is what I think is the overall problem here of trying to get control of Federal spending and a realistic approach to the budget. We are now into the 14th month that we have been without a budget. Our entire year of '81 went through with nothing but continuing resolutions and no budget. And we are now 2 months into this fiscal year, and still no budget. And I frankly do not know of a State that has ever run itself that way. Part of it is evident reluctance of some to see any curb put on Federal spending. So, we are still working on that. And now I am going to save all of the rest of the time here for whatever questions you may have. Let me just say that with regard to our program, which has only just now begun to be put into effect, contrary to the impression that a lot of people seem to have had that it is been tried and found wanting and is a failure, and that was decided before it started-we do not believe it is, and we think that some of the signs are very encouraging already. And that is that a year ago, or when we took office, inflation was above 12 percent, around 12 1/2 percent. For the first 10 months of this year, it is down to 9.6 and last month came in at 4.4. Interest rates, which were 21 1/2 , have of late begun to drop and are down to 15 3/4, and we think are going to continue coming down. The wholesale inflation rate has been running 7 1/2, which means that I think we can look forward to further drops in the days ahead, because the wholesale inflation rate determines, in advance, what the regular cost-of-living index is going to be just a ways down the road. But I know that you must have some questions, and I'd rather try that than continuing, as I say, plowing this already plowed ground.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmanagingeditorsdomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Managing Editors on Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-managing-editors-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "03-12-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1830, "text": "ENTITY, you talked about the great need to cut spending, yet on this emphasis of the need to get a budget, you have appeared before a veterans' group and you have said that you are not going to make them make any sacrifices. You appeared before a council on aging and you told them you are not going to make them make any sacrifices. What groups are you prepared to appear before and say, You have to make the sacrifices? No, I think with regard to the veterans, we were talking about medical benefits for the veterans and so forth. And I do believe that this is a contract that you have to take care of those who have served their country. Social security-what I said to them was-and this was the basis of the plan that we submitted, but which was widely distorted in the debate that followed and I think for pure political demagoguery-that all the way through the campaign I cited the immediate problem of social security, of its running out of funds, and the long-range actuarial imbalance which is in the trillions of dollars, if you look on down the road, for those people who are just beginning their working years. What I pledged to do was to have a social security-to put it on a sound fiscal basis, and yet not at the expense of those people who are presently retired; that you pull the rug out From under them and reduce their benefits. The only thing that could be called a reduction in any way in the proposal we made, of those existing benefits, was we were going to try and get social security onto the fiscal year basis with regard to the cost-of-living adjustment. That would mean that for 1 year alone, they would go 15 months instead of 12 before their cost-of-living adjustment was computed. And that would, as we figured it out, average probably a $90 reduction of increase, not a reduction of existing benefits, reduction of their increase over their lifetime. The other things that we had suggested in that program were not aimed at deserving and eligible recipients. They were aimed at the abuses in the program, people that are collecting disability benefits and are not disabled. A recent story of a family, a heartbreaking story, that made it look as if we had suddenly taken this family off disability benefits-and we looked into it to find out if this was true.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmanagingeditorsdomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Managing Editors on Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-managing-editors-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "03-12-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1831, "text": "We found out they were taken off of their disability benefits under the previous administration, and they were taken off because for 3 years, the disabled household head had been working. And now the question is, working, moonlighting on the side-a cheek is being made to see whether he was paying income tax all that time. This is the type of thing that we think there is much more of it than anyone realizes, as was evidenced in Chicago a couple of years ago with the-or a few years ago-with the welfare queen who went on trial. And it was found that in addition to collecting welfare under 123 different names, she also had 55 social security cards. So, this is where we were going to try and make some of the changes. What do you see as the Federal role with regard to California in terms of the Medfly, which is a terribly expensive battle, and also the vast number of refugees from Asia that have moved into, particularly, Los Angeles? What do you see as the role there to perform? Well, we have been dealing with a reform of the immigration laws on all of this, except that with regard to the refugees-people who are fleeing persecution and who, if they were made to return to their own country, would probably face death or imprisonment-I think that our traditions-there is no way that we can abandon those traditions or the words that are on the base of the Statue of Liberty. And we have a particular problem, I know, with our neighbor to the South. But we think that this program is going to meet our needs and the needs of the refugees coming in, so that we will not be abandoning that. We are also looking at how we can handle these and probably a fairer distribution in our country. I know, in 1980-the administration then was caught by the great exodus from Cuba in addition to the Haitian overflow and so forth. No planning had been made for that. We are also looking at available sites and facilities for a detention center for those who are apprehended and are illegal aliens, who will probably be returned. ENTITY, one of the potential detention centers that you are considering is in northern New York, where I am from, where the climate is about as different as you can get from the Haitian climate and still be in the country. How humane is it to consider that, a site like that? Well, I know the climate problem, and we have thought about that and talked about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmanagingeditorsdomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Managing Editors on Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-managing-editors-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "03-12-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1832, "text": "One of our problems is finding a facility that would have all the factors and the capacity that we need for estimated larger numbers, and also finding one that the inhabitants of the State would be willing-you'd be surprised how difficult it is to find some State that wants it. We think that the one that we have settled on not only meets the needs but also happens to be in an area that would benefit economically from having an installation of that kind there because of the abnormally high unemployment rate, economic problems. ENTITY, the State of Florida claims the Federal Government owes a lot of money to the State because of the refugee problem. Although you did not inherit it, are you considering additional funds, or- To tell you the truth, I cannot answer that right now. We have not come in with the-we have not had our meeting yet with the new presentation from OMB of suggested budget cuts for '83, so until we do, I do not know just how some of these problems have been treated. Any thought being given to changing any of the benefits that have been cut or restoring any? Well, again, this would be something that we will face when we see the '83 budget, although I do not believe that the so-called safety net has been much changed. This recession-remember that when we came here, January 20th, we had a great unemployment problem, severe in several areas far more than in others. It is easy to look at, say, an 8 percent inflation rate and think of that as the nation as a whole. We have States, and some of you are probably from those States, where inflation is approaching the 20 percent mark. That is like the Great Depression of the thirties, due to the particular industries that have been affected-in addition to construction, the steel industry, automobiles, and so forth. We think that the best thing that we can do is to go forward with this plan, which we think is going to stimulate the economy. I think we are due, for several months yet, of hard times, but I think that in '82 we are going to see-later in the year-a change in the situation. The falling interest rates indicate that-the inflation rates that I mentioned-so that I think the safety net is still there for those people of real need. Is there an unemployment level at which you rethink that? I do not think anyone is going to stand by and see people in actual distress.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmanagingeditorsdomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Managing Editors on Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-managing-editors-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "03-12-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1833, "text": "Let me just say one thing about that particular problem. I was as surprised as anyone when suddenly the announcement was made that in a month we have increased the unemployed by 500,000. Now, as you know, there is no accurate way of counting the unemployed. There is an accurate way of counting the people who are in the work force. And it is difficult for me to understand this sudden surge of unemployment when, at the same time, there are 266,000 more people employed in the work force than there were on January 20th, when this administration started. I cannot believe that we have suddenly added three-quarters of a million people to our population. But let me point out one reason why there could be some fluctuations. First of all, any unemployed, other than those who are voluntarily between jobs, is too much. So, I do not want to sound callous about that. As a matter of fact, there is nothing that is harder for me to do than to think of putting somebody out of a job. I came into the work force myself in the depths of the Great Depression. I saw what took place there. But unemployment is determined by some 60-odd thousand telephone calls, like a Nielsen rating on a TV show, throughout the country-random. And the question is, Is anyone in the household looking for work? And on the basis of these calls and the percentage, the percentage of unemployed is determined. Suppose it is a housewife who says to you on the phone, Well, you know, the children are getting along now and if I could find something that did not interfere with family and was right, yes. Well, the person can put that down as she is looking for work, or the person from this end of the phone can put that down as no. Nor are we dividing between all those teenagers, that on the other end of the phone someone might answer and say, Well, my son would love to have an after-school job if he could find one, and so you can put him down unemployed. The millions of unemployed are not, all of them, heads of household, leading a family without earnings. Maybe I am overly suspicious, but I keep remembering that when I was Governor of California, they decided to do some changing in counting the unemployed, here in Washington. I protested as loud as I could, but did not get anyplace with it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmanagingeditorsdomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Managing Editors on Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-managing-editors-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "03-12-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1834, "text": "Our unemployment rate in California at the time was 5.2 , and in 24 hours, our unemployment rate went to 7.2, just based on a little change in the procedures here in Washington. So, I have been a little worried here that sometimes we-and I do not mean to do any less about trying to get them the work, we are going to-but I think that our program is aimed at that. I am aware that-I know somebody is waiting to tell me I have to leave- -but I am also aware that when Kennedy had his across-the-board tax cuts, aimed at the same thing, to stimulate the economy, and the same economists and many of the same voices were raised, advising against it and saying that was absolutely the wrong thing to do, he persisted. And immediately thereafter the rate of savings, personal savings in the country-the percentage went up from 2.9 percent of the earnings in the country to 8 percent. The rate of increase in employment-not unemployment, in employment-doubled. The percentage of the gross national product or, I mean, the gross national product increased sizably, and the government's revenues increased at the lower rate of taxation. Now, one of the economists who has previously, and all these past months, been opposed to our proposal, Walter Heller, a very distinguished economist, when the recession was announced a short time ago, Walter Heller said how lucky we were that our tax reduction was just going into effect and that that just turned out to be exactly the right medicine for a recession. Well, if it is the right medicine to maybe help cure the recession, why would not it have been good medicine to have prevented the recession? If we, taking those personal savings-if we could increase by 2 percentage points the rate of savings in this country, through these tax cuts, that adds $40 billion to the capital pool that is available for investment and for people for mortgages and so forth. And incidentally, since the construction industry is one of the hard hit things right now in this recession, we have taken action-and I maybe sticking- ENTITY. I do not want to be one of the White House leaks. This morning we had a group from the construction industry in, and we have-over in the Labor Department-made some definite changes in regulations. Those changes are going to free up the billions and billions of dollars in pension funds for-that they can now be invested in home mortgages.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmanagingeditorsdomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Managing Editors on Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-managing-editors-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "03-12-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1835, "text": "Previous to this, they have not been able to. The total pension money available for investment in this country is over a trillion dollars-will be 3 trillion by 1984-and for the first time, this money will be made available for that kind of investment, which we think should go a long way toward beginning the revival of the housing industry. You know, part of the lull in housing construction right now is the lowering of interest rates. The slump was caused by the high interest rates, but when the high interest rates start down, there is a lull while everybody says, Well, let us wait till they get lower. Maybe we can, with this new decision, maybe we can increase the speed with which those rates come down. What would be your advice, ENTITY, to Americans who want to know how to volunteer their time and their effort in a program that you have talked about-voluntarism? Listen- we just had a meeting yesterday of our national task force. That is exactly what they are set up to do-is to not only spread the word of where volunteer efforts have been tried someplace and are working successfully, and then spread that so that other people can do it, but also to answer that question of the many people who are trying to volunteer. There is an estimated $100 billion worth of time and effort right now being contributed in this country in work in voluntary causes, in addition to $47 billion in actual cash contributed in volunteer efforts. And some of the things we are finding-and the mail that I am getting is the most inspiring thing in the world-of communities that have just moved and said, Why have we been sitting here, letting government do this? We should have been doing it long ago. I believe this is beginning to sweep the country. So, people like that, I think will find that they are being sought out by the task force. If they do not get their volunteering in beforehand, somebody will be around to see if they want to volunteer.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmanagingeditorsdomesticissues", "title": "Interview With Managing Editors on Domestic Issues", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-managing-editors-domestic-issues", "publication_date": "03-12-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1839, "text": "You are here at this historic place, trying to speak with a sense of history. And I was thinking of past presidents that I know you have studied and commented on. And a couple came to mind who were able to express what they were trying to do in the world in about a sentence. Reagan wanted to roll back communism by whatever means. Lincoln has a famous letter in which he says, I would save the union by the shortest means under the Constitution. As you look at the moment of history that you occupy, do you think you can put into a sentence what you are trying to accomplish in the world? I am not sure I can do it in a sentence because we are fortunate in many ways. We do not face an existential crisis. We do not face a civil war. We do not face a Soviet Union that is trying to rally a bloc of countries and that could threaten our way of life. Instead, what we have is, as I say in the speech, this moment in which we are incredibly fortunate to have a strong economy that is getting stronger, no military peer that threatens us, no nation-state that anytime soon intends to go to war with us. But we have a world order that is changing very rapidly and that can generate diffuse threats, all of which we have to deal with. And I think that the most important point of the speech today for me is how we define American leadership in part is through our military might, but only in part, that American leadership in the 21st century is going to involve our capacity to build international institutions, coalitions that can act effectively, and the promotion of norms, rules, laws, ideals and values that create greater prosperity and peace, not just in our own borders, but outside as well. Is your sentence then pursuing U.S. interests abroad without going to war? Well, there are going to be times where we might have to go to war. And that is why I think it is very important for us not to get into these simplistic ways of thinking about it, either we pull back entirely and we are isolationist, or alternatively, every problem around the world is ours to manage. Rather, you know, what we have to do is clearly define where is it in our national interests to use military force, sometimes unilaterally.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnprnews", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of NPR News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-npr-news", "publication_date": "28-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1840, "text": "And typically when we have direct interests, core interests, our safety, our security, our livelihoods, the protection of our allies, you know, international opinion matters, but we may have to act on our own. When it comes to the kinds of issues, though, that dominate the headlines - a conflict in Syria, a Russian incursion into Ukraine, the kidnapping of 200 young girls in Nigeria - in those circumstances, we are going to be most effective when we use a wide range of tools - diplomacy, sanctions, appeals to international law. In some cases, a judicious use of military force may make sense. But in those circumstances, it has to be in a multilateral system where other countries are participating, we are not going alone, because when we make sure that other countries are participating, that means that we have done our homework, we have thought through the consequences, we have built legitimacy, and we are not carrying the burden entirely on our own. What should leaders like Syria's Bashar Assad or Russia's Vladimir Putin take away from this speech, in which you did speak passionately about not going to war unnecessarily and said you were haunted by the deaths of American soldiers? Well, I think they can take away from it that they have to be on guard when they act outside of international norms, that we are going to push aggressively against them. We are not always going to push using military actions initially. There may be circumstances in which we mobilize in the international community to take international action. But as I spoke about, when you look at events in Ukraine over the last two months, there is no doubt that our ability to mobilize international opinion rapidly has changed the balance and the equation in Ukraine. I just spoke yesterday to the newly elected president of Ukraine. Putin has just announced that he is moving his troops back from the borders of Ukraine. And that is an application of American leadership that is sustainable, consistent and is most likely to produce the kinds of results we want. It is interesting about Ukraine, though, ENTITY, because a lot of analysts have looked at that situation and said this is an area where Putin may have had a weak hand, but he gained. He gained Crimea. He asserted his influence over Ukraine. You speak of Ukraine, though, as a success. Do you feel that you have been successful in achieving your aims? You know, I think it is a mistake to think that somehow Mr. Putin reflected strength in this situation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnprnews", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of NPR News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-npr-news", "publication_date": "28-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1841, "text": "Ukraine is not just next door to Russia. Ukraine, in the minds of most Russians, has been a central part of Russia for decades, for centuries. And from Mr. Putin's perspective, he was operating from a position of weakness. He felt as if he was being further and further surrounded by NATO members, folks who are looking west economically, from a security perspective. And even in Ukraine, the crown jewel of the former Soviet system, outside of Russia, a oligarchy that was corrupt was rejected by people on the streets. And so what you saw was a scrambling, a reaction to people in the Ukraine saying, we want a different way of life. The fact that Crimea, which historically is dominated by native Russians and Russian speakers, was annexed illegally does not in any way negate the fact that the way of life, the systems of economic organization, the notions of rule of law, those values that we hold dear, are ascendant, and you know, the other side is going to be on the defense. That does not mean that we think that Ukraine should not have a good relationship with Russia. And I have said directly to Mr. Putin we want, ultimately, Ukrainians to make a decision about their own futures, and that, I assume, will include strong relations with Russia as well as with Europe. You are going to make Russia give Crimea back. Do you have the ability or the leverage to do that? Well, you know, I think we are going to have to see how it plays itself out. I am going to see Mr. Poroshenko, the newly elected president of Crimea - or newly elected president of Ukraine, next week, and I am sure that'll be a topic of discussion. Let me ask about Syria, ENTITY. White House officials have said that you are reviewing the possibility of military training for Syrian rebels. There has been, it is said, limited training by intelligence agencies up to now. This seems to fit with something you described in your speech when you talked about a $5 billion counterterrorism fund, which would affect places including Syria. I'd like to understand what you think has changed in Syria; what, if anything, is different about the situation in Syria, as opposed to a couple of years ago, when some of your advisers wanted larger-scale training of the rebels, and I believe you declined. Well, I think that is not an accurate portrayal of either what we have done or what the debate's been about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnprnews", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of NPR News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-npr-news", "publication_date": "28-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1842, "text": "The issue has always been in Syria how do we most effectively support a moderate opposition, recognizing that there are going to be limits to how rapidly we can ramp up the capacity of that opposition. And what we do not want to do is set folks up for failure. What we do not want to do is make promises that we cannot keep. I cannot speak to all the work that has been done with respect to both the political opposition as well as the armed opposition that are fighting against Mr. Assad, but I think it is been stated publicly we have been supporting them. Ultimately, I did not think then and I still do not believe that American military actions can resolve what is increasingly a sectarian civil war, and I also believe that, ultimately, the only way you are going to get a resolution that works for the Syrian people and the region is going to - is going to require some sort of political accommodation between the various groups there. But what we can do is to work with the neighbors in the region - Jordan, Turkey, the Gulf states, Lebanon - to deal with the refugee flows that are coming out of Syria, to deal with the humanitarian crisis that exists there and to build on the framework, the progress that we have made over the last couple of years. We have seen some success in the Syrian opposition gaining more capacity, gaining more training, gaining more effectiveness; and building on some of that success, it is conceivable that in combination with the other work that is done on the diplomatic front, that we are able to tip what happens in Syria so that it is more likely that we can arrive at a political resolution. Are conditions better now, then, for a more robust aiding of the rebels and training of the rebels than in the past? I think, in many ways, the conditions are worse. But the capacity of some of the opposition is better than it was before, which is understandable. The moderate opposition, as opposed to the jihadists that have seen the chaos there as an opportunity to gain a foothold, those are hardened fighters. When you talk about the moderate opposition, many of these people were farmers or dentists or maybe some radio reporters who did not have a lot of experience fighting. What they understood was, is, that they had a government that was killing its own people and violating human rights in, in the most profound way, and they wanted to do something about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnprnews", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of NPR News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-npr-news", "publication_date": "28-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1843, "text": "But creating a capacity for them to hold ground, to be able to rebuff vicious attacks, for them to be able to also organize themselves in ways that are cohesive - all that takes, unfortunately, more time than I think many people would like. I want to ask about China, ENTITY; East Asia more broadly. You worked to reassure U.S. allies in the region. It is understood, of course, the U.S. has specific commitments; for example, to defend Japan - I'd like to know if you have a larger objective in East Asia. Does the United States have an interest beyond its specific alliances in preventing China from dominating East Asia and the waters around East Asia, where China's been making some aggressive moves? Well, we do not have an interest in stopping China from becoming successful. China is the most populous country on Earth, at some - But I am asking their power, not their success. But at some level, they are going to be a big dog in that neighborhood, and we welcome China's peaceful rise. In many ways, it would be a bigger national security problem for us if China started falling apart at the seams. So we - we want the Chinese people to steadily have a higher standard of living; we want China to have increased capacity to participate in international efforts around issues like climate change. We have a very specific concern when China is not following basic international norms, basic rules of the road, where it does not feel bound by the kind of international practices that have helped to underwrite China's rise. I mean, part of the reason China's been successful is there is been relative peace in Asia, there has been freedom of commerce in Asia, freedom of navigation in Asia. All that facilitates the trade that is creating great wealth inside of China. Well, if in fact that international order has benefited China, then we expect China to help uphold the very rules that have made them successful, not take advantage of them. And so there are basic principles that big countries do not just push little countries around by virtue of size. There are mechanisms whereby, through international law, maritime disputes can be resolved. And what we have done then is worked with the countries of the region to say let us create a code of conduct that - in which, without taking any position on whether this particular rock in the middle of the water belongs to this party or that party, let us find a systematic, legal way for us to resolve these disputes without resolving to conflict.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnprnews", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of NPR News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-npr-news", "publication_date": "28-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1844, "text": "And so to - just the bottom line here is China is going to be a dominant power in Asia, not the only one, but by virtue of its size and its wealth, it is going to be a great power in Asia. We respect that. And we are not interested in containing it because we are in any way intimidated by China; we are concerned about it because we do not want to see constant conflicts developing in a vital region of the world that also, you know, we depend on in terms of our economy being successful. You know, those are a lot of markets out there, we sell a lot of goods out there, and, you know, we do not want to see these conflagrations that can end up impeding, you know, our own interests. Sounds like you want to avoid tripwire over any particular rock in the ocean, as you said. Well, you know, I think, more than that, what we also want is to be able to strengthen and constantly reinforce international norms because we believe, I believe, that America benefits when those norms are not only being upheld by us individually but where all countries buy in, where there is a sense that all of us benefit from some basic rules of the road. And China now as a rising power needs to be part of that responsibility of maintaining rules that maintain peace and security for a lot of countries. You have made some statements recently, ENTITY, that it seems you have been trying to put yourself in a historical context, if you can. You have talked about hitting singles and doubles on foreign policy. You talked about handing a baton from one ENTITY or one person in history to another. I wonder if you are at a point in your second term where even though there is well over two years to go, that you have to think about narrowing possibilities and a more limited list of things that you can realistically accomplish in the time you have left. That was the case the first day in the Oval Office. You know, you do not walk into the presidency and completely remake the world and ignore history and ignore the problems that are already sitting there in the inbox. So you have to make choices about what is important and what is not. It is interesting, though, you know, the comment I made about singles and doubles I think is - is only a partial quote.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnprnews", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of NPR News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-npr-news", "publication_date": "28-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1845, "text": "What I said was that when it comes to foreign policy, that oftentimes the United States has made mistakes not by showing too much restraint but by underestimating how challenging the environment is out there, not thinking through consequences, that there is a lot of blocking and tackling to foreign policy, to change sports metaphors, or, if you want to stick to baseball, that a lot of what you want to do is to advance the ball on human rights, advance the ball on national security, advance the ball on energy independence, to put the ball in play. And every once in a while, a pitch is going to come right over home plate that you can knock out for a home run. But you do not swing at every pitch. And we have opportunities right now, for example, and I talked about today, to advance an Iranian agreement on their nuclear program that could be historic. We may not get it, but there is a chance that it could still happen. I have not yet given up on the possibility that both Israelis and Palestinians can see their self-interest in a peace deal that would provide Israel security that is recognized by its neighbors and make sure that Palestinians have a state of their own. And what we want to do is make sure we are in a position to seize those opportunities when they arise. But in the meantime, the work that we do to help countries in North Africa secure their borders and root out terrorism, the work that we do to, you know, make sure that we have higher standards for labor protection and environmental protection when it comes to trade in Asia, the work that we do in making sure that young people in Latin America are coming to the United States to study through exchange programs so that - and that U.S. students are able to go to those countries to develop the commercial ties and cultural ties in the Western Hemisphere, you know, that stuff's not sexy. It is not going to be on the front page of the newspapers. But in many ways, that is what is going to ultimately be most effective; that is going to be what is going to most determine whether or not the United States retains its primacy and its leadership on the world stage in the 21st century. Let me ask about one ball you have tried to advance your entire term. You wanted to close Guantanamo in your first year. About a year ago you gave a speech in which you said you wanted to close Guantanamo. You referred to it again in this speech here at West Point.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnprnews", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of NPR News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-npr-news", "publication_date": "28-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1846, "text": "In the year since your last speech in which you said you wanted to close Guantanamo, it is our understanding that only 12 - about 12 prisoners have been sent back to their home countries, repatriated. Has that problem proved to be so difficult there is a good chance you may hand Guantanamo over your successor? Not if I can help it. I think it is very important for us to close Guantanamo. I think it is very important as we end the war that originally gave - gave life to Guantanamo that we now wind it down. Could you not send more prisoners back now? Well, the - you know, Congress has placed some restraints on us. But they have loosened those restraints. And I promise you that we are using every possible available avenue. In some cases, it is hard to return prisoners because the countries where they come from do not want them or cannot provide us assurances that they can control them. But what I know is that we cannot in good conscience maintain a system of indefinite detention in which individuals who have not been tried and convicted are held permanently in this legal limbo outside of this country. That is contrary to U.S. traditions. It feeds terrorist propaganda. It is not ultimately going to be effective when it comes to dealing with the long-term terrorist threat. It makes it harder for us to get cooperation from our partners. I mean, we spend 10, 15 times more, in many cases, for these prisoners than we would do in a normal supermax syst - prison in our federal system. So for all kinds of reasons, it does not make sense. And I am going to keep on pushing because I want to make sure that when I turn the keys over to the next president, that they have the ability, that he or she has the capacity to - to make some decisions with a relatively clean slate. Making sure that we have the right legal architecture for how we conduct counterterrorism and that there is greater transparency, as I discussed today, that is another. Making sure that people have a sense that when we use drones, we do so lawfully in a way that avoids civilian casualties and in ways that are appropriate. Making sure that our national security apparatus is - has, you know, enough legal checks and balances that ordinary folks, not just here in the United States but around the world, can feel assured that their privacy is being respected.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnprnews", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of NPR News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-npr-news", "publication_date": "28-05-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1847, "text": "You know, it is exactly 3 years since the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. And Mrs. Rabin said she was rather disappointed that you failed to mention her husband during the East Room ceremony last Friday. How do you respond to that? Well, you know, the agreement is actually supposed to enter into force on the third anniversary of his passing, of his killing. And I think that if, in fact, it does do so, it is a fitting thing, because none of us would be here if it had not been for him. He really started all this in a profound way. I know that the Madrid conference started before his election, but it was his conviction and his strength and security that he conveyed to the people of Israel, I think, that made this whole peace process possible. And I never do anything in the process that I do not think about him. ENTITY, from the tragic assassination to the current situation, Prime Minister Netanyahu might put himself at the same risk as Mr. Rabin. So perhaps it is unjustified to put pressure on him to follow the Oslo accord or the Oslo track. Well, I do not think there is any question that the Prime Minister has put himself at some physical risk in pursuing the peace process. But I believe that it is important that the people of Israel know that, at least in my opinion, it is a good agreement; that it strengthens Israel's security needs; that the agreements made with the Palestinians are fully consistent with Oslo. And the Prime Minister worked very, very hard to advance Israel's security interests. Just for example, there was the whole issue of what should be done with the people whom Israel believes have committed acts of violence and terrorism against Israelis. And I am convinced that the Palestinians will now act against these people in a way that is consistent with the agreement and that will meet the Prime Minister's and Israel's needs. So that is an example of a whole array of security advances that were embedded in this agreement. And I think all Israelis who support the peace process should support the agreement because I think it furthers the cause of peace. ENTITY, is it really the PNC, the Palestinian National Council, that is going to convene to revise the Palestinian covenant with your presence? Well, it is the PNC plus a number of other groups.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithshlomorazandjacobeilonisraelitelevisionchannel2", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Shlomo Raz and Jacob Eilon of Israeli Television Channel 2", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-shlomo-raz-and-jacob-eilon-israeli-television-channel-2", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1848, "text": "And some of these groups are embedded within the PNC; that is, they are dual membership for some of the people-in the Government, in the executive council, in the other councils involved. And some are outside the PNC. But among other things at that meeting, we will seek a clear renunciation of the offending parts of the charter and a general endorsement of the agreement, this whole agreement, so that the process can be seen to be going forward with the support of those who represent grassroots Palestinian opinion. The Prime Minister wanted me to support this provision, this effort, and he fought very, very hard for this, as did a number of members of his Cabinet who were there, because they thought that there needed to be a debate in a Palestinian forum, even if it was controversial and heated, which would give to the Palestinian people some evidence not only of a commitment to follow an agreement but of a changing of the heart, an opening of the heart of the Palestinians toward the Israelis. And I thought that argument had a lot of appeal, even though it was not without its hazards for Mr. Arafat. Because it is been 18 months since anything big has happened, and because there is a lot of-he has his problems, too, among them the fact that the standard of living for most Palestinians is lower today than it was when the peace process began, because the enemies of peace keep interrupting the flow of normal life. So I agreed that if it was that important to Israel and Chairman Arafat were willing to try to accommodate that condition by the Israelis, that I would go to Gaza and address this group and ask them to support the peace and to renounce forever the idea of animosity toward and opposition to the existence of the state of Israel, and instead embrace the path not only of peace but of cooperation. I want to ask you about your visit to Gaza. Do not you think, ENTITY, that this trip may be seen as a first step in recognizing an independent Palestinian state? Well, if so it would be, I think, wrong, because I have tried strictly to adhere to the position of the United States that we would not take a position on any final status issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithshlomorazandjacobeilonisraelitelevisionchannel2", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Shlomo Raz and Jacob Eilon of Israeli Television Channel 2", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-shlomo-raz-and-jacob-eilon-israeli-television-channel-2", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1849, "text": "One of the reasons that I worked so hard at Wye to try to bring the parties together is, I thought it imperative to take this next big step along the peace process so that we could launch the final status talks and get them underway in good faith, so that neither side would seek to prejudge a final status issue. That is not what I am doing in going there. The Prime Minister wanted me to go there and wanted us all to make this pitch. I asked them if they would make some joint appearances and if they would both make the same speech to Palestinian and to Israeli audiences. And they said they would do that. It would help the Palestinians to see Yasser Arafat saying the same thing to the Israelis he says to the Palestinians. It would help the Israelis, I think, also. And it would be a good thing for the Prime Minister to be able to give the same speech-whatever they decide to say, just say the same thing to both communities so that no one thinks that there is any evasion or shading or anything. I think, just little things like this to open up a little awareness of the other's position and build a little confidence, I think would be quite good. ENTITY, why will not you release Jonathan Pollard? Well, I agreed to review his case and to take the initiative to review it. I have not released him in the past because since I have been ENTITY in the two previous normal reviews-that is, the ones that were initiated by his request for clemency-the recommendation of all my law enforcement and security agencies was unanimously opposed to it. But the Prime Minister felt so strongly about it-and I might say, every Israeli Prime Minister I have dealt with on every occasion has asked me about Pollard. But you argued pretty-you had pretty harsh exchanges with Netanyahu, reportedly, about that? I thought then, I believe now, and I think the public opinion in Israel bears this out, that it was in Israel's interest to do this agreement on its own merits because it would advance the cause of Israeli security and keep the peace process going. I think there is been a lot of reporting about this with which I do not necessarily agree. That is no criticism; I just want to tell you my perception. Bibi Netanyahu argued strongly for Pollard's release. He made the arguments that anyone who knows a lot about the case and thinks he should be released would make. But I took no offense at that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithshlomorazandjacobeilonisraelitelevisionchannel2", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Shlomo Raz and Jacob Eilon of Israeli Television Channel 2", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-shlomo-raz-and-jacob-eilon-israeli-television-channel-2", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1850, "text": "He was representing what he believes to be the interest of the State of Israel. And he did it in-you know, he does not make arguments halfway. You observe the Prime Minister, he is an aggressive person; he fights hard for what he believes. I took no offense at it at all. And I would ask you all to remember, when evaluating reports that tempers were frayed or strong language was used-now, remember, the three of us, Mr. Arafat and Mr. Netanyahu and I, we were there for over 8 days. Most nights I was there, I went home at 2 and 3 o'clock in the morning. The last time we were there on this last day, I was up for 39 hours and so were they. Now, I am amazed that we did not have more disruptive conduct and more harsh words, given how exhausted and frayed we were. But it shows you how hard the parties were trying, on the one hand, to make peace, but on the other hand, to protect their security interests. He was desperately trying to find a way to make peace or to advance the peace process that would enable him to go home and sell it to his Cabinet and his constituency. And this Pollard issue was very important to him. But I took no offense at that. But still, ENTITY, there were many reports that you were very upset with Mr. Netanyahu and were quoted saying that his behavior was despicable. And this is the first opportunity I have had to say that. There was a moment in the negotiations when the two guys split apart, and there was an issue raised that I thought was wrong. And I said so in very graphic terms. But I never used the word despicable to describe the Prime Minister. I did not do that. There was a moment where I thought-there were various moments in these negotiations when I thought-at least from my perspective, trying to be an honest broker-they were both wrong. You would expect this over 8 days. But at that moment, the issue at stake had nothing to do with Pollard. It was an issue, a dispute between the Palestinians and the Israelis; it had nothing to do with Pollard. And it is true that there was a moment in which there was a heated exchange in which I said something rather graphic, but I did not adversely characterize the Prime Minister in the way that is reported. I'd like to talk about the late Yitzhak Rabin.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithshlomorazandjacobeilonisraelitelevisionchannel2", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Shlomo Raz and Jacob Eilon of Israeli Television Channel 2", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-shlomo-raz-and-jacob-eilon-israeli-television-channel-2", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1851, "text": "I think you know, ENTITY, that when you said the phrase, shalom chaver, goodbye friend, I think you touched many many Israelis in a very, very special way. And we have been curious, how did you come up with this? I even noticed you have a pin that says shalom chaver on your desk right here in the Oval Office. I have many Jewish Americans working for me here, and they all knew how close I felt to Prime Minister Rabin. And we were-everybody was sort of coming up with ideas. And Shimon Peres later told me that he had not seen those two words used together before because chaver, it is sort of a special word; it goes beyond normal friendship. And one of my-I wish I could say that I knew enough Hebrew that I came up with it, but one of my staff members suggested that I say it. And they explained it to me, what it meant, and it seemed to be perfect for what I was trying to say. I must say, for me, that was more than a political loss. I felt very close to the Prime Minister, to Mrs. Rabin. I got to know their children, grandchildren. And I think always when I am pushing the peace process forward that I am doing it not just for myself but maybe also a little for him. And I must say, in these last negotiations I was very pleased to see that Prime Minister Netanyahu-I saw in his eyes, I could almost see in his eyes the moment when he really made the decision that, well, maybe the Palestinians were going to make sufficiently specific security commitments that would be on a sufficiently clear timetable that he could sell not just to the Israeli public at large but to a decisive portion of his own constituency, which is a very different thing, as all of you know better than I do. And he could see that, that he could personally believe that it would advance Israel's security. And I saw that look in his eyes. I felt from that point on that eventually we would get an agreement. And that is the look that you want to see in a leader's eyes in a situation like that, because I still believe that the right formula is peace and security, and that you really cannot have one without the other.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithshlomorazandjacobeilonisraelitelevisionchannel2", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Shlomo Raz and Jacob Eilon of Israeli Television Channel 2", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-shlomo-raz-and-jacob-eilon-israeli-television-channel-2", "publication_date": "31-10-1998", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1852, "text": "As you know, in the Tampa/ St. Pete area, we are around 11 percent unemployment, among the highest in the country really, that number actually went up in 2009 after your first stimu-lus. So what would you tell Floridians wondering if you deserve another chance? Well, I think what I would say is that we are nowhere near where we need to be, but keep in mind that when I took office, we had already lost one million jobs in the previous quarter. We had lost more than four million in the previous quarter and we lost another four million in the three months when I came into office, so our economic plan had not even had the chance to take effect. We know the economy was contracting by nine percent when I came in. It was growing by four percent by the time the end of the year came around, so obviously the Recovery Act had an impact. We have got to do more, and that is why we have put together this jobs plan that incorporates the best ideas from Democrats and Republicans, rebuilds our roads, our bridges, our infrastructure, puts teachers back in the classroom. It would have a direct impact on what is going on in Florida, and what we need right now is Congress to go ahead and act, and they have been not acting in the inter-est of Floridians or the American people. You won over a lot of the independent Florida voters, much of them, a couple of years ago base on your theme of Hope and Change. The last couple of days we have had a lot of people tell us they have not seen much change and given our economic outlook, they do not see much hope. Do you feel you have let them down? No, and look, Florida's had a tough time partly because it was ground zero in terms of the housing bubble bursting and real estate has a huge impact on every state. But when you look at Florida, Arizona, Nevada, those places that had the biggest housing bubbles, they have been impacted the most. That is part of the reason why we are not just waiting for Congress to act. This past week, we went ahead and said we are going to help families refinance their homes that could save thousands of dollars for homeowners, keep people in their homes that might be worried about making mortgage payments. We are, for example, working with NASA and the private sector to bring additional jobs to central Florida. Boeing just made an announcement that we are very happy about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarkwilsonfox13tampabay", "title": "Interview with Mark Wilson of FOX 13 - Tampa Bay", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mark-wilson-fox-13-tampa-bay", "publication_date": "01-11-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1853, "text": "You are proposing registering guns like cars. But if you are going to do that, then why not take the next step and regulate guns, as we do cars? After all, if there is something seriously wrong about cars, the Government can regulate automobiles. Are you willing to do that? Well, first of all, I do not think we should minimize the impact that licensing handgun owners themselves would have. That is what I want to do. Now, it is tough to pass in this Congress because most of the Republicans agree with the NRA that guns are different, and even though it might save lives, we should not do it. But I think if we would begin the process of making handgun owners get a license before they can buy a gun, pass a Brady background check, and then have a gun safety course, I think it would make a difference. I think if we did that, plus had child safety locks, closed the big loophole in the background registration law by covering the gun shows and the urban flea markets, and then continue this technology into safe guns so that as soon as possible we can sell guns and adjust them so that, by fingerprints, they can only be fired by the adults who own them, all these things together would make our country a much safer place. And I am going to continue to fight for it. We need to start by passing this legislation that the Congress has had for 8 months now. The Senate passed a pretty strong law, with the Vice President casting the tie-breaking vote. The House passed a much weaker law. And they have just been sitting on this for 8 months. I hope that these last 2 tragic days will finally move the Congress to act. And I am going to meet with the leading conferees on the two bills in the next few days to try to do that. But you are not prepared to take the step to try to regulate guns? I think that the most important thing we can do now is to pass the legislation before the Congress, and then try to pass legislation that would require the owners themselves, people who want to buy handguns, to be licenses, just as car drivers are. I think that is the next big step, and I think it will make a big difference. Just with the Brady bill and the assault weapons ban and the more police on the street, we have got the murder rate down to a 30-year low. And the accidental death rate from children is astronomical. It is 9 times higher than the next 24 industrial nations combined.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1854, "text": "So we have got to do more with this. And I want to focus on this agenda. I think it will drive the death rate down from guns both for murders and from accidental death rates. ENTITY, how, if in any way, would your new proposals have prevented or even helped to prevent the shooting of this 6-year-old girl in Michigan? One is something that is still in the bill. If this gun had a child trigger lock on it, then the child, in all probability, could not have figured out how to undo the child trigger lock and fire the gun. Then I had a provision which neither the Senate nor the House passed, to make national a law that today I think fewer than 20 States have, which would hold adults responsible for the kinds of activities that this young boy tragically engaged in when he killed that little girl. I think that it ought to be national, not just in a few States. And so I hope the Congress, and maybe the conference, will reconsider that, even though even the Senate would not pass that. They ought to take a look at this now, because clearly the adults bear the primary responsibility here. And people would think twice before just leaving a gun hanging around the house that a kid could walk off with if that were the case. ENTITY, there are so many questions about this issue that run so deep in the American character, as well as our history. With, as you have mentioned, at least 200 million guns out there, what about the argument that says, listen, there is really no chance that we are going to have meaningful gun control in this country unless you go out and get those guns back, and that is simply not practical? Well, I think, first of all, you never want to make the perfect the enemy of the good. Look how much good the Brady bill has done. It is kept a half million felons, fugitives, and stalkers from getting handguns. And that is one of the reasons that the murder rate is at a 30-year low. So it will not solve all the problems, but it will solve some. Secondly, especially if we could license people when they come in to buy handguns, we could then couple that with a very aggressive gun buyback program. Keep in mind, yes, there are more than 200 million guns out there, but a lot of them are in the hands of collectors and not regularly in use.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1855, "text": "What we need to do is to get these cheap guns off the streets, and with an aggressive gun buyback program we could do that. Just with the few million dollars we spend on it every year, we get a huge number of guns, offering about $50 a gun. If you could get a lot of the older guns that are just out there floating loose off the street, if you could license the handgun owners, if you could have child safety locks, and then if we could proceed with this safe-gun technology so that in the future all the guns that were sold could only be fired by the adults who are their rightful owner, I think you'd go a long, long way toward making this a much, much safer country. And it would not in any way infringe on the rights of hunters and sport shooters, except to ask them to do what the rest of us do when we go through airport metal detectors or get driver's licenses. We undergo a little bit of inconvenience so that society as a whole would be a lot safer. And I think we have neglected this far too long. As I said, there is not enough urgency in the Congress. You have got a dozen kids a day still getting shot to death out there, and this bill has been up there for 8 months. So this is one place where I think the United States Congress is completely out of touch with the American people, largely because of the genuine fear people have of the organized NRA interest back in their district. And they just no longer reflect the views of the majority of the people. I had a woman tell me yesterday, when I was touring a high-tech facility in northern Virginia, that her husband was a Republican and an avid hunter who strongly supported these initiatives. It is time for Congress to get in step with the American people and take these actions that will make our children safer. Now, we have some Democrats who live in rural districts where there are a lot of hunters and where they are afraid of this, because when I passed the assault weapons ban and the Brady bill back in '93 and '94, there is no question that the NRA beat about a dozen of our Members. These people who voted with us to make our streets safer and save lives gave up their seats in Congress. And this is primarily a problem of the leadership in the Republican Congress being unwilling to part from the NRA.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1856, "text": "And I hope that they will do it now, because I think a lot of their Members want to. And almost all these Members of Congress could vote for this legislation and not be threatened at all, and they need to do that. When I talk to the Republican leadership in Congress, they-and I will say, somewhat gleefully-say, Look, there are at least 60 Democrats in the House who no way, no how are going to vote for any additional gun control legislation. Well, that leaves us with about 140 on our side, which means they only have to produce 80 for us to have a majority. So they ought to do that. There is 80 Republicans who come from suburban districts where their constituents strongly support this and where they would not be defeated by the NRA if they went with us. You have mentioned the NRA several times. Everybody knows the National Rifle Association pours a lot of money into a lot of campaigns to beat just this kind of legislation that you have proposed. But is it or is it not reality that what you have are tens of millions of Americans who own guns and, whatever their party affiliation, however they feel about you, are just adamant about not controlling guns any further, and that is the real problem? Well, it is, but most of them- a lot of gun owners-keep in mind, I am convinced a majority of hunters and sport shooters, once they understand that these regulations do not in any way, shape, or form, impact their ability to conduct their lawful affairs, will support what amounts to a minor inconvenience- doing a background check at a gun show, for example, having a child safety lock on a handgun-to save lives. In New Hampshire, we lost a Democratic Congressman who voted for the assault weapons ban and the Brady bill. He lost his job in '94. And I went up there in '96 and met with a bunch of people who were hunters and sportsmen, and I said, Now, the NRA told you we were going to take your guns away and inconvenience you. And I said, If you missed a day in a deer season, I want you to vote against me, too. But if you did not , they did not tell you the truth, and you need to stick with us. And as a society, we all undergo minor inconveniences so that our children can grow up safe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1857, "text": "And it is ridiculous-the United States is the only country in the world that would allow this kind of, I believe, recklessness with the public interest. Nobody else does it, and that is why we have the highest murder rate and the highest accidental gun death rate of children, because we do not take these commonsense measures. And we can do it, I will say again, without interfering with people's right to hunting and sport shooting. ENTITY, I know you have a meeting to go to. You have been very generous with your time. So many people, when I talk to them, they say, Look, it is fine for the ENTITY to talk this way, but he is going to see rocks grow and water run uphill before he sees any real gun control legislation. Now, you have made it clear you do not believe that. What can you do to move this along? Can you call the Members of Congress to the White House for a special meeting to compromise? What can you do? Well, I am going to bring down the leaders of the House and the Senate, the Republicans and Democrats, who are in charge of this bill in the conference. The House and the Senate version are in a conference. They are supposed to come up with a unified bill and let the House and Senate vote on it. And I do not have any doubt if they report out a good bill, it will pass. And I am going to do everything I can to pass it. I do not believe that. They said-once they said we'd see water run uphill before we had Brady background checks, and then before we banned assault weapons, and then before we banned these large capacity ammunition clips. We did all that, but we left some loopholes in the law that we ought to close. We ought to require child safety locks. We ought to invest in safe-gun technology. And we ought to license handgun owners. You know, every significant reform in a controversial area is considered to be impossible when you start. I'd love to come by sometime and talk to you about Colombia and China and Taiwan. But I appreciate you taking time today to do this. ENTITY, I really appreciate you taking time to do this. I will do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanratherthecbseveningnews", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of the CBS Evening News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-the-cbs-evening-news", "publication_date": "02-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1858, "text": "We are very pleased to be joined by the ENTITY . This is an interview about the Super Bowl and issues important to sports fans. We will get to the news of the day shortly. I am very good, thank you, ENTITY. ENTITY, you sit with Bob Kraft, you communicate with Bill Belichick, Tom Brady is a friend. Can we take that, from your personal relationships, that you are rooting for the Patriots today? Well, I guess you have to say that. They have been great friends of mine for a long period of time, and they are terrific people. And I have to tell you, the Falcons have terrific people also. But I have known them a long time, so I guess we are allowed to do that every once in a while. Have you communicated with Tom Brady or Bill Belichick this week? And if so, what advice have you given them? Well, I do not have to give them advice. And I speak to them on occasion, but I do not have to really speak very much about winning. They know how to do it. And it is a lot of pressure on them, but probably less so because they have been there and they have done it before. So more pressure always on the ones that have not done it. ENTITY, how do you feel about the abuse that is being directed to Tom Brady because he is a friend of yours? Well, I have not seen it. I mean, honestly, I have been so busy doing other things I have not seen that. I have not noticed it. But I can tell you that, generally speaking, that is a two-way street. There may be some people that are not liking the fact that he may feel good about me, but there are a lot of other people that like him a lot better because of it. There have been many instances of that, where people have sort of said a little bit negative about whatever it may be, even a store or a chain, and the chain's business goes through the roof. I mean, we have had cases like that too. ENTITY, what are your thoughts on Deflategate and the way that Tom Brady was treated? And it is over with, and we do not have to discuss it, but it was a rough period of time, and it was very sad. And look at the season he is had missing four games, and look at the great season he is had.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimgraywestwoodonesportsradionetwork", "title": "Interview With Jim Gray of Westwood One Sports Radio Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-gray-westwood-one-sports-radio-network", "publication_date": "05-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1859, "text": "So I just think it was an unfortunate experience, and I think it was bad for probably everybody involved. And that is all behind us, so that is a good thing. You have had some very strong negative opinions about Roger Goodell in the aftermath of his decisions on domestic violence and Deflategate. You are now President; he is obviously the commissioner of the NFL. If you were to see him and your paths were to cross, what would you say to him? Well, I'd just say good luck, just do a good job with the NFL. I mean, he handled the various situations this was prior to me running for office and he handled the various situations in his way, and I hope he is happy with it. But people can disagree on everything. I may not have disagreed I may really have looked upon the way he handled it a little bit differently than others, but you know what, it is the NFL. You plan to pardon Tom Brady? Well, Tom is always pardoned, you know that. Tom does not need a pardon. Tom his game pardons him, and his talent. So I think his game really pardons him. With all the head injuries and concussions, a big concern now with football, would you allow your grandchildren and Barron to play if they wanted? If they wanted, I would allow them to play, but I will say that they have to be very careful, because that would be the big risk to the NFL if it gets to a point where people are afraid to let their children play. That would not be a good thing for the NFL, certainly. But it depends on the level. I mean, I know I played football at a certain level, and I will tell you, it is a rough game, it is a tough game. But it is a rough game, and a lot of people are deciding the other way. But regardless, I would also leave it up to the young person in the family. I think I would have to do that. ENTITY, the NFL Players Association is fighting to legalize the use of medicinal marijuana for its players. These guys take a physical beating. Would you support them in this fight? Well, I have no opinion on it. They are going to have to take a look at that. They are going to talk with the league; they are going to be talking to, obviously, government officials wherever it may be. And when it comes up to the level of the Presidency, I will have an opinion.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimgraywestwoodonesportsradionetwork", "title": "Interview With Jim Gray of Westwood One Sports Radio Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-gray-westwood-one-sports-radio-network", "publication_date": "05-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1860, "text": "Today an estimated $5 billion will be wagered, 4.8 billion, unregulated and untaxed illegally. Well, what I'd do is I'd sit down with the commissioners. I would be talking to them, and we will see how they feel about it. Some would not want it, and probably others and I have read where others maybe do. But I would certainly want to get their input and get the input from the various leagues, and we will see how they feel about it. I'd also get the input from lots of law enforcement officials, because obviously, that is a big step. So we would not do it lightly, I can tell you. But I would want to have a lot of input from a lot of different people. ENTITY, Los Angeles will bid for the 2024 Olympics in the fall. Do you support that bid, and would it be a good thing for Los Angeles and our country? Well, I have been asked to support it, and I have actually spoken to the Olympic Committee in Europe. And they are I think, were very happy when they spoke to me. They wanted to have an endorsement from me, and I gave it to them very loud and clear. I would love to see the Olympics go to Los Angeles. The United States Committee's members have asked me to speak up about it, and I have. And I think I have helped them. But I'd be very happy and honored if they would choose Los Angeles, and we'd stand behind it. Do you feel your immigration policy and the recent Executive order might hurt the bid and cost L.A. some IOC votes? Well, I do not know, but we have to have regardless, we have to have security in our country. We have to know who is coming into our country. We have to have people that are coming in with good intentions, ENTITY. If people are coming in with bad intentions, I want to be able to find out before they get here. You see what is happened in other countries, you see what is happened in our country. So if people want to come into our country, they have to come in with good intentions. And we want to have strong borders. And we want to have extreme vetting, and we want to know what we are doing, frankly. And right now it is tied up in the courts. And I think it is a bad situation for the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimgraywestwoodonesportsradionetwork", "title": "Interview With Jim Gray of Westwood One Sports Radio Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-gray-westwood-one-sports-radio-network", "publication_date": "05-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1861, "text": "We have to know exactly who is coming into our country. And I think most people agree with me on that. And they may not express it, but you are seeing it more and more, people are agreeing with me. I want security for the United States. Now, ENTITY, many Russian athletes were banned from competing in the Rio Olympics last summer due to the Russian state-sponsored doping program. Should that ban continue in 2018 in Korea and 2020 in Tokyo until the Russians can prove that they are clean, and are you willing to express that to President Putin? Well, I think that is going to be really up to the various Olympic committees. They have taken a very strong stand, and that is going to be up to them, much more so than me. So we will see what they have to say, ENTITY. ENTITY, leaving aside your desire to have a productive relationship with President Putin, your comments earlier today to Bill O'Reilly on Fox before the Super Bowl seemed to indicate an equivalency between the actions of our Government and the actions of the Russian Government. Can you kind of clarify that statement? Well, I do not have to clarify it. The question was, do you respect him? He is the head of a major country. He is actually very popular in his country if you listen to various reports that are actually put out by polling agencies and various groups within our country, whether they like it or not. But they asked me whether or not I respect him. He is the leader of a major country, and you know what my answer was. And frankly, there are a lot of bad things going on in a lot of places in this world, and if we got along with Russia I do not know that we will. I do not know the gentleman, but I have had two conversations or three conversations with him. He called to congratulate me on the Inauguration recently and called to congratulate me previously on the election. And it was very nice, and I appreciated the call. But I have been called by virtually every leader of the world. And we have been called by just about everybody, so I do not put a lot of credence to that. I will say this. If we got along with Russia and other countries I mean, I want to get along with all countries but if we got along with Russia, if we got along with China, if we got along with Japan and the Prime Minister is coming next weekend.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimgraywestwoodonesportsradionetwork", "title": "Interview With Jim Gray of Westwood One Sports Radio Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-gray-westwood-one-sports-radio-network", "publication_date": "05-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1862, "text": "In fact, he is coming to the White House, and then he'd like to play golf, and we are going to come down to Florida, Palm Beach, and we are going to play golf. We are going to have a round of golf, which is a great thing. You get to know somebody better on a golf course than you will over lunch. So if we are able to get along with other countries, that is a good thing, not a bad thing. Will you have a bet? I think I know he loves the game, and we are going to have a lot of fun. ENTITY, people feel that divides are getting deeper in our country. The first couple of weeks in office, you see what is happening across the country. Today, in sports, right here on the field and in the military, we see people with different backgrounds come together for the common good. What concrete plans do you have to unite our country and bring our Nation together? And one of the reasons I won the election is because of the fact that we were such a divided country. And we had a tremendous group of people that you look at issues and you look at what is going on, and there was such division in our country. And I think a lot of people think that I am going to be able to bring it together, and I think I will be able to do that. But we have been a very, very divided country for a very long period of time. And you know, I guess they consider me to be very much of an outsider, but it is an outsider that can bring us together. And I think I will be able to do that. Well, boxing is an interesting I have had many, many fights, as you know. I have been involved with just about everybody in that business, and I really enjoy the boxing, and I enjoy what they have done with the UFC, Dana White and all of the folks, the families that have done such a great job with that. And I enjoy sports at any kind. I enjoy virtually every sport. And but I have great respect for what they are doing and what they are doing with the I think today's game is terrific, and I think it is going to be terrific. You have now been in office a couple of weeks. It is been tough on a lot of people because we are breaking the glass a little bit. We are being strong on vetting; we are being strong on coming into the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjimgraywestwoodonesportsradionetwork", "title": "Interview With Jim Gray of Westwood One Sports Radio Network", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jim-gray-westwood-one-sports-radio-network", "publication_date": "05-02-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1865, "text": "It has been a great day so far, not only yesterday but so far this morning, and I am looking forward to a real fine time on this trip to Florida. When you said anything to the right of your philosophy cannot win in Florida, are you speaking specifically of the philosophy of Ronald Reagan and Ronald Reagan in particular? I have said that anyone further to the right than my philosophy, on a nationwide basis, cannot win the general election. I think it is important for that philosophy, which is a middle-of-the-road philosophy, is the right philosophy for the United States. And anyone on the right or on the left of my philosophy just cannot win because most Americans believe in a moderate, middle-of-the-road philosophy. Would you put Ronald Reagan in that category? I will let the American people make that decision. Also, how do you plan to alter your campaign strategy to have at least a confident victory or feeling of victory in Florida? I have been tremendously encouraged by the fine turnouts that I have received in Orlando, in Ft. Lauderdale, and elsewhere. So, I think we have got the initiative, we have the right programs, we have some great leadership in Lou Frey and Bill Young and Skip Bafalis1 and all of the others. But have you got the votes for it? I think the votes will turn up on March 9. Are you planning to step up your Florida campaigning, sir? Well, I think we had a pretty busy day yesterday, as well as today, and as I said, we are most likely to come back again. And I have to emphasize--because it is very important--that my principal responsibility is to be ENTITY, and that takes a good bit of time. We will find a way to come down and see our friends and encourage our workers and to give recognition to our leaders. I think my principal job is to work at the responsibilities of being ENTITY. On the other hand, I think it is equally important, with the time that is available, to come out and see the people and let the people know from me personally what my philosophy is and what my programs are. So we will try to mesh the two. ENTITY, the last time you were in this county was 2 years ago, when you were Vice President. You defended President Nixon then, and it was only a few months before he resigned. Is not that association with President Nixon going to hurt you in this campaign, and is not it hurting you already?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexchangewithreportersarrivalstpetersburgflorida", "title": "Exchange With Reporters on Arrival at St. Petersburg, Florida.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/exchange-with-reporters-arrival-st-petersburg-florida", "publication_date": "14-02-1976", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1889, "text": "It is another groundbreaking for one of these battery plants. It is an attempt to show some positive results from a stimulus program that is being received a little more skeptically by the public now, even as opposed to where things were 15 months ago. The first thing to know is specifically what is happening here in Holland, Michigan, but also all across the country. When we came into office, America accounted for about 2 percent of the advanced-battery markets for electric and hybrid cars. And what we did was we said, Look, let us put up $2.4 billion that has to be matched by private dollars. And now you have got nine advanced-battery manufacturing facilities already up on line. And we expect that by 2015 we are going to have about 40 percent of the market in advanced-battery technology. And that is going into, by the way, a couple of the cars that we saw today, the Chevy Volt as well as the Ford Focus. So this is an example, I think, of what our economic strategy has been from the start. We had a disaster on our hands. We have been able to stabilize the economy and prevent the free fall. Instead of 750,000 jobs a month being lost, we have now gained jobs in the private sector for five consecutive months. But we have still got a long way to go. And so, not surprisingly, the American people, who are out of work, who are still struggling to pay the bills, they still want to see more action when it comes to jobs. And I do not blame them. But what I do want to point out is the very specific things that are being done as a consequence of some tough votes that were taken by Democrats last year. Were there more things in the stimulus -- you talked about the public-private partnership. We are seeing a ton of private capital not in the game right now. Well, it turns out that we are actually getting three dollars in private investment for every dollar that went into the recovery act. So that leveraging is taking place. You have got to remember also that about a third of the recovery act last year was tax cuts. And nobody talks about it, but those were not just tax cuts to individuals. They were also tax cuts to small businesses. And so that is why, for example, next week I hope the Senate takes up the proposal to get small businesses loans, because although big companies are now getting loans, you are still seeing problems with respect to small companies getting credit.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddmsnbcsthedailyrundown", "title": "Interview With Chuck Todd on MSNBC's The Daily Rundown", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-msnbcs-the-daily-rundown", "publication_date": "15-07-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1890, "text": "You had this meeting yesterday with Warren Buffett, President Clinton, some other CEOs. And I understand the issue of private capital getting into the market, I assume, came up. What are they telling you -- what are these CEOs telling you of why this money is not being spent right now to create jobs? You know, you hear that it is We do not know what the government's going to do. Is that what you are hearing? Yeah, I will tell you exactly what Warren Buffett said. He said we went through a wrenching recession, and so we have not fully recovered. But we have still got a long way to go. And the reason people have not fully invested yet and started creating as many jobs as we would like is because it takes some time to come back. He used a good example in the housing market, where about 1.2 million households are formed that buy a house each year. But we went through a span of time, four or five years, because of the bubble and subprime lending and all the shenanigans that were going on with the mortgage market, where we were building 2 million homes a year. Now we are building 500,000. And what Warren pointed out was, Look, we are going to get back to 1.2 , but right now we are soaking up a whole bunch of inventory. So a lot of the challenge is to work our way through this recession, try to accelerate not only profits, because companies now are making money primarily because they cut costs, but also to see the opportunities out there. And that is what we were trying to show with this plant. We just have to seize them. I understand Warren Buffett told some business leaders last week at a conference that he no longer fears a double-dip recession. I am confident that we are moving in the right direction. The economy is definitely growing and we are definitely seeing additional hiring. Should we fear a double dip? Well, here is what we should fear, that if we do not keep track, keep on track with the policies that we put in place -- if we started seeing, for example, a wrenching reversal in investment, the kinds of plants that we saw today, we could end up having problems. We could further slow growth. The other thing that -- the main thing that keeps me up at night right now is we lost 8 million jobs. The month I was sworn in, we lost 750,000 jobs.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddmsnbcsthedailyrundown", "title": "Interview With Chuck Todd on MSNBC's The Daily Rundown", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-msnbcs-the-daily-rundown", "publication_date": "15-07-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1891, "text": "We have regained about 600,000 this year so far. And if we stay on pace, hopefully we will gain several hundred thousand more. And that is going to require us tapping into the new sectors like the clean-energy economy, where there is growth to be had. It also means that we have got to start selling more than we are buying, which is why I am emphasizing export growth so much. But, look, nobody in the White House is satisfied with where we are right now. What we absolutely are convinced of, though, is that we are on the right track. And I think that the statistics bear that out. You know, in your remarks in Holland, you seemed to also make a political argument about the other side, saying that they, you know, were not for these plans. What do you tell the person who may have voted for you, cannot find a job or got laid off since you took office, why they should still keep the Democrats in charge? Because they are not feeling any of the positive yet. Look, if somebody's out of work right now, the only answer that I am going to have for them is when they get a job. Up until that point, from their perspective, the economic policies are not working well enough. And you are okay if they hold you accountable for that, if they cannot find a job. That is my job as ENTITY is to take responsibility for moving us in the right direction. But what I am absolutely convinced of is that we are going to have a choice, not just in November but for years to come. We can go back to all the same policies that got us into this mess, where we basically provide special-interest loopholes; we do not regulate Wall Street; we have a health-care system that is out of control; we provide tax cuts who do not need them and were not asking for them. Or we can take the approach that I have taken since I came in and that I campaigned on, which is to make sure that we start investing in our education system, to make sure that we are investing in clean energy, to get control of health-care costs, to deal with our structural deficit, the fact that we are spending more money through entitlements and through a whole range of other things than we are taking in. And it is hard, because you do not see immediate gratification.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddmsnbcsthedailyrundown", "title": "Interview With Chuck Todd on MSNBC's The Daily Rundown", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-msnbcs-the-daily-rundown", "publication_date": "15-07-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1892, "text": "But what I'd say to the person who is out of a job right now is we are going to be doing everything we can to create the environment where the private sector can come in and start creating jobs. And until they can find a job, I expect to be held accountable. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs sparked a firestorm this week when he said there are enough seats in play in the fall to give Republicans control of the House. During our interview in Michigan, I asked ENTITY if he is prepared for the midterms to be a referendum on both him and his policies. Well, first of all, we have got a long ways before the election, number one. You disagree with Robert Gibbs' assessment? Number two, we have got -- number two, this is going to be a choice between the policies that got us into this mess and my policies that are getting us out of this mess. And I think if you look at the vast majority of Americans, even those who are dissatisfied with the pace of progress, they will say that the policies that got us into this mess, we cannot go back to. They understand that, because they remember that even before the financial crisis, wages were flat-lined. And so now, when they look at Holland, Michigan and they say, Instead of jobs moving overseas, we are seeing jobs move from South Korea here to the United States, that is something that gives them a sense of a future, a vision in which America is strong; it is competing. That is the kind of future I think Americans want. So you are prepared for November to be called a referendum on your policies and this presidency. ENTITY, you are not listening to me. What I am prepared is to be held accountable for the policies that I have put in place. But Americans do not have selective memory here. They are going to remember the policies that got us into this mess as well. And they sure as heck do not want to go back to those. Either you did not want a debate about health care again on Capitol Hill, which got a little raucous a year ago, or, You know what, the Senate process is broken and we have got to go around it ?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddmsnbcsthedailyrundown", "title": "Interview With Chuck Todd on MSNBC's The Daily Rundown", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-msnbcs-the-daily-rundown", "publication_date": "15-07-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1893, "text": "Well, what is true is when it comes specifically to appointments, whether it is judges or critical positions in national security, Homeland Security, FBI, there have been more delays, obstruction and stalling when it comes to just appointing people to run the day-to-day aspects of Washington than any president has experienced in history. And, you know, the fact of the matter is that I cannot play political games with the Senate on these issues. I have got a government to run. And at a certain point, we have to go ahead and just make sure that people are in place to deal with the enormous challenges that are ahead. Well, here is what I am ready to say, that Washington has spent an inordinate amount of time on politics -- who is up, who is down -- and not enough on how are we delivering for the American people. The good news is that, despite no cooperation from the other side, we have, over the last two years, stopped an economic free fall, stabilized the financial sector. We are on the verge of passing a financial regulatory bill that provides consumers the kind of protections they deserve -- Probably will be passed by the time people see this. Will be passed, potentially, by the time we land, I get back to Washington; a health-care bill that not only is going to make sure that everybody has access to coverage, but also is reducing costs. So when you look at the list of things we have been able to accomplish, it does show that when people are determined and are willing to take tough votes even when it is politically inconvenient, we can still get things done. You have had an enormous amount of legislative victories. It is comparable to any president in history. It is not translated into political capital with the public. Is it -- honestly, are you frustrated by that? You know, I am not frustrated, because we were in such a deep hole that even if we got three-quarters of the way up out of the hole, even if I know we are going in the right direction, people are still feeling things are tough. Now, look, when I -- before I was sworn in, I remember talking to some of my guys, and we had just gotten the estimates from the economists about what we might be seeing in terms of not only job losses, but economic contraction.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddmsnbcsthedailyrundown", "title": "Interview With Chuck Todd on MSNBC's The Daily Rundown", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-msnbcs-the-daily-rundown", "publication_date": "15-07-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1894, "text": "I think people would anticipate -- you do not have to be a savvy political analyst like ENTITY to say if unemployment is at 9.5 percent, the party in power is going to have some problems, regardless of how much progress we have made and how much worse it would be if the other side had been in charge. I want to talk about the terrorist attack in Uganda. Clearly your administration is taking this al-Shabab very seriously. You have had a senior official tell us the organization -- the operational abilities of that entity out there is maybe stronger than any other -- -- al Qaeda. Should we be doing more militarily in Yemen than we are now? Well, here is what we have done. Part of the reason that an analyst would say that al Qaeda is stronger in Yemen than just about anywhere else is because we have actually been pretty successful at forcing al Qaeda in the border region between Afghanistan and Pakistan to hunker down. They have been pinned down, and it is hard for them to carry out big operations. We have got to keep that pressure up. It is absolutely true, though, that al Qaeda in Yemen is dangerous. And what they have been able to do is not mount huge-scale attacks, but they are successfully recruiting individuals who may carry out low-level attacks -- Well, it is scarier, oddly enough, for some people. Well, in some ways it is harder because these are people whose name are not on a list. Abdulmutallab, the guy who tried to blow up the plane over Detroit, is a classic example of the kind of person that al Qaeda in Yemen is recruiting. Many people are traveling to Yemen, getting indoctrinated, and then being sent back to the West. So we have been cooperating with the Yemeni government. We want to make sure that we are entirely on top of it. Are they cooperating with us? Its terrain is a little bit like Afghanistan's. They have got their own ethnic problems there. And so this is a tough part of the world. But we are building up capacity, working with them to make sure that we do not take our eye off the ball, even as we continue to put pressure between Afghanistan and Pakistan. I know the first lady was down there touting it in Panama City, Florida. Are we going to see you guys down there? When we were in Pensacola, the beach looked as pretty as any beach that I have seen.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddmsnbcsthedailyrundown", "title": "Interview With Chuck Todd on MSNBC's The Daily Rundown", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-msnbcs-the-daily-rundown", "publication_date": "15-07-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1897, "text": "Last time I sat down with you here in the White House and had a long conversation, it was just right after Wye, and you were feeling real good and real happy and really accomplished and, today, considerably different. Yes, Friday night I was up all night talking to them. I slept an hour, and then maybe I slept another 30 or 40 minutes in different snippets. Prime Minister Barak had a Cabinet meeting that lasted almost all night last night. And in the middle of it, he came out and announced that the Israelis would suspend their ultimatum, because they had some encouragement and there was so much effort being made by the world diplomatic community. What are you doing from here, in Washington, at your desk talking on the phone with these guys? I mean, how are you able to effect this, and what do you see your role as now? Well, I have spent so much time with both of them, and I know quite a bit about what makes them tick. And I think I understand the pressures they are both under, and I believe I understand what happened here, how they both came to see themselves and their people as victims in this. I think that they both became concerned about 24 hours ago, maybe a little more, that this thing could really slide into a much deeper conflict. So at least today we have pulled back from the precipice. Kofi Annan is out there, and I think he is doing some good work there. So I feel good today, as compared with yesterday. Although, if we can end the violence and if we can get agreement between the two sides on some sort of factfinding commission to figure out how this happened and how to keep it from happening again which was the thing that the U.N. resolution called for, that, in fact, Barak and Arafat had agreed to in Paris. Although they had not agreed to the composition of the commission, they had agreed that it ought to be done. If we can do that, the next big step is to begin the negotiations, the peace negotiations, as immediately as possible, because otherwise the sort of public pressures, both within the Middle East and beyond, will get worse. I was surprised that the feelings on both sides could be stripped to the core as quickly as they did, because they have made so much progress and they got so close.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1898, "text": "But in a funny way, I think that from the Israeli point of view, Camp David made them feel even more vulnerable because Barak, at Camp David and since, went further by far than any Israeli Prime Minister had gone before. And I think the Palestinians, number one, really thought it was not enough to make a peace agreement but also have a different strategy since basically the physical concessions have to be made by Israel except for what the Palestinians have to agree on security, in terms of joint security presence in what would become a Palestinian area in the West Bank. They have to make agreements on the West Bank territory, on the right-of-return language in the U.N. resolutions, who gets to come back, and if they do not come back, what is their compensation. They have to resolve Jerusalem, and they have to deal with security. Interestingly enough, because it was the most concrete with the fewest number of unpredictable consequences in the future, they made more progress at Camp David on security than anything else. They also had a habit of working together on security and getting along. But I think that the Israelis sort of felt aggrieved that they did not get more done, because they offered so much. Then the Palestinians felt provoked by what happened on the Temple Mount with Let us not get too far into this   We do not have to get into the weeds, but the point is that then a whole series of events happened where each side began with each successive event it seemed that each side misunderstood the other more. Does any of it tend to piss you off about the relationships that you formed with you formed a very strong relationship with Arafat and also Barak. Did it change your mind any, when you get into this goddammit, Yasser you have the same interpreter, right, that you used to share? So you have got a close relationship. This will all be settled by the time this comes out, so just speak your mind. It will all be settled, or it will not by the time this comes out. The whole thing is frustrating, but you have got to realize we are dealing with fundamental questions of identity. What Jack Lew was saying at Rosh Hashanah, though the Jews go back and read the story of Abraham and Sarah giving birth to Isaac . I was thinking it is interesting how the circumstances under which the sons of Abraham were born and became separated. And it sounds like sort of epic family tragedy, and they just sort of keep replaying it down through the years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1899, "text": "That is the thing that bothers me. I just hope that somehow, you know, at this moment, however long it takes, we will get beyond that. To the outsider who cares about them both, it seems so self-evident that the only acceptable answer is for them to find a way to live together in peace. When you are out of office, what are the three or four issues you think you are going to want to most focus on and be most concerned with? Well, first of all, I have not quite figured out what to do and how to do it, because I am so into what I have been doing. I have laid the basic plans for my library and policy center. And I know I am going to have an office in New York, because I will be there, as well. And I have talked to a lot of people in general terms about it. But I decided that I would try to be effective in this job right up until the end. And in order to do it, I cannot be spending vast amounts of time kind of planning out my next step. I also think I probably need a couple months to kind of just rest, relax, sleep rest, get a little perspective. I have thought a lot about ex-Presidencies. There have been two really great ones in history, John Quincy Adams and Jimmy Carter, and they were very different. Quincy Adams went back to the House of Representatives and became the leading spokesman for abolition. You see the Washington Monument right behind us that actually, in his last term in Congress, was Abraham Lincoln's only term in the House, and they stood together on that mound when the Washington Monument was dedicated. But Jimmy Carter used the Carter Center to do very specific things. He works on human rights, election monitoring, getting rid of river blindness in Africa, agricultural self-sufficiency. From time to time, he is engaged in various peace issues, primarily in Africa. And he works here at home on Habitat for Humanity, which is now, by the way, the third-biggest homebuilder in America stunning thing and also involved all over the world. I have been to Habitat sites in Africa, or one in Africa, but there are more than one. So the challenge is to trade power and authority broadly spread for influence and impact tightly concentrated.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1900, "text": "And I am sure I will be interested; I will try to do a lot on the areas that I have always been involved in, this whole area of racial and religious reconciliation at home and around the world, economic empowerment of poor people, something I am very interested in here and around the world. As we speak, I still do not know for sure whether the new markets initiative that the Speaker of the House and I have built such a broad bipartisan coalition for will pass. We have got 300-some votes for it in the House. It is really got a chance to be one of the signature achievements of this Congress, and it is something that Republicans ought to like, because it basically involves getting private capital into poor areas in America. And then I have got a big initiative to relieve the debt of the world's poorest countries that will put the money into education, health care, and development back home, if they get the debt relief. So that is something that I have always been very interested in. We make 2 million microcredit loans a year around the world, under AID in my administration. The Grameen Bank model. We set up a community development financial institution program here in America, and we fund those here in America, as well. So we have done a lot of work on that. And I am very interested in this whole idea of the relationship of energy to economic growth and the challenge of global warming, which I believe is real. And I believe we can break the iron link between how nations get rich and how they deal with the environment. I do not think I think the energy realities of the world have changed drastically in the last 10 years, and they are about to really change with the development of fuel cell engines, alternative fuels. And there is also we have funded a lot of research on biofuels not just ethanol from corn, but you can make biofuels out of grass. You can cut the grass out here and make fuel out of it. It takes about 7 gallons of gasoline to make about 8 gallons of biofuel. But they are working on research which would lead to one gallon of gasoline making 8 gallons. So I am interested in all that. I am interested in the breakdown of public health systems around the world. ENTITY, TB, and malaria kill one in every four people that die every year now, those three diseases. So you would set up something like you are very mindful of the Carter Center.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1901, "text": "I do not know how I am going to do it. I am thinking about it. I have explored a lot of ideas, but I am going to take some time when I get out to think about it. I also want to make sure that whatever I do, I give the next President time to be President, and whatever I do, I do not get in the way of the next President, because a country can only have one President at a time, and I want to be supportive of that. Well, you must have obviously thought a lot about Teddy Roosevelt. I mean, you are or he are the youngest you are the youngest President since Teddy Roosevelt, to come out of a successful Presidency, and be in your midfifties, because of your powers, really, and energy. Do you compare yourself much to him? Have you thought much about him? Well, I think the time in which I served was very much like the time in which he served. And I think the job I had to do was quite a lot like there are some interesting historical parallels with the job he had to do, because he basically was his job was to manage the transition of America from an agricultural to an industrial power, and from essentially an isolationist to an international nation. In my time, we were managing the transition from an industrial to an information age, and from a cold-war world to a multipolar, more interdependent world. And so I have always thought these periods had a lot in common. But when Teddy Roosevelt left, he served almost 8 full years, because McKinley was killed in 1901, shortly after he was inaugurated. But he thought he really should observe the twoterm tradition that George Washington had established that his cousin would later break in the war before, the election was right before the war. anyway, Roosevelt, when he got out, then he felt Taft had betrayed his progressive legacy. So he spent a lot of the rest of his life he built a whole third-party-new-political movement and promoted what he called the New Nationalism around America. But I think in some ways the impact he might have had was a little tempered by his evident disappointment at not being President anymore. And I think that is not an option for me, because I cannot run again, because now there is the 22d amendment. Roosevelt did not have the 22d amendment. So it is not a real issue for me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1902, "text": "So I have got to try to use whatever influence and networks and friendships and support I have built up around the world and here at home just to have a positive impact, to be an effective citizen. And I think I will find a way to do it. On the other hand, you have got the advantages of the incumbency; you have got the highest popularity rating of any President; the economy is doing good. It looks like you would have won in a walk. Is it really consistent with democracy, to have this kind of term limit on a President? Congressional? I have never supported legislative term limits. But I think the arguments for executive term limits, on balance, are pretty compelling. I mean, I have an extra amount of energy, and I love this job, and I love the nature of this work. But maybe it is better to leave when you are in pretty good shape, too. Better to leave when you are in good shape. I think maybe they should maybe they should put consecutive there. Maybe they should limit it to two consecutive terms. Because now what is going to happen is see, Teddy Roosevelt was young but not so young for his time. He was the youngest person to have been President, but he died at 61. Now, anybody that lives to be 65 has a life expectancy of 82. So you are going to see people who most people mature, politically and it is like all different activities have gymnasts are tops at 14 or 15, basketball players at 25 or 28. In their early fifties, most Presidents do their best. And now you are going to have more and more people, particularly that come after me, living much longer lives. Is that enough time to repeal the 22d amendment, get that through? This is not really about me, because my time is up. But I think that if you cannot predict all the challenges the country will face in the future and whether someone uniquely suited to a given moment will be there. So maybe they should but I am just saying, you may have people operating at a very high level of efficiency, in politics, from age 50 to age 80 in the future, because of the changes in the human life cycle that are going to come about as a result of the human genome and pharmaceutical developments and all kind of other things we are learning. We may be able to reverse Parkinson's. We may be able to reverse Alzheimer's. So there is going to be a lot of things that are different about aging in the future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1903, "text": "We are going to have to totally rethink it in ways we cannot imagine. And if it seems appropriate, then I think some future Congress may give the States a chance to at least limit the President to two consecutive terms, and then if the people need a person, a man or a woman, to come back in the future, they can bring them back. It may take decades, but it would not surprise me if it happened simply because of the lifestyle, the length of life we are looking at. Not to drag this out people say that you love campaigning. I mean, that you do not stop campaigning in all aspects. I mean, how are you going to sort of withdraw from that in the next couple of years? I do like politics. But I like governance, too. I like policy. I liked it all. That is one of the reasons why I have been so fortunate in my life; I got to do something that was basically about politics and policy and governing, and in executive positions, being a Governor for a dozen years and President for 8. I got to deal with politics, policy, and governing, the three things that I really loved. And I think I got better at it all as I went along. I am very interested I think I will spend a lot of time helping other people. I am thrilled about Hillary running as we do this interview. I have worked very hard with Tony Blair to try to build this network around the world of kind of likeminded political leaders, and if I can be helpful to them, I want to be. So I am sure that, from time to time, I will get a chance to do a little politics after I leave here. But I am also looking forward to a different chapter in my life. I am still young enough to learn how to do new and different things. And it is exciting to me. There is never been a period in my life that I did not enjoy and find challenging and rewarding. And so I just need a little time to get my bearings and hope I am not too old to change. Going back to the beginning, one of the first things you did in your earlier term was trying to overthrow the military ban on gay people. Why did this backfire, and what did you learn from that? Well, I think it backfired partly because the people that were against it were clever enough to force it, force the pace of it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1904, "text": "I tried to slow it down, but the first week I was President, Senator Dole, who saw it as, I think, an opportunity, pushed a vote in the Senate disapproving of it. And I tried to put it off for 6 months, and the Joint Chiefs came down and raised hell about it. And I wanted to do it the way Harry Truman Harry Truman issued an order saying, Integrate the military. Come back in 3 years or 2 years, whatever, and tell me how you are going to do it. And a lot of the gay groups wanted it done right away and had no earthly idea of what kind of I think they were shocked by the amount of congressional opposition. So a lot of people think I just sort of compromised with the military because they asked me to. A lot of people have forgotten that. We knew that there were at least 75 percent of the House would vote against my policy. So if I were going to sustain a different policy and have it withstand congressional action, I had to have a veto-proof minority in one House or another. But what happened was, the Senate voted 68-32 against my policy, which meant that I could not sustain my policy in either House, which meant they were going to enact it over my they were going to, in a sense, ratify the status quo in law. And it was only at that time that I worked out with Colin Powell this do not ask, do not tell thing, went to the War College, and explained what the policy was going to be based on, what we had agreed the agreement we had reached together. And then they wrote that into law. And then we had several years of problems where it was not being implemented in any way consistent with my speech at the War College, which General Powell agreed with every word of, which we'd worked out. So Bill Cohen has now changed the training and a lot of the other elements that contributed to the fact that this policy continued to have a lot of abuse in it, and I think it is better now. I think the policy I implemented originally, that I wanted to implement was the right policy. Would you do it any differently? Do you wish you could have done it differently? I think that what I would like to do, what I wish I had been able to do, is to get an agreement on the part of everybody involved to take this out of politics and look at it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1905, "text": "But the Republicans decided that they did not want me to have a honeymoon, that they wanted to make me the first President without one, that we were living in a 24-hour news cycle, and that the press would happily go along with my not getting a honeymoon and that they would make this the opening salvo. And they understood and I did not understand exactly what I know now about how what we do here plays out in the country. Because they have added up, first but because it was one of my campaign commitments and I refused to back off of it, the message out in the country was, We elected this guy to turn the economy around, and his top priority is gays in the military. Bob Dole's top priority was making this the controversy that would consume the early days of my Presidency, and it was a brilliant political move by him, because at the time I was not experienced enough in the ways of Washington to know how to explain to the American people what was going on. If it happened to me again, I would say, Why is this the Republicans' top priority? I do not want to deal with this now. We can deal with this in 6 months when the study is done; let us take care of the American people now. And if it happened now, all the gay groups, who are now much more sophisticated about dealing in Washington than they were then, would come in and say, That is absolutely right. Why is he doing this? We want to deal with and we would put it back on them. They would be in the hot box, and we could win it. But the country has come a long way on gay rights issues since '93. Because keep in mind, we did drop the ban on gays in security positions, national security positions. We had done a whole lot of other things to advance a lot of the causes that the gay rights community wanted. So we have made a lot of progress there plus all the people I have appointed. And I think the country has moved on that issue. The country is overwhelmingly for hate crimes legislation. The country supports employment nondiscrimination legislation. The only reason that we cannot get those through the Congress is that the leadership of the Republican Party is way to the right of the country. You know, historically, politicians have never, ever done much for gay rights. But gay issues are in the mainstream certainly, for instance, Reagan, who was very funny with gay people and had lots of experience in Hollywood.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1906, "text": "Why did you take it upon yourself, particularly in light of the political heat, to advance the causes of gay people? I believed in it. I just said, from the time I was a kid, I had known people who were gay, and I believed that their lives were hard enough without having to be hassled about it. I saw it as a civil rights issue. I also did not buy the kind of conservative attack on them, that this was sort of a conscious choice to have a depraved lifestyle. I had had enough gay friends since I was a young man to know that to believe, at least, that that is not the case. So I saw it as a civil rights issue. I believed in it. I also thought that as a white southern Protestant, who could obviously talk to a lot of the so-called Reagan Democrats, the people we had lost that came back, that I was in a unique position to do it. And Al Gore, I must say, reinforced that, because he felt it at least as strongly as I did, and he wanted to do something about it. And we thought that we could do that for the same reason we thought we ought to take on the NRA. You know, that if we could not do it, coming from where we came from with our backgrounds and kind of out of the culture we came from, and understanding that opposing elements, who could do it? You know, if that whole gaysin-the-military thing came up today, I do not think it would be handled in the same way. It might not be that we could win it today, but today we would get a civilized response, and we'd have a long study. People would handle this straight. It would not just be a it would be handled in a whole different way today. What about what is going on with the Boy Scouts? Were you disappointed with the Supreme Court decision, and what do you think you, as President, can do about that? Well, I cannot do anything as President about the Supreme Court decision. Were you disappointed with it not about the decision but about the Boy Scouts? I think what the Boy Scouts were reacting to was one of these stereotypes for which there is no evidence whatever, which is that adult gay adults are more likely to abuse children than straight adults, sexually. But I think that I think that is what was behind that. Now, apparently, the Girl Scouts have no such prohibitions and have had no known problems.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1907, "text": "I am not sure about that. I doubt that. Is there something does not the President have an official capacity with the Boy Scouts as, like, an honorary chairperson or something like that? And the gay groups asked me not the gay groups, the press asked me if I would whether I should resign from that. The President is always the honorary chairman of the Boy Scouts. And it is going to be interesting when we have our first woman President, if they make her the honorary chair of the Girl Scouts, or she gets to be the honorary chair of the Boy Scouts. Because I think that first, I think the Scouts do a world of good, and in our time they have begun to be more active in the cities, which I think is really important, to go into a lot of these places where the kids do not have a lot of family or community support. And I think that it is near the end of my term, so it would just be like a symbolic thing that would, in my view, probably cause more harm than good. And I think it is better for me to say I disagree with the position they took and try to persuade them to change their position, which I hope they will do, because I think It seems like there are so many States and communities that are moving to pressure them. Yes, I think there should be a lot of grassroots pressure on them to change. They will change at the grassroots level. But what is happening is look, the overwhelming thing which changes people's attitudes on these issues is personal contact, personal experience. I will tell you a little story. When we did the gays-in-the-military thing, I got not my pollster, another guy that I knew sent me a poll he had done saying this is a political disaster for you, and here is why but that is not the reason, the point I am telling you. The polls showed by 48 to 45, people agreed with my position in 1993. But when asked, do you strongly so I won it, 48-45. But among those who felt intensely, I lost it 36-18 or 15 36-15. No, but for the antis, it was a single-issue vote. For the pros, it was, You know, I am broadminded; I have got a lot of other things on my mind. They are still mad at Cheney for what he said the other day. What did Cheney say?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1908, "text": "He was not hard over against he was not hard enough over against gay marriage or civil unions. Let me make the larger point. But in this poll, interestingly enough now, again, this was '93 there was not a huge gender gap; there was not even a huge regional gap, as you might expect with the South being way bigger than anyplace else. People who identified themselves as evangelical Christians were 72-22 against my position. People who said yes to the question, Have you personally known a gay person? were 66-33 for my position. So this is a matter of personal experience, and the country will come to this. They will come to the right place on this. Most gay people kept their sexual preference secret for a long time. A lot of venerable institutions in society that worry about their respectability and impact and the Boy Scouts is such a venerable institution what they are really dealing with is people coming out much more than affirmative prejudice. It is like, Hey, let us go back to the way it used to be where people did not say and I did not have to deal with this. That is what I believe, anyway. Because I remember I grew up in a southern town. One of my teachers was gay. There was a gay doctor in my hometown that some people knew and did not talk about. So we are dealing with a huge kind of and this goes to the core of how people think about themselves and how you work through all this. But it is a matter of personal contact. In your first year in office, you regularly talked with Richard Nixon. What did you two talk about, and what were your impressions? Do you remember that? He came to the White House. I had Nixon back at the White House. I have got a letter that I treasure that Nixon wrote me about Russia a month to the day before he died. Have you ever seen that letter, Jake? You know, it was sort of his take on where Russia was and the early part of my Presidency. ENTITY He went to Russia right before he died. He wrote me a letter about where he thought things were, and a month later he was gone. Well, I had him back here. I just thought that I ought to do it. He lived kind of in the he had lived what I thought was a fundamentally constructive life in his years out of the White House. He had written all these books. He tried to and he tried to be a constructive force in world affairs.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1909, "text": "And I thought that he had paid quite a high price for what he did, and I just thought it would be a good thing for the country to invite him back. So when he came up, what was it like when he came here? Was that the first time you had met him, in a way that spend any time? Actually it is funny, because I had had two other chances in my life to meet him. We were somewhere in 1969 we were at a dinner. I was working here in the summer 1970 and there was a dinner where he was, and I did not go shake hands with him, because I was young and mad about the Vietnam war. And then in the 1980's sometime, we were in the same hotel in Hong Kong. We were staying in the Peninsula Hotel in Hong Kong. I was there on a trade mission, and I was supposed to meet him, and somehow or another it got messed up. But when he came here, what was that like? What was he like? He met my daughter, who was then going to Sidwell, and his mother was a Quaker, and I think his children went there, or at least had some association with Quaker schools. So he had this long talk with Chelsea about who was then 13 about Sidwell and Quaker schools. But it was rather touching, because he seemed still, after all this time, somewhat ill at ease in personal conversations with people he did not know. But it was obvious to me that he had thought about what he would say when he met my daughter. How was he like to you? I mean, did he treat you like the young man, or was he nervous? He sort of identified it is interesting, he told me he identified with me because he thought the press had been too hard on me in '92 and that I had refused to die, and he liked that. He said a lot of life was just hanging on. So we had a good talk about that. But I found it interesting I always thought that he could have been he did some good things, and I always thought he could have been a great President if he had been more, somehow, trusting of the American people, you know. I thought that somewhere way back there, his something happened in terms of his ability to just feel at home, at ease with the ebb and flow of human life and popular opinion.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1910, "text": "And I think also, some of his weaknesses were reinforced by the way he rose to national prominence, because he got elected to Congress by convincing people Jerry Voorhees was soft on communism, and he got elected to the Senate by convincing people that Helen Gahagan Douglas was soft on communism. Then he busted Alger Hiss and got to be Vice President when he was, I do not know, 38 years old 37. Nixon would have been, had he won in '60, would have been as young as I was when he got elected. So I think all of a sudden, boom, one term in the Congress, a couple years as a Senator, boom, you are Vice President, 8 years as Vice President, and how did you do this? You did this by sort of whipping popular opinion up into this frenzy by demonizing your opponent as being a little pink. And I think that kind of reinforced some of his weaknesses. Whereas, if he had had to run like I did, in a little State, where you had to go to every country crossroads, people expect you to run the Governor's office like a country store, and you were used to brutal campaigns and used to trusting people to sort of see through them, if you fought them out hard enough, I think it might have rounded him in a different way. I think it might have prepared him a little. By all accounts, he was a nicer guy before the Jerry Voorhees campaign and that there is something in that. Well, look, when he ran for President, he got 35 percent of the black vote. If he had a good record on civil rights and for a Republican, he had a good record in the House and the Senate. And you know, there is no when he got to be President, he signed the EPA and OSHA and a lot of other stuff. The guy had some and he had a very fertile policy mind. He could get out of his ideological box. Remember, it was Nixon that imposed wage and price controls in 1971. He understood that. He understood that only a Republican could go to China. Which Presidents do you feel the most affinity for, in terms of the way the problems they faced and the way they have handled them? We spoke a little bit about the similarity with Teddy Roosevelt. Are there any others that you feel a particular kinship to? Well, I think Roosevelt and Wilson except I did not have a war, thank God.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1911, "text": "But Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson had the same during that whole period, they were dealing with the kinds of challenges that I have dealt with, both at home and around the world. And so I identified with them a lot. There are a lot of others that I like, but I think Harry Truman, in a funny way even though most of the ideas, like the U.N. and the international institutions, a lot of them were hatched and germinated when Roosevelt was still alive Truman also had to create a new era, had to organize a world where our commitment to the world was not an option after the Second World War. But we had to create a set of international institutions where we could be leaders, but in which we were also interdependent. And that is what not only the U.N. but also NATO, the Marshall plan, and the Bretton Woods institutions that have been that we have tried so hard to modify in my time. And Truman I liked Truman a lot. I am from Arkansas, and we border Missouri. I was raised on Harry Truman. David McCulloch did a great job on that book. If you read Merle Miller's Plain Speaking it is a much earlier book it also made him look pretty good, and he was an old man when he did a lot of that talking. Have you read Wilson and FDR, and it ends in Johnson I cannot remember if he put Truman or Kennedy in it or not but this whole sort of tradition of progressivism, of using Government as an instrument of social justice and economic progress. And so they were Princeton, where obviously where Woodrow Wilson was president, did a seminar, or a 2-day symposium, excuse me, on the Progressive Era, on the Presidencies of Roosevelt and Wilson. So they asked me to come and speak about that and about the relevance of that for the work I had done. So I talked about that. But I also said that they were part of a larger tradition that I also felt that this time was a part of, which was defining the Union, defining what America was. When we started the after we ratified the Constitution, there was a huge debate early on between George Washington, Alexander Hamilton, and John Marshall on the one hand, and Thomas Jefferson and all his allies on the other, about whether we would have a strong nation and what did that mean. And", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1912, "text": "you know, John Marshall subsequently became Chief Justice, and wrote all the great nationbuilding decisions of the first 20 years of the 19th century. But even before that and Alexander Hamilton you remember, wanted to build a great, strong national financial system. George Washington supported him. They wanted a Federal Government that was strong. The Republicans wanted more than the Articles of Confederation, but not all that much more. Now, as I said, when Thomas Jefferson got elected President, he was glad the other side won, because he used that to buy Louisiana and send Lewis and Clark out, which are two of the most important things in the first half of the 19th century that were done. And Louisiana cost only $15 million, but that was one year's Federal budget at that time. Can you imagine what the Congress would say if I said, Hey, I have got a deal for you, and it just costs $1.9 trillion. Let us go do this ? The second battle was the battle to define the Union in terms of who was part of it. That is what Abraham Lincoln, you know, lived and died for. Gary Wills has argued brilliantly that he, in effect, rewrote the Constitution, the common meaning of the Constitution, for the Gettysburg Address, and brought it closer to the natural meaning of the words the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Then the third time we had to redefine the Union was under Woodrow Wilson Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, whom we had one, we moved into an industrial era, and we had this huge wave of immigrants coming into our cities, into our factories. And we had to define, number one, what the role of the Nation was in incorporating all these people and defining the conditions of civilized life child labor, minimum work week, all that stuff. And number two, what the role of the Government was in mediating between the industrial society and the civil society, which was the antitrust laws, in an economic sense, and in a larger sense, all that land Teddy Roosevelt set aside, when people first began to worry about pollution and using natural resources and all that. Teddy Roosevelt partly was able to be our first great conservation President, because people could see that growth in pollution could take away some of our natural resources. And then, of course, Wilson built on that with a social agenda and then defining our responsibilities in the world in terms of World War I and his argument for the League of Nations, which ultimately prevailed, even though he lost it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1913, "text": "And then the third great time was Roosevelt in the Depression and in World War II, and afterward, Roosevelt and Truman had this excuse me, the fourth time. You had the beginning, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson. Then you had the fourth great period, was this period, because what they were doing is, they had first to essentially bring the Government into the heart of the management of the economy. That is what the Federal Reserve and all that had been created, but we did not really manage the economy until the Depression. Then there was this whole idea that the responsibility of the Government was to help build and sustain a middle class society, everything from Social Security to the GI bill. Then, after the war, what they had to do was create the conditions of permanent involvement of America in the world, because Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson got us involved in the world in a leadership way, and then we just walked away from it and paid the consequences. So the cold war was on us after the war. So basically Roosevelt and Harry Truman built the structures within which America could lead and operate in an interdependent world. And I would argue that this period is the fifth great period of nation-defining. Because we have to define what the role of Government is in an information global society, both in terms of empowering people to make the most of their own lives, dealing with a far greater array of racial and religious and social diversity than we have ever had before, and dealing with a world that is very different than the world of the cold war, or the world before that that we used to move in and out of. So we had to have the permanence of involvement that we had in the cold war, with a greater degree of interdependence than we had in the cold war, because it is not a bipolar world. So we have a different set of challenges. And my election spawned a reaction in the Gingrich revolution, or the Gingrich counterrevolution, where if you go back and look at all their arguments for weakening the Federal Government, for toughening stands against immigrants, for turning away from the civil rights claims of gays, for refusing to strictly enforce the civil rights laws and strengthen laws protecting women, the whole social and economic agenda they had and Government is bad the private sector is good basically, they were trying to rewrite the Progressive Era that we built up over this time, and we, I think, essentially defeated them in three stages.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1914, "text": "One was when they shut the Government down, and we beat their budget back. Then we went on to get a bipartisan welfare reform and Balanced Budget Act and the biggest expansion in child health under the Gingrich Congress, the biggest expansion in child health since Medicaid. And three was when, after Gingrich was gone, I vetoed their big tax cut last year, and the public stuck with me. Now, I do not know if you saw it, but earlier this week Al Hunt had a piece on Rick Santorum saying, Where have all the conservatives gone? , in pointing out that all these guys with these rightwing records were out there running away from what they did, running as the new moderates. And in a way, that is a form of flattery. But the point is, every forward progress in this country has always sparked a reaction. And they won some of their reactions. I did not prevail on health care. I did not prevail on gays in the military. I have not won every fight I have been in. But the big things that would have taken us down and taken the country in a different direction the budget and Government shutdown, impeachment, and the big tax cut those three things were the seminal battles, and we prevailed. And if you look at it, if you look at the arguments that we are having, you can go all the way back to the beginning, and it is the same sort of thing that you saw in the fight that Washington and Marshall and Hamilton had with Jefferson and his crowd; that Lincoln had with the people that were against him, and you know, divided the country; that Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson had with the people against them; that FDR and Truman had with the people against them. And there is a story about him going to did I tell you this? In the New York Times, in the story about it, about how everybody that hates me or hates her or hates us both, this is their big deal, so they want to give money to Lazio. So he is at a fundraiser in Alabama Alabama. And there is a guy that says, I just cannot stand him. He says, She is a carpetbagger and he did not mean to New York; he meant to Arkansas and he is a scalawag. Now, the scalawags were the Southerners who supported the Union in the Civil War.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1915, "text": "And after the Civil War, all the Southerners who fought for the Confederacy were disenfranchised. So that guy was actually exhibit A of my argument that I am making. And one of the reasons they dislike me so intensely, that crowd, is they think I betrayed they worked very hard, under the cover of Reagan, being quite nice, to basically have the old, conservative, white southern male culture dominate the political life of America. And they see me as an apostate, which I welcome. I mean, we have this so when I take on the NRA or do something for gay rights, to them it is worse if I do it. So when he said I was a scalawag, the guy knew exactly what he was saying, and he did for anybody that read it, did a great service, because he was absolutely accurate. I have no quarrel with what he said. Like Roosevelt, you are a traitor to your class? But it is very interesting, when you see sometime when an adversary of yours says something that you 100 percent agree with, the guy is absolutely right. That is why he is against me, and that is what I have tried to be in my whole life. I mean, I had a grandfather with a fourth grade education, fifth grade education, who was for integration of the schools. And we were still having the Lincoln fight in the South, when I was a boy in school. They are trying to drag you out of here. I owe it to him. We will do one more. I just love Rolling Stone. They have been so good to me. I'd just like the long view and your philosophy about where we are going, what you have seen, and what you think about America. I want to ask you questions about, you know, what have you learned about the American people. You have had a unique exposure to them that nobody else has ever had. I will tell you this. When I leave office, on January 20th, I will leave even more idealistic than I was the day I took the oath of office, 8 years earlier. Because the American people almost they are fundamentally good, and they almost always get it right if they have enough time and enough information. Now, they have got to have enough information. They have got to have enough time. They have to have a way to access it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine0", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine-0", "publication_date": "10-10-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1933, "text": "Can you tell us a little bit about how you have gone about intellectually preparing for your second term as president? I am not sure it is an intellectual exercise as much as it is reminding myself of why I ran for president and tapping into what I consider to be the innate common sense of the American people. The truth is that most of the big issues that are going to make a difference in the life of this country for the next thirty or forty years are complicated and require tough decisions, but are not rocket science. that we have the most competitive workforce in the world, that we have a better education system, that we are investing in research and development, that we have got world-class infrastructure, that we are reducing our health care costs, and that we are expanding our exports. On issues like immigration, we have a pretty good sense of what is broken in the system and how to fix it. On climate change, it is a daunting task. But we know what releases carbon into the atmosphere, and we have tools right now that would start scaling that back, although we'd still need some big technological breakthrough. So the question is not, Do we have policies that might work? It is, can we mobilize the political will to act? And so, I have been spending a lot of time just thinking about how do I communicate more effectively with the American people? How do I try to bridge some of the divides that are longstanding in our culture? How do I project a sense of confidence in our future at a time when people are feeling anxious? They are more questions of values and emotions and tapping into people's spirit. Have you looked back in history, particularly at the second terms of other presidents, for inspiration? I have said this before, but one of the things that happened in the first term was that we had so many fires going on at the same time that we were focusing on policy and getting it right, which means that we were spending less time communicating with the American people about why we were doing what we were doing and how it tied together with our overarching desire of strengthening our middle class and making the economy work. I always read a lot of Lincoln, and I am reminded of his adage that, with public opinion, there is nothing you cannot accomplish; without it, you are not going to get very far.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfranklinfoerandchrishughes", "title": "Interview with Franklin Foer and Chris Hughes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-franklin-foer-and-chris-hughes", "publication_date": "26-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1934, "text": "And spending a lot more time in terms of being in a conversation with the American people as opposed to just playing an insider game here in Washington is an example of the kinds of change in orientation that I think we have undergone, not just me personally, but the entire White House. Let us talk about that in terms of guns. How do you speak to gun owners in a way that does not make them feel as if you are impinging upon their liberty? Well, in our comments today, I was very explicit about believing that the Second Amendment was important, that we respect the rights of responsible gun owners. In formulating our plans, Joe Biden met with a wide range of constituencies, including sportsmen and hunters. So much of the challenge that we have in our politics right now is that people feel as if the game here in Washington is completely detached from their day-to-day realities. So everything we do combines both a legislative strategy with a broad-based communications and outreach strategy to get people engaged and involved, so that it is not Washington over here and the rest of America over there. That does not mean that you do not have some real big differences. The House Republican majority is made up mostly of members who are in sharply gerrymandered districts that are very safely Republican and may not feel compelled to pay attention to broad-based public opinion, because what they are really concerned about is the opinions of their specific Republican constituencies. There are going to be a whole bunch of initiatives where I can get more than fifty percent support of the country, but I cannot get enough votes out of the House of Representatives to actually get something passed. You spoke last summer about your election potentially breaking the fever of the Republicans. The hope being that, once you were reelected, they would seek to do more than just block your presidency. Do you feel that you have made headway on that? And the Republican Party is undergoing a still-early effort at reexamining what their agenda is and what they care about. I think there is still shock on the part of some in the party that I won reelection. There is been a little bit of self-examination among some in the party, but that has not gone to the party as a whole yet.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfranklinfoerandchrishughes", "title": "Interview with Franklin Foer and Chris Hughes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-franklin-foer-and-chris-hughes", "publication_date": "26-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1935, "text": "And I think part of the reason that it is going to take a little bit of time is that, almost immediately after the election, we went straight to core issues around taxes and spending and size of government, which are central to how today's Republicans think about their party. Those issues are harder to find common ground on. But if we can get through this first period and arrive at a sensible package that reduces our deficits, stabilizes our debts, and involves smart reforms to Medicare and judicious spending cuts with some increased revenues and maybe tax reform, and you can get a package together that does not satisfy either Democrats or Republicans entirely, but puts us on a growth trajectory because it leaves enough spending on education, research and development, and infrastructure to boost growth now, but also deals with our long-term challenges on health care costs, then you can imagine the Republicans saying to themselves, OK, we need to get on the side of the American majority on issues like immigration. We need to make progress on rebuilding our roads and bridges. There are going to be some areas where that change is going to be very hard for Republicans. I suspect, for example, that already there are some Republicans who embrace the changing attitudes in the country as a whole around LGBT issues and same-sex marriage. But there is a big chunk of their constituency that is going to be deeply opposed to that, and they are going to have to figure out how they navigate what could end up being divisions in their own party. And that will play itself out over years. Are there any forces for reform within the Republican Party, people you have been able to establish some sort of working relationship with? Well, look, I have always believed that there are a bunch of Republicans of goodwill who would rather get something done than suffer through the sort of nasty atmosphere that prevails in Washington right now. It is not a fun time to be a member of Congress. And I think if you talk privately to Democrats and Republicans, particularly those who have been around for a while, they long for the days when they could socialize and introduce bipartisan legislation and feel productive. So I do not think the issue is whether or not there are people of goodwill in either party that want to get something done. I think what we really have to do is change some of the incentive structures so that people feel liberated to pursue some common ground. One of the biggest factors is going to be how the media shapes debates.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfranklinfoerandchrishughes", "title": "Interview with Franklin Foer and Chris Hughes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-franklin-foer-and-chris-hughes", "publication_date": "26-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1936, "text": "If a Republican member of Congress is not punished on Fox News or by Rush Limbaugh for working with a Democrat on a bill of common interest, then you will see more of them doing it. I think John Boehner genuinely wanted to get a deal done, but it was hard to do in part because his caucus is more conservative probably than most Republican leaders are, and partly because he is vulnerable to attack for compromising Republican principles and working with Obama. The same dynamic happens on the Democratic side. And I think at least leaders like myself-and I include Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi in this-are willing to buck the more absolutist-wing elements in our party to try to get stuff done. You inspired a lot of people in your first presidential campaign, and with your books, by talking about a new kind of politics. And now, four years later, it is a time in Washington that is characterized by nastiness more often that not. How do you reconcile those two things four years in? I believe that what I talked about in 2008 is still where the country is. And it describes my real-world view of how politics should work. I have always been suspicious of absolutism. I have always been suspicious of ideological litmus tests. I am not somebody-when I look back on American history-who believes that one party has got a monopoly on wisdom. So I guess the issue is not that the concept in 2008 was wrong. I think the issue is that we have these institutional barriers that prevent what the American people want from happening. Some of them are internal to Congress, like the filibuster in the Senate. Some of them have to do with our media and what gets attention. Nobody gets on TV saying, I agree with my colleague from the other party. People get on TV for calling each other names and saying the most outlandish things. Even on issues like the response to Hurricane Sandy, Chris Christie was getting hammered by certain members of his own party and media outlets for cooperating with me to respond to his constituents. That gives you an indication of how difficult I think the political environment has become for a lot of these folks. And I think what will change that is politicians seeing more upside to cooperation than downside, and right now that is not the case. Public opinion is going to be what changes that. When you talk about Washington, oftentimes you use it as a way to describe this type of dysfunction.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfranklinfoerandchrishughes", "title": "Interview with Franklin Foer and Chris Hughes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-franklin-foer-and-chris-hughes", "publication_date": "26-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1937, "text": "It can seem as if you are apportioning blame not just to one party, but to both parties- In fact, that is one of the biggest problems we have got in how folks report about Washington right now, because I think journalists rightly value the appearance of impartiality and objectivity. And so the default position for reporting is to say, A plague on both their houses. On almost every issue, it is , Well, Democrats and Republicans cannot agree -as opposed to looking at why is it that they cannot agree. Who exactly is preventing us from agreeing? And I want to be very clear here that Democrats, we have got a lot of warts, and some of the bad habits here in Washington when it comes to lobbyists and money and access really goes to the political system generally. It is not unique to one party. But when it comes to certain positions on issues, when it comes to trying to do what is best for the country, when it comes to really trying to make decisions based on fact as opposed to ideology, when it comes to being willing to compromise, the Democrats, not just here in this White House, but I would say in Congress also, have shown themselves consistently to be willing to do tough things even when it is not convenient, because it is the right thing to do. And we have not seen that same kind of attitude on the other side. Until Republicans feel that there is a real price to pay for them just saying no and being obstructionist, you will probably see at least a number of them arguing that we should keep on doing it. It worked for them in the 2010 election cycle, and I think there are those who believe that it can work again. I disagree with them, and I think the cost to the country has been enormous. But if you look at the most recent fiscal deal, I presented to Speaker Boehner a package that would have called for $1.2 trillion in new revenue-less than I actually think we need, but in the spirit of compromise-and over nine hundred billion dollars in spending cuts, some of which are very difficult. And yet, I am confident we could have gotten Democratic votes for that package, despite the fact that we were going after some Democratic sacred cows. And had we gotten that done, it would have been good for the economy, and I think it would have changed the political environment in this town.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfranklinfoerandchrishughes", "title": "Interview with Franklin Foer and Chris Hughes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-franklin-foer-and-chris-hughes", "publication_date": "26-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1938, "text": "Democrats, as painful as it was, as much as we got attacked by some of our core constituencies, were willing to step up because it was the right thing to do. And the other side could not do that. It seems as if you are relying more on executive orders to get around these problems. You have done it for gun control, for immigration. Has your view on executive authority changed now that you have been president for four years? I continue to believe that whenever we can codify something through legislation, it is on firmer ground. It is not going to be reversed by a future president. So a great example of that is the work we did on do not ask, do not tell. There were advocates in the LGBT community who were furious at me, saying, Why do not you just sign with a pen ordering the Pentagon to do this? And my argument was that we could build a coalition to get this done, that having the Pentagon on our side and having them work through that process so that they felt confident they could continue to carry out their missions effectively would make it last and make it work for the brave men and women, gays and lesbians, who were serving not just now but in the future. And the proof of the pudding here is that not only did we get the law passed, but it is caused almost no controversy. It is been almost thoroughly embraced, whereas had I just moved ahead with an executive order, there would have been a huge blowback that might have set back the cause for a long time. But what I do see is that there are certain issues where a judicious use of executive power can move the argument forward or solve problems that are of immediate-enough import that we cannot afford not to do it. And today, just to take an example, the notion that we would not be collecting information on gun violence just to understand how it happens, why it happens, what might reduce it-that makes no sense. We should not require legislation for the CDC to be able to gather information about one of the leading causes of death in the United States of America. Have you ever fired a gun? Yes, in fact, up at Camp David, we do skeet shooting all the time. Not the girls, but oftentimes guests of mine go up there. And I have a profound respect for the traditions of hunting that trace back in this country for generations. And I think those who dismiss that out of hand make a big mistake.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfranklinfoerandchrishughes", "title": "Interview with Franklin Foer and Chris Hughes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-franklin-foer-and-chris-hughes", "publication_date": "26-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1939, "text": "Part of being able to move this forward is understanding the reality of guns in urban areas are very different from the realities of guns in rural areas. And if you grew up and your dad gave you a hunting rifle when you were ten, and you went out and spent the day with him and your uncles, and that became part of your family's traditions, you can see why you'd be pretty protective of that. So it is trying to bridge those gaps that I think is going to be part of the biggest task over the next several months. And that means that advocates of gun control have to do a little more listening than they do sometimes. Sticking with the culture of violence, but on a much less dramatic scale: I am wondering if you, as a fan, take less pleasure in watching football, knowing the impact that the game takes on its players. I am a big football fan, but I have to tell you if I had a son, I'd have to think long and hard before I let him play football. And I think that those of us who love the sport are going to have to wrestle with the fact that it will probably change gradually to try to reduce some of the violence. In some cases, that may make it a little bit less exciting, but it will be a whole lot better for the players, and those of us who are fans maybe will not have to examine our consciences quite as much. I tend to be more worried about college players than NFL players in the sense that the NFL players have a union, they are grown men, they can make some of these decisions on their own, and most of them are well-compensated for the violence they do to their bodies. You read some of these stories about college players who undergo some of these same problems with concussions and so forth and then have nothing to fall back on. That is something that I'd like to see the NCAA think about.3 The last question is about Syria. I wonder if you can speak about how you personally, morally, wrestle with the ongoing violence there. Every morning, I have what is called the PDB-presidential daily briefing-and our intelligence and national security teams come in here and they essentially brief me on the events of the previous day. And a big chunk of my day is occupied by news of war, terrorism, ethnic clashes, violence done to innocents.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfranklinfoerandchrishughes", "title": "Interview with Franklin Foer and Chris Hughes", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-franklin-foer-and-chris-hughes", "publication_date": "26-01-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1943, "text": "We just had a few things we wanted to get your views on. What has Sullivan told you about his views on Roe versus Wade? Can you straighten that out? Exactly what you heard him say when he was announced. He has supported my position 100 percent. The only thing he said, and that is what he said. So, you do not envision dropping him under any circumstances? I have not heard one single person suggest that. If Roe versus Wade is overturned, as you support, how concerned would you be about women being allowed to have abortions in cases of rape, incest, and -- -- We will have to wait and see what the decision is on Roe versus Wade. Obviously you have to comply with the law, and what the law is is defined by the courts. What about this new Brady option we are hearing about on S&L's -- the idea of charging for insurance for depositors? It has not come to me as a formal recommendation. And so, I am not going to say what I am going to do, but that is one option. I will answer the question with a question. Is it a tax when the person pays the fee to go to Yosemite Park? Using the park -- there will be a lively debate on this, but I would simply leave that rhetorical question out as one way of answering your question. I do not want to signal that this is what we are going to do. I am not trying to suggest that. But it sounds like you are receptive to the idea, though? I am receptive to any idea that will solve this problem. I am not receptive to a tax increase. Governor Sununu said over the weekend -- he was talking about whether your no-tax pledge increase is a 1-year increase or is it throughout your term. Can you sort of clarify your thinking on that? I am not thinking beyond anything other than to say I will not raise taxes, and I have got to stay with that approach. And again, we are going to, you know, just send a proposal up there that solves this budget problem without raising taxes. And the fundamental reason for that is, I want to keep the economy going. I want to keep the recovery -- not recovery, but the growth going in this economy. I do not want to kill off investment or employment opportunity. And the higher the taxes, the more you do that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeraldboydthenewyorktimesandkatherinelewisthehoustonpost", "title": "Interview With Gerald Boyd of the New York Times and Katherine Lewis of the Houston Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gerald-boyd-the-new-york-times-and-katherine-lewis-the-houston-post", "publication_date": "25-01-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1944, "text": "So, I really feel strong on that particular point, and I have not thought beyond 1 year, Jerry, or anything of that nature. You mentioned in your Inaugural Address that you wanted to eliminate the scourge of drugs. How can you do that? I mean, what do you have in mind when President Reagan was unable to eliminate drugs? I think the elimination of drugs is going to stem from vigorous change in the society's approach to narcotics. The answer to the problem of drugs lies more on solving the demand side of the equation than it does on the supply side, than it does on interdiction or sealing the borders or something of that nature. And so, it is going to have to be a major educational effort, and the private sector and the schools are all going to have to be involved in this. I would like to think that we can funnel more money into it, but I also have this overriding problem of the deficit to contend with. So, the question is, we cannot permit the measure of concern on any issue -- drugs or education or environment -- to be determined simply by how much Federal money goes after the problem. We cannot do it. We have got to use this office to encourage all elements in our society to participate in the fight against drugs, in the fight to improve education, or working to make the environment better. Because we are dealing with scarce resources in terms of Federal money. And the law has constraints on all of us in that regard. Secretary Baker said in the confirmation hearing that he was concerned about going ahead with the Moscow summit on human rights in 1991. Are you concerned about that? Well, I think that we need to look for performance. And I think the Soviets know that we feel this way after the Secretary's testimony. And I think that Mr. Gorbachev knows of my commitment to human rights because I had several meetings with him. And I'd say that there has been definite improvement in some ways there. But let us see what develops as we move towards that conference date. What are your views on Mr. Greenspan's comments on inflation from yesterday? I have not read them yet, and I want to be sure to read them. I must say I am encouraged that the markets, at least recently, have been saying that things are reasonably stable and certainly not there is no signals out there in the markets that this economy is in real trouble.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeraldboydthenewyorktimesandkatherinelewisthehoustonpost", "title": "Interview With Gerald Boyd of the New York Times and Katherine Lewis of the Houston Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gerald-boyd-the-new-york-times-and-katherine-lewis-the-houston-post", "publication_date": "25-01-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1945, "text": "I have not talked to Alan lately, but I do not want to see us move so strongly against fear of inflation that we impede growth. We have to keep expanding opportunities for the working men and women of this country. I just saw this little summary of what Greenspan said. That is what I was told. That is why I do not want to get into commenting on his -- -- Visit to China Are we going to China? We may have it. We may have something on that -- you know, yea or nay -- before the close of business today. There is talk that you are hitting the ground walking. Where'd you get we ? November. There is a lot of talk that you are hitting the ground walking rather than running, that you are taking -- or that you are starting slow. Are you concerned about that? No, but you are not moving ahead on the budget. You are not moving ahead on any agenda. Moving ahead on the budget -- I mean, we are spending a lot of time on it. I know we have got some meetings -- meeting with budget team, 10 a.m. But you mean in terms of sending up legislation or -- -- Yes, and that there is no sort of an active agenda that you are pursuing from day one and that you are putting things off, you are studying things, you are waiting. Well, I have been a President since January 20th, and I think it is a little early to make conclusions one way or another on all that. The environmentalists say they are going to be making a litmus test out of ANWR . Is there any chance you are going to reconsider the Interior seat? I am in favor of prudent development there. I remember the pipeline. I remember the arguments against it. And I also know the effect it did not have on the caribou. You may remember that. Phrases that lived on from campaign history about caribou bumping up against the pipeline. A lot's been made about how you are doing things differently -- you have a different way of doing business. Was it important to you to particularly demonstrate that in this first week in office? Not to do it differently, but it is important to me to do it my way. And that is what we are trying to do, and what I will do. I have to do that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeraldboydthenewyorktimesandkatherinelewisthehoustonpost", "title": "Interview With Gerald Boyd of the New York Times and Katherine Lewis of the Houston Post", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-gerald-boyd-the-new-york-times-and-katherine-lewis-the-houston-post", "publication_date": "25-01-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1973, "text": "That is the stuff you are going to remember is taking them to the park and pushing them on a swing and hearing them laugh. That is going to be what is most precious in your life, and you just want to make sure you do not miss out on that. Let us talk about My Brother's Keeper. It is an initiative that you said gets to the very heart of why you ran for president. The truth is is that a lot of young men of color are not doing well, partly because they do not have dads in their lives, partly because they do not have networks of support. It is important to me partly because, you know, I grew up without a dad, and I know that I went through my own struggles. You talked about the cycle, but you have broken the cycle for your own family. I try every day for Michelle and my girls to be what my father was not for my mother and me. Does this I mean, the fact that you did not have a dad has it changed your life as a father yourself? Yeah, you know, I I made a decision in young adulthood that it was going to be important for me to make sure that I was there for my kids. I have really tried to make sure that I did not miss parent-teacher conferences, that I did not miss the ballet recitals or the soccer games. I tried to be disciplined about, if I am in town, being home for dinner every single night. And I think it is made a difference. You know, the one thing the girls know about me is I love them to death. How do you think your girls would describe you? I think they would say that I am a good, fun dad who teeters on the edge of being embarrassing sometimes. You know, we set, you know, some pretty firm rules early on in their lives about cleaning up after themselves and making their beds and waking up on time. They have got their acts together. And we really do not have to check on their homework or nag them too much about stuff. They handle their business. So we are really proud of them. Right. What is harder, being and I think my dad would maybe have a comment on this but being a protective father of teenagers or president of the United States?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjennabushhagernbcstoday", "title": "Interview with Jenna Bush Hager of NBC's Today", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jenna-bush-hager-nbcs-today", "publication_date": "12-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1974, "text": "Well, as you know from experience and you may have chafed under this a little bit they do have a Secret Service detail, which I have joked the main reason I ran for reelection was to sustain that all the way through their high school years. You know, I do not worry too much about their social lives. They are growing up in a place I once called home. And my sister Barbara and I gave Sasha and Malia a tour when their father became president. I actually met them in this very room when your wife brought them here to tour their new home. And I taught them how to slide down the banister. So you can thank me later. Yes, I very much appreciate that. They have not broken any bones, thanks to those lessons that you gave. Yeah, I taught them the proper way, right? Safety first in this house. One of the things we said is to enjoy every minute. You know, you are living history. But are they enjoying their life here? What is been great is the fact that they have been able to have a pretty normal life. They have got great friends. They have got sleepovers here. They go over to their friends' house to sleep over. They go to the mall. And what I have been really proud of is the fact that they have not gotten an attitude. They do not take this for granted. Finally, the main point of that letter was to, you know, ignore the polls And I know that for Barbara and me it was hard to listen to people criticize our dear dad. Can they stay away from that? Do they or do they take the criticism to heart? They do not really feel deeply burdened by some of the chatter in the news, because it is really not part of their lives. But I am sure that the letter you wrote, you and Barbara wrote, and the example you guys set sure helped them a lot. And Chelsea Clinton, you know, had dinner with Malia one time, which was really generous. You guys are a fairly exclusive club of people who had to put up with this nonsense and turned out to be just amazing young women.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjennabushhagernbcstoday", "title": "Interview with Jenna Bush Hager of NBC's Today", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jenna-bush-hager-nbcs-today", "publication_date": "12-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1975, "text": "Let us talk about ISIS to begin with. Did they bring down that Russian plane? Well, we do not know that yet. I think we are still looking at all the details. Any kind of aviation tragedy like this requires a lot of forensic work. It becomes more difficult when we are not actively involved on the ground. We are offering full cooperation with the Egyptians, with the Russians and others. But a lot of this is peace work. But there is a possibility that they may have taken place. A lot of the intelligence community seems to think it is more of a probability. Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on House Intelligence Committee thinks it is. And he told me last week that this would mean that ISIS has fully eclipsed Al Qaeda as the greatest terror threat in the world. Number two, what we have known for a long time, since the duration of my presidency and before that, is that a small network of people if they have got some skills and bomb making capabilities can carry out some big damage. And this is why we have ramped up our aviation security not just here in the United States but overseas. If there is a carrier coming here, then we are working with that airlines and that airport to make sure that they have got certain procedures. Now, we do not fly directly over the Sinai to the United States, and as a consequence we do not have those same arrangements at those airports. But this is something that we have known is a consistent vulnerability in this modern era. And that is part of the reason why we invest so much in not only putting safeguards in place but also learning each time there is an incident like this to see how this might have happened. But if ISIS with affiliates in so many countries right now, even Afghanistan, if they decided now to go to international terror, that is a game changer, is not it? Well I have to tell you, ENTITY AQAP in Yemen Al Qaeda in Yemen we know has had plots consistently over the last several years to try to bring down an airliner. I think that one of the challenges of these international terrorist organizations is that they do not have to have a huge amount of personnel. If there is a crack in the system, then they potentially can exploit it. And they are looking for these cracks to exploit. What makes ISIL the challenge that it is right now is primarily the fact that they are occupying territory in two countries that are not governed effectively in those spaces.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1976, "text": "All right, so in Iraq, when you get into the Sunni areas of Iraq there is not strong governance. And their ability to sustain themselves in those areas are the primary and principle concern we have. with respect to ISIL. that Vladimir Putin will start to take them on? Well Putin, I think, from the start has been sincere in seeing ISIL as a threat. The reason he went into Syria is not primarily because of ISIL, but to prop up Assad. And part of our goal is to underscore for him and for everyone in the region that ISIL is the primary threat and you cannot solve the ISIL problem if, in fact, you have got a country that is governed by somebody who is illegitimate and that the majority of Syrians reject. Can you convince him? What is interesting is we have already seen I think a growing awareness on the part of the Russians after several weeks now of fairly high paced bombing that they are not going to win this militarily. I think they understand that. They may not admit it publicly, but you are already starting to see indications of that. And it is a modestly positive sign that they have engaged with us, the Saudis the Turks and others to try to broker a political transition plan. Now, they have not yet come to the conclusion that Assad cannot be part of a new Syria. And I think it is going to take some time for them to get there. But our goal here, and John Kerry, I think's, done outstanding work in starting to create a platform and a set of principles whereby we agree that a political s solution is what is required, that it has to be inclusive, that there is going to be a transition phase. And, by bringing in the Iranians and the Russians, which is tough for us and tough for a number of our coalition allies they are now at the table. We are starting to shape who are the groups that could responsibly govern Syria.  And some of your critics say, even your friendly critics say, like Fareed Zakaria, that what you have on the ground now is not going to be enough. Every couple of months you are going to be faced with the same choice of back down or double down. I think what is true is that this has always been a multi-year project precisely because the governance structures in the Sunni areas of Iraq are weak, and there are none in Syria.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1977, "text": "And we do not have ground forces there in in sufficient numbers so simply march into Al-Raqqah in Syria and clean the whole place out. And as a consequence, we have always understood that our goal has to be militarily constraining ISIL's capabilities, cutting off their supply lines, cutting off their financing at the same time as we are putting a political track together in Syria and fortifying the best impulses in Baghdad so that we can, not just win militarily, but also win by improving governance- But ISIS is gaining strength, are not they? Well, no, I do not think they are gaining strength. What is true is that from the start our goal has been first to contain, and we have contained them. They have not gained ground in Iraq. And in Syria it they will come in, they will leave. But you do not see this systematic march by ISIL across the terrain. What we have not yet been able to do is to completely decapitate their command and control structures. We have made some progress in trying to reduce the flow of foreign fighters. But one of the things that I will be talking about when I see President Erdogan in Turkey and discuss this with the G20 is that we have still got to do more work in controlling the border so that the influx of foreign fighters is much more reduced. And you know, what we also have to do is frankly work with the Iraqis to strengthen their capabilities. Because one of the big challenges throughout this campaign has been that the Iraqi military has proven itself to be effective in protecting Baghdad. But it is much harder for them, because they are primarily Shia, to move out into Sunni areas. And part of our goal has to be to recruit more effective Sunni partners in Iraq to really go on offense rather than simply engage in defense. So what do you think when you hear someone like Ben Carson get up in a debate and say, Hey, this would be easy. We can take ISIL out just by bombing their oil fields in Anbar, that is what a general told him. What I think is that he does not know much about it. And look ENTITY, I think it is fair to say that over the last several years I have had access to all the best military minds in the country and all the best foreign policy minds in the country. And I am not running for office. And so my only interest is in success.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1978, "text": "And if I am down in the Situation Room talking with people who have worked in these regions and have run major military operations from the chairman of my joint chiefs of staff Joe Dunford to, you know, individuals like General Allen, who was involved in Iraqi operations back in 2007/2008, and they do not think it is easy, then it is probably not easy. And what we have been able to do is to shape a strategy that first and foremost contained the momentum that ISIL had gained. We are now in a position where slowly, incrementally we are pushing back against areas where we know we have got some solid partners like the Kurds and the Peshmerga. But until we get the Syria political situation resolved and until Assad is no longer a lightning rod for Sunnis in Syria and the that entire region is not longer a proxy war for Shia/Sunni conflict we are going to continue to have problems. That could take a generation. That is not going to happen anytime soon with making sure that ISIL continues to shrink in its scope of operations until it no longer poses the kind of threat that it does, not just primarily to us, but to neighbors in the region like Jordan or Saudi Arabia and that the humanitarian crisis that is taking place with millions of people who are fleeing the country that that can be relieved. You are not running for office. But as you know, the Republican candidates are putting your foreign policy on the ballot. If you were up on that stage, how would you respond? Well, what I would say is that America is not weaker; it is stronger around the world than when I came into office. And that can be measured by the influence that we have on a whole range of transnational issues, the cooperation that we get on not just counterterrorism, but on critical issues like climate change the work that we are doing in Asia that I will be traveling to talk about in terms of creating the kinds of rule based systems that preserve our freedom of navigation and try to push back against Chinese efforts that may threaten the peace and prosperity of the region. You know, there was a lot of talk among these Republicans about the success of Putin's strategy in the Ukraine. But in fact, because we were able to mobilize the entire international community, we have been able to you know, not only reduce the fighting in Ukraine, but now we are still on track to potentially resolve that peacefully.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1979, "text": "So you know, one of the things that is striking to me, ENTITY, is that pub public opinion around the world about the United States is significantly higher than it was when I came into office. We have not seen the kinds of big threats against the United States that sadly we saw during something like 9/11. We have been able to take more than 180,000 troops or 150, 60, 70,000 troops out of harm's way while still maintaining coalition partnerships. And in everywhere from Latin America to Africa we helped to shape the agenda for a more peaceful, prosperous world. So when you hear rhetoric like this, ENTITY, about America's never been in greater danger that is rhetoric. But when you think about it, when you reflect on it, where have you fallen short? You did not expect to have several thousand troops in Afghanistan, more than 3,500 troops in Iraq. Well, I think actually in Afghanistan let us take Afghanistan as an example. I do not think any of us were ever under any illusion that we could withdraw every single troop out of Afghanistan and that country, which is one of the poorest in the world, that has gone through 30 or 40 year so fighting would be completely stable. Our very premise, our strategy was always that we were going to have to provide the kinds of advice the kinds of training, the kinds of military support that would be required so that this nascent democracy began to work. And that is exactly what we are doing. I when I consider where we have fallen short, what is absolutely true is that in the Middle East and in Syria in particular the you know, enormous changes that took place post Arab Spring were ones that do not happen, you know, every ten years. And we have not been able to get the kind of success on the ground with countries that were fragile to begin with that were governed by dictators to create the kind of civil society that would allow for a functioning, if not perfectly democratic, then at least civil society and government. And when you hear the Republicans talk about well, you know, we'd go in and fix this right away. We are going to win in Middle East. What is clear is that you do not have any sense of how difficult it is. And they do not have a lot of sense of history, including the recent history of our efforts in places like Afghanistan and Iraq. Donald Trump is speaking about history. He wants to bring back Operation Wetback from President Eisenhower and deportation force.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1980, "text": "What would that mean? Well, I think the name of the operation tells you something about the dangers of looking backwards. And the notion that we are going to deport 11, 12 million people from this country, first of all I have no idea where Mr. Trump thinks the money's going to come from. It would cost us hundreds of billions of dollars to execute that. Imagine the images on the screen flashed around the world as we were dragging parents away from their children and putting them in what, detention centers and then systematically sending them out. Nobody thinks that that is realistic, but more importantly, that is not who we are as Americans. What do you think when you hear people cheer for that? Well, what I think is that there is always been a strain of anti-immigrant sentiment in America, ironically from folks who themselves two generations back or even one generation back were immigrants themselves. And it is the job of leaders not to play into that sentiment. And given what happened in 2007, 2008, given the fact that despite the recovery, I think people still have some post-traumatic stress and are still concerned about prospects for jobs and economic security in the future it is easy to play on those fears. But that is not that is not what you want from your president. And to their credit Republican and as well as Democratic senators and or presidents in the past, including Ronald Reagan, including George H.W. Bush, including George W. Bush have understood that we are a nation of laws, but we are also a nation of immigrants and that proposing radical and necessarily cruel solutions to a problem that can be solved by some good, old-fashioned legislation of the sort that passed on a bipartisan basis in the Senate and I would've been able to sign two years ago if the House Republicans had allowed it to come to the floor 'cause there was a majority on that floor to vote for it we do not want I think, a president or any person in a position of leadership to play on those kinds of fears. You say we are a nation of laws. On the issue of Guantanamo, one of your big promises, closing Guantanamo Speaker Ryan says you cannot close it on your own, do not have the authority. Do you have the authority to close it on your own? Well, here is what I know is that we need to close it. If you take a survey of retired generals folks who are currently in uniform they will tell you that this is a consistent recruitment tool for jihadists.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1981, "text": "It is contrary to our values. It costs huge amounts of money. So it is my job to, first and foremost, work with Congress to try to find a solution. And what we have been able to do during the course of this administration is to systematically transfer and draw down the numbers who are there. My hope is that by the end of this year we are seeing close to under 100 prisoners remaining and detainees remaining. And when they say no? Well they I am not going to one of the things that I have been consistently trying to do is to give Congress the chance to do the right thing before I then look at my next options. And Congress is going to have an opportunity, I think when they look at the numbers, when they look at how much it costs for us to detain these individuals, when they hear from both current and retired military officers who say this is not what we should be doing they are going to have the ability to make their own assumptions. So you are not ruling out doing it on your own? My job right now is to make sure that Congress has a chance to look at a serious plan and look at all the facts and we will take it from there. Will you rule out executive action? We will take it from there. You have called Hillary Clinton a good friend, strong friend, one of America's finest secretaries of state and said she'd make a great president. ENTITY, I am not going to make endorsements when, you know, I have said in the past it is important for the process to play itself out. Would he make a great president? You know, I think Bernie is capturing a sense among the American people that they want to know the government's on their side, that it is not bought and paid for, that you know, our focus has to be on hard working, middle class Americans not getting' a raw deal. I think Martin O'Malley has important things to say. I am confident that we are going to have a good, strong Democratic candidate, and that they will be able to win in November. Finally-- when you were a student, you spoke out, you protested apartheid in South Africa. If you were on the campus of University of Missouri today, would you be a protestor? Without knowing all the facts I have read enough to know that there is clearly a problem at-- the University of Missouri. And, that is not just coming from students. That is coming from some faculty.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1982, "text": "And I think it is entirely appropriate for students in a thoughtful, peaceful way to protest-- what they see as injustices or inattention to serious problems in their midst. I want-- an activist student body just like I want an activist citizenry And, you know I'd rather see them err on the side of activism than being passive. I think that what you saw with the University of Missouri football team, and the coach, you know, standing up for something that they think is right-- harkens back to a powerful tradition that helped to bring about great change in this country. See, that is what I wanted to ask you- --and making sure that you are engaging in a dialogue, because that is also how change happens. The civil rights movement happened because there was civil disobedience, because people were willing to get to go to jail, because there were events like Bloody Sunday. But it was also because the leadership of the movement consistently stayed open to the possibility of reconciliation and sought to understand the views even views that were appalling to them of the other side. Because there does seem to be a strain on some of these campuses of a kind of militant political correctness where you shut down the other side. And I disagree with that. You know, I have now got, you know, daughters who-- one is about to go to college-- the other one's-- you know, going to be on her way in a few years. And then we talk about this at the dinner table. And I say to them, Listen, if you hear somebody using a racial epithet, if you hear somebody who is anti-Semitic, if you see an injustice, I want you to speak out. And I want you to be firm and clear and I want you to protect people who may not have voices themselves. I want you to be somebody who is strong and sees themselves as somebody who is looking out for the vulnerable. But I tell 'em-- I want you also to be able to listen. I do not want you to think that a display of your strength is simply shutting other people up. And that part of your ability to bring about change is going to be by engagement and understanding the viewpoints and the arguments of the other side.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1983, "text": "And so when I hear, for example, you know, folks on college campuses saying, We are not going to allow somebody to speak on our campus because we disagree with their ideas or we feel threatened by their ideas-- you know, I think that is a recipe for dogmatism. And so, but I want to be clear here 'cause, and it is a tough issue because, you know, there are two values that I care about. I care about civil rights and I care about kids not being discriminated against or having swastikas painted on their doors or nooses hung-- thinking it is a joke. I think it is entirely appropriate for-- any institution, including universities, to say, Do not walk around in black face. It offends people. Do not wear a headdress and beat your chest if Native American students have said, you know, 'This hurts us. This bothers us. But we also have these values of free speech. And it is not free speech in the abstract. The purpose of that kind of free speech is to make sure that we are forced to use argument and reason and words in making our democracy work. And you know, the you do not have to be fearful of somebody spouting bad ideas. Make the case as to why they are wrong. That is how-- that is how things work in-- in-- in a democracy. And I do worry if young people start getting trained to think that if somebody says something I do not like if somebody says something that hurts my feelings that my only recourse is to shut them up, avoid them, push them away, call on a higher power to protect me from that. You know, and yes, does that put more of a burden on minority students or gay students or Jewish students or others in a majority that may be blind to history and blind to their hurt? It may put a slightly higher burden on them. But you are not going to make the kinds of deep changes in society-- that those students want, without taking it on, in a full and clear and courageous way. And you know, I tell you I trust Malia in an argument. If a knucklehead on a college campus starts talking about her, I guarantee you she will give as good as she gets. Sounds like you have been having some good dinner table conversations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabc", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc", "publication_date": "12-09-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1984, "text": "You first time met with President Putin in Slovenia, and now in Slovakia is going to be your 12th meeting. Do we need a fresh start? And what do you expect for this meeting? First of all, we do not need a fresh start in my personal relationship with Vladimir Putin. It is important so that we can he and I can have good talks, and we can understand each other and understand the decision-making process. Vladimir makes a lot of decisions. And I make a lot of decisions. And I like to talk about him about, Well, why did you do this? or Why did you do that? And I suspect he likes to ask me the same questions. Secondly, we have got the framework for a good strategic relationship, which is important. The campaign came, and in American public life, I mean whether it be foreign policy or domestic policy, often you kind of shut down when the campaign comes. People were not really sure who was going to be the next President for a while. I'd call it reinvigorate. We have got the framework, and it gives us a chance to move it forward. Your father was a pilot, was a hero of Second War. What the best the people who can to those who won the war. What can you say to the patriots?  My answer is, is that, thank you for your sacrifice. The Russian veterans the people of Russia went through an unbelievable period of time of sacrifice. The stories of courage and bravery against the onslaught of the Nazis was really fantastic. I mean, it was a great lesson for bravery. And same in our country they call it the Greatest Generation ; that is what they call the World War II people because they sacrificed. And it still this world still requires sacrifice in different ways. And I am looking forward to the celebrations. The wartime alliance, do you have lessons for us now? We have again the common enemy. He sees clearly the common enemy. And we will talk about that common enemy that is still active. The enemy there is a set of beliefs they believe in, and I believe the best way to defeat those beliefs is by spreading freedom and democracy. Free societies spend more time listening to their people and the demands of their people as opposed to being able to fight and spread in this case fighting an ideology that is an ideology of hatred as this as your good country full fully understands. American-Russian relationship what was the biggest success during your first term? And what are your plans for next 4 years?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrussianitartass", "title": "Interview With Russian ITAR-TASS", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-russian-itar-tass", "publication_date": "18-02-2005", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1988, "text": "VH1 Save The Music, you have been involved for a while. When did you first hear about the program, and why did it draw you? Well, I am trying to remember whether I first heard about it from my wife or whether I read something about it. But I actually wrote a letter to John Sykes because I was so excited about what they were doing. I had been in school music when I was a young person, starting at the age of 9. And I had been really, really upset about all these schools dropping their music programs when I was Governor. And Hillary and I redid the school standards in Arkansas. We tried very hard to protect the music programs and the arts programs and the physical education programs for the people who were not in team sports. And so I realized that all over the country these schools were under more and more financial pressure, and they thought that maybe the path of least resistance was just to get rid of the music programs. And so here was someone trying to do something about it. Growing up I know, I have watched a lot of tapes on you. We did Rock and Roll ENTITY a while back with you. I loved it. They gave me a copy of that. Music education was really important to you, obviously, growing up Looking at where you are now, arguably one of the most important people on the planet, what did music education do for you, and how has it come to play in your life now? Well, first of all, it gave me an outlet for all this energy I had. It gave me a constructive way to be creative. It also taught me discipline, and it taught me that to create something beautiful required hard work and discipline. It taught me how to be to create alone and also how to work with a group, in a band, a jazz band or a combo. It is such a wonderful when I was a kid and I'd have a tough time, as long as I could play, I could always be okay. I could just be in a private place. And it fueled my imagination. And it gave me an appreciation of things in life that has stayed with me to the present day. I can still go in my music room that Hillary built me upstairs in the White House and play for 15 or 20 minutes, and all the cares of the world go away. So you guys have got to remember that when you are playing. Clinton said it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrebeccarankinvh1newyorkcity", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Rebecca Rankin of VH1 in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-rebecca-rankin-vh1-new-york-city", "publication_date": "16-06-2000", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1989, "text": "Let us talk about, there was a resolution passed in Congress a few days ago, unanimous resolution, saying that music education was extremely important. Why is it so important that this was passed, and what is it going to do in the future? Well, I think it was important that it was passed because it shows that the Representatives of the people of both parties have now are acknowledging that it is important and it is a problem because there are so many schools that do not offer it anymore. And I think it will tend to increase public awareness of this, public support for maintaining the music programs. The ENTITY's Advisory Commission on Music and the Arts did a study a couple of years ago, and Hillary was the honorary chair of the committee. They found that local pressure, parental involvement, community involvement was the single most important factor in either keeping or restoring music programs to the schools. I think also, though, the Congress and the ENTITY have a responsibility to keep putting as much money out there to the schools to pay for their other expenses as possible the buildings, the teachers, to have smaller classes so the schools will have the money they need for the music programs. But you know, there is lots and lots of research on this now which shows that if a good school music program increases academic performance, that a lot of young people learn in different ways and are dramatically stimulated by music. So that is another reason we ought to be for this. It actually will help the overall learning enterprise. That is an important point because I think everybody thinks of it as just an art, and it stops there We have had a lot of artists helping us this week with VH1 Save The Music week and the Today Show. Mariah Carey was out yesterday; A.J. McLean from the Backstreet Boys; the Goo Goo Dolls. Today we have Bon Jovi playing at the Today Show in Rockefeller Center. I love Bon Jovi. I am a music fan of his. I like his acting. He is doing very well in the movies now. He is been to the White House to visit Hillary and me on several occasions. And I am pleased for his success, and I am grateful that he is helping today. What does it say to the public to have such important sort of star power behind a program like VH1 Save The Music? Well, I hope that it increases the public's awareness. I mean, these people could all be doing something else.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrebeccarankinvh1newyorkcity", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Rebecca Rankin of VH1 in New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-rebecca-rankin-vh1-new-york-city", "publication_date": "16-06-2000", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1995, "text": "Next week, ENTITY makes his first visit to Europe as ENTITY. a summit with NATO heads of government, talks on the Middle East with , and meetings with the Governments of Spain and Italy. Today, ENTITY has invited us to the White House to discuss the issues facing the West. It is the first time an American ENTITY has met European journalists in a television program of this kind. ENTITY's travels come at a pregnant time. He leaves an America somewhat doubtful about its world role as it absorbs the sudden, final collapse in Indochina. He faces a Western Europe hungry for reassurance, but again somewhat doubtful of America's present will and capacity to back up that reassurance. ENTITY, we are gathered in the room from which Franklin Roosevelt delivered his famous fireside chats to rekindle the American spirit during the Great Depression of the thirties. Do you see your travels to Europe as necessary to rekindle the spirit of the Atlantic Alliance? I think the trip has a perhaps broader aspect or implication. First, I should say that the closeness between the United States and the Western European countries has a long history and an important future. The trip, as I see it, is aimed at solidifying and making more cohesive this relationship-economically, diplomatically, and militarily. I also see it as an opportunity for us to take a look at the past and consult about the future and to make our personal relationships even better. And if we approach it with that attitude or with those viewpoints, it is my opinion that we, as well as the other allies, can make substantial progress. So many commentators see the Europeans in need of some reassurance. Do you feel that is part of your mission? I am sure that my presence there, and what we intend to say, and what we intend to indicate by our actions, will be very, very helpful in this regard. Has your handling of the Mayaguez incident, in effect, done some of that work for you by reaffirming America's will to respond when challenged? I am sure that both domestically in the United States, as well as worldwide, the handling of the Mayaguez incident should be a firm assurance that the United States is capable and has the will to act in emergencies, in challenges. I think this is a clear, clear indication that we are not only strong but we have the will and the capability of moving.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1996, "text": "ENTITY, it seems to me that the handling of the Mayaguez incident proved your own determined character, but not necessarily the American will. It was short, and it did not need any Congressional decisions. What has weakened the credibility of the American commitments, I think, in the eyes of the allies are these restrictions and limitations that Congress has put on the Presidency. And then there is also feeling that a kind of neo-isolationism is rising in Congress. I was wondering how you would deal with this doubt in American credibility? Now, I believe there are some new indications that indicate that Congress is taking another look, and perhaps the Mayaguez incident will be helpful in that regard. There were some limitations, but we lived within them. But it was rather short, and it did not require an extensive commitment. But there are some things taking place in the Congress today that I think ought to reassure our allies that the United States--ENTITY, the Congress, and the American people--can and will work together in an extended commitment. Let me give you an illustration. This past week, the House of Representatives, in a very, very important vote, defeated an amendment that would have forced the withdrawal of 70,000 U.S. military personnel on a worldwide basis. And of course, that would have affected our commitment to NATO. And the vote in the House of Representatives was 311 to 95, as I recall. It was a much more favorable vote this year than the vote a year ago. I think this is an indication that the American people are getting out from under the trauma of our problems in Vietnam. Senator Mansfield--the Democratic leader in the United States Senate--has always, in the past, been demanding and favoring a withdrawal of U.S. military personnel from NATO. Just the other day, he publicly stated that he was reassessing his position and wondered if it was not now the time to perhaps keep our strength there until certain other circumstances developed. During the debate in the House of Representatives, the Democratic leader, Congressman O'Neill of Massachusetts, said this was not the time or not the place or not the number for the United States to withdraw troops from overseas. What I am saying is, we may be entering a new era, an era that will be very visible and very substantive in showing the United States capability and will to not only do something in a short period of time but to stick with it. Are you taking a Congressional delegation with you to Brussels?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1997, "text": "It might not be very helpful for Members of Congress to explain the situation in Congress, and it may also have some advantages vice versa. We have a continuous flow of Members of the Congress, Senators and Congressmen, traveling to Europe, and I think it is good. They meet periodically with their counterparts in various European countries. So, there is no doubt that the attitude of Congress will be well explained to heads of state and to other parliamentarians. I do not think it is necessary to take on this trip Members of the House and Senate. May I focus one moment on the shade of difference between the political and the military type of assurances the United States can give to Europe? Europeans are concerned not as much at the link between the American security and the European security but between American security and what we may call the future of European democracies, which are in trouble in some cases. How do you look at the all-political problem from this point of view? We, of course, have to be most careful that we do not involve ourselves in the internal politics of any country, European or otherwise. We, of course, hope that there is stability in any and all governments, in Europe particularly, and that the political philosophy of the party that controls the country is one that has a relationship to our own political philosophy, not in a partisan way but in a philosophical way. And when we see some elements in some countries gaining ground--the Communist element, for example--it does concern us. We, of course, were encouraged by the fine vote of the Portuguese people. I think the Communist party got only 12 percent of the vote and the non-Communist parties got the rest. But, unfortunately, that vote has not as of this time had any significant impact on those that control the government, but nevertheless we approve of the political philosophy of the people of Portugal. We are concerned with some of the elements in the government. ENTITY, could I come back to the Congressional question for a moment. Are you saying that as a result of the trends you see now in the Congress that you are no longer, as you were at your press conference on April 3, frustrated by the restrictions Congress has placed on the Chief Executive? I said this was the beginning, perhaps, of a new era. Could it lead to the Congress reversing itself on the War Powers Act? I doubt that. I think the Congress felt that the War Powers Act worked reasonably well in the Mayaguez incident.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1998, "text": "But there are some other limitations and restrictions imposed by Congress which I think are counterproductive or not helpful--for example, the aid cutoff to Turkey. Turkey is a fine ally in NATO. We have had over a long period of time excellent political and diplomatic relations with Turkey. I am working very hard, for example, to try and get the Congress to remove that limitation on aid to Turkey. We have been successful in the Senate. We hope to do so in the House. But there are some others, plus that, that I hope we can modify or remove in order for the ENTITY to act decisively, strongly, in conjunction with the Congress, but not hamstrung by the Congress. ENTITY, the Europeans have been deeply struck by a poll recently indicating that the American people would only accept military intervention to defend Canada and no other country. Now, this seems to indicate a deep sense of isolationism or at least neo-isolationism, and I wonder what you feel about that question, what you think of that poll, and how you think you can react against that trend in your own country? I am positive that that poll was an aftermath of our involvement in Vietnam. I believe that the United States, the American people, will completely live up to any international commitments that we have. That poll was taken in isolation, so to speak. It was not related to any crisis or any challenge. I think the record of the American people in the past is one that clearly indicates we will respond to a challenge, we will meet a crisis and will live up to our commitments. The history is better than some poll taken in isolation. You do not feel that there is, then, an isolationist mood in America at this stage? I think there was one developing during and even to some extent after the war in Indochina or in South Vietnam. But now that we are freed of that problem, it seems to me that the American people will feel better about their relationships around the world, will want me as ENTITY and will want the Congress as their Congress to live up to the commitments and be a part of an interdependent world in which we live today. ENTITY, could we move on to the relations with the Communist world and the question of detente.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 1999, "text": "It seems to many that the United States is moving into a new emphasis in its foreign policy away from detente towards more support for the allies; in fact--Secretary Kissinger has even used the word--of a need for a new abrasive foreign policy. How would you describe the post-Vietnam foreign policy, and is it shifting away from detente? I do not think there is a contradiction between reaffirmation and strengthening of our relationships with our allies and a continuation of detente. The United States, through many administrations following World War II, has had a consistent foreign policy. It is my desire, as ENTITY, to build on this foreign policy that has been developed over the years. It does encompass working with our allies in Europe, in the Middle East, in Africa, in Latin America, in Asia, and in other parts of the world, and I think by strengthening those relationships, it gives us a better opportunity to use detente for the purposes for which it was designed. Detente was not aimed at solving all the problems. It was an arrangement-and still is--for the easing of tensions when we have a crisis. Now, it cannot solve every crisis, but it can be very helpful in some, and it can have some long-range implications; for example, SALT I and hopefully SALT II. What I am saying is that our policy can be one of working more closely with our allies and, at the same time, working, where we can, effectively with our adversaries or potential adversaries. ENTITY, Secretary Kissinger has just repeated the American commitment to West Berlin. He called it, as I recall it, the acid test of detente. Now, the Soviet Union has recently challenged the four-power status of Berlin by raising some questions about East Berlin. Do you think that this is helpful for detente or that this is something which goes into the general area that you just described? It would seem to me the broad description I gave can be very applicable to the problem raised involving Berlin. If the allies are strong, that will have an impact on any attitude that the Soviet Union might take, and at the same time the existence of detente gives the Soviet Union and ourselves an opportunity to work in the solution of the problem in an atmosphere with less tension.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2000, "text": "Do you get the feeling in Congress that there is a certain suspicion that the Russians are getting more out of detente, as some of the leading Members of Congress have said, than the United States? I think there are some Members of Congress--and perhaps some in the United States in the nonpolitical arena--who have the impression that the Soviet Union has been a bigger beneficiary than the United States. I strongly disagree with that viewpoint. I think detente has had mutual benefits. And I would hope that as we move ahead, the mutuality of the benefits will continue. I do not believe that those who challenge detente and say it is one-sided are accurate. I think they are completely in error. May I put the question differently? Since detente is a way of looking at current affairs, do you subscribe to the argument that the United States should only do what it finds in its own interests, no matter how appealing detente may look at times? Should the United States stick only to what it finds in its own interests, no matter how appealing detente may look? You mean in the United States interest vis-a-vis the Soviet Union or the United States vis-a-vis its allies and friends around the world? Also, in terms of, say, the European Security Conference, for instance, where the question has been raised as to what the usefulness of this whole exercise would be for the Europeans and the Americans without a counterpart? I would hope that detente would have a broader application than only in our own self-interest. But I must say that we have to be very certain that what we do does not undercut our own security. Detente has been used on some occasions, if my memory serves me correctly, to ease tensions on a broader area than just in U.S.-Soviet Union relations. Could you tell us whether the recent talks between Dr. Kissinger and Mr. Gromyko1 have helped to overcome some of the obstacles that you encountered on SALT? They, of course, went into the status of our SALT II negotiations. I do not think I should discuss any of the details. I think they will be helpful in the resolution of some of the negotiations that had to follow after the Vladivostok meeting last December.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2001, "text": "Do you feel that from now on, when there are certain problems going on the periphery of the Western world and of detente, you should take the Russians to task on those subjects in a harsher way than you have done up to now--in Vietnam, for example, and the help they gave to the North Vietnamese? We have indicated quite clearly that we did not approve of the supplying of Soviet arms to the North Vietnamese. We have clearly said that detente is not a fishing license in troubled waters. I think that the implication of that statement is very clear. We intend to be very firm, but detente gives us an opportunity to be flexible and flexible in a very meaningful way. So, it will be orchestrated to meet the precise problem that is on the agenda. ENTITY, on SALT, one more question, if I may. Do you think, sir, that to solve the problems that have come up in SALT II, it requires a political impetus and decision by the two leaders involved, namely, yourself and the General Secretary? We found from the meeting in Vladivostok that there were certain issues that had to be solved at the very highest level, and Mr. Brezhnev and myself did do that. I suspect that as we move into the final negotiations it will be required that the General Secretary and myself make some final decisions. And therefore I would hope that the preliminaries can be gotten out of the way and most of the issues can be resolved, and then the final small print, so to speak, can be resolved when Mr. Brezhnev and I meet, hopefully this fall. you said a moment ago, talking about detente, if the allies are strong, detente will work. A lot of commentators--and one noted one in Newsweek this week--see a perceptible sliding among the allies in Western Europe with the growth of pacifist spirit, a growth of Marxist philosophy in certain governments in the West, and wonder and are asking whether they are not going to end up in the embrace of the Soviet Union in making an accommodation with the Soviet Union. Do you have any slight fears as you set out for Europe that that is what is happening to the Western alliance and you need to do something about it? I have followed the recent meeting of the secretaries of defense, so to speak, and the report I got back was encouraging.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2002, "text": "We do have to upgrade, we do have to modernize our military capability in the Alliance, and I think we will. I am convinced that in the political area, the meeting we are going to have will be helpful and beneficial in that regard. So, although I see some problems in one or more countries internally, I think basically the Alliance is strong. And as long as our allies in Europe see that the United States is not going to pull out, that the United States will continue to be a strong partner, I think this will strengthen the forces favoring the Alliance in our European allies. Therefore, you believe that these problems can be settled without too much difficulty? I certainly recognize the problem between Greece and Turkey involving Cyprus. There are to be both Karamanlis and Demirel in Brussels, and I hope to meet with both and see if we can in any way be helpful. I think this is a solvable problem and there is a beginning of the negotiating process that hopefully will lead to a solution. We have to recognize that everything is not perfect, but that does not mean we cannot solve those problems that are on our doorstep. Now, ENTITY, there is another problem which is perhaps more important still, which is the one of Portugal. It is going to make, I suppose, discussions in NATO very difficult with a Portuguese Government which is dominated by the Communists. Do you think that eventually a new law or new regulation should be made so that countries who do not follow the ideology of the Western world can leave NATO or should be encouraged to leave NATO, such as the pro-Communist Portuguese Government? I am concerned about the Communist element and its influence in Portugal and, therefore, Portugal's relationship with NATO. This is a matter that I will certainly bring up when we meet in Brussels. I do not see how you can have a Communist element significant in an organization that was put together and formed for the purpose of meeting a challenge by Communist elements from the East. It does present a very serious matter, and it is one that I intend to discuss while I am in Brussels. ENTITY, it has been reported that when the Portuguese elections were approaching and it looked as though the Communists were going to do much better in the elections than they actually did that you were in favor of some action by the United States to reduce the possibility of their success and possibly using the CIA in some form. Could you tell us about that? I do not think I ought to discuss internal matters that might have involved another country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2003, "text": "We had no involvement. So, I think I should leave it right there. ENTITY, you and your mission in Europe will be very close to Portugal. You will be stopping in the Iberian Peninsula, in Madrid. Spain is one country which does not belong to the NATO community, and it does not belong to the Europe of Nine , either. The Spanish people have been asking for a long time to be more closely associated with the European defense--collective defense setup--and your Government perhaps has looked with even more sympathy of recent to the Spanish request. How do you view this policy by the Spanish Government at this time? Well, the United States has had a long and friendly relationship with Spain. In 1970, we signed a friendship agreement. In 1974, we had a declaration of principles that involved our relationship in many, many areas on a broad basis. We think Spain, because of its geographical location, because of other factors, is important in the Mediterranean, in Europe. We believe that somehow Spain should be eased into a greater role in the overall situation in Europe. I am not sure that is something that has to be done at the present time, but it does seem to me that Spain, for the reasons I have given, ought to be brought more closely as far as our relations in the Alliance. Has the Portuguese development, ENTITY, speeded that thinking? ENTITY, in your first speech when you became ENTITY--first important speech--you talked of Europe, you talked of alliance, and you never mentioned the word Europe, and you were criticized for that in Europe. And you still since have given the impression that, for you, Europe is more the NATO organization than the Community. I would like to ask you, do you consider Europe as an entity? Do you think it should have its own independence and its own unity? What are your views on that? I do consider Europe as an entity. On the other hand, we have direct relationships with the major nations in Europe through NATO. On the other hand, we do in the future and have in the past worked within the economic system with Europe as a whole. For example, we have worked very closely with the International Energy Agency, which is a very important part of our efforts to avoid future problems and to develop some solutions in the field of energy. We look upon Europe as an entity, but on the other hand, we deal in a specific way with Europe, or major nations in Europe, through our NATO alliance.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2004, "text": "How vital do you think is Britain's participation in Europe? I do not believe I should get involved in how the vote is going to turn out on June 5,2 but I think Europe is strengthened by Britain's participation. I think our overall Western world economic strength is likewise improved and strengthened by Britain's participation. You mentioned the international energy organization, and there is a good deal of dissatisfaction among European governments that they have done much more in reducing the consumption of petrol than the United States has. I know you have tried, and I was wondering now, in view of the fact that Congress did not come up with a bill, are you going to raise the import tax by another dollar? I agree with you entirely. The European nations have done a much better job in reducing the consumption of petrol, or gasoline as we call it, and I admire them for it. As ENTITY, I have tried to convince the Congress that they ought to pass a comprehensive energy program that would aim at conservation on the one hand and new sources of energy on the other. Now, I am going to make a decision in the next 48 hours as to whether or not I will increase by $1 the import levy on foreign oil. They have done literally nothing affirmatively to solve our energy problem. Perhaps the imposition of the extra dollar will stimulate the Congress to meet the problem that is important from the point of view of not only ourselves but the consuming nations--those in Europe, ourselves, Japan. I am very disturbed, I might say, about Congress' lack of affirmative action. The statement by the Shah that he is going to increase the price again by 25 percent has not helped you in Congress, has it? I think it probably has helped us, because if the price of oil is increased and we have no defense against it, it proves the need and necessity for the United States to have the kind of an energy program that I have proposed. If we had that program in place, the one I recommended to the Congress in January, the threat of an increase in the oil price would be far less. It is the lack of action by the Congress that puts us more and more vulnerable to price increases by OPEC nations. So, I hope this prospective or threatened oil price increase will get the Congress to do something such as what I have recommended. Then we would not have to worry about that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2005, "text": "Did you try and persuade the Shah not to raise the price of oil, as he is quite influential in the group of OPEC nations? We talked about it. I did point out that it could have very adverse economic impacts, not only on the consuming nations--like Western Europe, the United States, Japan--but it could have very, very bad effects on the less developed nations, who are more of a victim than even ourselves. I would hope that there would be a delaying action, but in order to make ourselves less vulnerable for this one and for other threatened increases in the future, the United States has to have a strong energy program, an energy program that is integrated with that of Western Europe through the International Energy Agency. And I can assure you that we are going to keep urging and pressuring and trying to move the Congress so that we end up with the kind of a program that will preclude these increases. Could I ask one other question on energy? Defense Secretary Schlesinger said in an interview this week that if there came another oil embargo, the United States would not be so tolerant this time and could act, and he even mentioned military action. Now, could you explain what that means? I would rather define our policy this way. We have sought throughout the Middle East to have a policy of cooperation rather than confrontation. We have made a tremendous effort to improve our relations with all Arab countries. And we have continued our efforts to have good relations with Israel. If we put the emphasis on cooperation rather than confrontation, then you do not think about the potentiality that was mentioned by the Secretary of Defense. Since we do believe in cooperation, we do not consider military operations as a part of any policy planning that we have in mind. Well, we put emphasis on cooperation, not confrontation, so we in effect rule out the other. In the spirit of cooperation, we are looking at the United States for leadership in the area of development of alternate sources of energy. We are particularly looking at you for obtaining a nuclear fuel---enriched uranium, natural uranium--and, very important for us, access to technology. you plan to do in this area--in this critical area for many countries of the world? I will be making a decision in the relatively near future as to how we can move affirmatively in this area to provide adequate sources of enriched uranium. We must do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2006, "text": "The basic problem is whether you do it through government on the one hand or private enterprise on the other. We will have a decision; we will get going because we cannot tolerate further delay. ENTITY, there is a great concern in the world about the proliferation of nuclear matter, and the more nuclear powerplants are going to be built, the more the United States is going to supply them, the more of that material will be available in the world. I was wondering whether--the question is the reprocessing of this material. I wonder whether it would be possible to find a multilateral way of trying to reprocess this material, because there is a question of prestige with so many governments involved. We are concerned about the proliferation of nuclear capability. We are trying to upgrade the safeguards when the powerplants are sold or made available. We think there has to be continuous consultation on how we can do it technically and how we can do it diplomatically. We are going to maximize our effort, because if the number of nations having nuclear armaments increases significantly, the risk to the world increases, it multiplies. So, this Administration will do anything technically, diplomatically, or otherwise to avert the danger that you are talking about. ENTITY, the oil and energy race is intimately tied up, of course, with the Middle East. You and Secretary Kissinger have said recently that your reassessment of policy in this most explosive and dangerous area, which has been going on for 2 months, is not yet complete. It is a little difficult to understand how you could have spent 2 months and are, as you say, meeting next week with no new policy. I think my meeting with is a very understandable part of the process. He, of course, has a deep interest and concern in a permanent, peaceful solution in the Middle East. I want to get firsthand from him his analysis, his recommendations. Of course, that meeting will be followed by one with Prime Minister Rabin here on June 11, where I will have the same intimate relationship, where he can give me his analysis and his recommendations. ENTITY, it has been some time since there was an authoritative statement of United States policy vis-a-vis the Middle East with reference to U.N. Resolution 242, which calls for secure boundaries and withdrawal from occupied territories. Would you care to state the policy once again?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2007, "text": "Of course, the United States voted for U.N. Resolution 242 and 339 , so we do believe that within the confines of those words, any policy in the long run has to fit. But the details, because they were quite general in many respects--the details will be set forth in the policy statement that I will make sometime after meeting with . Do you think that the question of Russian policies and overtures in the Middle East should be duly linked perhaps to other areas? The Soviet Union, as a cochairman of the Geneva conference, obviously has an interest in and a responsibility for progress in the Middle East. I notice that they have been meeting officially, diplomatically with representatives from Israel, and they have been meeting in the same way with many Arab nations. ENTITY , Mr. Schlesinger has again stressed the possibility of using force in case of an embargo in the Middle East, and he said that if there was another embargo, the United States would not have so much patience as last time. How do you feel about that, and in what case do you think military force could eventually be used? As I said a moment ago, the policy of this Government is one of cooperation, not confrontation. And if you put the emphasis on cooperation, then you do not include within any plans you have any military operations. I do not think I should go beyond that, because everything we are doing in the Middle East--the numerous meetings I have had with heads of states, the many consultations that Secretary Kissinger has had with foreign ministers-it is all aimed in trying to, in a cooperative way, solve the problems of the Middle East. And none of those plans that we have incorporate any military operations. ENTITY, if you could give us a longer perspective of history. Some of your aides believe that the West is in decline. And I was wondering whether you share that outlook? I think the West is in a very unique situation today. The West, so to speak, by most standards is technologically ahead of any other part of the world. The West, I think, under our system of free governments, is in a position to move ahead, taking the lead in freedom for people all over the world. It seems to me that whether it is substantively or otherwise, the West could be on the brink of a leap forward, giving leadership to the rest of the world.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2008, "text": "There is one aspect to the Middle East, ENTITY, which possibly concerns your visit to Europe this next week. Some of your officials have said that one of your concerns was possibly to suggest to the Alliance that it widen its sphere of attention and interest. Does that mean into the Middle East, and what exactly do you have in mind? I do not think the Alliance, as such, ought to involve itself in the Middle East. Of course, every one of the countries in Western Europe, including the United States and Canada, have an interest in a permanent, peaceful solution in the Middle East. And each of the countries will have an impact, some--for one reason or another--more than other nations. But I do not think the Alliance should, as a unified body, move into these very delicate negotiations. What is this initiative that you are reported to be considering to suggest that it does widen its sphere of attention? Well, it would be in a broad, but not substantive way. The impact of each nation, if we could all agree, whether it was done through the Alliance, would be extremely beneficial and most helpful in getting the Arab nations, as well as Israel, to resolve some of these longstanding, volatile questions. Do you mean asking individual members of NATO to do more in the Middle East? Back in NATO--I would like to move back to Europe very briefly--I would like to come back to your answer on your attitude towards the Common Market. I had a feeling by what you were saying that you have a slightly cool attitude towards the Common Market. Do you still believe and support the unity of Europe in the same way as supported it but which was less strongly supported by ? I give full support to the Common Market, the European Community efforts in trying to resolve some of the difficult economic problems. Under this Administration, under my time as ENTITY, we will work together, I hope. And there have been some recent illustrations where we have been able to resolve some very sticky problems in the field of agriculture in a very constructive way. And I have some good evidence, I think, by recent developments that will be the attitude of the Community. ENTITY, are you apprehensive of European rivalry? I am not apprehensive, because I think America is strong and we have the will and we have got the technical capability. I think we can compete with any segment of the globe. I do not like to discount it, but I think competition is beneficial to everybody.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalists0", "title": "Interview With European Journalists.", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-0", "publication_date": "23-05-1975", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Gerald R. Ford"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2009, "text": "Secretary Shultz did give rather a bleak news conference in Moscow and seemed to have struck out, coming back empty-handed. That may or may not be true; maybe you are getting private information otherwise. And what are your maximum and minimum goals for this summit? What do you really think you can get out of it? Oh, Helen , I have not tried to pin it down to success or failure or terms of that kind. We are going there to try and basically eliminate if we can or certainly reduce the distrust between our two countries. We have to live in the world together. And it is that distrust that causes the problems and causes the situation with regard to arms negotiations. As I cited to our Russian friends when they were in here the other day that statement-it is not mine, I wish it were-but a statement that I read in the press the other day that summed it up so succinctly; and that is that nations do not distrust each other because they are armed, they are armed because they distrust each other. Well, do you think you can get anywhere near a semblance of an arms agreement? Will you negotiate Star Wars at all? Well, I will be presenting the same thing that I told those others. My concept of the strategic defense system has been one that, if and when we finally achieve what our goal is, that is a weapon that is effective against incoming missiles-not a weapon, a system that is effective against incoming weapons-missiles-then rather than add to the distrust in the world and appear to be seeking the potential for a first strike by rushing to implement my concept has always been that we sit down with the other nuclear powers, with our allies and our adversaries and see if we cannot use that defensive system for the elimination of nuclear weapons. And that, certainly, I will discuss there and try to impress upon them how firmly we believe in this. I do not think the negotiation of facts and figures about which weapon and how many and numbers and so forth in weaponry should take place at the summit. I think that belongs where we have already put it and that is with the arms control negotiators that are already in Geneva. That is their kind of figuring that should go on. We should not be doing that with all of the things we have to discuss at the summit meeting. At that meeting there are a number of things-some of them I hinted at in the speech in the U.N.-regional situation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2010, "text": "In other words, try to, as I say, eliminate the distrust that exists between us. ENTITY, if I could pursue the SDI a little bit more. Considering what you told the Soviet journalists when they were here last week, there seems to be some discrepancy between your comments to them and your comments today about what the conditions for deployment would be. Could you explain it to us now? Yes, because I have already explained that to our allies at the United Nations, and this was the first misunderstanding that I have seen about it. I went through the transcript of that interview, and I mentioned it three or four times through there, in the transcript. And I think it was someone just jumped to a false conclusion when they suggested that I was giving a veto to the Soviets over this; that, in other words, if that thing that I have just described to you, that meeting, took place and we could not get satisfaction, that I would say, Well, then, we cannot deploy this defensive system. I could not find any place where that was anything but an erroneous interpretation of what I'd been saying. Obviously, if this took place, we had the weapon-I keep using that term; it is a defensive system-we had a defensive system and we could not get agreement on their part to eliminate the nuclear weapons, we would have done our best and, no, we would go ahead with deployment. But even though, as I say, that would then open us up to the charge of achieving the capacity for a first strike. We do not want that. We want to eliminate things of that kind. And that is why, frankly, I think that any nation offered this under those circumstances that I have described 'would see the value of going forward. Remember that the Soviet Union has already stated its wish that nuclear weapons could be done away with. You say today that you would go ahead with deployment if you had the system and there were not international agreement on mutual deployment. The other day you said that that deployment would be only on condition of what you call disarmament. This misunderstanding, it seems to me, on whoever's part has caused a lot of confusion. Does that disrupt your negotiations with Gorbachev, and what can he expect when you have said this to his journalists and now you are telling us something different? No, I am not telling something different.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2011, "text": "I am saying that reading that transcript of what I told to the journalists-someone has jumped to an erroneous conclusion. I do not find anything in there-maybe it is because I have talked about this with so many individuals, as I have said, at the U.N. and all-that maybe having more of an understanding of it, I see it more clearly than some others might. But I have not-and I have had others now that look at this transcript and they do not get that interpretation, that I am giving anyone a veto over this defensive system. May I ask you, Mr. ENTITY, it seems that in the recent weeks you have been more flexible in the way you have talked about the SDI. You have not said that it could not be a bargaining chip, as you used to say it very often before. The demands that have been made on us already with regard to arms control are that we stop the research and any effort to create such a defensive system. And I have said that there is no way that we will give that up, that this means too much to the world and to the cause of peace if it should be possible to have an effective defensive system. In discussions here in the office, I have likened it many times to the gas mask-1925, when all the nations of the world after World War I and the horror of poison gas in that war. When it was over, all the nations got together in Geneva and ruled out the use of poison gas, but we all had gas masks, and no one did away with their gas masks. Well, this, in a sense, is how I see what this could be. The defense that would-it would be so practical and sensible for any country, including the Soviet Union, to say, why go on building and maintaining and modernizing these horrible weapons of destruction if there is something that can be implemented that makes them useless? ENTITY, Secretary Shultz held a press conference in Iceland today on his way back to report to you and with him was a senior official-not identified, but we can guess who it is-who held a background briefing for reporters. And he said that the impression that the American delegation got during this weekend's talks in Moscow was that Mr. Gorbachev was concerned that U.S. policy was influenced by a small circle of anti-Soviet extremists.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2012, "text": "Now, if Mr. Gorbachev said that to you personally, how would you respond, Mr. ENTITY? I would respond with the truth as clearly as I could enunciate it. This is one of the things that I feel with regard to the distrust, that the Soviet Union tends to be distrustful and suspicious that things that are presented to them are perhaps concealing some ulterior motive. And I want to discuss with him the record-our own record, that if this were true, that if the United States was guided by some desire to one day assault the Soviet Union, why did not we do it when we were the most powerful military nation on Earth right after World War II. Our military was at its height. We had not had the great losses in the millions that the other nations had had that had been there longer. We had not been bombed to rubble as all the rest had, and we were the only ones with the ultimate weapon, the nuclear weapon. We could have dictated to the whole world, and we did not . We set out to help the whole world. And the proof of it is, today, that our erstwhile enemies-and there could never have been more hatred in the world than there was between the enemies of World War II and ourselves-they are today our staunchest allies. And yet here is a former ally-there are Americans buried in the soil of the Soviet Union that fought side by side against the same enemies. And so, I think we can prove by the record that any fair-minded person would have to see that we did not have expansionism in mind. We never took an inch of territory as a result of the victory of World War II or of World War I, for that matter. And on the other hand, to point out to him why we are concerned about them-that their expansionist policy is very evident. The gunfire has not stopped for a moment in Afghanistan. We could name all the other spots where they or their surrogate troops are in there. So, this is my hope, that I can convince him, if he is a reasonable man-and there is every indication that he is-would see that if we both want peace, there'll be peace. ENTITY, your remark that you think Mr. Gorbachev is a reasonable man brings me to another question.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2013, "text": "I assume that you have been doing a lot of reading about Mr. Gorbachev, the man, and Gorbachev, the leader of the Soviet Union, and that perhaps you have even seen some videotapes of him in action. What sort of an opponent do you expect to face across the table at Geneva? Ralph , I would think that any Soviet leader who reaches the office that he holds would be a formidable opponent. If he does not subscribe to the party philosophy, he would not be in that position. ENTITY, this Yurchenko case is very puzzling, baffling to everyone. Is it baffling to you? Have you ordered an investigation of the CIA handling? And have you gone even further to order an investigation of handling by any agency of defectors per se? Well, right now the Justice Department is investigating the INF and their- or INS, I mean, and their handling of the Medvid incident down in New Orleans to see just what led to all of that. I have to say that-coming as they do together-these three particular incidents, you cannot rule out the possibility that this might have been a deliberate ploy or maneuver. Here you have three separate individuals in three different parts of the world who defected and then recanted and, of their own free will, said they wanted to return to the Soviet Union. And in every one of the three incidents, we insisted on and did secure the last word, the final meeting with each one of them, to make sure that they understood completely that they were welcome here, that we would provide safety and sanctuary for them here in the United States. And in every incident that was repudiated, and we had to say that, of their own free will, as far as we could see- ENTITY and for whatever reason, they wanted to go back. So, were we had by Yurchenko? And is this a sort of a disinformation plan to disrupt- On the other hand, there is no way you can prove that it is. So, you just have to accept that we did our best in view of their expressed desires, and then they did what other defectors before them have not done, and they-oh, I think here and there, there is been one or two that went back. So, you cannot rule out personal desire, homesickness, whatever it might be.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2014, "text": "I am sure that, as has been suggested by someone discussing this, that people who go through that must be under quite some strain, and it must be a traumatic experience to step forth from the land of your birth and denounce it and say you want to live someplace else, in another country. Either they honestly did feel they wanted to defect and then changed their minds, or the possibility is there that this could have been a deliberate ploy. It sounds like you are leaning toward the latter, that there has been something very systematic No, maybe I spent more time explaining why I did not think you could rule that out but-  I said there is this suspicion that has been voiced by more people than me- and all I have to say is we just have to live with it because there is no way we can prove or disprove it. Do you think that that makes the information that he did give the CIA worthless or perhaps even, you know, that it was misinformation? Well, actually, the information that he provided was not anything new or sensational. It was pretty much information already known to the CIA. So, that would tend to support your thought that perhaps this whole thing was cooked. If you want to take it that way. I am not going to comment on that one way or the other. Would you say you are perplexed by it? I think anyone is perplexed by this. I think it is awfully easy for any American to be perplexed by anyone that could live in the United States and would prefer to live in Russia. You'd better tell them one more time that there is no way to tell either way. You said it about four times, but the questions keep coming back. We got it. to the summit preparation. What do you expect from the summit on the human rights issue? You have been very cautious on the human rights issue in the Soviet Union. I have always felt that there are some subjects that should remain in confidence between the leaders discussing them. In this world of public life and politics, if you try to negotiate on the front page-some items-you have almost put the other fellow in a corner where he cannot give in because he would appear in the eyes of his own people as if he is taking orders from an outside government.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2015, "text": "And the greatest success that, I think, has been had in this particular area has been with predecessors of mine who have discussed these subjects privately and quietly with- Are you encouraged by Yelena Bonner being allowed to have medical treatment in the West, or do you think it is just something to defuse the issue before the summit? I do not know, but I welcome it. But let me point out also this does not mean that human rights will not be a subject for discussion. They are very important to the people of our country and, in their view, of a relationship with the Soviet Union. But I do not think that it is profitable to put things of this kind out in public where any change in policy would be viewed as a succumbing to another power. ENTITY, talking of spies, some months ago-I forget the date-in one of your Saturday radio speeches, you said there were too many Soviet and East European diplomats in this country and too many spies among them. And you said, in effect or perhaps precisely, that you were going to cut these numbers down. Could you brief us on what has happened since then, sir? Well, we are having discussions about that and reducing numbers. We recognize that when we do anything of this kind there is going to be retaliation, but what we are trying to do is to simply arrive at agreements that will be mutual and with regard to reductions of staff and numbers in each other's countries. or within this administration? ENTITY, -this has been done at a ministerial level. If you could go quickly, we can get one more round, but you have got to do it quickly. Is Weinberger trying to sabotage the summit? And are you trying to overthrow Qadhafi? Secretary Weinberger is not trying to sabotage anything of the kind. He is been most helpful in all of the meetings that we have had on this. And all of the talk that we unhappily read about feuds and so forth; again, this is a distortion or misinterpretation of my desire for what I have always called Cabinet-type government, where I want all views to be frankly expressed, because I can then make the decision better if I have all those viewpoints. And the fact that we have debate and discussion in that regard, in that way, should not be construed as feuds and battles and so forth. I want all sides. You want it-it is okay in the public?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2016, "text": "It is okay in public and on the front page? Well, not the way it is been portrayed on the front page. Well, but it'd been portrayed not in the spirit in which I just spoke of it. It is been portrayed as animus and anger and so forth, and it is not that kind. It is the devil-advocate type of thing where I hear all sides. Now, with regard to Qadhafi, let us just say we do not have a very personal relationship. Were you going to try to overthrow him indirectly? No comment on are you trying to overthrow him? I never like to talk about anything that might be being done in the name of intelligence. ENTITY, your health is vital to the long-range success of any progress that you make at the summit. Why will not you permit the release of the test results from your periodic examinations to reassure the public that there is no recurrence of the cancer? First of all, that term the recurrence of cancer -you have given me an opportunity to give an answer I have wanted to give for some time. I am deeply appreciative of the concern of people and all the letters of condolence and good wishes and so forth that I have received. But I feel the people have been doing this under a little misapprehension. The whole thing has been portrayed as that I was a sufferer of cancer, I had cancer. And then an operation took place, and now I have had a good recovery. No, the truth of the matter was, I had a polyp. There are two kinds of polyps in the intestines, and one kind, if allowed to go on, eventually becomes cancerous and then would spread. It is true that it, within itself, had begun to develop a few cancer cells, but it was still a self-contained polyp. The only way that type of polyp can be removed is by major surgery. So, in reality, the only real illness that I suffered in any way and at any time was the incision. And my healing was not a healing of cancer; mine was a healing of a 10- or 12 inch incision. So, I am delighted to get this out and on the table before you. Yes, they gave me a complete schedule, and they said we will want to do this down the line periodically, and then, it gets farther and farther apart as time goes on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2017, "text": "It would mainly be an examination, periodically, to see if any further polyps of that kind-if one could start, then, I suppose another could start. And then, if so, you'd want to get rid of them. The examinations that I have had are also spaced out, like this last time, are part of the kind of annual physical that I have had for many years and long before I came here. Where, once I used to go into the hospital for a few days and have all the whole physical done, well, now we do it in bits and parts. So, this last one, mainly I went in and they simply examined the incision-wanted to see how the healing was coming-and then I had some x-rays of the lungs, which had nothing to do with the operation, but that are a normal part of the general physical that I have. Now, there will be another trip there coming up in the near future and that will be the first trip for a look at the intestines for the possibility of polyps. And so, when the doctors come out and when the doctors-they say the same thing to me that has been said to you-maybe I will have them say it to you instead of me repeating it-when they stand there in front of me and say, You have had 100-percent recovery. I go out and tell you that and you think I am covering something up. I just would suggest that, while I am not suggesting we do not believe you, it would be reassuring to a lot of people to see the test results and know what is being done and how it is being done and- Well, the test result, in the cases of this kind, is simply to tell you what happened. For example, if they do the examination to see-to check if there is another polyp-well, the only test is they say to you there was not one or there is one; whichever way it comes out. So, it is a case of verbalizing. There is not any report to be given you that-oh, incidentally, I also had the blood check taken this time also with the x-rays. But that was done here a few days before, not at Bethesda. They take a little blood, see what it is. And that would be done, this would have been done, now, even without any physical examination.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2018, "text": "They always do this prior to a trip abroad, make sure that they know what is there, and in the event of an accident or anything, they know what could be needed. ENTITY, we were talking about Qadhafi, but do you think the U.S. should give some aid to the rebels in Angola, as it is doing in Nicaragua or in Afghanistan? We were embarked on a plan of trying to negotiate the Cubans out of Angola and the independence of Namibia, and this also involved that in that there would be a reconciliation between UNITA, the Savimbi forces and the present government, which, more or less, was installed by the presence of the Cuban troops. Now, with the elimination of the Clark amendment, we are still most supportive of that, that we believe a settlement in Angola should involve UNITA, and the people of that country have a choice in making a decision as to the government they wanted to have. And so, all of this is going forward. So, you do not envision your covert aid to rebels in Angola because of the Clark amendment, as you mentioned, having been- No, I think there are some areas where we could be of help to them. I have no further questions, Mr. ENTITY. Well, how do you feel on the anniversary of your reelection? I wish the Congress would have a sharp memory of it as they are discussing tax reform and some other things. Do you have any particular goals for the next 3 years? tax reform, a program that will set us, even longer than 3 years, on a course for the elimination of the deficit; then, the achievement of a balanced budget amendment, so that once and for all we will be free of this. And I have had one tucked away in the back of my mind for a long time, that once we can do that, then, I would like to see us start on the reduction of the national debt. Well, then, would you veto the House version of the Gramm-Rudman as it stands now? Well, that is a general thing; this is talking about a particular piece of legislation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesthewireservices", "title": "Interview With Representatives of the Wire Services", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-the-wire-services", "publication_date": "06-11-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2027, "text": "Let me take a couple of questions. And if I were speaking to the Panamanian people, I would tell them that the affection of the American people for the people of Panama is still very much intact, strong. Secondly, I would say to the Panama Defense Forces, the PDF, they have a useful role to play, and they will in the future of Panama have a useful role to play. And if Noriega were to leave office, we would have good relations with Panama. We would have good relations with the Panama Defense Force. And clearly, the good feelings between the American people and the people of Panama would grow and prosper. And so, I would hope that Noriega would leave and that the results of this election would be recognized. The fraud in the election has been condemned by people all across the world; the European Community, leaders in our hemisphere, all the way to Japan -- people speaking out in indignation against this thuggery and against what the man has done. So, I just want to be sure that the people of Panama understand that relations can quickly return to normal if Mr. Noriega will leave and set aside his dictatorship and permit democracy to prevail. Do you think they have any doubt about that? And are not you calling for a coup on the part of the PDF? I mean, the Catholic Church in Panama also has basically been saying the same thing to the PDF. That I just said? Are you saying that you would like the PDF to get Noriega out? I would love to see them get him out. We'd like to see him out of there -- not just the PDF, the will of the people of Panama. It sounds like you are calling on the people of Panama to rise up and basically have a revolution. Is that what you are trying to say? A revolution -- the people rose up and spoke in a democratic election, with a tremendous turnout, said what they wanted. The will of the people should not be thwarted by this man and a handful of these Doberman thugs. That is what I am saying. What do you think the people should do now? The people should do everything they can to have the will of the people respected. They ought to heed the international calls, and they ought to just do everything they can to get Mr. Noriega out of there. Have you been in conversation and contact with President Cerezo and others? Venezuela apparently has offered Noriega asylum.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorpsthesituationpanama", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps on the Situation in Panama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-the-situation-panama", "publication_date": "13-05-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2028, "text": "Have you been in contact with the Venezuelans, and do you have thoughts on when and where Noriega should go? No, but I have no doubt that countries would receive him. Why, have you had any assurances indirectly on that? Well, I have a habit of not liking to go into detail with what I talk to others about. But I am just confident that they would receive him, and I think Noriega knows this, too. You said the other day that you would not favor dropping the drug indictments. But if he were to go to someplace that, either through prearrangement or postarrangement, did not have extradition arrangements with the U.S., how would you feel about that? Yes, because if he has -- no, he was saying, if there was a country that prohibited extradition -- and he ought to think about that. think we have any control over that. Would you allow him into a country that did not have an extradition But I am obligated as ENTITY of the United States to respect our laws and to go forward on fulfilling obligations under the law. But if he went to a place where there was not any extradition treaty, then that would be a different situation than if he went to a place where there was an extradition treaty. Do you care which one he does? Yes, I'd like him to -- well, I care that he does whatever it is that it takes to get him out of there right now. And that is what I'd like to see happen. I think it is right for the people of Panama. It is right for the democracies in this hemisphere. You cannot have an election that is blatantly stolen, where people that win are beaten up by thugs. So far, you have struck out -- and so did President Reagan -- in trying to get him out of power. Do you have any other options? Still at the plate, and we will stay at the plate until we can help the people of Panama have the democracy for which they spoke so articulately in an election. And we are not going to give up on it. A couple of days ago, you said that the goal of your sending those extra troops down there was to protect American lives.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorpsthesituationpanama", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps on the Situation in Panama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-the-situation-panama", "publication_date": "13-05-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2029, "text": "Now you seem to be adding a new, much more outspoken dimension to your intention here, which is to see Noriega leave and leave I am not changing the definition of the role of the American troops at all. Have you had any contact with him indirectly, sir, in the last 2 days? No, you asked the question properly. How does it feel personally, after over a year of seeing this drag on -- -- now this thing comes to a head? How does it feel when you read the accounts and see the pictures? See, I think there is a whole new ingredient in Panama, regarding the relationship with Panama. And I think the election made so clear that the people want democracy and made so clear that that democracy is being thwarted by one man that that in itself could be the catalyst for removing Noriega. Now, why do I say that? Because, heretofore, you have not heard the neighboring countries around Panama speaking up. You have not seen the EC , our friends in Europe, speaking up and denouncing what happened. And I think the Japanese weighed in on this. So, I think this is a very different climate now and one much more conducive to possible change, because the people spoke so overwhelmingly, and heretofore, that has not been quite as clear. Never underestimate the power of the people, even though their will seems to have been frustrated short-run. Do you think the OAS will do something on Wednesday? And I'd love to see a very powerful and strong statement coming out of there, and I'd like to see it as unanimous. But I am not sure what will come out of it. ENTITY -- you are worried about the people in Panama and what they have gone through, and it is in their hands. Are you concerned, though, about any violence that might be started by anything that the people would do to change the situation where innocent lives may be lost or children would be hurt and families disrupted as they try to make a change for democracy? I always worry about the loss of innocent human life. And I would be worried about that. Would you caution them against rising up in violence? We will protect American lives in every possible way. That is a solemn responsibility of ENTITY, and that is one of the reasons I augmented our forces in Panama -- is the reason I augmented them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorpsthesituationpanama", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps on the Situation in Panama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-the-situation-panama", "publication_date": "13-05-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2030, "text": "Are you concerned that the situation there -- with your calls and mounting pressure internationally -- would lead to a situation right now in Panama that might lead to violence that would, in fact, endanger American lives more than they would be otherwise? I mean, I would be concerned about any escalation of violence that would endanger American lives. And I think we are in a good position to protect our American lives and interests. Do not let it die. The people could see that as inflammatory, like it is a call to -- -- to revolt. Would you add any words of caution No, I would add no words of caution. The will of the people should be implemented. And if I wanted to increase the rhetoric, strengthen it, I would do so. But I think I have phrased it just about the way I feel. What? And the will includes -- -- demonstrations in the street? What form would you say Look, I am not about to get into proposing a three-point action plan for the people of Panama. All I want them to know is that if they get rid of Noriega they will have an instant normalization of relationship with the United States and there will be a useful role for the Panamanian Defense Force. And I think there has been some doubt about that, perhaps in the Panamanian Defense Force itself, as to how we now view the Force, because of the thuggery of its leader. And this gives me an opportunity to clarify that specific point, as well as to repeat my support for Endara and Calderon and Guillermo Ford, who was so brutally beaten. Are you contemplating sending even more American troops down there now? Well, if I were, it would be unlikely I would announce it here, just before landing in Starkville, only because I think it would be prudent to do it differently. I have no short-run plans, but that does not preclude anything I will do in the future. You know Noriega. Is it strictly power that he wants or is there a point where he could be negotiated out? I think it is power that he has wanted, but I do not know what his view is now that he is seen a total repudiation of his rule. And you see, I keep coming back to the fact that what happened the other day in the election is something quite different than has been on the table before. So, I just do not know the answer to it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorpsthesituationpanama", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps on the Situation in Panama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-the-situation-panama", "publication_date": "13-05-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2031, "text": "It might be now he'd like to find a way to get out. I would hope that would be the case, but I do not know that for a fact. He has lost all support, all respect -- the man is considered just out of it, an outlaw, by the world community now as a result of what happened. I do not have an answer for it. Are you saying that the United States at this juncture has, more or less, done what it could and that now what we are going to do is lend moral support to whatever the Panamanians decide? That we really cannot from the outside do anything further? No, what I have said is that we have taken certain action to protect American lives. I have now spelled out, although I hope it had been understood before, what it would take to have good relations with the United States; and I will continue my own efforts internationally. You see, I do think it is important that it not be the United States, the Colossus of the North, coming down there to try to dictate to the people of Panama. And that is one of the reasons I spent a lot of time last week working with the international community and instructing the State Department to do the same thing. So, we will continue our international efforts. Are you disappointed in the response to that of the PDF and some of the Panamanians to why you sent the troops down there? Are you disappointed in their response? I mean, you have come out here to clarify your views. No, I am not disappointed in the response. What I am trying to do is make clear to the Panamanian Defense Forces that there is no vendetta against the Panamanian Defense Forces as an institution. There is clearly the desire to see Mr. Noriega get out of office. I do not know how they have reacted to the American forces. ENTITY, how long can the people of Panama be expected to put up with Noriega? About 4 days ago when they demonstrated loud and clear they do not want any more. They have had it; and their will should be respected and honored. So, we have got to find a way to have that magnificent expression of democracy be honored. Are there certain things that you and the administration are sending them immediately, once Noriega leaves? We'd recognize immediately the Endara government.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorpsthesituationpanama", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps on the Situation in Panama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-the-situation-panama", "publication_date": "13-05-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2032, "text": "As soon as he is sworn in, we would return our Ambassador; we would remove our economic sanctions; we would, in essence, have normalized relations with a country for whom we have great affection and whose people have great affection for us. If you talk to those two delegations that came back, both of them -- the liberal members of the delegation, the conservative members, the Republicans, the Democrats -- all of them certified, stipulated that the people of Panama have great affection for our country and for our people. So, you'd see an instant release of this oppression; and you'd see an effort by the United States to help Panama go down the road to democracy and to help them economically, as best we could, and to welcome them as they rejoin the family of democracies in this hemisphere. We would not need a lot of delaying or thinking about it either. But it has to have the -- with that -- it is the departure of Noriega and the recognition of the people's will; those two have to go together. Was there some development this morning or some intelligence that you got that caused this today? No, but I know because I was talking to General Scowcroft yesterday and talked to Secretary Baker this morning. And I have had an uneasy feeling that perhaps what I have told you here today was not known clearly there. And it gives me a chance to -- well, the question as to how we view the Panamanian Defense Force itself, what would happen if Noriega left, vis-a-vis the United States of America, and I hope it is known   Well, I think in a situation of this nature, where the head of the PDF has become such a pariah, that there perhaps -- been misunderstanding there as to how we view the institution itself and other of its officers. But if they come in there and Noriega goes and they respect the will of the people, I -- you know, we see a very useful role for the Panamanian Defense Force, in their own internal security and for their own -- any threat they might feel they had to the external security. If the PDF asked for U.S. military help, how can we respond? What would we do? Asked for it to do what? If they asked for military support -- if the PDF asks for military support from the United States.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmembersthewhitehousepresscorpsthesituationpanama", "title": "Interview With Members of the White House Press Corps on the Situation in Panama", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-members-the-white-house-press-corps-the-situation-panama", "publication_date": "13-05-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2033, "text": "Thank you for your time; I appreciate it. It takes time to do something like this. Why do you think the race is so tight, given the economy, the issues, the incumbency? Well, I think for one thing, things have been good for a long time, and I think a lot of people may take it for granted and may not have they may not be as clear as they should be, which I hope we can use the last week to do, on what specific policies contributed to it and what could undermine it. I also think that, you know, there is not as much general awareness as there might be about the differences between the two parties on health care, education, the environment, and crime, where I believe that the things we have done over the last 8 years had a measurable impact on all those things going in the right direction. And a lot of most Presidential races are fairly close, you know, because a lot of Presidential voting is cultural. I mean, a lot of it is cultural. So I think there are a lot of reasons it is close. Also, keep in mind, in the history of our Republic, only two Vice Presidents have ever been directly elected President. One of them when Martin Van Buren succeeded Andrew Jackson, we were effectively a one-party country then. And the other, when George Bush defeated Michael Dukakis, the country was not in as good a shape as it is now, but it was in pretty good shape, and Bush basically destroyed Dukakis. It was a hugely negative campaign with a lot of charges that were never effectively rebutted. There have been differences on the issues, but neither one of them has called each other's patriotism into question or whether they are normal Americans. Basically, the rap that was put on Dukakis was like reverse plastic surgery. So I think that that explains it largely. At the end of the interview, I am going to ask you to make a bet with me. What physical change in you says that you have served 8 years and it is a job that really takes a toll? Well, I think I am in better shape, better health than I was 8 years ago, in a lot of ways. I think that is about it. I have got a few wrinkles I did not have 8 years ago. I have had a good time. I have enjoyed it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2034, "text": "One of the most important jobs that you, as a President, have is to talk to the country in the wake of national tragedies, frame the issues for the American people. the Oklahoma City bombing and the Columbine shootings. Where were you when you first heard about the Oklahoma City bombing, and what was your first reaction, personally? And then how did you think you should frame that to the American people, to help them understand what is really a national trauma? And where were you when you heard it? I was in the White House. I believe I was in the White House, because I remember making a statement at the beginning, right in the Rose Garden, saying what you would expect me to say, expressing the Nation's sympathy for the loss but also urging the American people not to jump to conclusions about who had done it. Remember in the beginning, there were a lot of people saying it was obviously some sort of act of foreign terrorism. There was one man that was brought back on an airplane. He was flying out of the country through to London, and he was brought back, suspected of maybe being involved, and he was not . And of course, subsequently, it was a domestic terrorist act. But then when I went to Oklahoma, at the memorial service, what I tried to do was to elevate what the people who had been working in that building were doing. They were all public servants, and it was at a time when it was quite fashionable to bash the Government. And I told myself, even, that I would never refer to people who worked for the Government even in agencies I thought were not performing well as bureaucrats again, because this whole we have gotten, for more than a dozen years, a sort of demeaning rhetoric about the nature of Government and the nature of public service. And I tried to point out that these people were our friends and our neighbors and our relatives, and they were an important part of America's family and that their service ought to be honored in that way. And also, obviously, I took a strong stand against terrorism. And I was able later I went to Michigan State and gave a commencement speech and tried to amplify on that. But I really believe that was the turning of the tide in the venom of anti-Government feeling.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2035, "text": "Did you see was it a conscience thought to you that this could be the turning of the tide, and if you focused it correctly, if you said, You know, you cannot love your country if you hate your Government, that this would crystallize that feeling? I think I felt that after I had some time to think about it. In the beginning I was just horrified about all those people dying, all those little kids killed and hurt. What I am trying to get at is, once beyond that obvious first reaction I mean, it occurred to me that, you know, the American people are fundamentally decent, and they have got a lot of sense. And I thought that this might break a fever that had been gripping us for too long. And you thought, if I can take advantage of this opportunity I mean, to have this tragedy in every tragedy comes an opportunity, so is this an opportunity where I can make people rethink that idea. I think in a way, at least at some maybe not even at a conscious level, the American people were rethinking it. And I think maybe that is why what I said at the memorial service struck a responsive chord in the country. What I am trying to get at is, was that a deliberate thought on your part? That I have an opportunity as President to Well, I thought that yes, I was conscious of what I was saying. Did you connect it in some way to a kind of metaphorical bomb-throwing of Newt Gingrich, of the real anti-Government stance that he was taking at the time? I was careful not to do that. I wanted it to change the American peoples' attitude toward public servants and their Government. But to do it, you had to focus on what happened. One of the things that I did not like about Newt and he certainly was not responsible in any way for the Oklahoma City bombing because one of the things I did not like about him is, he was always blaming the 1960's or liberals for everything that went wrong. When that woman, Susan Smith, drove her kids into the lake in South Carolina, he blamed the 1960's, and it turned out that the poor woman had been sexually abused by her father, her stepfather, who was on the local board of the Christian Coalition or something. And when that woman dropped her kid out of the window in Chicago, he blamed the welfare culture. So I did not want to get into where I was doing reverse blame.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2036, "text": "I just wanted to try to make it clear to the American people that we should not have a presumption against Government in general or public servants in particular. Where did you first hear the news about that? And again, what was your reaction to that? I believe I was in the White House when I heard that, but I am not sure. But I know that I called the local officials and the school officials from the Oval Office. You know, that was only the most recent and the most grotesque of a whole series of highly visible school shootings that we have had a number of them in the South, one of them in Jonesboro, Arkansas. That was in my home State, and I knew some of the people who were involved, who run the school and in the county and in the city. What I thought there was that I thought a lot of things. I thought, number one, how did those kids get all those guns, and how could they have had that kind of arsenal without their parents knowing? And I thought, after I read a little about it, how did they get so lost without anybody finding them before they went over the edge? We had a spate of before all these killings associated with that kind of darkness on the net, network What do you mean, darkness on the net? Well, those kids were apparently into some sort of a were not they into some sort of satanic-like thing?  There were, earlier, a number of kids who killed themselves who were into talking to each other about destruction, but they were not killing other people. And I just kept I worry that I worried then; I worry now about the people in our society, particularly children, that just drift off, and no one knows, or people feel helpless to do anything about it. You know, I could not help thinking, wondering whether those kids could have been saved if somebody got to them, and then whether all those other children would still be alive. It seemed shocking to me and a lot of other people that after that there was no we did not get any new gun control legislation after an event like that. It is going to be interesting to see what the voters in Colorado do. They have a provision on the ballot now in Colorado to close the gun show loophole. I think what happened is that well, first of all, you cannot say nothing came out of it, because there was an organization of young people in Colorado that then organized kids all over the country for commonsense gun legislation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2037, "text": "Now we have the Million Mom March, and they are very active. But the truth is that when legislation time comes that a lot of the people in Congress are still frightened of the NRA, because even though there is broad public support for these measures, they are still not primary voting issues for a lot of the people who are for them. Whereas, the NRA can muster an enormous percentage of the vote maybe 15 percent, maybe even 20 sometimes for whom that is a primary voting issue. So if you have got an issue where you are ahead 60-30 but in your 60 it is a primary voting issue for 10 percent of the people, and in their 30 it is a primary voting issue for 20 percent of the people, the truth is, you are a net loser by 10 percent. That is the way that is what happens in Congress and State legislatures. They know they could lose their seats. You see the tirade that Charlton Heston has carried on against Al Gore and me, before saying that I was glad some of these people were killed because it gave me an excuse to take people's guns away. We never proposed anything that would take anybody's guns away. I saw a special you may have seen it on television the other night on ABC. Peter Jennings actually went out and went to some of these gun shows. And he was talking to all these people who were absolutely convinced that we wanted to take their guns away. The NRA is great at raising money and building their organizational power by terrifying people with inflammatory rhetoric. I guess that is why, since LBJ passed the first law after Bobby Kennedy was killed, I was the first President to take him on. You got Brady and assault through, but why did not you take the opportunity with this post-Columbine atmosphere? I mean, you called the White House Conference on Violence immediately But it focused on, like, violence in the media Yes, but we also did lots and lots and lots of events and then you thought you could reason with the NRA. No, I did not think I could reason with the NRA. I thought Congress would be so shocked and the public was so galvanized that we had a window of opportunity. And what happened to that, is my question. They knew that they could not afford to have their Members voting wrong on closing the gun show loophole or banning the importation of large capacity ammunition clips, which allows people to get around the assault weapons ban. Were you powerless to do something about that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2038, "text": "No, we had tons of events. And we got a vote if you will remember, we finally got a vote in the Senate, where you can bring things up, where we got a majority vote for it. Al Gore broke the tie another reason he ought to be President, he broke the tie. But we could not get a bill out of a conference committee, that had it in there. You would have won that vote. We could win the vote today if you could get a vote. But the leadership of the Republican Party, as long as they are in the majority in both Houses, they can control things, especially in the House. You can write the rules so that you can just keep stuff from coming up. And we had lots and lots and lots of events at the White House, not just one. We had a ton of events. We brought people in. We talked about it. We finally got the vote in the Senate. We got 50 votes. Then Al broke the tie. We got 51. And there is no question that we could pass it. But I will remind you that one of reasons that Democrats are in the minority today in the House is because of the Brady law and the assault weapons ban. And interestingly enough, we did not there is not a single hunter has missed an hour; not a single sport shooter has missed an event an hour hunting I should have finished the sentence or a single sport shooter has missed an event. But they acted like the end of the world, but a half million felons, fugitives, and stalkers have not gotten handguns because of the Brady law. The ironic thing is, there is no reason here when we tried to pass the Brady law they said, Well, this will not do any good because all these criminals get their guns either one-on-one or at gun shows or urban flea markets. Let me change the subject. I feel passionately about this, and I am glad I took them on. I am just sorry I could not win more. There are a lot of good people out there in America who work hard; their only recreation is hunting and fishing; they do not follow politics all that closely; they get these NRA mailings. They are good people, but they think they can believe these folks. And they know that if they can stir them up, they can raise more money and increase their membership. And they do it by basically terrifying Congress.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2039, "text": "How would you characterize race relations today, as compared to when you took office? Well, I think, first of all, the country is changing. It is growing ever more diverse and, therefore, more and more people are having more contacts across racial, ethnic, and religious lines. And I think that, ultimately, the more people relate to each other, the more they come to not just tolerate I do not like the word tolerance in this context because it implies that one group is superior, putting up with an inferior group and tolerating them. I think the more they come to genuinely appreciate each other's heritage, find it interesting, and find a fundamental common humanity I think a lot of it is just systematic human contact. And beyond the human contact, I think that the race initiative we started led to hundreds of efforts all over the country to have honest conversations. You know, sometimes people work around each other for years and they do not know the first thing about one another. I mean, there are people who probably work in the White House who see each other every day that do not know the first thing about one another. So I think that the one thing we did was to spark all these conversations and also to highlight systematic efforts that were working in local communities and try to get them replicated around the country in communities, in workplaces, in schools. I think that there was a genuine effort to deal with that. I think the third thing is that we may have had some impact on it, I and my administration, because we were so much more diverse than any other administration in history. So I think the climate in the country was positive for that. And you sense that change in climate from those factors in Because this is one of your main priorities? All the rhetoric is about racial inclusion. Now you know, we could argue about the policies. I think that the Republican policies are still divisive, but the rhetoric is about inclusion. And even they a number of their members have taken a different tack on immigration. Do you have any special message to young people, any sort of valedictorian thoughts to the kids in school right now, as you leave office?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2040, "text": "First of all, I think that they should realize that they are very fortunate to be living in this country at this time, fortunate because of our economic prosperity, fortunate because of our enormous diversity, and fortunate because of the permeation of technology in our society, all of which enables us to relate to the rest of the world and to one another in different and better ways. Secondly, I think they should understand that our future success is not guaranteed and depends upon their interest in public affairs, as well as their private lives and their participation. One of the things that is really concerned me about this election is all these articles that say that young people think there is not much in it for them. I think maybe that is because there has been a lot of debate about Social Security and Medicare in the debate. But it is actually not just an old folks' issue, because when all of us baby boomers retire and I am the oldest of the baby boomers; the baby boomers are people that are between the ages now of 54 and 36. So when we retire, unless everybody starts having babies at a much more rapid rate, or we have hugely greater immigration, there will only be two people working for every one person drawing Social Security. Now, more of us are going to have to work into our later years. And more of us have a choice now because one of the good things that Congress did unanimously was to lift the earnings limit on Social Security. Because the baby boomers, most of them, I know, are obsessed with our retirement not imposing an undue burden on our children and our grandchildren. We have to build a clean energy future to avoid global warming. Two stunning studies have come out in the last month, and because of the Presidential campaign, they have not been much noticed. One analysis of a polar icecap says that the 1990's were the warmest decade in a thousand years. The other projecting study estimates that if we do not change our greenhouse gas emissions, the climate could warm between 2.4 and 10 degrees over the next century; 2.4 is too much. Ten degrees would literally flood a lot of Louisiana and Florida.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2041, "text": "Then you have got this incredible scientific and technological revolution that will lead to, among other things if you just take the human genome alone, a lot of the young people in America today, when they have their children, they will get a little gene card to take home with them from the hospital, and their children will be born with a life expectancy of 90 years, because they will be able to avoid so many of the illnesses and problems that they have a biological propensity to. So this is a fascinating time to be alive, but it is not free of challenges. So I would say to the young people, you ought to be grateful you are alive at this time. You will probably live in the most prosperous, interesting time in human history, but there are a lot of big challenges out there, and you have to be public citizens as well as private people. Do you think that people should go to jail for possessing or using or even selling small amounts of marijuana? I think, first of all This is after we are not publishing until after the election. I think that most small amounts of marijuana have been decriminalized in most places and should be. I think that what we really need one of the things that I ran out of time before I could do is a reexamination of our entire policy on imprisonment. Some people deliberately hurt other people. And if they get out of prison if they get in prison and they get out, they will hurt them again. And they ought to be in jail because they cannot be trusted to be on the streets. Some people do things that are so serious, they have to be put in jail to discourage other people from doing similar things. But a lot of people are in prison today because they, themselves, have drug problems or alcohol problems. And too many of them are getting out particularly out of the State systems without treatment, without education, without skills, without serious effort at job placement. You are talking about any offender? But there are tons of people in prison who are nonviolent offenders, who have drug-related charges that are directly related to their own drug problems. Do not you think those people should we be putting nonviolent drug offenders in jail at all, or should we put them in treatment programs that are more fitting and not ENTITY I think it depends on what they did. You know, I have some experience with this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2042, "text": "  Well, let me just say about my brother whom I love and am immensely proud of, because he kicked a big cocaine habit I mean, his habit got up to 4 grams a day. He had a serious, serious habit. He was lucky to live through that. But if he had not had the constitution of an ox, he might not have. I think if he had not gone to prison, actually been put away forcibly somewhere, I think his problem was so serious, it is doubtful that he would have come to grips with it. I mean, he was still denying that he was addicted right up until the time that he was sentenced. So I am not so sure that incarceration is all bad, even for drug offenders, depending on the facts. Let me finish. I think the sentences in many cases are too long for non-violent offenders. I think the sentences are too long, and the facilities are not structured to maximize success when the people get out. Keep in mind, 90 percent of the people that are in the penitentiary are going to get out. So society's real interest is seeing that we maximize the chance that when they get out, that they can go back to being productive citizens, that they will get jobs, they will pay taxes, they will be good fathers and mothers, that they will do good things. You have got mandatory minimums. Would you do away with those? I certainly think they should be reexamined and the disparities are unconscionable between crack and powdered cocaine. I tried to change the disparities, and the Republican Congress was willing to narrow, but not eliminate, them on the theory that people who use crack are more violent than people who use cocaine. Well, what they really meant was that people who use crack are more likely to be poor and, coincidentally, black or brown and, therefore, not have money. Whereas, people who use cocaine were more likely to be rich, pay for it, and therefore be peaceable. But my own view is, if you do something violent, it is appropriate to have an incarceration. But I think we need a serious re-examination in the view toward what would make us a more peaceful, more productive society. I think some of this, our imprisonment policies, are counterproductive.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2043, "text": "And now, you know, you have in a lot of places where, before the economy picked up, prison-building was a main source of economic activity, and prison employment was one of the big areas of job growth. Do you think people should lose access to college loans because they have been convicted of smoking pot which is now law? I think that, first of all I mean, those are people that seem to need a loan the most. First of all, I do not believe, by and large, in permanent lifetime penalties. There is a bill in Congress today that has bipartisan support that I was hoping would pass before I left office, but I feel confident it will in the next year or 2 which would restore voting rights to people after their full sentences have been discharged, and they would not have to apply for a Federal pardon to get it. I changed the law in Arkansas. When I was attorney general I changed the voting rights law in 1977, to restore voting rights to people when they had discharged their sentence. And my State is one of the relatively few States in the country where you do not have to get a pardon from the Governor to register to vote again or from the Federal Government, for that matter. But I do not believe in making people wear a chain for life. If they get a sentence from a jury, if they serve it under the law, if they discharge their sentence, the rest of us have an interest in a safe society, in a successful society, and seeing that these folks go back to productive lives. You know, keeping them with a scarlet letter on their forehead for the rest of their lives and a chain around their neck is not very productive. Just to wrap this up, do you think that we need a major rethink of what these drug sentencing laws are? I think we need to look at who is in prison, what are the facts Well, they are filled with drug prisoners, these jails. most of them are related to drug or alcohol abuse, but there are some non-violent offenders unrelated to drug or alcohol abuse, which is not to say that I do not think white-collar criminals should ever go to jail. But I think we need to examine the natural tendency of the American people, because most of us are law-abiding, is to think when somebody does something bad, we ought to put them in jail and throw the key away. And what I think is, we need a discriminating view.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2044, "text": "There are some people who should be put in jail and throw the key away, because they cannot help hurting other people. And I believe that one of the reasons for the declining crime rate is that we have a higher percentage of the people in jail who commit a lot of the crimes; a very small percentage of the people are multiple, habitual criminals. And if you could get a significant percentage of them in jail, the crime rate goes way down. Now, on the other hand, there are a whole lot of other people in jail who will never commit another crime, particularly if they have if they get free of drugs or free of their alcohol abuse and if they get education and training and if somebody will give them a job and give them another chance. And what I think we need is a serious reexamination of what we have done, because we have done a lot of good in identifying people who are habitual criminals and keeping them in prison longer, and that is one of the reasons that the crime rate has gone down, along with community policing and improving the economy. But we also have just captured a whole lot of people who are in jail, I think, longer than they need to be in prison and then get out without adequate drug treatment, job training, or job placement. But the society is moving on this. I notice now back in Washington, there is a really good program where maybe two, that I know where they try to keep people who go to prison in touch with their children, and they use the Internet so they can E-mail back and forth. They try to, in other words, not cut people off so completely that they lose all hope and all incentive of returning to normal life, and they try not to damage these kids so badly, to reduce the chances that the kids will follow in their parents' footsteps. Let me change the subject. I think we need a whole new look at that. The sentencing guidelines, the disparities, are only a part of it. We have to look at how long should certain people go to prison from the point of view of what is good for society. We need to completely rethink it, because criminal laws and sentencing tend to be passed sort of seriatim in response to social problems at the moment. You, in general, restored judicial discretion and replace the kind of panic legislation that was passed about crack or The reasons for the sentencing guidelines in the first place was to try to reduce the arbitrary harshness.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2045, "text": "It was not because they wanted to make sure everybody went to jail for a while; it was because the citizen guidelines tended to be abusive on the other end of the spectrum. I think we may need some sentencing guidelines, but I think the impact, the practical impact of the ones we have has led to some people going to prison for longer than they should and longer than they would have under the old system. I am going to change the subject. What was it like to run a war night after night? I mean, was it your mentality in feeling that as all of that was going on as you go to sleep every night? You were literally praying? You know, it is easy for people to talk about war when it is appropriate to use military force, but you have to know that once human beings start using big, powerful weapons, there will be unintended consequences. We wound up bombing the Chinese Embassy. We hit a schoolbus. And we have the most skilled Air Force and the most sophisticated weapons in all human history. In the Gulf war, which is normally thought of as a 100-hour war and a model of sort of technical proficiency, we had 4 1/2 months to settle in and prepare there, and still a lot of the American casualties were from friendly fire. The same thing happened even in the small engagement in Grenada and President Reagan. There are once you start killing people, there will be unintended consequences. How do you get yourself personally comfortable I mean, how do you get yourself, as a person and as a politician, ready to make that decision with a level of comfort you are now going to go ahead and do this? You have to be convinced that the consequences of inaction would be more damaging to more people and to your country. And in the case of Kosovo, I did not think it was a close case. They had already killed several thousand Kosovars, and they were running a million of them out of their homes, 800,000. It was a clean case of ethnic cleansing. And I thought the United States and our European Allies had to stand up against it. We could not let it happen in the heart of Europe. If we did that, we would lose the ability to stop it anywhere else. And would not it be on your conscience in some way, for having failed to stop it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2046, "text": "Look, it took us one of the things that just tore at me and in the end it did not require much military engagement, although it required some was how long it took me to build a consensus. It took me 2 years to build a consensus among our Allies for military action in Bosnia. And you know, what happened there was, after the slaughter at Srebrenica we finally got you know, everybody said, Okay, let us go we did a few air strikes, and all of a sudden we were at Dayton and the peace talks. And for all the raggedness of it, the Bosnian peace has held, and it is better now because we turned back the tide of ethnic cleansing. And I just knew, you know, there is no point in letting it happen again in Kosovo. How do you feel, then, about Rwanda? You did not have the allies; you did not have intelligence, all kinds of things. Is there anything that we could have done to prevent it? Do you feel any responsibility in that, personally? I feel terrible about it. One of the reasons that I went to Tanzania to be with Mandela and try to talk to the Burundians into the peace agreement because before my time, over 200,000 people were killed in Burundi. Same deal the Hutus and the Tutsis, same tribes, fighting the same battles. In Rwanda the thing that was shocking about Rwanda was that it happened so fast, and it happened with almost no guns. The idea that 700,000 people could be killed in 100 days, mostly with machetes, is hard to believe. After that, we began working very earnestly in Africa to train troops to be able to go in and prevent such things. We worked very hard with something called the Africa Crisis Response Initiative. And when I was in Senegal, I actually went out of Dakar to another city to watch a training exercise at least a parade exercise and talk to the troops from Senegal that our American soldiers were working with. We are now working with the Ghanaian forces and Nigerian forces to give them the training and the capacity to prevent the resumption of the slaughter of Sierra Leone. So I think that I hope the United States will be much, much more involved in Africa from now on, and everywhere.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2047, "text": "In economic development, we passed the Africa trade bill this year; in fighting ENTITY, TB, malaria in Africa; in debt relief, we passed a big debt relief legislation this year; and in helping them to develop the mechanisms to do this. The African countries have leaders who are willing to go in and take their responsibility in these areas if we will give them the logistical and other support necessary to do it, if they are trained to do it. That is what happened in East Timor, where we did not have to put troops on the ground, but we sent 500 people over there and provided vital airlift and logistical and other support, so that the Australians and New Zealanders and the other troops that came in could bring an end to the slaughter there. In Europe it had to be done by NATO, and the scale of it and the power of the Serbian Government was such that if we had not been directly involved with our NATO Allies, we never could have turned it back and Milosevic never would have fallen. If we had not stopped him in Bosnia and Kosovo and kept the sanctions on, the people would never have had the chance to vote him out. So I feel good about that. I wish we had been Rwanda, if we had done all the things we have done since Rwanda and Africa training the troops, supporting them, working with them what I think would have happened is, the African troops would have moved in; they would have stopped it; and we could have given them the logistical support they needed to stop it. Another reason to vote for Gore. Another huge reason to vote for Gore, because, you know, Governor Bush has said that he does not think that is the business of the American military. We are only supposed to fight and win wars and let everybody else do this. He kept talking about Kosovo, I noticed, in a way as if we were the only forces in Kosovo. We were only 15 percent of the soldiers in Kosovo. Let me change the subject, back to Washington. Why do you think you were such a lightning rod for partisanship and bitterness and so much hatred during your term now? I think there were a lot of reasons. The Republicans really did not they believe the only reason they lost in '76 to Jimmy Carter was because of Watergate. They believe that, from the time Mr. Nixon won in '68, they had found a fool-proof formula to hold the White House forever, until some third party came on. That is what they believe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2048, "text": "Did you ever hear anybody articulate that, the Republicans I had a very candid relationship with a lot of those guys. They would tell me what was going on. I think they really believed that America saw Republicans as the guarantor of the country's security and values and prudence in financial matters, and that they could always turn Democrats into cardboard cutouts of what they really were; they could sort of caricature them as almost un-American; and that basically the Congress might be Democratic most of the time because the Congress would give things to the American people. But the Republicans embodied the values, the strength, the heritage of the country, and they could always sort of do, as I said about Dukakis, reverse-plastic-surgery any Democrat. So I came along, and I had ideas on crime and welfare and economic management and foreign policy that were difficult for them to characterize in that way. I think I was the first President in a long time that never got a day's honeymoon. I mean, they started on me the next day. I think, secondly, I was the first baby boomer President, not a perfect person, never planned to be I mean, never claimed to be and had opposed the Vietnam war. So I think that made them doubly angry because they thought I was a cultural alien, and I made it anyway. Southern Baptist, because the dominant culture of the Republican Party President Reagan put a nicer image on it. But the dominant culture were basically white southern Protestant men who led the surge of the new Republican Party, first under President Nixon and the silent majority and, you know, blue-collar people, and then it came to an apotheosis under President Reagan. So I think that, you know, they did not like losing the White House, and they did not like me, and they did not like what they thought I represented. And that all happened at the time you had this huge growth in conservative talk shows and these you know, sort of associated think tanks and groups and networks that grew up in Washington from the time of Nixon through the time of Bush. And I think they had sort of a permanent alternative Government set up by that time. And they went to war the first day of my Presidency.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2049, "text": "Because you were the most threatening politically, and they despised what you represented culturally, age-wise and think they honestly disagreed with me on a lot of the issues as well, but a lot of it was, they were mad they were not in, which is one of the reasons they are working so hard now. And one of the big challenges that we face in the closing days of this election is to motivate the people that agree with us to the level that they are motivated. Were you surprised about the difficulties you had in your own party with Sam Nunn on the gays thing and Moynihan on health care and Kerrey on the economic plan? Not particularly, because I will come back to the gays in the military. Do not , because we have run through that. And the answer to that is, no, because a lot of the Democrats who were culturally conservative and pro-military thought that gays in the military coming up so early was inconsistent with the whole New Democratic approach we were taking. But as I explained to you, I think when we talked last, I did not bring it up first. Now, on the other issues, the fundamental problems there was that there were no easy answers. I mean, Bob Kerrey comes from Nebraska. He and Jim Exon were Democrats, but Nebraska is one of the most Republican States in the country, and I think, you know, he thought we should have maybe cut spending a little more or raised taxes a little less, or cut taxes a little less on lower income working people so we would not have to raise it as much, you know. And I think and we'd been through that tough Presidential campaign. But I did not take offense to that. Moynihan believed, first of all, with some justification, that he knew more about most areas of social policy than anybody else did. I think he thought we were making a political mistake not to do welfare reform first, which turned out to be right. We did make a political mistake not to do welfare reform first. And secondly, I think he felt that the system in Washington could not absorb in a 2-year period the economic plan which he strongly supported. The NAFTA trade agreement, which he strongly supported, which was controversial within our party, and then this major health care thing. He really did not believe and he is told me that, you know, he said, you know, We just do not have time to do these.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2050, "text": "He said, The system cannot absorb this much change in this short a time. Hillary gets a bum rap for that. That was basically my fault, because I knew that basically there is only two ways to get to universal coverage. You either have to have a taxpayer subsidy, which is what we have done now with the Children's Health Insurance Program, because now we have got the number of uninsured people going down in America for the first time in a dozen years, primarily because in the Balanced Budget Act, we insisted the Democrats did on getting the Children's Health Insurance Program, which is the biggest expansion of Government-financed health care since Medicaid. You either have to do it that way or you have to have an employer mandate where the employers have to provide the health insurance, and then you exempt smaller businesses and subsidize that somewhat. I did not take offense at it. You know, they thought I was being bullheaded, and I think, in retrospect, they were probably right. What was your relationship with Newt like? I had an unusual relationship with him. Was it   It depended on which Newt showed up. But I thought the good Newt, I found engaging, intelligent, and that we were surprisingly in agreement in the way we viewed the world. But you know, Newt supported me in virtually all of my foreign policy initiatives. And after he got his Congress, he realized that a hundred of them had never had a passport. I remember him calling me once, wanting me to get them to go on foreign missions. He said, If you ask them, then they cannot be attacked back home for boondoggle trips. So we actually had a very cordial relationship. He was also very candid with me about his political objectives. And he, in turn, from time to time, would get in trouble with the rightwing of his own caucus because they said I could talk him into too much. We had a pretty good relationship. You know, on the other hand, as I told you, when he did things like blaming every bad thing that happened in America on Democrats in the 1960's and all that, I thought it was highly destructive. At some point, probably around 1996, I got to the point where I no longer had personal feelings about those things. But you know, things like the Whitewater investigation and the Travel Office investigation he was smart. He knew there was nothing in that stuff. It was all politics to him. It was about power.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2051, "text": "But he really did believe that the object of politics was to destroy your opponent. And you know, he ran Jim Wright out of the Congress on account of that. That is what he thought he was doing. And he had an enormous amount of success in the beginning, and he won the Congress basically by having that take-no-prisoners, be-against-everything approach. Did not he tell you once on the phone that he was planning to lead a revolution against you? Well, he thought he was leading a revolution, and I was in the way. And I think he really believed, after '94 What did you think when he says this to you? I am out there to destroy I am going to take you on. I thought he was a worthy adversary, and I thought I would defeat him, because I thought the American people would stick with me. I think he thought that he could create, for the rest of my Presidency, a sort of an almost a parliamentary system where he would be the prime minister and make the policy, and I'd be in charge of foreign policy, and he'd help me. I mean, historically, the Newt versus Bill, I was just trying to think back, there has not been as powerful I mean, powerful and as antagonistic a Speaker to the President, not in modern times. You had an actual enemy. You had somebody actually out there daily fighting you, not a not a Lyndon, not a McCormack. Everybody went with Reagan and gave him what he wanted. That is what they decided to do. And you know, now I have a Speaker in Hastert I can really work with. But he still has the dominant power in the caucus is Tom DeLay and Dick Armey. And if they had their druthers, you know, they'd still follow that approach. But the balance of authority is so power is so close in the House that more often than not, we work things out. But in the Senate, you have got the same thing with Lott. You know, Lott I have a very cordial personal relationship with. I have a lot in common with Lott in terms of our background and childhood and, you know, that whole thing. How did you develop your strategy in sort of dealing with Newt and outflanking him? Well, that is part of it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2052, "text": "You know, I felt after they won that when the people actually saw the fine print on their contract, they would think that there was a contract on America instead of a contract with America. And then I felt that I had to oppose them when I thought they were wrong. But I could not let them push me back into the old confrontation where they could say, Clinton's an old Democrat. He is defending everything, even the indefensible, so you may think we are going too far, but America has to change, because this is a country in constant change. So that was for example, instead of just fighting them on the budget, I offered my own balanced budget.  That is because I felt they had to have a chance to run their and then when we got to the Government shutdown, I was not just against what they were doing; I had an alternative. See, I believe and I think it is more important, I think it is easier for Republicans to be against everything than Democrats because people view us as the party of affirmative Government. And since I believed in balancing the budget, I just did not want to do it the way they wanted to. What is your bottom line on Newt, historically? I mean, what is your if you were an historian, what would you say about Gingrich? That he was immensely successful in, first of all, consolidating the power of the Republican Party and its rightwing and then in winning the Congress, winning the historic struggle for Congress in '94 by opposing me right down the line. And in '94, the people the economy was getting better, but people did not feel it yet. The budget we passed did not impose great tax burdens on ordinary Americans, but they did not know it yet. And the crime bill we passed was going to help bring the crime rate down without interfering with people's gun rights, but they did not know it yet. So you had the best of all times to run through a gaping hole. And then I had made the mistake of trying to do both, trying to do the economic plan and NAFTA, which dispirited some of our base supporters. And then I tried to do health care under circumstances that were literally impossible. You could not get a universal coverage plan passed through Congress. So I made a lot of errors, and he ran through them, and he therefore changed the Congress.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2053, "text": "Then I think people will say that we had one of these historic battles that periodically happens in America about the role of the National Government and, indeed, what the meaning of the Nation is. And I think he thought he could actually carry out the revolution that President Reagan talked about, you know, drastically shrinking the Federal Government, drastically limiting its ability to act in the social sphere and moving it to the right. And to me, we had a series of battles that were really the latest incarnation of this ageold battle of what does it mean to be an American, what is the idea of America, what is the purpose of a nation? There was my veto of the Newt tax bill after Newt was gone. The battle over the same thing is now happening, shaping up over the courts. The most important issue in this election may well be what happens to the courts. Because there is now already we are one vote away from having enough votes that would repeal Roe v.Wade. But there is this other issue in the courts which I think is quite profound, which is, there are five votes right now to restrict the ability of Congress to require the States to participate in protecting the American people in a lot of fundamental ways. But it is the same battle that we had between George Washington and John Adams and Alexander Hamilton and John Marshall on the one side and Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Payne, and a lot of other people on the other in the beginning; the same battle Abraham Lincoln had around the time of the Civil War. Did the Federal Government have the power to enslave them? The same battle we had at the dawn of the industrial revolution when Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson asserted the authority of the Nation to proscribe basic conditions in the workplace and protection. And it was the same battle that Franklin Roosevelt fought. Now we are in the fifth battle over how to define America. And in the first three skirmishes, we won. But I see that as a big issue in this election, a huge issue. Let us talk about impeachment a little. You are going to in the history books, it is going to say, of course, that you were the second President ever to be impeached. Do you feel that that will cloud your real accomplishments? And I am just grateful that, unlike Andrew Johnson, I was less embittered by it and I had more support from the public and in the Congress, so I was able to resume my duties and actually get a lot done for the American people in the aftermath.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2054, "text": "Did you ever get so angry during it that you think it clouded your judgment? I got angry, but I always was alone or with friends who would deflate me, so I do not think it ever clouded my judgment on any official thing I took. You know, I realized that when it was all over, I would have the responsibility to work with the Republicans, as well as the Democrats. One of the things I had to learn as I said, it took me almost my whole first term to learn it is that at some point Presidents are not permitted to have personal feelings. When you manifest your anger in public, it should be on behalf of the American people and the values that they believe and the things they do. You just cannot a lot of this stuff you cannot take personally and especially when I realized that for the people that were directing it, it was just politics. You know, it was about power and politics. So I was largely able to purge myself of it. And I had very strong personal feelings about it, but I tried never to talk about it. in private? Yes, because Presidents will always be under siege in some way or another. And if you do not want the job and the attendant heat, you should not ask for it. Does it make you uncomfortable to talk about this episode now? I just think the less I say about it right now, the better. What do you think of Ken Starr now? I think he did what he was hired to do. You told me you never really met him and had no ill feelings. I met him. You know, I met him once when he interviewed me. He was hired to keep the impeachment thing I mean, to keep the inquiry going past the '96 election and to do whatever damage he could. That is why he was put in, and he did what they asked him to do. What is your take on Henry Hyde, who was supposedly Mr. Reasonable, and then he seemed to defy the will of the people after the '98 elections, where he kind of got repudiated? Well, he did what he was hired to do, too. I mean, the rightwing was in control of the Congress, and they thought they had paid in '98, and they thought they would never have to pay again. They thought it was a free shot to put a hit on me, and so they did.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2055, "text": "Once the elections were done, I remember seeing you a week before, and clearly Democrats were going to take the House in a way they had never taken it before in an off election. And it was a referendum on this issue, and then they went ahead him and the Republican leadership went ahead despite that. What does that tell you about them? That they wanted to they stayed with their rightwing, and they thought they would pay no price in 2000, because they thought, whatever happened, it would all be over by now. And they thought they could put a black mark on me in history, and that was really important to them. They were just angry, and they thought they had paid once, and they would not have to pay this time, because the American people would move on to other things as they always do. And so they did it. It is not an issue now in this election, really. It is in three or four House seats, but not many. It is an issue to me. I have tried the only way it should be an issue in the election is that it indicates how important it is, if they should maintain their majority, they have somebody in the White House that can restrain them. Because it is just an example of other things they were doing to the environmental laws of the country, to the education laws, to the health care system. The American people should not be expected to dwell on it. They should not have to deal with it. Who do you think really came through for you and got up and defended you? There were 800 people, including a lot of Republicans who did not even like me, who filed testimony talking about how inappropriate it was. Then there was that bipartisan panel of career prosecutors who said that no one would bring any criminal charges on this. So a lot of people who came forward who had no particular reason to do it but who cared about their country and were offended by what was going on. Do you think in some way this is sort of a referendum on sort of the nature of morality or the character of America in some way? No, I think people strongly disagree with what I did. I think that they just were able to discriminate between a bad personal mistake and the justification for a Constitutional crisis. I think it said more about their ability to discriminate between two different kinds of problems than any changed moral standards. In the sixties we always talked still they talk about karma, you know, your karma?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2056, "text": "Did you ever look at it in terms of what is in my karma that I got this shit-hammer dropped on me? If I had not made a personal mistake, they would not have the pretext to do what they did, even though what they did was wrong. Do you think it benefited us, that process, that we learned from all that, from the impeachment process? Well, the one thing it did was it pointed out all the other excesses. What was that? That civil lawsuit against me was bogus. Even the judge, who was famous for disliking me personally, threw it out as having no merit. So I think that what it did was, at least for the time being, it took a lot of the venom out of our public life. You know, even as hard as George Bush and Al Gore are hitting each other now in this election, they are by and large hitting at each other over the issues. I mean, Bush has got some ad up now questioning Gore's integrity, which is amazing that Bush would question Gore's integrity, but anyway. But he knows that there is a certain number of voters who vote for Republicans because they are convinced that they are morally superior to Democrats, not withstanding the fact that we are awash in evidence now that they are not. And so he is doing that, but there has been very little of that, even from him. They are basically the level of venom is lower than it was. And maybe I absorbed enough for several years. Because I think it is just crazy for America with all these fabulous opportunities and some pretty stiff challenges out there to waste our elections and our public officials' time with things that we know are bogus or trivial and cost the taxpayers a fortune, for no other purpose than for one side to pursue political advantage over another. There will always be some of that, but my instinct is that in the next 4 years, we will have a lot less of it. The press as President, you have a relationship with the press that is unique to anybody in the world. What is your take on the press in America? Well, I think that, first of all, it is very difficult to generalize. I think that on the balance, it is a great advantage for the President to have a bully pulpit that can reach everyone in America and everyone in the world instantaneously.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2057, "text": "And any criticisms that a President has about negative press or incessant carping or whatever you have got to temper that with the fact that they make it possible for you to do your job in a communications age. And they work especially the working press, I have an enormous amount of respect for them. I mean these people that are on this airplane, because I have worked hard and I keep long hours, it is a hard job for them, because they have to they go around in the vans, not in Air Force One or the helicopters. They have a lot of hard work to do, and I think by and large, most of them do it as well as they can and as honestly as they can. I have an enormous amount of respect for them. Now, there is another part of the press that are kind of part of almost a celebrity political press that are that go all the way from the columnists to the people that are on all these talk shows all the time. And they have in order for them to be successful, their comments have to have edge. They tend to be more negative and more dogmatic in their attempts to be and sometimes there is more heat than light in a lot of what is said in a lot of those forums formats. But that is part of the new age we are living in. And also they are sort of on the cutting edge between the serious press, the tabloid press, and pure political advocacy and entertainment. You have got all these segments now that are kind of blurred together, compounded by a 24-hour news cycle, and the fact that there are umptydump channels people can watch, some of which are news channels that know they have to go after narrowly segmented markets, and they are targeting certain audiences. So it is a very different press environment, and if you took it all seriously, it would run you nuts. But you cannot once you realize kind of what the environment is, you just learn to deal with it. I think the important thing is to for Presidents, especially to try to hear the criticism, because it is not always wrong. I find it easier, really, when it comes from thoughtful columnists who are really trying to make a serious contribution to the national debate. Even in some other forums it is important. Which columnists or reporters do you think have been particularly good or particularly smart in their coverage of you in the last 8 years?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2058, "text": "Well, I think just in terms of columnists, I think Tom Friedman is the best foreign policy writer we have today, by a long stretch. I think he understands the world we are living in and the one toward which we are moving. Therefore, whether he is criticizing me or analyzing an issue or whatever he is doing, he is trying to do it from a completely honest point of view of trying to say, here is where the world is; here is where we are going. I think Ron Brownstein is one of the best political columnists in America today, one of the two or three best. And you know, he understands this whole New Democrat movement that I have been a part of. He understood the ideas that underlay the '92 campaign and the whole Democratic Leadership Council effort, everything we are trying to do. And he made it his business to study that. I regret that his other responsibilities at the Post do not give him time to write more columns, because I think he is very good. No, I think that it was sort of like this Wen Ho Lee deal in a way. I mean, the same guy got a story, and it was kind of overwritten, and dire things were predicted. But I think whatever I feel about that, it has to be tempered by the fact that the Times has a serious conscience when it comes to the national issues. I think they really have tried consistently to think on the public issues, I think they really have done an excellent job of analysis and are trying to come out in the right place in the right way. So whatever I feel about that is tempered by that. Do you think institutionally it is working right, the press as a whole, the major newspapers, the networks, and so forth? I think they are doing the best they can in a very new and different environment. I have a lot of sympathy with them. So you do not have resentment towards them? Like, a lot of Presidents just hated once done, they just hated them. You know, how can Presidents hate the press? I mean, they can gripe all you want about all the negative coverage you get on the evening news or on these talk shows or being blasted in the newspaper or having to get on something where they are dead wrong like on Whitewater, whatever it is dead wrong, but still, every day they are right in all kinds of other things about all the things that affect the American people and their lives.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2059, "text": "And anytime you want a microphone to have your say, you have got it. What creature comforts are you going to miss the most about leaving the White House, not living there? Everybody says I will miss Air Force One the most once I have to return to commercial travel. But what I will miss the most is not the creature comforts; it is the honor of living in the White House, which I have loved. I have loved living there, because I love my country; I love the history of my country. I know I was a pretty good American historian before I got there, and I know a lot more than I did then, and I have read a lot about Presidents that most people do not know much about, including me before I got there. And even more than that, I will miss the work. I love the work. I actually have loved doing this job. Even in the worst times the whole impeachment thing I just thank God every day I can go to work. I love the job. I have always loved it. Looking at the other side of the coin, what is there anything that seems attractive to you about not living there anymore? It will be the first time in 20 years you know, I have been I was Governor for 12 years, and 10 years, the last 10 years in a row so it will be the first time in 18 years that I have really had a private home that was my primary residence, and where I will get up every day, feeling a responsibility to be of public service, but knowing that I am basically in control of my life again. And it will be an interesting challenge for me. Eighteen years is a long time to be a chief executive, living in public housing, with every day scripted out you know, hours and hours a day, particularly if you work like I do. It is a challenge, and I am going to be interested to see whether I can meet it and what it means, you know, to go into this next chapter of my life. I am actually excited about it. What is the one thing about being what is the one thing that would surprise either Bush or Gore about being President that they just cannot know now? What advice would you give the next President? Now, Al will not be as surprised by that, because he is been there 8 years. It is another good argument for voting for him, because he is experienced and he makes good decisions. He makes good decisions, and he is had experience.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2060, "text": "And the environment, I think, will be less hostile for either one of them than it was for me, and they will have more of an opportunity to craft cooperative solutions, because almost under any conceivable scenario, the Congress will be even more closely divided than it is now. You know, the Democrats are going to pick up some seats in the Senate. They might even be in control. But if they are, they will just have a one-seat majority here, too, and I think the Democrats will win the House. But if they do, they will not have any bigger majority than the Republicans do now, maybe a little more, but not much. So you will have a very closely divided Government which will require them to all work together. So I think they may have a less hostile environment than I did, and I hope they do, but I think they will still be surprised at how many different things they will have crash in on them at once. What would you tell them to do? You say, look, here is what you have got to do as the next President. Here is what I would like you to do. Well, first of all, I think after the election, they ought to get more rest than I did. You know, I did not really take a vacation. I think they ought to clear their heads. I would advise them to work as hard as they can to get a good Cabinet and a good staff, and then really emphasize teamwork, and when you come to the tough decisions, do what you think is right. A lot of these decisions, you know, that were unpopular that I made Bosnia, Haiti, debt relief in Mexico, taking on the NRA, doing the debt thing reducing the deficit, I mean, right now, it is like smooth sailing. But it is just not in the nature of human existence to be free of difficulty. And I think when you come down to those tough decisions, you just have to do what you think is right, tell the American people why you did it, and hope they will go along with you. So this comes out after the election. So do you want to give me a prediction. And I think if he does not , the only reason that I think that he might not win is if they vote a higher percentage of the people that want Bush to be President vote than the percentage of people that want Gore to be President.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjannwennerrollingstonemagazine", "title": "Interview With Jann Wenner of Rolling Stone Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jann-wenner-rolling-stone-magazine", "publication_date": "02-11-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2061, "text": "Could I begin, ENTITY, with a twopart question? What is the significance of the South African election to you and the American people? And do you have any particular message for the people of South Africa that we could take back to them? First of all, I think it would be difficult to overstate the significance of this election to the American people for many reasons, first of all, our own history of racial division. We, after all, fought a great Civil War over slavery, and we continue to deal with our own racial challenges today. So all Americans, I think, have always been more drawn to the problems and the promise of South Africa than perhaps other nations have been. Secondly, our own civil rights movement has, for decades, had a relationship with the antiapartheid movement in South Africa. So this will be a great sense of personal joy to many, many Americans who have been involved in this whole issue personally. And finally, it is important to the United States because of the promise of harmony and prosperity in South Africa and what that might mean, not only to South Africa but to many other nations in the region and to the prospect of a revitalization, a new energy, a new peace, a new sense of possibility throughout at least the southern part of Africa. The United States is elated at the prospect of these elections. We have contributed to the effort to fight apartheid. We have tried to support the effort to have good elections and to make them meaningful, and we want to celebrate with and support South Africa. But we realize that the real work will begin after the election, of continuing to live in harmony, of fighting the new problems every day, of making democracy work, of dealing with the social problems and the very severe economic problems. And we intend to be a partner from the beginning. Shortly after the election I will announce a substantial increase in United States assistance and support for building South Africa economically, dealing with the social problems, helping the political system to work. And then in June, we will have here a very large conference sponsored by the Secretary of Commerce, Ron Brown, in Atlanta, bringing together large numbers of American business people to give us the opportunity to urge them to be involved with South Africa in the rebuilding. Well, I do believe that we ought to dramatically increase our assistance, which we will do. I think we ought to dramatically increase our private investment in South Africa, which I intend to work on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2062, "text": "I think we ought to do what we can to mobilize the resources of other nations to also contribute. And I intend to spend a lot of time and effort on that. I do not know that I would say it is exactly like the Marshall plan or that that is exactly what is needed, but it is obvious that a lot of money, a lot of investment, and a lot of opportunity is going to be needed to sort of jumpstart South Africa. And I think that the promise of this new democracy is that people will be able to live up to their potential. And I intend to do what I can to be a strong partner in that. This is the last one to would you you would probably be going to Africa soon, and is there any intention of paying a visit to our country? I assure you I am going to send a very high-level delegation to the inauguration to celebrate the elections. And I have been talking with my staff about when I can go to Africa. This year, because of the 50th anniversary of the ending of World War II, I will wind up making three trips to Europe, and I will go to Asia in the fall. But in 1995, 1996, my travel schedule is more open. I think that the United States, frankly, has not with the exception of South Africa has not paid as much attention to Africa as it should have and to its long-term potential and particularly to those countries that are trying to resolve their political problems and do things to help their people. Well, I do have some thoughts, actually. I think it has worked in South Africa partly because people with enormous influence decided to be statesmen instead of wreckers. After a certain amount of time, you had the leaders of the various groups deciding that there was no longer a future in fighting and killing and dying, that splitting the country up was not an option, and that somehow they were going up or down together. And then they translated those understandings into concrete commitments, not just an election. An election is only part of it, although a big part. I think the decision to go for a government of national unity for 5 years is absolutely critical to this and making the decision before you know the outcome of the election. The decision to have a bill of rights, the decision to have a constitutional court, I think all these things have made a huge difference.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2063, "text": "And I think what you have got in other places, these sort of ancient divisions racial, ethnic, and religious divisions where people have not come to that wisdom; they do not understand yet, for whatever reason, that in the end they will be better off if they work together and that controlling territory is of nowhere near the significance in terms of quality of life and meaning of life that it was 100 years ago. It is almost as if, in some of the places that you have mentioned and you have written so powerfully about Bosnia, and I know you care a lot about Azerbaijan; you have the Abkhaz problem, you have all these things it is almost as if the cold war sort of imposed a freeze-frame on the history of a lot of these places. And then when it went away, people woke up and resumed the attitudes that they had held in the early part of the 20th century, which they carried over from the 19th century, as if there had been no communications revolution, as if there had been no changes in the global economy, as if all these things had happened. Here in this country, too, the ethnic diversity of the United States ought to be our greatest asset as we move into the next century. It used to be in America that the burden we carried was the burden of the fight between blacks and whites going back to slavery and the Civil War and the aftermath. And there was a study released in our press last week that said sometimes these groups resented each other as much as they resented the white majority, depending on what the facts were. So we are still dealing with this. I have to tell you, I believe that if the elections come off well, and especially in the aftermath of the agreement yesterday where Chief Buthelezi agreed with Mr. Mandela and Mr. de Klerk to participate in the elections and they worked out the constitutional role for the King of the Zulus I think when that was done I think if this election comes off, it will send a message around the world that there is another way to deal with these problems and that if it can be done in South Africa, how can you justify the old-fashioned killing and fighting and dying over a piece of land, over divisions which are not as important as what unites people in other places. I mean, it is amazing; you think of it contrast what we see in Gorazde with what we see about to happen in South Africa. It is a matter of enormous historical impact.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2064, "text": "And I think that when it is shown around the world it has to reverberate in ways that we cannot fully assess but that have to be positive. Well, first of all, we have not finalized the amount of the aid package. We are working on it now, and we are going to get as much money as we can during this fiscal year from funds that are idle in the appropriate accounts. That is, there are some we are looking, we are scouring the Government accounts for things, money that will not be spent that we can put into this. And we will do as much as we possibly can. South Africa is a country of 40 million people where 7 million are homeless, for all practical purposes. If you look at it in the larger sense, if you look at the amount of investment we have, we have only a billion dollars invested now in South Africa since the advent of the sanctions and I am glad that I could lift the sanctions but a billion dollars. In the early eighties we had $3 billion. And one of the things that I intend to do in June with this conference that Secretary Brown is having is to do everything I can to accelerate return of American investment to the levels of the early eighties, and then to exceed that, because we know, as a practical matter, if you look at the incredible human and natural resources of South Africa, that there would be more American money, private sector American money than Government money. Now, next year and the year after we are going to stay after this thing on a multiyear basis we may be able to do better. But I think, given the condition of our budget laws and where the money is right now and the fact that we are in the middle of a fiscal year, we are going to do quite well. What are you trying to do with this money? Well, first of all, I want to encourage the South African leadership, once it is elected, to tell us what they think should be done with it. I do not want to be we are in no position to be dictating that; we should be asking them. But I can tell you, I know we can make it available for economic development projects, for human resource projects like housing and health and education, and for democracy and institution building how do you set up a system which will deliver these services and function properly.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2065, "text": "It occurs to me, for example, the interconnection in South Africa and southern Africa generally, the transportation and waterways and the potential for telecommunications interconnection to leverage economic growth explosively throughout the region, is very great. It might be that your leaders would say, Well, if you have this amount of dollars, put it into these investments because they will generate more opportunities. It may be that your leaders will say, We cannot stand the sight of all these people living in substandard conditions; put more of it in housing. It might be that there is a public health problem that you want to deal with. I think that we should be guided in part, or in large measure, by what we are asked to do by the new leaders of the new South Africa. ENTITY, do you have any plans to invite the new South African President to Washington? Yes, I will issue the invitation promptly after the election. Well, we are certainly prepared to do that, to make that kind of investment. And we have, as you know, invested some money, as I said, since I have been ENTITY, I think somewhere in the range of $35 million, just to try to make the political process work right. If you ask me one thing I have learned in my own life growing up as a young boy in the segregated South, it is that this is something that you never solve, you just have to keep improving, you have to keep working with. My own interest in politics in America was inflamed overwhelmingly by my opposition to racial segregation in my own State, my own community, our own neighborhoods, our schools, and the terrible consequences which flowed from that. And so I thought, well, you know, when I grow up maybe there is something I can do to solve this. And when I ran for public office and when I served as a Governor of my State, and then when I became ENTITY, I think that I will always be able to say I did things to make it better. But this is not the sort of thing you solve. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, identifiable differences will always be used by narrow-minded people or frustrated people or ignorant people or sometimes bad people as a lever, a wedge, a means of acquiring power or influence or dominance or just inflicting harm.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2066, "text": "The ultimate test of your democracy will be whether a disciplined effort can be made to take the attitudes represented, as you acknowledge, by your leaders and keep working until they become more and more and more real in the daily lives of every citizen of your country. It will get better, but you will always have to work on it. If they work at it I think it will get better. But I think you will, first of all, people will always tend to show a certain affinity to organize their living patterns around people who are more like them. But some people will seek a more integrated life. That is my experience in the South; that is my experience in America. I mean, I was amazed when I traveled around in other parts of America that a lot of people that I knew in other parts of the country lived a more segregated existence than I did, for whatever reason, maybe just the nature of the population of their communities. But I think there will always be a certain amount of cohesion of people of the same race or ethnic group or religious group, particularly if they have strong religious convictions. You see that all over the world. You see that here. To a certain extent, there is nothing wrong with that and it is not unhelpful. What is unhelpful is if that is used as a way to divide people and if it leads to some sort of legal or practical discrimination. And I think what Mr. Lewis is saying is absolutely right. We still have too much of that in America. We had a meeting here this morning, just for example, we had a meeting this morning; we had a couple of hundred people in the Rose Garden to talk about how we could better immunize all of our children in America. And it is appalling that a country as wealthy as we are only immunizes about two-thirds of our kids, about 64 percent of our children under 2 with all the recommended childhood immunizations. And it is impossible to avoid the conclusion that one of the reasons is that children under 2 are more likely to be children of color and more likely to be poor than adults over 50 who tend to make the decisions that control public policy in this country. So we had a meeting today to celebrate trying to organize ourselves with some discipline at the community level to eradicate not only a health problem but a problem of discrimination against the young, the poor, and often, children of color.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2067, "text": "But I think you see this played out over and over and over again in every society. And what I think is going to happen in this country is that increasingly we will come to understand that the fact that we are a multiracial society is an enormous asset in a global economy, but only if we take advantage of it, only if we educate all our children, keep them healthy, and teach people to live together in ways that permit them all to succeed. South Africa has an enormous asset now. You have a biracial society; you have some other ethnic groups, too, I know, and mixed race, but you have essentially two great large ethnic groups of people, each of whom have different experiences, different backgrounds, different contacts throughout the world now. It can be a terrific asset for you that you are different, but only if you use it. You can now turn it into an asset. So I guess my answer to Tony is, some places it will be better; some places it will be worse throughout the world. highly homogeneous, coherent societies that think they can operate with great discipline by their own sets of cultural rules which are widely accepted within the society, who will then attempt to do well in the global economy by having high rates of savings, investment, and exporting to others but keeping their own life; or open, multiethnic societies which welcome the whole world and try to find a way to make strength out of diversity. And what you are going to see is each of those societies will be dealing with the conflicts that any course of action dictates. You have got a great reform movement going on in Japan, fighting great opposition, because they are saying, We need to be more open; we need to appreciate diversity more. But we do not want to be so open we do not have any discipline or control or direction, or whatever. And you have America saying, This diversity is a great asset for us, but not if we have so little discipline our crime rates are too high, our education systems are too poor, or whatever. So you have these two great models, each of them trying to find the strengths of one another. You have a chance to do that in South Africa. And it is a unique opportunity, at least in that part of the African Continent. And I think the world will come beating a path to your doorstep.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2068, "text": "It will not just be the United States; the whole world will start showing up down there when you pull this election off, because they will be so exhilarated by the moral and the practical potential of what it is you are engaged in. That is what I believe. I'd like to answer the question it is a good question and a fair one and I'd like to sort of I will give you two answers, consistent one with the other, but I think showing what I perceive to be the dimension of the problem. First of all, the leaders of the country have taken great steps to minimize the prospect of that development by agreeing to a constitution with a strong bill of rights and a constitutional court and by agreeing to a government of national unity and by also, frankly, siding with international global developments that are consistent with human rights, renouncing terrorism, renouncing the spread of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. All these things augur for a government that will be balanced and fair and will not tolerate as official policy the abuse of human rights. If that should occur, I would think the United States should have the same obligation to speak against it there as we did before in South Africa and as we do now elsewhere in the world. I think the far greater danger for the man who wrote the piece and it was a very moving piece, I thought the far greater danger is what is in the heart of millions of people who to go back to your question who have not yet bought into the whole process that is unfolding. And who knows how many people there are carrying what wounds inside who may think they have some opportunity and some position to which they might be elected or just some opportunity because of their newfound freedom for payback time? I mean, that is something that no one can calculate. In other words, democracy requires every day millions and millions and millions of decisions in a country as large as 40 million, by people they just make decisions sometimes you will begin to make them almost subconsciously to support the democratic process, to show personal restraint, to respect the rights of other people, to deal with all these things.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2069, "text": "I think that is going to be the far bigger challenge, is when you get the government in place and you have got the laws, you have got the bill of rights, you have got all this stuff, the government's going to try to do the right thing, I think the majority party will try to do the right thing what will happen is, what about all the people up and down the line? And what is in their hearts? Those are things that happen to free societies, and you will just have to work at stamping them out and minimizing them. I think the United States should focus more on Africa as a whole, as a continent. Do you intend to do that? And I intend to do that. Now, you know today, of course, we are profoundly I know that I will not use your term, but you know what occupies our headlines, of course, are in the north, Somalia and Sudan and the problems there and then moving down the continent to Rwanda and Burundi and then moving down to Angola where more children have been injured by land mines than in any war in human history. It is not on CNN at night, so people do not talk about it. And we are terribly troubled by Rwanda now, but it was not so many months ago that in a period of months it is estimated that as many as a quarter of a million or more people died in Burundi. There are other countries where progress is being made, where democracy is beginning to work, where people are beginning to try to put together these things that will make a successful country. And it seems to me that the United States ought to be working with countries that are trying to make good things happen, as well as doing what we can to alleviate human suffering where there is a tragedy. And I think we need a more balanced and more aggressive policy in Africa, and I am hopeful that we will be able to provide one. We have been so caught up with our own financial problems and cutting back on everything. And in our country, foreign aid of all kinds has a history of being unpopular among the people and, therefore, among the Congress. But I think that if there is a success in South Africa, which I expect there to be, I believe America will try to come to you; I believe the world will try to come to you; I think there will be a fascination about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjournalistssouthafrica", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Journalists on South Africa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-journalists-south-africa", "publication_date": "20-04-1994", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2071, "text": "The first thing I want to ask you is, how can you feel so secure about your security right now? In fact, when the incident occurred, within a matter of seconds a Secret Service agent was upstairs at the White House there with me. They have worked very hard to increase their ability to protect the President every year. And they get better at it every year. I have a high level of confidence in them. This incident could have happened at any time, I suppose. I regret it, but I do not think the American people should worry about it. We live in a democracy. The one thing I do hope people will draw from this incident is that the congressional Members who were brave enough to vote for the crime bill, to stand up to the brutal pressure the NRA put on them and the threats they leveled against them, to try to get these assault weapons off the street were right. That man had a modified assault weapon with a magazine with at least 20 bullets. And I think it is a good thing that we are trying to move against that. But in a free society where people have free movement and where there are lots of guns, this kind of thing can occur. We have to get out here and be with one another and talk to one another. So I am just going about my job and doing it with a very high level of confidence in the people whose job it is to protect the President. ENTITY, hearing that from you makes us feel a lot better. We asked our viewers to call into us, to write into us, to E-mail us with their questions for you tonight, so I'd like to take some time and talk about some of their questions. Linda Parker from Hartford wants to know how you feel about colleagues who have distanced themselves from you lately. Congressman Sam Gejdenson and Jim Maloney, who is running for Gary Franks' seat, did not show up when you appeared here a couple of weeks ago. How do you feel when your colleagues do this? Well, first of all, I can say for Sam Gejdenson that is just not an accurate characterization. I went to his district at his invitation and campaigned for him at a time when nationally I was not in nearly as good a shape in the polls as I am now, so I just think that is a bum rap. And Mr. Maloney, my wife has been to Connecticut campaigning for him. I took no offense at that. I think that it was a very successful trip to Connecticut.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjanetpeckinpaughwfsbtelevisionhartfordconnecticut", "title": "Interview With Janet Peckinpaugh of WFSB Television, Hartford, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-janet-peckinpaugh-wfsb-television-hartford-connecticut", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2072, "text": "Afterward, surveys show that the support rose for Mr. Curry, our candidate for Governor up there. And I feel very good about the State of Connecticut and the relationship I have had with the Democrats. I also think, however, that every Member of Congress and every Senator should seek to run, to some extent, a campaign that is tied not to the President but to their constituents. What I like to hear a Member say is, When I voted with the President, I did not do it for him, I did it for you. John Francis from Stratford wants to know your thinking on that. Well, here is what happened, and I think it is very important for the voters to listen to this. The Republicans put out this contract, and they said, If you will give us control of the Congress, we will take you back to what we did in the 1980's, trickle-down Reaganomics. We will give massive tax cuts, mostly to upper income people. That must be appealing in Connecticut; you have a lot of upper income people. We will give massive tax cuts. We will increase defense; we will increase Star Wars. And we will balance the budget in 5 years. That costs a trillion dollars. The only way to do that is to cut everything, including Social Security, across the board 20 percent. You say, we do not want to do that. Then you have to cut everything else in the Government across the board 30 percent. That bankrupts Medicare. If you do not do that, you are right back to where they were before, massive deficits, shipping jobs overseas. Connecticut lost 150,000 jobs in the last 4 years because of that kind of economic policy. We need to invest and grow with discipline. We do not need a lot of easy promises. We need to embrace the challenges of the global economy, invest, and grow. If they carry through on their promises, they cannot keep their promise to cut the taxes and increase the spending and balance the budget without going after it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjanetpeckinpaughwfsbtelevisionhartfordconnecticut", "title": "Interview With Janet Peckinpaugh of WFSB Television, Hartford, Connecticut", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-janet-peckinpaugh-wfsb-television-hartford-connecticut", "publication_date": "02-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2077, "text": "You are giving a major speech in Paris in a few hours' time on what you describe as a new era of transatlantic union. And obviously, the picture in Europe is much more encouraging, it would seem, than a few years ago. What is changed, in your view, and what needs to be fixed? This is the what is changed is the we have gone beyond the Iraq period for two reasons. People are beginning to see progress. And therefore, people that at least governments that felt like they did not want to participate in the liberation of Iraq have now wanted to participate in the reconstruction of Iraq. And their people are beginning to see some success. Maliki has moved things Stockholm and comports himself like a leader would, and he speaks hopefully about the future. Secondly, that there are a lot of issues that we are focused on that kind of send a signal that cooperation is necessary to change the conditions of the world for the better cooperation on ENTITY, cooperation on malaria, cooperation on trade, hopefully, discussion about climate change, cooperation in Afghanistan. In other words, the agenda is varied, and it is profound. And my speech basically says that by focusing on these issues and by working together in a unified way, we can be trans-formative, just like we were in the past. Europe used to be inward looking right after World War II necessarily so to rebuild. Now we can be outward looking as we help others. I also have a I am a believer that liberty is transformative the power of liberty is universal, that moral relativism must be rejected, and that we have got to have confidence in liberty to help others so that we are more secure ourselves. And one of the areas of Europe where liberty has been sort of partly transformative is clearly post-Soviet Russia. And you have had very strong personal relationship with Putin. First of all, is your assessment that Putin is still basically in charge? Let me start with the second. My personal relationship is important because we had differences. And therefore, if you work hard to establish a relationship of trust, that you are then able to air out your differences in a way that is respectful of the other person, and at the same time, find common ground. One area of common ground that has really not been given much attention is Iran. I agreed that the Iranians should have they have the sovereign right to have civilian nuclear power. Putin obviously believes they should; witness the cooperation on Bushehr.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2078, "text": "We both agree, however, that they cannot be trusted with the knowledge that comes from enrichment. And therefore, Putin suggested to the Iranians that Russia provide the enriched uranium necessary to run their fuel plant. And as I said yesterday in the press conference, that this really undermines the argument for the Iranians because if, in fact, their only focus is on civilian nuclear power, they readily accept the plant, the fuel, and the offer of Russia to pick up the spent fuel. So there are areas where we cooperate, and there are areas where we have disagreements. And yet I believe the best foreign policy for the American ENTITY is to be in a position to earn the trust of those where there is not a hundred-percent agreement. And by the way, any American ENTITY will find out there is never a hundred-percent agreement, even with your closest friends. And so the first part of the question yes, look, I think it is I went to Sochi. Putin introduced me to Medvedev. And he, in not only his body language, but in his words to me that Medvedev is going to be in charge of foreign policy. I think it is I will take him for his word, and then we will watch and see what happens. How concerned are you about issues like human rights in Russia?  I think it matters when people speak up, whether it be in Russia or China or anywhere else. In Russia's case, there was early on in my Presidency, I remember talking to Vladimir Putin on behalf of the Catholic Church, where there were concerns about the Church being able to have a robust presence. Vladimir Putin is sensitive to religious issues. He has a beautiful little Orthodox church on his own property, which he proudly showed me and Laura one time. He made sure I met some of the Jewish community when I was there in Russia. And so he is sensitive to religious liberty, more so than some other countries. And is Western leverage reduced by the fact that Russia has a good chunk of the world's natural energy resources? I think it certainly changes the equation on a lot of foreign policy. It is interesting to watch the European Union wrestle with energy independence. Early in my Presidency, nations were saying they were going to get rid of nuclear power.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2079, "text": "And I questioned them quietly, on an individual basis, about that decision, because if you get rid of one source of power, you have to find another source of power, unless, of course, you do not care whether your economy grows. So I predicted to some of these leaders that there would be an issue in terms of having a sole source supplier, particularly of natural gas from Russia. And my only point is, is that this energy issue complicates a lot of foreign policy issues, including that between the EU and Russia, as well as that between the United States and Venezuela, or the world and Iran. And the question is, what do you do about it? What we need to do about it in the United States is to get this Democratically controlled Congress to allow us to explore for oil and gas. We did an energy study when I first became ENTITY that predicted it would be an issue if we did not explore for oil and gas. And what people do not understand is hydrocarbons are necessary as we transition to a new era, based upon new technologies. It takes time and money to develop these technologies. The world is in the process of doing that. The United States is spending a lot of money on research, both privately and publicly. And yet we forgot the notion of transitioning. And so we do not explore in ANWR, we do not explore for oil shale, we do not explore off the coast of America, and we should be. In terms of the oil price, which is obsessing most of the world now, is there anything individual governments can do, in your view? It took us a while to get to where we are; it is going to take us a while to get out of it. And the truth of the matter is that there is either got to be more supply or less demand. And demand does not decline overnight, although patterns and habits are beginning to change in the United States. You notice some of these car manufacturers are now announcing they are going to be manufacturing smaller automobiles. I think that people have got to recognize that, I mean, our policy in America has been robust on the development of new technologies and weak on finding enough hydrocarbons so that we can become less dependent on foreign sources of oil. You mean the magic wand? And in terms of these conferences, I notice there is going to be a conference in Jeddah, and your national security staff I was asked this at a press conference last night.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2080, "text": "Of course, I am going to go home and take a look at what it all means, and I will decide who is going to attend on our behalf. But if I might repeat, the solution to the price of hydrocarbons is either more hydrocarbons or less usage of hydrocarbons. During my trips to the Middle East I have got great relations with the leaders there, and I talked to King Abdallah about increasing the supply of oil, on the theory that if you harm your consumers with high price, they will find other ways to power their economies as quickly as possible. And secondly, he should not want to see kind of a worldwide contraction as a result of consumers spending money on energy that ends up overseas, as opposed to spending money on opportunities in their respective economies. So I think people, if they take a sober look at the world's supply, there is just not a lot relative to demand. One of the things that could help is that if some countries, big consumers of hydrocarbons stop subsidizing their populations so that there is a response to price on the demand side. Iran has been very much on the agenda again, all this week Ahmadinejad has all but said no to the latest incentive package. If that stands, what is the next step in your view? And sometimes the world tends to focus on the process as opposed to the results. And I have tried during my Presidency to say, we need to focus on the results. Here is your way forward; if you choose not to, there will be a consequence. And the consequence in this case, in the diplomatic channel, is sanctions that are effective. So we will work with our partners on implementation of the sanctions thus far in place through the U.N., and work with them on additional sanctions, including through the U.N. process, as well as through the financial process. What is at stake here? On the theory that there are people inside Iran who, one, are suffering as a result of the decisions their Government made; but secondly, leaders inside of Iran who are sick and tired of the isolation brought about by this regime. In 2003, the Iranians had agreed to verifiably suspend; we had agreed to say, there is a way forward, working with our European partners. Then Ahmadi-nejad gets elected, changes the tone and changes the policy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2081, "text": "And so my only point there is that and this is the point I make to our partners is that the Iranians had adopted a different attitude during my Presidency in other words, in the relatively near past and that is not to say they cannot do it again. And the consequences of Iran having a nuclear weapon are substantial. They are substantial in the Middle East. If the people in the Middle East do not think that the United States and Europe, for example, are going to work to provide security, they will find their own ways to secure themselves. And what the Middle East does not need is a nuclear arms race. It does not need the instability that comes from an innate fear that the West is not strong enough or willing enough to take on the problem. In my judgment, it is the international issue that faces all of us. And therefore, success in Iraq is important; it has consequences for the Iranian issue. It is important for us to have security agreements with our friends. We, the United States, has security agreements with UAE, for example. When you go to the Middle East and you sit in my seat and listen, yes, there is concern about the Palestinian state. But the dialogue has shifted dramatically from solve the Palestinian state and you have solved the problems in the Middle East, to now solve the Iranian issue and you solve the problems in the Middle East. Let us assume that Ahmadinejad does not respond to this latest package, that there are additional sanctions. You clearly feel very strongly about this issue. That is why I put all options on the table. What happens if at the end of the year, you have tougher sanctions, but you still have no resolution? I do not want to speculate on that. My hope is, is that let us get the tough sanctions in place. And alternatives not just for the United States, alternatives for a lot of other countries, some of which the world needs to think about as we head into this arena. We do not want a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. But you would be willing to hand over a status quo which was slightly improved, i.e., tougher sanctions? Actually, it is not status quo because there is a multilateral forum in place that will enable ENTITYs to more likely deal with this issue. I have made it clear that it is difficult for the United States to achieve an issue in a one-on-one situation with people like Ahmadi-nejad or Kim Jong Il.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2082, "text": "I have changed the foreign policy of the United States to make it more multilateral because I understand that diplomacy without consequences is ineffective. And the only way to achieve consequences through diplomacy is for there to be a universal application, in this case, of sanctions. You know, I tell my partners, we are asking you to sanction. I know you are sitting there saying to yourself, Well, it is easy for him to say because they have already sanctioned. And the question facing countries is, does money trump effective diplomacy for the sake of peace and security? Postsurge, are things heading in the right direction, in your view? And as a result of violence being down, the economy is growing and political reconciliation is taking place. And the lesson learned in this postconflict period in both Iraq and Afghanistan is, you got to have security. I gave a speech at the Air Force Academy that said it is a different set of issues that we face now than we faced 60 years ago in postconflict. First of all, the conflicts took longer to resolve in World War II, and yet the reconstruction was done in relative peace and security. Here it took little time to accomplish the initial military objective, and reconstruction had to be done in the face of a lot of violence. And in 2006, it became apparent that our strategy of training and encouraging the Iraqis to take the lead was not working; sectarian violence was severe. As you know, I made the decision to send 30,000 more in because we recognized that and had belief that security would yield this kind of evolution of democracy, and it is. The number of laws they passed, the Iraqi Parliament have passed, have been I would say it certainly exceeded expectations. And they passed their budgets faster than we have passed our budgets. The British Government, Gordon Brown had said yesterday, I think, that he will announce sometime in the coming weeks future plans for British deployment in Iraq. British officers have acknowledged that in the recent fighting in Basra, the American military role was crucial to making sure that there was a response. Is there not a concern that, whatever the justifications for a British withdrawal, that a British pullout of troops could have an effect either on American deployment or on the situation as a whole? Or are you relaxed about it? I am , first of all, appreciative of the fact that Gordon Brown is constantly in dialogue with us about what he and his military are thinking.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2083, "text": "Secondly, we ourselves are bringing out troops based upon return on success. And thirdly, I am confident that he, like me, will listen to our commanders to make sure that the sacrifices that have gone forward will not be unraveled by drawdowns that may not be warranted at this point in time. I am looking forward to discussing with him. We have had some discussions. He was going to be at 3,500, I think, if I am not mistaken; he is now at 5,000. I think he is at 4,200. It is greater than he thought, in other words   In other words, the Government took a look and said, Well, maybe we ought to leave more troops in. My only point is, is that timetables you say, timetable for withdrawal, and our answer is, there should be no definitive timetable; there ought to be obviously a desire to reduce our presence, but it is got to be based upon success. All I can tell you is, from my perspective, the British response has been that way. They have said, we are going to have we think we will be at 3,500, but then adjusted their plans based upon the conditions. Still looking for them. And the obvious question your critics ask, particularly in Britain, is if we'd known at the time there were not any WMD, would there have been this war? Well, you know, that is one of those great hypotheticals that we did not know. Now having said that, I still strongly defend the decision. The world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power. But ENTITYs do not get to do redos; they do not get to do look-backs, ifs. All I can tell you is, is that we thought for certain there was weapons of mass destruction, as did the nations that voted for 1441. See, the interesting thing about history is that short-term, kind of momentary history, is that people forget what life was like at the moment that this decision was made. One, people forget that we tried to solve this problem diplomatically. Will Bush go to the United Nations, or will they move without trying to solve this problem diplomatically? Well, we did go to the United Nations; I insisted we go to the United Nations. And we worked diligently from the summer of 2002 until March of 2003 to see if we could not have solved this. We went back to the United Nations for a resolution.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2084, "text": "And in the meantime, we are working with our allies and friends. We did not realize, nor did anybody else, that Saddam Hussein felt like he needed to play like he had weapons of mass destruction. It may have been, however, that in his mind all this was just a bluff. After all, there had been 17 United Nations Security Council resolutions, the world was not serious, which leads me back to the point that when the world says something, it better have it better mean what it says, otherwise people who are destabilizing just do not take it seriously. And so I was asked in Germany one of the guys said, You making any mistakes? One of the mistakes was my language made it look like that I was anxious for war; that because of my language, I did not understand the consequences. Well, of course I understand the consequences. And I understand better than anybody that the Commander in Chief has got an obligation to comfort those who have lost a loved one because of his decision. And then the man went on and said, Well, was it a mistake to get rid of Sad-dam Hussein? You very movingly described in one interview this week that how difficult it is to put young American men and women in harm's way and how much time and energy you have tried to devote to doing what you can, obviously, to comfort the families of someone who has been killed And making sure they understand that the sacrifice will not go in vain. Nothing worse than a politician making decisions based upon the last Gallup poll when people's lives are at stake, or where they have made a sacrifice. And I tell these folks and they want to know look, there is a lot of them, and I have not visited with all the families. Many, many families look at me trying to determine whether or not, one, I believed that it was necessary; and two, whether or not I am going to let their son or daughter kind of lie in an empty grave when it comes to the sacrifice they made. They want to know whether or not the ENTITY if he believes it was necessary, whether or not he is going to see this thing through, regardless of what they are screaming on the TV sets. You are flying into Britain where your public awaits you, and you know there is a tough public there sometimes. Do I care? Only to the extent that it affects people's view of my the citizens I represent. Do I care about my personal standing?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2085, "text": "One of the questions, of course, they ask, is, do you feel a sense of personal pain over the Iraqi civilians who have I feel a sense of pain for those who were tortured by Saddam Hussein, by the parents who watched their daughters raped by Saddam Hussein, by those innocent civilians who have been killed by inadvertent allied action, by those who have been bombed by suicide bombers. I feel a sense of pain for death. I feel a sense of pain for the families of our troops. I read about it every night, or I used to read about it every night. But I get a report every day about whether or not the U.S. has suffered casualties. And when I get those reports, I think about those mothers and fathers. And I meet with a lot of families a lot in order to be able to it is my duty to try to console and comfort. And many times, the comforter in chief ends up being comforted, by the way, by the families, the strength of the families. This is a volunteer army, and these kids are in this fight because they want to be in the fight. And they believe in it. And yet these poor parents are looking at oftentimes looking at negativity, just people quick to report the ugly and the negative. But it is hard to report on the schools that are opening or the clinics that are opening or the playgrounds that are filling up. I have great faith in the power of liberty. First of all, I was not surprised when people went to vote in defiance of the killers. I was pleased, but not surprised, because I believe in the universality of freedom. And I say to people, I am concerned about the comfortable isolating themselves and saying, who cares whether somebody over there lives in a free society? And I will say in my speech, moral relativism must be challenged, this notion that it does not matter what forms of government are I think it does matter. I think it also matters, along these lines, that when I talk about freedom, it is just not freedom from tyranny, it is freedom from ENTITY/ENTITY; it is freedom from malaria; it is freedom from hunger for two reasons. One, it is in our national interests that we defeat hopelessness. And secondly, it is in our moral interests. A nation is a better nation when it feeds the hungry and takes care of the diseased.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2086, "text": "And therefore, when I go to the G-8, my message to the G-8 is, yes, we will talk about the environment, and that is important. But George W. Bush is going to be talking about those people who are needlessly dying because of mosquito bites. And I expect them to honor their obligations. Why do not you match what the United States of America does? We are putting up $30 billion for ENTITY/ENTITY, $1.6 billion for malaria. And why do not you match us? And so we are going to go to the G-8 and we are going to sit down and say, Have we matched? Because there are people needlessly dying today. And we will come up with a good solution for greenhouse gases by getting China and India at the table. And it is going to take time to evolve, but I am going to remind people we can act today to save lives for the good of the world. That means shorten my answers. No, no, I will shorten my questions. First of all, your relationship with Tony Blair I am struck, in your last question, that you seem to share with him a genuine passion for ideas and that politics matter. How would you describe your relationship with Blair? I would say, first of all, it is a relationship forged by fire. We share as you can tell, I have this idealistic streak, and so does Blair. But we also understand that this idealism is a practical response to the world. These acts are not isolated acts of lawlessness. We are in a war. A lot of people hope this was not the war you know, just kind of dismiss it as, oh, there is some irritated guys, you know, just kind of making some moves. We viewed it as an ideological struggle that requires response through good intelligence, sometimes military, obviously, sometimes law enforcement, all aiming to dismantle and protect our people dismantle the cells and protect our people, but that ultimately, freedom has to defeat the ideology of hate. Was Tony Blair your poodle, to use the  You know, look, this is the convenient one of the great things about Western press is that they oftentimes retreat to the convenient rather than trying to, you know, probe the depths of a relationship or the depths of somebody's feelings or the basis of philosophy. It is convenient to say, you know, warmonger, religious zealot, poodle.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2087, "text": "I mean, these are just words that people love to toss around foolishly. How do you think and how do you hope that you and Blair but particularly yourself how would you hope that the achievement what is your greatest achievement or your greatest pride as ENTITY? Well, first of all, just so you know, I am not going to be around to see it. It takes a while for history to have its you know, to be able to have enough time to look back to see why decisions were made and what their consequences were. So you know, I'd hope it'd be somebody who would use the influence of the United States to help transform societies by working on disease and hunger and freedom. Does this job take its toll on you? You got to have a set of beliefs that are the foundation for your very being. Otherwise these currents and tides and 24-hour news and politics will kind of leave you adrift. And I tell people that when I get home, I am going to look in that mirror and say, I did not sacrifice my core beliefs to satisfy critics or satisfy pundits or, you know ENTITY's Future Yes, I am going to think about that, yes writing a book. I am going to build a Presidential library with a freedom institute at SMU Southern Methodist University all aimed at promoting the universal values that need to be defended. I am very worried about isolationism and protectionism. The world has gone through these isms before. And you watch and see, the protectionist debate is mounting in the United States; it is mounting in Europe, certainly. It was much easier to kind of blame the economic woes on external forces, and therefore, the response would be, okay, let us quit trade, let us make sure our jobs are not going elsewhere, and that is some of those concerns are legitimate. On the other hand, it is a forerunner of isolationism, and you know, I remind people that we have been through a period of isolationism and protectionism right before World War II. And so I am going to set up a this is not , like, you know, a headquarters for the Republican Party. And by the way, just so you know, the foreign policy I have just outlined for you is you know, it is not a hundred percent received amongst conservative thinkers in the United States either. Do we have 90 seconds? I would say 90 seconds.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2088, "text": "Just one very quick this is going to seem slightly flippant, but you are going to the greatest fan club of The West Wing television show in the world on Sunday. Since you are the only person who can review that program from experience I have never watched it. Because I do not watch network TV. I seriously do not watch TV. You know, I watch sports, but I'd much rather read books. And I do, I read a lot. I may even read yours. But I will not be able to find it because it is written by so-called written by the other guy. Last question, which comes back to Iraq again. Gordon Brown and I thought your question on the pain you feel personally was quite clear and absolutely strong. Gordon Brown a couple weeks ago phoned a voter who was upset about Iraq, and apologized on behalf of the Government, not for the war, which he still thinks was the right thing, but for the kind of suffering of the Iraqi people. But they are living in a free society. Everybody is going to have to handle their own internal business the way they want to. But my view is, is that when you talk to Iraqis, they are thrilled with the idea of living in a free society. Do they like the fact that violence is still there? But every society reaches a level of violence that is tolerable. And has that reached Iraq? I do know they live under a Government that they helped elect, or they elected. And there is still a lot of work to be done, do not get me wrong, but and you know, the thing that people ought to focus on is the courage of the Iraqis. They put up with a lot of violence, Muslims killing Muslims. But first of all, there have been some accidents, but nobody can claim that the United States or Great Britain are intentionally killing innocent people. As a matter of fact, warfare has changed a lot. It has, but before the war, hundreds of thousands were discovered in mass graves Freedom trumps tyranny every time. And it is hard for people to see that. It is hard for people sitting afar to say, Is not that beautiful, somebody lives in a free society? And my point is, is that I think it is important for those of us who do live in free societies to understand that others want to live in free societies. And it takes time and sacrifice and effort to get that done.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnedtemkotheobserverromeitaly", "title": "Interview With Ned Temko of the Observer in Rome, Italy", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ned-temko-the-observer-rome-italy", "publication_date": "13-06-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2090, "text": "I want to ask you about Libya and the latest developments . U.N. mandate allows you, allows the coalition to protect the no-fly zone, to protect civilians, but it does not give any leeway to go after Gadhafi. Will you stay in Tripoli ? Well, look, first of all, we have been successful so far in accomplishing the very specific objectives of the mission under the U.N. Charter, which was to establish a no-fly zone, to make sure that we provided humanitarian protection at a time when that was urgently needed. Gadhafi had turned his troops on his people and said that they should go into Benghazi, a city of 700,000 people, and show no mercy. And because the international community rallied, his troops have now pulled back from Benghazi. The United States came in early to shape the environment so that a no-fly zone could operate safely, taking out, for example, Gadhafi's air defense systems. And so U.S. planes have already been significantly reduced in the area, because what is now happening is that all the other members of the coalition are maintaining that no-fly zone. You are absolutely right that Gadhafi may try to hunker down and wait it out even in the face of a no-fly zone, even though his forces have been degraded. But keep in mind that we do not just have military tools at our disposal in terms of accomplishing Gadhafi's leaving. We put in place strong international sanctions. We have frozen his assets. We will continue to apply a whole range of pressure on him. But with respect to the military action, that specifically is done under the U.N. Security Council resolution, and calls for maintaining the no-fly zone and ensuring that the people of Libya are not assaulted by their own military. Can you and will you give military support to the rebels? Well, you know, obviously we are discussing with the coalition what steps can be taken. I think that our hope is that the first thing that happens once we have cleared the space is that the rebels are able to start discussing how they organize themselves, how they articulate their aspirations for the Libyan people and create a legitimate government.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuancarloslopezcorrientelatina", "title": "Interview With Juan Carlos Lopez of Corriente Latina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-carlos-lopez-corriente-latina", "publication_date": "23-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2091, "text": "And you know, potentially what we may see is that all the enthusiasm the Libyan people had for a change in government that was occurring a few weeks ago but that Gadhafi, through just brutal application of force, made people fearful, that that can resurface. And it may be that it is not a matter of military might, but instead an idea that is come to the Libyan people that it is time for a change that ends up ultimately sweeping Gadhafi out of power. But we are going to be examining all our options, but our first task right now is to shape the environment so that, you know, Gadhafi's forces cannot attack his own people; maintain the no-fly zone. And the United States' role, once that environment is shaped, is actually significantly reduced because we have got a broad-based international coalition, including Arab states, that believe in the same thing that we do. Is it a contradiction when a Nobel Peace Prize winner authorizes the use of force on the eighth anniversary of the ? Well, listen, the when I received that award, I specifically said there was an irony, because I was already dealing with two wars. We were in the process of pulling our troops out of Iraq, and I was still dealing with an Afghanistan war that had dragged on for many years but had not been sufficiently focused in terms of accomplishing a clear goal of protecting the American people. And so I am accustomed to this contradiction, of being both a commander in chief but also somebody who aspires to peace. The situation here is entirely focused on making sure that the Libyan people can live out their own aspirations. You know, we are not invading a country. We are acting under a mandate issued by the United Nations Security Council, in an unprecedented fashion and with unprecedented speed. We had a limited task, a focused task, and we have saved lives as a consequence. And I think the American people do not see any contradiction in somebody who cares about peace also wanting to make sure that people are not butchered because of a dictator who wants to cling to power. We want to talk about your trip and your message to Latin America. Many said that you said things that people expected, but there were not details. That is and is part of a more . Certainly what is true is that the relationship between the United States and Latin America has evolved I think in a very positive way over the last several years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuancarloslopezcorrientelatina", "title": "Interview With Juan Carlos Lopez of Corriente Latina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-carlos-lopez-corriente-latina", "publication_date": "23-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2092, "text": "I mean, if you think about the countries that we are visiting, Brazil, a country that used to be under a dictatorship, transformed itself into a democracy, is now a growing economic giant not just in the region, but around the world . A center-left government, but one that embraces free enterprise and open markets and trade. Then I went to Chile, also once was under a dictatorship, has now transitioned to a full-fledged democracy. President Pinera perceived to be a center-right president, but he is also somebody who cares deeply about social inclusion and alleviating poverty inside his country. You come here to El Salvador, you have got President Funes, who was elected under the banner of the FMLN, a left-wing party, but is now operating in a very practical way. In some cases, it is causing him problems, both on the left and the right. And what I think that shows is that the entire region is much less interested in ideology, much less interested in left or right. It is interested in practical results. How can we solve problems to help kids get an education, help people support themselves and find a job, help businesses develop, help the entire region grow. And that is the kind of partnership that we want. You know, we still have specific programs that we are involved with here in El Salvador. You know, they received a millennium challenge grant that provides over $400 million to help this country develop. They are one of four countries that we have selected for a partnership for growth that will involve us working very closely with their economic team to find out what are the barriers to economic development in this country. So we still have, yes, very specific programs, but the overall context has changed, because we want to be seen as a partner to a region that is already growing, already vibrant, and that recognizes it is not coming hat in hand to the United States to solve problems. You know, Brazil, Chile, they are solving their own problems. In some ways, you know, they are doing some things that we should envy. And they are a leader in biofuels. You look at Chile, how they have managed fiscally. They have done a good job managing their budget, even through a recession.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuancarloslopezcorrientelatina", "title": "Interview With Juan Carlos Lopez of Corriente Latina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-carlos-lopez-corriente-latina", "publication_date": "23-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2093, "text": "And so this is a two-way street instead of a one-way street, and that basis of mutual respect, mutual interest, mutual trust, you know, that is what I think will forge a very strong relationship in the Americas, throughout the Americas, into the future. I want to ask you about immigration , immigration problems, and they are asking, when will it be enough, when will these types of attacks ? temporary protective status like Salvadorans have and legalize people ? Well, keep in mind that temporary protective status was targeted very specifically at people who were not just escaping economic challenges, but very real political challenges. And so that is not going to be the solution to the overall immigration problem. I am going to need some help. I can get the majority of Democrats to support it. I need some help from Republicans. But we are going to put forward, as I said in the State of the Union, our proposals, our plans for comprehensive immigration reform. I will make the argument to the American people once again as to why this is necessary. And in the meantime, I think one of the interesting things that we are seeing, despite some of this crazy legislation that has been introduced by people who I think are just trying to get attention, and is offensive, on the other hand you have seen some legislation, for example in Arizona, that was proposed and now is being pulled back because businesses are starting to recognize this is not good for business. And perhaps some of my Republican friends are going to start recognizing if they looked at the last census, that they are going to have a very hard time winning any elections if they continue to deliberately target anti-immigration sentiment. And so, using the bully pulpit, I want to be absolutely clear to the American people, we are a nation of immigrants. Most of us came from someplace else. And you know, there is a legitimate role to make sure that we have secure borders, that we have a strong process of legal immigration, that we are making sure that businesses are not exploiting undocumented workers. But ultimately, we are going to have to have a comprehensive approach that also includes taking those who are already in the United States, living in the shadows, and giving them a pathway towards a legal status. And we are going to we are going to continue to fight for that. He then met with you and now the ambassador, the U.S. ambassador has to Mexico. There was an agent who was murdered in Mexico.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuancarloslopezcorrientelatina", "title": "Interview With Juan Carlos Lopez of Corriente Latina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-carlos-lopez-corriente-latina", "publication_date": "23-03-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2105, "text": "Are you going to talk to Mueller? I am looking forward to it, actually. Do you have a date set? Do you have a date set, Mr. ENTITY? And I am looking forward to it. I do worry when I look at all of the things that you people do not report about, with what is happening. If you take a look at, you know, the five months' worth of missing texts that is a lot of missing texts. So you do sort of look at that and say, What is going on? You do look at certain texts where they talk about insurance policies or insurance where they say the kinds of things they are saying, you gotta be concerned. But I would love to do that, and I'd like to do it as soon as possible. When will you do it, Mr. ENTITY? Do you have a date set? Do you have a date set, Mr. ENTITY? I guess you are talking about two or three weeks, but I would love to do it. You know, again, it is I have to say subject to my lawyers and all of that but I would love to do it. Would you do it under oath, Mr. ENTITY? You mean like Hillary did it under who said that? I said that. Would you do it under oath? Oh you said it. You did say it. You say a lot. Did Hillary do it under oath? I have no idea, but I am not asking about I think you have an idea. Do not you have an idea? Do you not have an idea? Do you really not have an idea? I will give you an idea. She did not do it under oath. But I would do it under oath. Listen, but I would do it. And you know she did not do it under oath, right? She would do it under oath. If you did not know about Hillary, then you are not much of a ENTITY. ENTITY, you are going to do it under oath? To reach a higher standard, you would do it under oath? Oh, I would do it under oath. Do you trust the FBI? Well, what am I going to say? When you look at five months? This is a large-scale version of this. Well, McCabe got more than $500,000 from essentially Hillary Clinton. And is he investigating Hillary Clinton? Do you remember, did anybody hear many of my speeches when I talked about McCabe?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreporterstestifyingunderoathspecialcounselrobertsmuelleriii", "title": "Interview with Reporters on Testifying Under Oath to Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-testifying-under-oath-special-counsel-robert-s-mueller-iii", "publication_date": "24-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2106, "text": "He was the star of my speech. And I said a man who was more or less in charge of her the wife got $500,000 from Terry.  Do you regret having him as your acting FBI director, then? You know what, I keep out of it. I keep out of it. It is one of those things. But he was the star of many of my speeches. Because he got from $500,000 to $700,000, whatever the number was. And, you know, in Virginia Did you ask him who he voted for? In Virginia, you do not have to spend the money. So I never checked as to whether or not they spent the money on the campaign. How much of the money did he spend on the campaign, do you know she how much was it? Wait, how much of the money was spent? Did you ask who he voted for? Did you ask McCabe who he voted for? Did you ask him that? I do not know what is the big deal with that. Because I would ask you, Who did you vote for? But I do not remember that. I saw that this morning. I do not remember asking him that question. I do not remember asking him the question. I think it is also a very unimportant question, but I do not remember asking him that. Hey, chief, would you do me a favor? When we come back, when we come back, I want you to have a deal, OK? See if you could have a deal. We can use all the audio? Nice and, not you do not repeat, and this and that, just one nice piece. Do you believe Robert Mueller will be fair to you? I only repeat for the purposes of making sure you understand. One more quick one do you think Robert Mueller will be fair to you in this larger investigation? Are you concerned about it? Because here is what we will say, and everybody says: No collusion. How do you define collusion? You are going to define it for me, OK? But I can tell you, there is no collusion. I could not have cared less about Russians having to do with my campaign. I was a much better candidate than her. I was one of the greatest candidates. Nobody else would have beaten the Clinton machine, as crooked as it was. Someday you are going to say that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreporterstestifyingunderoathspecialcounselrobertsmuelleriii", "title": "Interview with Reporters on Testifying Under Oath to Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-testifying-under-oath-special-counsel-robert-s-mueller-iii", "publication_date": "24-01-2018", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2118, "text": "ENTITY, it is nice to see you. It is nice to meet you. I welcome you here. And I thank you for the opportunity to talk to you about some of the decisions that I have made right here in this Oval Office. Actually, I want to tell the people of the Middle East that this is the place where big decisions are made. But here it comes to my mind that how hard it is on you, ENTITY, to take like-a big decision like war, for example-is it that easy to take a decision such like war-- And when I campaigned for office, I never really thought about the decision to put men and women in harm's way. Circumstances changed, of course, and I had to make some very difficult decisions about how to protect our homeland and take action necessary to- the actions that, I think, will yield the peace. And so whether it be in Afghanistan or Iraq, I was-I have made those decisions. And I will tell you, they are hard decisions, because I understand the consequences. One of the hardest things for me is to meet with a mother. I met with a mother yesterday in Pennsylvania who lost her son in combat. And you know, those can be very tearful and emotional moments, and I understand that. And my-the only thing I try to do is provide as much comfort as I can and to assure the mom, in this case, that I thought the decision was necessary for peace and necessary for our security, and that I valued the fact that her son would volunteer, and that I vowed to honor that sacrifice by achieving our objectives. Anyway, this is the room where I make the decisions. But would these moments-I mean, these emotional moments, would they make you reconsider or rethink about what is going on in our area now? As a matter of fact, I leave most of the meetings reassured that the loved one, in this case, fully understanding what we were doing. See, I believe that, one, it is noble to liberate 25 million people from a tyrant; two, that we cannot allow Iraq to be a safe haven for people who have sworn allegiance to those who have attacked us. In other words, I believe we must defeat the extremists there so we do not have to face them here at home. And three, I believe the spread of liberty will yield peace.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2119, "text": "And I believe the Middle East is plenty capable of being a part of the world where liberty flourishes. And so I leave those meetings saddened by the fact that a person has pain in her heart-and yesterday she had pain in her heart-but encouraged by the fact that her son died for a noble cause and a necessary cause. And that is exactly what she told me. Actually, I want to thank you again, ENTITY, for giving us the opportunity to talk for the first time to the Arab world, to address them with the big concerns. I know we have a great deal of questions. I know you have a very tight schedule-- I want to show you the Rose Garden, one of the most famous areas-- It is a great chance for me. I heard, ENTITY, also, that you are receiving an Iftaar-- in the White House, which is, of course, a Muslim ritual But I want to tell you- and I hope this does not bother you at all- that in the Islamic world, they think that ENTITY is an enemy of Islam-- that he wants to destroy their religion, what they believe in. Is that in any way true, ENTITY? One, that the radicals have done a good job of propagandizing. In other words, they have spread the word that this really is not peaceful people versus radical people or terrorists; this is really about the-America not liking Islam. Well, first of all, I believe in an almighty God, and I believe that all the world, whether they be Muslim, Christian, or any other religion, prays to the same God. That is what I believe. I believe that Islam is a great religion that preaches peace. And I believe people who murder the innocent to achieve political objectives are not religious people, whether they be a Christian who does that-we had a person blow up our-blow up a Federal building in Oklahoma City who professed to be a Christian. But that is not a Christian act, to kill innocent people. And I just simply do not subscribe to the idea that murdering innocent men, women, and children-particularly Muslim men, women, and children in the Middle East-is an act of somebody who is a religious person. We are having an Iftaar dinner tonight- I say, we -it is my wife and I. This is the seventh one in the 7 years I have been the President.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2120, "text": "It gives me a chance to say Ramadan Mubarak. The reason I do this is, I want people to understand about my country. In other words, I hope this message gets out of America. I want people to understand that one of the great freedoms in America is the right for people to worship any way they see fit. And the value-the most valuable thing I think about America is that-particularly if you are a religious person-you can be free to worship, and it is your choice to make. It is not the state's choice, and you should not be intimidated after you have made your choice. And that is a right that I jealously guard. Secondly, I want American citizens to see me hosting an Iftaar dinner. That is a strong message for the Americans. I want to remind your listeners that one of the first things I did after September the 11th is, I went to the local mosque. And I did because I wanted to send a message that those who came to kill Americans were young terrorists, and they do not reflect the views of the vast majority of peaceful people in the Middle East; and that our-precisely the message I was trying to send, the war is not a struggle against Muslims, the Muslim religion; it is a struggle of honorable, peaceful people throughout the world against the few who want to impose their vision. Actually, ENTITY, we are talking about these terrorists and what is going on in the world right now. Are you also a man of war, as some try to describe, ENTITY? I dream it will be- the last thing I want to be is a President during war. And I responded, after careful deliberation, in an attempt to make sure that-with a strategy of protecting ourselves. We cannot allow these people that attacked us to have safe haven. We must not give them an opportunity to strike us again. And therefore, it is important to keep the pressure on. On the other hand, the ultimate way for peace is for people to realize the great blessings of liberty. And what is interesting-and what has taken place ought to be hopeful to people in the Middle East- is that two young democracies have sprung up where people, when given a chance, voted. I believe the God that the Muslim prays to is the same God that I pray to. After all, we all came from Abraham. I believe in that universality.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2121, "text": "And I believe a gift of that Almighty to every man, woman, and child is freedom; I really do. And I think people, if given a chance, will seize freedom. And it is liberty and free societies, not-they do not have to look like America-an Iraqi democracy is going to be Iraqi; it is going to reflect Iraqi traditions and Iraqi history. One, people can vote; people can express their opinion; people can be in a free press; people ought to be allowed to go to the town square and protest against their government without fear of reprisal. And when given that opportunity, 12 million Iraqis went to the polls. So excuse me, ENTITY, what you are trying to say is, sometimes a decision of war-you have to take a decision of war in order to achieve peace. And that is what happened in Iraq. I was very concerned about the dictator in Iraq. He was an enemy of the United States of America. He had ties to terrorists-I am not saying those who attacked us on September the 11th, but I am saying ties to terrorists. He had a lot of money that he was willing to spend on weapons of mass destruction. We did not find the weapons, but he certainly had the knowledge. And in my judgment, over time, he would have been able to develop those weapons, and they would have been-one thing the Middle East does not need is a nuclear arms race. Yes, we are going to discuss this. Well, this guy does not - the man, Saddam Hussein, had capability; but remember, there is also a human condition. I believe in human rights. I believe every life has value, whether it be an American life or a life of a person in the Middle East. And this brutal guy killed hundreds of thousands of his own people. And he was unbelievably brutal to neighbors and, as well, to Iraqis. And there is -liberation is a powerful-to me, liberating people is a powerful step toward peace. I wish we did not have to do this militarily. I gave diplomacy a lot of chance to work. He had the choice as to whether or not this issue would be resolved peacefully. And so I do not regret the decision. As a matter of fact, I feel it was the right decision to this day. And now the question is, will America keep its commitment to the millions of Iraqis who want this society to work?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2122, "text": "And the answer to that is, yes, we will. And here, ENTITY, I would love to ask-I mean, for the Iraqis now, they know and they keep on listening to the news. Sometimes we tell them we want to withdraw the troops. And now we are talking about the partition of Iraq, which is very, very bad news for the Iraqis. I know you refused this. You want the unity of Iraq. But what if this Iraqi-what if, in the next administration, another President comes to the office and believes in the partition of Iraq? Well, first of all, an American President must understand that Iraq is a sovereign nation operating under its own Constitution. And I am very confident that the will of Iraq will prevail. And I know there is some noise out of here about partition. But most folks who follow this issue do not support partition, and they do not think it is a good idea. What Iraq is going to have to do is get the proper balance between the central Government and the Provinces, the very same thing we have been worried about here in America for years. What is the right road between the States and Washington? But that is what they are going to have to do in Iraq as well. And they are going to need the security situation such that they are able to have an honest political discourse. So our step one was to help them secure their neighborhoods-and it is working- and make sure these radicals, such as Al Qaida and some of these Shi'a groups, many of whom-which are criminal, are not able to have their way with this society. And now we will work toward helping these folks have the important discussion about what should be the role of Baghdad, or what should be the role of the Provincial governments. And when they get that right, when they get settled out, then I think you will see a much more unified country. And it is going to be very hard for an American President or any other outside country to dictate to the Iraqis, Here is what your government must look like, because the Iraqis will show over time that they are capable of making these decisions themselves, and they are making hard decisions right now, by the way. I know that your message, your deep message was-to the Arab world-was democracy, freedom, human rights.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2123, "text": "And you have said too many times that the first message is democracy, is that you have rights, you people of the Middle East, to be free. Because all we hear now in Iraq is, let us achieve security; let us achieve stability. Is democracy in the Middle East on hold now, waiting for security first? I strongly believe in the freedom movement. It is ingrained in my soul. It comes from my belief that freedom is universal. And I believe freedom is ingrained in everybody's soul, and if just given a chance, they will reach for it. Now, in Iraq, in order for the Government to have breathing space, to be able to do the hard work of reconciliation so that the dreams of the average citizen in Iraq can be realized-which is a free society-there is got to be security. And so security is really a step, an important step, in the freedom movement. You cannot make the decisions if you are worried about getting blown up. And what the enemy wants to do, the enemy of a free Iraq, they want to create enough chaos and confusion inside Iraq that causes people to doubt. And they want, by the way, to kill enough innocent people that causes the American people to lose their patience and determination to help freedom movements. Not every freedom movement requires military action. But freedom movement does require U.S. commitment to helping reformers and just the average citizen realize the blessings of a free society. And so the freedom movement is the front and center of our foreign policy because I understand that the peace that we want-listen, we all want peace, except for those who are trying-- ENTITY, we have moved from the Oval Office to the beautiful garden, and here I would like to ask you question that go through the minds of the Arab world. Our world is going through very difficult days. Let me start with what people expect of me, which is Iran. ENTITY, have you made the decision to strike Iran, as some are saying, or trying to say that you will not leave your administration and office before you strike Iran militarily? I have made the commitment that I would continue to work with the world to speak with one voice to the Iranians, to the Iranian Government, that we will work in ways that we can to make it clear to you that you should not have the know-how on how to make a weapon, because one of the great threats to peace and the world would be if Iranians showed up with a nuclear weapon.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2124, "text": "It would give them an opportunity to blackmail or threaten or possibly follow through with their stated objective, which is the destruction of Israel. I, of course, said all options are on the table, but I made a pledge to the American people, we will work diplomatically to solve the problem. And that is why you see us at the United Nations working with the EU countries and China and Russia to send that clear message, and that we are going to continue to impose sanctions and make it harder for the Iranian Government to operate in the world until they change their mind, until they come to a new way forward. I have said that if they suspend their nuclear program, we will be at the table. But they have so far refused to do that. I have also spoken to the Iranian people. And I want to make it clear to the people of Iran that the United States respects Iran, respects the people, respects the proud tradition, and that the Government of Iran has taken decisions that make it harder for them to live their lives. It is the decisions of the Government of Iran that have led to the isolation of the country. And that if this Government would only be responsible, would listen to the world, would not continue its weapons program-the idea of being able to have the capacity to make a weapon-then there is a better way forward for the Iranian people. But, ENTITY, is there a redline, either a timeline or redline- I hear from analysts that Iran wants today, or at least trying today to buy time in order for you to wait-to lose the time that you can make a big decision, such as going to war. Is there a ceiling that if negotiations would fail, a decision to go to war would be made? The Iranian regime must understand that I am dedicated to the proposition that they should not continue their desire to enrich, as will be people that follow me in office. This is not a party issue, an issue between one party or the other. When the Iranian President announces to the world that he is going to destroy an ally or announces to the world that he will end up defying the world-that-no matter who the President is, there is going to be a continued focus and effort to achieve this issue, to resolve this issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2125, "text": "This issue, before I move to Iraq, which also, a lot of Iraqis are waiting for this-is there-there are some leaking to the press, and particularly the Arabic press-is it true that you have issued orders, ENTITY, to your senior generals in the American military to prepare for a major and precise strike that could happen during the end of January or February? I would call that empty propaganda. Evidently, there is a lot of gossip in parts of the country-world that try to scare people about me, personally, or my country or what we stand for. It is gossip; it is baseless gossip. ENTITY, we have talked about Iraq. And you have tried to give us a message to assure the Iraqi people-when we were in the garden together-that you do not believe in the partition or the division of Iraq. And this is a very controversial issue in Iraq. And it is scary to even some of the leadership in Iraq. Just to continue and follow up with that issue, did we reach what we reached because of American mistakes or because of Iraqi mistakes and the Iraqi Government? I think, first of all, the successes in Iraq have been really quite extraordinary. One, the people of Iraq no longer have to live under a dictatorship, a brutal dictatorship. Secondly, the Iraqi people wrote and ratified a modern Constitution. Thirdly, there is a Government that is in place that is beginning to take on the responsibilities of governing. For example, quite a few billions have been spent in the Provinces by the central Government. That does not get any focus, but there is a functioning Government; there is revenue sharing; there is money to the Provinces. But the biggest problem facing Iraq was because killers, bombers decided to murder innocent people in order to stop progress. So what I tell people is, is that the reason why there has not been smooth progress-and by the way, it is hard to transition from a dictatorship to a Iraqi democracy-but the main problem has been not the Iraqis or not the United States, but it is been the fact that people have murdered. For example, what I find appalling is that Al Qaida bombed a holy site, a Muslim holy site; that there have been bombs in markets where innocent people are shopping and young children get destroyed by Muslim-people who profess to be Muslims. Their hearts are so hardened that they are willing to kill innocent people. And so the task is to deny these people their ability to blow up the innocent.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2126, "text": "And that is exactly what is happening because of Iraqi bravery and Iraqi forces and a commitment by the Government to deal with murderers. And the role of a state is to protect the innocent people from those murderers. And that is what you are seeing taking place in Iraq. But in the meantime, government is beginning to function better. First of all, the leaders never have had any practice with democracy, and they are learning to get along after years of tension and resentment. I support Prime Minister Maliki strongly, and I support the Presidency Council strongly. I just had President Talabani in to the Oval Office the other day. And the reason I do is because-I look for courage and commitment. And these leaders are courageous men, and they are committed to a free Iraq. But are things better-getting better over time? And what is important for the Iraqi people to know is that we are going to support them, is that they have got our help because we want them to succeed. We want them to realize their dreams. ENTITY, so the words that were said attributing to the White House or the American position about disappointment in Prime Minister Maliki is not true? You are not disappointed in Prime Minister Maliki and this Iraqi Government yet? I strongly support Prime Minister Maliki. One of the jobs that I have to continue to do is constantly repeat what-the position of my Government. And the position of my Government is that Prime Minister Maliki is a good man who is working hard, and we strongly support him. But it is not just Prime Minister Maliki that we support, we also support President Talabani or Vice President Al-Mahdi or Vice President Hashimi. We support those who are committed to peace and committed to the welfare of the Iraqi people. And we support those who are willing to take on these extremists, the few who are murdering innocent people in order to create chaos and confusion inside of Iraq. And I am proud of the courage of the Iraqi citizens. The Iraqis have been through a lot of bloodshed and violence, and yet they are still strong in their desire to achieve. ENTITY, let us move to Lebanon. And a lot of Lebanese are waiting. You have met with Mr. Sa'ad Hariri today, and they are all talking about the upcoming elections in Lebanon that could or could not happen. Does ENTITY have a specific, preferred candidate in Lebanon that you wanted to support for the Presidency of Lebanon?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2127, "text": "Is there going to be elections in Lebanon that will take place? No, I have no specific candidate, and I told that to Sa'ad Hariri. I have a deep desire to help the Lebanese democracy succeed. I am deeply concerned about foreign interference into the Presidential election. I am concerned that neighboring countries will try to create instability so that this democracy does not succeed, just like I am deeply concerned that there is been murder on the streets of Beirut, including Sa'ad Hariri's dad, and that the international community must follow through in an expeditious way-must follow through quickly in holding-in having an international tribunal, so that those who murdered-so that the facts come out and those who murdered would be held to account. There is just too many parliamentarians who are trying to work for a peaceful Lebanon being assassinated. And we need to know who is doing that assassinations. And when they are found out, they need to be held to account; there needs to be a consequence. Thirdly, I told Sa'ad Hariri that I sent one of our top military men into Lebanon to help them modernize their armed forces. And the reason I felt comfortable doing that is because Prime Minister Siniora showed courage and had-as did the Lebanese forces when they went out to rout out some extremists who were causing chaos or trying to cause chaos in Lebanon. And yet it became apparent to me that this military was full of courageous people but did not have the modern equipment necessary to defend the country from extremists and/or extremists who had been funded from outside influence. Sa'ad Hariri shared with me the strategy of the March 14th coalition, and I was more than willing to listen. I assured him and I assure the Lebanese people that we want to help you succeed. ENTITY, are we able to say today, for example, to the Lebanese people-and we know that the United States is the most powerful constituency in Lebanon-can we say to the Lebanese people that you, specifically, ENTITY, will prevent any foreign interference in Lebanon that could be imposed from the outside and have a President that is being promoted by outside force? I think maybe that is a promise that I am not sure I could keep, because the one thing that we did was, we worked with France to pass a U.N. resolution to get Syria, Syrian presence, visible presence, out of Lebanon.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2128, "text": "However, I suspect that there is still a lot of Syrian influence in Lebanon that is not helpful. And one way to make it clear to the Asad Government that we do not appreciate this is for the United States to-is to analyze the sanctions we have placed on the Government and think about other ways to continue to send a message and to work with our friends, particularly in Europe, to send the same message. The international community said we ought to have a tribunal. I am frustrated frankly by the pace at which the tribunal is lingering; it is not moving. There needs to be a definitive moment where the evidence is laid out, and if it is clear evidence-in other words, if somebody's guilty, they ought to be held to account so that murder is not-so that there is this clear signal that murder is not going to be accepted. The brave souls of Lebanon who are being killed-Sa'ad Hariri's dad was one, blown up, murdered. Because he supported democracy. Lebanese democracy is for freedom. And that ought to send a clear message to people throughout the world that it is so important for those of us who live in free societies to support brave people who are promoting liberty. This man wanted nothing more than the Lebanese mom to be able to raise her child in peace. And yet somebody ordered or somebody followed through with coldblooded murder to deny those dreams for the Lebanese people. And the same thing is happening in Iraq, and it is unacceptable behavior. And the United States is firm in its desire to help the average citizen in the Middle East live in peace. So we have common interests. And that is really what I want the people in the Middle East to hear, that each issue is an issue that is got difficult problems, but there is an interconnection. Extremists want to stop freedom, though. And we want you to live in peace. And we respect your religion, and we respect your humanity. And our desire for you is to realize your full potential, God-given potential. ENTITY, of course I cannot conclude this interview without asking the most important question, that is the issue of Palestine. Is ENTITY convinced, truly convinced inside, that it is possible yet to achieve peace between Israel and Palestine? Can we achieve the two states, living side by side, and not as two enemies but two friends?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2129, "text": "I believe in my soul, in my heart, that not only is it necessary that there be two states living side by side in order to achieve peace, but it is possible. I am very optimistic we can achieve a two-state solution. First, Prime Minister Olmert and President Abbas are committed to a two-state solution and are making progress. We have done a lot of dialog between the two men, and they are making progress. And they are making progress that-I believe-where the average Palestinian and average Israeli will begin to see what a vision looks like; in other words, something to work for, something that is more tangible than just a Rose Garden speech by the President or hopeful comments by others-something real. Secondly, that-you know, we are hosting a international conference that will be attended by interested parties-the Arab League, you know, important Arab League group will be there; a committee will be there from the Arab League. And it is an opportunity for there to be a serious-substantive discussions about the way forward and a two-state solution. A lot of it is going to be empower both parties, give them confidence to follow through on the vision. I also want you to know that I fully understand the two-state solution is a part of a comprehensive peace in the Middle East, and that our strategy is to get all concerned countries to the table; to get this comprehensive peace moving forward in a way that is tangible and real, so people can see it. In other words, I am not interested in just a photo opportunity, and I do not think anybody else is going to be interested in that. I really want to see if we can advance the progress. Step one was for there to be a commitment by Israel and the Palestinians to this peace. And step two is a commitment to the roadmap. In other words, nobody is going to want-have a state that becomes a launching pad for attack. The Palestinians-the average Palestinian does not want that, and surely the Abbas Government does not , and Israel cannot stand that. And so we have got-we got to work a lot with the Palestinians to help their security forces-and we are-and to help the President and the Prime Minister with economic aid, tangible economic aid so the average Palestinian can see a better life ahead, can realize there is something better than violence. And so I am very optimistic about it, about the prospects for peace. Steven told me that time is over, ENTITY.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2130, "text": "Could you just- a few seconds, if you allow me. And since I wanted to go ask you that question when we, after-20 days after commemorating September 11th, I said, when I meet ENTITY, I am going to ask him a question. This massacre that happened on 9/11, it is very difficult for any Arab who lives in the Arab world that can imagine what happened to innocent American people on that day. I would like to know what was your reaction the first time when you heard that 15 Saudi Muslims were among the hijackers who committed this crime and this terrorist act? How did that affect your relationship with the Kingdom-which plays a major role in the region-and particularly Crown Prince Abdallah-now King Abdallah-who is a personal friend of yours? King Abdallah is a personal friend of mine, and I respect him. You know, I have seen murder before in my own country. I have seen evil people take innocent life. And when that is happened, I have not condemned everybody else around. I will give you an interesting story. I was in a community yesterday-a gunman came and killed five young Amish girls- this is last year. The Amish community, which is a religious community here in America, went and reached out to the wife and children of the gunman in compassion and love. It was a great act of compassion. And the reason I tell you that is, my reaction on September the 11th was, I vowed to find the killers-those who ordered the killing-and bring them to justice. On the other hand, never did it enter my heart and my mind to be embittered toward a group of people, innocent people, who had nothing to do with the murderer. In other words, I was focused on the individuals and their commanders, not citizens in the Middle East, of any country, particularly Saudi Arabia. In other words, my first reaction was not, look, the Saudis are bad people. My first reaction was, evil people came and killed, and we will react to protect ourselves. And we will react to protect ourselves in two ways. One is to work with concerned governments, including Saudi Arabia, to find those few that are willing to murder us. And those same murderers that came to the United States would very much like to murder the leaders in Saudi Arabia. And the long term-these people believe something.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2131, "text": "There is an ideology behind their views, and the ideology basically is very different from one based upon freedom. Their ideology is, you cannot worship the way you see fit. And if you do not worship the way they want you to worship, you will be publicly beaten, or you will be killed, or you will be in prison. They do not believe, for example, young girls ought to be educated. I strongly disagree with that. I think one of the great potentials of the Middle East is women. And I certainly know, as a father, that I want my little girls to be-you know, have a good education, which they did. And I am confident other fathers want the same thing in the Middle East, even though we may not speak the same language or share the same religion. And so my reaction was-tough reaction to make sure we find those who ordered the killing and bring them to justice and to keep the pressure on them so they do not do it again-and I believe they want to do it again. But on the other hand, I have this sense of a possibility based upon something that is worked throughout the world, and that is, people being able to realize dreams through liberty. This is not the first time that societies have had to make choices. This is not the first time where people made the focused effort to become a free society. And it will not be the first time when a part of the world has gone from one that is been tense and full of unspeakable tragedy to one of peace. And that is where we are headed; we are headed to peace. And I cannot thank you enough for the opportunity to speak on a free channel to people throughout the Middle East. It is hard for me to believe that people cannot look at America and say, Wow, what a compassionate group of people -because we are. And yet I understand the images of my country have been distorted. And I understand people say things about me personally that simply are not true. And so I appreciate the chance to come and talk to you directly and to talk to your viewers directly about what is in my heart and about the fact that my country is a country of peace. ENTITY, on behalf of myself and Al Arabiya TV, I would like to thank you very much for this opportunity. You were very generous with us on time; I know you have a very hectic schedule.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithelienakouzialarabiya", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Elie Nakouzi of Al Arabiya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-elie-nakouzi-al-arabiya", "publication_date": "04-10-2007", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["George W Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2171, "text": "Before you ask questions, I just want to say that I really have appreciated the stories you have done, because I think it is so important that it is sort of a balance thing, but I want to raise public awareness of this and awareness also with people with influence who can influence decisionmaking without throwing people into an unnecessary panic. Sandy was making fun of me today before you came in Sandy Berger was. He said, When you started talking about this 6 years ago, nobody around here people just did not they had not thought about it. I have been asking them to think about this for a long, long time. And of course, we had it more or less in the context of terrorism because we had the World Trade Center and all the other things to worry about. But actually, one of my first questions because we have heard so many rumors about how you got interested, and none of what has happened would have happened without your interest. Well, it was first of all, I spend a lot of time thinking about 5 years from now, 10 years from now, 15 years from now. I think that is one of the things that Presidents are supposed to do and especially when things are changing so much. But we had keep in mind, we had the World Trade Center issue; we had the CIA killer; and then later you had the incident in the Tokyo subway and then Oklahoma City. We have had a lot of terrorist incidents, culminating in the bombing of our Embassies in Africa and what happened in Khobar, other things. One of the things that I have worried about from the beginning, with the breakdown of the Soviet Union before my time here, was how to help them deal with the aftermath of the massive nuclear system they have, and starting with the Nunn-Lugar funds, going all the way up to our threat reduction proposals in this year's budget you know, we tried to hire keep the scientists and the labs working and do joint projects of all kinds that would be constructive. But it was pretty obvious to me that, given the size of the Soviet biological and chemical programs and the fact that we know a lot of other nations are trying to develop chemical capacity and some biological capacity, that we had not only nuclear problems but we have a chemical and biological problem. And of course, the Vice President and others sort of sensitized me to this whole computer problem. We had the incident with the defense computers just a few months ago.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2172, "text": "But before that, I kept reading about all these non in the line of national security all these computer hackers. I can do E-mail and a few other things, you know. But it struck me that we were going to have to find some way to try to deal with that, too, because of the defense implications, as well as the other possibilities. Hot Zone or Cobra Event ? Which one impressed you? Well, The Hot Zone was interesting to me because of the Ebola thing, because that was a fact book. But I thought The Cobra Event was interesting, especially when he said what his sources were, which seemed fairly credible to me. And then I read another book about a group of terrorists shutting down the telephone networks in the Northeast and the Midwest. I read so many things. But anyway, when I and a lot of times it is just for thrills, but a lot of times these people are not far off. You know, they sell books by imagining the future, and sometimes they are right; sometimes they are wrong. So I have gotten I do not want to sound I have gotten a lot of sort of solid, scientific input. I have also solicited opinions from people working on the genome project, for example, and about what the implications of that might be for dealing with biological warfare. And last year, we had a whole group of experts come in here and spend an extended amount of time with me and then follow up with the staff on biological issues in particular. So I have had a real interest in this, and I think we are about to get up to speed. But we just have to be prepared for it. I mean, it is if you look back through all of human history, people who are interested in gaining control or influence or advantage over others have brought to bear the force of arms. And what normally happens, from the beginning of history, is the arms work until a defense is erected, and then there is an equilibrium until there is a new offensive system developed, and then a defense comes up going all the way back to well, even before it, but castle moats which were overcome by catapults.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2173, "text": "And so, basically, I think what has concerned me is that we, because we are moving from one big issue will there be a nuclear war between the United States and the Soviet Union to now a whole lot of proliferation of issues, dealing with smaller scale nuclear issues, chemical and biological issues, missile technology, and of course, the related computer cyber-crime issue is that I just do not want the lag time between offense and defense to be any longer than is absolutely necessary. That, I think, is the challenge for us, is to try to before anything really tragic happens not only in the United States but anywhere else. We have had enough warning signs out there now, enough concrete evidence, and we need to close the door of the gap between the offense and defense. How worried should we be, and how we do not want to panic people. And research has seen some of these warning signs, and readers call, and they want to know, is this how worried should we be? Is it going be more serious in the future? I would say that if the issue is how probable is it in the very near-term an American city or community would be affected, I'd say you probably should not be too worried. But if the issue is, is it a near certainty that at some time in the future there will be some group, probably a terrorist group, that attempts to bring to bear either the use or the threat of a chemical or biological operation, I would say that is highly likely to happen sometime in the next few years. And therefore, I would say the appropriate response is not worry or panic but taking this issue very seriously, expecting all elected officials with any responsibility in this area to know everything they can, and to do everything we can both to erect all possible defenses and then to try to make sure we are doing everything we can to stop this. Now, we know right now we know that a lot of what we have done already has delayed WMD programs, some of which I cannot talk about, but slowed the development of WMD programs, of missile technology development that might deliver such weapons and other things. And we are doing everything we can to stop or slow down the ability of others, insofar as we know about it and can do something about it. And meanwhile, we are doing everything we can both to develop defenses and emergency responses. But I think we have got an enormous amount of work out there ahead of us, an enormous amount of work.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2174, "text": "And a lot of this has to be done with great cooperation between the Federal Government we need cooperation of the private sector on the cyber issues, the computer issues. We need cooperation with local government on public health response issues, exposure if there appears to be an outbreak. We had all these sort of false alarms of anthrax in California how many? more than a dozen, I think, in the last month. So we need to be able to diagnose and to treat and also to manage those things. Does one of these threats worry you more than another, and does any one in particular keep you awake at night? Well, I have spent some late nights thinking a lot about this and reading a lot about it. I think in terms of offense versus defense, if you go back to where we started, the thing that I am most interested in and you will see we have allocated several hundred million dollars basically to research and to applied research the thing that I am most interested in is developing the ability to quickly contain biological agents. You know, it is just like for the people who went through Oklahoma City, nothing could be more horrible. The thing that bothers people about biological agents is that, unless they are properly diagnosed, contained, and treated, that it could spread. For example, we know that if all of us went to a rally on The Mall tomorrow with 10,000 people, and somebody flew a low-flying crop duster and sprayed us all with biological agents from, let us say 200 feet, that no matter how toxic it were, half of us would walk away, for reasons no one quite understands. You know, either we would not breathe it, or we'd have some miraculous resistance to it And the other half of us, somebody would have to diagnose in a hurry and then contain and treat. Otherwise, it would be kind of like the gift that keeps on giving, you know. And I do not mean that I am not trying to be macabre, but you asked me what keeps me awake at night, and that bothers me. And that is why the thing that I thought was most important about what we did last year, and what we learned a little bit from our defense scare even though it was on a computer issue, we had this defense issue, plus we were dealing with all this we'd studied for a year all this especially this biological issue is we had this work going on in 12 different places in the Government.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2175, "text": "So we had to organize our efforts so that we could be accessible to local governments, so we could work with them to set up their own preventive mechanisms. And I have to tell you, it may be we may have to await it is a note I made to myself that we may have to have a perfect defense, I mean, instantaneous. We may have to depend upon the genome project, interestingly enough, because once the human genes' secrets are unlocked, then if you and I think we have been infected, they could take a blood sample, and there would be a computer program which would show us if we had, let us say, we had a variant of anthrax. Let us suppose some terrorist hired a genius scientist and a laboratory to take basic anthrax and put some variant in it that would be resistant to all known anthrax antidotes. And what you would want is to be able to take a blood sample, do an analysis, put it through a software program that had already been developed, and say, Okay, here is this is how the genes are different. And then presumably, not too long after we have developed this, they will already know, well, therefore, this is how you should how you should change the vaccine. And we know now I know this is kind of bewildering, but keep in mind this is actually good news because, if there were no genome project, if there were no rapid way to do quick analysis that would go right to the tiniest variant, we would be in trouble. And now these scientists are working on this, and we are actually a little bit ahead of the original predicted timetable on unlocking the secrets of the gene. And when that happens, one of the side benefits, I think, will be to be able to tell these things much more quickly. But meanwhile, we have got this plan. We are stockpiling the vaccines, and we are doing all this research which the Government has to fund, because obviously there is no market for it, right? It is not like there is no market for it, and I hope there never will be any market for it. But we have to pay, the Government has to pay for this research to develop new vaccines and to manage it along. And I think we will do I think we have got a very good increase in the budget, and I really think it will have broad bipartisan support. And targeting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2176, "text": " Yes, but I think to be fair, we are a good ways away from that. I think we need to worry far more about the fact that most of these groups we know, for example let us take something I can talk about because it is public record. We know Usama bin Ladin's network has made an effort to get chemical weapons. Well, we know they have made an effort to get chemical weapons; they may have made an effort to get biological weapons. We do not know that they have them. It is true if you take this thing out to sort of the science fiction conclusion, obviously the genome project itself carries the seeds of its own misuse. But right now I am absolutely convinced that the advantages dwarf the disadvantages in this area. Plus, which all the other advantages of it I mean, it is going to lead us to we will save countless lives because we will know in advance what predisposition people have, what problems they have the genome project would be the seminal event you know, when it is done, of the first part of the 21st century, there is no doubt about that. But to come back to your point, the only point I would make, whenever you ask me a question like that, I think it is best for you to remember the formulation that I started with, and it is interesting to think about the moat and the catapult, the spear and the shield anything. It is all a question of people who have money, organization, and an interest, whether it is political or financial or religious or whatever, in oppressing other people or holding them down, will always be looking for new offensive weapons. Our goal should always be, for the sake of the world as well as the security of the American people, to make sure not only that we can defend ourselves and counter-punch, if you will, but to develop with each new wave of technology to close the gap between offense and defense. And if we do that, I think that is the strategy that I hope will become at least an integral part of our national security strategy in the WMD area. ENTITY, in the interim we have a lot of Americans, more than 2 million Americans in uniform, being vaccinated against anthrax. The Secret Service told me I could not discuss that, and they have good reasons for not wanting me to do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2177, "text": "But let me say, I am convinced that like any other vaccination, there may be some small rejection, but I think on balance it is a safe procedure. I have looked at the reports, and I think on balance, given the fact that we send so many of our men and women in uniform into places where they could be exposed, I think that they are better off being vaccinated. I do not believe that the threat in the United States is sufficient that I could recommend that to people, to the public at large. What about first responders or people in hospitals who might be exposed to smallpox, anthrax, plague, and things like that? The real answer there is, we have not reached a conclusion, but we are considering that. Because we have to work with the first responders, we have got the public health people looking into this and other people, and I think that that is a judgment that ought to be made primarily by people who are in the best position to make a professional judgment about it. We have heard about something else that is being considered that I think Bill wants to ask you about. As you may be aware, Secretary Cohen and people at the Pentagon are talking about trying to create a new position of commander in chief for the continental United States because of the terror threat. And it is moving through the system, and at some point it is going to come to you, probably sometime this summer. Are you inclined to create that kind of position for the military? Let me say, I think that we need to have an organized response, if you will, to what you might call homeland defense on CBW and cyber or computer terrorism issues. And now we have established a national coordinator on these issues in the White House. We have got this national domestic preparation office at the Justice Department. We have got a National Infrastructure Protection Center. We have got a joint task force on cyber defense already at DOD in response to what they went through before. So I want them to look at where we are and make some recommendations to me. I am not sure that that is what they are going to recommend, and I think that I should not give an answer to the question you ask until I see what the range of options are and what the range of recommendations is. Do you have a leaning one way or another? No, just except to say that it is very important that we outline every single responsibility that we have as a nation at the national level and that someone be responsible for it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2178, "text": "I want to know as I said, one of the things that we learned last year that I think was a legitimate criticism of what we have done in our administration is that we had 12 different places where these activities were going on, and they were not being properly coordinated and driven in the proper fashion. And we have tried to resolve this. And this is sort of the last big kind of organizational piece, as far as I know, that is yet to be resolved. Again, the American people this should not be a cause for alarm; this should be a cause for reassurance. They should want us to be wellorganized on these things because remember, for years and years, when I was a boy, we used to do all those they had all these fallout shelters, and every school had its drills and all that. I mean, I am older than you, so you would not remember this, but No, we did it. But you know, and we it was a sensible thing to do under the circumstances. Thank God we never experienced it. And so what I want us to do is everything, within reason, we can to minimize our exposure and risks here, and that is how I am going to evaluate this Pentagon recommendation. Secretary Cohen, I think, is also real focused on this now. I have been very pleased with the priority he is given it. And I think that all these guys know that after their experience with the computer issue that all this tomorrow's threats may be very different from yesterday's, and we have got to be ready. What do you say to people, to skeptics who say all this is just Pentagon maneuvering, creating new bogeymen to scare us so they can whip up new budget authority? Even though we are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars and in the aggregate a few billion dollars, it is nowhere near as expensive as maintaining this sort of basic infrastructure of defense; the case of public health, the basic infrastructure of public health. I say to them, they should understand that we have intelligence and a lot of it is in the public arena, you all write about it about all the countries that are trying the countries and the groups that want chemical weapons, that want biological weapons, that are trying to get agents, precursor agents that you can use to develop chemicals or basic agents you can use to develop biological weapons.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2179, "text": "And everybody knows now the world is full of hackers that seek to intrude on networks, that seek to insert bogus codes into programs, and all this sort of stuff. And it would be completely irresponsible for us not to allocate a substantial investment in trying to protect America from threats that will be, in all probability, as likely or more likely in the future than the threats we think we face today. That is why we started this conversation by saying, I do not want to say anything that will overly alarm anybody. I am not trying to stir up a lot of false threats. But if you look at just what the UNSCOM people in Iraq they say that they do not believe that the reporting in Iraq is consistent with what they believe the chemical capacity there is. If you look at the fact with regard to chemicals, with the Chemical Weapons Convention, if we can get it properly implemented, at least we will be able to track probably, that plus intelligence, large volumes of chemical stocks. But with biological stocks, a very small laboratory with the right materials to work with, you could develop supplies that could kill a large number of people. It simply is irresponsible for us not to both do the best we can with public health protections, do the best research we can on vaccines, stockpile what we know works, and then get out there and try to build a defense and an ability to interrupt and stop, with export controls and any other way we can, these developments. And it costs money. But to me, it is money well spent. And if there is never an incident, nobody would be happier than me 20 years from now if the same critics would be able to say, Oh, see, Clinton was a kook; nothing happened. I would be the happiest man on Earth. I would be the happiest man on Earth. If they could say, He overexaggerated it; nothing happened; all he did was make a bunch of jobs for scientists and build the Pentagon budget, I would be elated 20 years from now to be subject to that criticism because it would mean that nothing happened, and in no small measure because of the efforts we have made. Since we have so little time left, ENTITY, Russia How can you be sure since they violated the treaty that they signed banning biological weapons for 20 years, does it make sense to work with them now on biological projects? Are you certain that they are not doing biological research?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2180, "text": "And what do you do? Let me say this. I think that the more we work with them and the more their scientists are working with us and the more successful we are in building a common endeavor, the more it will be in their interest to comply. The real danger in Russia, I think dangers are two. One is I will take one that is outside the CBW area so it does not look like I am waving the red flag here. When we started the space station you know, John Glenn went up and then we sent the first two components of the space station up it had been months since a lot of those Russian scientists had been paid. That is why it is very, very important, I think, to say we value this enormous infrastructure of scientific expertise they have in the space area, in the CBW area, and we want to work with them. This budget of mine would enable us to do joint work with 8,000 Russian scientists. That bothers me. The second thing that concerns me is that when Russia shed communism, they adopted a strategy which was widely lauded at the time in the United States and elsewhere, but they were actually when I went to Russia, and you remember right after my mother died I got on the plane, and I went to the Czech Republic and Russia that was, what, January of '94. Actually, at that time the Czech Republic was doing very well and was sort of the poster child of the new economy in the former Communist countries. But when I was there, Russia had actually privatized more property than the Czech Republic had. And this relates partly to the economic crisis, but when they did it, they did it without having had the benefit of an effective central bank, a securities and exchange commission, all these other things, so that you had money coming in and money flying out now. And one of the problems they have now is that it is not a totalitarian Government anymore; there are a lot of private companies all the private companies there by definition used to be part of the state, unless they are new businesses. And so one of the problems we are having is, even when they are trying to help us, is keeping up with what all these companies and their subsidiaries do. And that is been the tension that you have written a lot about and there is been a lot in the press about was there missile cooperation with Iran or not, and does that violate our understanding, and does that call for some action visa-vis Russia?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2181, "text": "And part of the problem is just keeping up with this proliferation of companies and people that used to have some connection to the Soviet State, some connection to the defense apparatus. It is not a simple process, and it is not a perfect process, but I am absolutely convinced that this threat reduction initiative we have got can kind of intensify our efforts to work with them, as well as to really implement the Chemical Weapons Treaty and get some teeth in the Biological Weapons Convention. It may not be perfect, but it is better than the alternative. What do you do if the nightmare comes to pass, and some country hits us, hits us hard, with a biological weapon? What kind of response would you do? Well, first of all, if some country were thinking about doing that, I would certainly hope that they would not have the capacity to do it before we could stop them or interrupt them, if it was a that is, if you are talking about somebody lobbing a missile over here or something like that. I think if it happened, it would be an act of war, and there would be a very strong response. But I think we have demonstrated that. But I think the far more likely thing is somebody representing some interest maybe it could be a rogue state; maybe it could be a terrorist network walking around a city with a briefcase full of vials or in spray cans, you know. So what we have to do any country with any sense, if they wanted to attack us, would try to do it through a terrorist network, because if they did it with a missile we'd know who did it, and then they'd be sunk. Would you respond with nuclear weapons to a biological attack? Well, I never discuss the nuclear issue. But I think that we would have at least a proportionate, if not a disproportionate, response if someone committed an act of war against the United States. That is what we would do. And if somebody willfully murdered a lot of our civilians, there would be a very heavy price to pay. ENTITY, you have time for one more Did you have a chance to watch any of Senator Bumpers' presentation today? I watched that. He said he criticized the House managers for lacking compassion for your family. He described your family as a family that has been about as decimated as a family can get. The relationship between husband and wife, father and child, has been incredibly strained if not destroyed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudithmillerandwilliamjbroadthenewyorktimes", "title": "Interview With Judith Miller and William J. Broad of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judith-miller-and-william-j-broad-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "21-01-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2182, "text": "The first time it was about 35 degrees with a whipping wind, and the second time, I had a very good second nine holes. We were talking about your sleep or lack of same over in the Oval Office. You mentioned something about a nap. If I can take a nap, even 15 or 20 minutes in the middle of the day, it is really invigorating to me. On the days when I am a little short of sleep, I try to work it out so that I can sneak off and just lie down for 15 minutes, a half an hour, and it really makes all the difference in the world. We are in the Library now, where President Roosevelt made his fireside chats. Is this among your favorite rooms? I love this room. People who work around here can come in here and check out these books just like any other library. It is also a public room that is open to everyone who comes in the White House on a tour. So people get to see this wonderful library of America, great old portrait of George Washington, and as I was telling you a moment ago, the little-known anonymous design for the White House by Thomas Jefferson. He tried to become the architect of the White House anonymously, and his design was rejected in favor of this one. You were mentioning that certain Presidents dominate this house, as opposed to how they may be viewed in history. What did you mean by that? What I meant was most of the Presidents who are dominant here were very important Presidents, or all of them. a bedroom named for him, the room where he signed the Emancipation Proclamation, his statues and portraits everywhere. He put both of the round porches on the White House and changed the front to the back of the White House and the back to the front. Theodore Roosevelt built both the wings, and his portraits are everywhere and his vigor and youth. Franklin Roosevelt lived here longer than everyone else, but he has just a couple of portraits here in the house and a very modest presence, considering the fact that he was plainly the dominant personality in terms of the length of time that he dominated here. So it is just sort of interesting who dominates, because of the contributions they made to the house itself, I think. What are the chances that Bill Clinton can be one of those dominant Presidents in this house? I think this house is in good shape; I do not know that I can do anything to it that would improve it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2183, "text": "I imagine that I will enjoy living here and that I will revere the responsibility about as much as anybody who is ever been here. How hard it is to do everything I want to do as quickly as I want to do it, that the pace of change, although they say we are keeping quite a brisk pace-the House of Representatives adopted the budget resolution and my jobs stimulus package last week in record time-but I still get frustrated. I have a hard time keeping up with everything and keeping it going forward. I am an impatient person by nature, and I want to do things. We have had a minimum so far of the kind of backbiting and factionalism and all that you hear about. What would you count as your biggest success so far? I think moving the economic program as quickly as possible and developing a big consensus for the idea that we need to make a serious attempt to both reduce the deficit and increase investments in jobs and education and technology. We have got to do both at the same time. I have been very worried that I would not be able to convince the American people or the Congress to do both at the same time because we have never done it before in the history of the country. But the competition we are in in the world and the problems we have had for the last 12 years absolutely require us to invest in our people and their jobs and to reduce the deficit at the same time, I believe. Now, it is my information, I want to check it with yours, that what you call the job stimulus part of your economic plan is in trouble in the Senate. One, you may not have the votes. Senator Byrd said this afternoon that he saw trouble on the horizon. Does that match your information? We plainly got the votes to pass it as it is or with very minor modifications. What most Americans do not know is that of the 100 Members of the Senate, if you have one more than 40 you can shut everything down. And you know, there is been some discussion that the Republicans may try to filibuster the stimulus program and may try to stop us from trying to create any new jobs. They have 43 Republican Senators, and they may be able to hold 41 of them. And if they do, you know, they can indefinitely postpone a vote. I would hate to see that happen, and I think it would not serve them well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2184, "text": "The American people did not elect any of us to perpetuate the kind of partisan gridlock we have had for the last several years, and particularly to have a minority of one House do that. I do hear that. You know there is some argument around the edges among the more pro-deficit reduction Democrats that we should make some minor changes in the jobs stimulus program, but they are not great, I do not think. Two things strike me, not just about what you said but the way you said it. Correct me if I am wrong, it sounds to me like you are really worried about the possibility that it will be slowed if not stopped, the stimulus part. I think in the end we will pass it because, first of all, I think the public would just be outraged at the thought that we have a chance here to create haft a million new jobs and to do things that are good that need to be done and that it would be slowed up. I am just pointing out that if the minority in the Senate can get 40 votes plus one, they can stop anything from happening. And that is what happened when they tried to gut the motor voter bill last week. That would have really been a big-it is a major piece of political reform, makes it easier for all kinds of people to register and vote. And they were willing to pass the motor voter bill, which allowed people to register when they license their car but not allow people, low-income people, to register when they pick up their Medicaid or Social Security benefits or something else. I have seen it. I hope it will not , and we will do our best to avert it. ENTITY, let me come to what I and, I think, a lot of Americans perceive to be the gut of this. Do we really need this, what you call stimulus package now? Does not it or does it present a real threat to inflation and increasing the deficit? Why not either reduce it or call it off since the economy seems to be moving? Because we are not producing jobs and because it does not present a threat to inflation, nor does it present a threat to the deficit. I agreed over the next 5 years to reduce the deficit by 4 times as much as the stimulus package over and above the deficit reduction that I have proposed, $500 billion of deficit reduction. So, we have blown away the amount of the stimulus package over the next 4 years in extra deficit reduction. So, we are not adding to the deficit.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2185, "text": "Secondly, the financial markets have already discounted the prospects of this being inflationary. Third, and most important of all, unemployment in America is too high. Unemployment in all the rich countries except Japan is too high. We have to prove that we can generate jobs in America again. And there is no indication that we are doing that. Now, last month we had a lot of new jobs, but way, way over half of them were part-time jobs with no health care benefits and no security of lasting. So, we need this to create jobs. This program invests in community, invests in people and their education. ENTITY, I want to talk to you about Russia. Time for us to take a break. We will continue with conversation about Russia in just a moment. ENTITY, just right off the top of your head, what percentage of this day have you spent dealing with the problems in Russia? And let me ask a specific question. If I am a trying-to-do-right American, lost my job, trying to support my wife and kids, tell me why I should pay for spending foreign aid to help the Russians? Because it is in your interest. And let me tell you why it is in your interest. For one thing, America needs good customers for its products. And Russia, a free Russia with a free economy, would prefer to do business with America over any other country. And they prefer to buy our farm products and other products, and we have to look ahead. Every year we have to be looking ahead to find more and more markets for our products because as we get drawn into the global economy, we have got to sell more to other people to keep our incomes high. Secondly, we have a real interest in keeping Russia democratic and keeping them committed to reducing their nuclear arsenals. Because otherwise we have to turn right around and rebuild our defenses at very high levels, spend huge amounts of taxpayers' money on nuclear arsenals, raise our children in a more dangerous world, and divert needed resources which ought to be spent on education and training and investment here at home. So a safe, a democratic, a free market-oriented Russia is in the immediate economic interest of every working American and very much in the interest of those folks and their children over the long run. If we let Russia revert to a country which will never be able to do business with us, that is bad business.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2186, "text": "If it reverts to a nationalist, even if not a Communist, a highly nationalist nuclear power that forces us to spend more of our money keeping our guard higher, then that is money that will be diverted from the future of the working families and their children. What about the theory that whatever money we try to give to the Russians, it would be money down a black hole, just disappear because chaos and pandemonium axe hour by hour? First of all, we do not have enough money to, on our own, affect the course of events. Ultimately the Russian people will have to work out their own future. But there are some specific things we can do which will not hurt us; in fact, will help us, and which will send a clear signal to the forces of freedom and democracy and market economies in Russia that we and the rest of the West will help them. You know, for example, if we provide more food aid, that helps our farmers, and we can do it at relatively low cost to ourselves. If we can find a way to help to privatize more businesses and to make those work, that helps us. If we can find a way to help them run their energy business better so they do not lose as much of their oil or their gas in the pipeline, that helps them without hurting us. It gives us a market for our pipeline products. If we can find a way to help them convert their nuclear power plants that are built on the Chernobyl model to a different energy source, that could put a lot of our folks to work, put a lot of their people to work, and make them safer environmentally and economically. Now, over the long rim, they are going to have to do some things for themselves. They are going to have to get control of their rampant inflation. They are going to have to make sure that they can get out of the bureaucracies that do not work anymore, that clog up all reforms. They are going to have to make a lot of decisions themselves. But there axe some targeted, limited commitments we can make that, no matter what happens, will not hurt us very much and carry the potential of helping us a great deal while helping to keep good things alive in Russia. Now you have met with the Russian Foreign Minister this afternoon. Did you come out of that with increased confidence that Boris Yeltsin will survive? He is like all of us in public life; he is not perfect.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2187, "text": "I am not perfect; we all have our problems. But he is a genuinely courageous man, genuinely committed to freedom and democracy, genuinely committed to reform. And I think now he is more open perhaps than in the past at trying to work out some kind of accommodation with others who would negotiate with him to keep reform going, even though they may have some different ideas. Well, that is what I have to do here. I have to work with the Senate and the House, the Democrats and the Republicans. I think he is got to work on all that. But I think he is got a fair chance to survive. And I think not only the United States but I think the major Western countries ought to do what they can to be supportive of his elected Presidency now because he represents the ideals and the interests of our Nation and our way of life. ENTITY, correct me if I am wrong, but you have said a couple of times, I think, recently that Boris Yeltsin is the only democratically elected leader in Russia. I just want to go over that. If Boris Yeltsin is impeached because he is tried to suspend the constitution and Aleksandr Rutskoy, who has now broken with Yeltsin and is also committed to democratic reform, comes into power, would you, would the United States Government consider him a democratically elected leader and swing in behind him? First of all, it is true that he was elected on the ticket with Yeltsin. But when Yeltsin was elected, he won an overwhelming popular victory. If you go back and look at the distribution of votes, there is no question that that is what happened. I do not want to get into what might happen or what-if questions. The constitution under which these proceedings might take place was one that came in 1978 under the Communist government. Yeltsin and Rutskoy were elected together on a ticket. I think in the end the Russian people will resolve this one way or the other by what they do or do not do in the referendum in April. ENTITY, I would love to spend hours talking foreign policy. We have such a short time here. Let me try to do something reasonably brief, and that is mention some countries and potential problems out on the horizon and just have you respond briefly. Particularly if it is proven that Iranian-sponsored terrorists had anything to do with the World Trade Center bombing, would you be prepared to retaliate?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2188, "text": "First, let us note that even as we speak, we were just given notice that another major arrest was made and someone brought to the United States from Egypt where the apprehension was made. I do not want to speculate about who was behind it until I know. Let me say that I am more concerned about the Iranian government maintaining its militance, perhaps supporting, in general, terrorists organizations or engaging in unsafe proliferation of weapons of mass destruction for its own use or for the benefit of others. I wish Iran would come into the family of nations. They could have an enormous positive impact on the future of the Middle East in ways that would benefit the economy and the future of the people of Iran. I am very troubled that instead of trying to contribute to alleviating a lot of the problems of the Islamic people to the region, they are seeming to take advantage of them. I hope that they will moderate their course. I asked the question, should it be proven they had anything to do with the World Trade, would you be prepared to retaliate? So far, you are on the record as not answering. I want to be on the record as not answering. I want to maintain all options in dealing with terrorists, but I want to be on the record as not answering because I do not want the inference to be there that I am accusing them of something that I have no earthly idea whether they did or not. Just before you came into office, you were quoted as saying words to the effect, well, if Saddam Hussein goes a certain way, I, Bill Clinton, could see relations getting better. Do you regret having said that, or is that a fair quotation? What I said was, I cannot conceive of the United States ever having any kind of normal relationship with Iraq as long as Saddam Hussein is there. I cannot conceive it. What I said was that I did not wish to demonize him; I want to judge him based on his conduct. And in that context, I will be very firm, and the United States will remain very tough on the proposition that he must fully comply with the United Nations requirements, which he has still not done, in order for us to favor any kind of relaxation of the restrictions now on him through the U.N. What used to be called the Balkans, what once was Yugoslavia,", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2189, "text": "is now referred to in shorthand as Bosnia You seem-and I say this respectfully, but I want to say it directly-you seem to have been all over the place in terms of policy toward Bosnia. One, tell us exactly what U.S. policy toward Bosnia is at the moment and what we can expect in the future. Well, first, let me respond to your general comment. And like most Americans, I am appalled by what has happened there; I am saddened; I am sickened. And I know that our ability to do anything about it is somewhat limited. I am convinced that anything we do would have to be done through the United Nations or through NATO or through some other collective action of nations. And I am limited also not only by what I think the United States can do or should do but by what our allies are willing to do. Now, against that background, we have done a number of things. We have been instrumental in tightening the embargo against Serbia. It is much tighter than it was when I took office. We have pushed for enforcement of the no-fly zone against the Serbians. I think we will get that in the United Nations sometime in the next couple of weeks. We have begun the airlift operation, which was initially criticized and is now universally recognized as having done an awful lot to alleviate severe human suffering and to meet profound needs. We have determined that we should support the Vance-Owen peace process to try to bring an end to hostilities there. But we have also been very clear that if the Bosnians will sign off under the Vance-Owen plan and the Croatians sign off on it, and the Serbs do not , that we think that we are going to have to look at some actions to try to give the Bosnians a means to at least defend themselves. I am very concerned about this. If the parties will good-faith agree to a peace process, then I would be willing to have the United States participate with other nations in trying to keep the peace in Bosnia. ENTITY, before I get away from foreign policy, very quickly-North Korea, nuclear proliferation: one of those things people's eyes glaze over. Important, of course, hut is it something that consumes a lot of your time? Well, it is caused me a lot of concern in the last few days.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2190, "text": "Just for the benefit of our viewers, the North Koreans have refused to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency's inspectors to look into sites where they might be illegally producing nuclear weapons under the nonproliferation regime. And because they would not allow our inspectors in and because the United Nations continued to insist that they do so, the North Koreans have now given us notice that they are going to withdraw, which means they are going to put themselves outside the family of nations seeking to contain nuclear weapons. That would be a great mistake, and I hope they do not do it. It is deeply troubling to us and to the South Koreans. You know, Seoul, which is now a teeming city of well over 8 million people, is very close to the 38th parallel, very close to North Korea. And over the last few years, relations between those two nations have been warming, and people began to dream of reunification in the same way that it happened in Germany. I do not want to overreact to it. The North Koreans still have a couple of months to change their mind, and I hope and pray that they will change their mind and return to the family of nations committed to restraining nuclear proliferations. There is no easy transition to make to health care, but we need to move on. As I understand it-correct me if I am wrong-you are telling the American people that their health care coverage will be increased, that the deficit at the same time will be cut. The translation of that is that there is going to be yet another significant increase in taxes, is not it? And we are looking at the options to do it. If I might, let me try to describe the problem. And I know we do not have a lot of time, but let me be as brief as I can. The average person who has health insurance is pretty satisfied with the quality of health care, but terrified of losing the health care coverage. They are just afraid that either through higher deductibles, higher co-pay, or just outright loss of the insurance, or they had to change jobs but they have had somebody in their family that is sick, they will not be able to keep their health insurance. The average business is terrified about the cost of health care. We are spending 30 percent more than any other country and getting less for it. So more and more people lose their health insurance every year. And then there are a lot of people who do not even have access to health care.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2191, "text": "They never see doctors or dentists or go to a medical clinic. So we have got the most expensive health care system in the world. For the people that can afford it and stay with it, you get to choose your doctor, choose your providers of all kinds, and it is good stuff. But millions of people live with insecurity, and the cost of it is really breaking the economy. In order to this cost problem and the security problem, you know, to tell people you can still choose your doctor but you are never going to have to worry about losing your health insurance, you have to find a way to pay, to cover everybody who does not now have health insurance, and to stop the loss of coverage for people that have it. That costs money. But if you do it, that permits you to cut out literally tens of billions of dollars of excess paperwork and administrative cost, stop a lot of other things that are driving up costs in the system. And you literally save, between now and the end of this decade, hundreds of billions of dollars, of both private dollars and taxpayer dollars. So the issue is, how do we make people secure so you can still pick your doctor; you are never going to lose your health insurance, you are always going to have it, no matter whether you change jobs or lose your job; you are always going to have access to health care. How do we do that? Bring the cost down, and do it within a time that is acceptable. How are you going to pay for that? We are looking for a lot of different options, but the last thing I think we ought to do, the last place we ought to look, is to ask the employers and the employees of America who are paying too much for their health care right now to pay more to solve this short-term problem. But the dilemma is this, quite simply-100 percent of the people who studied this problem say this-you may have to pay some more in the short run or find some more money in the short run, but over the long run it is going to save a massive amount of money. I can do more to save money on the Government deficit and to free up money in the private sector by bringing health costs in line with inflation and solving this problem than any other single thing I do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2192, "text": "What we are trying to find a way to do is to cover all the people who do not have coverage and to guarantee the security to the working people who are afraid of losing it without raising their taxes. And we are looking for ways to do it. We have got 400 people, including doctors, nurses, health economists, experts from all over America working on this, and they have done good work. I think we have got a chance. And I have got another month to do it. ENTITY, at your news conference yesterday, correct me if I am wrong, but I thought you got a little testy when you were asked about gays in the military, respect for you in the military. Am I wrong about that? I thought it was an unusually worded question, but that is all part of it. No, I do not mind talking about it. Let me say, I talk on a regular basis with General Powell. I have met with the Joint Chiefs. I have a whole schedule of things that I am working through now to continue to work with the military. This is a very difficult time for them. Well, is it correct that you have reversed your position? Nothing I said yesterday is in any way inconsistent with anything I have ever said before about this. First, let us review this issue. The Joint Chiefs agree that they should stop asking enlistees whether or not they are gay. So they have already said, we will not ask you to lie, and we will not use your forms against you. I agree and everybody else agrees that any kind of improper sexual conduct should be grounds for dismissal or other appropriate discipline. There is a very limited argument here, which is if you do not do anything wrong but you do acknowledge that you are gay, should you be able to stay in the military and, if so, should you be able to do anything anyone else can do? Would you consider any restrictions on duty assignments? And the answer is, I am waiting for the report of the Secretary of Defense made in conjunction with the Joint Chiefs. I think they are divided among themselves on this issue. Other nations which admit gays into the military, some of them have no differences in duty assignments, and some do. What I said was, if they made a recommendation to me, would I review it and consider it? I mean, I asked them to study this. I cannot refuse then to get the results of the study and act like my mind's made up.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2193, "text": "This is not an area where I have expertise. I have to listen to what people say. I will consider the arguments. I have a presumption against any discrimination based on status alone, but I will listen to any report filed. ENTITY, time is running out on us here. I want to give you an opportunity on this program before this tremendous audience to indicate who your choice on the Supreme Court is going to be. This is a great opportunity for you to do it. I want to give you an opportunity. I must tell you I have not reached a final decision. The problems in Russia and just the stuff I have been doing on the economy have kept me from spending quite as much time on it as I would have. But Justice White, to his everlasting credit, gave me his letter now for his resignation in June, and his successor cannot take office until October, so he gave us some time. I love the Constitution of the United States, and I believe in the Supreme Court as an institution. I used to teach constitutional law. There will be few things that I will do in this job that I will take more seriously, few responsibilities I will cherish more. And I will try to appoint someone that I think has the potential of being a magnificent Justice, someone who will be a defender of the Constitution, but someone who has good values and common sense and who understands the real life experiences of Americans as well as the law. Let us talk about this for a moment. That is right. If you think about it, it is been a long time. President Johnson put Thurgood Marshall on the Court, and I just went to his funeral. If you are not going to reveal who it is going to be-I will give you another opportunity to do that-tell us in what directions you hope to take the Court? I mean, you make an appointee hoping that he will at least bump the Court in some other direction. Let us talk philosophically about the Court. Well, there was a lot of talk, as you know, during the last 12 years when the Republicans held The White House, about trying to move the Court in a sort of a rightward direction. Indeed, the political platforms of the Republicans were repeatedly filled with litmus tests and specific requirements and everything, and pushing the Court to the right. In fact, as has always been the experience with Presidents, some of the appointees did, in fact, move to the right. You know, they had different views.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2194, "text": "I would like to put someone on the Court who would make sure that there was a certain balance in the debate, that there was a real feeling for the rights of ordinary Americans under the Constitution, but that also someone who was hard-headed, who understood that the criminal law had to be enforced, that you did not want to over-legalize the country. I'd also like to put someone on there who was a very cogent and powerful arguer and who could show respect for the other Justices, who could be a good colleague, and who could engage people in honest dialog. I mean, I think the Supreme Court is no different, really, in that sense from a lot of other units. I cannot help but believe that when they are all talking together and working together and honestly trying to pick each other's brains, that they are not only free to act on their own convictions but they will learn from one another and maybe make better decisions. During the campaign, you campaigned as one who would be a President tough on crime. You talked about wanting to appoint a Justice with a big heart. What do you mean big heart ? Does that mean trouble for prosecutors and law enforcement officers? As a matter of fact, I think-there may be differences about capital punishment, for example. I have supported capital punishment, and I still do. And I would not necessarily make that a litmus test, because there is a big majority on the Supreme Court that support capital punishment. So whatever my appointee turns out to do on that, it will not change the majority. The majority agree with me on that issue. I mean, we need an administration that takes an aggressive approach to the crime issue. But we need to be smarter about it. I mean, we cannot talk tough on crime and make sentences tougher and refuse to pass the Brady bill and make people wait 7 days before criminals can buy handguns. We ought to take automatic weapons out of the hands of kids in the streets of our cities. If we are really going to be tough on crime, we ought to be not only tough in the traditional ways but also to change the environment some. ENTITY, it is my unfortunate duty now to ask the tough questions you do not want to hear. Number one, do you have a favorite in the Oscar race for the Academy Awards? Have you seen these movies? Which one do you favor? I have not seen them all, so I cannot say. The ones I have seen I enjoyed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanrathercbsnews1", "title": "Interview With Dan Rather of CBS News", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-rather-cbs-news-1", "publication_date": "24-03-1993", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2198, "text": "Let me begin by saying it is a great pleasure to welcome President Park and our friends from the Republic of Korea. Madam President, we are greatly honored that you have chosen the United States as your first foreign visit. This, of course, reflects the deep friendship between our peoples and the great alliance between our nations, which is marking another milestone. I am told that in Korea, a 60th birthday is a special celebration of life and longevity, a hwangab. Well, this year, we are marking the 60th anniversary of the defense treaty between our nations. Yesterday President Park visited Arlington National Cemetery and our memorial to our Korean war veterans. Tonight she is hosting a dinner to pay tribute to the generation of American veterans who have served in the defense of South Korea. And tomorrow she will address a joint session of Congress, an honor that is reserved for our closest of friends. from the ashes of war to one of the world's largest economies, from a recipient of foreign aid to a donor that now helps other nations develop. And of course, around the world, people are being swept up by Korean culture, the Korean Wave. And as I mentioned to President Park, my daughters have taught me a pretty good Gangnam style. President Park, in your first months in office, South Korea has faced threats and provocations that would test any nation. Yet you have displayed calm and steady resolve that has defined your life. Like people around the world, those of us in the United States have also been inspired by your example as the first female President of South Korea. your focus and discipline and straightforwardness. And I very much thank you for the progress that we have already made together. Today we agreed to continue the implementation of our historic trade agreement, which is already yielding benefits for both our countries. more manufactured goods, more services, more agricultural products. Even as we have a long way to go, our automobile exports are up nearly 50 percent, and our Big Three Ford, Chrysler, and GM are selling more cars in Korea. And as President Park and I agreed to make sure that we continue to fully implement this agreement, we believe that it is going to make both of our economies more competitive. It will boost U.S. exports by some $10 billion in support of tens of thousands of American jobs. And obviously, it will be creating jobs in Korea as they are able to continue to do extraordinary work in expanding their economy and moving it further and further up the value chain.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2199, "text": "We agreed to continue the clean energy partnerships that help us to enhance our energy security and address climate change. Given the importance of a peaceful nuclear energy industry to South Korea, we recently agreed to extend the existing civilian nuclear agreement between our two countries, but we also emphasized in our discussions the need to continue to work diligently towards a new agreement. As I told the President, I believe that we can find a way to support South Korea's energy and commercial needs even as we uphold our mutual commitments to prevent nuclear proliferation. We agreed to continuing modernizing our security alliance. Guided by our joint vision, we are investing in the shared capabilities and technologies and missile defenses that allow our forces to operate and succeed together. We are on track for South Korea to assume operational control for the alliance in 2015. And we are determined to be fully prepared for any challenge or threat to our security. And obviously, that includes the threat from North Korea. If Pyongyang thought its recent threats would drive a wedge between South Korea and the United States or somehow garner the North international respect, today is further evidence that North Korea has failed again. President Park and South Koreans have stood firm, with confidence and resolve. The United States and the Republic of Korea are as united as ever. And faced with new international sanctions, North Korea is more isolated than ever. In short, the days when North Korea could create a crisis and elicit concessions, those days are over. Our two nations are prepared to engage with North Korea diplomatically and, over time, build trust. But as always and as President Park has made clear the burden is on Pyongyang to take meaningful steps to abide by its commitments and obligations, particularly the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. And we discussed that Pyongyang should take notice of events in countries like Burma, which, as it reforms, is seeing more trade and investment and diplomatic ties with the world, including the United States and South Korea. For our part, we will continue to coordinate closely with South Korea and with Japan. The United States is fully prepared and capable of defending ourselves and our allies with the full range of capabilities available, including the deterrence provided by our conventional and nuclear forces. As I said in Seoul last year, the commitment of the United States to the security of the Republic of Korea will never waver. More broadly, we agreed to continue expanding our cooperation globally.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2200, "text": "In Afghanistan where our troops serve together and where South Korea is a major donor of development assistance we are on track to complete the transition to Afghan-led operations by the end of next year. We discussed Syria, where both our nations are working to strengthen the opposition and plan for a Syria without Bashar Asad. And I am pleased that our two nations and our Peace Corps have agreed to expand our efforts to promote development around the world. Finally, we are expanding the already strong ties between our young people. As an engineer by training, President Park knows the importance of education. Madam President, you have said and I am quoting you We live in an age where a single individual can raise the value of an entire nation. So I am pleased that we are renewing exchange programs that bring our students together. And as we pursue commonsense immigration reform here in the United States, we want to make it easier for foreign entrepreneurs and foreign graduate students from countries like Korea to stay and contribute to our country, just as so many Korean Americans already do. So again, thank you, President Park, for making the United States your first foreign trip. In your Inaugural Address, you celebrated the can-do spirit of the Korean people. That is a spirit that we share. And after our meeting today, I am confident that if our two nations continue to stand together, there is nothing we cannot do together. Let me start by thanking ENTITY for his invitation and his gracious hospitality. During my meeting with the President today, I was able to have a heart-to-heart talk with him on a wide range of common interests. I found that the two us of have a broad common view about the vision and roles that should guide the Korea-U.S. alliance as it moves forward, and I was delighted to see this. First of all, the President and I shared the view that the Korea-U.S. alliance has been faithfully carrying out its role as a bulwark of peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in Northeast Asia and that the alliance should continue to serve as a linchpin for peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula and in Asia. In this regard, I believe it is significant that the joint declaration on the 60th anniversary of our alliance we adopted spells out the direction that our comprehensive strategic alliance should take.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2201, "text": "Next, the President and I reaffirmed that we will by no means tolerate North Korea's threats and provocations, which have recently been escalating further, and that such actions would only deepen North Korea's isolation. The President and I noted that it is important that we continue to strengthen our deterrence against North Korea's nuclear and conventional weapons threat and shared the view that in this respect, the transition of wartime operational control should also proceed in a way that strengthens our combined defense capabilities and preparations being made toward that way as well. We also shared the view that realizing ENTITY's vision of a world without nuclear weapons should start on the Korean Peninsula, and we stated that we would continue to strongly urge North Korea in close concert with the other members of the six-party talks and the international community to faithfully abide by its international obligations under the September 19 joint statements and the relevant Security Council resolutions. Korea and the U.S. will work jointly to induce North Korea to make the right choice through multifaceted efforts, including the implementation of the Korean Peninsula trust-building process that I had spelled out. North Korea will not be able to survive if it only clings to developing its nuclear weapons at the expense of its people's happiness. This is the shared view of the other members of the six-party talks and the international community. However, should North Korea choose the path to becoming a responsible member of the community of nations, we are willing to provide assistance, together with the international community. We also had meaningful discussions on the economy and ways to engage in substantive cooperation. The President and I welcome the fact that the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement, which went into effect 1 year ago, is contributing to our shared prosperity. We also said we will make efforts to enable our people to better feel the benefits of our free trade agreement for them. I highlighted the importance of securing high-skilled U.S. work visas for Korean citizens and asked for executive branch support, to the extent possible, to see to it that the relevant legislation is passed in the U.S. Congress. Moreover, we arrived at the view that the Korea-U.S. civil nuclear energy cooperation agreement should be revised into an advanced and mutually beneficial successor agreement. We said we would do our best to conclude our negotiations as soon as possible. The President and I also had in-depth discussions on ways to enhance our global partnership.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2202, "text": "First, we noted together that Northeast Asia needs to move beyond conflict and divisions and open a new era of peace and cooperation and that there would be synergy between President's Obama's policy of rebalancing to Asia and my initiative for peace and cooperation in Northeast Asia as we pursue peace and development in the region. We shared the view about playing the role of coarchitects to flesh out this vision. Furthermore, we decided that the Korea-U.S. alliance should deal not just with challenges relating to the Korean Peninsula and Northeast Asia, but confronting the broader international community. I am very delighted that I was able to build personal trust with ENTITY through our summit meeting today and to have laid a framework for cooperation. All right, we have got a couple of questions from each side, so we will start with Stephen Collinson of AFP. Does the United States have a core national security interest in stopping the slaughter in Syria or merely a strong moral desire to see the violence end? And at what point does the cost of not intervening in a more direct way than you have done so far outweigh the cost of doing so? And if I may ask, President Park, ENTITY's critics have warned that failing to act on perceived violations of U.S. red lines in Syria could embolden U.S. enemies elsewhere, including in North Korea. Are you convinced that Kim Jong Un has taken the U.S. and South Korean warnings seriously, and do you see the withdrawal of two missiles from a test site as a sign that he is willing to deescalate the situation? Well, Stephen, I think that we have both a moral obligation and a national security interest in, A, ending the slaughter in Syria, but, B, also ensuring that we have got a stable Syria that is representative of all the Syrian people and is not creating chaos for its neighbors. And that is why for the last 2 years, we have been active in trying to ensure that Bashar Asad exits the stage and that we can begin a political transition process. That is the reason why we have invested so much in humanitarian aid. That is the reason why we are so invested in helping the opposition and why we have mobilized the international community to isolate Syria. That is why we are now providing nonlethal assistance to the opposition, and that is why we are going to continue to do the work that we need to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2203, "text": "And in terms of the costs and the benefits, I think there'd be severe costs in doing nothing. That is why we are not doing nothing. That is why we are actively invested in the process. If what you are asking is, are there continuing reevaluations about what we do, what actions we take in conjunction with other international partners to optimize the day when or to hasten the day when we can see a better situation in Syria, we have been doing that all along and we will continue to do that. I think that, understandably, there is a desire for easy answers. And my job is to constantly measure our very real and legitimate humanitarian and national security interests in Syria, but measuring those against my bottom line, which is what is in the best interest of America's security and making sure that I am making decisions not based on a hope and a prayer, but on hard-headed analysis in terms of what will actually make us safer and stabilize the region. I would note not to answer the question that you lobbed over to President Park that you suggested even in your question a perceived crossing of a red line. And what I have said is that we have evidence that there has been the use of chemical weapons inside of Syria, but I do not make decisions based on perceived. And I cannot organize international coalitions around perceived. We have tried that in the past, by the way, and it did not work out well. So we want to make sure that we have the best analysis possible. But I would just point out that there have been several instances during the course of my Presidency where I said I was going to do something, and it ended up getting done. And there were times when there were folks on the sidelines wondering why has not it happened yet and what is going on and why did not it go on tomorrow? But in the end, whether it is bin Laden or Qaddafi, if we say we are taking a position, I would think at this point the international community has a pretty good sense that we typically follow through on our commitments. With regard to actions towards Syria, what kind of message would that communicate to North Korea? And recently, North Korea seems to be deescalating its threats and provocations. What seems to be behind that? You asked these two questions. In fact, North Korea is isolated at the moment, so it is hard to find anyone that could really accurately fathom the situation in North Korea.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2204, "text": "Hence, whether the Syrian situation would have an impact is hard to say for sure. Why is North Korea appearing to deescalate its threats and provocations? But what is clear and what I believe for sure is that the international community with regard to North Korea's bad behavior, its provocations, must speak with one voice, a firm message, and consistently send a firm message that they will not stand and that North Korea's actions in breach of international norms will be met with so-and-so sanctions and measures by the international community. At the same time, if it goes along the right way, there will be so-and-so reward. So if we consistently send that message to North Korea, I feel that North Korea will be left with no choice but to change. And instead of just hoping to see North Korea change, the international community must also consistently send that message with one voice to tell them and communicate to them that they have no choice but to change and to shape an environment where they are left with no choice but to make the strategic decision to change. My question goes to ENTITY. You just mentioned that North Korea in order to induce North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons, what is most important is the concerted actions of the international community. With regard to this, during your meeting with ENTITY today, I would like to ask what was said and the views that you shared. And with regard to this, what Russia and China the role that they are playing in terms of inducing North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons, how do you feel about that? My next question is to ENTITY Regarding the young leader of North Korea, Kim Jong Un, I would appreciate your views about the leader of North Korea. And if you were to send a message to him today, what kind of message would you send to him? With regard to the North Korea issue, Korea and the United States, as well as the international community, the ultimate objective that all of us should be adopting is for North Korea to abandon its nuclear weapons and to induce it to become a responsible member of the international community. This serves the interest of peace on the Korean Peninsula and the world, and it also serves the interest of North Korea's own development as well. And so in order to encourage North Korea to walk that path and change its perceptions, we have to work in concert.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2205, "text": "And in this regard, China's role, China's influence can be extensive, so if so China taking part in these endeavors is important. And we shared views on that. With regard to China and Russia's stance, I believe that China and Russia not to mention the international community, of course share the need for a denuclearized Korean Peninsula and are cooperating closely to induce North Korea to take the right path. In the case of China, with regard to North Korea's missile fire and nuclear testing, China has taken an active part in adopting U.N. Security Council resolutions and is faithfully implementing those resolutions. And with regard to Russia, Russia is also firmly committed to the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. And with regard to the adoption of U.N. Security Council resolutions on North Korea, it has been very active in supporting them. And they have also sent a very and they have also worked very hard to include a stern message to North Korea in the joint statement of the G-8 Foreign Ministers meeting. Such constructive efforts on the part of China and Russia are vital to sending a unified message to North Korea that their nuclear weapons will not stand, and encouraging and urging North Korea to make the right decision. Obviously, I do not know Kim Jong Un personally. I have not had a conversation with him, cannot really give you an opinion about his personal characteristics. What we do know is the actions that he is taken that have been provocative and seem to pursue a dead end. And I want to emphasize, President Park and myself very much share the view that we are going to maintain a strong deterrent capability, that we are not going to reward provocative behavior. But we remain open to the prospect of North Korea taking a peaceful path of denuclearization, abiding by international commitments, rejoining the international community, and seeing a gradual progression in which both security and prosperity for the people of North Korea can be achieved. If what North Korea has been doing has not resulted in a strong, prosperous nation, then now is a good time for Kim Jong Un to evaluate that history and take a different path. And I think that, should he choose to take a different path, not only President Park and myself would welcome it, but the international community as a whole would welcome it. And I think that China and Russia and Japan and other key players that have been participants in six-party talks have made that clear.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2206, "text": "Do not worry about what I say; watch what I do. And we are so far at least, we have not seen actions on the part of the North Koreans that would indicate they are prepared to move in a different direction. The Pentagon said today that there may be as many as 70 sexual assaults a day in the military up by 35 percent during your term in office and also that many sexual assaults may not be reported, in fact. Given what we know about an Air Force officer in charge of preventing sexual assault recently being charged with sexual assault and also the recent cases of a couple of Air Force generals who've set aside convictions of instances of sexual assault, can you speak to the culture in the U.S. military that may be at play here and talk about your response to that and what you can do going forward to improve things? And if I may, President Park, I would ask you, yesterday you said that if North Korea does not change its behavior, we will make them pay. I wondered if you could elaborate on that comment a little bit. Well, let us start with the principle that sexual assault is an outrage; it is a crime. That is true for society at large. And if it is happening inside our military, then whoever carries it out is betraying the uniform that they are wearing. And they may consider themselves patriots, but when you engage in this kind of behavior, that is not patriotic, it is a crime. And we have to do everything we can to root this out. One of the things that we have been trying to do is create a structure in which we are starting to get accurate reporting. And up and down the chain, we are seeing a process, a system of accountability and transparency so that we can root this out completely. And this is a discussion that I had with Secretary Panetta. He had begun the process of moving this forward. But I have directly spoken to Secretary Hagel already today and indicating to him that we are going to have to not just step up our game, we have to exponentially step up our game, to go at this thing hard. And for those who are in uniform who have experienced sexual assault, I want them to hear directly from their Commander in Chief that I have got their backs. I will support them. And we are not going to tolerate this stuff, and there will be accountability. If people have engaged in this behavior, they should be prosecuted.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2207, "text": "And anybody in the military who has knowledge of this stuff should understand this is not who we are. This is not what the U.S. military is about. And it dishonors the vast majority of men and women in uniform who carry out their responsibilities and obligations with honor and dignity and incredible courage every single day. So bottom line is, I have no tolerance for this. I have communicated this to the Secretary of Defense. We are going to communicate this again to folks up and down the chain in areas of authority, and I expect consequences. So I do not want just more speeches or awareness programs or training, but ultimately, folks look the other way. prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged. Regarding North Korea's provocations and bad behavior, we will make them pay. With regard to that, for instance, what I meant was that if they engage in military provocations and harm the lives of our people and the safety of our people, then naturally, as a President who gives the top priority to ensuring the safety of our people, it is something that we cannot just pass over. So if North Korea engages in provocations, I will fully trust the judgment of our military. So if our military makes a judgment which they feel is the right thing, then they should act accordingly. And this is the instruction that I had made. And North Korea has to pay a price when it comes not only with regard to provocations, but also with regard to the recent Kaesong industrial complex issue, where, based on agreements between the two sides, companies had believed in the agreement that was made and actually went to invest in the Kaesong industrial complex, but they suddenly completely dismiss and disregard this agreement overnight and deny various medical supplies and food supplies to Korean citizens left in that industrial complex, refusing to accept our request to allow in those supplies, which is what prompted us to withdraw all of our citizens from that park. This situation unfolded in the full view of the international community. So who would invest, not to mention Korean companies, but also companies of other countries, who would invest in North Korea in a place that shows such flagrant disregard for agreements, and how could they, under those circumstances, actually pull off economic achievement? So I think, in this regard, they are actually paying the price for their own misdeeds. I am from Seoul newspaper. My question goes to ENTITY.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2208, "text": "President Park has been talking about the Korean Peninsula trust-building process as a way to promote peace on Korean Peninsula. I wonder what you feel about this trust-building process on the Korean Peninsula? Well, as I indicated before, President Park's approach is very compatible with my approach and the approach that we have been taking together for several years now. And as I understand it, the key is that we will be prepared for a deterrence that we will respond to aggression, that we will not reward provocative actions, but that we will maintain an openness to an engagement process when we see North Korea taking steps that would indicate that it is following a different path. All of us would benefit from a North Korea that transformed itself. Certainly, the people of North Korea would benefit. South Korea would be even stronger in a less tense environment on the Peninsula. All the surrounding neighbors would welcome such a transition, such a transformation. But I do not think either President Park or I are naive about the difficulties of that taking place. And we have got to see action before we can have confidence that that, in fact, is the path that North Korea intends to take. But the one thing I want to emphasize just based on the excellent meetings and consultation that we had today, as well as watching President Park over the last several months dealing with the provocative escalations that have been taking place in North Korea, what I am very confident about is, President Park is tough. I think she has a very clear, realistic view of the situation, but she also has the wisdom to believe that conflict is not inevitable and is not preferable. And that is true on the Korean Peninsula. That is true around the world. And we very much appreciate her visit and look forward to excellent cooperation not only on this issue, but on the more positive issues of economic and commercial ties between our two countries, educational exchanges, work on energy, climate change, helping other countries develop. I have had a wonderful time every time I have visited the Republic of Korea. And what is clear is that the Republic of Korea is one of the great success stories of our lifetime. And the Republic of Korea's leadership around the globe will be increasingly important. And what underpins that in part has been the extraordinary history of the alliance between the United States and the Republic of Korea. And we want to make sure that that remains a strong foundation for progress in the future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentparkgeunhyesouthkorea0", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Park Geun-hye of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-park-geun-hye-south-korea-0", "publication_date": "07-05-2013", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2211, "text": "You have been told, I think, that we are doing a documentary. We went across a good part of the country to places where you have given speeches over the years to just talk with people about how their lives have changed. I am going to listen to this one. I appreciate that. And that is the beginning of our discussion here, although we will range a little bit farther. This caused me to go back and look at some of your speeches. And there was one in St. Charles, Mo., in 2010, in which you said, Let us face it, people have lost faith in government, that it started before you were ENTITY and it is getting worse. Do the events of this year suggest that it is getting even worse? I think that there has been a steady growth in people's cynicism about institutions generally, and government in particular. And some of it is justified because we have got a Congress that is been dysfunctional now for quite some time and cannot seem to organize itself to solve problems. You now have a Republican Congress, they control both chambers and they cannot even pass their own agenda, much less pass something that has bipartisan support. And at a time when there are a lot of big issues out there, people feel as if things are not working the way they should. Having said that, not all the cynicism is justified. Even without Congress cooperating, we have been able to make progress on a whole range of issues. And I think people are seeing that when government makes smart decisions, it actually has a significant impact. And part of my hope during the course of this election is that it is clarifying that people say, all right, here is what each party stands for, here is what each presidential candidate and various congressional candidates stand for. If we are going to move forward in a democracy then the ultimate arbiter of making things work is the voter, and putting people in charge who are serious about America's business as opposed to just playing to various narrow constituency groups. If some of the cynicism is not justified, are you concerned that voters this year will go too far in overturning things? You know, ultimately I have confidence in our voters.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2212, "text": "If you look at American history, there have been times where we have taken some tough turns, primarily fed by fear and disruptions and dislocations, but with a very substantial exception of the Civil War, generally speaking, the democratic process muddled through and we emerged better and stronger than we were before. And I have no doubt that the same thing will happen this time. But I do think that part of what has changed - during the course of my presidency, I have seen it - is the splintering of media. The power of social media and the Internet has turbocharged what previously might have been marginal views or marginal groups, has made it harder to generate consensus because people are not looking at the same set of facts. I have said this before. If you are watching Fox News, you have a different set of facts than if you are reading the New York Times editorial page. And that, I think, has led - or increased the polarization, and that makes it harder for people to sort through who is telling the truth and how we actually get stuff done. Let me ask though, ENTITY, you have still got the biggest megaphone. People can even see you on Fox News. If you have been ENTITY for almost 7 1/2 years and people have still no faith in government, are you accountable for that? Well, look, as a general proposition, I do not spend a lot of time looking at polls. Well, right now I think the majority of the American people think that I am doing a good job. That does not necessarily give me a lot of comfort if I cannot move this Congress forward. And the question then becomes - and I have heard some people in the Republican Party suggest that in some fashion I am responsible for what is happened to them, and the rise of Trump and the dysfunction that you see in their party generally. What I would say is that I came into office wanting to work on a bipartisan basis, and if you have looked at my old speeches you would see that. made a determination that it was good politics to oppose everything that I did. The problem was that by opposing everything I did, even things that previously they had been for, it pushed their party further and further to the right. When we talk about dysfunction in government, it is not as if both parties are equally dysfunctional. The Democrats have a pretty well thought through agenda. When we were governing in the first two years of my administration, we got a lot done.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2213, "text": "We were probably as productive as any Congress in 20, 30, 40 years. You have a particular problem in the Republican Party right now that needs to get sorted through. Now, that is not unique in the annals of American history. There have been times when the Democrats were wrapped around the axle, and extreme wings were setting the agenda. And I think the Republicans will get out of this. But right now, at least, partly in reaction to my presidency and the political decisions that they made, they find themselves having created an atmosphere in which even somebody like Paul Ryan is viewed as not sufficiently conservative, or if he does just some of the basic work of governance that somehow he has betrayed the base and is decried as a Republican in name only. And when you have that kind of environment, it is very hard to get the kind of cooperation that is necessary for us to solve problems that people are concerned about and that I am assuming that during the course of your conversations they have raised repeatedly. Let me ask one of those concerns. In Kansas, we spoke with a woman named Heather Gray, who said, 16 years ago I was making $10 an hour. Today, she said, I make $10 an hour. The problem of stagnant wages, of course, did not start with your presidency, but it has not improved much. Well, we have got some long-term trends that we have to battle, and when I came into office we were in the midst of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. We have successfully dug ourselves out of that hole. The country has, but wages have not improved for average people ... I am going to answer your question. So we had unemployment at 10 percent. It is now below 5. We had a housing market that had completely collapsed. We had a situation in which people had lost trillions of dollars in wealth in their 401's and they have recovered it. In fact, Americans have gotten back about $30 trillion of wealth since I came into office. So by every measure, the economy has improved. But the long-term trends that had occurred before I took office and have continued is a combination of globalization and automation, leading to more downward pressure on wages because you need fewer workers to make a certain amount of stuff; and entire job sectors being shrunk or eliminated; more and more people going into the service sector, and in the service sector, historically wages have been lower.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2214, "text": "And that is all been compounded by some very specific policies both at the federal and the state level that is made it harder for workers to organize and get more leverage to get higher wages. This is why we fought for higher minimum wages. This is why, I think, it is so important that as we move forward, if we are going to benefit from all the huge productivity increases and efficiencies that arise out of the global supply chain and automated everything, then we are going to have to redesign that social compact to make sure that everybody is getting a decent wage. It is not as if we need a radical restructuring of the economy. If we had a minimum wage that required everybody to get - be above poverty if they are working full time, that would go a long way towards alleviating some of the trends that we talked about. And in fact, we have seen wage growth now begin to occur over the last couple of years, but it is not happening as fast as it should. There is a writer for the Financial Times, Philip Stephens, who wrote something interesting after Britain voted to leave the European Union last week. He wrote in a column, globalization is not working, that it may make countries richer, but the majority of people are not benefiting. He was writing about Britain, but you mentioned globalization in the context of the United States. I think he is right that what you are seeing across the advanced economies is that when you have globalization and suddenly there is competition from everywhere, that empowers people who have a lot of skills, can use the Internet. Suddenly they have access to all the markets. And what that means is, if you are very good at something, if you are LeBron James or you are Seinfeld or you are ENTITY Jobs, then suddenly you can leverage your skills in ways that you could never do before. If you are a manual worker, and are doing work that can be replaced not just by a lower-wage worker somewhere else but more frequently by a machine, then you are in a tougher spot because you now are competing against the entire world instead of just the people who live around you. And that is why it is so important for us to think about how do we make sure that everybody is participating in that global economy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2215, "text": "If you continue on the current trends, then what you are going to see is a continuing increase in inequality, and that is not going to be economically sustainable because it turns out that the economy works best when everybody has a stake in it and workers have money in their pockets and are spending it, and that is good for business. And I think you see that somewhat in the Brexit vote. You see some of it in both the Sanders campaign and the Trump campaign, people feeling as if we are potentially being left behind. Or what is the cure to this whole thing? And the notion is that, from my perspective, we are not going to suddenly eliminate the global supply chain. We are not going to disentangle the world economy. It is just too integrated now by virtue of technology and the Internet. And so what we have to do is to make sure that wages around the world are beginning to rise, that environmental standards around the world are beginning to rise, that within our own countries we are providing the education that people need to compete in this global economy, with new skills for the new industries that are out there, that we invest more in things like infrastructure that make us competitive, and also, by the way, cannot be shipped away. I actually think that, over time, it can raise everybody's living standards and create a more peaceful world. But if you do it in a way where the benefits of globalization are only for the elites who are flying around from capital to capital and looking at their investment portfolios on a laptop or a computer screen, and they are not worrying, they feel disengaged from their national economies and their national workers and their national communities, then you are going to see a reaction to it. Donald Trump talked about global elites after the vote in Britain. Is Trump right that there are big parallels between what motivated the British vote and what people are feeling and thinking about in the election this year in the United States? Well, first of all, I think it is important to remember that Mr. Trump embodies global elites and has taken full advantage of it his entire life. So he is hardly a spokesperson for - a legitimate spokesperson for a populist surge from working-class people, on either side of the Atlantic. I think that some of the concerns around immigration, some of the concerns around a loss of control or a loss of national identity, those are similar.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2216, "text": "I think there is a xenophobia, an anti-immigrant sentiment that is flashing up not just in Great Britain but throughout Europe, that has some parallels with what Mr. Trump has been trying to stir up here. Having said all that, the U.S. economy has not only recovered but we are about 10 percent larger than we were pre-crisis, when I came into office. You have had a decade of stagnation there, partly because of austerity measures that we did not duplicate. The Republicans attempted to impose those kinds of strategies here and I resisted them, and I would argue that that is part of the reason why we did a lot better. We reformed our banking system a lot faster. And so overall, I think that the differences are greater than the similarities. But what is absolutely true is that the ability to tap into a fear that people may have about losing control, and to offer some sort of vague, nostalgic feelings about how, you know, we will make Britain great again or we will make America great again. And the subtext for that is somehow that a bunch of foreigners and funny-looking people are coming in here and changing the basic character of the nation. I think that some of that is out there, both in Europe and the United States. And again, that is not unique to England. You have seen it in the Le Pen Party in France. You see it in some of the far-right parties in other parts of Europe as well. You mentioned people fearful of change. The way that voters express that when we talk with them is that they are concerned about changing the traditions, values or institutions of this country that have made the country great over time. Immigrants do bring new ideas, new cultures, different religions, other things. Does it matter particularly if they do change the country? Well, I think that there are some bedrock values that should not change, and in fact, have not changed. The values of our Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the values of free speech, the values of religious tolerance, the values of pluralism, the values of us being a nation of immigrants that can absorb people from every corner of the world and yet at the end of the day, because we all pledge allegiance to a flag and a creed, we become one.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2217, "text": "I think, ironically, that if you look at the values that immigrants bring when they come here - whether they are coming from Poland, or Italy, or now Vietnam, or South Korea or India - the values they bring are quintessentially American values. They are striver's values; they are the values that say we are going to make something of ourselves, regardless of the station in which we were born. When you look at second-generation immigrants, or third-generation immigrants, they are as American as any kid here. That is part of what separates us from the United Kingdom or Europe, is we have had that tradition of being a nation of immigrants. And so, you know, when people are concerned about some of the changes that immigrants may bring, you know, they need to go back and read what people were saying about their grandparents or great-grandparents when they came. You read about the description of Irish who arrived, and the language that is being used is identical to the language that Mr. Trump uses about Mexicans. You know, when Southern Europeans were coming instead of Northern Europeans, there was absolute certainty that America was going down the tubes because these swarthy, you know, folks were coming here and they had different attitudes. And Catholics were coming, which meant that the pope was going to control us. And - this kind of xenophobia is part of the American tradition, and the good news is that, you know, after these spasms of it, it typically fades away, because the immigrants who come here, in fact, are coming here precisely to embrace the opportunities of being American. Is there a danger that Europe, after this Brexit vote, will turn inward, focus increasingly on its own problems and its own turmoil, and be less active in the world? Well, I think that the best way to think about this is a pause button has been pressed on the project of full European integration. I would not overstate it. There has been a little bit of hysteria post-Brexit vote, as if, somehow, NATO's gone and the trans-Atlantic alliance is dissolving and every country is rushing off to its own corner. What is happening is that you had a European project that was probably moving faster and without as much consensus as it should have.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2218, "text": "You have a monetary union - although England was not a part of that - that was always going to be difficult to manage, because the economy in Germany is very different than the economy in Italy or Greece. And you have a European Union government in Brussels that, because it needs consensus from, you know, more than a - more than a couple of dozen countries, oftentimes seems overly bureaucratic and deadlocked. And I think this will be a moment in which all of Europe says, all right, let us take a breath, and let us figure out how do we maintain some of our national identities, how do we preserve the benefits of integration and how do we deal with some of the frustrations that our own voters are feeling. But the basic core values of Europe, the tenets of liberal, market-based democracies, those are not changing. The interests that we have in common with Europe remain the same. They are going to have to worry about working with us on the Middle East; they are going to have to worry about us working together to deal with an aggressive Russia. They are going to have to deal with us, with respect to how do we continue to uphold international rules and norms around the world that have served both the U.S. and Europe very well. And so, I do not anticipate that there is going to be major cataclysmic changes as a consequence of this. Keep in mind that Norway is not a member of the European Union, but Norway is one of our closest allies. They align themselves on almost every issue with Europe and us. They are a place that is continually supporting the kinds of initiatives internationally that we support. And if over the course of what is going to be at least a two-year negotiation between England and Europe, Great Britain ends up being affiliated to Europe like Norway is, the average person is not to notice a big change. I think that is entirely up to them. On this side of the Atlantic, we heard from a number of people about immigration when we traveled across the country. One of them was a man named Jose Luis Valdez. He is a business owner, a restaurant owner in Kansas City, Kan. So, he is getting ready to vote for the first time, but he has followed politics for a long time. He knows that you won the Latino vote very heavily in both your elections. And speaking about the failure to pass immigration reform, he said of you, he used us. He used our votes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2219, "text": "Felt you should have done it when you had a chance when you had a Democratic Congress, you should have done more. What would you say to him? Well, what I would say to him is his restaurant might not be doing so well if I had not focused my first two years on saving the economy. So, it is not as if I did not have anything else to do. And I think it would be pretty hard to argue that I have not put everything I have had into getting this done. But, you know, one of the things that I have learned in this presidency is that until you get something done, people are going to be frustrated. You think of the incredible progress we have made during the course of my presidency with respect to LGBT rights - the rights of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgender - the historic speed with which we consolidated equal treatment for that population And you know, these days, if I go before an LGBT crowd, you know, people are cheering and saying I have been one of their greatest champions. But it was only about three or four years ago when, you know, I would get heckled in some LGBT events because, you know, marriage equality had not gotten done yet. And it did not matter how many times I told them, look, you know, it is - it is going to get done. It is just - it turns out that the wheels in democracy do not always move as quickly as you'd hope. And I cannot just do these things with a stroke of the pen. You know, that is - that is sort of the nature of all social change here. And so, if you - if you were interviewing one of the DREAM Act kids, who over the last several years have been able to get a driver's license, a permit to work or to school, have joined our military, they - they would not say that they have been used. They would say, thank you. And I think that is the reason the vast majority of Latino voters continue to support me, because they see the effort that has been put in. Now, one last point I will make, because I - right after this most recent Supreme ruling, or lack of ruling came down ... I said to them, look, everything is teed up.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2220, "text": "And instead of despairing, you just need to understand we have got four months, five months, and you have got a very clear choice between two candidates - one of whom not only supports all the initiatives that I have put forward, but is going to be in a position if I do not get a ninth Supreme Court justice to break that tie. And to - one way or another, by next year, we are going to have either my administrative solution to immigration reform done, it will be in train, because it will have been decided on and - and will no longer be blocked. Or, alternatively, you know, Mr. Trump will win, in which case, you know, we will have a whole bunch of other problems on our hands with respect to immigration. So, in some ways, this is how the democratic process works. And I am constantly reminding young people, who are full of passion, that I want them to keep their passion, but they have got to gird for the fact that it takes a long time to get stuff done in this democracy. It is not as convenient as, you know, people would always like, but this is a big country with a lot of diverse views. Let me ask about a passionate young person that we met along the way. He is an activist now in Baltimore. He was active in the protests after the death of Freddie Gray ... who was in a police van, and died later, as you know. And he was unhappy with a statement that you made at the time, when you were supportive of peaceful protests but also criticized what you called criminals and thugs who had looted stores. He felt that you were being too harsh and went on to say in our interview that you were speaking from a position of privilege, his suggestion being that maybe you did not quite get what was going on in the streets. What would you say to him? Well, obviously, I do not know him personally, so we would have to have a longer conversation. What I would say is that the Black Lives Matter movement has been hugely important in getting all of America to - to see the challenges in the criminal justice system differently. And I could not be prouder of the activism that has been involved. And it is making a difference. You are seeing it at state and local levels, and the task force that we pulled together in the wake of Ferguson has put forward recommendations that were shaped both by the people who organized the Ferguson protests as well as police officers.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2221, "text": "And it turns out that there is common ground there, in terms of how we can be smart about crime, smart about policing, respectful to all communities and try to wring some of the racial bias that exists in the criminal justice system out of it. What I would also say, though, is that if somebody is looting, they are looting. And the notion that they are making a political statement is not always the case because these are businesses oftentimes owned by African-Americans. You have situations in which suddenly - friends of mine in Baltimore, their mothers who are elderly have to now travel across town to get their medicines because the local drugstore got torn up. And making excuses for them I think is a mistake. There are ways of bringing about social change that are powerful and that have the ability to pull the country together and maintain the moral high ground and there are approaches where I may understand the frustrations, but they are counterproductive. If I were to summarize what else this young man said, I might say that he feels that he is trying to overturn what he sees is a racist or corrupt system and that you have become part of it. Yeah, look, ENTITY, I think that you can always find folks who are going to feel as if change has not happened fast enough. That is the nature of these issues and by virtue of being ENTITY of the United States, if there is a problem out there then I am the ultimate public official that people know. And if it has not gotten fixed in a couple of weeks, people are going to say, why did not you fix it? I think it'd be - I think people would be pretty hard-pressed to not see the efforts that we put in around criminal justice reform where we are supporting it fully. The initiatives that we have made with local mayors and state officials around the country to reform the criminal justice system, the fact that as ENTITY, I have been the first ever to even visit a federal prison, that the positions I have taken on criminal justice issues are unprecedented by any president. The work we are doing with commutations is unprecedented and I have now commuted more sentences for nonviolent drug offenses than the last seven or eight presidents combined. 22 in this case. 22-year-old kid on the streets of Baltimore who is still feeling frustrated, then I am not going to be surprised if that frustration's expressed.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2222, "text": "As part of this project, we also had a look at your 2008 campaign speech in Philadelphia about race in which you talked in one passage about anger in the black community, which you said is sometimes counterproductive but it is real and there are reasons it. There is another passage which I had not even noticed before, in which you say there is a similar anger among some in the white community who do not feel particularly privileged by their race and do feel frustrated that they are losing jobs, losing pensions, feel like they are losing ground. Looking back, were you describing there the same force that is driving much of our election discussion here in 2016? Well, not only the election and discussion driving 2016; this has been an ongoing theme in American history. You can go back and during Jim Crow and segregation and you have got black sharecroppers who have nothing and alongside them, poor white farmers who do not have that much more except for the fact that they are white. And the degree to which a lot of politics in the South were specifically designed to make sure that that sharecropper and that white farmer did not get together to question how the economy was structured and how they both could benefit, that is - that is one of the oldest stories in American politics. So - so it is not surprising that what I said in 2008 still holds true today. It was true for a long time. The nature of racial bias in this country is unique and the challenges that African-Americans have faced are incomparable. Native Americans in this country, you know, were burdened by extraordinary bias and cruelty, as well. And it is probably not useful to sort of catalog every possible group's grievances. What is true, though, is that as I travel around the country, what a black, working-class person has in common with a white, working-class person is significant. And what prevents them from voting along the same lines or working together on the same projects to do with a whole range of cultural and identity issues which, you know, they obviously feel are important and valid. But what I have tried to do throughout my presidency is get - try to get people to recognize themselves in each other, and that is probably partly related to my own upbringing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2223, "text": "I was raised by a white mom and white grandparents who, you know, never suffered the kinds of discrimination that their black cohorts might have experienced but who had their own struggles, who went through a Great Depression, who - a grandmother who had to work her way up without ever a college education, starting in the steno pool or as a secretary to be - and experienced her own discrimination because of being a woman. And so I have seen the degree to which their struggles are not that different from Michelle's parents' struggles, at least in terms of how they think about it, and the similar values of hoping that their kids are going to do better and that education is the key. And that, you know, everybody's got to work hard and take responsibility but that they'd like a government that was more responsive to clear out some of the barriers for their advancement. And I believe that our politics - when our politics are at our best - is not based on identity politics, but it is based on a sense that everybody should have a fair shot and everybody should get a fair shake. Everybody should be responsible for doing their fair share, and you know, that theme you will see in every speech that I have given since I was running for the state Senate, and it has not changed much now that I am nearing the end of my political career. Somebody following this year's election might say, well, that debate's worse, it is gotten worse. Do you see any sign that that debate is any better, that it is moved in some direction? You see it in the younger generation. If you look at the 18-to-30 cohort, or the 18-to-40 cohort, they have a very different set of attitudes about all these issues. It is true, by the way, around the world. we were talking about Brexit, you know. The younger voter was not fearful of global interdependence. They embrace it. They see themselves as being able to navigate through all these different worlds. You see it when I visit Vietnam, or countries in Africa or Latin America at - the new generation is much more comfortable with diversity, with connectivity, with the fact that change is constant, that they are not going to be working at one job for 30 years. And you know, they want to make sure that they can get the skills, they can get the access. But they see a bright future for themselves.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2224, "text": "Here in the United States, you talk to young people, it does not matter where, it does not matter whether they are black, white, Latino. They are not afraid of the future. And so when you look at the - the frustrations and the fear that a Trump tapping into, you know, that is an earlier generation that feels unsettled. And I think we can be sympathetic and understanding of the fact that they feel unsettled, but - but also recognize that, you know, if we get the decisions that need to be made right, then 10 years from now, 20 years from now, we may look back at something like the Trump campaign as the last vestige of - a kind of politics of us versus them that really does not apply to - to today. And one last thing I'd say about this, because you will - you will hear sometimes people suggest that, well, if Democrats and Republicans had been paying attention to white, working-class voters, then something like Trump would not have happened. Well, the fact is, is that my administration, for example, when we promote a higher minimum wage or stronger union laws or health care, for that matter, that is helping that cohort. That is designed to make sure that they get a better deal in this economy. And, you know, one of the things that you have seen during the course of my presidency is the ability, the power of a certain slice of the media to emphasize to white, working-class voters somehow that these things are not good for you, that this is ENTITY and his socialist friends who are trying to take money from you to give to an undeserving, you know, Mexican immigrant or black welfare mom and - and tapping into - sort of an identity politics that, you know, is powerful and oftentimes can work, but it is actually counterproductive, and it certainly does not reflect what we have been trying to do. What is true and what is - what is been interesting to see during this election cycle is that the Republican Party that has opposed minimum wages or union laws or what have you, they have a populist insurgency on their hands. And Mr. Trump, I think, has, at times, exploited this - this gap between what, you know, the Republican business community has promoted and - and what their constituencies are actually looking for. We ran across a statement of yours from 2008 about changing the trajectory of the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2225, "text": "You said that Ronald Reagan had changed the trajectory of the country, partly because the country was ready for it. That John F. Kennedy had done the same thing, because it was the right moment. The country was going in a certain direction. You wanted to see such a moment. You believed there was such a moment for you in 2008. Is there a risk that Donald Trump could say the same thing in 2016, that he could be the man to change the trajectory of the country now? Well, if he won, he could say that. I mean to say, you think the country might be ready for that? And I think that will be tested over the next four months. But I think it is pretty hard to argue that somebody who almost three-quarters of the country think is unqualified to be ENTITY and has a negative opinion about it is tapping into the zeitgeist of the country, or is speaking for a broad base of the country. Look, that is what elections are for, and that - I think it is important for Democrats, progressives, moderates, people who care about our traditions, who care about pluralism, who care about tolerance, who care about facts, who think climate change is real, who think that we have to reform our immigration system in an intelligent way, who believe ... in women's equality and equality for the LGBT community. I think it is important for those of us not to be complacent, not to be smug. And you know, the one thing I have tried to do during the course of my presidency is to take seriously the objections and the criticisms and the concerns of people who did not vote for me. I said on election night back in Grant Park, I am ENTITY of everybody. I have got a particular point of view. I have - I do not make any apologies for it. I believe that, if you go back and read my speeches dating back to 2004, where I first came to national prominence, that there has been a consistency there, that I have done or tried to do exactly what I said. And the core of that message is e pluribus unum, out of many, one, that - that we are better when we are together, that I do not believe in tribalism. I do not believe in stoking divisions and scapegoating. I think that people have common hopes and common dreams. And I think that America is at its best when we are unified and working together.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2226, "text": "And during the course of my presidency, you have seen polarization and division and all kinds of consternation and frustration. But what you have also seen quietly is a country that yanked itself out of a Great Recession and recovered as well as any country ever has from such a massive financial breakdown. You have seen 20 million people have health insurance that did not have it before and health care inflation actually going down so that, you know, we have saved trillions of dollars in cost relative to what we are expected to be paying over the course of programs like Medicare and Medicaid. What we have seen is a financial system that is a lot sounder. We see an LGBT community that is - is recognized as equal in ways that they were not before. You have seen an entire generation grow up, I think, feeling as if the old divisions do not make sense. And you know, I feel pretty confident that as long as we do the work over the next several months and then continue that work over the next several years, that we will have emerged from this era stronger, more prosperous, more secure and adhering more closely to the values and ideals that make America exceptional. We have gone across the country, we have gone across the country asking people how their lives have changed in the last eight years. How has your life changed in the last eight years? Well, everybody's teased me about how gray I am and that is OK. That picture of you and Derek Jeter, that was something. My - my daughters have grown up and I think for any father out there, seeing your kids come into office - when I came in office, they were so much younger than I realized at the time, I think. And for them to be these amazing young women now, that changes your life more than just about anything. It is interesting, though, that my fundamental belief in public service, my fundamental belief in the capacity of politics to - to solve problems, my belief in this country is stronger, not weaker. I have been frustrated by some things that I did not complete, that I could not wrap and mail and ship before I got out of here. Getting infrastructure done, you know, we got $2 trillion worth of infrastructure. If we got working on that now, we'd be growing a lot faster, the unemployment rate would be even lower, wages would be higher. You look at Syria being the most prominent example, where you have got a heartbreaking situation and not a lot of good choices.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2227, "text": "Having said all that, if you had told me at the beginning of my presidency that we could begin the process of making sure everybody has health insurance in this country; that we could recover fully from a terrible economic crisis; that, you know, we could make sure that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon without having to launch a war; that we could restore diplomatic relations with Cuba in a way that did not just transform our relationship with Cuba, but has put our relationship with all of Latin America on its strongest footing, maybe in history. If you told me that we could, you know, extend democracy to a place like Burma, one of the worst, you know, military dictatorships in the world and that I could visit there and you'd see millions of people lining the streets. If you told me that - that you could have gay and lesbian men and women proudly serving in our military without having to hide who they were, or that you could have a bipartisan effort to actually reduce sentences for nonviolent drug offenses have a credible chance of getting through Congress. You'd tally it up, it is not bad for 7 1/2 years' worth of work. Climate change, with the Paris Agreement, 200 countries signed on - is a classic example of how I think about my work, but also the possibilities of government and politics. We have not solved climate change because of that agreement, but we have now built an architecture that allows us, gives us a change to, over time collectively, in an unprecedented way, curb the pollution that contributes to climate change. But have we now given the next president, the next Congress, the next generation a chance to solve it? I think of myself as a relay runner. I take the baton. Sometimes, you take the baton and you are behind in the race, and you have got to run a little bit harder to catch up. Hopefully, by the time you pass on the baton, you are a little bit better positioned in the race. And I think there is a humility that comes out of this office, because you feel that no matter how much you have done, there is more work to do. But I think that there is a confidence that well-meaning people working together can - can change the country for the better.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsteveinskeepnationalpublicradio4", "title": "Interview with Steve Inskeep of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-steve-inskeep-national-public-radio-4", "publication_date": "27-06-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2228, "text": "I am excited, I am honored to introduce my first guest, the 44th President of the United States, please welcome ENTITY. It is good to see you and . Let me just say, I think Kevin looks good in a suit. He looks a little like Secret Service. And you are the only guy who can get him to wear it. Now, you know, it is funny, because the last time you were here, you walked in, you had your jacket on your finger, and you had the two guys with you You know, the I was mentioning earlier, we landed yesterday, and then this is an example of life in the bubble we landed at the fairground down in Costa Mesa, and I see the fairground where I think we are having this town hall, and I said, Well, why do not we walk over there? Now, they let me walk on the way back, but, you know, the doctor is behind me with the defibrillator. Michelle jokes about how our motorcade you know, we have got the ambulance and then the caboose and then the dog sledthere's the submarine. Well, look, we are going through a difficult time. I welcome the challenge. You know, I ran for President because I thought we needed big changes. And I do think in Washington it is a little bit like American Idol, except everybody is Simon Cowell. Everybody's got an opinion. But that is part of what makes for our democracy. And I do think, though, that the American people are all in a place where they understand it took us a while to get into this mess, it is going to take a while for us to get out of it. And if they have confidence that I am making steps to deal with issues like health care and energy and education, that matter deeply to their daily lives, then I think they are going to give us some time. Let me ask you about this. I know you are angry, because, you know, doing what I do, you kind of study body language a little bit. And you looked very angry about these bonuses; actually, stunned. Tell people what happened.  You have got a company, AIG, which used to be just a regular old insurance company; then they insured a whole bunch of stuff, and they were very profitable, and it was a good, solid company.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenothetonightshowburbankcalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno of The Tonight Show in Burbank, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-burbank-california", "publication_date": "19-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2229, "text": "Then they decided some smart person decided, let us put a hedge fund on top of the insurance company and let us sell these derivative products to banks all around the world, which are basically guarantees or insurance policies on all these subprime mortgages. And this smart person said, you know, none of these things are going to go bust; this subprime thing, it is a great deal; you can make a lot of profit. So they sold a whole bunch of them billions and billions of dollars. And what happened is, is that when people started going bust on subprime mortgages, you had $30 worth of debt on every dollar worth of mortgage, and the whole house of cards just started falling down. So the problem with AIG was that it owed so much and was tangled up with so many banks and institutions that if you had allowed it to just liquidate, to go into bankruptcy, it could have brought the whole financial system down. So it was the right thing to do to intervene in AIG. Now, the question is, who in their right mind, when your company is going bust, decides we are going to be paying a whole bunch of bonuses to people? And that, I think, speaks to a broader culture that existed on Wall Street, where I think people just had this general attitude of entitlement, where, we must be the best and the brightest; we deserve $10 million or $50 million or $100 million dollar payouts. And, you know, the immediate bonuses that went to AIG are a problem. But the larger problem is we have got to get back to an attitude where people know enough is enough, and people have a sense of responsibility, and they understand that their actions are going to have an impact on everybody. And if we can get back to those values that built America, then I think we are going to be okay. Well, you know, it is interesting, when you said it is like, I had to laugh the other day when the CEO of AIG said, okay, I have asked them to give half the bonuses back. Now, if you rob a bank and you go into court and you go, Your Honor, I am going to give you half the money back. And they seem stunned that we are not jumping at this wonderful offer. Well, you know, the only place I think that might work is in Hollywood. Let me ask you this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenothetonightshowburbankcalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno of The Tonight Show in Burbank, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-burbank-california", "publication_date": "19-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2230, "text": "Now, they I heard them say, well, one of the problems is it is contractual, and if we do not pay these bonuses, well, they can sue us. All the time people say, so sue me. I mean, the Federal Government is in debt a trillion dollars. We are broke sue us. In fairness, I think that part of the calculation they were making was the way the contracts were written said, if you do not pay us immediately, then we can claim three times as much as we were owed under the bonuses. And so they were making a legal calculation, and their legal judgment was not necessarily wrong. The main thing we are going to do everything we can to see if we can get these bonuses back. But I think the most important thing that we can do is make sure that we put in a bunch of financial regulatory mechanisms to prevent companies like an AIG holding the rest of us hostage. The problem is not just what is happened over the last 6 months. The problem is what was happening for years, where people were able to take huge, excessive risks with other people's money, putting the entire financial system at risk, and there were no checks, there were no balances, there was nobody overseeing the process. And so what we are going to be moving very aggressively on, even as we try to fix the current mess, is make sure that before somebody makes a bad bet you say, hold on, you cannot do that. Well, here is something that kind of scared me. Today they passed this thing that says we are going to tax 90 percent of these bonuses. And the part that scares me is, I mean, you are a good guy if the government decides they do not like a guy, all of a sudden, hey, we are going to tax you and then, boom, and it passes. I mean, that seems a little scary as a taxpayer, they can just decide you want to take a break and answer that when we come back? I have got a good answer too. We are talking with ENTITY. Before the break, I mentioned that they had just passed this new bill which will tax them 90 percent, and I said it was frightening to me as an American that Congress, whoever, could decide, I do not like that group, let us pass a law and tax them at 90 percent. Well, look, I understand Congress's frustrations, and they are responding to, I think, everybody's anger.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenothetonightshowburbankcalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno of The Tonight Show in Burbank, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-burbank-california", "publication_date": "19-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2231, "text": "But I think that the best way to handle this is to make sure that you have closed the door before the horse gets out of the barn. And what happened here was the money has already gone out and people are scrambling to try to find ways to get back at them. The change I'd like to see in terms of tax policy is that we have a system, going back to where we were back in the 1990s, where you and I who are doing pretty well pay a little bit more to pay for health care, to pay for energy, to make sure that kids can go to college who are not as fortunate as our as my kids might be. Those are the kinds of measured steps that we can take. But the important thing over the next several months is making sure that we do not lurch from thing to thing, but we try to make steady progress, build a foundation for long-term economic growth. I just read today about Merrill Lynch. They handed out 3.6 billion. It is not even million anymore, it is billions in bonuses. I know it would make me feel good should not somebody go to jail? I say that because I watch those people in New York, even people who had lost everything when Bernard Madoff went to jail, at least they felt they got something. They got some satisfaction. Most of the stuff that got us into trouble was perfectly legal. And that is a sign of how much we have got to change our laws, right? We were talking earlier about credit cards, and it is legal to charge somebody 30 percent on their credit card and charge fees and so forth that people do not always know what they are getting into. So the answer is to deal with those laws in a way that gives the average consumer a break. When you buy a toaster, if it explodes in your face there is a law that says your toasters need to be safe. But when you get a credit card, or you get a mortgage, there is no law on the books that says if that explodes in your face financially, somehow you are going to be protected. So this is the need for getting back to some commonsense regulations there is nothing wrong with innovation in the financial markets. We want people to be successful; we want people to be able to make a profit. Banks are critical to our economy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenothetonightshowburbankcalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno of The Tonight Show in Burbank, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-burbank-california", "publication_date": "19-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2232, "text": "And we want credit to flow again, but we just want to make sure that there is enough regulatory common sense in place that ordinary Americans are not taken advantage of, and taxpayers, after the fact, are not taken advantage of. Yes because when I was a kid, we would banks or credit cards would lend you money so you would pay it back. Now they lend you money so you cannot pay it back. It is like we were talking before, I mentioned we all saw A Wonderful Life Mr. Potter, the meanest man, remember he owned the whole town? You know what he charged on a mortgage? He is like Mother Teresa now. Well, and part of what happened over the last 15, 20 years is that so much money was made in finance that about 40 percent, I think, of our overall growth, our overall economic growth, was in the financial sector. Well, now what we are finding out is a lot of that growth was not real. It was paper money, paper profits on the books, but it could be easily wiped out. And what we need is steady growth; we need young people, instead of a smart kid coming out of school, instead of wanting to be an investment banker, we need them to decide they want to be an engineer, they want to be a scientist, they want to be a doctor or a teacher. And if we are rewarding those kinds of things that actually contribute to making things and making people's lives better, that is going to put our economy on solid footing. We will not have this kind of bubble-and-bust economy that we have gotten so caught up in for the last several years. Now, Treasury Secretary Geithner, he seems to be taking a little bit of heat here. How is he holding up with this? He seems like a smart guy. I do not think people fully appreciate the plate that was handed him. This guy has not just a banking crisis, he is got the worst recession since the Great Depression, he is got an auto industry on that has been on the verge of collapse. We have got to figure out how to coordinate with other countries internationally. He is got to deal with me; he is got to deal with Congress. And he is doing it with grace and good humor. And he understands that he is on the hot seat, but I actually think that he is taking the right steps, and we are going to have our economy back on the move.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenothetonightshowburbankcalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno of The Tonight Show in Burbank, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-burbank-california", "publication_date": "19-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2233, "text": "Now, it is , Hey, you got this, you got that; hey, good luck. No, no, but this is the point that I made, I think, 2 days ago, when somebody asked, Well, do you have confidence in Tim Geithner? If I am not giving him the tools that he needs to make sure that we are moving things forward, then people need to look at me. On the AIG thing, all these contracts were written well before I took office, but ultimately I am now the guy who is responsible to fix it. And one of the things that I am trying to break is a pattern in Washington where everybody is always looking for somebody else to blame. And I think Geithner is doing an outstanding job. I think that we have a big mess on our hands. And the key thing is for everybody just to stay focused on doing the job instead of trying to figure out who you can pass blame on to. Well, when will the money this money was given out to the banks, I would have thought by this time it would have sort of trickled down to Main Street, to people wanting to get loans. Well, what is happening is a lot of these banks are keeping it in the bank because their balance sheets had gotten so bad that they decided, you know what, for us to stay solvent we need to maintain certain capital ratios; we have got to have a certain amount of capital in the bank. And they have not started lending it yet. And that is why what we have got to do right now what we are doing is essentially doing a diagnostic test trying to use some auto language here so you . We are doing a diagnostic on each of the banks, figuring out what are their capital levels, can they sustain lending. And then I think we are going to separate out those banks that are in good shape, we are going to say to them, all right, you are on your own; go start lending again. Those banks that still have problems, we will do a little more intervention to try to clean some of those toxic assets off their books. But I actually have confidence that we will get that done. In the meantime, we are taking a lot of steps to, for example, opening up open up separate credit lines outside of banks for small businesses so that they can get credit, because there are a lot of small businesses out here who are just barely hanging on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenothetonightshowburbankcalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno of The Tonight Show in Burbank, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-burbank-california", "publication_date": "19-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2234, "text": "We are trying to set up a securitized market for student loans and auto loans outside of the banking system. But that is why we have got to solve the banking problem, and we have got to solve issues like health care, energy, and education that will put us on a pathway for long-term economic growth. We are going to take a break. When we come back I want to ask you what we can do all right, we will take a break. More with the President, we will be right back. So I was going to ask you before we went to the break so you have obviously, we have a lot of people with a few dollars couple of hundred, couple of thousand but there is millions of them. What should they do? Should they be spending money? Should they hide it under their mattress? Look, first of all, everybody should have complete confidence in the banks. They should not be putting it in their mattresses. I will leave it up to others to provide individual, personal financial advice. But I will say this, that if you are working right now, obviously, you have got to be prudent and you have got to recognize that the economy has been in a tough way. But, you know, we have still got kids who are going to need a coat for winter or a computer for school. You know, that young family is still going to at some point need to buy a house. And right now cars, for example, we know that typically you need about 14 million cars for this population, and right now only 9 million are being sold every year. So at some point those inventories are going to run down and people are going to start buying cars again. So you know, what people should not do is forget that what has built America has always been a faith and a confidence in the future. And our future is bright if we take some smart steps right now. And that is what we are working on in Washington. And I think, if everybody stays focused on getting through these tough times, the future is going to be very bright for all of us. Now, you mentioned cars a minute ago. You went to the electric car you went to look at some batteries today. It is spectacular what is being down now with plug-in hybrids, where not only are you getting the hybrid technology, but now you can plug it in at home in your garage. And potentially, we could see cars getting 150 miles to a gallon of gas.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenothetonightshowburbankcalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno of The Tonight Show in Burbank, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-burbank-california", "publication_date": "19-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2235, "text": "And when you get home you could potentially sell the energy in your car back into the grid, back to your utility, and get money. So we are going to be investing billions of dollars in research and development around these technologies. I have got the GM hydrogen car. That is a whole new level of technology. That is what is going to create the auto industry of the future. That is where we are going to win back manufacturing. These batteries are being made in Japan, just like wind power is being made in Europe. We need to bring that here, and that is part of what my budget and part of what our Recovery Act is all about. Let me ask you some personal things. Now, how cool is it to fly in Air Force One? Now, let me tell you, I personally think it is pretty cool. Especially because they give you, you know, the jacket with the seal on it. See, I still get the little wings when I fly. So you have the jacket. I will tell you, though, Malia and Sasha, my daughters, they are just not as impressed. The first time we went on Marine One right, you have got the marines in front and they are saluting you, and we go up, and we are passing the Washington Monument, circling around on the way to Camp David, and Sasha looks over and she says, Are those Starbursts? That is Can we have some? So they are splitting up the Starbursts, and we are flying over the Lincoln Memorial. And that so they got a whole 'nother level of cool. Now, are they going to put a basketball I imagine the bowling alley has been just burned and closed down. I have been practicing bowling. I bowled a 129. No, listen, I am making progress on the bowling, yes. And how about, are you going to put in a basketball court? Well, we have a basketball court already at Camp David. We just had a little rim that was inadequate at the White House now. But there are tennis courts, so we are going to just get those you know, those rims that you can roll in and out. And then we will just put them on either end. Let me ask you, when people ENTITY, would you like to play? Do they throw the game? I do not see why they would throw the game, except for all those Secret Service guys with guns around.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenothetonightshowburbankcalifornia", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno of The Tonight Show in Burbank, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-the-tonight-show-burbank-california", "publication_date": "19-03-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2236, "text": "It is nice to see you all. You just got the readout of the President's meeting with the Amir of Qatar. They had an opportunity to speak for themselves to readout that meeting. Other than noting that, I do not have anything at the top here so we can go straight to questions. First of all, the Keystone bill is arriving at the White House today, or already has. That is what I hear. Can you tell us when the President intends to veto it, as he promised? Well, as I mentioned yesterday, the President does intend to veto this piece of legislation and we intend to do it without any drama or fanfare or delay. So I would anticipate that we will have an update on this later on today. So you expect it today? We can expect it today? Yes, you can count on that today. We will have a statement through the usual channels. It is in the pipeline. You physically have the bill now? It is my understanding that Congress did send the text of the bill to the White House this morning. On DHS funding, as you know, the Senate Majority Leader has offered to split the bill so that there is a separate vote on the immigration policies of the President and another one on the funding itself. Senator Reid has objected to the sequencing of that. He wants to vote on the clean funding bill first before you go on to immigration. Does the President have a preference on that? Does the President want to at least just get this issue off the table and it does not matter on sequencing? The official White House position is that the President served in the United States Senate for a period between 2004 and 2008, in which he readily weighed in on legislative maneuvers and strategies related to the complicated procedures that essentially guide the legislative process. At this point, it is the responsibility of Congress to figure out how to perform among their most basic functions, which is to ensure that the budget for the Department of Homeland Security gets passed in a timely fashion. But, ENTITY, this is his party and it could essentially end up closing one of his executive agencies. The President has -- well, Republicans spent a lot of time and a lot of money and a lot of effort going around the country about making the case why they should be put in charge of the United States Congress. They succeeded in that effort, and they persuaded the American people to hand them the responsibility of the majority of both the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2237, "text": "And the question now facing Republicans is how they are going to use that authority and whether or not they are going to do it responsibly, in a way that is in the best interest of the country and whether or not it is in the best interest of our national security. And the fact of the matter is I cannot find anybody who thinks it is a good idea to shut down the Department of Homeland Security, which means that congressional Republicans should simply do their job. And they should pass legislation that would fully fund the Department of Homeland Security for the remainder of this year. And Senator McConnell is offering a clean bill like you demanded, so why not get behind this bill? Well, I have not seen the particulars in terms of exactly what he is put forward, but ultimately it will be up to the individual members of Congress to make their own decision. But, again, congressional Republicans are in charge. They are in the majority. And this is something that they sought, and these are exactly the kinds of problems that they hoped to have the opportunity to solve, and we look forward to them doing it. The contours of the deal that are being discussed would allow Iran to potentially consider moving toward a nuclear device after 10 years. And I am wondering if that is a period of time -- I know that parts of the discussion have been about a 20-year period before -- that seems to be the compromise number. Is that a number that we can trust the Iranians to stick by and not to begin producing a nuclear device after that? Well, Jim, I am loathe to get into the negotiating details of the position that is adopted by the United States and our international partners when they are sitting across the table from the Iranians. However, I will say that there was a report today indicating that we were negotiating for essentially a 10-year deal. That does not reflect the accurate negotiating position of the United States and our international partners. But the second part of your question is important as well. It goes to whether or not the United States and the international community is prepared to start trusting the Iranians. I think the point, Jim, of these negotiations is to not just reach an agreement with the Iranians, but reach an agreement with the Iranians that we can verify on a continuing, ongoing basis; that there is ample reason for the international community to not put a lot of faith in the claims of the Iranians when it comes to their nuclear program.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2238, "text": "It was just a few years ago that there was this covert nuclear facility in Iran that had previously been undeclared that did yield some evidence indicating that Iran was trying to secretly develop a nuclear weapon. So what we need is a clear agreement from the international community and the Iranians and an agreement that is verifiable. And any part of an agreement will include ready access by the international community to ensure that Iran is living up to their end of the bargain. But you are saying that reports that the deal would clamp down on Tehran's nuclear activities for at least 10 years and then slowly ease those restrictions, that is not correct? Well, again, I am not willing to get into the specific details of our negotiating position. But there are some who are making the case publicly that we are in favor of a deal that would just be 10 years in duration, and that is not accurate. On Keystone, the veto is one thing, but I am wondering, how long is it going to take the administration to finish its review of whether the project is in the national interest? This is a review that is being conducted by the State Department, and so you can contact the State Department for an update on the timing of that review. The President is not going to announce something on that as well today? Again, the review is being conducted by the State Department, so you can get an update from them about their timing. Secondly, there are reports that the DOJ is not going to press charges against George Zimmerman for the shooting of Trayvon Martin. Can you confirm that? I cannot confirm that. So you should check with the Department of Justice about any announcement they may or may not be planning to make at this point. Lastly, on Ukraine, Prime Minister David Cameron said he would deploy military personnel in the next month to Ukraine to help with training, and I am wondering if that is something that the U.S. is considering -- any measures to help Ukraine with military training? Well, let me say a couple things about this. The first is that the United States continues to be concerned by ongoing violations of the Minsk Implementation Plan by Russian-backed separatists in Ukraine. We have seen repeatedly that these Russian-backed separatists have continued to violate the terms of the agreement despite the fact that they made firm commitments in the context of an immediate and comprehensive cease-fire.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2239, "text": "In addition to that, we have seen Russian military vehicles -- I am sorry -- we have seen Russian military personnel have participated in the recent attacks on Vuhlehirsk and Debaltseve. And the Russian military has put in place a robust command structure in eastern Ukraine. We know this because separatist fighters have also previously acknowledged that they are operating under instructions from Moscow. Russia and the separatists it backs have acted in direct contravention of the Minsk Implementation Plan that they agreed to. And we continue to call on all signatories to carry out the commitments undertaken in the plan in the September Minsk Agreements fully and without delay. The other thing that we are concerned about is that there are reports that Russian-backed separatists have prevented members of the OSCE special monitoring mission from getting full access to the conflict areas. There are even some reports that indicate that those separatists have made grave threats against members of the OSCE monitoring team. So we have seen continued behavior that is in direct violation of the agreement that Russia and the other parties signed just a couple of weeks ago. So we continue to be concerned about the situation in Ukraine. I do not have any updates in terms of assistance that we will provide to the Ukrainians at this point other than to remind you that we have already provided substantial assistance to the Ukrainian military and we have already provided substantial economic assistance to the Ukrainian government and the Ukrainian people. And there was additional assistance the administration believes we should provide and that is why we have called on the United States Congress to pass legislation that would offer additional loan guarantees to the Ukrainians to strengthen their economy while they try to deal with this continuing instability in the eastern part of the nation. Back on DHS, if I may. Senator McConnell is apparently shopping a compromise on the Hill right now to try to move forward on that. Is the White House looking to find a compromise, or are you still certain you have got to have a clean bill? Well, ENTITY, the administration has been clear that we stand ready to compromise with members of Congress, including Republicans, when it comes to trying to address the many problems caused by our broken immigration system. In fact, we spent a lot of time over the last couple of years trying to reach that compromise, and in the United States Senate, we succeeded in doing so, that we got more than a dozen Republican senators to sign on to a compromise bipartisan immigration reform proposal.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2240, "text": "That was a proposal that was blocked by House Republicans, even though we knew that had the House Republican leadership allowed it to come to the floor, it would have passed with bipartisan support. So we do stand ready to have those kinds of conversations with members of Congress. But we should not compromise our homeland security just because Republicans want to pick a political fight. It is not consistent with the Senate Majority Leader's aspirations to send a signal to the American people that Republican leadership should not be scary -- that is his word, not mine. So we are hopeful that Republicans will do the responsible thing, that they will join with Democrats to support a full-year extension of funding for the Department of Homeland Security prior to the deadline. And then if there are Republicans that want to have a legitimate conversation with the administration about how to solve the problems that are created by our broken immigration system, then we stand ready to do that. We'd even host those meetings right here at the White House if they would like. As far as the meeting today with the leader of Qatar, there are reports that Qatar has lent support to Hamas in the past. Do you think there is an issue with the President meeting with the leader of Qatar while not meeting with the leader of Israel? Well, ENTITY, I can tell you that -- let me say a couple things about that. As it relates to Prime Minister Netanyahu, as we have said this many times, there is no foreign leader with whom the President has spent more time than Prime Minister Netanyahu. And that is a testament to the deep and ongoing security relationship that exists between the United States and Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu himself has said that the level of security coordination between the United States and Israel under the leadership of President Obama is unprecedented, and we certainly would share that assessment. As it relates to the leader of Qatar, I can tell you that there are a number of important interests that we share with Qatar. Like all partnerships, especially in this region of the world, the United States does not necessarily agree with the Qatari government on every issue, but we have the kind of relationship that allows us to be frank and open about where we disagree and why. But the bottom line is that our interests with Qatar converge somewhat more often than they actually diverge; that Qatar has been a significant help on a range of regional issues, including Afghanistan, Iran. As you know, the Qataris have even agreed to host a regional training site for the moderate Syrian opposition.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2241, "text": "So we certainly welcome the efforts of the Qataris to participate in this broad international coalition to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL. We also know that the Qataris have indicated a willingness to work closely with us in other aspects of our strategy against ISIL, too, particularly as it relates to terror financing. And this is a focal point of the administration's efforts to shut down terrorism across the globe, but it certainly is an important part of our strategy for degrading and ultimately destroying ISIL -- that if we can shut off the financing of their operations, we are going to add even further strain to their ability to carry out the terrible things that we have seen them do. So we are working closely with the Qataris on that aspect of our strategy, too. And I think that is precisely why the President convened the meeting with him in the Oval Office today. On the same subject, do you acknowledge that Qatar has been a significant source of especially private donations to ISIS and other terrorist groups? Well, ENTITY, what we acknowledge is that there are areas where we disagree with the Qataris, but more often we find that our interests overlap, that our interests with the Qataris are consistent. And whether it is our work with the international community to try to ease the international community's concerns about Iran's nuclear program, to dealing with the situation in Afghanistan, or even the ongoing campaign against ISIL, that there are a variety of ways in which the United States has been able to work effectively with the Qataris to protect and advance our national security interests in the region and around the globe. And for a long time, the Qataris have been accused of trying to play it both ways -- of welcoming hate preachers, as we might call them, to their biggest mosque, of continuing the financing, and only really trying to stop it when pressure is put on. So can you say whether pressure is on them now to stop that financing and whether there has been any progress either in that area or with supporting these people that come in and preach against Jews and other faiths? Well, ENTITY, I can tell you that the administration does continue to work closely with the Qataris to try to improve our efforts to shut down the financing for terror operations. And the Qataris have been an effective partner in that endeavor so far, but we do believe that there is more that they can do and more that we can do together to shut down the financing of terror operations around the globe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2242, "text": "And was that made clear today to them, that they can do more? Well, I do not have a detailed readout of the meeting. But you can check with my NSC colleagues to see if you can get a better sense of how this issue was discussed in the meeting. And shortly after the video came out of the burning of the Jordanian pilot, it was said that this could be a way to bring in more of the Arab participation. Because really it is only been about 3 percent of the airstrikes have come from Arab partners and other countries. It just seems like it has not changed for the duration of this. Well, ENTITY, I think there are a lot of different ways to evaluate this, and certainly the easiest way to evaluate this is to take a close look at the way in which Arab countries have participated in our military operations against ISIL. And as we pointed out on a number of occasions, there are important Arab partners who are taking action alongside American military pilots to strike ISIL targets in Syria. And we certainly welcome that contribution and it is making a tangible contribution to our ongoing effort and to our broader strategy. There also was an important role for them, for our partners in the region, to play when it comes to shutting down ISIL financing; that there is a lot of money that is moving through that region -- whether it is the black market for oil to other sources of illicit financing for their operations. We are also working with the Qataris and other regional partners to combat ISIL's efforts to move foreign fighters into that region. You will recall that the President convened a meeting of the United Nations Security Council to discuss this important issue last fall. We continue to work with our partners around the globe and in the region on those efforts. And we also work with Muslim leaders in the region to try to counter the extremist ideology that ISIL propagated on social media; that there is an important role for more moderate voices in the Muslim world to stand up and to use their influence to try to counter that messaging. And we certainly welcome the influence of political leaders in that effort as well. And really quickly, on Bob McDonald misstating his past service -- does that bother the President or the administration? Well, ENTITY, I can tell you that, obviously, as you know, Secretary McDonald went to West Point. He served in the 82nd Airborne. He is somebody who, when he was in the military, completed jungle, arctic, and desert warfare training.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2243, "text": "So he is somebody who understands firsthand the sacrifice that our men and women in uniform make on a regular basis. He is also somebody who understands firsthand about why what he said about his service was wrong, and that certainly is why it was appropriate for him to apologize. But there is no reason to think that the mistake that he made should interfere with his ability to continue to lead the fight for our veterans and to continue to implement the kinds of reforms at the VA that are so critical to making sure that our veterans are getting the benefits that they deserve. First, yesterday I asked you about whether or not the President would be calling congressional leaders to the White House to try to work out some agreement to prevent the Homeland Security shutdown from happening. I do not know of any meeting like that that is planned at this point. But like I said, I believe that members of Congress are still returning from their week-long recess last week and once they are all back in town, if it is necessary for the President to bring some of them down to the White House and have a conversation about this, then we will do that. Do you think it would be productive given what you just said about how the President has been out of the Senate for a number of years, does not want to get engaged in these questions of procedural -- I think the point is that it is their responsibility to work this through. And again, Republicans spent a lot of time trying to persuade the American people that they should be entrusted with the reins of the United States Congress and be entrusted with the power of the purse. And we need to see if they are going to step up and assume responsibility. Again, there are probably going to be some times over the course of this year where Republicans in Congress are going to have to make some really tough decisions and take some really difficult votes. I am not really sure why funding the Department of Homeland Security and making sure that that funding does not lapse is considered a difficult task. But again, this is a challenge for Republican leaders to decide if they can demonstrate to the American public that they are going to continue to act in the country's best interests. On the Iran nuclear talks, you said that the White House is not negotiating for a 10-year sunset, basically, a 10-year -- a point where Iran would be able to become effectively a nuclear power. Is the administration, is the White House, the President opposed to a timeline that is so short?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2244, "text": "You said you are not pushing for it, you are not arguing for it, you are not negotiating for it. Well, again, ENTITY, I have used this analogy on other occasions, or on other topics. It is not something that you and I can negotiate from here, that ultimately we are going to have a conversation with the Iranians about the way that they can resolve the international community's concerns with their nuclear program. At this point, there is not more detail that I can share about the negotiating position of the United States other than to say that those reports from earlier today were not accurate and did not accurately reflect our negotiating. I understand why you would not want to negotiate it here, obviously, but this seems to be a pretty fundamental question. The report that you now said was inaccurate, but I am trying to get how much of -- I do not want to use the word red line, but how much of an absolute non-starter that is. The report suggested a deal taking place with the Iranians after a period of just 10 years, where it would basically have no restrictions on their ability to enrich uranium. Well, what is unacceptable is the idea that Iran would obtain a nuclear weapon. And that has been our policy for quite some time. And the whole purpose of these negotiations is to make sure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. And the reason for that is that it would be terribly destabilizing for the region. It could precipitate, and I think we could even say is likely to precipitate a nuclear arms race in what is already a very volatile region of the world. That would not be in the best interests of American national security, and it certainly would not be in the best interest of our closest ally in the region, Israel. So that is why we are engaged in these negotiations. And once we have -- the President has indicated that the time for conducting these kinds of negotiations is running short, and so once we have sort of reached the other end of these things, we can have a more detailed conversation about what that deal is. And can you confirm --there was some confusion about the deadline. Is the deadline for these talks March 24th, as White House officials have suggested in the past, or is it March 31st? You mean March 24th or 31st? I know that it is -- I have always heard people say it is the end of the month.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2245, "text": "So let me see if I can get back to you with a specific -- if there is a date certain. The Republican leaders have said that the President vetoing Keystone would be a political move to please environmental extremists. What is your response to that? Well, the reason the President will veto this legislation that has passed the Congress is that it circumvents a longstanding administrative process for evaluating whether or not infrastructure projects like this are in the best interest of the country. And it does not represent a specific position on the pipeline itself. It just merely says that the benefits, the consequences of building that pipeline should be thoroughly evaluated by experts and through this administrative process that has existed for decades and has been used by previous Presidents of both parties to evaluate similar infrastructure projects. And that is the proper path moving forward, but does not represent a final disposition of the Keystone project. I know the Vice President and the Secretary of State will be out of town next week during the start of -- actually during the whole AIPAC conference. Will an administration official be addressing the AIPAC conference at all? We will have more information on that soon. Obviously we have received an invitation from AIPAC and we will get back to them. So we should expect just a name -- it is not whether you are going to have an administration official attend the conference. It is just a matter of figuring out which administration official actually addresses AIPAC? Well, again, I think -- we have received the invitation from AIPAC. We are considering the invitation. And once we have made a decision we will get back to AIPAC about who the speakers will be, and then we will be in a position to talk about it. The President has expressed more optimism about bipartisan -- Who is been invited and what the President's hopes are for that legislation? ENTITY, I would anticipate that we will have a list of lawmakers who participate in that meeting. Both Democrats and Republicans were invited, and I would anticipate that there will be a bipartisan group of members at the meeting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2246, "text": "The President, as you point out, does view this as an opportunity for us to find some common ground to move the country forward; that there are some Republicans who have raised similar concerns that the President himself has discussed about our criminal justice system, about reforms that could make our system more consistent with our values of fairness and justice and equality that certainly the President believes are really important, and I know that many of the members -- that all the members who are participating in the meeting also believe are important. So this is an area that is worthy of careful consideration and consultation because there might be an opportunity for Congress to act in bipartisan fashion with the strong support of the President to put in place reforms to our system that would make our nation more just. So the President is looking forward to that discussion. I would anticipate that we will have, like I said, a list of the members who participate and at least a general overview of that meeting once it concludes. ENTITY, yesterday, Governor Fallin, after she met with the National Governors Association, with the President, reported that the President said he was open to crude exports from the U.S. Is that an accurate characterization of what the President told the governors? And is that sort of a shift in position from what he has previously said? I was not in the room when that exchange occurred, so it is hard for me to accurately reflect the way the question was asked and the way it was answered. What I can do, though, is assure you that the policy of the administration has not changed, that crude oil export regulations are administered by the Department of Commerce. That is where these kinds of regulations are considered. And I do not have sort of change to announce at this point. Following up on Iran, is it the administration's position that you would want a permanent agreement, one that has no timeline whatsoever, to meet the goal that you said repeatedly, which is to ensure there is never a development of a nuclear weapon? Well, I think what we want is we want an agreement that is verifiable and we certainly want one that all parties live up to. And again, in terms of what kind of time constraints are placed in the context of the negotiations and how long people would be signing up, that is not something I am going to prejudge or be in a position to talk about from here. answer suggests that the administration is open to a timeline of some kind. I recognize that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2247, "text": "I guess what I am trying to say is I am just not going to be in a position to talk about the details of our negotiating position with the Iranians. And the reason for that is simply that we have agreed on the front end with our international partners who are joining us at the table and with the Iranians that we can have an open, candid dialogue in the context of these negotiations with the goal of trying to reach an agreement. And attempts to try to influence those negotiations by talking about them outside of the context of the negotiations are not going to be helpful to that process. But my point is, we will have an opportunity at some point, -- on or around the end of March, we will have an opportunity to discuss either the framework for an agreement that is been reached, or we will be able to discuss why we were not able to reach an agreement despite the common-sense, reasonable proposal that is been put forward by the international community. And your interest in understanding exactly what was put forward is a reasonable one, but one that I cannot discuss right now. Have you reconciled in your own mind how you could describe to the country an agreement that had a timeline that also met the standard of Iran never obtaining a nuclear weapon? whether or not Iran can obtain a nuclear weapon. and whether or not it will resolve the international community's concerns about their efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon. So that is the focal point of these negotiations. And again, once we are in a position to evaluate either an agreement that has been reached, or an offer that was made an then rejected by the Iranians, we can talk in more detail about the negotiating position that was assumed by the United States and our international partners, and how it was possible to reconcile that with the policy goals that we have stated, the most important of which you have reiterated here, which is to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. On Secretary McDonald -- a couple of veterans groups have said they accept his apology, but said it raises questions in their minds about his trustworthiness. And they do not talk just about this, but they have also made mention of misstatements that the Secretary may have intentionally or unintentionally made about how many people have been fired and held accountable in some of the implementation of reforms. Is the President satisfied that Secretary McDonald is trustworthy and is, in fact, implementing all of the reforms and legislation he recently signed?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2248, "text": "The President believes that Secretary McDonald has a very difficult task in front of him to try to bring much-needed reforms to the VA. And this is a task that generations of VA secretaries have tried to accomplish. Many of them have made progress, and the President is pleased with the progress that Secretary McDonald has made so far. And the reason that Secretary McDonald has been successful so far is that not only does he bring with him some private sector management experience that I do think is useful when trying to get his arms around a large government agency like this and manage it efficiently, or at least as efficiently as possible, this task also reflects his own personal commitment to these issues that starts with his own military service to our country. But even after he left military service, Secretary McDonald was committed, even using his free time, to try to support military families, our veterans and their families. And that is a testament to his character. It is a testament to what drives him, and it is why he is well suited for this job. But I do not think there is anybody who sits around -- who wakes up in the morning thinking, boy, my job is really hard today, I wish I could just go walk in Bob McDonald's shoes because that sure would be a weight off my shoulders. I think everybody recognizes that he is a got a very difficult task in front of him. And that is why his skill and personal commitment to these issues are so important to his success. When the VA was in a lot of trouble, the President tasked Rob Nabors to go over and assist. Is he still working in carrying out essentially a conduit role from the White House to the VA, and serving as that sort of presidential intermediary or liaison with this new Secretary? Rob is still working at the VA and is still providing the Secretary and other members of the senior leadership at the VA the kind of advice and expertise that they continue to benefit from. So we certainly are pleased to have Rob still serving his country and our veterans over at the VA. Senator McCain raised his concerns about the Choice Card, which is part of the legislation the President signed. We had a couple of questions at the budget briefing, but it does not appear that every member of Congress is satisfied that this Choice Card is going to be implemented in the budget and the financial flexibility is going to be there for veterans to obtain care outside of the system if they meet the criteria.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2249, "text": "Can you assure veterans, from this podium, that, in fact, financing will be there and the Choice Card will be implemented fully as written by Congress? Well, I am not intimately familiar with this issue, so let me take this question for the VA and see if we can provide you some data to help you understand our position on this. I want to take you back to Keystone for a moment. Is there any way in your mind, if the process plays out -- you have made the point that this has sort of circumvented longstanding processes -- if they were to play out, in your mind, is there any way the President signs off on the Keystone XL? This is an ongoing review that is being conducted by the State Department. They are going to evaluate the impact that this project would have on the country. They are going to have the opportunity to evaluate the impact that this project would have on contributing to climate change. And it certainly is possible; the President will keep an open mind as the State Department considers the wide range of impacts that this pipeline could have on the country, both positive and negative. And so we will see what happens once the State Department has completed their - what is called the national interest determination - what essentially is a report evaluating whether or not the completion of this infrastructure project would be in the best interest of the United States of America. You said as far as Israel was concerned there is a deep, longstanding security relationship between our country and theirs. I am curious, as it relates to the Iranian talks, is it fair to characterize a level of frustration on behalf of the administration to this notion that some people are cherry-picking bits and pieces and maybe as an outside actor attempting to influence the negotiations? Well, ENTITY, I think you asked about this last week, I believe, where I did express some frustration that we have seen some people take information that they had obtained about the U.S. negotiating position and cherry-pick information to try to distort the public impression of exactly what that negotiating position was. So that is why, at least, even in the context of the questions that I have taken today, that I have been loathe to get into the details of the U.S. negotiating position. Everybody will have an opportunity to evaluate that soon enough.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2250, "text": "But as the details come out, albeit you are saying they are not accurate, you can understand why many perhaps in Israel might say, you see, this is exactly what we were talking about to begin with. Well, I think what people around the globe can be confident of is that the United States is negotiating with one clear goal in mind, which is to make sure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. And we are working closely with the international community to achieve that goal. That was the goal of the sanctions regime that Congress passed and this administration implemented in close coordination with our allies around the globe, to compel the Iranians to come to the negotiating table and try to resolve the international community's concerns with their nuclear program. And those talks are underway, and we certainly would not want anything that I say from here or any other efforts to try to distort our negotiating position to negatively impact our ability to try to bring those negotiations to conclusion in a way that yields a strong and verifiable agreement that is clearly in the best interest of not just the United States and not just Israel and not just our international negotiating partners, but is clearly in the best interest of the whole country -- or of the whole globe. As far as AIPAC is concerned, there is zero chance that someone will not be going to AIPAC, right? Well, again, they have extended an invitation to the administration; once we have decided how we are going to respond to the invitation, we will let them know. And then once we let them know, we will let all of you know. But you will accept it, someone is going, right? I hear you. It does seem just as a matter of common courtesy, it seems like we should respond to their invitation first and then we can talk about it publicly. I certainly did not come close to saying that. I want to ask a question a different way. Given the President is going to make obviously the final call on XL, is there no communication between the White House and State Department about when you might expect their report? Well, I do not know -- I cannot account for every single conversation that occurs between the White House and the State Department. I think it is certainly possible that somebody in the White House has gotten an update in terms of how much longer it would take the State Department to compete their review, but I am not aware of those conversations.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2251, "text": "But even if I were, I am not sure I'd be in a position to announce for the State Department what their timeline is going to be. If they are prepared to announce a timeline then they will announce it. As you know, there are a lot of people anxious about this. They waited six years and there are others who are concerned about a political implication for 2016 depending on when the President does make his decision. Is the expectation that once the State Department report comes out, the President will make a decision fairly quickly? Does he feel like he needs to do that quickly? Well, I would not want to prejudge the outcome here, but I would anticipate that once the review has been completed that there would not be a significant delay in announcing the results of that review and ultimately making a decision on this project. But on DHS, as you know, there are critics who have suggested that the White House has overstated the potential impact if there is a delay in funding, saying that because everyone who is essential will still be working that it will not make a significant difference to national security. And we heard from some people, including the FEMA Director yesterday, about what that would be. So given that, what kind of preparations are underway for a possible shutdown? Well, Chris, I can tell you that it is not just the administration who is making the case that shutting down the Department of Homeland Security would have a bad impact on national security. I know that Congressman Peter King was on television today making exactly that case. So he does not often agree with the administration, but at least in this case he is making the same case that we are. He is not the only one who is making that case. I do know that the Department of Homeland Security has been engaged in a planning process to ensure they are prepared and can take the steps necessary to try to mitigate the impact of a shutdown of that department. But as I have mentioned before, the impact of that shutdown will include tens of thousands of Homeland Security personnel being furloughed. It will include many Homeland Security officers showing up for work to protect their country but not getting a paycheck on time. And that does not seem particularly fair, and I am not sure why anybody thinks that would be a good outcome for the country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2252, "text": "But DHS is doing the responsible thing, which is, even as they try to talk to members of Congress and encourage them to fulfill their responsibility and pass a budget, they are also engaged in the planning to try to mitigate the potential impact of shutting down their agency. Can you give us a sense of what is involved in that planning? A few days ago, a Mexican citizen was killed by two police officers in Pasco, Washington. Is the President aware of the incident? What is his reaction to that? Can you say it one more time? A Mexican citizen was killed in Pasco, Washington, the state of Washington. My question was, was the President aware of the incident, or the White House, and what is the reaction to that? I have certainly seen the news reports. I have not talked to the President about it. I do not know if he is aware, although knowing he is an avid consumer of news, I assume that he is. But I do not know a lot of the details of the case beyond what I have read in news reports. So for questions about sort of where that investigation stands, I'd refer you to the local authorities there. I have a question about Ukraine. You said earlier that you continue to be concerned by these violations. And the President said when Merkel was visiting that if Russia continued to do this he would seriously consider sending arms to the Ukrainian government and also possibly increasing the sanctions. So you are seeing these violations. Now what are you going to do? Well, what we are doing right now is we are continuing to support the ongoing efforts to try to implement this agreement. And I know that there was a call that was scheduled among the foreign ministerial level of the four groups that have been involved in these negotiations -- the Russians, the Ukrainians, the French and the Germans -- I believe that was yesterday -- I do not know if it was yesterday or today, but I know that those efforts are ongoing and we continue to support them. And the consequences that you cited of failing to live up to those kinds of commitments continue to be on the table. So we are going to continue to closely watch the situation with the President, the Vice President, and other senior members of the team, continue to be in close touch with our partners who are working this situation and we are going to monitor it closely. Look, right now they are violating it. How long will they go on violating it until you do something?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2253, "text": "I am just wondering, how long do you give this process? I mean, they are not living up to it now. You are monitoring it. How long are you going to monitor the violations before you do something? We will we are going to continue to try to work diplomatically to resolve this situation. And that has been our approach from the beginning, which is that it is our view that the only way we are going to resolve this is not with a military solution but with a diplomatic solution. And that is why we are continuing to press that option. But, you are right, at some point you have to start considering some other alternatives, which is why the United States has already provided substantial military assistance to the Ukrainian military. It is why we have already worked with our partners in Europe to put in place a sanctions regime and isolate President Putin and -- or Russian political leadership. And that was a response to their earlier violations of generally accepted international norms. But, yes, the potential of increasing our assistance to Ukraine and increasing the costs that are sustained by Russia has the potential to be implemented. But we are going to continue to watch this and make decisions accordingly. Well, is it also possible that these violations could continue and you decide to do nothing else? Well, I think our level of pessimism is not quite that high, but we will -- You say there is the potential that you might do something else. I am just wondering, if the violations continue, might you also decide that it is not worth doing anything else on sanctions? Based on our past response to Russia's provocations and failure to live up to generally accepted international principles, I think you could rightly conclude that it is unlikely that that is the outcome. But as we see Russia continue to destabilize eastern Ukraine and continue to take steps that are clearly in violation of agreements that they have signed, that the risk of further sanctions only increases. ENTITY, I want to come back to Iran one more time. I just want to be clear about what you are denying. You are denying that the United States has proposed a 10-year agreement, is that right? My understanding of the reports -- that I will confess that I have not seen firsthand -- but my understanding of the reports indicate that -- they wrongly indicate that the agreement that is being negotiated right now will be 10 years in length, and that is not our negotiating position at all.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2254, "text": "But you are not denying that there is some substantially longer agreement of which there is a 10-year opening phase to it, right? Well, what I am reluctant to do is to sort of wade in on a detailed assessment of where the negotiations currently stand. I am not asking for details. Just are you denying something longer? But again, we will have an opportunity in the coming weeks to consider either to evaluate an agreement that is been reached, or to evaluate an agreement that the Iranians walked away from. But suffice it to say the United States continues to negotiate from the position that there should be an opportunity for the Iranians to ease the international community's concerns about their nuclear program to, in a verifiable way, make clear to the international community that they will not acquire a nuclear weapon. The Iranians have said many times that that is consistent with their view and with their national policy. It is the view of the international community that they just need to be able to verify that for the international community. And ultimately, if we can come to an agreement around those outlines that would be a good outcome for not just the United States and Israel, but it would be good for the world. Can we follow on this? At this point, would you still call on Prime Minister Netanyahu to cancel the speech before the Congress? And if so, would the President meet with Netanyahu? Connie, we have not called on Prime Minister Netanyahu to cancel his speech. And we have indicated the reason that the President will not meet with him during this visit to the United States is that it comes just two weeks before his election. And in order to avoid even the appearance of interfering with a democratic election in another country, the President will not meet with the Prime Minister. But I would anticipate that at some point after the elections, regardless of who wins, that the President will convene a meeting with the leader of Israel and will continue the very close coordination on security issues that has characterized his relationship thus far with Prime Minister Netanyahu. As the United States and her allies try to come to an agreement with Iran about its nuclear ambitions, what is this administration doing -- how is it engaged to reduce nuclear weapons in nations that actually do have these weapons, like China and North Korea, Russia, Pakistan, et cetera? Well, ENTITY, the President -- I think each of those situations is a little bit different.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2255, "text": "But we certainly have even worked closely with Russia to reduce our nuclear stockpile, and this is something that the President did early in his tenure. And that, he believes, is in the best interest of not just U.S. national security, but also the safety of citizens and people around the globe. But, certainly, we continue to be focused on these issues. Last Friday, a federal judge appointed by President Obama issued an injunction on a separate immigration executive action, specifically stopping the detention of migrants coming across the border in Texas. Is the Department of Justice going to seek a stay of this injunction in the same way they are seeking a stay -- I'd encourage you to check with DOJ about sort of the next step in that legal process. I do know that the issue in question in that legal proceeding was related to our efforts to address what at the time was a rather urgent situation that we saw a substantial number of unaccompanied minors at the southern border attempting to illegally enter the United States of America. And one of our efforts to try to respond to that situation was to detain recent border-crossers near the border, and to try to find an environment in which families could be detained together, and to try to make sure that we are doing that in the most humane way possible. So I know that there are some who raised concerns about that policy, but that is what the administration believed was an appropriate way to respond to that urgent situation. Since that time, we have seen the numbers of undocumented immigrants, particularly unaccompanied minors, in that sector of the border decline substantially. And that is thanks to the comprehensive strategy that this administration has put in place, working with Central American countries, working with our partners in Mexico, and stepping up some of our law enforcement capabilities on the border to try to address the situation. And that situation has -- or at least the urgency of the situation down there has subsided dramatically. your administration argued that this detention served as a deterrent to make sure that was not another ongoing flood of migrants. That is part of the comprehensive strategy you just mentioned. Is the administration at all concerned now that this deterrent is gone, that you will see another wave of migrants?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2256, "text": "I think the most effective deterrent that we have is to have the President of the United States making very clear that people in Central America should not send their kids on this very dangerous journey; that too often, we saw reports of kids who did not complete the journey safely, that they were killed. In some cases, we saw the kids were actually funneled into human trafficking rings. So we have continued to make the case very clearly and very publicly that parents should not even contemplate to putting their kids in the hands of human traffickers in trying to move them into the United States illegally. So we have been really clear about that, and that is probably the most effective deterrent that we have. But to the extent that other things can also deter and reinforce that message, we obviously want to support them. The Congressional Budget Office sent a letter to Thad Cochran, scoring the President's executive actions for DACA and DAPA, and it found that his executive actions would actually increase budget deficits by $8.8 billion over the next 10 years. I was wondering if you could square that CBO finding with the President's budget, which claims immigration reform and executive actions would reduce the budget. We may have to follow up with you on this, because my reading of that report was actually that removing the executive actions would actually add $8 billion to the deficit. Off-budget, you are right. That is if we do not consider -- that is if the payroll taxes from the DAPA and DACA recipients did not go to the Social Security trust fund. But if the Social Security trust fund exists, if those payroll taxes are going to the Social Security trust fund, then that CBO letter found that the immigration actions do add to the deficit by $8.8 billion over the next 10 years. Well, I may have somebody who is more steeped in the budgetary details. My understanding is that this would have a positive impact on our deficit precisely because for the first time what we'd be doing is we'd be bringing people out of the shadows and actually making them pay taxes. That would be a good thing for the life of Social Security. It would be a good thing for our economy. And ultimately, it would be a good thing for the deficit. But we can have somebody follow up with you on your -- on what may be a more detailed question.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2257, "text": "ENTITY, back on Keystone, does President Obama believe that 2,300 days is a reasonable length of time for the State Department to conduct an evaluation? Well, I think it is certainly fair to suggest that the State Department is conducting an in-depth review. The other thing that is also true is that there have been some legal proceedings that have interfered with the completion of this review. And that certainly did impact the State Department's ability to evaluate the route of the pipeline since it was not finalized and was subject to this ultimate court ruling. But within just the last few weeks the Nebraska court has issued a decision that has finalized the proposal, and now that final proposal can be evaluated by the State Department. That is what they are doing right now. Can you imagine what he would say if he gave you an assignment and you said, I will get back to you in 2,300 days? I will give you the last one, ENTITY. One, when last year Prime Minister Modi came to the United States, late last year -- and including at the United Nations and at the White House, at the U.N. he announced that India should be a member of the U.N. Security Council, and which President in India also announced and endorsed. What is happening with that membership? And also Prime Minister Modi addressed in Washington the U.S.-India Business Council and calling on the Fortune 500 companies make in India, which will create thousands of jobs in the U.S. and thousands of jobs in India. So what is happening with that issue? And the two leaders also set up a hotline. The two have spoken ever since his visit to the White House? ENTITY, I can tell you as it relates to India's membership on the Security Council, I know the President endorsed them acceding to the Security Council in the context of a variety of other important reforms to the operations of the United Nations. I do not have an update for you on the status of those ongoing reforms, or at least efforts to try to bring about some of those reforms. But I am sure my colleagues in Ambassador Power's office can give you some additional information on this. ENTITY, the President often discusses his view that we need to have more products that are stamped with Made in America and that that would be good for the U.S. economy. It would be good for job creation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2258, "text": "The President also does believe that, as Indian consumers have the opportunity to buy American goods, that it could be good for the Indian economy, as well. So the President did have the opportunity to discuss some of these economic issues and our trade relationship with India. In the context of his visit to India just last month, the President spent a lot of time with Prime Minister Modi and they spent a lot of time talking about some of these economic issues. You will recall that there was a CEO summit in the context of those meeting, and that there were American and Indian business leaders that spent some time talking through some of these issues. And the President himself had the opportunity to sit down at a roundtable with a couple dozen of them and talk about some of the challenges that they face as they try to do more business together in a way that benefits the economies and job creation in both countries. So there is an opportunity for us to try to advance the interests of both our countries by working together and by coordinating our efforts. And the President is certainly committed to that, again, in part, because the substantial economic benefits that could be enjoyed by the American people. I know that Prime Minister Modi has a similar interest. And I do not know of any recent conversations that they have had, but that continues to be a priority of both the President and his administration. Second, ENTITY, as far as the immigration is concerned, when President issued executive order millions of people were happy in that they will come out of the shadow. What message you think President has for them? They are waiting to come out of the shadow and apply for their status. Well, ENTITY, this is something that we are concerned about. The President does believe and we have said on many occasions that we believe that there is a very clear precedent for the executive actions the President announced at the end of last year; that taking executive action to try to address some elements of our broken immigration system is consistent with the way that Presidents of both parties for several decades have used their executive authority. And there is no doubt that these kinds of changes would be good for our economy, would be good for job creation, and would be good for bringing about greater accountability to our immigration system.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingpresssecretaryjoshearnest238", "title": "Barack Obama Press Briefing by Press Secretary Josh Earnest", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-press-secretary-josh-earnest-238", "publication_date": "24-02-2015", "crawling_date": "05-07-2023", "politician": ["Josh Earnest"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2259, "text": "I am in Bangkok, and one of the reasons I have come is not only to pay my respects to the Government and the people of Thailand, but also to be in a position to speak about freedom in Burma. I just had lunch with some people that are deeply concerned about the future of Burma, people that were involved in the student marches of '88, people involved with humanitarian assistance. I was regretful that my wife could not join us, because she is an articulate spokesman for the people of Burma; but she is on the border on this mission of saying to the Burmese people, you have friends, and you are not alone, and the United States cares about you. So I want to thank you for giving me the chance to answer your questions, and I will be glad to do so now. Why do not we just go around the table? ENTITY, it is an honor to be with you, and many thanks, giving a chance to-this roundtable discussion. My name is ENTITY, from Voice of America; Toe Zaw Latt from Democratic Voice of Burma; and Soe Win Than from BBC. We have one lady here from Radio Free Asia, May Pyone Aung. I would like to start a couple questions about the relief aid policy of United States. Recent relief operation, the Burmese regime did not allow the U.S. Navy ship aid through the Pacific come, and international community, the U.S., obviously, was really frustrated. I would like to know, if Burma faced another catastrophe or disaster, are you going to try to help, or are you going to--Burmese regime again? But first of all, we care about the human condition, human suffering. I can remember the day it hit. I was told that this was going to be a major disaster for the people, and so I ordered our Navy ships in the area to be prepared to sail toward the Burmese area to provide aid and logistics and management. We are very good about dealing with major emergencies. And interestingly enough, we were involved with a military mission in the area, so we were prepared to send a robust package in. No telling how many lives could have been saved or how much human suffering could have been dealt with more effectively had there not been the slow response of the military dictator. But now our aid, along with other people-other countries' aid, is beginning to move. In answer to your question, yes, our Government will respond if there is another catastrophe.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignradiojournalistsbangkok", "title": "Interview With Foreign Radio Journalists in Bangkok", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-radio-journalists-bangkok", "publication_date": "07-08-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2260, "text": "that there needs to be truthfulness at the highest levels of government. People have got to understand and listen to reality and understand that nations and people want to help when there is suffering. In the meantime, we are going to keep pushing for freedom. During the time, a lot of Burmese people, they were expecting a sort of humanitarian intervention, even though the Burmese regime did not allow the aid. We chose to go through the normal routes. We wanted to basically say, here is your opportunity to receive aid. But I do not think it would have been helpful for the Burmese people had there been a conflict over the delivery of aid. What we do not want to do is compound a terrible situation. In other words, if we just sent in-sent people in, our military in without visas or permission from the Government, there is no telling what the reaction would have been. And so yes, I-no question, there was frustration on the delays, but I felt the best way to do so was the way we ended up doing it. My only point is, is that there is - if there is another catastrophe, and let us pray there is not, but if there is, the Government will now see that they have nothing to fear by welcoming in U.S. aid and other countries' aid. They ought to welcome that. And of course, we'd like to help on that too. We spent about $57 million, or over $50 million of help so far. We care about the stories we hear. And we want the farmers to get seed and fertilizer so they can grow and feed their families and feed the people in their area and, hopefully, grow enough for the country. Now, the United States has proposed civil military relief exercise with the countries in this region, and recent ASEAN meeting endorsed that relief exercise, and probably next year the Philippine will host. So they agree to cooperate relief exercise. I wonder, if the countries in this region agree to cooperate, are you going to invite this exercise to include Burmese military regime or North Korea? I have not thought that through yet, to be frank with you. I cannot answer your question, because you are the first person who is asked me that question. I will take it back to Washington and- under consideration. I have no-but I cannot say yes or no right now. How will the United States try to overcome this impasse, most recently seen at the Security Council over Burma?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignradiojournalistsbangkok", "title": "Interview With Foreign Radio Journalists in Bangkok", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-radio-journalists-bangkok", "publication_date": "07-08-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2261, "text": "Well, what we have got to do is continue to work with countries on the Security Council and explain to them that what matters most in life is the human condition and that individual rights are important. And we just have a lot of work to do to convince people that the status quo in Burma-that life can be better, let me put it that way. And it is in their interest that life is better, particularly China. China is an important country on the United Nations Security Council; they are an important country in the world, obviously, Burma's neighbor. And we-I hope that I can use my good relations with the Chinese leadership to convince them that the way forward is for there to be more civic participation, more citizen participation in the future of the country, and that the perfect way to do that is to explain to them how backward the Government was when it came to the response for the natural disaster. Hopefully, that will open up eyes. But no question, there is a lot of diplomacy that needs to be done to convince others that people like Aung Suu San Kyi deserve to be free and political prisoners ought to be free. And the reason I am talking to you today is because I want those in prison and their families to know that we care about them and think about them. I mean, it is in the common ground, for example, that the Burmese be a peaceful country. I mean, we care about that. Whether or not the Chinese will agree that somebody like Aung Suu San Kyi ought to be free and ought to be the center of foreign policy like it is for us, I do not know. We just have to work it hard.  you will be meeting the highest Chinese leadership tomorrow. And you said you would mention Burma to those leaders. You have not been able to convince them until now. How optimistic are you that you will be able to convince, and how are you going to go about doing this time, sir? Well, you know, look, it is -I have mentioned Burma a lot to the Chinese leadership, and it is -I have mentioned Darfur; I have mentioned Tibet; I have mentioned religious freedom inside China. And it is just a matter of continuing to make the case. I have-I am sure the Chinese leader's mind is going to be on the Olympics. This is a big deal for the people of China.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignradiojournalistsbangkok", "title": "Interview With Foreign Radio Journalists in Bangkok", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-radio-journalists-bangkok", "publication_date": "07-08-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2262, "text": "One of the reasons I am going is to be able to pay my respects to the people of China, and well as to be in a position where I can bring up these issues with the Chinese Government. I am just-it is -to me, this is a process of continually having a consistent message, speaking to the people of Burma, letting the prisoners know we care about them, and pressing hard at the international level. I make no promises to your listeners except that we will continue to try. One thing is the relationship with the regime. Then you have been probably the President who is more committed for the Burmese democratic movement. But the United States tough line against Burma sometimes entrenched the generals there, and some people would say that given the example of the Nargis Cyclone relief efforts, then if you have had this kind of relationship with the generals then you could be able to do more. I understand your point. We have been tough, because we believe that the general has been very stubborn in not allowing certain freedoms, and we believe that is wrong. We believe that those arrested in the marches of '88 ought to be released from prison. There is about 2,000 political prisoners who are being held simply because they had a belief that was contrary to what the general thinks. You notice I am saying general because it is generally viewed as a one-man regime. I know there is others that support him. But yes, I have been and-because I believe that-as a matter of fact, just signed a bill that is going to continue the sanction regime, particularly when it comes to jade and precious gems. That is an interesting question, had we had a different relationship, one, what would it say to the reformers, but also, would it have changed the number of days required to let relief in? What I am concerned about is the general was not being given full information, that he was not fully aware of reality. And I do not think his reaction was because of relations with the United States; I think his reaction was-is because he was in denial to a certain extent about the realities on the ground. But I am constantly-look, my mission, so long as I am the President, which is 6 more months, is to think about ways to relieve human suffering and how to help people inside Burma. And if I thought it would make-help us achieve the objective by changing the relationship with the Government, I'd give it serious consideration.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignradiojournalistsbangkok", "title": "Interview With Foreign Radio Journalists in Bangkok", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-radio-journalists-bangkok", "publication_date": "07-08-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2263, "text": "But I do not necessarily agree with that premise. On the other hand, the people that are listening to your radio broadcast has got to know that the President of the United States and a lot of other people in America are concerned and care about how they live and want them to be free and want them to realize the beauties of a Burmese-style democracy. Nevertheless, what is important, though, if for there to be a strong voice in laying out that vision. And that is what I will continue to do. you just met a group of Burmese activists and then you share views with them on Burma's struggle. What do you see and what do you get from having lunch with them? First of all, there is a lot of courageous people that have made a decision to work hard on behalf of the rest of their citizens to achieve a free society. Secondly, that they have great hopes that the United States will continue to speak out, that the United States will not abandon our belief in the universality of freedom. Thirdly, they were-I asked-I said, if you were me, what would you do? And I got a variety of opinions. And it was fascinating to hear voices of people who have actually been on the frontlines of change. I came away with the impression that they are very grateful to the American people for the generous support. Sometimes our generosity is not-actually ends up in the hands of the people as quickly as it should, but nevertheless, that they are- there seems to be a general awareness that the American people care. There are people who may even be wearing the military uniform who understand that the status quo is not acceptable, and there needs to be a better way forward. But a lot of the frustration was focused on a single person, the general in charge of the country, and that-there was a belief that he did not seem to care that much about the plight of the average citizen. And so hopefully, U.S. pressure and U.S. focus will get him to think more about the average person and care about the way the average person lives. Many critics said that our opposition itself is also very much divided and they are not united enough against the military regime and that-do you think that the United States can help prepare them for their future democratic Burma? Well, first of all-that was an interesting question-I did not think they were very divided, at least the crowd I was with.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignradiojournalistsbangkok", "title": "Interview With Foreign Radio Journalists in Bangkok", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-radio-journalists-bangkok", "publication_date": "07-08-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2264, "text": "But I thought they were pretty united in their dream for a better Burma. You know, one of the things that, obviously, the people involved in the democracy movement have got to think through is how do you get from here to there. In other words, it is not easy to go from a very fierce military one-man rule to democracy. And you have a very good point, and that is, is that there is a-is there a focused roadmap to get to a better tomorrow? It is hard for me to tell just in that conversation. Obviously, that is going to be a concern for-it must be a concern for people. The rewrite of the Constitution is just a-it is not a good document; it is not a fair document. So therefore, there needs to be a constitution at some point in time that will enable Burma to be a Federal state that-based upon the will of the people. The military regime will hold a election in 2010, and they began preparing this month for election. And then what is U.S. stand on this election? I think the Constitution is a sham constitution, and therefore-but, you know, I-this is a society that is not interested in democracy. They have proved they are not interested in democracy. If they are interested in democracy, they'd let the prisoners out of prison, for starters. The political prisoners would be a-given to chance to leave and live in a free life. That is the first test, not election under a sham constitution. And so, you know, they will play like the election was fair and all this-to justify their behavior. And I think people like yourself ought to be speaking out that the elections, unless certain conditions are met, cannot possibly be fair. We understand and the Burmese listeners also understand how you and the First Lady are compassionate for Burmese people, how much you strongly support to the freedom for Burma.  I know both candidates and the-freedom for Burma is a bipartisan issue. And the Burmese people-it is not just the President that thinks about the citizens of Burma. There is a lot of people in our Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, that feel the same way. And so I think the Burmese people are going to have a consistent friend in the United States. You are talking to the China authorities. Do you think China can play a role to make situation better in Burma? I think-oh, yes, I think China could play a different role.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignradiojournalistsbangkok", "title": "Interview With Foreign Radio Journalists in Bangkok", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-radio-journalists-bangkok", "publication_date": "07-08-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2265, "text": "And so I will -I will bring up the Burma-Burmese issue again to President Hu Jintao, who I like. And they just got different interests, at times, from the United States. And so I have got to work hard to see if I cannot convince him that we share the same goals. Wonder will Thailand and ASEAN in Southeast Asia-- They need to send a signal. Obviously, Thailand was very helpful when it came to helping with the cyclone- aftermath of the cyclone. After all, this is a staging center for a lot of our materials and other peoples'-countries' materials that came through. Yes, and they can continue to work the issue. We just got to make sure that ASEAN delivers a message that is inspiring to the people of Burma. President, besides sanction and travel restrictions on the generals in Burma, do you-have you ever thought of alternative strategies work on Burma-under U.S. and then with the international community? And if your question is, do I-am I trying to convince others to join us on the strategy? In other words, it would be better if we could all speak with one voice. And I have been in-you know, it had not been that hard with some countries, like the European countries, for example. But it is been difficult with some of the countries in the neighborhood here because we do not share the same goals. Their goal is stability and-at times. And that is not necessarily the-I am for stability too. But I'd like to see the system move toward a free society. I have got a friend who helps deal with the rape victims along the border. These women are being raped- she says, systemically raped by the military as part of their campaign of fear. That stuff has got to end in order for me to feel comfortable with any other policy toward Burma. In other words, there is -and others have different priorities. And so therefore, it is hard to find common ground, but we will continue to try to do so. Then I got to go to the games. I am cheering the American Olympic team. You have the conviction and idea to bring freedom and democracy to Burma, but some people would say that the United States does not have much strategic interest in Burma, unlike Afghanistan. I think so long as there is human suffering like there is here in Burma, then this will be of strategic importance to the United States.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignradiojournalistsbangkok", "title": "Interview With Foreign Radio Journalists in Bangkok", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-radio-journalists-bangkok", "publication_date": "07-08-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2267, "text": "Here is the pitch to Bobby Bonilla, and Bonilla takes ball one outside. So I guess that ends some of the conversations about how Cone's arm is. ENTITY is here with us. I am the good luck charm when I am on this radio In fact, when you were with us last year, Bobby Bonilla came up and promptly hit one over the center field wall. And he drives this one deep into right center field This one is bouncing over the wall. And right after Bonilla hit that home run, then Ripken came up, and he did the same thing. In fact, ENTITY, you broadcast that Ripken home run which was an historic night. You were part of it. So let us go back now and take a listen here. We have played that 500 times since then, and everybody loves that. Here is Cal the following season as we pick up again, and ENTITY is here with us. What do you think now? Cal taking ball one from Appier. Well, he is got the only two RBI's, does not he? Two-run single in the first inning for Cal, and now we are a 2-2 ball game. Did you get a chance to see Cal before the game? He baited me about going out on the pitcher's mound because last year I stood in front of the mound and started so he said, you know, That is what that mound is there for. You are supposed to step up on top of it. And he fouls it off back out of play. So I asked him if he were baiting me. He said, If you do not want to go out there and do what you are supposed to do, it is all right with me. You got the Ripken treatment. So I had to go up there and stand on the mound. You are like part of the family now if he was talking to you like that. Well, you stood up there, and you threw a strike in there. It was a slow strike, but I got it over. He hit a hard ball there. Here comes Bonilla, and Ripken has done it again. We may have to have you on every time he bats. Well, it looked like he got a little slider that kind of hung up there above the knees, and he blooped it into shallow center.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonmillerandfredmanfrawbalradiobaltimoremaryland", "title": "Interview With Jon Miller and Fred Manfra of WBAL Radio in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-miller-and-fred-manfra-wbal-radio-baltimore-maryland", "publication_date": "02-04-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2268, "text": "I have a feeling that Alomar, Palmeiro, Bonilla, Ripken, they are going to combine for a few runs this year. He hit .320 last year with Milwaukee. Not a power-type hitter, but he gets the ball to all fields. And he takes ball one, down and in, on a breaking ball.  She is a little jealous that I am here today, but she had to go to school today. You know, she and her mother just took a wonderful trip. They went to see our forces in Bosnia, and then they went to Turkey and Greece. So I told her she got to go to Turkey, Greece, and Bosnia, and I got to go to Baltimore. Here is a foul ball back into the upper deck. Well, we thought maybe she'd get spring break or something. They missed so many days this winter; they need to go more, not less. It is good to see springtime out here, is not it? We had a tough winter. Baseball has brought the sunshine back. You will see how hard the wind is, though, and you do not feel it in here, which is good. Yeah, I have been downtown on top of one of the buildings. The flag is standing straight out at attention out there, but inside here, very comfortable. I mean, you walked out on the mound, and we have seen guys bounce them in there. But you put it right in. Did you warm up ahead of time? And not getting it was Lockhart. Who warmed you up? You played catch with somebody? Well, Mr. Angelos threw me a few balls. We threw about 20 balls together, and then I threw about 20, 30 more balls down there, just fooling around. Well, we put out tapes and CD's of the whole Ripken thing last September and raised money for charity. And everywhere we went after they completed that, people commenting about how much fun it was that you were on the air. And when Cal hit that home run, it wasthere you were, the First Fan. That is what B.J. Surhoff is saying as they call him out on strikes. And that is what B.J.'s arguing, too. But he is called out on strikes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonmillerandfredmanfrawbalradiobaltimoremaryland", "title": "Interview With Jon Miller and Fred Manfra of WBAL Radio in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-miller-and-fred-manfra-wbal-radio-baltimore-maryland", "publication_date": "02-04-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2269, "text": "I toldI went down to see the umpires before the game, and I said that I really wanted to see them because they were the only people in the country that got secondguessed more than I did. So I like those guys. I am for them, you know. Well, that is it for the Orioles in the third inning. The ENTITY is here with us, ENTITY. And at the end of three, it is the Orioles, 3; Kansas City, 2. ENTITY, ENTITY, along with the ENTITY, ENTITY, as the Royals come to bat. The Orioles are back in front, 3 to 2. ENTITY was just commenting to us between innings about what a beautiful scene it is here at Camden Yards. I wish everybody could see it. And he makes the catch. I think everybody here is having a good time. You know, it is been said thatI mean, opening day in baseball really, actually for a baseball fan, carries all of the same sentiment that we ascribe to New Year's Eve, you know, a clean slate, a fresh start, high hopes. But it is even more tangible in baseball because we really know that they have got a shot. Now, you were telling us between innings that you had a chance to go down to Atlanta and see the layout there. I looked at the Olympic Stadium, which is magnificent. The American people will love it. And then after the Olympics, a section in the back is going to be taken down like what we now see from here over center field, and it is going to be converted into the Braves' new stadium. But the unique thing about it is, it is going to bethe base line is going to be even closer I mean, the foul line is going to be even closer tothe base lineto the stands than here. And home plate's going to be even tucked in tighter than here, so that the average distance from base line to the stands will be about 45 feet. And the major league ballparks average something like 70 feet. So even though the Braves have this magnificent pitching staff, they are going to be tested because they will not get as many easy foul-outs. In comes Hammonds, and he makes the catch for out number two. Well, that is a good point because, I mean, the current stadium in Atlanta probably has more foul territory than any other ballpark. But it just interested me that they are going to have a little extra handicap there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonmillerandfredmanfrawbalradiobaltimoremaryland", "title": "Interview With Jon Miller and Fred Manfra of WBAL Radio in Baltimore, Maryland", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-miller-and-fred-manfra-wbal-radio-baltimore-maryland", "publication_date": "02-04-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2278, "text": "I asked the ENTITY how he plans to get the country and the Congress to focus on Working Families The country's already focused on family issues. Every single day, there are conversations around the kitchen table where people are trying to figure out, you know what, this childcare is costing so much. I am not sure that we are going to be able to make our mortgage at the end of the month. There are folks who are saying, you know, little Johnny is sick but if I do not show up at my job, because I do not have paid family leave, we are not going to be able to pay the electricity bill. And so the goal for our Working Families Summit on Monday is to lift up a conversation that everybody's already having individually and letting people know you are not alone out here. And so what we want to do is to lift up best practices, show that for companies who are offering paid family leave, who are offering flexibility, their workers are more productive, more loyal, there is lower turnover and, ultimately, they are going to be more profitable. I am going to be taking some action, a presidential memorandum, directing every federal agency to be very clear to their employees that it is my view that offering flexibility where possible is the right thing to do. We do not want people having to choose between family and work when you have got an emergency situation. You know this, but you talk to 10 different people, you are going to get 10 different challenges that they face in trying to succeed at the work and life balance, to succeed at both. What are the three things that you would like to see companies, employers, businesses do to make it work, because you know those priorities do not always align? There are some things that we know will make a difference in people's lives. Paid family leave; we are the only advanced country on earth that does not have it. It does not make any sense. One of the most precious memories that I will ever have is when my first daughter, Malia, was born, I was lucky enough that my schedule allowed me to take that first month off. 00 in the morning and feeding her and burping her and, you know, creates a bond that is irreplaceable. And a lot of companies are already doing it and it is working. And Michelle and I have talked about this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkatebolduancnnsnewday", "title": "Interview with Kate Bolduan of CNN's New Day", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kate-bolduan-cnns-new-day", "publication_date": "23-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2279, "text": "You know, when we knew that employers had our backs and were willing to give us flexibility to look after family, that made us want to work harder for that employer, even if it meant taking work home with us. So we have unpaid family leave right now but for a whole lot of families it means they cannot use it because they just cannot afford it. If I have got a parent teacher conference you know, we always say that we want parents involved in our kids' education. There are millions of families out there who cannot even imagine taking time off to go to a parent teacher's conference. And then the third thing is the issue of childcare. You know, we do not do a very good job providing high-quality, affordable childcare and there are a lot of countries, a lot of our competitors do it. That means that it is a lot easier for women to be in the workforce and not have to make choices that ultimately mean that they are , in some cases, getting paid less or having less opportunities. I should add on that list equal pay for equal work. We have done some things administratively on that front. I always say that should not be a women's issue because I always wanted Michelle to make sure that she was getting paid fairly because when she brought her paycheck home that went into the overall pot to help us pay our bills. You know, Republicans, they will be critical of some of the initiatives you try to It is no secret that Democrats' midterm election strategy is to pitch to women, to get the women to come out to vote. They have said that. I was raised by a single mom who had to work, go to school, raise two kids. I did not come from a wealthy family. We were helped by my grandparents and the primary breadwinner there was my grandma, who never got a college education but worked her way up from a secretary to being a vice president at a bank, but also hit a glass ceiling. I have got a strong, successful wife, who I remember being reduced to tears sometimes because she could not figure out how to juggle everything that she was doing. And I have got two daughters that I care about more than anything in the world. And so this is personal for me and I think it is personal for a lot of people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkatebolduancnnsnewday", "title": "Interview with Kate Bolduan of CNN's New Day", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kate-bolduan-cnns-new-day", "publication_date": "23-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2280, "text": "ENTITY, you are paying a visit to Pakistan at a very crucial juncture, at a time when changes are being experienced in the region. And people of Pakistan are pinning a lot of hope on your visit because they think many problems are there and your visit will play a very vital role in it. The first thing that is really important for people to understand is that relations between our countries oftentimes depend on the relations between the leaders. In other words, ENTITY Musharraf and I can set a tone for the relationship because of our capacity to talk to each other. And it is important to be with each other and to share concerns and to talk about ideas. And so one object of the trip is to continue what is a good relationship. A good relationship between me and ENTITY tends to permeate throughout our Government. Secondly, I and one reason we have got a good relationship is we speak frankly with each other. Listen, I understand he has got a difficult job made really difficult by the fact that people have tried to kill him, as you know. Extremists have decided that he is a obstacle to their vision and, therefore, have tried to kill him. And so he is not only a man who is shown great courage in the face of adversity, but he does have a vision of how to work together to achieve common objectives. Secondly, I want the people of Pakistan to know that the American people care about them, that ours is a relationship that is much bigger than just the war on terror; that when our Chinooks flew supplies into the rural part of Pakistan, it was not out of a sense of just, kind of, pure diplomacy, it was out of a sense of care and concern about the individuals. And I understand sometimes people may have wonder about our motives, wonder about America's true concerns. And this will give me a chance to speak to the people of Pakistan and say, Look, we care for you, and remind people that in our country, there is great Pakistani Americans. We are a rich society because we have got people from around the world, including people who were born and raised in Pakistan and have now chosen America as a home. And so it is a trip that is of good will and importance. ENTITY, there is a common perception that the relations between the United States and Pakistan have fluctuated in the past. So what measures would you suggest to make it more durable and sustainable for the days to come and the long-time perspective?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistantelevision", "title": "Interview With Pakistan Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistan-television", "publication_date": "24-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2281, "text": "Yes, that is a really good question, because, again, we want people to understand this relationship is a vital relationship that will exist throughout the years. One way we can do that is increase trade opportunities before our countries between our countries. And we will be talking about a bilateral investment treaty. Secondly, student exchanges and I understand there is been some issues with visas, and we have got to work through those, because I believe the more Pakistani youngsters who come to America to study will get to really see what America is all about. And as more Americans that go there to study will see what Pakistan is all about. And so there is ways for us, beyond the war on terror and by the way, the war on terror is a critical aspect of our relationship; do not get me wrong. But the other thing that is interesting and I think important for the people of Pakistan to know is that ENTITY Musharraf, in his democracy initiative, can show the whole Muslim world, and the world itself, that it is possible to have a religious that is not extreme and a state that listens to people and responds to the needs of people. And that is a really important message that Pakistan can show the world. And I will, of course, continue to talk to my buddy and my friend about his goals for a democratic Pakistan. ENTITY, an early solution to the whole issue of Kashmir, about which you have also mentioned in your speech at the Asia Society that is vital for the region. So, in your view, being a close friend of both Pakistan and India, what role the United States can play in resolving this issue? Well, I started to play a role in my speech, and I spoke out on the issue and encouraged ENTITY and the Prime Minister of India to continue down the road of solving the issue with a solution that is acceptable to all sides. There is a temptation sometimes for countries to try to jump in the middle of dialog. I have seen the progress that is been made in the relationship from when I first became ENTITY You might remember an early time in my Presidency, there was real tension. And part of it has to do with trust, but there is got to be tangible progress; I recognize that. And so I will use my trip to urge the leadership to continue solving this issue, with the idea that it can be solved. ENTITY, what economic incentive would you offer to Pakistan during the forthcoming visit?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistantelevision", "title": "Interview With Pakistan Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistan-television", "publication_date": "24-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2282, "text": "And one of the steps on a robust trading relationship is what is called the Bilateral Investment Treaty, and that is an important part of the process. And believe me, every time ENTITY talks to me, he is talking about markets, and I understand that. But he also understands that there is some steps needed before this robust trade. I must applaud ENTITY's vision for the Pakistan economy. But the truth of the matter is, what matters is results. That is really good news for the people of Pakistan. First and foremost, because, obviously, if people can make a living and do well, they can see the benefits of democracy tangible benefits of living in a system where people are free to express themselves, but where the marketplace is the economic determinant. Coming to another subject, what strategy the United States has adopted for conquering terrorism in Pakistan, in a very holistic manner? First of all, freedom defeats an ideology of hatred. And the enemy I say the enemy because they will kill they innocent Pakistanis; they kill innocent Americans We need more Muslims have died at the hands of Al Qaida and these extremists than anybody else. These I do not view these people as religious people. I view them as people who have taken a great religion and kind of twisted it to meet their means. And so they have a vision. And it is not a vision it is a vision that does not recognize the freedom of people to worship. It is a vision that does not understand the that recognize the importance of women in society or free speech. And so the way to defeat that vision is with a better vision, more hopeful, and democracy provides that vision. We are in close coordination, of course, with the Government of Pakistan. We share a mutual interest. Nobody should want foreign fighters in their soil wreaking havoc. And it is hard for a part of a country to develop if there are people in that part of the country that are willing to kill innocent life to achieve an objective. And so we share short-term objectives with the Pakistani Government. We also share the long-term objective, and that is that is freedom. I am looking forward to the trip.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpakistantelevision", "title": "Interview With Pakistan Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-pakistan-television", "publication_date": "24-02-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2289, "text": "ENTITY, you know that the problem in Colombia is the fighting of this drug problem. And the newspapers in Colombia are very much in front of this thing. I personally had an experience just 2 weeks ago. I was in New York. I was invited to the Waldorf Astoria for dinner. And the person who invited me came to the Grand Central and walked from the Grand Central to the Waldorf Astoria, and in that short walk, four people offered him drugs. Is it in the United States that there is not enough control and enough punishment, enough action in that way? So, what can you tell our readers about that? Cano first, I strongly supported what President Barco said when he called attention of the world and certainly the United States to the consumption problem. We have no argument with that he is right. And what I am trying to do in our new antidrug strategy is to go after not only the criminals that sell drugs to your friend in those two blocks but the people that use it. We are coupling with that an all-out education program that is not just government but private sector as well. What concerns me and other leaders is that it is going not only into some countries in our own hemisphere, South America, but all through Europe. And I asked the Soviets if they had a problem with it, and it is everywhere. But I think when President Barco, my respected friend, pointed out, look, you have got to do something about consumption, he was right. And I have used that in speaking to leadership groups in this room and in others to try to encourage support for our antinarcotics program, which still does have strong support in our country, and for the legislation we need, getting tougher on the people that sell it, and for the education, of educating against being a user. ENTITY, Argentina is trying to restructure its highly inefficient economy. And that implies some degree of social tensions. And President Menem was here recently to explain some of these goals. What was your perception of these goals and these problems? And what do you think the U.S. can do to assist or help a country like Argentina dealing with these economic and social problems? In the first place, I was most impressed with President Menem not just here when he came to visit but at the United Nations when we sat together and had a chance to have a quick meeting. I think there is been a universal respect for what he is tried to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2290, "text": "He came out of one political background, and he has broadened the appeal not just to have support in the Argentine but in the United States as well. I told him we want to work with him on the debt problem. I realize it is not easy because Argentina does have a very large debt. But the elements of the Brady plan are there, and they can be very helpful to him. We want to encourage and be helpful in privatization, and I think there is ways that we can encourage investment in Argentina, given these political reforms. So, it is across the board; it is not just one program. But the thing that is impressed me is the toughness of the man and his willingness to make the tough decisions on getting his economic house in order and, indeed, what he is doing on the political front. So, I think you will see a whole new relationship between Argentina and the United States. This is on my mind because the Argentinian Ambassador presented his credentials yesterday, and well, he really said just about what I am saying here in terms of the feeling in Argentina about the United States. And I want to encourage as many of our top people to go there as possible; work closely with the finance people, the environment people, the military, whatever it is. So, we have a new era bilaterally; and I think, universally, there is a respect for what he is trying to do. first is subversion; second, the tensions in the military suspected of violation of human rights; and third, the economy and the foreign debt? Subversion: nobody is interested in doing anything other than to help stop possible subversion. Because as Chile moves towards its elections within the next few weeks, this is a very significant development; and it is one that, in my view, can result speaking as ENTITY in better relations with our country. On the military violations, this obviously is a matter where the people of Chile and the Government and everybody else has to respond. There is not much we can do about it. But I do not want to see in any country a military subvert the will of the people when democracy is on the move in this hemisphere a general answer to a specific question. Well, of course, Chile has been out in front of other countries in managing its economy, in spite of its difficulties in some areas. We talked about the politics, the political problem. But Chile, because of its I would not say economic miracle, but they have done far better.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2291, "text": "And the elements of support from the international institutions and again, on the Third World debt or their debt problems are in place pretty much in Chile. So, I am somewhat optimistic about their being about to cope financially, at least as we see it from the United States. ENTITY, in spite of superpower negotiations on regional issues, Soviet-bloc arms continue to pour into Nicaragua. What does your government plan to do about this? And do you plan to bring this up at the coming summit in San Jose? I will bring it up every chance I get And what we are trying to do is educate our friends in Europe and people who strongly support democracy all over the world that this is happening. I think people do not believe it. Secondly, we will continue to work with the Soviet Union. We had a little argument not argument, but they felt we had challenged their word on this whole question, as you remember, not so many weeks ago. And we were not doing that. We were pointing out the totality of the shipments, which are in the range that you have just outlined here. So, we will make clear every chance we get to the Soviets that that is not in their interests, and certainly we view it against the security interests of the United States, and we view it against the tide in terms of democracy. Why should that military clique, who at one point were espousing their own Marxist beliefs, deny, through having a military force far bigger than is required and bigger than any of its neighbors, the will of the people? So, it is a combination of these things. And I will be pleased to discuss it in Costa Rica; in Washington, DC; or anyplace else. And I think there is a little more understanding now in our country about it, but not as much as there should be, see, because the regime keeps denying this, you see. ENTITY, according to the Tela accords, which were signed recently by the five Central American Presidents, the Nicaraguan resistance must be demobilized and voluntarily repatriated by December 8th. With the economy of my country in terrible shape, Honduras is insisting that the resistance leave its territory by this date, December 8th. If the resistance does not want to return voluntarily to Nicaragua, for whatever reason, will the United States take them? And will you take this up with President Azcona when you meet with him in San Jose on Friday?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2292, "text": "one was voluntary repatriation, and I think the other was to democratic conditions, or something of that nature. And so, those two are the sine qua nons of demobilization, it seems to me. And so, I can sympathize; and, yes, I will be glad to discuss it further with President Azcona. I understand it does cause some differences, but I do not want to push for anything other than voluntary and then demobilization into democratic conditions. So, I think the major objective here should be to see that these elections are free and fair and that opposition and, yes, we will help with repatriation on those conditions, absolutely; we will help. But I must insist that all of us in this hemisphere and I will try to insist on this do what we can to be sure that these elections coming up in Nicaragua are free and fair and that the opposition has a chance to take its case to the people. And I am not just talking about 3 minutes on television at midnight. I think there is got to be a very fair presentation of the opposition case. So, I do not want to sound insensitive to what is happened, to the burden on Honduras. I am sensitive to it and am perfectly prepared to discuss it further with President Azcona. We discussed it when he was up here. But we are getting close now in terms of time, and these elections are the key to a lot of things. There have been reports of the United States concentrating troops along the Mexican border for drug interdiction matters. A, can you confirm that for us? And, B, given the nature of our border and the fact that Mexico uses a substantial part of its own army for the same purposes, would you like to see an operation on the border constrained to the border of Mexico and the United States designed to break up drug traffic and arms traffic coming from the United States into Mexico? I'd like to see the utmost cooperation between the military. I am not sure that I am prepared to endorse a joint force, and I am not sure Mexico President Salinas would want that. But I should tell you, we have reached a new level of cooperation because of the courage of the new President of Mexico. And in terms of our interdiction, what you may be thinking of is not a deployment of U.S. troops but using the National Guard in some areas on exercises to try to stop drugs from coming in.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2293, "text": "The more cooperation we have with Mexico along the lines you are talking about to interdict whether it is illegal arms going one way or illegal drugs coming another to have that border policed and peaceful, the better it is. But I am very encouraged by the cooperation we are getting all up and down the line from the Salinas administration, and I hope they are encouraged, because this is indeed a two-way street. And as one who feels very close to Mexico as you know, my grandchildren are half-Mexican, and this one is one that is real close to my heart. And I do not want to propose anything nor will I support anything that looks like an abuse of U.S. power. The way to do it is to work cooperatively with the Salinas regime and the officials in the military, policia, whatever it is, to accomplish the ends that both countries want. And I am not suggesting we do not have border problems. We do; Mexico does with us. But the level of cooperation has really stepped up. And our visit with the President here I think the more my high officials my Cabinet people that saw him, the more impressed they were. the economic crisis and the terrorist subversion. They limit and complicate any effective action which may be taken with regard to the drug traffic. Well, we have made some proposals on antinarcotics that affect Peru and affect Bolivia. But I think the way to answer that question is to say I enthusiastically look forward to participation in this so-called Andean drug summit, and we are going to be trying to set the along with as invitees and invitors. Now we have had official invitation from Bolivia and Colombia and Peru. And I think to really definitively answer your question we have got to have that meeting, because I do not want them to be making proposals that just go counter to the culture in Peru. And I want them to understand, though, how strongly we feel about it and how prepared we are to help them. So, we have made some proposals, and as you know, we have helped in the past, principally in Bolivia on helicopters and spraying. But I do not want to go further than that now until we have this summit. There is no point in having it if we have our minds already made up. I have got to hear from them. We have got to have a hemispheric answer, not just a U.S. proposal on it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2294, "text": "ENTITY, ex-Secretary Schlesinger, writing in the Washington Post this morning, pointed to the increasing consumption of oil by the U.S. and the increasing dependency, as a result, on the Gulf region. Now, I know that, as a former oilman, you must be aware of the very large reserves in the hemisphere of heavy oil. I would be very wary of interjecting myself, our government, into the market. I'd be concerned about that. I can see the security argument that some might make, and it is valid. You have Mexico; you have the enormous resources in Lake Maracaibo in Venezuela; Colombia has some production. And you can make a case that there is more for the security interest of the United States in giving preference. My problem with it is it distorts the market, and it artificially could raise the price to the American consumer, or you could start regional conflict not military but economic conflict between the producing countries. And Saudi Arabia and, to some degree, Kuwait and Iran dominate the international oil market. And if we move to preferences, if we move to regional compacts of this nature, I think you could set off a price war that would damage the economy not just of the of every producing country. And that would work opposite of increasing prices here, but it would not be good for the economies that need to optimize their revenue from oil and gas. And I am talking about Mexico, and I am certainly talking about Venezuela. But I share Jim's I did not see this article, but I share his concern about my country becoming ever increasing on foreign sources. And that is why I have tasked Jim Watkins, our able Secretary of Energy, to come up with a national energy policy. It will be more use of domestic of gas, I am sure. It will be a vital industry in oil, but it will be alternate sources as well. We are not going to back away from nuclear power in this country. ENTITY, in Peru and my country, Bolivia, there are thousands of people working in the coca leaf fields because they do not have any other source of income. Unless there is a serious commitment from rich countries to help to create jobs through investments, for instance the narco traffic problem probably will not change.  Julio , we certainly consider that. Again, that is a subject that I want to discuss with your new and, I'd say, very impressive President. Again, I had a good meeting with him.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2295, "text": "And I do not want to prejudge this so-called Andean drug summit, but we recognize that many of these small peasant farmers are dependent on coca crops. I also recognize that the business has gotten pretty good for them better than it used to be because more people, especially in my country, are using the damn stuff. But we have got to be openminded about alternative cropping. We have certainly got to be openminded about trying to get business opportunities that would take some of these farmers and get them involved in something other than producing coca. So, I am openminded, but again, I do not want to prejudge the summit. ENTITY, as you know, we will have Presidential elections in Brazil in 3 weeks. And the U.S.-Brazil relations have become a major issue in the political campaign. What I would like to know is your expectations regarding this election and what the new President, that will be elected by the people for the first time in almost 30 years, could expect from the U.S.? Let me answer your question, but let me ask for clarification. How has the U.S. become an issue in the election? And the heartbeat is democracy, I am convinced of that; that has not always been the history. I think that is the heartbeat in Brazil. So, the United States should stand ready, as we have with Argentina, to see what comes out of the election clearly, not be involved in the election and then stand ready with a friendly country and I think we do have friendly relations with Brazil to iron out what has cropped up as difficulties, be it in trade or something else. Look, you have got a new regime. What do you stand for? What kind of relations do you want with the United States? And we are ready we are ready to deal with you. And Brazil faces horrendous debt problems, too. One area that is been a little contentious has to do with the forests and with the environmental implications of that on global warming. And at first, I think there was a disconnect between Brazil and the United States, but now I do not think we are very far apart. We had a good talk with President Sarney in New York about this. And I think when we were talking about environmental set-asides he thought I was talking about intervention into the sovereignty or diminishing the sovereignty of Brazil. And heaven's sakes, we are not interested in that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2296, "text": "We are interested in this concept of global warming and in working with Brazil in a constructive way. Without knowing who wins the election and what that person stands for, I'd have to wait and see. I would simply go back to Argentina, when some were predicting, I think we would all recognize, great difficulties if President Menem won the election. We had a lot of sophisticated guys telling me, hey, this would be not good for me, for the United States, for our country. We have all been through campaigns; we have listened to campaign rhetoric espoused a little myself from time to time. But look at the facts; look at where we are going. And we want to do that with Brazil, and we will. ENTITY, the drug fighting it is a matter of survival in Colombia and a way to defend our democracy. The Colombian Government established a reward of 100 million pesos to the person that provides any information in order to catch the big drug traffickers. However, they move to other countries, and the action has not been effective yet. Has the United States Government, through any international organization, considered the possibility of setting up a better and more attractive reward? I had not thought about the reward possibility. Maybe our Department of Justice has. So, I should hedge a little bit on that. What we have done is set up or are in the process of setting up much more cooperation with others in terms of the problem itself. In the first place, we have, I want to repeat, a great respect for what President Barco is doing against a lot of tough forces and against good God, here you guys are in the newspaper business, and just for printing the truth and standing up against this, you have been firebombed and had great difficulty. So, we can identify with that. So, I think it is going to be everyone knows our stance on extradition, and I understand it is not a particularly popular stance in some areas in Colombia. But the administration, President Barco, has been very good about that. Whether the reward I know we have some rewards, but whether it applies to this or not, I'd have to get you an answer. Marlin, if you would I am embarrassed to say I do not know the specific figures.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2297, "text": "If there was some feeling on the part of President Barco, on other leaders in the hemisphere, that this would be useful, I can guarantee you I would give it fast consideration, because we have got to show that we are doing what we can against consumption your point and that we want to cooperate in every way possible to bring these people to justice. ENTITY, the drug cartel has sent various messages to the Colombian Government and to the Colombian Congress seeking some sort of dialog to end the war. In their last message 2 days ago, they even proposed that this subject should be put to a referendum. They have specifically offered to dismantle all their operations, to retire completely from the business, and to eliminate drug trafficking from Colombia. What would be your reaction if the Colombian Government would eventually agree to this dialog? I would let the Colombians make their determination on how they want to treat problems in their own country. But I would be very wary of taking the word of an indicted drug dealer. I would be extraordinarily worried about that because I do not think they keep their word. I think these are people that the background on some of them, you know well, were common criminals until they got into the lucrative business of poisoning the kids not just in the United States but in Colombia as well and every other country as well. So, I am not sure the Colombian officials need free advice from me, but I would be very wary about that negotiation. And I think that the Government of Colombia has been very wary about that kind of negotiation because they know the kind of people they are dealing with. ENTITY, Colombia's war on drugs can only be sustained if the country's economy is strengthened. Eighty-seven million dollars, which was given to our country basically in military equipment, is a welcome aid. We were very grateful for your help. But we feel that in order to maintain the proper political attitude of the Colombian people towards drugs much more for the country's economy is needed. Could you consider and perhaps the meeting at the Andean summit might be the place to give, eventually, discussion to this would you be able to consider a type of Marshall plan for countries such as Colombia that are decidedly and deeply involved in the war on drugs? Well, again, I would be willing to consider anything. And I hate to cry poor mouth we are living under constraints on the economic side that I wish we were not living under.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2298, "text": "But we did discuss with the President of Colombia the egregious effect that the coffee agreement has had on the overall economy and, thus, the resources available to help fight narcotics. So, we told him, look, we are going to try to help reinstate this agreement. It is not a popular thing in this country because people think, hey, I am going to have to pay more for a cup of coffee; but we ought to go the extra mile here in trying to help Colombia. And so, it is with that in mind on that one facet of the problem I think we can try to help. But, look, if there is some bold plan that can come out of this summit that will help in the areas that produce it and then Colombia, which has both production and has become this factory, really, for these people we should be openminded about it and go the extra mile to try to help on the economic because I do see the connection. We do not just say, look, you do something about these drugs crime, criminals, explosions, arms and then forget the economy. We are not going to do that. But I have got to stop a little short until I know what the view of these leaders will be when we get there. The celebration of the 100 years of Costa Rican democracy will make you coincide in our country with Nicaragua's President Daniel Ortega. I have thought about that. Is there a possibility that you will be meeting or would you be willing to meet President Ortega in Costa Rica, and what topics would you be willing to discuss with him? We are there as guests of President Arias. This is a multilateral approach, coming there to salute democracy. I find it somewhat ironic that Mr. Ortega is there to salute democracy, but nevertheless, so be it; that is good. We want to have a tribute to 100 years of Costa Rican democracy, and what we do not want to do is inject a lot of regional tensions into their meeting. But I am going to be polite, charming and if I had an encounter, it would be very firm because I do not see why that one Sandinista regime is swimming against the tide, as Chairman Mao used to say. The aspirations in our hemisphere, in all these countries, is for democracy; and you see it happening all the time just heard about it around this table by your very questions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2299, "text": "And Marx's star is fading not just in this hemisphere but look at Eastern Europe, look around the whole world and human rights are rising up, and pluralism is coming on. So, let the Nicaraguan people speak to this question. They do not need George Bush telling them how to do it. Let them speak to it and be sure that the opposition has every opportunity to take their case to the people of Nicaragua. But it is not going to help to have me go through this once again with Mr. Ortega. I had a chance to do that in Brazil. He knows how I feel about it, and everybody knows we have a tense relationship. So, I do not want to act like we are waltzing around there in great harmony, because we are not. And there are so many ways that they can prove that they want to join the family of nations in this hemisphere stay with it, and stop subverting El Salvador in the process would be a good way to begin. We stopped a major shipment of arms interdicted the other day going into El Salvador. So, I have no agenda with Mr. Ortega. And as he takes a step that might lead to democracy, great, I am for that; but we are not going to solve any problems there in Costa Rica. I am there as the guest of the country, guest of President Arias. I wish Mr. Ortega had been there when Arias was sworn in, and I will tell you why. I realize that the United States has varying degrees of problems in our own hemisphere for a lot of historic reasons. Maybe you were there this day I am talking about. I represented the United States as Vice President. You had 30,000 people in a stadium in the capital. And what you did was to go in there, everybody lined up behind their flag. And I am saying to myself, I do not know what kind of reception I am going to get the U.S. Stars and Stripes and the Vice President I know we have got good relations with Costa Rica, but a lot of other countries represented. I swear to God, to the day I die I will never forget the reception for my country. It was not me they did not know who the hell I was but marching in behind the Stars and Stripes with our little delegation, and people were cheering, and it was democracy. It overlooked any kind of regional differences, and it was so moving and touching.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2300, "text": "And when the Nicaraguan representative walked in there, they were whistling and giving it the old cheer that you give when some guy gives you a bad call in a soccer game. And it said something. I am standing, listening very carefully to this what are the people trying to say? and it is not we love you, North Americanos or anything like this. And it made a profound impression on me. And I do not think there is going to be an occasion for that kind of thing. But if Mr. Ortega had been there instead of his representative, Vice President Ramirez, he would have heard this, and he would have sensed it. He would have understood what the Costa Ricans were talking about when they had this peaceful transition yet again the will of the people being exercised. Sorry to end with a lecture, but it is a good ending point because we are not going down there to have some battle with Mr. Ortega. But I am there to celebrate the Costa Rican democracy, 100 years of it, and to join other democratically elected Presidents in saluting the democracy of this country and recognizing that it has not been easy for Argentina or Brazil or some countries to come out of a different kind of a past, even though the people probably never lost their confidence in democracy. And so, that is what we are going there for. And I just hope that it does not get cluttered up by the photographers that work for you guys wanting to see a picture of me and Ortega together. That has nothing to do with democracy in Costa Rica nothing. ENTITY, on Mr. Noriega we each asked our question. Will you answer one question on Noriega? You have been criticized in this country politically and some of the media for the way you reacted in the coup in Panama. You said that you acted according to what you felt. I was not criticized by any of the Presidents of the countries around this table, I noticed not one. We have got a lot of hawks out here; we have got a lot of macho guys out there that want me to send somebody else's kid into battle. And what I will do is prudently assess the situation at the time, and I have seen nothing in terms of intelligence or fact coming in later that would make me have done something differently. And that does not mean that under some provocation or some denial of our rights as the United States of America, that I'd be afraid to use force.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2301, "text": "But for these instant hawks up there to those doves that now become instant hawks on Capitol Hill, they do not bother me one bit because the American people supported me by over 2 to 1, and I think I sent a strong signal to the countries represented around this table that we are not going to imprudently use the force of the United States. If somebody lays a glove on an American citizen there in the Canal Zone or where we have certain treaty rights, then we have got a different story. Will you participate in the next uprising? And this man must be brought to justice. You know, one of the hits they gave me is I said that we have no argument with the Panamanian Defense Forces. And some of our more sophisticated columnists, perhaps who you are referring to, say the minute the President says this, this implies that he is going to use U.S. force. I am not going to do that. But it does not imply I am not going to use force. So, I am not going to say what I am going to do force or no force but there is no implicit guarantee that when some guy jumps up and causes a coup, that the United States is going to send in the SOUTHCOM forces. So, we took a few hits on it, but not too much. But when I had the Prime Minister of Spain here the other day, he understood it. And it is very important to me, I think, as it relates to this hemisphere that we all love so much, too. The minute Noriega gets out of there, the minute he is gone unless replaced by a tyrant, so I reserve that but the minute he is gone, we have instantly improved relations with Panama. We have good relations with the people of Panama. And I will be darned if we should sit here, as countries that respect democracy, and let this man beat up the Vice President, Guillermo Ford, beat the hell out of him and bleed him out there, to avert democracy. We are talking about the trend for democracy, and Panama is entitled to it. And it cannot be superimposed by the United States, but they spoke in a free and fair election, and they are entitled to it. And I am going to do everything I can from up here. I am working with our colleagues in the hemisphere, Venezuelan President and others, to try to see that the will of the people is respected. And Noriega is the fly in the ointment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatinamericanjournalists", "title": "Interview With Latin American Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latin-american-journalists", "publication_date": "25-10-1989", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2302, "text": "We share a strong commitment to curtailing the threat of weapons of mass destruction in general and to continuing the work in Iraq. And again let me say how pleased I am at the agreement that he worked out with Iraq to continue the inspections, as well as the access which has been provided to the UNSCOM inspectors which was previously denied. The last 6 days is not the same as the next 6 months, but it is all very hopeful. And ENTITY deserves a lot of appreciation from the United States and from all Americans for the work that has been done. ENTITY, are you both on the same wavelength in terms of what would happen if there is a breach in the agreement in the aftermath of that implementation? Well, over the weekend ENTITY said he thought that under the resolution there would have to be some consultations before any military force could be taken or used. We believe that the resolution gives us the authority to take whatever actions are necessary. But of course, we would consult. It would be unthinkable that we would not do that. We do that all the time anyway. I spent an awful lot of time on the telephone with large numbers of world leaders in the last several weeks as this difficulty has unfolded, and so I am not sure there is a conflict between our positions. What do you think, ENTITY? I think what ENTITY has said is exactly what I said on television on Sunday. And not only was ENTITY himself informed, as you will recall, Mrs.- the Secretary of State Albright consulted Council members, Ambassador Richardson, Secretary of Defense Cohen-and so there was consultation even this time around. So the consultation is an ongoing process and part of the way we do business in the international community. And I agree with what ENTITY has said. ENTITY, what do you think about Senator Lott's criticism that this agreement is a sellout? The agreement on its own terms is clearly not a sellout. The agreement on its own terms preserves the integrity of the UNSCOM inspections. It does add some diplomats to the inspection process in the Presidential sites, but if the agreement is complied with-and again, I think ENTITY did a good job working through these issues over the weekend-then we will be able to do what the United States has always wanted, which is to complete the inspection process. Again, let me say-I know I do not need to beat this dead horse, but I think it is worth repeating one more time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspriordiscussionswithunitednationssecretarygeneralkofiannanandexchange", "title": "Remarks Prior to Discussions With United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-prior-discussions-with-united-nations-secretary-general-kofi-annan-and-exchange", "publication_date": "11-03-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2303, "text": "I see this issue with Iraq in the larger context of the threat I believe will be presented to the world for the next few decades from biological and chemical and perhaps even, God forbid, small-scale nuclear weapons-a different sort of weapons of mass destruction threat than we have faced in the past. And world leaders simply have to come to grips with the potential that is out there for organized groups-not just nations but terrorist groups, narcotraffickers, international criminals-to make and deploy such weapons for their own purposes, so that this is very important on its own merits. But it is also very important as the first of what I believe will have to be a many, many year effort by all peace-loving people to deal with this issue. ENTITY, how would you feel about testifying or talking to the grand jury and in some way giving your side of the story in the ongoing controversy? Well, you know I am not going to talk about that today. I have got to do the work that the people of this country hired me to do, so I cannot -I am not going to discuss that. Sir, with your pledge to cooperate fully, as you mentioned when this story first broke-- I wish you would concentrate on my issues. I just do not have anything else to say about it. ENTITY Sir, are you going to embrace the Conrad bill for tobacco, sir? Let me say-I'd like to answer that question and then, if I could, I'd like to make one comment about Kosovo before you leave. I have said that the Conrad bill embraces the principles that I feel strongly about. I have not reviewed all of its provisions, and I am not sure exactly what it does, for example, on the tobacco farmer issue, but in general I think Senator Conrad has put out a very good bill. And what I hope will happen is that either his bill will attract bipartisan support or that it will lead to a bipartisan bill reflecting the principles that I have outlined in the tobacco settlement- for the tobacco settlement. I personally believe, even though there are now less than 70 scheduled work days left in this year, that Congress ought to have no higher priority than to get this done. We need to do this and get this behind us. We do not need to wait until next year. Let me just make one comment if I might about Kosovo, because the Secretary of State has just returned from an arduous trip.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspriordiscussionswithunitednationssecretarygeneralkofiannanandexchange", "title": "Remarks Prior to Discussions With United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-prior-discussions-with-united-nations-secretary-general-kofi-annan-and-exchange", "publication_date": "11-03-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2304, "text": "The United States and I condemn in the strongest possible terms excessive violence that has led to the death of innocent civilians there. We believe the cause of it is the inadequate response by the Serbian Government to the legitimate concerns of the Albanian minority in Serbia, but majority in Kosovo. I believe that the decision that the Secretary and other world leaders reached in the last few days, the reimposition of the sanctions, and the strong statements that were made coming out of the Contact Group, and the unity of the countries gives us some hope that we can resolve this. But this is a matter of great concern to me; I know it is of great concern to ENTITY. We do not want the Balkans to have more pictures like we have seen in the last few days, so reminiscent of what Bosnia endured. And I just want to make it absolutely clear that to me it is a very serious issue. consider military action, sir, as your Secretary of State has said in the past, and others? But the Secretary of State, along with all of her colleagues-and there is been remarkable unanimity on this- they have taken a position that gives us a chance to avoid further bloodshed by all parties under all conditions. That is what I want. Have you been in touch with Milosevic? Will you have some travel tips on Africa for ENTITY? I think I will be discussing a few interesting things, and I have one or two ideas that I would want to put to ENTITY. I think it is great that he is going to Africa, and I think it is good for U.S.-African relationship, and the entire continent is excited that for the first time a sitting U.S. ENTITY is doing this. And it is a sign that U.S.-African relationship is on the upswing. And I am very pleased about that. ENTITY, will the American people hear your version in the Lewinsky matter? Well, we are going to discuss that. We are working very hard on that. We are doing everything we can to get it back on track. And I hope we can have a chance to talk about it. Will this visit have helped in some way?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkspriordiscussionswithunitednationssecretarygeneralkofiannanandexchange", "title": "Remarks Prior to Discussions With United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-prior-discussions-with-united-nations-secretary-general-kofi-annan-and-exchange", "publication_date": "11-03-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2311, "text": "We are in the Cabinet Room at the White House in this Christmas season. It is a great pleasure to have as our special guest, as part of our millennium month, the ENTITY. Do you spend a lot of time-do you have a lot of Cabinet meetings? And I have a lot of other meetings in here, like with individual Cabinet members. I met this week with three or four different Cabinet members and extended staff here. So we have large meetings in here. This room is, like, right off the Oval Office? That is right, right off the Oval Office. Did they plan it that way so the ENTITY could run right in and meet with- how often do you have Cabinet meetings? I do not have too many full Cabinet meetings, because we have 23 members of the Cabinet plus Chief of Staff. So I have a few of those a year, when we have to do a review and get all geared into one issue or another. But I have a lot of meetings with various Cabinet officials in this room and with maybe more than one who are all working on a common project. We have a lot to talk about, and I want to get an overview as we look ahead to this millennium but cover some current things. That is the basis of the State Department yesterday-should we travel; should we stay home? We are told the Cabinet members have been asked to stay home or stay in Washington. The Cabinet members are staying here, but it is really just as a precaution, because we feel a high level of confidence about where we are with the Y2K problems. We have been working on this for years. We have spent a lot of money on it; we have tried to get all the private sector involved. All the big systems in this country, I think-airline travel, banking systems, electrical systems, Social Security checks-all those things I think are in good shape. We are here partly as a precaution and partly so, if any of our friends in other parts of the world have any trouble, we can all be there to give whatever help we can. And how about the terrorism threat, where people are asked to be careful, especially overseas, and we have these arrests occurring in Washington and Vermont? Well, what I would say to the American people about that is that we know that at the millennium, a lot of people who may even be a little crazy by our standards or may have a political point to make, may try to take advantage of it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2312, "text": "So we are on a heightened state of alert. We are working very hard on it. And my advice to the American people would be to go on about their business and do what they would intend to do at the holiday season but to be a little more aware of people and places where they find themselves. And if you see something suspicious, well, call us and let us know. We are working very, very hard on this. And if it were me, I would not just refrain from activities. I am going to go out and do my Christmas shopping. I am going to do what I normally do. Are you saying if you have a hunch about something, go to the hunch? If you have a hunch about something, if you see something that is suspicious, you should report it, just to make sure that we do everything we possibly can to maximize our protection. Colin Powell says that maybe by doing all this, you have scared them off. You know, if you make people fear the alert so much, that might cause terrorists to have a second thought. Well, they should have a second thought, because we are working it hard. Let us discuss some things political-one of your main-you know that. Do you agree with Al Gore's request to have debates? I do not want to get into handicapping the campaign. I think that the more debates they have, the better. I am very proud to be a member of my party when I see those two debate. They have their ideas. You know I favor the Vice President and not just because I feel personally loyal to him. I think he is been by light-years the best Vice President this country has ever had, by a long, long way. But I think the fact that he and Bill Bradley are out there talking about education; they are talking about health care; they are talking about biomedical research; and they know what they are talking about; and they have thought about these things-I think it is a very substantive, good thing. And that is what I think elections ought to be about, so I am proud of that. Were you surprised at the idea, though, to say, let us forget-you know, Goldwater and Kennedy were going to do that. I was intrigued by it. If someone had offered me that in 1992, I probably would have done it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2313, "text": "Yes, probably, because I think we need to find out whether we can have elections without the kind of money that they cost today, and we cannot have them without that kind of money unless people can have access, the candidates can have access to the voters. That is, what costs all the money is access to the voters. Barry Goldwater had told me that he and John Kennedy had arranged that if Goldwater would be the nominee in '64, had Kennedy lived, they were going to travel around together. And I'd like to see it happen in a general election. I do not think it is necessary for the voters to be for one person but think that the other person is a bad person. And I think it is very bad development in our politics. So if there could be a way to be more and more debates, not only now but in the general election, I think it would be a good thing for American democracy. I did three last time and three the time before, but I would have done six or seven or however many. I believe in this. You say, of course, you are supporting your Vice President. What do you think of Bill Bradley, though? Oh, I have known him for many years. I like him. He is had a very interesting life, and he is got an interesting take on things. Kennedy could run with Johnson. You picked a man from a neighboring State to run with you. Do you understand the difficulty of a Vice President running? But it gets easier as time goes on and people focus on it. But I think that, as I said, when Harry Truman became President, he did not even know about the atomic bomb. And we had already lost five or six Presidents in office by the time he became President. Both of them had responsibility in office. Then President Carter upped the ante more; Vice President Mondale had far more responsibility than anybody had before. President Reagan, to his credit, gave President Bush a lot of responsibility. But no Vice President has ever had the range of responsibility and the level of achievement, accordingly, that Al Gore has had, whether it was in our technology policy, our environmental policy, our foreign policy, the economic empowerment of poor areas. If something happened to you, there is not surprise we have to tell him?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2314, "text": "There would be nothing- if something were to happen to me tonight, he could become President, and there would be nothing he would not know, no person he had not met, no issue he had not dealt with. We will be right back with the ENTITY, at this Christmas season. Speaking of debates, it was Vice President Gore's idea, we just reminded each other, to debate Perot. And I understand you were the only one here that agreed with that. They all thought there was a lot of downside to it. But I wish we had more debates in recent years on trade policy, because it is such a controversial thing. Everybody is for selling more of our exports. Everybody has the feeling, because we have a big trade deficit, that people take advantage of us. People are worried about losing their jobs, even though the unemployment rate is at a 30-year low. And I think we need to continue to debate this. I wish we had more of them. I hope there will be some trade debates in this election. Did Seattle throw you, ENTITY? I ask that because Governor Bush was with us last week, and he agrees completely with you on the trade issue, but he said he thought-I am paraphrasing-that you kind of copped out, that you did not forcefully attack those people who were demonstrating; you sort of rode the middle. Well, first of all, I attacked those who were violent in no uncertain terms. And I said to those who were demonstrating for a cleaner environment or for decent labor standards that I thought their concerns were legitimate but their opposition to the trade agreement was wrong. And that is what I believe. And I think that we are a little different on that. I mean, I strongly agree, and most Republicans that apparently agree with me that we ought to have expanded trade. We benefit, not just from the exports; we also benefit from the influence. You have got an- time, so do I. We benefit in that an open market enables us to grow and still have to compete, and that keeps inflation down.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2315, "text": "One of the reasons-in February we are going to have the longest economic expansion in the history of the country, and we did it with three things We did it with getting rid of the debt-deficit; we did it with investing in technology and people; and we did it with opening our borders in trading and continuing to compete, because usually, when you have this kind of economic growth, inflation takes over and kills the recovery. But the difference between me and most Republicans is that I believe that globalization is inevitable. But people are scared of all this change, and what we have to do is to convince them that change can be their friend. And the way to do it is to say, Okay, we are going to compete, and we are going to win over the long run, and we are going to win in the short run. no forced labor, no child labor, no abusive working conditions. Did Seattle surprise you? I think-I knew there would be a lot of people there. I was surprised the first night at the level of violence. Who instigated it, you mean? Yes, throw rocks-there was just a very small percentage of those thousands of people who were doing this. There were probably a couple of hundred people who were prepared to throw rocks at stores and take other violent action. Most of them were there to express their opposition to some aspect or another of this process of globalization, but they cannot turn the clock back. The world is better off than it would have been if we had not had 50 years of increasing economic integration, and America has won big these last 7 years by being involved. And we are making a huge mistake, in my judgment, if we do not continue to both expand trade and work for better core labor standards in a better environment. Do the unions then not understand this? They are the biggest supporters your party has-the trade unions in America have been. If you look at Seattle, for example, there are 170,000 union members in and around Seattle. And most of them have jobs in part because their companies are so tied to trade. I went to York, Pennsylvania, the other day to the Harley Davidson motorcycle factory, something most-at least most guys and an increasing number of women can identify with. They have got a year's backlog, and 25 percent of the Harleys are sold overseas, and the biggest foreign market is now Japan, which makes the only competitors to Harley and motorcycles.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2316, "text": "Some unions feel that their jobs might be undercut by the importation of textile or clothing goods or shoes or whatever, but on balance, we have won big as a country by opening our markets, showing we are not afraid to compete, and asking others to open their markets, too, to be fair, whether it is farmers or manufacturers or people in entertainment or people in the information technology business. Is it tough going into a last year? I ask that because we sat together here quite a few times. I remember once we were looking out, and you said to me, You know, my bad days are good days. I love this job. You love this job. And I will miss it. People ask me all the time, What will you miss most? Will it be living in the White House, going to Camp David, getting on Air Force One? The job is what I will miss most, the work. There is no place in the world where you can come in contact with so many different kinds of people and so many different kinds of issues and have so much opportunity to do good or stop bad things from happening. But the hard thing about it now is you want to do everything, and you have to be disciplined. You have to figure out what can I do? What can I put out there that the country ought to do that maybe cannot be done while I am here? I just want to do everything I can. We will be back with the working ENTITY right after this. A lot of them are saying it should be changed. What do you think? I tried to have a different policy. I tried to say gays should be able to serve in the military-- But if the military code of justice says that homosexual acts are illegal, if they keep it, then they'd have to observe that. But when we went to do not ask, do not tell, it was all we could get through the Congress. The Congress had a vetoproof majority to reverse the policy I recommended. Now a new administration and new Members of Congress, they are free to do something different. What we are doing now-in August, we issued some new guidelines to try to correct some of the abuses, because the policy, as it was articulated in '93, has been often abused, and that is what is led to some of these expulsions, some of this harassment. The Secretary of Defense is absolutely committed to faithfully implementing the policy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2317, "text": "It is really do not ask, do not tell, do not pursue, under those circumstances. No, I did not say that. I recommended a different policy, but the policy is better than the results. That is, if the policy were faithfully applied, we would not have many of the problems that we have had these last few years. And I think the Secretary of Defense and the leadership of the Pentagon is now- with these new guidelines and with the work they are doing to try to make sure people are trained and they understand they are not supposed to go in and harass people and what can and cannot trigger an inquiry, I think we can make it better now. How much-we know about your interest and the gains we have made in the racial area and still a long way to go. How are we doing in that area, in the homosexual area in this country, with regards to acceptance, do you think? We are a long way from where we were just in '92 and '93. I think vast majorities of the American people support hate crimes legislation that protects gays as well as people with different racial and religious backgrounds. I think most Americans strongly support nondiscrimination in the workplace and would vote for the employment nondiscrimination act if they were in Congress. I hope that the Congress will vote for it this year, this next year. I think that-the real problem, I still believe, is the absence of open, personal contact. We do not know it-- I think there are too many people who do not know gay men and lesbian women in the ordinary course of their lives, and they do not see that there are people who- their friends, their sisters, their brothers, their sons, their daughters, their co-workers, and that it is-my judgment is it is not a lifestyle people choose. I think that-and I think that my view is that every American that works hard, obeys the law, plays by the rules ought to be treated with dignity and respect and have a part in our American family. That is what I believe. Do you agree with the Vermont judiciary that while marriage may be wrong, they are entitled, couples who live together who are gay, to equal benefits? That is always been my position, that- you have got gay couples that, for example, have been together for years now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2318, "text": "One of them- and I am beginning to think about this, because I am moving into this age bracket now; one of them has a heart attack; one of them gets sick; one of them is in the intensive care unit in the hospital; and only family members can come in; and sometimes they are not allowed in-that kind of thing. You know, I think that, in terms of health care coverage at work or in terms of property and willing of property to your closest family member, that sort of thing, I think they ought to be able to do that. Well, marriage in our culture and to me has a certain connotation, meaning for me, that has not gotten me to where I could accept that, because I think it is basically a union for the purpose of, among other things, having children, and so that is why I have never supported the term of marriage, although there are a lot of increasing numbers of people, even in the clergy, who believe that they should be able to do that. We will be back with more of ENTITY. We have got an overview here on the millennium and some other things after this. We are in the Cabinet Room at the White House with ENTITY. The Washington Post said that you are applying to the Government to reimburse for legal fees. I have never-I have never considered doing that. So where did that story come from? I think it was leaked from the Independent Counsel's Office. That is the way the story read to me. I think that they have cost the taxpayers enough money already. I may be entitled to it, but my instinct is not to do it. But I have really never had a discussion about it. My instinct is not to do it. I have had this legal defense fund; people have helped me pay for my legal fees. The travesty in this thing is the way the law is written. You can only get your legal fees if you are a target of an investigation but you are not charged. So if you are charged and acquitted, you cannot get them, and if you never were a target, you cannot get them. So the thing that I think is just tragic is you have no idea how many completely innocent people that were harassed repeatedly and called into hearings and called into this, that, and the other thing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2319, "text": "Everybody knew they never did anything wrong, but I mean, not just one interview which you could understand but over and over and over again, so that they have these massive legal bills, and they are not eligible for any reimbursement at all. So I have been trying to figure out how to help them pay their legal bills. That is what I wish I could apply for. I wish there was some fund where I could get some money for them to pay their bills, because a lot of these people, they are not President; they are not like me; they cannot have a legal defense fund that would pay their bills off. How did you emotionally hold up through all that? Is that part of your structure? Where does that come from? One is what you said. If somebody hits you and knocks you down, you were supposed to get up, not give up. And I also deeply believed- one thing I knew, the Whitewater thing was a total fraud, and I thought the people who were pursuing it knew it was a fraud at some point . They had to, especially 4-something years ago, when the Government report came out, the RTC report saying that neither my wife or I had done anything wrong and had detailed millions of dollars in explanations showing that. The other thing was that I am -in the last couple of years, I had to come to terms with a lot of things. I prayed a lot; I thought a lot; I sought a lot of advice. I had a lot of help from really good people, here and around the world. A lot of the people I served with, world leaders, called and talked to me. Are you surprised at that? I was touched by it beyond belief. Some of the conversations I had with people like Nelson Mandela, I have carried with me all my life. They were there for you? And that was part of the-- But here-but also, letters I got from, you know, kids around America. You would not believe the letters I got from-- And letters I got from religious leaders and people that taught philosophy and thought about these things. It was just-and I also had a lot of counseling, a lot of help from these ministers who came in and met with me, and my wife and daughter had a lot to do with it Hillary and Chelsea had a lot to do with it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2320, "text": "Are you hurt by the Dick Morrises, the Stephanopouloses who write books, who write columns, become part of the media sometimes, in Morris's case, often a very critical- a guy you were pretty close to? Does that hurt you? Well, first of all, I am very grateful for the overwhelming loyalty that I have enjoyed from people who could have made a lot of money by dumping on me because that is what sells and the kind of media culture they were in. And I have enjoyed an extraordinary degree of it. I have also had a lot of stability. A lot of people have stayed with me the whole time. So let me start with my gratitude. When Dick first started going on television and saying those things, he used to call somebody here in the office and apologize in advance and just say, You know, I have got to do this. It is the only way I can get on television. I know that. And so it is hard for me to take it seriously. I think that a lot of the things that he has said, he knows downright are not true, and I feel bad for him because I think you pay a terrible price when you do that over and over and over again. You feel bad for him? I feel really bad for him. And he is said a lot of things that he just knows are not so. And so I feel badly for him. But I do not -I cannot be mad at him. With George, it is a different story. But when George entered politics, he entered as a boy wonder. He came right in with Dick Gephardt, you know, and he assumed great responsibilities because he is a person of-he works like crazy, and he is smart, and he is basically good-hearted in a lot of ways. I remember when I was attacked in the New Hampshire primary, and everybody said, He is dead, and he ought to get out, and all that, George was asking, Well, should we withdraw? And James Carville and I, who grew up in the country, you know, out there with the folks, we looked at him and said, George, if the people want me to withdraw, they will withdraw me at election time. That is what you have got elections for. And I think that-I think he is probably more comfortable now being a part of the professional critics of the Washington establishment, the media establishment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2321, "text": "That is where he started in politics, and I think that is just where he is. Do those pundits in general bother-do they get at you? Some guy-Truman wrote that famous note when he got mad. I have got that note, you know. You have the actual note? One of the great little stories of my Presidency is Steve Forbes gave me that letter that Truman wrote. I have always been grateful to him. SOB he called that writer. Yes, he said, You will need a new nose, a lot of beefsteak for black eyes, and perhaps a --- Do you ever watch ENTITY Live or Meet The Press or somebody-do you get mad? No, the truth is I never watch them. I never watch the Sunday talk shows. And the only time I ever see any of these other programs is if I am channel surfing late at night and I happen to run into them. I watch your program sometimes when you are interviewing somebody I want to hear from. But basically, you do not turn on Meet The Press or And if I did, what good would that do me? If someone-if I read a column, like an op-ed column, of someone who says, I think the ENTITY administration policy is all wet on this for these reasons, I read that, because Benjamin Franklin said, Our critics are our friends. They show us our faults. But I cannot-you cannot afford to be angry as ENTITY. If you are angry all the time over things people say about you-you can be angry about what happens to the American people. But if you are angry about what happens to you, then you are wasting a lot of time and emotional energy that belongs to the American people. And you are not going to make good decisions. So nothing really good can come with that. You really feel like an employee of the people? We will be back with some more moments with ENTITY from the Cabinet Room in the White House. We are back with ENTITY. I want to read something that was given to me today. The last time-not the last time, we have been together many times, but the night Vince Foster died, you were on television together, in this building. We were the last two to know about it. We were going to go another half hour, and McLarty came on and said, You cannot do it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2322, "text": "But anyway, that aside, the last question to you that night was called in by someone asking you, even though you had only been a year, less than a year in office, what do you think your legacy will be? I will be happy to tell you. Number two, I'd like to provide health security for all Americans. Number three, I want my national service plan to pass to open doors of college education to millions of Americans. Number four, I strongly want to pass a welfare reform bill that will move people from welfare to work. And five, I want to reform the political system. Reading this, how have you done? And we have made-we have done some really good things in health care; we just have not been able to have universal access. And I finally got-I am very proud of this- we had 100 percent of my party vote for the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform. So we now have unified the Democratic Party for our campaign finance reform, and it is just a question of whether the other party will come along now. We have done a lot of other things as well, and we have been able to advance the cause of peace in Northern Ireland, the Middle East, the Balkans. I am sorry we were not able to have more progress in health care, but we may have some this year. The main thing is I feel this enormous gratitude because I think our country is ending this century on such a high note, and I really do think we built our bridge to the 21st century. And are you going to campaign for Hillary? But I think that there is a time for that. I think in the beginning people want to know who she is, what she believes, what she will do as a Senator, and they will want to see her. And I need to be as supportive of her as I can. There will come a time when I can perhaps help her in the campaign. The people of New York have been wonderful to me, and I am very grateful for that. But they want to make an independent judgment about her, so I have to be careful about when I do it and how I do it. But if and when I can help, I will do whatever I can to help, because first of all, for her, I want her to win. It would be such a gift for the people of New York and America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingcnnslarrykinglive", "title": "Interview With Larry King of CNN's Larry King Live", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-cnns-larry-king-live", "publication_date": "22-12-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2323, "text": "As you know, there is a lot of mistrust in the country about what the government does, why it does it. On Friday, the SEC, headed by a chair you appointed, accused Goldman Sachs of securities fraud just as the financial regulation reform debate was heating up in the Senate. What do you say to people out there who say there was something fishy and political about that? Well, what I'd say is that I gave a speech about financial regulatory reform in 2007 before our current crisis, in 2008, before we fully knew what this crisis was going to be. We released financial reform as a package over a year ago. And so we are not Johnny-come-latelies to this thing. We have been pushing this hard throughout. And the SEC is an entirely independent agency that we have no day-to-day control over. And they have never discussed with us anything with respect to the charge that will be brought. So this notion that somehow there would be any attempt to interfere in an independent agency is completely false. So you can say categorically, no winks, no heads up in advance, no signal from anyone? We found out about it on CNBC. In the 2008 campaign, you got a lot of money, about $1 million from employees of Goldman Sachs. Your former White House counsel Greg Craig is apparently going to represent Goldman Sachs. In light of this case, do either of those things embarrass you? First of all, I got a lot of money from a lot of people. And the vast majority of the money I got was from small donors all across the country. And moreover, anybody who gave me money during the course of my campaign knew that I was on record, again, in 2007, 2008, pushing very strongly that we needed to reform how Wall Street did business. And so nobody should be surprised in the position that I am taking now, because it is one that I was very clear about during the course of the campaign. As far as my former White House counsel Greg Craig, he is one of the top lawyers in the country. He has a range of clients. But we have the toughest ethics rules that any president has ever had. And the one thing that he knows is is that he cannot talk to the White House, he cannot lobby the White House. Once he left the White House, he cannot in any way use his former position to have any influence on us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharwoodcnbc", "title": "Interview With John Harwood of CNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harwood-cnbc", "publication_date": "21-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2324, "text": "And so neither of those things, I think, are going to have any bearing on how we move forward on this issue of Wall Street reform. But the circumstance of him representing Goldman Sachs in this case, in light of the federal action, is not a problem in itself. He is a top lawyer who is being hired to deal with an investigation that is ongoing. Let me ask you a broader question about Wall Street. Should average Americans think about big Wall Street institutions the way that some come to think about tobacco companies? That is, companies whose core activities are harmful to the country? I think that, and I have said this repeatedly, we have to have a thriving financial sector, because, essentially, part of what is made America so successful is our ability, if we have got a dream and we want to go get some financing for the next Apple computer, the next iPod, the next, you know, invention out there, that we are able to go and get investors to finance our dream and make it happen. So we have got to have a thriving and effective financial sector. But we also have to have basic rules of the road in place to make sure that investors, consumers, shareholders, the economy as a whole are protected against excess, are protected against wild gambles that are taken purely because it is good for somebody's year-end bonus as opposed to because there is some economic function that actually contributes to society as a whole. And I think that throughout our history, there have been times where the financial sector swung way out of balance. That is part of what happened back in the 1930s and 1929 after the crash, and FDR came in place and said, we are going to set up some rules so that we do not have bank runs, so that there is not wild speculation. We have gotten into one of those places where we need to update those rules of the road. And if we do so, not only is that good for the economy, not only does it protect consumers and investors, it is also good for the financial sector, because it will rebuild trust, and people will have confidence that when they are dealing with banks, when they are dealing with these institutions, that they in fact are playing it straight, above board, and they are competing on the basis of who is providing the best services and the best products as opposed to who is got the most creative accounting rules or who is able to concoct the wildest derivatives that may serve no economic function whatsoever", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharwoodcnbc", "title": "Interview With John Harwood of CNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harwood-cnbc", "publication_date": "21-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2325, "text": "Some of the institutions and their lobbyists do not seem to think it would be so good for them. They have made out very well under a regime in which, when things were going well, they were making huge profits. And when things did not go well and everything crashed, taxpayers were left footing the bill. I, and I think a vast majority of Americans, think it is unacceptable to have a situation in which tails you win and heads I lose. And taxpayers have been put in the position where they had to make a choice a couple of years ago, either we let the entire economy crash because of irresponsibility on Wall Street, or alternatively we end up having to pony up money. The core of the Wall Street reforms that we are proposing is to make sure, number one, that we do not have to bail out firms if they acted recklessly, that we can unwind them in an orderly fashion that protects the economy as a whole and taxpayers are not on the hook. Number two, that instruments like derivatives, very complicated instruments that are hugely leveraged and can put everybody at risk -- what Warren Buffett called financial weapons of mass destruction -- that those are all put in an exchange, in a clearinghouse so that everybody knows exactly what is going on. And again, taxpayers are not on the hook. And that we have got very strong consumer protections so that we do not have people being fooled or tricked into instruments that end up putting in a very difficult financial situation and erode the health of the economy as a whole. When you spoke in New York a few months ago to a lot of those Wall Street executives, you urged them, even in the absence of a law, to take to heart the need to change the way they do business. Have they done that? I mean, look, I think that you do not want to paint with too broad a brush. I do think that there is a sense of, now that the crisis is over, let us go back to business as usual. And what I have been saying consistently is, we have to change business as usual so that financial institutions are still making a profit, they are still providing excellent service to companies, there is still innovation, there is still dynamism. We want to make sure that the core functions in the free market are working, but that we do not find ourselves in the kind of crisis situation that we found ourselves in a year and a half ago.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharwoodcnbc", "title": "Interview With John Harwood of CNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harwood-cnbc", "publication_date": "21-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2326, "text": "Sometimes with all the rhetoric, which is pretty strong on both sides, it is hard to sort out the actual disagreements on policy. Your side, you have said that the other side is trying to weaken the legislation at the behest of special-interest lobbyists. Senator Lincoln proposed derivatives rules that went further than what your administration proposed. Does that mean that your administration in the first instance knuckled under to a special-interest lobbyist? This has to do with derivatives, the issue that I just raised. And the core principle that I have put forward is that when you have got these complex financial instruments, they should be in a clearinghouse, an exchange, like the stock market, where taxpayers are not on the hook if one party in that situation goes belly up, that the other financial players are the ones who are covering any losses, that everybody knows exactly what is going on. And if we had that kind of transparency, then those things can potentially serve a function. United Airlines can hedge against buying fuel, because they do not know what oil prices are going to be like six months from now. So as long as we have got that kind of transparency and accountability, then we are meeting that core principle. What about that financial institutions can own those derivatives? I think Senator Lincoln has a range of good proposals in terms of derivatives. I think what we put forward met that core principle. And I am confident that what we are going to see in the next several weeks is a bill that, at the end, enshrines that principle, that if you are going to operate with derivatives, you have got to make sure that you are an open book, everybody knows what is going on, and we are not going to see a replication of the kinds of crises that we have seen before. Let us talk about taxes. You have got to have a tax bill this year; otherwise, when those Bush tax cuts expire, taxes will go up for everybody. Is there any way that you would accept, either on a temporary basis or a partial temporary basis, the preservation of some of those Bush tax cuts for the top end? I do not think we can afford it. Look, I just paid my taxes, and I had a pretty healthy bill. I am sympathetic to the fact that people would prefer paying fewer taxes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharwoodcnbc", "title": "Interview With John Harwood of CNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harwood-cnbc", "publication_date": "21-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2327, "text": "That is part of the reason why, as part of the Recovery Act, we cut taxes for 98 percent of working families, because we thought it was important in a recession to make sure people got a little bit of help. But as we go forward, if we are going to be fiscally disciplined, we have got to do two things. We have got to cut programs that are not working and show the strength. And that is why, for example, I put a three-year freeze on discretionary spending, something that previous presidents had not done, because we have got to hold the line on spending. And I have proposed a range of cuts on all kinds of things. So if Congress sent you a bill extending tax cuts to any extent for those above 250,000, you'd veto it? Well, I am not going to get into vetoes right now. What I will tell you is that it is sensible for us to say that if you make more than $250,000 a year, going back to the tax rates that existed under Bill Clinton are perfectly fair. For us to extend them would mean hundreds of billions of dollars of lost revenue at a time when everybody says we have got to make sure that we are dealing with our deficit. Well, speaking of the deficit, in early 2011, some of your advisers think it is time with the economy getting better for a serious assault on the deficit. Should Americans think of your promise not to raise taxes for anyone under $200,000 as lasting for the entirety of your presidency, you would never accept tax increases for that group? Or is it something for the initial phase of your presidency, now you take account again of where the deficit is and make a different decision? Over the last decade, the wages and incomes of ordinary families have flat-lined at best. So middle-class families have been seeing a bigger and bigger burden as health-care costs go up, college costs go up. And the fact of the matter is is that their wages and incomes fail to match up. So they needed some help, they needed some relief. That is why I wanted to cut taxes for them. Where you have seen huge growth of incomes and wages is at the top end. That is why I think letting the Bush tax cuts phase out made some sense.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharwoodcnbc", "title": "Interview With John Harwood of CNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harwood-cnbc", "publication_date": "21-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2328, "text": "Now, the thing I did not anticipate up until a few months before my election was the fact that we were going to be in such a deep crisis that I'd be inheriting a $1.3 trillion deficit, $8 trillion worth of accumulated national debt that we are going to have to deal with. And that is why I have appointed this bipartisan fiscal commission to give me recommendations in terms of, how do we deal with this in a serious way moving forward. So in effect, that changes the terms of your promise in the campaign, because of that worsening deficit situation? I believe that we should be able to solve this problem without putting a burden on middle-class families. I believe that we should be able to make sure that we do not burden middle-class families further. Having said that, I am also going to wait for the fiscal commission to provide me what their best recommendations are. Because the one thing that I think all of us agree on is that we are currently on an unsustainable path, and that means that we are going to have to have a tax system that works better for everybody and is simplified. That means that we have got to get control of entitlement reform. And by the way, health-care reform went a long way towards doing that. But we are also going to have to look at Social Security and the other aspects of entitlements. It means that we are going to have to cut out waste in the system. But at a certain point, what we have got to do is match up money going out and money coming in. And right now, we have got a huge structural debt that I inherited and that the recession made worse. We are going to have to solve that. And that means that I do not want to pre-judge what this commission is going to come up with. I want to take a look and see what they propose. If reducing consumption is a good idea, could you see the potential for a value-added tax in this country? You know, I know that there is been a lot of talk around town lately about the value-added tax. That is something that has worked for some countries, it is something that would be novel for the United States. And before, you know, I start saying this makes sense or that makes sense, I want to get a better picture of what our options are.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharwoodcnbc", "title": "Interview With John Harwood of CNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harwood-cnbc", "publication_date": "21-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2329, "text": "And my first priority is to figure out, how can we reduce wasteful spending so that, you know, we have a baseline of the core services that we need and the government should provide, and then we decide, how do we pay for that, as opposed to figuring out how much money can we raise, and then not have to make some tough choices on the spending side. You say you are going to pick a Supreme Court choice by the end of May. You have got a lot of qualified candidates out there, but some would provoke bigger fights than others because of legal decisions, things they have written, their personal background, whatever. Are you taking account of the size of the fight that a nominee would propose in making your selection, given all the other things you are trying to do? I think the main thing I am thinking about was true when I selected Justice Sotomayor, is, who can do a great job on the court? Who can look at a range of really complicated issues and adhere to the law and fidelity to the Constitution? But who is also somebody who has the kind of life experience so that they understand how their decisions are impacting ordinary people? And you are right, we have got some terrific candidates. I am confident in the next couple of weeks we are going to be able to make a decision, and it is going to be somebody who will be confirmable, that I think both conservative and liberals, you know, who are familiar with these individual's legal background will say are imminently qualified for the court. And I expect a smooth confirmation process. Some people think you are a little cocky sometimes, so I am going to invite you to be self-critical. You have seen all aspects of the presidency -- the demands, private persuasion, public communication, decision-making. What do you think are the aspects of the job you are best suited for? What do you need to get better at? And how might that change your approach to the job? Well, you know, this last year and a half has been, I think, by any historical standard, a pretty exceptional year and a half, where we have had to make some very tough decisions very quickly in less-than-optimal conditions. You had an economy that was crashing, we had to make some very fast decisions. Some of those decisions were very unpopular. When I look at what we have done well, I think the core decisions we have made have been the right ones.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohnharwoodcnbc", "title": "Interview With John Harwood of CNBC", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-harwood-cnbc", "publication_date": "21-04-2010", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2330, "text": "Tonight we are going to illuminate the bridge in blue because blue is my father's favorite color. And I think it'll put a smile on his face. In terms of having concerns about people coming here from other states, are there anything, sort of protocols, you can put in place? I know it is much harder to do by people traveling by car, but is there anything the state can do to really make sure there is not- What other states did, if you remember in the beginning, when they were afraid of New Yorkers going there, they did a mandatory quarantine. That if New Yorkers traveled to their state, they had to quarantine for two weeks. We are not there yet, but it is just a great point of irony that when we start this situation, the other states said, No, we do not want New Yorkers coming here. Federal government was talking about blockading New York and not allowing New Yorkers to leave. That is what they were talking about. Now, it would have been illegal, unconstitutional, and it would have started a civil war, but I do not know that any of those things is ever stopped the federal government before. They wanted to blockade New York. The other states wanted to make sure no New Yorkers went to their state. We have the lowest infection rate. And my health officials are saying, We hope people from Florida do not come here. How many businesses did you call and what kind of reception did you get? What kind of reception did you get from business owners that you called about shutting down and staying shut down? People send me texts and videos and pictures. And they were sending me texts and videos of particular restaurants and bars at particular times. We got over 25,000 complaints from people, which is a very interesting phenomenon, by the way. We have never gotten 25,000 complaints. Sometimes when I say something really absurd, but not even 25,000. So now they see a business doing the wrong thing, they snap a picture, right? Everybody has a phone and a camera. They snap a picture. They are doing complaints, 25,000 complaints. Some of them actually text them to me. So I made a few phone calls and said to restaurant owners, bar owners, What are you doing? We have the guidelines. I am looking at a picture of your establishment taken 25 minutes ago. I am looking at a picture of your establishment, taken 25 minutes ago, and people are violating everything.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnygovernorandrewcuomojune15pressconferencetranscript", "title": "NY Governor Andrew Cuomo June 15 Press Conference Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/ny-governor-andrew-cuomo-june-15-press-conference-transcript", "publication_date": "15-06-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Cuomo"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2331, "text": "You are violating the rules. What are you doing? And look, the state is going to enforce the rules, the state licenses bars and restaurants for a liquor license, state liquor authority. You can lose your liquor license. You lose your liquor license, that is serious. So I just wanted to make sure they knew the laws and the rules. I wanted to make sure they knew that the state was going to be sending out inspectors. And even their patrons do not respect it. The people of the state know what they did. They know the sacrifice they made over 106 days to get that virus down. And they do not want anyone's irresponsibility to jeopardize that. I have been with people, somebody walks by does not have a mask, they are outraged. There are a lot of conscientious people who paid a very high price, did the right thing and they do not want other people ruining it for them. What kind of response did you get from business owners? They would say, We told people. Was their best response, but what does that mean? We told people? They are your patrons, in your establishment, you are responsible. ENTITY, how would social distancing be enforced on the bike path? Like any other path, like any other park, stay six feet apart when you cannot wear a mask. Do you want to answer, ENTITY? As an example today, when we opened the path, we are going to have staff all across the shared use path to make sure reinforcing that people need to stay socially distancing. We also have signage out there as well. ENTITY, Kiryas Joel confirmed to us that several private schools have reopened under the phase two religious gathering allowance. We have also have videos of dozens of kids going in, buses with backpacks and masks. There is also another video we got a huge wedding at KJ last weekend with hundreds in attendance. Orange County says Kiryas Joel is in state's police's jurisdiction, why is not state police enforcing your executive order? Well, first, local governments have the primary responsibility for enforcement. And I have said a number of times, local governments have to do their job. I have taken responsibility for every bad decision and every unpopular decision, right? I am the one who sets all these rules. Everybody's angry at me. The one thing I need the local government to do is actually enforce them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnygovernorandrewcuomojune15pressconferencetranscript", "title": "NY Governor Andrew Cuomo June 15 Press Conference Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/ny-governor-andrew-cuomo-june-15-press-conference-transcript", "publication_date": "15-06-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Cuomo"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2332, "text": "Now, they do not want to enforce them because they are not popular. Nobody wants to go to the bar and say, you guys have to wear a mask. You guys, guys being gender neutral, are violating the social distancing. I get it. But they have to do their job. Any religious group, any community, they have to do their job. If they need backup help by the state police because they cannot handle it, then we will provide state police backup help, but they have to do their job. I cannot use the state police everywhere in this state. We do not have enough state police. I need the local governments to do their job. One more then we are going to cut a ribbon. Hey, ENTITY, in chatting with any of the restaurant owners or bar owners about lack of social distancing and not wearing masks, did any of them counter to you by saying, Well, where is your call on your request to the protestors who had been gathering and not really social distancing and in some cases wearing masks? Should not the rules be the same for the protestors as they are for the bar owners and restaurant owners? They did not say that because they listened to my briefings. And because I have said to the protestors on a number of occasions, you should be wearing masks. And by the way, I said to the police, you should be wearing masks, even on a symbolic level. You want other people to comply with the law, you are going to enforce the law, adhere to the law. ENTITY, can you give us your impression of the bridge path. And do you think it will have an impact on the black Rockland economy? I think, and I will ask ENTITY to chime in because he sees it more closely. I think the bridge has had a tremendous positive impact on the entire regional economy. It is better for the environment. It is saving money. People are coming to restaurants, et cetera, just to see the bridge, especially before this ENTITY situation. There are other pedestrian passes on the Hudson that attract people just to walk over the Hudson. They are just a pedestrian path and people, by the thousands, go just to walk over the Hudson. Here, you can walk over the Hudson on a beautiful bridge, you can see New York City to the South, the Hudson Valley to the North.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnygovernorandrewcuomojune15pressconferencetranscript", "title": "NY Governor Andrew Cuomo June 15 Press Conference Transcript", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/ny-governor-andrew-cuomo-june-15-press-conference-transcript", "publication_date": "15-06-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Cuomo"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2333, "text": "We appreciate you taking the time, and we appreciate your commitment to answer our questions. We really appreciate that. Over the years, I have heard you talk about your adherence to a philosophy called positive thinking. Is this the mantra that if you believe something, if you visualize it, then it will happen? I also think in terms of the downside. I have been given a lot of credit for positive thinking, but I also think about downside because only a fool does not . To what extent do you think that that positive thinking mindset is suitable to handling the worst pandemic that we have seen in a century? I think you have to have a positive outlook. Otherwise, you would have nothing without a positive outlook. I think we have done an incredible job, between the ventilators and stopping very infected people from China coming in, meaning putting the ban on China, which frankly nobody wanted me to do, practically nobody because it was very early in January. When you put a ban on Europe, that is a big thing. We would have probably lost hundreds of thousands of lives more had I not done that. And all of the experts, every one of them, not one of them wanted to do it. Three months later, they are all saying, I am glad you did it. The criticism of you that is most prominent, is about the communication. It is the public health experts saying that it needs to be based in reality. And they are saying that the wishful thinking and the salesmanship is just not suitable in a time when the pandemic has killed 145,000 Americans. And I understand what you are saying, that people need to hear positive thinking, but for the past five months it is been, the virus is totally under control, and the cases have been going up and the deaths have been going up. But you have been saying it is under control. Nobody knew what this thing was all about. 1917, but it was a totally different, it was a flu in that case. And by the way, if you watch the fake news on television, they do not even talk about it. But you know, there are 188 of the countries right now that are suffering, some proportionately far greater than we are. Right now, right now, Spain is having a big spike. You look at Moscow, look at what is going on with Moscow. Look at Brazil, look at these countries what is going on.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2334, "text": "This was sent to us by China, one way or the other, and we are never going to forget it. Believe me, we are never going to forget it. And we were beating China at every single point. We were beating them on trade, we were making progress like nobody's ever made progress. Before the pandemic, they had the worst year, Jonathan, that they have had in 67 years. You know that. With the tariffs and everything else I did, we would taking in billions of dollars. I was giving some of it to the farmers. The farmers were doing well because they were targeting the farmers, I was targeting China. Then all of a sudden, the game changed, and I had to close it down. I closed down the greatest economy ever in history. And then, I closed it down. And now we are opening it. And we saved, by the way, by closing it down, we saved millions of lives. If we would have gone to herd and we knew very little about the disease, if we would've gone herd, we would have lost millions of people, millions of people. We are at 140,000 people. We are at 140. We would have lost millions of people. And those people that really understand it, they really understand it. They said, it is incredible the job that we have done. And again, I bring it up, the ban- Who says that? By the time you banned China, it came in through Europe. Nobody knew the extent. But the question is, Mr. President, by June we knew things were bad. And the last time I was with you was the day before your Tulsa rally in the Oval, and you were saying big, huge crowd, it was endorsed. These people, they listen to you. By the way, Excuse me, Jonathan, we had a 19,000 seat stadium and first of all, we had 12,000 people, not 6,000, which you reported and other people reported. It was like an armed camp. Because they had 120 Black Lives Matter people there and Tulsa- I understand but why would you have wanted a huge crowd? And Tulsa, well, because that area was a very good area at the time. That is a month later, but Tulsa was a very good, Oklahoma was doing very well as a state. We had a tremendous crowd, we had tremendous response. It was like an armed camp. You could not get anybody in.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2335, "text": "But we had 12,000 people. The other thing we had that nobody wants to talk about, so Fox broadcast it. It was the highest rating in the history of Fox television Saturday night. You are saying something. That speech was the highest rated speech in the history of Fox television on Saturday night. And nobody says that. I think you misunderstand me. I am not criticizing your ability to draw a crowd. Are you kidding me? I have covered you for five years. You draw massive crowds. You get huge ratings. I am asking about the public health I am just saying this. I am just saying this. At the time And I canceled another one. I had to cancel it and we were going to have a great crowd in New Hampshire, and I canceled it for the same reason. I have covered you for a long time. I have gone to your rallies. I have talked to your people. They love you. They listen to you. They listen to every word you say, they hang on your every word. They do not listen to me or the media or Fauci. They want to get their advice from you. And so, when they hear you say, everything's under control, do not worry about wearing masks. I mean, these are people, many of them are older people, Mr. President. Well, what is your definition of control? It is giving them a false sense of security. Under the circumstances right now, I think it is under control. I will tell you what- But that does not mean we are not doing everything we can. It is under control as much as you can control it. This is a horrible plague that beset us. You really think this is as much as we can control it? Well, I will tell you, I'd like to know if somebody First of all, we have done a great job. We have gotten the governors everything they needed, they did not do their job. Many of them did not and some of them did. We will talk about the successful ones, the good ones. We had good and bad. And we had a lot in the middle, but we had some incredible governors. I could tell you right now who the great ones are and who the not so great ones are, but the governors do it. We gave them massive amounts of material. President, you changed your message this week, in terms of you canceled the Jacksonville convention, you said, Wear a mask.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2336, "text": "You are saying that, It is going to get worse before it gets better. And you said that. You understand that. If I could just finish my question. The question is, even some of your own aides wonder whether you would stick to that message until Election Day, whether in a week or two, you will not say, Right, we have got to reopen again. We cannot do this stuff anymore. That you will get bored of talking about the virus and go back to that sort of cheerleading. I never get bored of talking about this, it is too big a thing. So will you stick to that message? And again, it should have been stopped by China, and it was not . We have it here. We have 140,000 people at this moment. And what you have to do, is handle it the best it can be handled. And again, I am working with the governors. I got them tremendous amounts of equipment that they would have never gotten. Jonathan, they would not have equipment now, if I did not get. When can you commit, by what date, that every American will have access to the same day testing that you get here in the White House? Well, we have great testing. Let me explain the testing. We have tested more people than any other country, than all of Europe put together times two. We have tested more people than anybody ever thought of. India has 1.4 billion people. They have done 11 million tests. We have done 55, it'll be close to 60 million tests. And there are those that say, you can test too much. You do know that. Who says that? What testing does- What testing does, it shows cases. Nobody has done it like we have done it. We have gotten absolutely no credit for it. But we have come up with so many different tests. The only thing that we have now is some people have to wait longer than we'd like them to. We want it- We want point to point. We want to have a five minute to a 15 minute test. Every American-   And, from what I understand, we are close to 50% where it is point to point tests. We are making thousands of instruments, thousands of tests right now, tens of thousands that can be distributed to various parts of the country. And we have even sent some of them to other countries where they had a big problem.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2337, "text": "Jonathan, almost 50%, in fact, I think the number might be over, is immediate testing. You take a test. You have to send it to a laboratory. Let us say that takes a day. There is nothing you can do about that. But when do you think you will have it for everyone? I think that you will have that relatively soon. What does that mean? You already have half. I would much rather get back to you. Because I do not want to have you write in one month, I did not make it. I missed it by a day. I get it. President, I want to talk about the federal intervention. One thing I would say about testing. Because we test so much, we show cases. So, we show many, many cases. We show tremendous number of cases. I know you are smiling when I say that, but I am telling you. Well, I mean, I have heard you say this. So, they do not show case. I was not going to continue on the testing, but you said it. So, we are testing so much because it is spread so far in America. We are testing so much because we had the ability to test. Because we came up with test- Jonathan, we did not even have a test. When I took over, we did not even have a test. Why would you have a test? We did not have a test because there was no test. And, in a very short order, we got one test. We got another test. We got another. Many of those tests are now obsolete because it is called science. But, because we tested so many people, 55, 60 million people, very soon, we get cases. Some kid has even just a little runny nose. And then, you report many cases. So, we look like we have more cases than massive countries like China, which by the way, does not report, as you know. Well, I do not put any stock in China's figures. The point is, because we are so much better at testing than any other country in the world, we show more cases. If you look at death- And, if you look at death per- Well, right here, United States is lowest in numerous categories. We are lower than the world. We are lower than Europe. What does that mean? Oh, you are doing death as a proportion of cases. I am talking about death as a proportion of population.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2338, "text": "That is where the U.S. is really bad, much worse than South Korea, Germany, et cetera. You cannot do that. Why cannot I do that? You have to go by the cases. What it says is, when you have somebody where there is a case- The people that live from those cases. It is surely a relevant statistic to say, if the U.S. has X population and X percentage of death of that population versus South Korea- Because you have to go by the cases. You do not know that. You do not know that. You think they are faking their statistics, South Korea? I will not get into that because I have a very good relationship with the country. But you do not know that. And they have spikes. You take the number of cases. I do not know what we are first in. We have the best. And we have cases because of the testing. I understand on the cases, it is different. No, but you are not reporting it correctly, Jonathan. If you take a look at this other chart look, this is our testing. We do more tests. Well, do not we get credit for that? And, because we do more tests, we have more cases. In other words, we test more. We have now, take a look. You deserve to be praised for testing. Plus, 60,000 Americans are in hospital, 1,000 dying a day. If you watch the news or read the papers, they usually talk about new cases, new cases, new cases. I am talking about death. Well, you look at death. It went down to 500. It is gone down in Arizona. It is going down in Florida. It is going down in Texas. It is going down in Florida? That is my report, as of yesterday. Anyway, Mr. President, if I could change subjects. It is going down in Arizona. It is gong down in Texas. Texas has big problems. It spiked and is now going down in Florida. It is evened out and going down in Florida. I will have to see those figures. But you have to look at this. This is the number of tests compared to the rest of the world. I do not deny your figures. You have done more tests by far than the rest of the world. I do not deny that. And, because we have done more tests, we have more cases. You have more infections.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2339, "text": "Now, you can take them back. President, different subject, it is been widely reported that the U.S. has intelligence indicating that Russia paid bounties or offered to pay bounties to Taliban fighters to kill American soldiers. You had a phone call with Vladimir Putin on July 23rd. Did you bring up this issue? That was a phone call to discuss other things. I think a lot of people. If you look at some of the wonderful folks from the Bush Administration, some of them, not any friends of mine, were saying that it is a fake issue. But a lot of people said, it is a fake issue. But we had a call. We had a call talking about nuclear proliferation. Which is a very big subject where they would like to do something. We discussed numbers things. We did not discuss that. And you have never discussed it with him. I have never discussed it with him. I'd have no problem with it. But you do not believe the intelligence. It is because you do not believe the intelligence. Nobody ever brings up China. They always bring Russia, Russia, Russia. If we can do something with Russia in terms of nuclear proliferation, which is a very big problem. A much bigger problem than global warming in terms of the real world, that would be a great thing. It never reached my desk. It was in your written brief though about it. If it reached my desk, I would have done something about it. It never reached my desk because- Do you read your written brief? I read it a lot. I read a lot. I read a lot. You read your daily intelligence brief? I comprehend extraordinarily well, probably better than anybody that you have interviewed in a long time. I read a lot. I spend a lot of time at meetings. Because this was apparently in your- The world is a very angry place, if you look all over the world. I see a 22 soldiers were killed in India with China fighting over the border. It is been raging for many, many decades. I have so many briefings on so many different countries, but this one did not reach my desk. The reason I say this is, even if you do not believe this particular piece of intelligence, and there is dispute, no doubt, there is dispute in the intelligence committee about it, John Nicholson, former head of forces in Afghanistan said, and this is when he was working for you, that Russia is supplying weapons to the Taliban.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2340, "text": "Is not that enough to challenge Putin over the killings of U.S. soldiers? Well, we sold them weapons when they were fighting Russia too. When they were fighting with the Taliban in Afghanistan- I am just saying we did that too. I did not ask Nicholson about that. He was there for a long time. Did not have great success because he was there before me. And then, ultimately, I made a change. But you surely heard that. I mean, it is well known in the intelligence community, that they are arming the Taliban, Russia. Russia is supplying weapons and money to the Taliban. I have heard that but, again, it is never reached my desk. I mean, he said it on the record when he was in- Hey, Russia does not want anything to do with Afghanistan. Let me just say about Russia. Because of Afghanistan, they went bankrupt. The last thing that Russia wants to do is get too much involved with Afghanistan. They tried that once. And by the way, we are largely out of Afghanistan, as you probably know. Well, I wanted to ask you about that. The US troop level in Afghanistan right now is roughly the same as it was when you- We will be down in a very short It is already planned. We will be down in a very short period of time to 8,000, then we are going to be down to 4,000. We have been there for 19 years. But if you just let me finish my question. You boosted to 14,000, and now you are back down to 8,500. We will be at 4,000. I will get you the exact- I do not want to tell you that. I do not want to tell you. It is going down to 4,000. On election day, how many American troops will be in Afghanistan? That is almost as many as when you came into office. We had much more. We had a lot of people over there too. And we did a good job. We wiped out ISIS. Let me just tell you what you do not see. Have you thought about going down to zero? We took out, in Syria, we took out ISIS. We a hundred percent of the caliphate. When I took over Obama, it was totally rampant. ISIS was all over the place. We took them out. We captured them. We killed them a hundred percent, not 99%.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2341, "text": "I wanted to get out at 99. 99% was good, but a hundred percent of the caliphate. We took out Soleimani. We took out al-Baghdadi. We took out people that nobody thought possible. Al-Baghdadi was the biggest terrorist of them all. They could not find him. I took him out. I took him out. I have done things that no other president's done. They should have never been in the Middle East. The decision to go to the Middle East and get into the Middle East was the single biggest mistake made in the history of our country. You told Fox News recently that you could not say whether you'd accept the results of the 2020 election. What does that actually look like as the sitting president? What would that actually look like? Well, Hillary Clinton never accepted them. Well, she conceded on them. I mean, she does not accept them and she got beaten very easily. She conceded on election night. Now, she grumbled about it and said all sorts of- She wrote books about it. Okay, fine, she wrote books. She wrote books about it. I get it. I get it. I am not disputing you beat Hillary Clinton. Listen, what of asking is you will be the sitting president in the White House. What does that look like not accepting- I will tell you what it looks like. Let me tell you what it looks. So we have a new phenomena. It is called mail-in voting, where you send, where a governor- It is been here since the Civil War. They have never done anything like that. It will be bigger this year because of the pandemic. So they are going to send tens of millions of ballots to California, all over the place, to who is going to get them. I have a friend who lives in Westchester County- They send applications, not allots. He had a beautiful, wonderful son. He called me, he said, I just got a ballot for my son, Robert. Somebody got at ballot for a dog. Somebody got a ballot for something else. You got millions of ballots going, nobody even knows where they are going. You look at some of the corruption having to do with You have to apply, you have to go through a process. You have to apply for mail-in. Look, you are sending it out- Let us do concrete. Let us do concrete. You download them off You can get them off the internet.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2342, "text": "There is no way you can go through a mail-in vote without massive cheating. I honestly do not understand this topic with- The Republican party has an extremely well-funded vote by mail program. Your campaign puts out emails telling people to vote by mail. Your daughter-in-law, Lara Trump, she did robocalls in California saying it is safe and secure, mail-in voting. Let me tell you. We have no choice. Let me tell you. We have no choice because right now, we have, but we have many court cases that we are waiting. We have one filed in Western Pennsylvania. We have many court cases where we are trying to end it. We went through World War I, you went to the polls, you voted, we went through World War II, you went to the polls, you voted. You have had mail-in voting since the Civil War. And now because of the China virus, we are supposed to stay home, send millions of ballots all over the country, millions and millions. You know, you could have a case where this election will not be decided on the evening of November 3rd. What is wrong with that? It will not be two months, but what is wrong with the proper mail-in count? Have you discussed the- Because lots of things will happen during that period of time. Especially when you have tight margins, lots of things can happen. There is never been anything like this when you try Now, of course, right now, we have to live with it, but we are challenging it in many courts, as you know, all over the country. President, the other day, a reporter asked you about Ghislaine Maxwell. You said, I just wish her well, frankly. I have met her numerous times over the years, especially since I lived in Palm Beach, but I wish her well, whatever it is. President, Ghislaine Maxwell has been arrested on allegations of child sex trafficking. Why would you wish such a person well? Well, first of all, I do not know that, but I do know this- She is been arrested for that. You know that. She is now in jail. Yeah, I wish you well, I'd wish you well, I'd wish a lot of people well. So you are saying you hope she does not die in jail? Is that what you mean by wish her well?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2343, "text": "Well, her boyfriend died in jail and people are still trying to figure out how did it happened? And I do wish her well. I am not looking for anything bad for her. I am not looking bad for anybody. And they took that and made it such a big deal- He died in jail. I do, I wish her well. Let us move to Portland. I am sure you have seen the disturbing footage of people in fatigues beating the Navy veteran. It is not fake news, it is on video. Pepper spraying him. For 59 days, these people were anarchists and agitators, and some protesters, but these were anarchists. These people were beating the hell out of the city. They were beating up our federal buildings and our federal courthouse. We told the police to stop it. And the police would not do it. But your Inspector Generals are investigating unconstitutional- You are trying now to blame law enforcement instead of anarchists- It is Antifa and anarchists that are causing the problems, not law enforcement. Our law enforcement, if we did not have people at our courthouse, and they are strong, tough people, and they do not want They try and be very good, believe me. But if we did not have people there, you would have your federal courthouse, a $600 million building, you would have that thing burned to the ground right now. I am asking you about tactics and about the unmarked vans where they are rounding people up. Okay, let me tell you about unmarked. Can I just finish my question. Well let me tell you about unmarked. Could I just finish my question? Because it relates to this. This is from Rand Paul. We cannot give up liberty for security. Local law enforcement can and should be handling these situations in our cities, but there is no place for federal troops or unidentified federal agents rounding people up at will. What is your response to Senator Paul? First of all, these are Homeland Security people. They are securing a courthouse. Border, hopefully they have ICE in there. Hopefully they have ICE. Because these terrorists, these Antifa people, these people that are at anarchists and agitators, when they see the name on a uniform of a person, a policeman or a law enforcement person, they find out where that person lives. And then they go and they scare the hell out of the person's family. And so they do it for that reason. It is just common There is nothing secret about this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2344, "text": "And you know it. We have Chad Wolf. They have people. He is doing a fantastic job. He is doing a fantastic job. Chad Wolf has pickets and very dangerous looking people outside of his house. He is tough and he is got people, but if you have the names on all of these uniforms, you will have these maniacs in front of their houses, scaring their family and their wives or husbands, whatever it may be. I think it is a very good reason not to have your name. Why should you have identification? Do you support that investigation? Well, I have not seen the result yet. Let me see the result. But you support the initiative of it? Have you been watching television- Have you been watching television? Have you been seeing the violence? Now, if you watch NBC News like I watch NBC fake news. I am watching it. I am watching this NBC News sham, and you have a mayor named Wheeler and he is standing out there and he is being accosted by the people. You know that. I mean, it is horrible what they are doing to him in Portland, the mayor of Portland and he thought he'd go out. What they were doing and saying, and everything else to him, I happened to watch it on a different station. He had five security guards. I saw it. He got out with his life. If you watch NBC News, they make them like he is standing there bravely fighting with the people, in a positive sense, that everything is wonderful. He is lucky he got away with his life because they would've killed him. He had five guards, but NBC News showed it like he is standing with the people for justice. Look, those people, take a look at what they have done to the courthouse. Take a look at what they have done to the streets. We had a very good We have arrested a lot of people and we now have a 10 year rule. You try not to knock down our courthouse- You touch our courthouse, you go to jail for 10 years. Turning to the rest of the country, we have not seen protests like this since the '60s. If I could finish my question. If I could finish my question. And they are doing it for political reasons. You said you have done so much for African Americans. President, have you ever met with a Black Lives Matter activist to hear them out, hear their arguments?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2345, "text": "Well, Black Lives Matter started off to me very badly because it was- Did you ever meet with one? That was the first time I ever of Black Pigs is what they are referring to, in a blanket, fry them like bacon. So I got off to a bad start. I got off to a very bad start. Would you meet with a- Would you with a Black Lives Matter activist? Nobody's asked for a meeting, right? I have never been, nobody's ever asked me for a meeting. Let me tell you with African Americans, I am doing very well. They had the best employment numbers they have ever had. They had the best job numbers they have ever had. They were making more money than they ever made. We were all set until we got hit by China with the virus. Do you believe that- Do you believe though, Mr. President, that many police treat black people differently from white people? You have seen the statistics. The knee on the neck was a disgrace. I am talking about what does systemic racism mean to you? I hope the answer to that question is no. Does anybody really answer that question accurately? What is your cold-hearted view of it? Police have killed white people- I know, but why do you think Black men- in larger number, police have killed white people. In quantity, but why do you think Black men are two and a half times more likely to be killed by police than white men? but I do not like it. But you must've thought about it. I do not know why, but I do not like it. I do know this- Does it speak to something systemic? that police have killed many white people also. But proportionally, what does it speak to? It speaks to something, if that is the number? If that is the number, it speaks to something that to me is unacceptable. And what do you do about it then? Well, I think we have already done a lot of things- Let me just tell you. No, no, I understand your achievements. I know what you are going to say. I am not suggesting you have not done a lot economically- I have done a thing called criminal justice reform. I get it, I am just saying what changes- I am asking about a statistic. I got criminal justice - I get it. I get it. I got opportunities on, I took care of the historically Black", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2346, "text": "If you look at what I have done for colleges, for Black colleges and universities, I got them funding. Obama never did it. I did more for the Black community than anybody with the possible exception of Abraham Lincoln, whether you like it or not. You really believe you did more than Lyndon Johnson who passed the Civil Rights Act? I have done things. He passed the Civil Rights Act. If you take a look at what Lyndon Johnson did? Because frankly, it took a long time, but for African Americans- under my administration, Jonathan, under my administration, African Americans were doing better than they have ever done in the history of this country. So I did a lot, job numbers, all of it, money. They had money, they were getting great. and now you know what we are doing? I am building it up again. We are going to have it. Next year will be a great year, unless it is screwed up by somebody that does not know what he is doing, which could happen, but I do not think it will. John Lewis is lying in state in the U.S. Capitol. How do you think history will remember John Lewis? I do not know John Lewis. He chose not to come to my inauguration. He chose I never met John Lewis, actually, I do not believe. I cannot say one or the other. I find a lot of people impressive. He did not come to my inauguration. He did not come to my State of the Union speeches, and that is okay. And again, nobody has done more- for Black Americans than I have. I think he made a big mistake by not showing up. But taking your relationship with him out of it, do you find his story impressive? What he is done for this country? He was a person that devoted a lot of energy and a lot of heart to civil rights, but there were many others also. Would you support that idea? I would have no objection to it if they have like to do it. President, you have been so generous with your time and we really appreciate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsdonaldtrumpinterviewtranscriptwithaxiosonhbo", "title": "Donald Trump Interview Transcript With Jonathan Swan of Axios on HBO", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-interview-transcript-with-axios-on-hbo", "publication_date": "03-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Donald Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2354, "text": "I only have 20 minutes or thereabouts, so I have tried to write some concise questions. So, let me put it to you this way. The conservative revolt that Jack Kemp is leading appears to be a challenge to your leadership of the party. And I wonder if you think this is a decisive battle with the far right between the main body of the party? But, very frankly, I am surprised, because I think the issue is so clear cut that when the facts are explained, how they can continue resistance to this when we have protected entirely the tax cuts passed last year and when, in fact, this is less a tax increase than it is a tax reform. Only about 17 percent of this represents new taxes on the people, and 31 percent represents collecting money that we are duty bound to collect, because it is owed and presently not being paid. together, and I am wondering how you plan to restore this GOP unity and your own leadership amongst the so-called dissidents. They are so far on the wrong side right now that I think maybe it is up to them to restore it with me Is Jack Kemp now out of your coalition. I do not bear grudges or anything, no. He is been here to the leadership meetings, and he is heard my side. I realize how strongly he well, is almost, you might say, a purist to the extent that he just cannot see the difference between reform and increase. And if it were a case of this present tax reform which, incidentally, was not of our choosing. This was made necessary in order to get the spending cuts we are still trying to get. If it had resulted in altering the incentive tax cuts that we put in place, I could understand. I am just hard put to understand how he can continue to believe that this in some way represents a turn in my direction or philosophy, because it does not . Does what he is doing do you hold the theory of the allegation of what he is doing is his effort to buttress his own ambitions for the Presidency in 1984? No, I am not going to make any suppositions of that at all. You do not believe that? I will just accept it as a legitimate disagreement. Where are the Boll Weevils on this particular issue? They helped you very much last year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeremiaholearythewashingtontimesfederaltaxandbudgetreconciliation", "title": "Interview with Jeremiah O'Leary of the Washington Times on Federal Tax and Budget Reconciliation Legislation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeremiah-oleary-the-washington-times-federal-tax-and-budget-reconciliation", "publication_date": "13-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2355, "text": "Now, this is awfully I have been meeting with individuals and with groups from the Congress steadily for the last several days, and I have to tell you that this seems to me a more mixed situation, that there is division within these various groups, and I could not pin down exactly, rather than that one group that you just mentioned, Jack and that coterie that is a united group. I think there is a division in all the ranks Gypsy Moths, Boll Weevils, Republicans, Democrats on support of this. And what I have been doing in the meetings is simply trying to correct the misperception they have of it, and, in many cases, that is been successful, that they have come in with a misunderstanding of what we are trying to do. Well, I have never seen you work so hard as you have in the past 2 weeks. Do you think you have attained the 100 votes or near it that the Democrats say have to get before they will support it? All I can say is that everything indicates we are making progress. You do not want to predict victory yet? Are you going to keep this pace up all the way through Tuesday? You have not decided whether to go to the Nation on television yet? Well, we were talking about this early in the week, because, again, much of the press coverage, I think, has contributed to a misconception about this. And I, in these couple of trips that I have made out in the last few weeks into the country, I discovered that this constant drumbeat of biggest tax increase in history when it is nothing of the kind has well, the people are uninformed. And when I have had an opportunity, as I did in Billings, Montana, the other day, to explain what it is we are doing, I found then the people were in support. Well, why do you think the Conservative Republicans are resisting this bill so much? Is it because it taxes people who have not been paying and should have been, or because it reduces tax benefits on things like construction or things like cigarettes, dividend interest, or is this just an election-year reaction? I think it is, pretty much, an election-year reaction, and the idea that they may be portrayed as, now, supporting tax increases when we have been the party going the other way. Of course, I must say that some of those conservative voices I have to be frank and say they cannot be described as people who were followers and have abandoned me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeremiaholearythewashingtontimesfederaltaxandbudgetreconciliation", "title": "Interview with Jeremiah O'Leary of the Washington Times on Federal Tax and Budget Reconciliation Legislation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeremiah-oleary-the-washington-times-federal-tax-and-budget-reconciliation", "publication_date": "13-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2356, "text": "Some of them never were for me. I have read your letter, the last part of the letter. Do you feel that you have met your mandate to reduce spending and taxes, in view of the figures that the Wall Street Journal had? They said spending this year is 24.1 percent of the GNP, compared to 21.9 in the '75 recession, and 22.5 in the last Carter year, the GNP, now, being 24.1 higher than either of the previous recessions. Well, of course, you have got to recognize that in the depth of this recession, there had been a bigger dip in the percentagewise, also in the gross national product. What I am counting on we are going to get that percentage down. We think that the percentage has been too high for a number of years of gross national product. But we are talking about a normal gross national product also. We have had a long period in which the GNP has been going down, and only just recently, in this last quarter, did it show any increase at all. The percentage that we are aiming at is to reduce the percentage of increase in government spending each year. And, when we took office, it was running at 17 percent a year, increasing. Now, remember, on the other hand, we have an obligation that I accepted during the campaign of one area where there would be increased spending. And that was to rectify the damage that has been done to our national security and national defense. And, many times in the campaign, I was asked by people in question-and-answer sessions, and sometimes by the press, if I found that I came down to choice of balancing the budget or doing what needed to be done for national defense, which side would I come down on? And I said every time, On the side of national defense. And, incidentally, to audiences, when that was asked, that answer always received applause, which indicated to me that the American people have been well aware that our defenses had been allowed to deteriorate. Were you aware that Ed Meese 2 said yesterday in a speech here that the conservatives' way has not worked, and that now, quote, We have to try something else. Does that mean that the administration or yourself was reconsidering supply-side economics?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeremiaholearythewashingtontimesfederaltaxandbudgetreconciliation", "title": "Interview with Jeremiah O'Leary of the Washington Times on Federal Tax and Budget Reconciliation Legislation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeremiah-oleary-the-washington-times-federal-tax-and-budget-reconciliation", "publication_date": "13-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2357, "text": "And I think maybe he was talking about those same dissidents that you have been talking about there, and I'd like to see the whole framework or the manner in which it was asked or something. first of all, continued reduction in spending; at the same time, that for the economy's sake and to get it rolling again that we must also, as we can, reduce the percentage that government is taking in taxes from the people. Now, to that extent this is probably what Jack Kemp is relying on, that wherever it may come from, that this $99 billion now is coming from the private sector and going to government. You are certainly perceived as further to the center than Kemp is right now, or he is further to the right than you are, but You could not add the other, which is all important. It was made plain to us this year. We did not come in with the proposal to raise revenues. We came in with the proposal for more cutting of spending. And found out this time and crossing the aisle, Democrat and Republican we could not put together a coalition for the continued spending cuts unless we would agree to some added revenues. Now, when, over a 3 year period, those revenues turned out to be revenue increases $99 billion, $31 billion of which is money owed the Government not being collected and in that same 3 year period our tax cuts are going to bring in $406 3 billion to the people then I figured that the price was not too high in return for getting $280 billion in reduced outlays, $3 for every $1 of revenue. What is your opinion of the reported threat I do not know if it is a real threat or a reported threat that Republican National Committee campaign funds might be withheld from House candidates in November if they do not vote for this bill? Weft, I do not see that. I do not know that that is anything more than rumor. My own feeling is we I am going to do my best to campaign for Republicans and get Republicans in office here No matter how they vote on the tax bill? You and you go for the entire record. But there are large tax increases in the bill, although it is not entirely a tax bill although not on personal income. And I know you'd rather have what this cut pass. What was Larry's 4 word was we choked on it, I think.  But what is the rationale for cutting $17.5 billion from the Federal health and welfare programs?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeremiaholearythewashingtontimesfederaltaxandbudgetreconciliation", "title": "Interview with Jeremiah O'Leary of the Washington Times on Federal Tax and Budget Reconciliation Legislation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeremiah-oleary-the-washington-times-federal-tax-and-budget-reconciliation", "publication_date": "13-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2358, "text": "Because, here again, people automatically transfer that into a reduction of care for those who really need it. What we see these as, these cuts, are based on our estimates of how we can continue to give the necessary care but eliminate the fat that has grown in the program. When we reformed welfare in California, we found out that in the Medicaid program, for example, the Medicaid patients were averaging several times as long in a hospital for an operation as private patients were for the same operation. I think some of it was that it was easier for a doctor to just leave them there and see them on his morning rounds than to have an office call or a house call or something. It was not they had no reason to get out. The average patient, you or I in a hospital, we know the price of the room, and the first thing we start asking is, How soon can I go home? Well, where they have no concern, they were willing to convalesce. It is that type of thing that we think will result from the tightening in the amount of money. Are you convinced that this reduction of 17.5 will not do harm or damage to any of the people who have need of these services? Will you veto I know you do not like to forecast vetoes, but strong signals, let us say the urgent supplemental bill that is coming down, even though it contains the CBI as sort of a hostage? Let me say, you. This does not come out until Monday. you almost answered the question yourself. In principle, I have told the Congress I am going to veto budget busting bills, if I have to do that in order to make them match this tax increase with the cuts in spending that are supposed to be attached to it. But I do refrain from announcing a veto of any specific bill until it arrives on my desk and I see it. We all know what it is like now. Do you think you can get the CBI out of another CBI separate bill out of the Senate later? I wish that the President of the United States had the power that most Governors have in their own States, which is the right of line item veto. I will see if I cannot arrange that. I was going to talk only about taxes, but I hope you let me allow me as I terminate here one question about the Middle East.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjeremiaholearythewashingtontimesfederaltaxandbudgetreconciliation", "title": "Interview with Jeremiah O'Leary of the Washington Times on Federal Tax and Budget Reconciliation Legislation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jeremiah-oleary-the-washington-times-federal-tax-and-budget-reconciliation", "publication_date": "13-08-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2374, "text": "And first, I must congratulate you for your daughter's wedding. I know you are listening to your mom; I know you are a father, and you are having a daughter's wedding. You know something, I was emotional, and-because I was so happy and proud. And she is marrying a good guy, ENTITY. And we were out there on our ranch, which is a part of the world Laura and I love, and it was just a special evening, and it was great. You have given- we are going to Lebanon. You are giving Hizballah the choice of being terrorist organization or a political party. What do you think would prompt Hizballah to abandon its Why Hizballah claim the existence of legitimate concern for these weapons? I mean, it is hard for me to get inside Hizballah's head. I do know that they are destabilizing Lebanon. I do know that they were viewed at one time as the protectors against Israel, and now, in fact, they are turning against the Lebanese people themselves. And I do know that Lebanon's success is very important for peace in the Middle East. And so our position-the-my Government's position is to support the Siniora Government, is to beef up his army so that he can have a chance to respond to people who are acting outside the confines of government. And you know, Hizballah would not be- would be nothing without Iranian support. And Iranian is the crux of many of the problems in the Middle East, whether it be funding of Hizballah, funding of Hamas, or obviously, actions within the young democracy of Iraq. And so a lot of my trip is going to be to get people to focus not only on Lebanon and remember Lebanon, but also to remember that Iran causes a lot of the problems around the Middle East. We are going to touch that Iranian support and Syrian support to Hizballah. Many supporters of the U.S. policy in Lebanon criticize the lack of practical American support to the Siniora Government. That is what we are seeing right now. The USS Cole is now heading to the region, in what you call a-or previously mentioned, the support of an American ally. Does this mean the USS Cole is willing to offer this practical assistance? And that is what we are doing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlukmanahmedbbcarabic", "title": "Interview With Lukman Ahmed of BBC Arabic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lukman-ahmed-bbc-arabic", "publication_date": "12-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2375, "text": "A couple years ago, I sent one of our top admirals to Lebanon to assess the needs of the military. And as well as I have been watching very carefully to assess the courage of the leadership, like Prime Minister Siniora. I am impressed by the Prime Minister. He is a good guy who cares deeply about the future of his country. And he needs a military that has got the practical equipment necessary to deal with elements in this society that are destabilizing. And as supporting the Lebanese military, that means they should go, or do you think would go, to disarm Hizballah? Well, of course, I do not see how you can have a society with Hizballah armed up the way they are. I mean, any time they feel like moving, they try to do it. In this case, though, they moved against the Lebanese people. They are not moving against any foreign country; they are moving against the Lebanese people. And it should send a signal to everybody that they are a destabilizing force. And-but the first step, of course, is to make sure that the Siniora Government has got the capacity to respond with a military that is effective, that can move point A to point B in a quick fashion, and that is got the capacity to get the job done. You are calling both Iran and Syria to halt their support to Hizballah. But in the absence of any direct contact with Iran and Syria, your administration- how do you think both countries should stop doing this? You are not negotiating with them. You are not exploring other means to have them halt their support. I mean, they know my position. Early on in my administration, we sent the word to the Syrians, with top administrative officials, that if you want better relations with the United States, stop supporting these extremist groups that are trying to stop the advance of free societies. So they know our position, the Syrians and the Iranians. If the Iranians want to have relations with us, they ought to verifiably suspend their enrichment, and then they will-they can visit with us and other nations involved with the-through the U.N. process. But they-both sides, both countries have made the decision to not take up offers.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlukmanahmedbbcarabic", "title": "Interview With Lukman Ahmed of BBC Arabic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lukman-ahmed-bbc-arabic", "publication_date": "12-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2376, "text": "And they are -I truly believe that the Middle East is where the world ought to spend a lot of time, attention, and focus to help bring prosperity and peace, and that when people do pay attention closely, they will recognize the destabilizing influence that the Iranians and the Syrians are having. So what are the other means that you think you could take to have them stop their support? Well, you know, there are sanctions, of course. And we are doing that. The problem is, some folks just do not see the same-the threat that Iran poses in the Middle East, for example, as others do. We are going to the Palestinian and Israeli issue. And we know that you are going there to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the establishment of Israel, and you are the ENTITY who put the idea of the two-state solution. They call this anniversary as Nakba, or disaster. What do you say to them, ENTITY? I say to them that I care deeply about the Palestinian people and their future. They are going to have a choice to make, hopefully, and that choice is, here is what a state's going to look like, or do you want the kind of state that Hamas has brought you? And there needs to be a vision that people can see, that is clearly spelled out, with defined borders and the refugee issue settled and something on how to move forward on the holy sites, security discussions. You can accept that, or you can continue to follow or accept in your presence these extremists who murder innocent people. Is not it interesting that as the talks begin to emerge, there is more rockets flying into Israeli neighborhoods? Because they want to stop the advance of a Palestinian state. And so no, I got a good message for the people of the Palestinian Territories. In fact, I am going to carry on that message. I am given 30 seconds, so I hope if you could allow me to ask this question here. In your last meeting with Abu Mazen here in the White House, you stated, as I quote here, that I am confident we can achieve the definition of a state. Yes. Are you willing to tell me that before the end of your administration, there will be an agreement to be concluded, based on the assurance you get from the-both sides? We are going to work hard for that end. I understand that. And Abu Mazen was expressing frustrations with the process, and that is okay.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlukmanahmedbbcarabic", "title": "Interview With Lukman Ahmed of BBC Arabic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lukman-ahmed-bbc-arabic", "publication_date": "12-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2377, "text": "He is sending a message. He was not speaking necessarily to the American people. He was sending a message back home that he is frustrated, and he expects there to be more progress made to his liking. I understand that. That is what negotiations are all about. Abu Mazen and Olmert are, of course, necessary to get a good deal, but there is still-Tzipi Livni and Abu Ala are talking now. And the fundamental question is, when it gets down to it, will they be able to agree? They have closed the gap, closed the gap. Will they be able to agree at that last minute? And that is why Condi Rice and Hadley and others are going out there all the time to encourage them to get a deal done. It is in their interests. It is in the Israelis' interests that there be a state living side by side with them in peace, and it is in the Palestinians' interest. What they need is a state that responds to the will of the people. And the first step is to define what the state looks like.  And the agreement that you are trying to get it done, is it going to be a description of the state or the establishment of the state? No, it will be a description of the state. Remember, I told everybody earlier that there is got to be some roadmap obligations that have to be met. Everybody understands that. And the state cannot look like Swiss cheese. It has to be contiguous territories with defined borders-and the refugee issue concluded as well. And that is what we are going to get before the end of your administration-- ENTITY, it is very vital, as you say it always, that their cooperation to have stability in Iraq. Do you think that it-you consider one day that-talking direct to them to have them achieve that goal to-- But they know our position. We have had talks between our Embassy and their Embassy. They know, and they know that the Iraqi Government, along with the U.S. Government, wants them to stop sending their weapons from Iran into Iraq, all aiming to kill innocent people. That is what they are doing. But they absolutely know our position. And when we catch them doing it, they will be brought to justice. And we are catching them doing it right now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlukmanahmedbbcarabic", "title": "Interview With Lukman Ahmed of BBC Arabic", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-lukman-ahmed-bbc-arabic", "publication_date": "12-05-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2379, "text": "Is that an accurate way of saying your name? ENTITY, will Ukraine be invited to participate in the Membership Action Plan at NATO summit? And how much, if it gets it, this invitation, how much time will be needed for Ukraine to enter NATO? Nine years as it is for Macedonia, or 5 years as it was for the Baltic States? ENTITY, first of all, it is -the decision will be made by NATO members at Bucharest. So when I come to your country, I will be saying that I believe that Ukraine benefits from not only the process to join NATO but eventually, hopefully, joining NATO. But that decision will not be made until we are all there in Romania. Secondly, it just depends on the country as to how long events will-the reforms take in order to get offered membership into NATO. And I believe it is in our collective interest that we offer a clear path forward. But it is very important for the people in your country to understand that the decision will not be made until after I leave Ukraine and make it to Romania. Are they still talking about the rainbow speech ? Were you there for that? I was giving a speech in the town square where Ceausescu had given his final speech. You remember that? I remember the rainbow most of all. Moldova is a country between NATO member Romania and possible future NATO member Ukraine. poverty, corruption, and Russian troops on its territory without its consent. Washington is currently involved in resolving a breakaway region, Transnistria. But my question is, what do you think the United States can do to help Moldova to become a democratic, independent state and not a failed state under Russian influence, a point of instability at the NATO border? First is to continue to make our intentions clear, and that is that we want to work to make sure Moldova, which is now an independent nation, has got sovereign borders and is treated like an independent nation. Secondly, we constantly advocate for good, clean, open government. Thirdly, we are a member of a 5-plus-2, which is the process by which, hopefully, the Transnistria issue would be solved. So our strategy is to work with the relevant parties and to promote, as you said, a independent, open, transparent, good-government Moldova.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-6", "publication_date": "26-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2380, "text": "how do you see Croatia future in the NATO architecture in southeastern Europe, regarding its capability to host joint military bases, and primarily NATO forces, and the further development of its armed forces and its readiness to take part in NATO missions and contribute to the common security of the alliance? And how do you see the role of Croatia in promoting peace and stability in southeastern Europe, especially regarding the present situation relating to the establishment of independent Kosovo? Secondly, Croatia has served as a very good example, following a very dramatic moment, and that is the breakup of Yugoslavia. And your Government has made difficult decisions and made those decisions, first and foremost, on behalf of the people. But it turns out, many of the reform decisions, therefore, make it likely that Croatia will be invited into NATO. The question is, would people have predicted 15 years ago that we'd be having this kind of discussion about Croatia? And yet Croatia is a independent, sovereign nation, hopefully, soon to be invited to join NATO, which is a clear example of what is possible if people make the right decisions on behalf of their people. Part of being a part of NATO means commitment to a modern military. And Croatian troops, which have performed bravely in recent active theaters during this war against extremism, will benefit from being in NATO and benefit from serving side by side with other members of NATO. NATO membership would be a very positive thing for the people of Croatia. And I am really looking forward to going to your country. I hope I am coming with good news, but the decision will be made in this case before I go to Croatia. And they say it is one of the most beautiful coastlines in the entire world. Hope you are going to see that. Am I going to get to see the coastline? I do think Great Britain ought to be in NATO, yes. In a different field of operations, in Iraq, there is been a recent upsurge again in violence, which appears to have emanated in the area of Basra, which Britain used to control. Do you believe recent events there serve as a warning to those in your country and beyond who have counseled you to withdraw rapidly? My first reaction to watching the Iraqi Government respond forcefully-and to make it abundantly clear that-I think the exact-I cannot remember the exact words of the Prime Minister, but criminal elements, I know, were a part of his declaration-would be dealt with.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-6", "publication_date": "26-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2381, "text": "I thought that was a very positive moment in the development of a sovereign nation that is willing to take on elements that are-you know, that believe they are beyond the law. And secondly, we are helping, but it is important to know that the Iraqis are in the lead. This is a positive moment in the development of a nation that can govern itself and defend itself and sustain itself. We will provide oversight and, on occasion, support when asked. And one of the things I will be saying in the runup to the Petraeus-Crocker testimony is that we have made substantial gains, but it is still a fragile situation. Therefore, the decision about our troop levels will be based upon not politics or not who can scream the loudest, but based upon whether or not we can maintain the successes we have had. And I understand there is people here who want us to leave regardless of the situation, but that is not going to happen so long as I am the Commander in Chief. The British commitment was-first of all, you were there from day one, and you were there during the very heavy fighting. And the British commitment was to move to the airbase based upon success. And I am very grateful for the British friendship and alliance and the contributions. What do you think, ENTITY? So you flew all the way over here just for this interview? Oh, so guess what happened to me. I went down to Crawford-that is in Texas-and I went to an event for-to honor some of our soldiers' families. And a local doctor-I think it was a doctor-came and said, Would you mind meeting a group of people from Ukraine? And there we were in Waco, Texas, with, I think, maybe 20 or 30 health care specialists from Ukraine that were in my home State. And it was sure good to meet them. And how important is Ukraine's recognition of Kosovo in the U.S. point of view? Do you expect this step from the Ukrainian authorities in the nearest future? That is going to be up to the Ukranian authorities to make the decisions that they deem are necessary. We hope they will recognize Kosovo's independence, just like we have. It is supervised independence, of course, but we strongly supported that idea from the beginning and supported the U.N. plan that would help lead to a supervised independence and, at the same time, guarantee the minority rights within Kosovo.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-6", "publication_date": "26-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2382, "text": "And we would hope Ukraine would do the same thing. Romania is a U.S. ally in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the Romanians are not met as allies on the United States territory. You are heading towards the visa issue, are not you? What Romania should do to enter in waiver visa program? And what do you recommend us, bilateral negotiations with the United States or negotiations through European Union? You better turn that thing up, because I am going to give you a whopper of an answer. Give me the news, I hope. Now, first of all, it is hard for me to justify to the citizens of Romania that they can serve alongside our troops in major theaters in the war against extremists and not be able to have-be treated like other members of the EU, as far as visa waiver, and I know that. And it is difficult for citizens to understand that. But we are still dealing with a-you know, it is-we are adjusting law based upon previous practice. And the law needed to change, reflecting the modern era, and it did change. Congress did change the capacity for-to have a new look at visa waiver. And my advice is for the Romanian Government to negotiate bilaterally with the United States in order to solve this problem. There are other countries in your neighborhood that are making good progress toward being granted visa waiver. And I would strongly urge your leaders to take a look at what they have done and then interface with our officials. And I will , of course, be talking of this with the President and the Prime Minister when I am there. ENTITY, Croatian NATO membership bid and steadfast support of your administration for that ambition was a centerpiece of the bilateral relations between Croatia and U.S.A. last 7 or 8 years. And will it now, if Croatia became a NATO member-and relations will be elevated to the higher level of allies-can we expect to see more importance will be attached to the economic cooperation, U.S. investment in Croatia in the future? Yes, our relationships tend not to be-they tend to be multidimensional and not just based upon one aspect or another. And I believe strongly in free trade and the movement of investment. And Croatia occupies a crucial part-a crucial space in an important part of the world. And of course, we want to enhance trade. A lot of Americans need to learn more about Croatia, although there are about a million Croatian Americans here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-6", "publication_date": "26-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2383, "text": "Of course, those opportunities will be advantaged if the Government makes rational decisions on, for example, good investment laws. And therefore, the laws need to be transparent, the rule of law consistent, the Government obviously clean, so that the main risk for an invested currency is not government risk, it is the risk of the enterprise itself. And therefore, to answer your question, yes, of course, we want to have all kinds of different aspects of our relationship flourish with Croatia. But in terms of investing, it is going to be up to the Government to make decisions to make sure the investment climate is good. You mentioned in your preamble that it is important for NATO to honor its obligations to Afghanistan. In recent days, Nicolas Sarkozy, your new friend- -has promised another 1,000 troops for Afghanistan. Is there any sense that on that battlefield and indeed, beyond, France is now emerging as your greatest ally? I have always said that the relationship with the United Kingdom is a special relationship. And that relationship was never as special as it was during times of conflict, whether it be the relationship in the past between, like, Roosevelt and Churchill, or whether it be the current relationship, more modern relationship between Tony Blair and myself. And so your question, our greatest ally, it is going to be hard for any nation to trump Great Britain as our-United Kingdom as our greatest ally. Having said that, no question, the relationship is changing for the better, and President Sarkozy gets a lot of credit for that. I like him personally. He is a highly energetic, decisive person, who is not interested in creating divisions between-in the transatlantic alliance, but is interested in making sure that not only are bilateral relations are good, but the transatlantic alliance meets the threats. And his statement about commitment to-French troops to Afghanistan is a very important preamble to the NATO conference. When you combine our commitment, the Canadian commitment, the British commitment, and the French commitment of troops that will be in harm's way, it is a strong statement that NATO understands the threats, understands the challenges, and is willing to rise to them. I thought we said two questions apiece. In your opinion, what are the prospects for democracy in Russia, in Medvedev-- I have not met President Medvedev yet. I may have met him once, but I have not had a talk to him, President to President, obviously. I am looking forward to meeting him.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-6", "publication_date": "26-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2384, "text": "So I am going to go to Russia. I have been invited to Russia. President Putin has invited me to Russia. You are the first to hear it, so you can hustle out of here and put it on the wires. This is no longer off the record. 30 p.m.-3:15 p.m., President Putin has invited me to go to Sochi. And it is to discuss the strategic agreement, the crucial part of which is missile defense. Condi Rice and Bob Gates had a good visit with the President and counterparts on this very issue-and hopefully, that we can advance our dialogue, so at some point in time, we can reach an agreement on these important matters, proliferation matters. I know we have got agreement on Iran, and that is that Iran should not have the capacity to enrich, and that I supported the Russian efforts to convince the Iranians that they did not need to learn how to enrich, because he-Putin-was willing to provide enriched uranium for a civilian nuclear power plant. So there is an area where we will continue to have discussions. And I called President-elect Medvedev and reminded him-and congratulated him for getting elected and reminded him that-of some of the comments he made about rule law and transparency-and cannot remember exactly everything he said, but it sounded very progressive. And I said, we are listening very carefully to your words, and I appreciated your speech and looking forward to working with you to help accomplish those objectives. But I have yet to work with him, obviously, President to President. So check back in with me after I have had a couple of meetings with him. When are you going to Russia? We have not worked the details yet. In other words, there is an invitation out there, and this is really-the way to look at this is a follow-up to Condi and Bob Gates's meeting, which is good. Romania and other nations would hope that the United States would have good relations with Russia. And it is important that we have good relations with Russia; we can find common interests. On the other hand, there are areas where we have been able to be in a position where I have expressed my disagreements with President Putin on different matters related to their democracy. And my strategy all along is to keep relations such that he will actually listen to what I have to say.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithforeignprintjournalists6", "title": "Interview With Foreign Print Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-foreign-print-journalists-6", "publication_date": "26-03-2008", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2387, "text": "Contrary to all the rhetoric that you are hearing from Russia, there is no excuse for not only Russian troops being massed along the borders of Ukraine, but also there is no excuse for the covert support and certainly the rhetorical support that you are seeing for these militias that are taking over government buildings and causing chaos. So it sounds like you are saying Vladimir Putin is trying to provoke a civil war. Well, what I am saying is that the Russians generally have not been respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. The question now becomes whether or not this can be deescalated and resolved in a way that gives Ukrainians a chance to make their own decisions about their own lives. What I have said consistently is that each time Russia takes these kinds of steps that are designed to destabilize Ukraine and violate their sovereignty, that there are going to be consequences. Putin's decisions are not just bad for Ukraine. Over the long term, they are going to be bad for Russia. Now, we want to give diplomacy a chance as long as ultimately the decisions are being made by Ukrainians not by Russians, not by Americans, not by other European nations, but by Ukrainians themselves. I know you have thought a lot about this, ENTITY. In your mind, is there a line never mind the color is there a line in Eastern Europe or Ukraine that Vladimir Putin must not cross? Can you articulate that for the world and for the Russian government? I think the world understands very clearly that Ukraine is a sovereign nation that has deep historical roots with Russia. None of us think that somehow Ukraine can ignore Russia, should be hostile towards Russia. Now, what we have said consistently is that we are not going to see a military resolution to this problem. But we do have a stake, as every country around the world has a stake, in upholding basic international norms and basic international rules. So what we are going to be doing is working closely with not just our European allies, but allies around the world and partners around the world, sending a strong message to Russia that there are consequences to this. And I think it is very important because we have not seen enough of this in some of the reporting. What Mr. Putin's been doing, he does out of sense of weakness, not strength.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmajorgarrettcbssthismorning", "title": "Interview with Major Garrett of CBS's This Morning", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-major-garrett-cbss-this-morning", "publication_date": "17-04-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2388, "text": "The fact that he is willing to endanger his economy and lose all credibility around the world the way he has is indicative of the fact that Ukrainians are unsatisfied with a relationship in which you have got another country trying to dictate their foreign policy and their economy. What message do you think Vladimir Putin is trying to send you and the U.S. military by having a Russian fighter jet buzz a U.S. warship? Is he mocking you and the U.S. military? I have to tell you that everybody around the world understands the superiority of our military. And as commander in chief, I do not make decisions based on perceived signals. We make decisions very deliberately based on what is required for our security and for the security of our allies. The Russians understand that. They are not interested in any kind of military confrontation with us, understanding that our conventional forces are significantly superior to the Russians'. We do not need a war. What we do need is a recognition that countries like Ukraine can have relationships with a whole range of their neighbors. And it is not up to anybody, whether it is Russia or the United States or anybody else, to make decisions for them. But what I really want to know, Mr. Vice President, is the expectation even the optics of this will be viewed by some through the prism of 2016. That is going to be true whatever you do, the moment you declare whether you are a candidate or not. Does that change your ability to work on behalf of this president? ENTITY, how does this all filter through your daily life? I could not say I could not say it better myself. I have got somebody who I think will go down as one of the finest vice presidents in history. And he has been, as I said earlier, a great partner in everything that I do. I suspect that there may be other potential candidates for 2016 who have been great friends and allies. I know that we have got an extraordinary secretary of state who did great service for us and worked with me and Joe to help make the country safer. Whoever the Democratic standard bearer is is going to be continuing to focus on jobs, making sure that our kids are getting a great education, making sure that we are rebuilding prosperity from the middle class out in this country. And I am very much interested in making sure that some of the stuff that we have gotten started continues.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmajorgarrettcbssthismorning", "title": "Interview with Major Garrett of CBS's This Morning", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-major-garrett-cbss-this-morning", "publication_date": "17-04-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2392, "text": "I am looking forward to our state dinner. It is a chance for me to, on a personal level, repay the favor of my friend Aleksander for his great hospitality to Laura and me when we visited he and Jolanta there in Warsaw. Secondly, it is a chance to say to our country and the world how important our relations are with Poland. We really think respect the Polish people. We have got great numbers of Polish Americans who still love the motherland. And it is going to be a wonderful occasion to build on a great relationship, make it even better. We will discuss a lot of topics. We will talk about the war on terror. Poland has been a great friend and supporter, member of the coalition on the war against terror. We have got troops in the on ships off the Indian Ocean. We have got engineers in Bagram, shared intelligence. I am confident he will want to talk about NATO expansion. Perhaps I will leave that for a question. But all in all, we have got great relations, and I look forward to having a good conversation with a leader I respect. And I respect Aleksander Kwasniewski. Why do not we start with you, sir. ENTITY, about your talks with President Kwasniewski next week, Poland has been viewed by your administration as one of the most successful examples of democratic transformation. However, the current Polish Government is taking some steps and adopting some laws which would obviously limit independence of media and central bank, which are the pillars of democracy. So are you going to raise these issues with the ENTITY? Well, first of all, I have got faith that a democracy will work. And I am confident that the Polish Government and the Polish people will come up with the right answers to issues relating to any law. I will of course, if he asks my opinion, I will remind him that an independent media is a very important part of democracy. It is one of the pillars of democracy. I value our media, as an aside, saying that of course to pander to the people here that cover me on a daily basis. But I do value a free and open media, and I think it is an incredibly important part. We value the progress that Poland has made and the example Poland has set in a neighborhood that was a pretty tough neighborhood for awhile. And I was most impressed, when I went to Warsaw, to see the spirit of the people and the optimism.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2393, "text": "I understand the country is going through tough times, but all countries go through tough times. ENTITY, you are taking Aleksander Kwasniewski it was your decision to go to Troy, Michigan, to meet with Polish Americans. What is the reason for that meeting, and if you could tell us, what is your message to Polish Americans? Well, first of all, the message to Polish Americans is, I respect and honor the Polish traditions and Polish heritage. Actually, there was a even in my own State of Texas, there is a community or two that Polish Americans have settled in Texas and still retains many of the great traditions and heritages. It also reminds people that even though they have got a Polish heritage and embraced Polish traditions, they are Americans. It is a great part of the American experience. We envelop and welcome people from all walks of life. That in itself is an important statement to constantly make in our country. It reminds people of the strength of the country. I have decided to go to Troy, Michigan, because it is going to be a I hope it is a fun trip for Aleksander. I mean, I think it is important I understand what a state dinner is like. They arrive on the South Lawn. I try to wear a tuxedo as little as possible, I want you to know. And he is going to see a big, enthusiastic crowd. It will give him a chance to say some things. And I think that is important to provide him a forum, so that he can not only be seen in a tuxedo but be seen speaking his mind about whatever issue he wants to talk about to an American audience that is made up of people from his homeland that have now settled in our country. To me, it helps complete the state dinner aspect of the trip. ENTITY, I talked to Mr. Kwasniewski just before yesterday. He looks good, in good shape. He told me that one of the topics he would like to touch on is the recent financial scandals in the U.S., because they are a kind of backlash on Central Europe, and the recovery is difficult.  Yes, I will explain to him we are doing things, and I will be glad to lay out the initiative I talked about and have been talking about, by the way, since March February and March and then the speech I gave in New York. And of course, our House has acted the House of Representatives acted, and the Senate has acted.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2394, "text": "And if he looks at what I proposed and what the Senate has proposed and what the House proposed, there is not much difference. And in other words, the point is that a bill will come out that will hold people accountable for accounting error accounting fraud and, as we go forward, hopefully set an example make it clear to people, there will be a consequence if they continue to do that. There are markets three things affect our markets, I will explain to Aleksander. One of course is confidence and the numbers, and we are addressing that. Secondly is the war on terror. And the American people know that we are doing everything we can to protect the homeland and run down these killers wherever they try to hide. And that is all they are, by the way, just nothing but a bunch of cold-blooded killers. And thirdly, the corporate sector the profits are beginning to improve, but the price-earnings multiples in other words, the price of a share relative to its earnings was very high, and the market is adjusting. So all three of those factors are important. And obviously we that is not the whole picture of our economy, and that is what Aleksander has got to understand. The market reflects part of it, but our unemployment rate is looks like it is steady. As a matter of fact, it had a drop, and it is level. In other words, the recovery is beginning to show some strength. So therefore, what I am going to ask him is to look at the entire picture. Finally, we have got good monetary policy and good fiscal policy here in Washington, and that in itself is part of long-term recovery. And so he will hear a man who is recognizes that we are making some progress. We have got to do more, but I am pleased to report to him that I think things are going to get better. The foundation for long-term growth has been is in place. ENTITY, I wanted to ask you a question about the war against terrorism. The Europeans seem to less and less support the war against terrorism. And I wonder if you could explain to us, why do you think it is happening, and if you are ready to go alone on this next phase of the war, whatever the phase is? No, I do not feel that the support from Europe is lessening.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2395, "text": "As a matter of fact, I have just come from a G- 8 meeting in Canada where, to a person, they were very supportive of our war on terror, because the Europeans recognize that the terrorists could strike them just as easy as they could strike us. We have still got great intelligence sharing amongst our nations. We have got good police action. We have hauled in we being the coalition has hauled in that means arrest 2,400, more than 2,400 terrorists. So we are picking them off, one by one. This is a different kind of war. I use every chance I get, when I speak to the American people, to explain why this is different. And so as opposed to destroying lines of tanks or shooting down airplanes, success is measured by one by one, one person at a time. And the European leaders understand that, and they have been very supportive. They still I think we have got about 8,000 troops in Afghanistan we do, in the Afghan theater, and there is another 8,000 troops from other nations there as well. I will continue to communicate and consult with our friends and allies as to every stage of the war, as the battlefront shifts. By the way, the battlefront is not shifting out of Afghanistan. We have got a lot of work to do there. And of course we will need to continue to have deliberations with our friends and allies, and we will have them for future theaters and different operations. We talk to them all the time. Speaking of war, ENTITY, Poland is going to buy new fighter planes  I have got a suggestion for them. However, President Kwasniewski just 2 days ago you kind of was kind of complaining that maybe the American offer is not meeting enough expectations. He is negotiating in public.  Fabulous product. And we will work with our friends to make you know, to compete on an above-board basis, totally above-board. And you know, we hope the Polish Government picks quality. If they do, they will, of course, come our way. But that is up to the Government. Aleksander will be and the Government of Poland will you know, we will respect the process and respect the country and appreciate it is a tough decision and hope they make the right decision as far as we are concerned. ENTITY, do you think that the NATO will play as important role for the United States in the present century as it played in the previous century?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2396, "text": "NATO served as kind of a bulwark in defense against Russian tanks storming across the European Continent. I witnessed the fact that not only have we got good relations with Russia, but the very same trip that I when I went to Moscow to sign this treaty that literally redefined our relationship from one of distrust and like it was during the cold war, to a new relationship, shortly thereafter we went to Italy and welcomed a new relationship between NATO and Russia. So the whole relationship has changed for the better. NATO has and I think it is going to be very hard very important to work that relationship with Russia, to allow for the the new relationship to develop and mature. And I think it will in a very positive way. The new relationship the new role of NATO is really needs to adjust to the new realities of the 21st century, and that is how to best fight the war on terror. And that means a different configuration of the use of our forces and the use of assets. Our forces need to be lighter and quicker to strike, and elite units need to be prepared to move at a moment's notice. The enemy has changed, and the battlefield, the nature of the battlefield has changed. And I think NATO is very relevant, and we will be an active and engaged partner in NATO. Let me just I will ask myself, Well, ENTITY, do you think we ought to expand? I gave a very important speech in Warsaw. It is interesting I hope the people in the world that are interested in our opinion on subjects noted that the speech was in Warsaw. And the speech was about a Europe that is whole, free, and at peace. And I talked about the expansion of NATO, and I said that I am interested more rather than less. And at the same time, I urged the applicant countries to take nothing for granted, to work very hard up until the last minute to show those of us in NATO that they will be willing and active and capable partners. And I look forward to our meeting in Prague. I fully understand the position of the Polish Government. I have had long discussions with Aleksander on the subject of NATO expansion, and I think people know that I am forward-leaning, depending if the member countries, you know, meet their MAP requirements. I want to go back to the finances and the limit. There is an attempt in Poland to limit independence of central bank, so it would be more be manipulated more by Government, so Government would have more influence over central bank.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2397, "text": "In the current situation, what is your feeling about this? Well, first of all, I do not know all the facts about how the Polish democracy is handling this particular situation. I can tell you, however, from my experience, that a central bank should be independent. And the independence of our central bank gives Chairman Greenspan and the other Governors of the Federal Reserve great credibility in our country, to know that decisions are being made apart from politics. And our central bank is a part of is a very important part of our has been and will continue to be a very important part of the economic vitality of our country. It also gives investors who look at our country great confidence to know that the monetary supplies be not based upon politics, but the decisions on monetary supplies will be based upon the vision of some very wise people. I think, when people look at how capital moves into countries, the independence of a central bank is an important part of attracting capital. And Poland needs to attract capital investment. If anybody were to ask me my advice on the central bank, that is what I would give. I'd like to ask you about different subject. According to the latest polls, you are the most popular foreign politician leader in Poland. I usually say I do not believe in polls, but I may have to change my mind. Well, how high is it? Would you be willing to visit Poland again? Why do not you go to Poland? I do not know what to say. I appreciate that. Are you willing to spend a vacation in Poland? I do not know if my mother could stand that. But listen, when I vacation, just kind of know about me, I like to be with my family, and I like to be in Texas. I just recently went to Maine. I'd love to go to Maine, too, to be with my mother and dad. But my favorite vacation spot is my own ranch in the State I love. And I like to get out and fool around on the land, and it does not matter how hot it is or how cold it is. How hot it is and cold it is matters to those who have to follow me. These poor souls Crawford in August. That is my idea of vacation. Although I must say, I had a great time up with Mother and Dad this weekend, and I love to be around them as well. But this August, I am going to go down to Texas and actually work out of Texas.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2398, "text": "After all, we are getting into the political season here in America. We have got our elections in November of 2002. ENTITY, we talk a lot about how September 11th changed the world, changed America. Has it changed you? I do not think a single event can change anybody's basic values. It obviously changed the fact that I knew that my time as the ENTITY would be dedicated to winning the war on terror and protecting our homeland. This is I keep telling people this it is just a different type of war, because much of the movement of the enemy is invisible to the American people and/or to the world. The killers on September the 11th had been in our country for a period of time. It was hard to tell that they were part of this unbelievably evil plot. And it we are concerned that another group are here or somewhere, not only here but in other countries in Europe. And so the task is an all-consuming task of protecting our homeland and making sure we do everything we can here to find out if anybody is here and who they are and disrupt their plans and, at the same time, hunt down their leaders. The wars of the past had known battlefields, and it was clear that such-and-such had to happen. This is a hunt for individuals. We are chasing down one person at a time. They were foolishly collected up at one point in time in the Shahi-Kot Mountains, and it was a tough chore. But our brave soldiers, along with coalition soldiers, were able to go in and score great success at bringing them to justice, as I like to put it. They are wise to our ways. They realize we are a heck of a lot tougher than they thought. They assumed America was a weak country, that we did not really believe anything. And so I realized after 9/11, after I got over the grief, along with everybody else in our country, that this was a long, very important struggle. And the struggle goes beyond just fighting an Al Qaida-type network. I have deep concerns about the development and deployment of weapons of mass destruction, and so should you, so should anybody who loves freedom, because there are nations in the world developing these weapons who hate freedom, leaders hate freedom. And what we cannot allow happen is these nations to develop these weapons and then blackmail us and/or use them. We will have a judgment will have missed history's call to freedom.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2399, "text": "And so I realize that this war is going to consume a lot of my time. On the other hand, these members of the press know that I am optimistic person who truly believes that we can achieve some positive things out of the evil done to the country and to the world. So when I talk to our friends, like Aleksander and others, I remind them of this call. We are leaders in a significant moment in history, and we cannot blink, and we cannot we must be determined and focused to achieve this important objective, which is peace for our children, is what we are really fighting for, civilization. ENTITY, you always said that you are supporter of removing the trade barriers. Why do you think there are so many of them still exist? And it is easier to mollify constituencies with protectionist rhetoric. Poland suffers from protectionist policies in parts of Europe, as you know. I am a strong believer in free trade. I will exercise that diligently to open up markets. On the other hand, I have an obligation to enforce law. And so I recently said that the I listened to an International Trade Commission ruling on steel. The ITC ruled that excessive steel imports were affecting our industry in a negative way. I put a temporary measure in place, which exempted, by the way, Poland. And that was a chance for the steel industry, our own steel industry, to get on its feet. But nevertheless, as I reminded members of the European Union, this only represents a very small portion of the $2 trillion of trade we have each year. But protectionism, for some, is a viable economic remedy. And in my judgment, protectionism would be bad for the world and bad for our country. We are opening up we sent our man to Doha to commit to the next round of the World Trade Organization. And unlike Seattle, where it all fell apart, we were able to we being those of us in the world who support free trade were able to move the process farther down the line. And I will continue to work for free trade. It is in our Nation's interests and the world's interests that we trade. It is in the developing world's interest that there be trade. And our country is we have got what is called AGOA, agreement with the African countries. I am working on a free trade agreement with Central Americans. I'd like to see a free trade agreement from Canada all the way down to Argentina.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2400, "text": "We have just got to convince our respective people that trade is in their interests. There is another ENTITY you have such a good relationship; it is ENTITY Putin. But there is this feeling also this is in cost of some human rights, human rights in Chechnya, press freedom in Russia it is overlooked now and probably some freedom of some other Russian republics. Do not you worry that this close relationship is putting your raising other problems? No, a close relationship with Putin allows me to make the case that, on media freedom, for example as a matter of fact, on my last trip there, I urged him to interface with media entrepreneurs from America to understand how free press actually works, something that they are not very used to in Russia. And I do push Vladimir Putin on the need to have open media and open his media. And secondly, in terms of Chechnya, I am constantly talking to Vladimir Putin about relations with Chechnya and understanding and supporting minority rights. The other issue that is very important, to which we do not turn a blind eye, and which I am deeply concerned, not only about minority rights, is proliferation, matters of proliferation. I think we are making some progress there. The immediate concern was proliferation to Iran, and I brought that up with Vladimir every time I visited with him. It is a very important issue that he understand that an armed Iran could be very dangerous to his own country, much less to our friends the Israelis or America, itself. And we have had some very important exchanges on that. 10 billion from the U.S., $10 billion from Europe over 10 years to help secure some weapons stockpiles. Vladimir is very interested in working with us to decommission some of his nuclear submarines to make Russia and the world more safe. In other words, my only point to you is, is that by being closer to Russia, we are able to deal more directly with some of the thorny issues that could separate us and could in fact make the West less likely to deal with Russia. And we have got another issues at home here that has upset a lot of our people, and that is chickens. Fortunately, we are arguing over chickens and not over war, over chickens and not over missiles, like we used to. But a lot of people here feel like there was a commitment made to let U.S. chickens into Russia. And they started moving into Russia, and all of a sudden they stopped moving into Russia.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2401, "text": "And so I have been so whether it be trade or minority rights or press, our relations are such that we are able to bring those up in a very frank and forthright way and yet still moved a very important relationship forward. Look, friends do not always agree, but friends are more likely to be able to work things out than enemies. As a matter of fact, in the old days, if there was a disagreement between enemies, that could lead to war. What solution do you see to the crisis, and what compromise do you expect from both sides? First, I do believe that we can achieve a vision of two states living side by side, at peace with each other. And that is the vision, and that is what all policy must aim toward. It starts with understanding that it is going to be impossible to achieve that vision if terrorists are allowed to have a free run and blow up the process. An incredibly important step toward the vision of two states living side by side is for the international community, including the Arab world, to work with us to develop the institutions necessary for the emergence of a Palestinian state that will be transparent; it will respect rule of law; it will have a constitution that will allow for a sharing-of-power arrangement; that will have institutions that outlast are far more important than any single one person And we are in the process of working toward that end. Colin Powell will be meeting with what the call the Quad in New York. Foreign Ministers from the Arab world will be coming as well, later on, to work on the step-by-step process toward the emergence of a Palestinian state. And I repeat, that requires a constitution, a judiciary, transparency when it comes to financial conditions. Something just ground to a halt. That thing had, what do we call it, a skidding halt. Sounded like it needs some new tires. Anyway, the international community wants to help with aid, but they are not going to help with aid if it is going to be stolen. Let us put it very bluntly. So we are working to get these institutions in place. Obviously as security improves, Israel is going to have to, as I said, pull her troops back to September of 2001 2000 levels. They are going to have to deal with the settlements. In other words, all parties have got responsibilities.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpolishjournalists0", "title": "Interview With Polish Journalists", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-polish-journalists-0", "publication_date": "12-07-2002", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2407, "text": "As we are walking towards your office I have to think you are going to miss this short commute. I am, it is one of the biggest benefits of being president that you really do not think about until you get here. I have never had to travel more than thirty seconds from home to office, and it is because of that that I have been able to maintain, you know, really a family life that has nurtured and sustained me during this time. How long did it take for the White House to feel like home though? You know, it, it took shorter, I think, for us, just because when you have got little kids, and you are tucking them in ? When you open a door and they are in their pajamas and they are , you know, wrestling with you and asking you, you know, to read to them and stuff, you know it starts feeling like home pretty quick. It feels even more like home now because you have all these memories that were formed watching your kids grow up. You know you talk about the kids, and I know you all were pretty, a little bit apprehensive coming into the White House, they were young. Was it a good experience for them? You know, you do not know how it would have turned out if they'd grown up in Chicago instead, and a more normal environment. We were concerned mostly about whether they'd develop an attitude, right? And they are, you know, sweet, kind, funny, smart, respectful people, and they treat everybody with respect. That is not just the biases of a parent. You know, we feel pretty good when we hear back from friends, cause they still have sleepovers and they go to other folks houses and when the parents say, oh you know, Malia, she is just so sweet, or Sasha helped to pick up the dishes, what is it that you are doing to ? They never complain about it? You know, they complained about Secret Service as they became teenagers, and Secret Service has done the very best job they could accommodating them, so it has not restricted any of their activities, but as you might imagine, if you are a teenager having a couple of people with microphones ? and guns always following you around, that could grate on them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2408, "text": "But you know, they have handled it with grace and I give Michelle most of the credit for how well they have done, but I also just think they are graceful, good young, young women. This part of the White House is so iconic. It--it does not matter what time of day it is, in some ways I feel more attached to this walk even than the Oval Office. I believe it. There is something about these steps and thinking about everybody who is walked here and all the business that is been done here. And business gets done on this walk. And even when you go up this ramp, and you think about FDR wheeling himself up, you know, got a little cigarette holder in his mouth, and it, that, that awe that you feel, that reverence that you feel for the place never entirely leaves. Well that is one of the things I was going ask you, because I know you kept in touch with people by reading those letters every day. How did you keep in touch with the presidency? I, more than anything, obviously the presidency is the people, and it is been interesting the emotions in the last few months. What you realize is that you may never have the team that is together in the same way, under the same pressures, and the attachments that you make to folks from your chief of staff down to ? We had a farewell dinner for some of my senior staff, and generally everybody likes to talk about how cool I was. I had trouble getting through just a few remarks, because not only do you appreciate the sacrifices they have made and the hours they have kept and the soccer games they missed and the birthday parties, but I also had a lot of young people who came in here, and this probably, you know, echoes with you, in your own experience, you were young when you got here. It did not feel like it when I left. Yeah, but you know, now suddenly you got members of your team who were 23, 24. They have met their wives here, or their husbands here. And you have a lot of eight year people. Yeah, and you, and they start bringing in their kids, who you think should be babies and now are in second grade or something, and you have watched them grow up.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2409, "text": "So I think what ends up happening is you end up maintaining those networks and those contacts, but the concentrated interactions and experience that you have here, I do not think, I do not expect you can duplicate anyplace else. We are about to walk into the Oval, and I was just wondering, the big gut-check decisions, did you make them in there or up in the Treaty Room at home? I think I made them on this walk sometimes. You know, there are times where I'd say the Oval Office, you use to gather the facts. The decisions you probably make late at night, or at least I do, I am kind of a night owl, up there. But there are some times where you think you have made a decision, but during that walk, where you are announcing the decision, you have just got to make sure that, you are prepared to live with it, because as you know George, a lot of these decisions are not-- the outcomes are uncertain. As you said, it is very busy, newsy day here, that shooting down in Fort Lauderdale this afternoon. Do we know enough now to know if it was an act of terror? As a general rule, until I have got all the information, George, I do not wanna comment on it other than just to say how heartbroken we are for the families who've been affected. These kinds of tragedies have happened too often during the eight years that I have been president. The pain, the grief, the shock that they must be going through is enormous. I have asked me staff to reach out to the mayor down there and make sure that coordination between the state and local officials is what it should be. But I think we will find out over the next 24 hours exactly how this happened and what motivated this individual. And also just a few minutes ago, this intelligence report came out on the Russian activities, declassified version. Russian president Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign. We further assess that Putin and the Russian government developed a clear preference for President-Elect Trump. President Putin was trying to elect Trump? Number one, the Russians sought to interfere with the election process-- that the cyber hacking that took place by the Russians was part of that campaign, and that they had a clear preference in terms of outcomes. What-- what I have repeatedly said is that you know, our intelligence communities spend a lot of time and effort gathering a lot of strands and a lot of data.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2410, "text": "You are saying high confidence here-- The-- this time they have got high confidence, and having seen some of the underlying sources and information that they are basing this on I stand fully behind the-- the report. What does that tell you about what President Putin is trying to do right now? And I-- I think back to 2012 when Mitt Romney talked about Russia being the number one geostrategic threat, you kinda dismissed him in the second debate-- Did you underestimate Vladimir Putin? You know, I do not think I underestimated him, but I think that I underestimated the degree to which, in this new information age, it is possible for misinformation for cyber hacking and so forth to have an impact on our open societies, our open systems, to insinuate themselves into our democratic practices in ways that I think are accelerating. And so part of the reason that I ordered this report was not simply to re-litigate what happened over the last several months, but rather to make sure that we understand this is something that Putin has been doing for quite some time in Europe, initially in the former satellite states where there are a lot of Russian speakers, but increasingly in Western democracies. There are gonna be elections coming up among our NATO allies that we have to pay attention to. I anticipate that this kind of thing can happen again here. And so in addition to the report assessing what exactly happened, what we have also done is to make sure that the Department of Homeland Security and our intelligence teams are working with the various folks who run our elections. And one of the things that I have urged the president-elect to do is to develop a strong working relationship with the intelligence community and I think it is important that Congress, on a bipartisan basis, work with the next administration looking forward to make sure that this kind of influence is minimized-- He-- he met with the intelligence leaders this afternoon. He talked about Russia and China and-- and other countries. They made no assessment on whether this affected the outcome of the election. He said very clearly it had no effect on the outcome. What do you think? You know, I think there are a lot of factors going into an election. I think the bottom line is-- is that Donald Trump is gonna be sworn in as the 45th President of the United States of America.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2411, "text": "And it is not necessarily profitable to sort of try to untangle all the different factors that went into it. The issue here is you have I think the-- the clear example of how, if we are not vigilant foreign countries can have an impact on the political debate in the United States in ways that might not have been true 10, 20, 30 years ago in-- in part because of the way news is transmitted and in part because so many people are skeptical of mainstream news organizations that-- everything's true and everything's false. In that kind of environment, where there is so much skepticism about information that is coming in, we are gonna have to spend a lot more time thinking about how do we protect our democratic process and as I have been saying for years, we are gonna have to spend a lot more time on cyber security. That is one of the reasons why I'd ordered a commission-- But bottom line, this time Vladimir Putin got what he wanted. And it could be another country in the future. It could be another election where you know, the-- the alignments between Republicans and Democrats are different than they were this time and-and--who a foreign country prefers. And that is why I hope that this does not continue to be viewed purely through a partisan lens. I think there are Republicans as well as Democrats who are concerned about this. And the-- the two things we need to do, George-- number one, we have to spend a lot more time, energy, resources on cyber security. That was one of the key recommendations of this commissions that I got a report from just a few weeks ago. And the second thing we have to do is to make sure that all of us think about how we approach our elections and our democracy not only to secure them from vote tampering, but also to make sure that we understand when propaganda is being churned through the system. And-- and one of the things I-- I will be honest with you, George. One of the things that I am concerned about is the degree to which we have seen a lot of commentary lately where there were, there are Republicans or pundits or cable commentators who seemed to have more confidence in Vladimir Putin than fellow Americans because those fellow Americans were Democrats. Does that include the president-elect? Well, what I will say is that--and I said this right after the election--we have to remind ourselves we are on the same team.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2412, "text": "Vladimir Putin's not on our team. If we get to a point where people in this country feel more affinity with a leader who is an adversary and view the United States and our way of life as a threat to him, then we are gonna have bigger problems than just cyber hacking. You-- you have talked to the president-elect Trump now several times over the course of this transition. What have you tried to impress on him about the job? He has been open to suggestions, and the main thing that I have tried to transmit is that there is a different between governing and campaigning, so that what he has to appreciate is as soon as you walk into this office after you have been sworn in, you are now in charge of the largest organization on Earth. You cannot manage it the way you would manage a family business. You cannot manage it the way you would manage a Senate office. And so you have to have a strong team around you. You have to have respect for institutions and the process to make good decisions because you are inherently reliant on other folks. So when I talked to him about-- our intelligence agencies, what I have said to him is-- is that there are gonna be times where you have got raw intelligence that comes in and in my experience, over eight years, the intelligence community is pretty good about saying, Look, we cannot say for certain what this means. But there are gonna be times where the only way you can make a good decision is if you have confidence that the process is working, and the people that you put in charge are giving you their very best assessments . How has he impressed you? Do you like him? You know, I have enjoyed the conversations that we have had. He is somebody who I think is not lacking in confidence, which is I think-- Some say that about you too. Well, that is what I was saying. It-- it is -- it is probably a prerequisite for the job, or at least you have to have enough craziness to think that you can do the job. I-- I think that he has not spent a lot of time sweating the details of, you know, all the policies that-- Does that worry you? I think it depends on how he approaches it. If he-- if it gives him fresh eyes, then that can be valuable.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2413, "text": "But it also requires you knowing what you do not know and putting in place people who do have the kinds of experience and background and-- and knowledge that can inform good decision making. And look, I-- I-- I think it is fair to say that he and I are-- are sort of opposites in some ways. Voters often do that, do not they? But so-- so let us say I am on the-- the policy wonk end of the spectrum. As much as I can dive into a briefing book and really work to-- to master various subjects that come before my desk, I am still not an expert on a huge amount of the stuff that we work on. But I do make sure that I have got people who are experts that are helping me make the best decisions possible. And if you do not have good people, and you do not have a good process and you do not have, at some level, the basic reverence for this office, and an understanding of the-- the incredible responsibilities and obligations, then, I think you can get into trouble. You are also not much of a tweeter. He was on a tirade this morning, sent out a lot of tweets early this morning. Clearly, according to him and his people, he is gonna keep on doing it when he is sitting there behind that desk. On the one hand information is--is moving quick, and-- I-- I-- or-- or the way in which people consume information is changing so fast. Clearly this worked for him, and it gives him a direct connection to a lot of the people that voted for him. I have said to him, and I think others have said to him that the day that he is the President of the United States, there are world capitals and financial markets and people all around the world who take really seriously what he says, and in a way that is just not true before you are actually sworn in as president. People take seriously what you say as well. And during the campaign-- many of your speeches you say, All the progress we have made in the last eight years go out the window if we do not win.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2414, "text": "I think that the-- the risk to all the progress we have made was at stake in the election because not just the president-elect but a lot of members of Congress, including now the Speaker of the House and the Senate majority leader, have said that their principal agenda was to undo a lot of this progress. But as I have been talking about over the last several days when it comes to health care, the gains that we have made are there. Twenty million people have health insurance that did not have it before. The rise in health care costs since Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act was passed, have been at their lowest rate in 50 years. Those savings have extended the Medicare trust fund by 11 years. So we-- we have got-- we have got a baseline of facts. So it is true theoretically that all that progress can be undone, and suddenly 20 million people or more do not have health insurance. But as I think Republicans now are recognizing that is -- may not be what the American people, including even Trump voters, are looking for. And my hope is that the president-elect, members of Congress from both parties look at, Where have we objectively made progress, where things are working better? Do not undo things just because I did them. I do not have pride of authorship. I said today in a forum on health care if the Republicans can come up with a system that insures more people cheaper, better I will be the first one-- And I can tell by your smile you do not think they can do it? Well, I am skeptical that they can do it mainly because for seven years now, including when we first tried to pass health care, I said to 'em, Okay, if-- if this does not work tell me what does. In this room I remember having meetings with Republican senators who initially had been trying to engage but saw that the politics of 'no' were growing inside the Republican Party. And I remember having a conversation in the Oval Office with one of those senators who was-- was starting to get a little sheepish about what compromises might-- garner his support. And finally I asked him, Is there any changes I could make that would get you to support this? And he said, Probably not, ENTITY, which was a nice change in terms of just candor. But what-- what that means then is, is that now the burden is to take a look.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2415, "text": "All right, if-- if-- if-- if you think that we have overregulated in the environmental space what I can show you is that we have tripled the amount of wind power in this country, increased by tenfold the amount of solar power. We are producing as much oil and gas as we have ever produced. Gas is at two bucks a gallon. If you think you got a better idea in terms of how to approach this that is not gonna result in more pollution, and more asthma, and more illness then put your ideas out there. But do not just oppose things because, This was Obama's agenda. Well, that is what is happening at the moment. But you know, the American people-- are-- are both anxious for change. We are in a time of-- of flux. You know, the-- the globe is shrinking, the inform age-- information age is-- is bringing a lot of changes. People are anxious about their future and their children's futures. But they do not want folks to be reckless and they do not want this town to just be tit-for-tat. And-- you know, one of the gratifying things, I think, about the end of my presidency-- even though admittedly-- my successor ran against a lot of what we stood for, is when you look at the individual issues and the progress that we have made on a lot of those issues, we got the support of a pretty decent majority. Even on health care what you have seen is a lot of stories surfacing lately about people who said, Well, I voted for Trump but I do not think he is really gonna take away my health care-- If in fact the Republicans make some modifications, some of which I may have been seeking previously, but they would not cooperate because they did not wanna-- make the system work, and re-label it as Trumpcare, I am fine with that. Because what I am thinking about are the millions of people, many of whom write me very personal letters-- Dear ENTITY, I did not vote for you. I was against Obamacare. And then my son who did not have health insurance signed up and we just found out that he had an illness. And thankfully he is now covered, otherwise he might not have gotten treatment and I might have lost my house.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2416, "text": "Dear ENTITY, You know, my husband got hooked on opioids and thank God we have coverage and were able to access substance abuse. He is clean now, he is gone back to work. You have people around the country who are benefitting from the steps that we have taken and as long as they continue to get helped, then at least I will know in my own mind that the work we did here had a lasting impact. You have often said that your toughest day in office was the day of the Newtown shootings. Toughest decision was early in my presidency when I ordered 30,000 more troops into Afghanistan. As somebody who had run to end a large troop presence overseas. Now, I had said from the start that I thought Iraq was a mistake, that we should have stayed focused on Afghanistan. I think it was the right decision because the Taliban at that point had gotten a lot of momentum before I'd gotten into office, partly because we had not been paying attention as much as we needed to to Afghanistan. And since that time we have been able to build up the Afghan security forces and stabilize it. But that was the first time in which I looked out at a crowd of West Point graduates and knew that some of those might not come back because of-- because of that decision-- How disappointing --then how disappointing is it to you that even though it is far fewer, there would still be troops in Afghanistan, still be troops in Iraq as you leave? Well, one of the things that I have learned, and I think we have all learned, is that we are not going to get the kind of decisive, permanent victories in this fight against terrorism that we would get from fighting another country. We are not going to get that MacArthur/Emperor moment, because by definition, even after decimating Al Qaeda in the Fata, even after taking out bin Laden there is still people there who have both the--the interest and the capacity if we do not maintain vigilance to strike against the United States. And these are still countries that are fragile enough that we are gonna have to partner with them in some way. But what we have done, I think, is build a model from a lot of hard lessons in Afghanistan and Iraq-- but in other places around the world, where we are working with them in an advisory capacity. It still puts burden on some troops of ours who are there as advisors and facilitators.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2417, "text": "But we do not have this huge footprint, we are less likely to be targeted as, you know, occupiers. And if you look at the current Mosul campaign again-- against ISIL, for example the-- the few thousand troops that we have there to support that effort allows the Iraqi military to move forward in an effective way. Now, would they do it as fast as if we had 50,000 or 100,000 Marines in there? But it does give us the ability to make sure that we are strengthening those folk who are interested in building up their countries rather than destroying them, and doing so in a way that is sustainable and does not put a constant burden on the amazing men and women that we have got in uniform. What has to be a disappointment on the home front is that-- it looks like the Democratic Party got pretty hollowed out on your watch, about 1,000 seats lost in the Congress, Senate, governors, state houses. Is that on you? I take some responsibility on that. I-- I think that some of it was circumstances. If you look at-- what happened, I came in in the middle of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. And unlike FDR who waited-- well, did not take office until about three years into the Great Depression, it was happening just as I was elected. I think we did a really good job in saving this economy and putting us back on the track of growth. But what that meant is in 2010 there were a lot of folks who were still out of work. There were a lot of folks who had lost their homes or saw their home values plummet, their 401k's plummet. And we were just at the beginnings of a recovery. And the, you know, whoever is president at that point is gonna get hit and his party's gonna get hit. That then means that suddenly you have got a redistricting in which a lot of state legislatures are now Republican. They draw lines that give a huge structural advantage in subsequent elections. So-- so some of this was circumstances. But what I think that what is also true is that partly because my docket was really full here, so I could not be both chief organizer of the Democratic Party and function as Commander-in-Chief and President of the United States. We did not begin what I think needs to happen over the long haul, and that is rebuild the Democratic Party at the ground level.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2418, "text": "Well, I think that it is something that I have an interest in. As-- as you know, George, my entire career, I started as a community organizer. Every one of my campaigns was premised on getting new people involved. And if there is a theme in my public career it is that if ordinary people get involved then good things happen. So I want to see the Democratic Party move in that direction. And what that means is that we are not just micro-targeting to eke out presidential victories; it means that we are showing up in places where right now we are not winning a lot. And if you look at sort of how politics has divided itself here in this country, the big divide right now is between urban areas, which have become increasingly Democratic, and rural or exurban areas that feel as if they are being ignored. if Democrats are not showing up in those places, even if you-- even if you are not gonna win right away but if you are not in there at least making an argument that, Hey, you know what? It is the Democrats who are trying to raise your minimum wage. It is the Democrats who are trying to make sure you got health care or that your health care costs are not killing ya. It is Democrats who were making sure that your kids are not drinking polluted water. It is Democrats who are trying to reign in the banks if they engage in excesses so that you do not end up having a problem. they are all looking down on you, they do not care about you. They are just trying to help out their various special interest constituencies, that argument ends up being successful. And so we have got to do a better job of showing up. And I was able to do that when I was the candidate. But I have not-- I have not seen or-- or presided over that kind of systematic outreach that I think needs to happen. He used it. Clare Booth Luce, the diplomat, former Congresswoman goes to him in 1962. He asks her, What is on your mind? She says, The greater the man, the easier it is to describe him in a single sentence. And she said to him, What is your sentence? I do not care what history thinks. I'd like to think that-- maybe the sentence is-- President Obama believed deeply in this democracy and the American people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2419, "text": "Because-- as I reflect back on what is worked for me in this office it is been that I have -- I have gotten people who maybe did not believe in the process to get engaged. Ironically, I have even gotten the other side that maybe did not believe in the process to get engaged. I, you know, I-- I-- I am -- I gather I am the-- the father of the Tea Party. I-- I invigorated the grassroots in the Republican Party as well as the Democratic Party. So, you know, I-- if-- health care got done because there were a lot of people out there who are not professional politicians, but are citizens, who pushed for it even when the politics was hard. But did you succeed on your own terms? Back in the campaign you talked about Ronald Reagan changing the trajectory of the country, setting on a fundamentally different path. Do you think you did that? I think I did in the sense that there is a whole generation coming up behind us that was engaged, inspired, worked for change during the course of my presidency, saw what was possible. And when you look at what they believe in, when they, you look at how they value diversity, how they believe in science, how they care about the environment, how they believe in, you know, everybody getting a fair shot, how they believe in not discriminating against people for sexual orientation and you know, their belief that we have to work with other countries to create a more peaceful world and-- and to alleviate poverty, that is the majority of-- of an entire generation that is coming up behind us. Well, you know, they came out to vote for me. The next phase and this is part of what I am interested in doing after I get out of the presidency is to make sure that I am working with that next generation so that they understand you cannot just rely on inspiration. You have to be involved during midterm elections, you have to care about what happens at a school board level. You have to be involved in terms of what is happening in your local neighborhood and what issues are there. So-- so I think that there is gonna be a lot of work to do in order to consolidate the transformations that I was interested in. I think if you look at surveys and attitudes among young people, you see it. I imagine you think the presidency's something you get better at over time?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2420, "text": "And what put this in my mind was reading Bob Gates' memoir. And he talks about being in the meetings with you and talking about the raid on Osama bin Laden, saying, Maybe he is getting too cautious; he is been there too long. I believe in term limits for presidents because I think that there is no doubt I am a better president now than I was when I start. In fact, I-- I would argue that I-- I am the best president I have ever been over the last year or-- or two. And sustaining the energy and focus involved in doing a good job I think starts to-- starts to gets tougher the longer you do it. And-- and I think we have done a pretty good job staying in touch with the American people. But at a certain point you cannot help but lose some feel for what is on the ground because you are not on the ground and-- and-- So-- so that tells me that there is-- there-- there is a utility in the democracy refreshing itself on an ongoing basis. And-- and that is part of what I tried to describe to my team and supporters after the election, there was a lot of disappointment. You know, I--what I have said to them is, Look, we-- we ran our leg of the race and we did a darn good job. I can document-- in fact, this past week we are -- we have put out memos from every agency showing what did we do. We-- we feel some pride about it. And-- and I can honestly say, George-- and I do not think there is a lot of dispute for this. You-- you can argue that we did not get everything done that we wanted to get done, but I can make a really strong argument, and I think prove, that by almost every measure the country's better off now than when I started. And so just to finish the thought, what that means then is that if we started here and we are now here, just like I described in health care, yeah, somebody comes in, they got new ideas, maybe ideas that are completely opposite of my ideas. Maybe some of it goes, maybe some of that progress goes back. Maybe they think of some things we did not think of, and so in some other areas-- we can learn something.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2421, "text": "But that just gives sort of the democracy an opportunity to test ideas, for those who lost to catch their breath, regain energy, reenergize themselves and then get back in the arena, and then we will make some more progress in the future. One-- one possible big exception: In the first line of your biography it is probably going to be first African-American president. The heart of your promise when you first burst on the national scene, bringing everyone together. And you look now and most African-Americans think we have gone backwards on race relations over the last eight years. What do you say to that? I-- I am absolutely convinced that race relations on the whole are actually better now than they were 20 years-- But we have greater awareness of where we are falling short than we used to. Let us just take the example of-- community police relations. I mean, the truth of the matter is that-- that the problem of police shootings and reactions in the community-- George, you and I are about the same age. I-- I think you remember what happened in Los Angeles after Rodney King, I think you remember what-- the divisions that happened after the O.J. trial. I think you -- the-- the notion that somehow any of that is new is not the case. What is true, though, is now we have got a bunch of videos that whatever side of the issue you are on, raises the temperature on these issues and makes people really focused and-- and-- and-- and trying to figure out, What exactly is this? And that is an example of something that it is not as if that is the first time that a hate crime has taken place in this country. Hate crimes have been taking place for hundreds of years in this country, but it is there on video. And the-- the-- the sort of seeing cruelty and callousness of that sort from young people is heartbreaking. And so naturally if you see a video like that you are gonna say to yourself, My God, this is horrible, and-- and rightfully so. But that allows us then to talk about how-- how-- how do we break free from those kinds of attitudes? And I think that we are in a position to continue to make progress, but it is gonna require us to both recognize what the problems are, also recognize the-- the-- the progress we have made", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2422, "text": "During the course of my presidency crime has been the lowest it is been probably since the '60s. But you would not know it if you were watching TV or looking at the internet, and you certainly would not know it, listening to this past campaign. But overall in the country this is a much safer place than it used to be. But if you ask the average person they'd tell ya, Naw, it is much more dangerous, despite the fact that violent crime has dropped precipitously. And so we have to recognize we have got some big problems on race, just like we got still big problems on crime, just like we got big problems on just about everything. But we also have to make sure that we have -- draw confidence from the progress that we have made, 'cause otherwise, you get into this cycle of cynicism. And you are also-- and I warn young people that I interact with about this-- you get into unrealistic expectations where you think that, Oh, we are gonna eliminate racism like that. I have one final question. I have a very strong memory of your inaugural. In that moment you are walking out of the Capitol, you see them all for the first time and you kind of pause and take it all in. Do you remember what you were thinking and feeling at that moment? The first inauguration I was thinking to myself, Let us make sure I do not screw this up. JFK gave probably the greatest inauguration speech ever that first time, but I guarantee you when he first walked out there he was thinking, Goodness gracious this is-- this is-- this is big and I better be up to the task. You turned around-- --I was walking out and I decided, You know what? Let me turn back and-- and remember this. And-- and what I remember thinking at that point, having gone through both the ups and downs of my first four years, and seeing the sea of people was, What a remarkable country this is and how lucky am I that-- that we live in a place where the son of a single mom, not born into any kind of fame or fortune, in a pretty remote state somehow can end up be in a position to-- to make a difference. And at that moment, just a little under two weeks from now, when President-elect Trump finishes the oath, power passes from you to him, what emotion will you be left with?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgeorgestephanopoulosabcnewsthisweek15", "title": "Interview with George Stephanopoulos of ABC News' This Week", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-george-stephanopoulos-abc-news-this-week-15", "publication_date": "08-01-2017", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2423, "text": "ENTITY, do you think it is a good idea for Prime Minister Netanyahu to sit down with Yasser Arafat personally and try to work out the problems between the Israelis and the Palestinians? Well, I think it is a good idea for him to sit down with me. And we are looking forward to it. We will be able to-we will answer your questions later. I think we should wait until after we have a chance to visit to answer questions. Has there been any progress in determining who was responsible for the terrorist action in Saudi Arabia? Well, I got an update yesterday. I do not know how to-I do not want to answer your question specifically. I feel confident that the investigation is being handled in the proper way and it is progressing. If it is state-sponsored, though, is there going to be U.S. retaliation if you can conclude that a state was responsible for this action? Let me-let us do the investigation first. Prime Minister, are you bringing the President information about Palestinian violations of the accord, sir? Prime Minister, do you think there are any Syrian links to the bombing in Saudi Arabia? Well, I thought that the President's suggestion of first investigating and then declaring may be not that frequent among political leaders, but I think it is wise. It is a wise suggestion in which I will follow. Do you have any evidence of Syrian involvement? We will answer more later. ENTITY, Secretary Perry seems to be getting a pretty tough grilling right now up on the Hill. Do you still have confidence in Secretary Perry? That is why I appointed General Downing to look at it all, to get the facts, and to evaluate the security situation there and elsewhere where our people might be at risk. And we will do a good job of that. But I think the American people recognize that, on balance, our military people have done a good job and that he is been quite a good and effective Defense Secretary. I have full confidence in him. And I believe that every fairminded person, when they look at his record, will feel the same way. Let us get everyone in first. Let me, first of all, say I am delighted to have the Prime Minister here. I have looked forward to having a chance to have this conversation. And I think that I should defer answering any substantive questions until we have a chance to visit.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsexchangewithreporterspriordiscussionswithprimeministerbinyaminnetanyahuisrael1", "title": "Exchange With Reporters Prior to Discussions With Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu of Israel", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/exchange-with-reporters-prior-discussions-with-prime-minister-binyamin-netanyahu-israel-1", "publication_date": "09-07-1996", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2424, "text": "ENTITY, after the customary preliminaries of reception, invited them to be seated, when at once the conversation commenced by ENTITY informing him that they were a delegation from the State Convention of South Carolina, sent there to present certain memorials of that body. These memorials had been very carefully considered in the Convention, and he believed they told exactly the truth. ENTITY inquired the object of the memorials. ENTITY informed him that one of them was in behalf of Jefferson Davis, A. H. Stephens, George A. Trenholm and Governor Magrath. He said they had understood that by the late interference of ENTITY, Messrs. Stephens and Trenholm had already been released from close confinement and permitted to return to their homes. He would ask for Governor Magrath either a pardon or that he might be released on his parole. They could assure ENTITY no harm would result from such an act of clemency. The business must be proceeded with gradually, and an effort made to execute the law. It was a too common expression, by way of argument in regard to clemency, that such a one had been pardoned, and that he was just as bad as another who had not been pardoned. ENTITY replied that the delegation presented no such argument as that. ENTITY said sometimes the peculiar locality had much to do with pardons. Like many other things in human affairs we cannot have a fixed rule. Much depends on discretion and circumstances. If we know ourselves, we want to do what is best and just, and to show a proper degree of humanity on the part of the Government. ENTITY remarked that they had not come there to express their own hopes and desires, but as delegates from the South Carolina Convention to present the memorials of that body in a formal manner. We will, gentlemen, extend all the facilities and courtesies which the question requires. We would prefer to pardon twenty men than to refuse one. ENTITY replied, that they did not design to say anything with reference to Governor Magrath, further than that they believed much good would result by the exercise of the Executive clemency toward him. ENTITY said if they could get Governor Magrath paroled it would be a great relief to him at the present time. ENTITY thanked ENTITY for having released Messrs. Stephens and Trenholm. We have thus far, then, anticipated your memorial.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudgewardlowalfredhugercoloneldawkinsandwhtrescottsouthcarolina", "title": "Interview with Judge Wardlow, Alfred Huger, Colonel Dawkins and W.H. Trescott of South Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judge-wardlow-alfred-huger-colonel-dawkins-and-wh-trescott-south-carolina", "publication_date": "13-10-1865", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2425, "text": "ENTITY said Mr. Trenholm was one of their most useful men, and there was no doubt he would exert all his power with a view to entire harmony between the State and the Government. ENTITY replied that he understood that was so; adding, if treason was committed, there ought to be some test to determine the power of the Government to punish the crime. He was free to say that it was not a mere contest between political parties, or a question as to de facto governments. Looking at the Government as we do, the laws violated, and an attempt made at the life of the nation, there should be a vindication of the Government and the Constitution, even if the pardoning power were exercised thereafter. If treason has been committed, it ought to be determined by the highest tribunal, and the fact declared, even if clemency should come afterward. ENTITY remarked they were well aware of that. ENTITY resuming, said there might be some unkind feeling on this subject, but it did not exist to any great extent ENTITY said, although not instructed by the Convention, he was induced to ask whether Mrs. Jefferson Davis, who was now confined to Georgia, could not cross into South Carolina to see her friends. ENTITY replied that he had received letters from Mrs. Davis, but they were not very commendable. The tone of one of them, however, was considerably improved, but the others were not of the character beseeming one asking leniency. ENTITY interposed by saying she was a woman of strong feeling. Yes; I suppose she is a woman of strong feeling and temper, but there is no intention to persecute her. True magnanimity takes things as they are, and when taken in the proper way I disconnect them from humiliation. Manifestations of temper and defiance do no good. ENTITY remarked that the tone of the newspapers was more favorable, and different from what it was. He then asked if ENTITY had seen a copy of the amended Constitution of South Carolina. Of course he had seen they accepted emancipation. He felt perfectly satisfied that the person and property of the negro would be protected, and spoke of the great difficulties of regulating labor and restraining vagrancy, etc. ENTITY remarked that they had a deep consciousness of the truth of all president said. ENTITY, resuming, observed that the character of an individual may characterize a nation, which is nothing but an aggregate of individuals; and when a proper spirit is manifested, all can act harmoniously.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudgewardlowalfredhugercoloneldawkinsandwhtrescottsouthcarolina", "title": "Interview with Judge Wardlow, Alfred Huger, Colonel Dawkins and W.H. Trescott of South Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judge-wardlow-alfred-huger-colonel-dawkins-and-wh-trescott-south-carolina", "publication_date": "13-10-1865", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2426, "text": "it lifts him above humiliation. In these cases, gentlemen, we will do the best we can. While there is sympathy, there is a public judgment which must be met But, I assure you, gentlemen, no disposition exists for persecution, or thirst for blood. ENTITY thought many of the evils would disappear if they inaugurated the right system. Pass laws protecting the colored man in his person and property, and he can collect his debts. He knew how it was in the South. The question when first presented of putting a colored man in the witness stand, made them shrug their shoulders. But the colored man's testimony was to be taken for what it is worth by those who examined him, and the jury who hear it. Those coming out of slavery cannot do without work; they cannot lie down in dissipation; they must work; they ought to understand that liberty means simply the right to work and enjoy the products of labor, and that the laws protect them. That being done, and when we come to the period to feel that men must work or starve, the country will be prepared to receive a system applicable to both white and black-prepared to receive a system necessary to the case. A short time back you could not enforce the vagrant law on the black, but could on the white man. But get the public mind right and you can treat both alike. Let us get the general principles, and the details and collaterals will follow. We must be practical, and come up to surrounding circumstances. ENTITY, ENTITY and ENTITY, all expressed to ENTITY their conviction that the State had accepted in good faith the result of the issue which had been made; that the people felt that ENTITY had stood between them and a harsh use of the power of the Government; that they felt entire confidence in his purposes and actions, and hoped, in return, to entitle themselves to his confidence as to their feelings and actions. ENTITY replied, he was glad to hear it; that whenever such mutual confidence existed, there would, he thought, be an open road to the restoration of good feeling and a prosperous condition and that if he knew himself, and he thought he did, he would recommend nothing but what would advance their interests. So far from pandering or looking to future elevation, he must be believed, when he said he had not an eye single to such preferment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjudgewardlowalfredhugercoloneldawkinsandwhtrescottsouthcarolina", "title": "Interview with Judge Wardlow, Alfred Huger, Colonel Dawkins and W.H. Trescott of South Carolina", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-judge-wardlow-alfred-huger-colonel-dawkins-and-wh-trescott-south-carolina", "publication_date": "13-10-1865", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Andrew Johnson"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2427, "text": "Because we have to get out now and raise our funds. And if I can do it in a regular, disciplined way, then I can maintain as much time as possible for my job even next year when the election begins. Is it hard to run a country and run for office? It is if you have to do it fulltime. And I just determined that the best thing to do would be to try to handle the fundraising in a regular way this year and try to get it out of the way so I could spend as much time as possible being ENTITY next year and defer the campaign as long as possible. Oh, so next year the campaign is going to come late to you. But what I'd like to do is to work as much as I can. Even on this trip we have done several official things. This morning I was up in San Francisco with 19 executives of major information firms announcing that we were going to provide computer hookups for all the schools in California over the next couple of years and challenging the rest of the country to follow the lead. And over the next few weeks, I will be trying to put together a national plan for this sort of thing. We know we can get computers in all of the schools, and if we can get the teachers trained, have good software , we are going to do very well, indeed. He was not, although I know him quite well, and I expect that he will be very supportive of this. Because he said recently on a show we did on television that he would be very supportive. Yes, he-I know him quite well, and we have talked about this extensively. We had lots and lots of other people there. There is a great feeling that California ought to lead the way because the State is now only 45th in students- computers per student-but they have the- they are the technological leader of the world. So I am encouraged by it. This is the audience's show, but let us cover some bases right up front. And again, I would like to put it off as long as possible. In the next 60 days, in the working out of this budget, we are going to define in some measure what our country is going to be like for the next several years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2428, "text": "And I just want to continue to focus on the substance of the changes we ought to make and the values we ought to put up front in protecting families and individuals and trying to bring our country together and give people a chance to make the most of their own lives and try to write that into the budget. And I think the less politics, the less partisanship we have, the better off we are going to be. I think-you know, he is plainly the most influential and effective Vice President in the history of the country, what he is done with technology, what he is done with the environment, what he has done with reinventing the Government. We have done more than any previous administration, Republican or Democratic, to shrink the size of Government, reduce regulation, and basically make Government more entrepreneurial. And he is led that effort. And of course, he is been the leading voice in what we have done in foreign policy as well. So I am looking forward to running with him, and I like working with him. I do not even have to ask a question, I just say a name. Colin Powell-what do you make of it? Well, as you know, I have worked with him and I like him and I think he is got a very compelling life story and he is a very appealing man. I have no idea what he is going to do, and I cannot -I do not really have any influence over it. So what I have to do is-- You have to think about it, though. Believe it or not-well, and you would expect that. I mean, he is a very impressive man, and he is gotten a lot of very favorable publicity, much of it very well deserved. And so that is just a part of it. But I have no control over that. What I have to do is to do the job the people gave me. And I really believe, in the world we are living in, with so much change going on and people being bombarded from all sides with so much information, people like me who are in office should not worry so much about being popular. We ought to do what we think is right for the long run and then hope-believe the election can be our friend. Because only when the election starts do people really begin to focus on it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2429, "text": "Are you, though, concerned about this apparent feeling in the country-Powell said it the other night on my television show-a plague on both the Houses, the Democrats, the Republicans. Bill Bradley is a classic example- he leaves the Senate. Both parties seem to be in disfavor. Well, I think they are in disfavor right now because the American people have seen them fighting in the Congress and they have seen few results since the last election and because in the previous election they did not understand what results had actually occurred. But if you look at the facts-first, I think there is a good chance that we will get a budget agreement that will both balance the budget, which both parties want, but which will preserve our fundamental obligations to our children in terms of education and technology in the future-- And that will change the feelings? and to the elderly in terms of having-reducing the rate at which Medicare and Medicaid grow but still not really hurting a lot of the older people of the country. If we get a good balanced budget, if we can get a decent welfare reform bill, if the people see the system working, then I think they will not have such negative feelings about both parties. But I also believe, in fairness, that the Democratic Party has done a lot of things that most Americans never thought they would. I mean, the Democrats took the lead alone in reducing the deficit from $290 billion to $160 billion a year. They passed a crime bill that increased the death penalty but also invested more in prevention, that had three strikes and you are out but also put 100,000 police on the street. The crime rate is going down in every State in the country. Well, because we still have troubles and because it is an unsettling time. If you look at what is happened all over the world, you have got this global economy that is going from an information society to a technology and- I mean, it is going from an industrial society to a technology and informational economy-- And you-look at all this, yes. And you have got-people are going to be faxing us; they are going to be E-mailing us; they are going to be doing all this stuff on the Internet. We do not have the cold war anymore, with nation-states organized in roughly two different camps. We have got instead a global economy. And the good news is you have got economic integration.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2430, "text": "The bad news is there is all this pressure for unsettling people's lives, whether it is people being less secure in their jobs or working harder for less or being subject to smaller fanatic groups who practice destruction like the sarin gas attack in the Tokyo subway or the Oklahoma City bombing or a bus blowing up in Israel. So it is a time of great ferment and upheaval where there are a lot of wonderful things going on and a lot of very troubling things going on. And the United States has-our job now, all of us in positions of authority and all of our citizens, is to embrace new ideas and change to try to create a new economy in which we can grow the middle class and shrink the under class, to try to create a social policy which rewards work and family and freedom and responsibility and to try to give us a different kind of Government that is more entrepreneurial and less bureaucratic but helps people solve their own problems. Now, this has only happened-the last time this happened to this extent was 100 years ago. And it is not surprising in a period like this that people would be looking around at all their options because they think there are so many balls up in the air. So, therefore, come independent candidates and disfavor and people leaving politics. And not only that, if you have got-look, if you go home at night and you have got 40 channels on television, and they say, which would you rather have, three parties or two, you'd say three. And if you ask five or four, they might say five. But I think that if this system that we have, which has made us the oldest democracy in human history, the longest lasting one, if it produces a balanced budget with a commitment to our children and our future and being decent to the seniors on Medicare and Medicaid, if it produces welfare reform that promotes work and responsibility without hurting innocent children, if it shows that it can come to grips with the fundamental challenges of the time, then it will generate more support. If it does not solve the problems, then it will not . Would you welcome an independent candidate? Is that good for the mix? You ran against it last time. I think it depends on who the candidate is, what the person says, what the issues are. What Powell would be for? Could we elect a black President?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2431, "text": "Oh, I think the American people-I would hope the American people would judge any candidate based on his or her merits, without regard to race or gender. That is what I hope, and that is the America I have worked for all my life. If you look at my appointments, if you look at the policies I have pursued, that is the America I have worked for. But I think-again, I will say it takes almost all the concentration I can muster every day to do the job I was hired to do. And that is what I am going to work on. But you love it. I love it. You told me once, My bad days are good days. Yes, because of-it is an incredible gift, with all the difficulties, to be given the opportunity to meet these challenges. And as I said, I honestly believe, when the history of this era is written people will say this was the period of the biggest change in the way we work and live in 100 years. So who could not be grateful to do that for a day, a week, a month, 4 years? If I get 8 years, that is so much the better. I am working hard at it. We are going to turn it over to the public. Are you going to sign off on this welfare bill? It depends on what it looks like. The Senate bill-I still have a few problems with the Senate bill. They took a lot of the extreme, kind of right-wing ideological things out of it. They have put in a bonus for moving people to work. They require people to sign personal responsibility contracts. They have put in a lot more funds for child care so people can go to work and still be good parents. These are all ideas that I have been pressing a long time. So I like it. It really would end welfare as we know it. And I think we can make it-if we can make it a little better in conference, I will be happy to sign it. If they make it a lot worse, they could kill it. I think it would not even get back to the Senate again. Right now you are leaning toward yes? Well, right now I like a lot of-the changes in the Senate bill that were made in the last 2 weeks were very good. If that is the direction the Congress is going in, we are going to have a great welfare reform proposal. But it still could get off the track.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2432, "text": "I just hope they will keep going in that direction. You are listening to ENTITY with ENTITY. What have we done in the last 4 years to help the environment? We do not hear a lot about ENTITY and environment? We have, first of all, faithfully advanced the cause of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. Secondly, we have done a great deal to try to promote public health in dealing with problems like the cryptosporidium problem that-that was the thing that got into the water in Milwaukee that killed all the people. We are trying to deal with that. Only you would know the actual name. We have also tried to improve public health through improving the food testing, like dealing with the problems with E. coli that caused the deaths from eating the meat. Would you say you have kept your promises? I have pushed through the California Desert Protection Act here, which was the biggest single land protection act and that kind of legislation in history. We worked very hard to solve the problems of the old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest-which the Congress has kind of messed up now-to get that out of court to protect the old-growth forests and to try at the same time to permit responsible logging. We reached an accord between the environmentalists and the farmers here in this so-called Bay Delta accord, in the farming area of California. We have worked to try to reduce the global warming and hazardous emissions through working on the clean car project with Detroit. We have supported the development of electric cars and natural gasburning cars and other things to promote clean air. Those are just some of the many things we have done in the environment. And in addition to that, I am obviously carrying on a vigorous fight now to prevent this Congress from using the budget process to undermine our ability to stick up for clean air, clean water, and the other basic environmental protections of the country. Well, I think it is a terrible mistake to neglect education funding in favor of building prisons. On the other hand, you still have to have strong criminal justice laws. The crime rate is going down in almost every State in the country-- It is not the only answer, but some people need to be sent to prison.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2433, "text": "Now, when we passed the crime bill last year, in addition to providing for three strikes and you are out and more funds to help States build prisons, we also gave the States and the communities of our country a good deal of money to promote prevention through education, through community activities and recreation, to give our young people something to say yes to. And in addition to that, our administration has worked very hard to give the States and the schools of this country and the young people of this country more educational opportunities, everything from getting kids off to a better start in school, to giving the school districts money for smaller classes, more computers, higher standards, to more scholarships and national service opportunities to pay for college education, to many, many more low-cost, easier repayment college loans. We have to be tough on crime, but we have to be smart about prevention and we have to continue to invest in education. You know, we have got 7 1/2 million new jobs in this country and an economic explosion by conventional measures, but half the people are still working harder for no raise. We have got to increase the skill level. So I agree with the questioner. You know, in California the cost of education has been increased so much and the funding decreased, that enrollment here has gone down in colleges by 10 percent at a time when it ought to be exploding. So I do want to reverse that, and I do think one of my fundamental obligations as ENTITY is to help our young people make the most of their own lives by getting a good education. And we cannot sacrifice that; that is the most important thing we can invest in for the future. Based on that, are you surprised that Governor Wilson got into the Presidential primaries? I have no opinion about that. Let the Republicans pick their nominees. All I am saying is, my obligation is to try to make sure that people like that caller can make the most of their own lives, and education is perhaps the critical element of that. We have an E-mail question. By the way, do you expect it to be Bob Dole? One of the things I learned is that you cannot predict, just as nobody predicted that much that I would be nominated and elected. I am going to be ENTITY, work on being ENTITY, and let them make their own decision. With Mexico in an economic and social tailspin, is NAFTA dead or jeopardized? And let me tell you why.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2434, "text": "NAFTA gives us a chance to have more access to Mexican markets and not to have a permanent trade deficit with Mexico just because their wages are lower than ours. In the first year of NAFTA's existence, we had a huge surplus with Mexico and generated many thousands of jobs. The truth is that the Mexicans expanded too quickly, borrowed too much money, and got in trouble. But now, under President Zedillo, they are slowly working their way back into a stable situation. Over the long run, NAFTA means more opportunities for Americans to sell products that bring higher wages to our workers, it means more stability in Mexico, it means less illegal immigration, it means better partnerships in Mexico and in Canada and then throughout Latin America for the long run. We have to make these decisions in this period of change not just on what might be good next month but on what will be good for America 10 or 20 or 30 years from now, and I am convinced that NAFTA and the GATT world trade agreement will be very good for America over the long run. A report just in, , from Reuters, that all the factions in Bosnia are going to meet in New York this week. What can you tell us? We just released that information, I think, from our plane. Ambassador Holbrooke, who is handling those negotiations for me, has been working very hard. I believe that a combination of factors, including the firm resolve of our NATO allies in the United Nations in stopping the siege of Sarajevo with the air campaign, some changes on the ground there in Bosnia, and the willingness of parties to work with Mr. Holbrooke and with our partners in Europe in Russia to get a negotiated settlement, give us some hope. Now, I want to caution everybody, this is Bosnia, and it is tough. But I feel better than I have in a long time. Well, they are coming to New York, as I understand it, in part for the United Nations. So it is convenient for them, and it is good for us. So we will be working- we talked for a long time today. I talked with the Secretary of State and my National Security Adviser and Mr. Holbrooke; we had an extended talk and we agreed on what the agenda was going to be, and I feel good about the process. But I want to caution the American people, this is Bosnia, we have got a long way to go. Are you hands-on in this?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2435, "text": "Yes, I have been very involved in it, and I feel that we are doing the right thing and we have a chance to put an end to the misery and to limit once and for all the possibility that this could spread into a wider war that can involve our people. This is the ENTITY special on Westwood One, if you have just joined us, with the ENTITY of the United States. Let us knock everything off. Well, let me first of all say that we have been doing a version of that. When we took the deficit from $290 billion down to $160 billion in the first three budgets that I was involved with, the first time since President Truman was office that we had a three-yearin-a-row reduction of the deficit, we eliminated hundreds of programs, we cut others, and we cut domestic discretionary spending and defense spending in the aggregate and then tried to make our priorities within them. Now what we are trying to do is to agree on a timetable for going to zero, and instead of- we are cutting categories, if you will, as you suggest. But within those categories, I still believe we ought to preserve our commitment to education, to technology, to research and development, to the things that will generate the jobs and the opportunities of the future for Americans, because that is an important value. But we are doing, in general terms, what you suggest. The reason you cannot take the politics out of it is because there is so much difference between the various Members of Congress and the administration on what should and should not be funded. But I do believe that what we need is an automatic mechanism to say that if in any year we miss our deficit reduction targets, then there will be some sort of across-the-board cut. Now, that is what we did when I was a Governor, and it worked very well. So I'd like to see us make our priority decisions now over the next 60 days, and then say if, in these years, these out-years we miss it and we have a bigger deficit than we thought, then there ought to be some sort of across-the-board shaving so that we can keep faith with the American people and take that process out of politics. Someone by fax wants to know where you draw the line in sand? What would you definitely veto that is a Republican proposal? Well, I have issued a lot of those things.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2436, "text": "The veto threats, if you will, or veto notices, I do not want this balanced budget process to be a pretext for destroying our ability to protect clean air and clean water. I do not want the balanced budget process to lead to massive cuts in our efforts to give our young people a chance to make the most of their own lives through education investments. And I do not want the balanced budget to be a pretext for really hurting the elderly, the disabled, and the poorest children in this country with excessive reductions in Medicare and Medicaid just to meet the 7-year target and mostly to meet this very large tax cut that benefits the upper income people like you and me who really have not asked for it. Now, I think we can have a tax cut targeted to the childrearing and to education and still balance the budget in a timely fashion. But we should not just jerk the rug out from under the health care of the most vulnerable people in this country. Have you asked Mr. Dole and Mr. Gingrich about the conference committee on the line-item veto? And what do they say? We have less than a minute because I have got to get an on-time break here. and they had the Congress so they were in charge of the spending, they did not want to give me the line-item veto. So you think there is no doubt it is just deliberate because of ENTITY? Well, I do not even know if they'd do that. They have got the Congress, and so now they like the spending. When they were in the minority, they liked the line-item veto. I have been consistent on this. I have always believed in the line-item veto. It imposes some discipline on the process. It is not a cure-all, but it gives you much more discipline. We have more to come. We are going to take a break, and then when we come back, more from ENTITY, more E-mail, more faxes overseas, in the United States, phone calls, et cetera, in this kind of historic town meeting. This in Westwood One, and you are listening to ENTITY with ENTITY. I guess this is from America Online. Due to the fiasco surrounding the O.J. Simpson trial, what is its effect on the American justice system? How do you see that trial-they are going into the jury next week? Well, I think it depends in part on things that still have to happen.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2437, "text": "But I would hope neither the American people nor our friends in the United Kingdom would judge the American justice system entirely on this trial, because the facts are so unusual. First of all, the trial was televised, which I think contributed to the circus-like atmosphere and some of the developments. You are opposed to televising? Well, I just think that you run a serious risk when you do it in a high-profile trial. Secondly, you had a very excellent defense, and you have had a lot of-in terms of-and they are famous, they are well-known, and they are able. And then you had all these extraneous elements coming in that do not normally come in a murder trial. So I would just say, we should be hesitant to recommend sweeping changes in the American justice system based on this trial, which is unlike any one in my experience. As an Attorney General in-which you were in Arkansas-- Did you ever have a televised trial? And I just think-on balance-I think all criminal trials can be heavily covered in the press and then reported on by television. But I think on balance, you run the risk of having more derailments and distractions if you have televised trials. Yes, we have got problems there, do not we? And it is a much more rare occurrence in Japan, unfortunately, than it is here But I would say to you that we will first of all make it clear that the United States deeply regrets the incident, that we do not condone any misconduct or any abuse of the Japanese people. We think that anybody who violates any laws should be treated accordingly. But we have been a good partner with Japan. And even though we have had some differences over trade matters, for example, when we had to have a real conflict over the treatment of automobiles and the auto parts, the Japanese are a great democracy and a strong ally for us, and our forces have been there now for quite a long time in genuine partnership. So if they think there is any kind of procedures we ought to take to improve things, we obviously are open to that. But I think as long as they know that we are not turning a blind eye to this, that we are outraged, that our heart goes out to them, they know that we have been a good partner and we respect them and we will continue to be. Is Vice President Mondale doing a good job of being up front with the Japanese?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2438, "text": "I think it is fair to say that he has exceeded the expectations even of his biggest fans in both showing the Japanese that we are deeply committed to our friendship and partnership with them and that we respect them in every way but that there must be some changes in our trading relationship. He has been very tough and very strong and, at the same time, very supportive of them. He is struck just the right balance. Well, it was a decision that we made together. Everybody said that it was bad politics- the people who said that if she went it would be condoning their human rights record and then if she went and said it was strong, that she would upset our developing relationship with the Chinese. But I felt that she has invested so much of her life in the welfare of women and children in our country and then around the world, and I thought that she could speak for our American values and about conditions that exist, not only in China but in other countries, even here in the United States, that are bad for the future of women and little girls-that it would be a good thing. And I think now everyone sees that it was a wonderful thing for our country and for the cause of freedom and human rights around the world. I am sitting in an office in the middle of our farmyard in the middle of North Dakota. The information highway is open to us, but the long-distance charges are much too heavy. Can we expect equal access for rural America in the future? That is one of the things that we have worked very hard on. The Vice President and I strongly feel that we have got to have equal and affordable access, whether people are isolated in rural areas or whether they are low-income people in innercities or whether they are small business people or people in schools and hospitals and libraries. And so one of the things that we are looking for, for example, in this telecommunications bill is a bill that will guarantee genuine competition to bring prices down and the quality and variety of services up. Rural America actually is in a position perhaps to benefit more than any other part of America by putting America into the information superhighway because you can bring all-everything to the smallest rural hamlet in North Dakota or in North Arkansas. It is going to be a big issue in the telecommunications bill, and it will continue to be a big issue for us. And I do believe the answer to your question is, I think this will be like all technology.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2439, "text": "I think the more of it there is, and the more competition there is, the lower your prices will be. In that regard, this legislation might remove all ownership restrictions for radio and television, meaning we could own anything in any amount. Do you favor it? Now there are restrictions now on how many-what percentage of the national television stations you can own-it is at 35 percent, I think-but the present bill has no restrictions in local markets. You could own five stations. Well, no, you could own two television stations, the radio stations, and the town newspaper. You are against that. I am against that. You might say, well, look at Los Angeles, we have so many television stations, but most places have three television stations, a handful of radio stations, and one newspaper. So I think the local concentration provisions ought to be changed before they send the bill to me. You got into criticizing Calvin Klein. I have no judgment about whether whatever they did violated the law. The crime rate's coming down, and the murder rate's coming down Drug use by people 18 to 34 is coming down. But violent crime among people between the ages of 12 and 17 is going up, casual drug use between-about people between 12 and 17 is going up. And these young people, in their most vulnerable years, trying to come to grips with their physical developments, with their intellectual challenges, where the world may seem bewildering to them, I just do not think they ought to be used as commercial objects. I do not think you ought to put teenagers out there selling jeans where you show their underwear. And basically, you send a message to all these kids out there that are struggling to try to come to grips with the world that what is really important is how they look in jeans and whether they can show their underwear and whether they can basically be sex objects when they are teenagers. And it was an emotional, visceral reaction on my part. It has nothing to do with the law. And I think the American people are going to have to reassert some things are important-more important than commerce, and the welfare of children is one of them. And speaking of nothing to do with the law, was Senator Dole also right in his criticism of what some of the things Hollywood turns out? And I know you are supported here very well-tonight there is going to be a gala with a lot of those people there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2440, "text": "Yes, but I think that the general comments he made were correct; the specific ones I do not have a judgment about. That is, the general thrust of saying that we need more sensitivity on the part of everybody in our culture-all the cultural influences in society, not just movies and not just records but all cultural influences in terms of the welfare of our children and their future, I think that is accurate. Now, having said that, let me remind you that this was an issue that I raised before when I was Governor in the 1992 campaign. In '93, instead of attacking Hollywood, I came to Hollywood and challenged the people here-and in television, which I think is a bigger problem just because kids watch more of it-to join with me in trying to deal with this issue. And one of the things that came out of that meeting- and I want to compliment the networks on this-I think the major networks and I believe Fox was involved with this-commissioned UCLA to do an annual study of the violent content of television programs. And UCLA recently issued their first report. So that is something positive that the networks are doing. Now we will have to see-will they act on those reports. But again, you do not want laws. No, I am not interested in censorship. What I am interested in is asking all of us in American society to be accountable for what we do. The more freedom you have, the more responsibility you have to exercise, in any area of life. And I think these things should become open for public debate, not because we want to gag people with laws, not because we want to be unrealistic but because our children, large numbers of our children are in deep trouble, and we all ought to be trying to rescue as many of them as we can and give them a good start in life. You are listening to ENTITY with ENTITY. Brandon, I'd say you are off to a good start just the way you handled the question. I want to compliment you for calling in and-- By the way, it is appropriate because the ENTITY planned on being ENTITY when he was 6. It is not so, but it is not too soon for you to think about it. I think you should- I would give you just a little simple advice. Number one, I think you should devote yourself to learning as much as you can in school. Learn as much as you can in school.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2441, "text": "Number two, I think you should try to make friends with and understand all different kinds of people because in a democracy like America, many different kinds of people make up our country and get to vote. And number three, when you are old enough, I think you should start to work for people you believe in in elections and learn how the election system works. So I would do those things. If you like people and you understand them, if you learn a lot in school and you develop your mind, and then you understand how the political system works, you might grow up to be ENTITY. Have we redressed that grievance? Well, it is interesting that you would ask that because I have-our administration has spent a great deal of time with the Native American tribes. And we now recognize in our country a government-to-government relationship with the American Indian tribes. We are trying to do things that recognize their integrity, that recognize their right to exist, their right to make many autonomous decisions, and that give them more support in trying to become more independent and to overcome some of the economic and other problems they have. since James Monroe in the 1820's to do that. So we are working on having the right kind of relationship with the Native Americans, and I think we are making some good progress. And I hope we will not see that progress reversed in this Congress. Before we take the next call, if we can capsulize it, what is happening today with Medicare? I presented a balanced budget that balanced the budget in 10 years and had a smaller but still sizable tax cut than the Republican congressional cut. Mine was basically targeted to middle income people to help them raise their kids and to deduct the cost of education after high school. They presented a 7 year balanced budget with a $250 billion tax cut and then basically made an arbitrary decision that they had to cut Medicare and Medicaid. Together, they had to reduce that spending by $450 billion over the next 7 years. With regard to Medicare, the problem with that is if you try to reduce it that much you either have to take so much out of the hospitals and doctors and other Medicare providers that you run the risk that they will not stay in the program or cannot stay afloat, or you have to excessively increase premiums and copays and other costs for seniors. And keep in mind, threequarters of our seniors live on less than $24,000 a year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2442, "text": "So what I am trying to do is to find some common ground with the Republicans to say we have to bail out the Medicare Trust Fund and lengthen its life. We have to slow the rate of medical inflation, but your cuts are simply too big and will cost too much hardship for the seniors of this country or to the health care system. Are they going to change them? Well, we are trying to find a way to work through to an agreement. There are lots of possibilities, and you know, the details are probably too complicated to go into here now. But that is basically the difference between us. And I am working hard to-because Medicare is a program that has integrity, it works, but it needs to be preserved for the future. May I ask if you are confident that we are going to see a compromised Medicare bill? I believe the chances are 50/ 50 or slightly better that we will ultimately reach a good faith agreement which balances the budget, preserves the integrity of Medicare and Medicaid, increases our investment in our children's future, and protects our environment. In other words, what is this? Or raising money. Yes, I have been doing fundraisers, and I have made addresses. But even the speeches I have given at my fundraisers have been reasonably nonpolitical, and then I am mostly trying to explain to the American people what I think we are going through right now and how I think we need to embrace new ideas based on old-fashioned American values and try to come together. I am really doing my best to see the American people go beyond partisanship to reach some common ground. Does the party pay, then, for part of this trip? Well, my campaign pays for all-if I do anything political, my campaign pays 100 percent of it. The taxpayers cannot pay for it. They do not pay for it. So even if you work 5 hours and you do politics 6 hours, politics pays? Unless I take a separate and distinct trip that is solely for the purpose of dealing with an issue before my job. Like the other day, for example, I flew to Colorado to do a fundraiser. My campaign paid for that. I left and went to another small town that was completely an educational event, and that was a public part of my job. What have you learned?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2443, "text": "Well, I think the most significant thing I have learned is that the ENTITY- being ENTITY and being an effective ENTITY and a good leader for our country is about more than actually what you accomplish. It is about more than the bills you pass in Congress or the executive actions you take. It is also about the words that you say and how you say them. And I have learned that, for example, the ENTITY has to be much more careful, much more clear, much more unambiguous than, for example, a Governor can in discussing an issue. And I am much more, I think, sensitive to the impact of my words and the way the decisions are made and the way they are communicated to the American people since Washington is so far from Boulder, Colorado, and all the other places that have called in today. And I think that giving the American people the understanding that we are making the decisions based on my convictions about American values, even though I know some of my decisions, whether it is to go into Haiti or to take on the NRA over the assault weapons ban or to take on the cigarette companies on teen smoking, may be wildly unpopular in the short run-I am trying to do things that are good for the long run. And I think I have to communicate to the American people clearly what the basic values are that animate my decisions and why I am doing this even though it may be unpopular because I think it will be good for the country over the long run. And that is a real lesson I had to learn, because when you are Governor, being Governor is more about whether you accomplish things and what you actually do in terms of the day-to-day work. Now, that is very important for a ENTITY, but very often it is almost impossible for people even to keep up with that until the election starts. So I have learned that. And if I were to win another term, I would try constantly, because I believe we are in a period of historic change, as I said earlier, to bring the American people together around shared values and a willingness to take bold steps and embrace new ideas even if they seem to be unpopular in the moment. By the way, you will be participating in many debates in this campaign? We can count on it. I believe the ENTITY should be accountable, and I think debates are a good way to do it. So I have always been willing to do that. Basically I would be opposed to those changes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2444, "text": "Our education budget preserves the commitment to special-needs children. My Domestic Policy Adviser, Carol Rasco, has a child who is almost-about grown now. But he had cerebral palsy. I have known him since he was 5. And I watched him come up through our public schools and develop and flower and get to the point where he could live in his own apartment. My college roommate for 4 years adopted a special-needs child. And I think the commitment of our Nation to let every child live up to the fullest of his or her own ability is something that we should not abandon. And we do not have to abandon it to balance the budget. Well, as you know, I believe the tobacco industry has made two great mistakes in the last several years. First of all, it is now clear that at least a couple of the big companies have been aware for years that tobacco was both addictive and harmful and that it was concealed. And secondly, it is clear that many of the tobacco companies definitely market to teenagers to get more customers because they lose customers every year even though it is illegal to sell cigarettes to teenagers, I think, in every State in the country. So I would like to see a firm effort against teen smoking. I do not really care, as I made it clear, whether the FDA does it or whether the Congress does it by law. But if the Congress does it by law, I expect them to adopt all the restrictions in substance that we have recommended. Now, many Congressmen are very loath to take on the tobacco companies because they are very wealthy, they have massive informational capacity to communicate to smokers, they have the ability to incite, inflame, and terrify the tobacco farmers who are really good, oldfashioned American hard-working people but who can be frightened by the tobacco companies. And so they do have a lot of influence, and frankly, all my political advisers told me that it was bad politics to take on the tobacco companies and there was a reason why no other living ENTITY had ever done it and that it was dangerous. But we had evidence that for 30 years companies had known that tobacco was addictive and dangerous and that 3,000 kids start smoking a day and 1,000 kids will have their lives ended sooner because of it. So if we can save 1,000 kids a day, that is worth a lot of political damage to me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2445, "text": "I think it is the right thing to do, and I hope they will not have so much influence in Congress that they will try to undermine this important effort. Should it come under the FDA? It should come under the FDA unless Congress is willing to write these requirements into law. Now, the FDA itself, Dr. Kessler said he did not care about regulating tobacco. If Congress would take the things we want to do and put it into law, the FDA would lose jurisdiction. They would not be able to do it on an ongoing basis, but the benefit we would get is then the move against teen smoking would begin right away whereas tobacco companies can tie us up in court for a while otherwise. So the FDA head, Dr. Kessler, has said that he will do it either way. But he would gladly give up jurisdiction to the Congress if, but only if, the Congress would take the same tough stand that we have recommended. Well, we are all over the board today. I believe on balance that both NAFTA and GATT will be a major boon to American agriculture. I was just out in California meeting with a lot of farmers there. And virtually all of them talked about how much stronger agriculture was as a result of it. With regard to NAFTA and Mexico, some of our livestock people have been concerned about how NAFTA would play and whether it would hurt them. With the GATT agreement, which is a worldwide trade agreement, there is no question that our farmers will be better off because other countries subsidize their farmers more than we subsidize ours. So if everybody has to reduce subsidies to an equal basis, American farmers will come out way ahead because we have the best, most competitive, most productive farmers in the world. If we can get a decent farm bill out of the Congress, that is, one that continues to reduce the cost of the farm programs but does not take us out of global competition and does not really wreck the family farm, then I think the future of agriculture is bright. In fact, I think we may have seen a bottoming out of the number of farmers. We may see the same or even a larger number of farms in the years ahead because global population would probably outstrip the ability of other countries to produce food. So farming should do very well in America for the next 20 or 30 years if we have a good farm bill and if these trade agreements are faithfully followed by all the countries.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2446, "text": "What did you think of what the Post and Times did? I might add, the FBI praised them today. Just for the reason that the caller said, I thought it took a lot of real courage on the part of the Post and Times to do what they did because our country has basically taken a very hard line in not cooperating with terrorists of any kind, not being blackmailed and not being subject to blackmail. The FBI recommended to the Attorney General, and she recommended to the Post and Times, after careful consideration, that they publish this for two reasons. One is they really felt, based on the best psychological profile they had of the Unabomber, that he would honor his commitment and stop killing people, stop trying to kill people. And secondly, they felt that the publication of the document, if it could be widely read, might actually help Federal authorities who have been looking for this person for nearly 20 years now, to identify a range of potential suspects. And they thought that this was not like, you know, like asking for a million dollars or asking to swap hostages or anything like that. So it was for that reason, with great reluctance, that the FBI recommended, that the Attorney General recommended, and that the Times and the Post did it. And you agree with it? I do agree with it under these circumstances. I sympathize with the comments of the gentleman that just called in. Our basic policy is strictly to not cooperate with terrorists of any kind. But under these circumstances, this narrow case, I think the Post and the Times did the right thing. And I appreciate the risks that they took with their journalistic integrity and with their principles to try to save lives and help us to finish this case. Do you plan to read Colin Powell's book? You know, I was kind of hoping he'd send me an autographed copy. I have not gotten one yet, but I was kind of hoping he would. He is autographed every other one in America. He might as well send one to you. By the way, would you-I know this happened once with Mr. Gingrich in New Hampshire. Would you sit down with Colin Powell and Ross Perot and others who are critical and semicritical-- I know you like-discussions in the White House.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarrykingculvercitycalifornia", "title": "Interview With Larry King in Culver City, California", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-culver-city-california", "publication_date": "21-09-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2456, "text": "It is election day, and you know, they give frequent flyer miles on Air Force One, you are going to get a free trip to anywhere. But you know, I had to take that very important trip to the Middle East, and when I came back, a lot of our candidates asked me to get out there and campaign, including Governor Cuomo, so I tried to do all I could to make the best argument for why we are moving our country in the right direction and we do not want to go back to the policies that failed us before in the eighties. So this morning I am just taking a last opportunity to encourage the American people to go out and vote, to make their voices heard today. The stakes in this election are quite high, as they always are in any midterm election, but especially in this one. So I hope the people within the sound of my voice will exercise their citizenship today and get out there and vote. Interesting contrast for you; maybe you can talk about it for just a second, between the events of the Middle East and our political system and the fact that the peace treaty signing coming so close to our election. Well, of course, we have been working on that very hard for a couple of years. It is just a coincidence that it came as close as it did to our election. But I would hope that it would remind the American people of the great potential of this country and the greatness of this country. And I hope it would keep our people in a positive frame of mind. One of the unfortunate aspects of so much of modern campaigning is that the negative tends to outweigh the positive, and the negative television ads, the whole business about the tone and tenor of our elections. This is actually quite a great country with a great past and an even greater future if the people who are going to be affected by it will invest in it and vote for it and vote for people who will build the country, not just place blame, vote for people who will keep moving us into the future. That is really the lesson of the Middle East, that people want the United States involved in the peacemaking and the problem solving of the world, whether in the Middle East or in Haiti or Northern Ireland, just to name three, because they think we have a good system and that we are a good people. And sometimes I think we forget it, and we need to remember it. We can go out, be heard, and make a difference.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohngamblingworradionewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With John Gambling of WOR Radio, New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-gambling-wor-radio-new-york-city", "publication_date": "08-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2457, "text": "As a man that has spent his entire life in politics, how do you define politics? Is it program or is it more the essence and the basics of hope, security, fulfillment? I think giving voice to people's hopes to getting people together, giving energy to other people is very important. So much of what we do down here in Washington basically is an effort to empower people to take responsibility for their own lives. There are not so many things that the Government does directly. I mean, we pay for medical care for the elderly through Medicare. We finance the Social Security system. We run a wonderful National Park System. the student loan program, the Head Start program, the crime bill which enables the city of New York to hire more police officers and have programs for kids to keep them out of trouble. All these things basically give people in their individual, family, or community lives the ability to take responsibility for themselves. So part of it is programs, but a lot of it is setting the right tone and the right direction, looking to the future all the time. This country is always at its best when it is coming together and moving to the future. I hear a frustration in your voice about the mood of the country, the cynicism, the negative advertising that is taking place on all sides in the past weeks. I think it has too much sway over our national life, but I think our communications in general with one another are too negative these days. We ought to be having more honest conversations with one another and doing less verbal bomb-throwing. I think the American people are frustrated by it, and that is why I hope that there will be a good turnout today for candidates like Mario Cuomo who have essentially been a positive force throughout their public careers. Because it is just so easy to give in to the kind of pounding-attack communications that tend to dominate not just the elections but often the daily communication of our public life. And it is not a very good way to run a railroad or a country, and we are better than that. And whatever happens today in these elections, I am going to be determined over the next few years to try to lift our country out of that. Along those lines, if, as predicted by some, the Republicans gain control of the Senate, will your agenda for the next couple of years have to change? No, but I will have to have more responsible bipartisan efforts on all parts.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjohngamblingworradionewyorkcity", "title": "Interview With John Gambling of WOR Radio, New York City", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-john-gambling-wor-radio-new-york-city", "publication_date": "08-11-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2460, "text": "ENTITY, minors buy one billion packs of cigarettes a year. How are you going to make not smoking and quitting smoking cool and attractive to young people? Well, I think we have to do several things. I think, first of all, the Government's responsibility is to make sure that the young people understand that it is addictive and dangerous and can kill them and that about one-third of the young people who start smoking every day-about 1,000 people a day, young people, start smoking who will have their lives shortened because of it. Then the third thing we have to do is make it less attractive, that is, we need to change the advertising and limit the ability of advertising to be a lure. We had a young teenager in here who was part of an antismoking group yesterday who said to me-I was so touched-she said, We look at these TV ads, she said, these girls smoking, they are always tall; they are always thin; they always have long hair; they are always pretty. She said, It is just like when the boys who are young see a movie star holding a gun. And it was shocking what she said. And then what we want the tobacco companies to do is to spend some money on an affirmative strategy to put out positive messages-over MTV, for example-about how it is cool not to smoke instead of to smoke. So I think you make it less accessible, less attractive, and then put out a positive message. And of course, we need a lot of help. We need people like you to do programs like this, and every parent in this country needs to talk to their children-all the parents need to talk to their children about it, because we now have done 14 months careful research and we know how damaging this is, and we know that the tobacco companies know how damaging it is from their own files. We have got to do something about it. Do you worry about making smoking more enticing by making it more forbidden to young people? I think that is always a concern; there could be some of that. But the staggering magnitude of the damage that it is doing is so great, I think if young people really understand how dangerous it really is and all the things that can happen to them and how it can affect their future, I do not think it will be more glamorous. You know, though, what kids are going to say.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2461, "text": "In a time where they are growing up and sex is associated with ENTITY, alcohol with drunk driving, going out late at night you could be shot, it is very violent, smoking during your adolescence almost seems like a lesser evil. I know it does, but in some ways it is the thing that puts the most at risk over the long run. And we have to do something about the other things, too. I have fought very hard to get the assault weapons out of the hands of gang members, to pass the Brady bill, to put more police officers on the street. The crime rate is going down in almost every-almost every big city in this country, the crime rate is going down. We have to-we are doing a better job trying to keep big shipments of drugs out of the country. We are working hard on that. On alcohol, it is less accessible than cigarettes. It is still a problem, but I want a zero tolerance drunk driving law for young people in every State in the country or here in the Congress. But the cigarettes-the magnitude of the damage caused is greater than all of that right now. And we just have to focus on it. I know it-because there normally is a period of several years between the time you start and keep smoking and the time you face the consequences, and when you are young you think you are going to live forever I know that it is going to be harder to get young people to focus on that. There is a lot of destructive behavior in America we need to attack at the same time, and I just think that we can get these numbers way, way down. You gave the number-a billion packs of cigarettes or a billion cigarettes a year-we can get that way down. And when we do, we will get the life expectancy of these young people and their quality of life way up. Did you ever experiment with cigarettes as a teen? Did you go through that phase? She smoked a couple of packs of cigarettes a day until my daughter got her to quit for her 8th birthday. When my daughter turned 8, her grandmother gave her that for a present. So I had a bad feeling about it from childhood. But it was only because of that. I am sure I would have done it otherwise. Why were you savvy enough to have a bad feeling about it? You did not like the smell of the house, or you did not like-- Yes, I did not like the smell in the house.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2462, "text": "And I thought it was-it struck me as a bad habit, kind of a nervous habit, a reliance. And I had a feeling that it was not good for her health. What would you say to Chelsea if you saw her fall under peer pressure of some of her friends and start smoking or if you found ashes in her bedroom in an ashtray or something? I would talk to her about it and tell her I thought it was a bad idea. She is the most militant person in our house, though. She and Hillary are always on me. You know, as I confessed yesterday, I still, once in a great while, maybe five, six, seven times a year, will smoke a cigar when I am outside. And I have got to do better with it. But if they see me chewing one on the golf course or something, they are on me. So my family is doing a better job with it than I am. Some kids I talk to said that nothing but an outright ban on cigarettes would deter them. Because cigarettes are just as deadly, if not more so, for adults. You have to go through all the same problems we went through with prohibition with liquor. It would have significant economic dislocations for a large number of Americans. And I think as a practical matter, because so many adults are, in effect, hooked on it, it would be very, very difficult to enforce. What I want to do is to phase it out over time by getting-if young people stop using cigarettes-if we could get young people, the usage down to zero, then eventually it will phase out. I think we just have to start with our young people. I do not think that. Most of them-a lot of them come from families that have been doing it 100, sometimes 200 years. I think some of these companies have known for a long time, according to their own documents, that nicotine was both addictive and destructive. And they have-insofar as they have pretended that they did not know that, that is wrong. I think some of these companies have said, we do not want teenagers to smoke, but they have consciously directed their advertising strategies to make it appealing to young people and not just Joe Camel, which was obvious, but a lot of other things as well. And what I want the tobacco companies to do is stop doing the wrong thing and start doing the right thing. I think they ought to come in here and support this-these restrictions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2463, "text": "I think they ought to ask Congress to enact them into law now. If they do not want the FDA to regulate them, let us enact the law now. And I think that we ought to start the very next day on this campaign together. If the tobacco companies really do not want kids to smoke, we can do this together. Are you going to try to bring back the cigarette tax? California has had a lot of success with that in their State. Well, this Congress would not adopt that. I have had a number of people who've come from tobacco countries suggest that some of the cigarette tax ought to be devoted to helping the farmers who want to convert their farmland to other purposes, to some sort of buy-out program. But I think that right now what we ought to do is-the bulk of the cigarette tax is available to the States, and a lot of the States now are passing cigarette taxes to help to pay for the health care bills of people who are suffering from tobacco-related illnesses. And I do not want to see the Congress and the Federal Government crowd that out. So when I proposed a tobacco tax before, it was to pay for health care. Right now, advertising is written off as a business expense, and that means the public pays in some fashion for all advertising, including cigarette advertising. Would you consider getting rid of the tax deduction for cigarette advertising? You are the first person who is ever suggested it to me. I'd never though of that. So I will give you a few minutes to absorb it, and I will come back. I have never thought of that. Because I think a lot of people would be offended by the idea of paying for an unhealthy product to advertise and garner more smokers through it. But I will let you dwell on it. Not only do you want to regulate tobacco products, but you are also in favor of regulating how they are marketed. When a musician sits down to talk with me and they are smoking a cigarette, should I not air that footage on MTV? Should I ask Keith Richards to put out his cigarette before he does an interview with me? Should this go for all television? Because of lot of young people watch MTV. I think you should ask him to put it out because I think there are a lot of young people-- And I know he is an icon-for me, too. I do not know if he-his heart might stop if he does not have a cigarette.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2464, "text": "That is the great thing about their endurance, you know. But that is a decision that each network, each interviewer, they will have to make. I believe very strongly in the first amendment and the right to free speech, free association, and freedom of religion. I believe in a very broad interpretation of it. But I believe that we should be restricting advertising directed at children because it is illegal to sell cigarettes to children. So, therefore, if it is illegal to sell cigarettes to children, it cannot be illegal to stop the advertising directed at children. In terms of the interviews and everything, I would hope every American adult, even those who smoke, would think, as I had to when I became ENTITY and I had this occasional bad habit of having my cigar once in a while, I would hope they would think about not doing it in public, not doing it around children, not setting a bad example. I think we adults have a responsibility to try to set a good standard for our young people and to basically say everybody's got a lot of problems, but being self-destructive is not a way to deal with them. ENTITY, I want to say this as politely as I can, but I think a lot of our viewers are going to be wondering why should they listen to you about this issue? Well, they do not have to listen to me about this issue. What we are going to do is change the law. But I will tell you why they should listen to me or to anybody else. I would say that if they wanted to listen to me, do not listen to me, look at the medical research, look at the evidence. This is about their lives, not mine. I have lived most of my life. Their lives are ahead of them. And the reason they should listen to me is that the evidence is on my side, not just because I am ENTITY. We know that nicotine in cigarettes and smokeless tobacco is addictive, is destructive, and will shorten the lives of one out of three people who start smoking on a regular basis. We know that. So what they should do is say, Okay, here is the evidence; now, what kind of life do I want to live? Ultimately, it is going to be their decision, because even if the law keeps cigarettes away from them in the near-term, soon they will turn 18, and they will be able to do whatever they want to do. They have to make these decisions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2465, "text": "But I think-my job, what I am trying to do here every day and with the economy, with saving the college loan program, with trying to preserve the environment from this awful assault that the Congress is making on it , is to give the young people of our country a good country to grow up into and a good life to look forward to. Then they have to make a decision about how to live that life. And what those of us who are older are supposed to do is to say here is what we think will maximize your choices. Here is what we think will give you the chance to live up to the fullest of your abilities. And that is what I hope they will listen to, because the evidence is on my side. I am not just preaching here, I have all this evidence. It is not like you do not have enough things to do already. Everything I try to do here, if you look at-let us just take trying to save the college loan program from attack and trying to preserve the environmental protections we have in this country. Why would I do that? Because I want my child and our grandchildren and all the young people coming up to enjoy a good life. That still requires all these individuals who are watching us to make decisions about how they are going to live. And being addicted to tobacco is not a smart thing to do if you want to have a long, full, good life. It is a huge roll of the dice. I never will forget a few years ago having to speak at the funeral of a very close friend of mine, a man that had literally no other vices. He was one of the most perfect human beings I ever knew. But he smoked a couple of packs of cigarettes a day, and he died of lung cancer 2 1/2 years after he had his last cigarette because it takes that long to clean out your lungs. And he was younger than me. I never got over it. I never will get over it. While I have you, there are a couple of other issues I wanted to ask you about that are important to young voters, in addition to smoking and their health, which you sort of rattled off very quickly. First, though, the woman best known as Jane Roe, whose struggle to obtain an abortion led to the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision, has come out against anything but first trimester abortions. How big a blow do you feel this is to the pro-choice movement?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2466, "text": "Well, as I understand it, she is gone through a number of changes in her life and had a serious religious conversion and believes that abortion is wrong now. The rule of Roe v. Wade is it permits everybody in America to make that same decision. That is, I think there are too many abortions in America. I have always believed that abortion should be rare but that they should be safe and legal until the third trimester when the child can live outside the mother's womb. If somebody has not made the decision by then, unless the life of the mother's in danger, I think they should be illegal, and they were in my State. But I think that leaving the decision to the woman and her doctor and whoever else she wishes to consult, I think on balance is still the right decision in our country. And that makes it possible for people like this woman to make up her own mind and to have her own convictions and then try to persuade other people that she is right. It leaves her free to say, My religious conviction is what is right for all of you; I hope you will follow me. People can do that. And we have a very vibrant, as you know, pro-life movement in this country of people trying to convince other people of that all the time. But we do not say to people who disagree that we are going to criminalize your conduct until the child can live outside the mother's womb. And I think, on balance, that is the right position for our country, and I would stick with it. Since abortion is under such attack in Congress, do you think that you should be doing more to support the pro-choice movement? Well, I do not know what else I can do. I am doing-I think I am doing everything I can. I have resisted the attempts in the Congress to take away the rights of choice to women in the service, to women who work for the Federal Government. And I hope we can beat it back because I think it is -I do not think that is the right thing to do. I do not think the law here is the way to resolve all these problems. You have used executive actions in the first 2 years of your Presidency for issues like abortion. And in recent months, with the Republican majority, you have turned to them more frequently, the regulation of teenage smoking being the most recent one. Do you feel like you are subverting the will of Congress by tackling issues this way?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2467, "text": "I think that I probably should have been doing more of this all along. But in the first 2 years, I had to pour all of my energies into trying to do something to bring the deficit down, to invest more in education, to try to expand trade, and get the economy going again. And we were able to do that, but the voters still gave the Congress to the Republicans. And now it frees me up, in a way, to-most of my efforts, to try to keep them from undoing the gains we have made from wrecking an economic strategy or wrecking the education program or wrecking the environment. But I can now do things like use my executive authority, for example, to promote welfare reform in all 50 States, to do the other things that we talked about. So I think I probably should have been doing more of it all along. Today lawyers for the legal defense fund are announcing how much money they have raised. Does that make you feel awkward to have them up there saying, We have collected this money for the ENTITY to defend him? But I am not a wealthy person and my adversaries decided that they would try to embroil me in all kinds of legal things, and I cannot afford to take any time off to think about it. So they are dealing with it the best they can in a legal and appropriate way. And I did not want to go to a few wealthy people and ask them to spend a ton of money to pay all my legal bills. So we resolved that the most appropriate thing to do would be to raise funds in a legal defense fund that had the same financial restrictions that running for Federal office does. And so that is what we have tried to do. Senator Dole and Senator Helms have proposed asking for $100 million in arms aid for Bosnia. Do you support this legislation? My position is that the United States should not, by ourselves, violate the U.N. rule against selling arms into Bosnia because it applies to all Yugoslavia, that instead, what we ought to do is have that U.N. mission there work to stop aggression against Bosnia by letting NATO use its air power and by strengthening the U.N. mission on the ground. What happened in Srebrenica was awful. But it happened in large measure because the United Nations would not permit the United States and the other NATO allies to take strong action from the air against the Serbs.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2468, "text": "Now that there is been a real change on the ground and the Serbs have been rolled back in the western part of Bosnia and in Croatia by the Croats, I hope we have a chance to make a decent peace there. I would not be against-if the U.N. mission fails, I would be for selling arms to the Bosnians or making it possible for the Bosnians to buy arms, but only when we get everybody to lift the arms embargo at the U.N. But let me just say this in closing. We have an embargo against Saddam Hussein in Iraq, and you see what happened. We put a lot of pressure on it; we now have some defectors coming over, weakening his power. If we say, We are going to ignore you, and we are going to sell arms to the Bosnians, then what is to prevent other countries from saying, Okay, we will ignore the U.N. embargo in Iraq, and we will bolster Saddam Hussein? I just have two more quick questions. Do you think it is a good thing that Time-Warner wants to sell Interscope Records? Do you know anything about that? I wanted to ask you if you were-well, Jerry Garcia has affected millions of Americans. Have you ever been to a Grateful Dead show? And why do you think he affected so many people of different backgrounds and generations? Well, first of all, he was just a great talent. And I was really pleased to see the Grateful Dead have one more great run around the country, you know, in the last couple of years and see all these young teenagers gravitating to a group that all of us liked 20 or more years ago. He had a great gift. And he even wound up putting out that line of ties. He had great ties. I would go around wearing Jerry Garcia ties and giving them away to people. But he also had a terrible problem that was a legacy of the life he lived and the demons he dealt with. And I would hope that all of us who loved his music and valued his contributions would also reflect on the consequences of, again, really self-destructive behavior. I mean, the lesson of Jerry Garcia's life is that he made a great contribution and he really was a-he had at least two generations of Deadheads, you know. Has she ever gone to a show?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtabithasorenmtv0", "title": "Interview With Tabitha Soren of MTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tabitha-soren-mtv-0", "publication_date": "11-08-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2469, "text": "We certainly appreciate that. Before we get on to talking about Canada-U.S. relations, I want to deal a little bit with your personal relations with Canadians. Does that matter to you? Does it matter to the relationship? I think I have had very good relations with the Canadians with whom I have dealt. We did not always agree, but I can understand people not agreeing with some of the decisions I made. But that does not necessarily mean there is any problems with the relationship. I guess much has been made about some of the name-calling that went on. That is just part of politics, and it does not bother me in the least. If I was bothered about name-calling from Canada, I'd certainly be bothered about name-calling from the United States as well. The relationship between Canada and the United States is really a relationship not necessarily by government only but by the peoples, by the interchange, by the exchanges we have, by the relatives on both sides of the border. In that regard, Prime Minister Harper, the new-I think this is now the third Prime Minister you have gone through-- He said that of the top priorities that he is got, softwood lumber has to be number one; says it is , in his words, putting a very serious strain on the relationship between the two countries. You have often said that this is something that you want to take care of. I am giving you an opportunity to make some news here. I may not see that. What would be- is there any one thing that you can do to unblock this issue? Well, I can tell our people to try to find common ground. I thought we were pretty close to a deal a couple of years ago-I cannot remember the exact timing of it, but I know we have been working on softwood lumber for quite a while. I fully understand how difficult an issue this is, particularly from Canada's perspective, since there is been some rulings. I told that to Stephen Harper, that I understand its importance. I understand its priority. And I'd like to get the issue resolved once and for all myself. The best thing I can do is tell our negotiators that-see if you can find common ground. Again, we were close to an agreement before-maybe that is a place for people to look for common ground. It is going to require some very quiet consultations to see if we can do what I'd like to see done.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithctv", "title": "Interview With CTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ctv", "publication_date": "28-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2470, "text": "Can it be solved on your watch? I know it creates anxieties in Canada. I really do not want to create anxieties. On the other hand, I do want to be fair to our folks here as well, and I think we can find ground. We have got the world's largest undefended border; we are both countries at war; we have got boots on the ground in Afghanistan. And yet here at home, we are putting more barriers along that Canadian-American border. You have often said that the reason for this-or what Stephen Harper calls the passport problem-you have said that it is because you want to know who is coming and going across that border. So I guess it begs the question, are the Canadians not telling you who is coming and going? Are we not doing a good enough job? Oh, I think Canada has been very cooperative, and the relationship between our services is very good. It can be a document, a tamper-proof document that will expedite border crossings, not delay border crossings. And right after September the 11th, obviously, our country took a hard look at the procedures enabling people to come back and forth across our borders, both north and south. And the idea was to come up, as I said, with a tamper-proof document. I know they have been focused on the passport, but surely we can design something-the law does not say passport only; the law says, kind of, passport-like, if I am not mistaken. We have found a lot of, for example, driver's license forgeries throughout the United States that make it difficult to-you know, as best as we can, assure our citizens that we know who is coming in and who is not. I guess part of the problem for a lot of people in this is they say, look, it is not so much guys like you and me going across-we have all got passports or identity cards. But it is the minor league, peewee hockey team, or the peewee baseball team that will not be able to play in each other's countries right now because it is too much of a hassle to get this card. I can understand-I mean, on any change of the status quo, you can always find, kind of, the nightmare scenario that makes life- it makes it feel like life is going to be a lot worse.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithctv", "title": "Interview With CTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ctv", "publication_date": "28-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2471, "text": "I think we can work with our Canadian counterparts to come up with something that is rational and meets the law that has been passed by the Congress and that I signed. Can you foresee-you are going down to Cancun as part of the exercise, I guess, of imagining a new North America and then getting it going. In your vision, can you foresee a day when there would be free travel of people across the borders without identity cards, just free movement of people in North America? That is probably down the road. But I am not imagining an important relationship, though, because we are really building on what our predecessors left behind, which is a trading arrangement that has substantially increased trade between the United States and Canada and Mexico. I am a believer that trade helps grow economies. I think free trade is an important part-and fair trade-something that Canadians want and something that Americans want is free and fair trade-benefits both of us. You know, we traded about nearly $500 billion, two-way trade, in 2005, which is very positive for both our economies. What I am concerned about is that protectionist tendency and isolationist tendency that could emerge in both our countries as well as in Mexico, which would make it harder for us to realize the benefits of collaboration together, make it harder for us to, kind of, grow together. And that would be not beneficial for the hemisphere, and frankly, it will make it a lot harder for future Americans and Canadians and Mexicans to compete with the Chinese, for example. And so there is a relationship which exists which needs to be protected and nurtured and streamlined and made more efficient, and that is really what the discussions will be in Cancun. A quick last question for you-I do not know if you are going to take the bait on this one. I let the cat out of the bag. Are you any happier with the Conservative Government in Canada than a Liberal Government? I am-I respect the will of the Canadian people, and as I say, you know, this is-there were some tense times when I made the decision to go to war in Iraq, and I understand that. I am not the-I fully understand why people, not only in Canada but in the United States, expressed deep concern about the use of force to protect ourselves. I stand by the decision. And therefore, I was not surprised when I heard, you know, members of political parties in both our countries express deep concern about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithctv", "title": "Interview With CTV", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ctv", "publication_date": "28-03-2006", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2472, "text": "We want to talk to you first about Medicare and then about new markets. You have got your long-awaited plan out on Medicare. What do you think the prospects are, especially looking at the early initial reaction that you got yesterday? What do you make of that? Well, first, I think it is a good sign that we have the Republican leadership with the door open. That is what having Senator Roth and having Congressman Thomas and the other two Republican congressmen there- McCrery from Louisiana, in particular, is a guy I know and have a regard for. McCrery would like to make an agreement on Medicare and Social Security-very serious man. I think, also, the breadth of the presence of the Democrats indicates that the most liberal Democrats have acknowledged that we need to make serious structural reform; and our moderate-to-conservative Democrats believe that this is enough structural reform to unify and coalesce around. So I think we have got something to go forward on. And what I intend to do is to call the leaders-Senator Lott and the Speaker and Senator Daschle and Mr. Gephardt-and ask them to come and meet with me the day we get back from Fourth of July recess, and let us try to make a plan for how we could do it this summer. Because I believe that I can do the same thing with the Social Security I have done with Medicare, I can offer them something. We could even maybe build on it and get the-done, because we cannot know that we are really going to pay the debt off which, as you know, I believe is profoundly important, unless we understand where we are on both. But I think the first thing to do is to get the Medicare because there is a real interest in it. When you have this meeting with the congressional leadership, are you going to give them a deadline for action? What will you do, specifically, at the meeting? What do you want to come out of it? Well, what I want to come out of it more than anything else is a common commitment to the goal. In other words, if the leaders will all say we want to do this and we think we can, it does not mean we will, but it will get us a lot closer. That will send a signal to the rank and file in both caucuses that this is something we are really going to try to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2473, "text": "And it would be a phenomenal gift to the country to do it, and we have the money to do it, and the only reason not to do it, frankly, is if somebody makes a real decision that the money should be diverted to something else. We are close enough now; we are much closer now, frankly, on Medicare than we were before we did the omnibus balanced budget in '97. This meeting or really the release of the plan is the start of a process. Some people think the end of the process could be a deal that enables Republicans to get some of the tax cuts they want and you to get the Medicare plan you want. Is that a possible end of this? Well, I think it depends first on whether we can get close enough so that- on the particulars of the structure of the Medicare-that is, can we get everybody, or more or less everybody for the kind of structural modernization that I think is imperative, where we have some genuine competition, but we do it in a way that does not sacrifice quality-that is why I want to set up this extra fund, because most people believe that in the '97 Balanced Budget Act we had excessive savings in some areas of Medicare from the point of view of providers, so we set aside a fund for the Congress to deal with that-and then whether we can get a general agreement on the structure of the drug benefit. A lot of our people-and I am very sympathetic-and maybe some of theirs would like to accommodate both the people that have huge drug bills and the biotech industry which wants to be able to sell these drugs if they keep investing and pushing the envelope on the big things. But I thought it important not to have a drug benefit that would be subject to the same criticism that we leveled at one of their tax programs back in '97-that, okay, it looks good for 5 years. So now, we have avoided that. But I think that if we can get agreement on the fundamentals of this and then if we can get agreement on real commitment to paying down the debt and taking the interest savings and plowing it into Social Security, then I think there is enough funding left over, not committed to either of those pots, given this new budget, that we can probably make it a kind of omnibus agreement covering other things. Yes, but I think that what we have to focus on is first things first.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2474, "text": "I think that, for the Democrats and for me, the important thing will be having the right kind of Medicare reform, having the prescription drug benefit, and getting the details right here. And so that is why I think we have to really-we have got to focus on that. I think the other stuff-assuming, as I said- it is a big assumption-assuming you get the financing right on the Social Security piece, I'd also like to have an omnibus agreement. I am going to try to get them to agree on Social Security, too. And a lot of people-most people do not think we can do that. I spent a lot of time just quietly thinking about it, on our trip to Europe and other things, trying to write out different scenarios. But I think there is much more energy right now behind the Medicare issue and a much greater sense of urgency. And frankly, you have got one that goes broke in 2015 and the other one, if they just hang with the money I have got, will stay all right until 2053 or 2055. So I think Medicare first, see if they want to do it, see if they will commit to try to do it by the summer. And then I think they can raise their other concerns once we get into the framework of the substance. But we have got to stay- this is a big, big-changes in Medicare, and we need to focus on that first. Are you concerned at all, though, that there may be a good number of Democrats who are afraid there will be a deal that they will not like? But none of them think that so far. In other words, I have worked very, very hard to keep our caucus together. I took a good deal of time to come out with the specifics of this plan, and we did a lot of serious work, all of us-and I include the White House in that, too-really trying to take the politics out of this in terms of what specifics we recommended. That is, I really tried to figure out what I thought had to be done structurally for this program to work, what kinds of savings we had to achieve, whether the economics really would support getting rid of all the copays on the preventive screening if you put in the copays on the lab tests that tend to be-most people believe are overused.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2475, "text": "So I think that-all I can tell you is that the negotiating process that I would support would be designed to produce an agreement that would be supported by the overwhelming majority of our caucus, and I would hope the overwhelming majority of theirs. If you look at the balanced budget agreement, we did a pretty good job. They had a slightly higher percentage of Republicans voting for it in the House than the Democrats, and in the Senate we had a slightly higher percentage of Democrats voting for it than Republicans. I think to get an agreement, we are going to have to do that. Given how important it is to you to try to win the Congress back, or as much as you could, for your party, do you ever feel personally torn about a deal versus trying to give Al Gore and the Democrats an issue? No, because I do not believe- it might help some individual Republicans get reelected to Congress if they voted for such an agreement, but I believe that for Democrats what is good policy is almost always the best politics. The do right rule is almost always best for us because we get hired to do things. The American people, when they vote for Democrats, they hire them. They give you this job, and you get a contract, and your contract is 2 years, 6 years, or 4 years if you are President; and they hire us to go to work every day and to do things. And I do not believe-for example, it did not hurt the Democrats in 1998 that we had a big budget at the end where there was a compromise that a lot of Republicans voted for, and we got the big downpayment on 100,000 teachers and a lot of other educational priorities. It did not hurt them at all. The only-this is not going to turn into a status quo country, and there are too many issues on which we are too deeply divided. If we can reach agreement on-and I am not saying this could happen-if we could reach agreement on Medicare, Social Security, taxes, investments in education, and there would still be differences in 2000 on next steps in education, on guns, on patients' rights, even if we pass a Patients' Bill of Rights, there are going to be differences, unresolved differences, on choice, on a lot of issues. In other words, there will be a vibrant election-year environment in 2000 for issues still to be decided by America that will be clear in the Presidential race and clear in the congressional races.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2476, "text": "Even if both parties-even if the Republicans join us-if you look at George Bush's message, it is assumed he will be nominated on this compassionate conservatism thing-and that both parties are competing for the dynamic center of America , I happen to think that is a healthy thing. If you just look at the real substantive differences, all-just the issues I have mentioned and others, we will have plenty to fight about, argue about in the election. So I think that actually both parties will be better off in dealing with the agenda of the 21st century. If we dealt with the baby boom problems right now, if we dealt with Social Security and Medicare and committed to pay the debt down, if we did all that, the Republicans would still say we need more for tax cuts than maybe we will get, or here is our next round of tax cuts, or whatever. One last question on Medicare, before we turn to new markets. Senator Breaux was critical, saying your plan did not go far enough by addressing structural reforms. And you, yourself, since Putting People First, have supported things like means testing. Are you frustrated that politically it was not possible to go farther than you went in this Medicare plan? No, I think-well, first of all, I think the structural reforms in the health care-there are two issues there. One is the means testing, which was not in his report, either, because some of the Republicans did not go for it. I do not think that is as big a problem as some people do, and I will come back to that. The second is an area on which we have an honest disagreement-Breaux and Thomas and me-and it is an honest disagreement. I want there to be-I want the managed care Medicare people to be given the maximum opportunity to make their program attractive to people in the traditional fee-for-service program, if they can do so. In that regard, I go just as far as they do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2477, "text": "Now, what I do not do, and I really do not think I should do, especially given the level of anxiety Americans have about managed care-even though I have imposed a Patients' Bill of Rights for federally funded programs, so our guys, our Medicare people, get the Patients' Bill of Rights-what I do not do that they do is I do not permit a level of what they call competition in the fee-for-service program in a way that would permit the cost of the traditional program to the beneficiaries to rise so rapidly that it would force people into managed care, whether they wanted to be there or not. And we just have an honest, philosophical difference about that. Now, on the upper income premium issue- I ran on that in '92. I have never made any secret to the American people that I think that is the right thing to do. We took the income limit off of the Medicare tax in the '93 balanced budget act. So every wealthy person in America today is paying much more in Medicare taxes than they will use anyway. In other words, if you are making a quarter of a million dollars a year, you do not have that $67,000-I think it was $80,000 cap, something like that-you do not have that cap anymore. So since '93, you have been paying a great deal into the Medicare program. So you do not have the equity argument you used to have. One of the reasons that Medicare program was extended in its life-apart from the cost savings we effected and waste, fraud, and abuse stuff, which we really did better about than most of us thought we could-is that we took the earnings limitation off the Medicare tax, and I think that a lot of times people who say upper income people should pay more have forgotten that and forgotten just what a significant amount of money that is to a lot of people. We better turn to new markets, because we want to talk a little about that, too. So you are going next week from Appalachia to Watts. Tell us why you are doing the tour. Well, I am doing it first to shine the light on these areas in America, because I believe that we have both an obligation to give the communities and the neighborhoods that have not been touched by the economic recovery the chance to be a part of it, to go into the new century with us, and", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2478, "text": "All the discussion leading up to what the Federal Reserve was going to do today on interest rates was all premised on the fact that we are having a great national debate now, because no one thought 5 years ago, 6 years ago that we could possibly have average growth well in excess of 3 percent and unemployment under 4.5 percent without having inflation. So we do not have any signs of inflation, but should not they be worried about it, since nobody really thought we could have it? Everyone knows that the technology explosion, especially in telecommunications and information technology, has dramatically increased productivity in ways that traditional economic models do not measure. Is there any way we could keep this economic recovery going, creating even more jobs, raising incomes even more, and not have inflation? And the answer is, yes, if you can either find more customers for American goods and services or more workers to come in and produce more so they are not just being added on for the same level of production. Now, what are the possibilities for that? Expanded trade, which is why I have worked very hard to build a consensus in my own party for trade, plus labor and environmental standards- why I went to Geneva and made those speeches, why I went to the University of Chicago and all that-for trade. The most obvious ones in America are more people from welfare to work. Tonight I had Eli Segal at the fundraiser, if you listened in on that. He is now got 12,000 companies in this deal where we are trying to hire even hard-to-place welfare recipients and train them. Because that is adding to the productive capacity. You get people who are both workers and consumers. The other big discrete population are the disabled, which is why this thing that apparently we are going to have an overwhelming bipartisan majority of Congress do, which is to let disabled people keep their Medicaid in the work force, it is potentially a very big, positive contribution to long-term growth, because, again, you are creating more workers and more consumers. Now, the third big opportunity is to find what areas have not been fully reached with investment and jobs in growth. And that is what this is about. Now, I want to talk about three things when we go there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2479, "text": "the empowerment zones; the community development banks, including the microenterprise zones and the enterprise communities; the tax credits employers get now for hiring people in those areas; and the Community Reinvestment Act, which, as you know, had been on the books for over 20 years, but over 95 percent of all the lending under the Community Reinvestment Act has been done during our administration. We really pushed it. So we will do a little of that, hear things that are working now. The second thing I want to do is to point out that one of the reasons there has not been more investment in these areas is that there is imperfect knowledge on the part of the American business and investment community. The head of Aetna insurance company, when we went to Atlanta, when we did our pre-trip-on the way back he was ragging me. He said, You know, I am the only guy here who is not happy we did this, because, he said, I'd already figured all this out by myself, and now all my competitors are going to know. I will just give you one example. In Los Angeles it is 35 percent. In East St. Louis, where we are going, it is 40 percent. That is just retail sales, no small-scale manufacturing, no professional services, none of that other stuff, all the other things you could do. So I think there is really a lot I can do just with the bully pulpit and taking these business leaders around and getting them-you know, we are going to have bipartisan political folks there; we have got Jesse Jackson and Al From; we are going to have Republican and Democratic Congressmen and Governors and all. But I think that just getting the business community to focus on the fact-because they are all interested in this question, what I want to say to them is, look, you do not just have to debate what Alan Greenspan is going to do; you can change the underlying reality on the ground if you change the economics. And the third thing that I want to do is to push the specific new markets legislation. Because all these other things we have done-even though the CRA, the Community Investment Act, is a nationwide law, it depends still in part on the vigors of the bankers in specific places, and all the other things have discreet impacts.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2480, "text": "In other words, we do not have a community development bank everywhere; we do not have an enterprise zone or empowerment community everywhere-I mean, an empowerment zone or an enterprise community everywhere. This new markets initiative basically is designed to put in place for the whole Nation, all distressed areas the same incentives that we give America to invest in developing economies overseas. I think they ought to have those incentives, developing economies at home. So, for example, the way this would work is let us suppose someone wanted to build a $150 million shopping center in East St. Louis and open 20 stores-I am just making this up-and they started with $50 million of investments; they have got a $50 million investment fund. On that $50 million they could get tax credits of 25 percent for their investment. They would also be able to go to the bank and borrow $100 million and have that $100 million subject to the Government guarantee, which would dramatically lower the interest rate that they would be charged to borrow the money, because if they defaulted on the loan, the Government would guarantee it. And those are the kinds of mechanisms we have in place now for people who invest in developing markets overseas. The reason that is important is, number one, unlike the empowerment zones, it would be nationwide, and number two, even if you had perfect knowledge on the part of investors, that you do not have now, there would be, in many of these places, somewhat greater risk to the investment than in a traditional investment. So by providing these two big incentives you lower the relative risk of this investment compared to others and make it even more attractive to do. But if you think about it, this is sort of my classic Third Way kind of approach. In the 1980's, we found out for sure that free enterprise alone would not develop these areas into the 1990's. In the 1960's, with the whole Great Society approach, it is not true that it did not accomplish anything. It accomplished a great deal. It fed people; it educated people; it started Head Start; it provided health care in rural areas; it provided some Government-funded jobs. But there was no internal structural change that would allow a lot of these places to become more self-sufficient on a long-term basis.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2481, "text": "If we could do this and really make a big difference over the next few years, then when the next recession comes along in America, it will not hit these areas as hard, because they will have, just like other places, some underlying economic supports, some self-sufficiency. And that means fewer people on the streets. It means you will not lose as many kids. It means a lot of things when times are tough. But it seems to me that there is an enormous interest in this now, in the business community. You can see it in the Wall Street Project that Jesse Jackson and Dick Grasso and others have done for the last few years, and you can see it in the massive commitment that-and NationsBank made to setting up community banks and microenterprise lending over the next 10 years. They made a huge commitment on their own. A lot of great things have happened in our empowerment zones. A lot of these development banks are beginning to really show some results. But there is no either nationwide awareness or nationwide framework which could be applied to every place. And that is what the new markets initiative is all about. It is about just increasing the awareness and the attractiveness of these areas to the investment community and then putting in place a framework that would make it even more attractive to invest now. And if we could get a lot of this done while the economy is growing, I think the benefits to America could be permanent. I think, in that sense, it is the perfect public/private partnership example that I have been trying to develop all along. I am really excited about it. I am just-it is a real dream of mine to prove this can be done. You will apparently be the first sitting ENTITY to ever go to an Indian reservation. I am sorry it has taken me so long, because I spent a lot of time with Native American leaders. I went to reservations back in '92, and I spent enormous time with the leaders of the tribes over the last 6 1/2 years. Some people would say you have done a lot-you have focused on empowerment zones; you have focused on some of these problems of poverty, people who have not participated in the economic good times-but that we have not heard so much about it lately, '95, '96. Why is now the time to put this kind of spotlight on the places that remind people that the economic prosperity has not been good for everybody?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2482, "text": "One is, I think that there is a feeling that the prosperity of the country is broadly shared, and that is right. We have got the lowest minority unemployment rates we have recorded. In the last couple of years, we have finally started to close the inequality gap. We have had substantial increases in wages for people in the lower 40 percent of our earnings. And there is a level of security about the direction of our economy that I think frees people in a way to think about those things that are still not done, because I think most Americans genuinely want to see everybody who is willing to work have a chance to participate in this. Secondly, I believe that it is an essential component of my effort to keep this economy growing without inflation, as I said. In other words, I think moving people from welfare to work is a moral imperative, but I also think it is very good for the economy. I think giving disabled people a chance to take their Medicaid and get in the work force is morally right; I also think it is very good for the economy, and I think this could be even better for the economy, and it is certainly morally right. We tried to do this in the past, and we have gotten kind of sporadic publicity for it. But we worked consistently at it. It is one of the many things that I asked the Vice President to lead. But he has done a superb job of this, and he is been systematic and disciplined. And just slowly, slowly, slowly over the last 6 years, I think we have completely satisfied that a lot of these communities, if they can get enough investment, can really take off and do well. So I think that the timing is really right now for America to think about this as sort of the next economic agenda. I know we have to leave, but speaking of economic good times, George Bush has raised $36 million so far in the first half of this year. What do you think about that? Do you think this has gotten out of-spiraled out of control? Or is this not-what do you think? It just seems like a stunning number today. It is a big number, but you have got to remember, Republicans have more money than Democrats, and they always promise upper income people bigger tax cuts. And he is the Governor of Texas; his brother is the Governor of Florida; and they have been out for 8 years, and they want in. So all those reasons mean big numbers. But what did he raise in Texas?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2483, "text": "When I ran in '92-8 years ago-in a State of 2.5 million people, with a lower per capita income and not nearly as many millionaires, we raised $4 million. That would be the equivalent of $20 million or more in Texas. So he is got a lot going for him. He is a Governor of a State; his brother is a Governor of a State; his father was President. They want to win; they have got more money than we do anyway. So I think that it is a credit to-he is got good people raising that money, obviously, but I am not at all surprised they have raised that kind of money. Which also raises the point that conventional wisdom probably told us the Democratic nomination would be sewed up at this point, but the Republican would not ; and it is actually the opposite, it appears to be actually perhaps the opposite of that. It depends; the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire will not be as influenced by the money, probably, just because there is only so many of them. There is only so much you can-but I think the real problem for all these guys, and one reason they can compellingly go out and raise this money-I mean, arguably, if you are talking about the money Bradley raised, he was a national figure for longer than any of the other people running in the Republican primary, except for Elizabeth Dole; maybe she was. But she was in the Cabinet, but Bradley was a nationally known figure for 18 years in the Senate, from the day he got there, and traveled the country extensively all that time building a network, for all 18 years. So I am not particularly surprised that he is raised a good deal of money. But I think that-to go back to the main point-one of the reasons all these people can compellingly argue that they need to get out and raise this money early is that, unfortunately, it not only gets more and more expensive to advertise with every election cycle, the States at the back end get more and more anxietyridden, so they keep moving their dates up. And one of the interesting things to me would be-I do not know the answer to this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2484, "text": "I will start by saying I do not known the answer to this, but when you write the history of this election in the primary process, it will be interesting to see whether or not, even though the small States have retained their early status-which I happen to think is quite a good thing, having been through it; I think it is a good thing, because I think it is terrible that when you get all these primaries-people running for President from tarmac to tarmac, they will run about the States; they do not really listen to the people's voices, their concerns, and when it is all said and done, they have not learned as much about the country as they should. If you have to run in Iowa and New Hampshire, you have got to know things. You have got to take time. So I believe in that. Keep in mind, on June 2d in 1992-June 2d-you had California, New Jersey, and Ohio. I am not particularly surprised about the amount of money anybody has raised. Are you concerned that it is bad news for Gore? I do not think that at all. I do not think that at all. I mean, I think the Republicans are going to raise more money than us. They outspent $100 million last year. They take care of their interest groups. The NRA's going to give them a ton of money. Look what they have done on the Patients' Bill of Rights. Everybody in the world with an opinion is for the Patients' Bill of Rights, except one, who is health insurance. But the health insurance might wind up giving more money in the election cycle than all the 200 groups that are for us. And so, that is the dynamic of modern politics. And their whole strategy is to rake in that dough and to dominate the communications. It does not matter in our politics if your opponent outraises you if you raise enough. The only issue in modern politics is whether you have enough. And keep in mind, in the primary process-unless Governor Bush is going to slow the campaign finance law and not take any matching funds-in the primary process, the only thing that really matters is whether you can raise all the money you need before the first primary starts so you can rationally plan how to spend it during the remainder of the primary season. Because there is a ceiling on how much you can raise in order to get the matching funds in all of the campaign finance system.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2485, "text": "So he should not -nobody else should be worried about that. The only people who should be worried are people who are not going to have enough to get their message out, and the fact that early money normally means you have got big political support. What you are seeing in the Republicans now is a little bit what you saw in '92. And Governors can raise more money than Senators, especially Governors of big States. I am not too surprised he is got all that money. But it is not bad news for the Vice President, because he is doing very well, and he is got all he needs, and he is going to get his money by the time he needs it. I think you will-my gut feeling is that you will not see that have an appreciable impact on the outcome of the election. Before he actually grabs our arm and drags us out here, I guess we have got to go. I am glad you are covering these things, though. It gives us a chance to really do something important. I am really sorry I kept you waiting. So, can we get a firm and final no from you that you are not going to run for Senate? I have to go out and make a living for my family, and that is-and I am going to spend the first 2 years organizing my life, doing my memoirs, and finishing my library. That is what I am going to be doing. I am not running for the Senate. I do not even know where that story came from. I think the story-the guy that reported the story first said someone said they mentioned it to me, and I did not say no. I do not even remember anybody mentioning it to me. But it is not-I had a lot of people in Arkansas ask me if I'd come home and run for Governor, every time I go home. And I tell them that we have got to get a young crop up there and put them in there. I am not in- I am not going to do that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanpageusatodayaboardairforceone", "title": "Interview With Susan Page of USA Today Aboard Air Force One", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-page-usa-today-aboard-air-force-one", "publication_date": "30-06-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2498, "text": "I want to first ask you your reaction-once again, this time Memphis, a fireman is dead, a police officer, and others. What is your reaction to this shooting? Well, as we are doing this interview, of course, we do not know all the facts, but it is a tragic thing for the city and for the families, because firemen and police, they put their lives on the line a lot, but they do not expect to be shot at the scene of a burning house. And we just have to find the facts to know what happened and whether anything could have been done about it. Another tragedy was the death of the 6-year-old, Kayla, in Michigan. I did. What did you tell her? Well, first of all, I told her that as a father I could only imagine her heartbreak, that there is nothing worse in life than having your child die before you, especially in tragic circumstances. And I told her I would do what I could to reduce the chances of it happening again. And I was very impressed with her. She and her husband, Kayla's stepfather, I think they really decided they are going to commit themselves to try to do things that will make the schools safer, the streets safer, the kids less vulnerable to this sort of thing. And we talked about some of the specific things we were working on. And one of the specific things is guns. When you talk about guns-besides being the President of the United States, you are a lawyer-do you think that the responsibility when a young child uses a gun and kills another child, that some of the responsibility may be cast in the direction of a parent or another adult? I think if the custodial adult either knowingly or recklessly leaves a gun where a child can get ahold of it, then I think there should be some liability there. It is outrageous that this 6-year-old boy was able to get that gun. And of course, I think there ought to be child trigger locks on these guns. And I think that we should keep working until we develop the technology which will enable us to make handguns that can only be fired by the adults who own them, which is-it is not that far off. I mean, the accidental gun death rate in America for children under 15 is 9 times higher than the rate of the next 25 countries combined.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgretavansusterencnnsburdenproof", "title": "Interview With Greta Van Susteren of CNN's Burden of Proof", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-greta-van-susteren-cnns-burden-proof", "publication_date": "08-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2499, "text": "I think there ought to be some responsibility there, not if there is been a reasonable effort and the child finds a key and gets in a safe or something. But if there is-if it is just total irresponsibility or intentionally leaving a gun in a place where a child could easily get it, I think they should be held responsible. Well, you use the words knowingly and recklessly, and that standard, it seems to me, is so different. In some parts of the country where people have lots of guns, the knowingly and recklessly standard is so much different from those who might be unfamiliar. Well, I think maybe if Congress wanted to legislate in this area-this is normally a State law area. And I offered Federal legislation in the post-Columbine era to deal with this. The Congress could have legislative history in which they could actually cite some examples of what in their view falls on one side of the line and what does not . Or what the Congress could do, if they feel that the circumstances are different from State to State, is to give some incentives for the States to pass such legislation. I think there are 17 States which have passed legislation that have some form of adult responsibility if children who are below the age of responsibility get guns. There are two different ways you could do that. You have been battling the gun-trying to get gun legislation for some time, and it seems to be a little bit of a logjam on Capitol Hill. Well, I think the main source of dispute now is over closing the gun show loophole. That is, a lot of these-predominantly, the Republican Members of the House, although not all of them, are reluctant to close the gun show loophole. And a huge number of the Republicans in the Senate, although not everyone, 90 percent of them do not want to close the gun show loophole. That is, they do not want to require people at these gun shows and urban flea markets to have to do the same background checks on people who buy guns there, as gun store owners do, and people who buy guns there. When we passed the Brady bill, 7 years ago now, almost 7 years ago, the NRA and their sympathizers said, Well, the Brady bill will not do any good because criminals do not buy guns at gun stores. Well, it turns out 500,000 people could not get guns because they had a record as a felon, a fugitive, or a stalker.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgretavansusterencnnsburdenproof", "title": "Interview With Greta Van Susteren of CNN's Burden of Proof", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-greta-van-susteren-cnns-burden-proof", "publication_date": "08-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2500, "text": "So now we ought to go to the huge number of people who do buy them at these gun shows and urban flea markets, which is exactly what the NRA said they did 7 years ago. But now that we are trying to get background checks there, all of a sudden they do not want to do it. Now, there is some chance of a compromise because Representative John Conyers from Michigan and Chairman Henry Hyde from Illinois have talked back and forth about whether there was a way to close the gun show loophole that the Republicans would let get out of the conference committee, and then we could pass it. And I urged them to work on that yesterday. When I look at this loophole, it seems to me-correct me if I am wrong- is that one side wants 72 hours to do the background check, and one side says, no, 24 hours. Is that the dispute, 24 versus 72? That is only part of it, and I will explain that. But there is also the question of what records will be checked and what you do with the people who cannot be checked within 24 hours. That is, John Conyers offered a 24-hour background check to Mr. Hyde. That is, the Democrats offered to the Republicans a 24-hour background check as long as there were some provision for holding roughly 5 to 8 percent of the applications that cannot be cleared in 24 hours. That is, believe it or not, over 70 percent of these background checks are done within a matter of an hour. Over 90 percent are done within 24 hours. And in that small percentage, the people that are likely to be rejected are-20 times the rate of rejections in the last 5 percent as in the first 95 percent . So there is a reason for holding those that cannot be checked when the records are not there. So I think if we can work out something to do with the other 5 percent, we could agree to 95 percent of the people to have a 24-hour waiting period. It is going to be interesting to see whether they will engage us in good faith on that. So what can we do with that 5 percent? Well, you enable them to- you give the 72 hours for that 5 percent.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgretavansusterencnnsburdenproof", "title": "Interview With Greta Van Susteren of CNN's Burden of Proof", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-greta-van-susteren-cnns-burden-proof", "publication_date": "08-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2501, "text": "And if they are at a rural gun show and they do not know what to do because they want to buy the gun and the gun dealer has got to leave and go on to another place, they should just consummate the sale and have to deposit the gun at the local sheriff's office. And then if it clears, they get their gun. And if it does not clear, the gun dealer gets his gun back. In my prior life as a criminal defense lawyer, I had to represent a lot of people who used guns in murders, armed robberies. And I have got to tell you, I do not think any one of them bought it at a gun show or a gun shop. What can we do about them? What we know is that some of this happens there because we have got-the gun death rate is at a 30-year low. So we know we are doing some good with the Brady bill, and we know we will do some more good with this. And we also know that a lot of these guns are passed among criminals or sold out of a trunk by somebody alone that would not be covered by the gun show law. I think what you have to do there is just do a better job of checking people for guns, and if you find somebody-if we do all this and you still find people with unauthorized guns, they have to be punished for that. I think that people who buy handguns would have to pass a Brady background check and a safety check and be licensed. I think we ought to license handgun owners the way we license car drivers. I think that will make a difference over the long run. The other thing I would say is, you have got over 200 million guns in this country. Now, that is slightly overstating the case in terms of the danger, because a huge number of them are in the hands of collectors who are perfectly law-abiding, who have the guns very well secured. And a lot of them are in the hands of hunters, who are law-abiding and have their guns well secured. But one of the things that I have advocated is a big expansion of the gun buyback program, because in the places where that is occurred, it is done some good-where you must give people money to bring in their guns, and then you melt them or destroy them otherwise.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgretavansusterencnnsburdenproof", "title": "Interview With Greta Van Susteren of CNN's Burden of Proof", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-greta-van-susteren-cnns-burden-proof", "publication_date": "08-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2502, "text": "And I noted just today-I was just stunned to hear that there are a number of Republicans in the House of Representatives that want to stop us from doing the gun buyback program. I cannot imagine why they want to stop that. A lot of cities with Republican mayors have done gun buyback programs. You bring a gun in; you get a certain amount of money. You gather the guns up, and you destroy them. You are taking that many out of circulation. So those are the kinds of things I think ought to be done. Do you have a gun? Have you ever owned one or shot one? I have owned hunting weapons. I have been given-I have never bought a pistol. I have been given pistols by the State police and others, and I have never kept them. I have never kept a gun in my residence. I have always kept them under secure circumstances outside the house when Chelsea was a little girl coming up and all that. But I have owned guns. I still remember shooting cans off fenceposts in the country with a .22 when I was 12. I have bad ears, so I would be careful how many times a year I'd go hunting. But I understand this culture. I have been a part of it. And I was Governor of a State for a dozen years where half of the people had hunting licenses. But I do not think it is right for people who are law-abiding to prevent the passage of these laws that will plainly save lives. I mean, you know, it is no big deal for people who are gun owners or people who are handgun owners to have to undergo a background check. And if it is a minor inconvenience for them to wait a little bit, it is worth it to save people's lives. We now have evidence that it saves lives. Nobody complains about going through airport metal detectors anymore, even if they have to go through 2 or 3 times, because they know it saves lives. People do not say we ought to repeal every speed limit or-you could say, Well, most car drivers are law-abiding, so let us just stop licensing car drivers. Let us stop giving them driver's license tests, because most of them are law-abiding. Well, there would be an uproar if you did that. So we should do more without eroding lawabiding gun owners' rights to hunt or sport shooting.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgretavansusterencnnsburdenproof", "title": "Interview With Greta Van Susteren of CNN's Burden of Proof", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-greta-van-susteren-cnns-burden-proof", "publication_date": "08-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2503, "text": "We should do more to protect ourselves as a community, a lot more. We are the only country in the world that is not doing more, and we have got the death rates to show it. And if we want to save lives, we are going to have to continue to do more. We have got the lowest crime rate in 25 years because we have done more. We have got to do more. Taking a look at what happened last week, if you had the legislation that you want or if we had the legislation the Republicans want, Kayla would still be dead. The legislation would not have prevented that gun from getting into that young boy's hands. No, but if you had adult responsibility legislation that was clear and unambiguous, at least people would think about it; guys like that would think about it. Even if- suppose this was a drug house, like they say- also, depending on how old these guns are, they would come with child trigger locks if you required them for all gun sales, prospectively. And I am not at all sure that even a callous, irresponsible drug dealer with a 6-year-old kid in the house would not leave a child trigger lock on a gun. Which raises the other question. Trigger locks are for guns that are from this day forward. What do we do with these millions of guns that are already out there? One of the things I think we ought to look at is see how you retrofit them, where we could sell them, what we should do with them. And I am just-if I could pass this, then I'd start looking at what to do with the guns that are out there now, whether we could get trigger locks for them and how we'd do it. Then the Senate passed a bill; the House passed a much weaker bill. We have been waiting 8 months for these people to get together with the Senate and the House and come up with a bill and send it to me. And so, I have always tried to focus dealing with the Congress not just on what I thought was ideal but on what we would actually achieve. And I think every American now knows that the intense lobbying of the NRA and the other gun groups has had a profound impact on the House and on the Republican caucus in the Senate. But still, there are some people who are brave enough to stand up against it and to do reasonable things.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgretavansusterencnnsburdenproof", "title": "Interview With Greta Van Susteren of CNN's Burden of Proof", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-greta-van-susteren-cnns-burden-proof", "publication_date": "08-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2504, "text": "I spoke to a representative of the NRA today who said that last summer, they had completely agreed on the bill in Congress, but that it was the Democrats and the White House that felt that the legislation in the House should be aborted. No, they agreed on the House bill because it did not do anything to close the gun show loophole. They did not want-we have got to close the gun show loophole. I think they would come along now with child trigger locks. I think they would, and I know they support the custodial parent being held responsible when there is an egregious act there of intentional or reckless-allowing a child to have a gun. And I appreciate that. I think they support more gun prosecutors and law enforcement officials, and I appreciate that. I do not know where they are-maybe they would go along with the banning of the large ammunition clips. They have never been for that before, but they might be for that. But their new big bottom line is we must never, ever, ever do a background check on somebody at a gun show unless you can do it in 30 seconds or something. I do not mind going to 24 hours, as long as you have got an escape hatch for the people you cannot clear in 24 hours, because I will say again, they are 20 times more likely to be turned down, that small percentage of people, than the general population that we can clear in 24 hours. The Vice President wants-or has suggested that we have photo licensing. What is your reaction to that? Because I think that it will establish a nexus between-first of all, to get a license, you ought to have to pass a safety course and the Brady background check. And I think then it will be easier to track the guns. We are trying to develop technology to track all guns and all bullets used in crimes and ultimately get them back to where they started. And I think for that reason-for crime control reasons and for safety reasons, it would be a good thing to do. Just like with licensed drivers, I think it is a community safety requirement that we ought to do. I think he is absolutely right about it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithgretavansusterencnnsburdenproof", "title": "Interview With Greta Van Susteren of CNN's Burden of Proof", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-greta-van-susteren-cnns-burden-proof", "publication_date": "08-03-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2508, "text": "It is an honor and a privilege to welcome my first guest back to the show. It is good to have you back, ENTITY Rebel forces killed by rebel forces. Well, this is somebody who, for 40 years, has terrorized his country and supported terrorism. And he had an opportunity during the Arab spring to finally let loose of his grip on power and to peacefully transition into democracy. We gave him ample opportunity, and he would not do it.  people long to be free, and they need to respect the human rights and the universal aspirations of people. they televised the death. You know, obviously, that is not something that I think we should relish. And there was a reason after Bin Laden was killed, for example, we did not release the photograph. You know, I think that there is a certain decorum with which you treat the dead even if it is somebody who has done terrible things. Now, you took some heat for the whole leading-from-behind tactic here with Libya. Well, the truth was, we this was a phrase that the media picked up on. But it is not one that I ever used. We lead from the front. We introduced the resolution in the United Nations that allowed us to protect civilians in Libya when Gaddafi was threatening to slaughter them. It was our extraordinary men and women in uniform, our pilots who took out their air defense systems, set up a no-fly zone. It was our folks in NATO who were helping to coordinate the NATO operation there. And the difference here is we were able to organize the international community. We were able to get the U.N. mandate for the operation. And so there was never this sense that somehow we were unilaterally making a decision to take out somebody. And that is part of the reason why this whole thing only cost us a billion dollars Not a single U.S. troop was on the ground. Not a single U.S. troop was killed or injured, and that, I think, is a recipe for success in the future. Let me ask you about that because, with Osama Bin Laden, I remember the night before you were at the correspondence dinner and the whole deal. How hard was it to make that decision to send in those Navy SEALs? It could have been a disaster, but the reason I was able to do it was when you meet these SEALs and you talk to them, they are the best of the best. They understand what exactly they intend to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenonbcsthetonightshow", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno on NBC's The Tonight Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-nbcs-the-tonight-show", "publication_date": "25-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2509, "text": "They are prepared for the worst in almost every circumstance. So even though it was 50/50 that Bin Laden would be there, I was a hundred percent confident in the men, and I could not have made that decision were it not for the fact that our men and women in uniform are the best there is. Now, you just announced the troops coming out of What did we accomplish there? The Iraqis now have the opportunity to create their own democracy, their own country, determine their own destiny. And I am cautiously optimistic that they realize that the way they should resolve conflict is not through killing each other but, rather, through dialogue and discussion and debate. And so that would not have been possible had it not been for the extraordinary sacrifices not just of our Armed Forces, but also their families. and reservists and National Guardsmen and women and the strain that that placed on those families during this long period, it is remarkable. So I think Americans can rightly be proud that we have given Iraqis an opportunity to determine their own destiny, but I also think that policymakers and future Presidents need to understand what it is that we are getting ourselves into when we make some of these decisions. And there might have been other ways for us to accomplish those same goals. But the main thing right now is to celebrate the extraordinary work that our men and women did. Let me ask you now, many members of many members of the GOP opposed withdrawing from Iraq. It is shocking that they opposed something I proposed. But, I mean, was not it originally did not they want to get out of Iraq? Well, look, I do not know exactly how they are thinking about it. You know, as you said, we have been in there four years, over 4,000 young men and women killed, tens of thousands injured, some of them for life, spent close to a trillion dollars on this operation. I think the vast majority of the American people feel as if it is time to bring this war to a close particularly because we still have You know, we still have work to do in Afghanistan. We are transitioning to Afghan lead there. Our guys are still and gals are still making sacrifices there. We would not have been able to do as good of a job in decimating al Qaeda's leadership over the last two years if we had still been focused solely on Iraq.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenonbcsthetonightshow", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno on NBC's The Tonight Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-nbcs-the-tonight-show", "publication_date": "25-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2510, "text": "And one of the arguments I made way back in 2007 was, if we were able to bring the war in Iraq to a close, then that would allow us to go after the folks who perpetrated 9/11, and obviously, we have been very successful in doing that. But al Qaeda is weaker than anytime in recent memory. We have taken out their top leadership position. Can I ask you about taking out their top leadership, al-Awlaki, this guy, American-born terrorist? How important was he to al Qaeda? Do you what happened was we put so much pressure on al Qaeda in the Afghan/Pakistan region that their affiliates were actually becoming more of a threat to the United States. So Awlaki was their head of external operations. This is the guy that inspired and helped to facilitate the Christmas Day bomber. This is a guy who was actively planning a whole range of operations here in the homeland and was focused on the homeland. And so this was probably the most important al Qaeda threat that was out there after Bin Laden was taken out, and it was important that working with the enemies, we were able to remove him from the field. I will tell you, we are going to take a break. When we come back, I want to ask you about Hilary Clinton and her role with the President right after this. So tell me about Hilary Clinton and the job she is doing. She has been, I think, as good of a Secretary of State as we have seen in this country. I am really proud of her. And I did a lot of jokes about you guys going after each other, but you come together for the sake of the country. Tell me about how that works. The truth is Hilary and I agree on the vast majority of issues. We did during the campaign.  we had a similar world view. She was, I think, understandably tired after the campaign and hesitant about whether or not this would be a good fit, and I told her that I had complete confidence in her, that the country needed her. She stepped up to the plate. She works as hard as anybody I have ever seen. She is tenacious, and we are really very proud of her. The entire national security team that we have had has been outstanding, and it is not just rivals within the Democratic party. My Secretary of Defense, Bob Gates, is a Republican. He was a carryover from the Bush Administration. He made an outstanding contribution.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenonbcsthetonightshow", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno on NBC's The Tonight Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-nbcs-the-tonight-show", "publication_date": "25-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2511, "text": "So I think one of the things that we have done is been able to restore a sense that whatever our politics, when it comes to our national security, when it comes to the national defense, everybody has to be on the same page. And so the question now is, as we end the war in Iraq, it is time for us to rebuild this country, and can we get that same kind of cooperation when it comes to fixing what is wrong here? Now, let me ask you something. This is stuff I love, this rumor that Joe Biden and Hilary might swap, and she might run for Vice President and he might is there You know, Joe Biden is not only a great Vice President, but he has been a great advisor and a great friend to me So I think that they are doing great where they are, and both of them are racking up a lot of miles. Joe tends to go more to Pittsburgh. Hilary is going to Karachi. But they have both got important work to do. But you do not want to say big f'ing deal in Karachi. That could have some problems. The good news is you are still three times better than Congress. They are at 13 percent. I mean so if you are grading on a curve if you are grading on a curve, you are killing. You know, look, we have gone through the worst financial crisis, the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. People are hurting out there, and they have been hurting out there for a while. And people were having a tough time even before the crisis. Costs of everything from college to health care to gas to food, all of it was going up, and so people were feeling a lot of pressure even before this crisis. And so I every day I wake up saying to myself, Look, you cannot expect folks to feel satisfied right now. I am very proud of the work that we have done over the last two or three years, but they are exactly right. We have got more work to do, and that is why, right now, for example, our biggest challenge is to make sure that we are putting people back to work. We stabilize the economy, but there are not enough people working. And so we put forward this jobs bill that has proposals that traditionally have been supported by Democrats and Republicans. I mean, we have got we are putting construction workers back to work rebuilding our roads and our bridges.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenonbcsthetonightshow", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno on NBC's The Tonight Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-nbcs-the-tonight-show", "publication_date": "25-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2512, "text": "And the thing that angers me and I think a lot of Americans is I did not like what they did to President Bush. I do not like when they do it to you. I mean, why does that anger you?  Look, I think the things that folks across the country are most fed up with, whether you are a Democrat, Republican, Independent, is putting party ahead of country or putting the next election ahead of the next generation. And so what we need there are some real differences between the party in terms of where we want to take the country. I believe we have got to invest in education and research and infrastructure in order for us to succeed in the long-term, and I think that there is nothing wrong with us closing the deficit and making our investments by making sure that folks like you and me who have been incredibly blessed by this country are doing a little more of a fair share. They have a different philosophy. We can argue about that, but on things that, traditionally, we have agreed to like infrastructure, like tax cuts for small businesses to give them incentives to hire veterans, on things that traditionally have not been partisan, we should be able to get together. We have got a lot of time, and the last thing we need to be doing is saying to the American people that there is nothing we can do until the next election. We have got to do some work right, putting people back to work. Well, you are by passing congress now and giving these executive orders. Well, look, if Congress is gridlocked, if the Republicans in Congress refuse to act, then there is going to be a limit to some of the things we'd like to do, but there is still some actions that we can take without waiting for Congress. So yesterday, for example, we announced working with some of the federal housing agencies. A lot of these folks, because their homes are underwater now, their mortgages are higher than what their homes are worth, a lot of them are having trouble getting refinanced by their banks. And so they are locked in at high rates when rates should be a lot lower for them. We have said, Let us figure out a way to waive some of the fees, waive some of the provisions that are preventing them from being able to refinance. And that could mean an extra couple thousand bucks in people's pockets right now.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenonbcsthetonightshow", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno on NBC's The Tonight Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-nbcs-the-tonight-show", "publication_date": "25-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2513, "text": "They then have that money to buy a computer for their kid for school or what have you, and that will get the economy going again. So we are going to look for opportunities to do things without Congress. We cannot afford to keep waiting for them if they are not going to do anything. On the other hand, my hope is that, at some point, they start listening to the American people, and we can work with Congress as well. Well, you are talking about listening to the American people. As President, you look out your window. Do you see this occupy Wall Street movement? Look, people are frustrated, and that frustration has expressed itself in a lot of different ways. It expressed itself in the Tea Party. It is expressing itself in occupy Wall Street. I do think that what this what this signals is that people in leadership, whether it is corporate leadership, leaders in the banks, leaders in Washington, everybody needs to understand that the American people feel like nobody is looking out for them right now. And, traditionally, what held this country together was this notion that if you work hard, if you are playing by the rules, if you are responsible, if you are looking out for your family, you are showing up to work every day and doing a good job, you have got a chance to get ahead. You have got a chance to succeed. And, right now, it feels to people like the deck is stacked against them, and the folks in power do not seem to be paying attention to that. So if everybody is tuned in to that message and we are working every single day to figure out how do we give people a fair shake and how do we make sure that everybody is doing their fair share, then people will not be occupying the streets because they will have a job and they will feel like they are able to get ahead. And part of my job over the next year is to make sure that if they are not seeing it out of Congress at a minimum, they are seeing it out of their President, somebody who is going to be fighting for them. We will take a break. When we come back, we will talk more with the President, ask him some personal issues. We will get to an issue, of course, that is very big here in Hollywood, this issue on the Kardashians. We will find out more about that. We are going to talk about some lighter stuff, about dealing with the pressure of being President. Now, I know you quit smoking.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenonbcsthetonightshow", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno on NBC's The Tonight Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-nbcs-the-tonight-show", "publication_date": "25-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2514, "text": "Remember you are under oath. So tell me how you cope with the daily pressures. We have got a little gym in the White House. She is in better shape than me, though. She will get up there a half an hour earlier than me. She will have already run 10 miles or something. Speaking of that staggering up to the gym. As ENTITY , everything is public. And I turned on the news last night, and I see my President at a very famous restaurant here in Los Angeles called Roscoes Chicken and Waffles. Now, I think you ordered the Country Boy Special. Now, is Michelle I mean, she is sitting back, watching the news. Here you are scarfing down the waffles.  once we got in the car, it smelled pretty good. So, I mean, I am eating the wings. You have got the hot sauce on there. And we were actually going to a fund-raiser So, suddenly, we pull up, and my sleeves were rolled up, and I got a spot on my tie. And my fingers are I am looking for one of those Wet Ones, you know, to see if I have chicken on my teeth. Right. and let us move and get exercise. But ENTITY, as quiet as this is kept, she loves french fries. She loves pizza. She loves chicken. Her point is just in moderation. She does not mind the girls having a having a smack, although Halloween is coming up. And she is been giving, for the last few years, kids fruit and raisins in a bag. You need to throw some candy in there. That is what she tells me. And part of this, I think, is a testimony to Michelle, also having my mother-in-law in the house because she does not take any mess. Do they have cell phones? We have Malia got a cell phone, but their not allowed to use it during the week just like they are not allowed to watch TV during the week. Oh. now, you recently said that you did not like the girls watching the Kardashians. Have you seen the show? No, I have not seen the show. So you are making a judgment without ever seeing the show. I am probably a little biased against reality TV partly because, you know, there is this program on C-SPAN called Congress that is that I that I that No, I have not seen the show. And do you recommend it, Jay?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaylenonbcsthetonightshow", "title": "Interview With Jay Leno on NBC's The Tonight Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jay-leno-nbcs-the-tonight-show", "publication_date": "25-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2515, "text": "Since you announced the agreement with Iran, it appears, if you look at several recent polls, that a majority of the American public oppose it and a majority of the United States Congress oppose it. Because people have not been getting all the information. It is a complicated piece of business and we are negotiating with a regime that chants Death to America! and does not have a high approval rating here in the United States. But the people who know most about the central challenge that we are trying to deal with, which is making sure that Iran does not get a nuclear weapon, they are overwhelmingly in favor of it - experts in nuclear proliferation, nuclear scientists, former ambassadors, Democrat and Republican. And as a consequence, one of my main tasks over the last several weeks - and this will continue into September - is to make sure that people know and understand that this is a diplomatic breakthrough that ensures we are cutting off all the pathways by which Iran might get a nuclear weapon. In your speech at American University, you made a comparison. You said that Iran's hardliners were making common cause with Republicans. It is come under a lot of criticism. Mitch McConnell says even Democrats who oppose the deal should be insulted. The Wall Street Journal says that this rhetoric shows that you have abandoned the hope of getting any Republicans, or even moderate Democrats, and you are targeting this message to the hard core of House Democrats who are going to sustain your veto. Fareed, your question is about politics. Let me talk about substance. What I said is absolutely true factually. The truth of the matter is, inside of Iran, the people most opposed to the deal are the Revolutionary Guard, the Quds Force, hardliners who are implacably opposed to any cooperation with the international community. And there is a reason for that, because they recognize that if, in fact, this deal gets done, that rather than them being in the driver's seat with respect to the Iranian economy, they are in a weaker position. And the point I was simply making is that if you look at the facts, the merits of this deal, then you will conclude that not only does it cut off a pathway for Iran getting a nuclear weapon, but it also establishes the most effective verification and inspection regime that is ever been put in place. It also ensures that we are able to monitor what they do with respect to stockpiles, plutonium, their underground facility.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnnsgps", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN's GPS", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnns-gps", "publication_date": "09-08-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2516, "text": "And that it does not ask us to relinquish any of the options that we might need to exercise if, in fact, Iran cheated or if at some point they decided to try to break out. And so the reason that Mitch McConnell and the rest of the folks in his caucus who oppose this jumped out and opposed it before they even read it, before it was even posted, is reflective of a ideological commitment not to get a deal done. And in that sense, they do have a lot in common with hardliners who are much more satisfied with the status quo. You do not think you are going to get any Republican... Well, I did not say that. What I said was that there are those who, if they did not read the bill before they announced their opposition, if they are not able to offer plausible reasons why they would not support the bill or plausible alternatives in preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, other than potential military strikes, then that would indicate that they are not interested in the substance of the issue, they are interested in the politics of the issue. You talked about Iran's hardliners, the old guard. But one member of Iran's old guard certainly seems to be Ayatollah Khamenei, the supreme leader. His Twitter feed has posted a likeness of you with a gun pointed to your head. Is this a guy you can really make a deal with? Well, as I said, Fareed, you do not negotiate deals with your friends. You negotiate them with your enemies. And superpowers do not respond to taunts. Superpowers focus on what is it that we need to do in order to preserve our national security and the national security of our allies and our friends. And I think that he tweeted that in response to me stating a fact, which is, is that if we were confronted with a situation in which we could not resolve this issue diplomatically, that we could militarily take out much of Iran's military infrastructure. I do not think there is a military expert out there that would contest that. The Supreme Leader, obviously, does not want to hear that, and I understand. But I am not interested in a Twitter back and forth with the Supreme Leader. What I am interested in is the deal itself and can we enforce it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnnsgps", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN's GPS", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnns-gps", "publication_date": "09-08-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2517, "text": "Keep in mind, Fareed, when we got the interim deal - as you are aware, the way this thing evolved was, first, we essentially froze their program - they had to roll back their very highly enriched uranium stockpiles. And for that, we turned on the spigot a little bit so that they could access more of their money. All the same critics of this deal suggested that this is terrible, this is a historic mistake. And for the last two years, as we have been negotiating the more comprehensive deal, not only have they continued to suggest that it was a mistake, until very recently, but the Supreme Leader was saying all kinds of anti-American stuff. They did exactly what they were supposed to do. The few times that they did not , we identified it and told them they had to correct it and they did. And, you know, the Supreme Leader is a politician, apparently, just like everybody else. What I am focused on is can we make sure that they are doing what they have to do and that we have sufficient safeguards and verification mechanisms to ensure that they do not have a nuclear weapon. And, again, Fareed, it is very important, I think, over the next several weeks, to not get distracted by tone, vote counts, is Mitch McConnell's feelings hurt. But let us address the argument. And it - the central point I was making yesterday - fairly exhaustively, it was a long speech - was that nobody has presented a plausible alternative, other than military strikes, to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Nobody has presented a more effective way to ensure they do not have a nuclear weapon, including military strikes, because we know, actually, if this deal is executed, it will provide more limitations on the Iranian nuclear program for a longer period of time in a more verifiable way. Nobody has had a good answer for that. So I think the answer that some might provide is that the alternative is not war, but more pressure and a better deal and, specifically, that Iran should not have the right to enrich. There are a lot of nuclear countries with nu - peaceful nuclear programs that do not have the right to enrich. Was it impossible to stick hard on that? First of all, there is no support for that position in Iran, including opposition members who were subsequently jailed back in 2009. So you have a consensus inside of Iran that they should have a right to enrich.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnnsgps", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN's GPS", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnns-gps", "publication_date": "09-08-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2518, "text": "The Non-Proliferation Treaty is very clear about guarding against the weaponization of nuclear power, but it does not speak to prohibitions on peaceful nuclear power. And we did not have the support of that position among our global allies who have been so critical in maintaining sanctions and applying the pressure that was necessary to get Iran to the table. And so in the real world, the alternatives you just described were not available. And, you know, I think that the notion that the United States Congress rejecting a deal that has been negotiated by the U.S. secretary of State, our top nuclear experts, with unanimous support around the world, other than the state of Israel and perhaps behind the scenes some of our allies who are also suspicious of Iran, that somehow in the face of that, countries like Russia or China would continue to voluntarily abide by sanctions in a way that would continue to put pressure on Iran is a fantasy. When we come back, much more of my exclusive interview with ENTITY from the White House. I will ask him about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Is it appropriate for a foreign head of government to inject himself into a debate this is taking place in Washington? More than four months before the Iran deal was even inked, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appeared before a joint meeting of the United States Congress to argue against it. Now that there is a deal between the world and Iran, Netanyahu has publicly and vocally condemned it. The Prime Minister has found many sympathetic ears for certain, but there are others - including some in Israel - who have called his rhetoric and actions into question. Prime Minister Netanyahu has injected himself forcefully into this debate on American foreign policy... Can you recall a time when a foreign head of government has done that? Is it appropriate for a foreign head of government to inject himself into an American debate? You know, I will let you ask Prime Minister Netanyahu that question if he gives you an interview. I do not recall a similar example. Obviously, the relationship between the United States and Israel is deep. It is reflected in my policies, because I have said repeatedly and, more importantly, acted on the basic notion that our commitment to Israel's security is sacrosanct. It is something that I take very seriously, which is why we provided more assistance, more military cooperation, more intelligence cooperation to Israel than any previous administration. But as I said in the speech yesterday, on the substance, the Prime Minister is wrong on this.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnnsgps", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN's GPS", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnns-gps", "publication_date": "09-08-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2519, "text": "And I think that I can show that the basic assumptions that he is made are incorrect. If, in fact, my argument is right - that this is the best way for Iran not to get a nuclear weapon - then that is not just good for the United States, that is very good for Israel. In fact, historically, this has been the argument that has driven Prime Minister Netanyahu and achieved consensus throughout Israel. So the question has to be is there, in fact, a better path to preventing Iran from getting a nuclear weapon than this one? And I have repeatedly asked both Prime Minister Netanyahu and others to present me a reasonable, realistic plan that would achieve exactly what this deal achieves, and I have yet to get a response. So, as I said yesterday, I completely understand why both he and the broad Israeli public would be suspicious, cautious about entering into any deal with Iran. But what I also try to remind everyone yesterday is, is that when we entered into arms treaties with the Soviet Union, they had missiles pointed at every single major American city. We actually had to constrain ourselves and reduce our firepower. Here, we are preserving all our options so that if Iran does cheat, we can still exercise the same set of options that we have in place today. And I have been very clear about the fact that if Israel were attacked by Iran, for example, there is no doubt that not just me, but any U.S. administration would do everything that we needed to do to make sure that Israel was protected. So there are all kinds of hedges if, in fact, Iran were not to abide by the deal. But if, in fact, Iran does abide by the deal, as it has the interim deal over the last two years, then we have purchased, at a very small price, one of the single most important national security objectives that both the United States and Israel has. There is been some debate about the amount of money that Iran will get as a result of sanctions relief. Whatever the amount is, it is clear, they are going to get some resources... and some part of it, and they being out of the sanctions regime, will be... will be - will be applied to their economy, but some of it...", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnnsgps", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN's GPS", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnns-gps", "publication_date": "09-08-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2520, "text": "So I want to be clear, are you saying to the region, to the Gulf States, to other Arab - to Arab countries, look, this is inevitable, Iran is going to play an increased role in the region, get used to it? I think the message is that the nefarious activities that Iran engages in, whether it is providing arms to Hezbollah or stirring up destabilizing activities among some of their Gulf neighbors, is something that they have been able to do consistently at very low cost - that I have no doubt that as Iran's economy improved or they got some financial inflows that relieves some fiscal pressure on their military, they may be able to fund some additional activities. And the reason that Iran has been effective has less to do with the amount of money they have spent. It has more to do with the fact that although Gulf countries, for example, spend eight times more, at least combined, on defense than Iran's entire defense budget, they have not deployed it in ways that have been as strategically effective. And part of the function of our meeting up at Camp David with Gulf leaders was to describe how we can work with them to create a more effective counter to these kinds of activities. And, you know, whether it is countering cyber-attacks or a possible ballistic missile threat, but more typically, the kinds of asymmetric proxy activities that Iran has developed over the last several decades, you know, those are things that we know how to do if all those countries are cooperating and we are doing it systematically. That will have a greater impact than simply preventing this deal from taking place. The flip side of it is if Iran is able to get a nuclear weapon, if its breakout time remains as short it is - as it is right now and they are installing advanced centrifuges and so on, then they will be emboldened to engage in more of the activities that have been discussed, which are not constrained or bound by the amount of money Iran has, but rather have to do with the very strategic decisions that Iran is making at any given time. We will be back with the ENTITY in just a moment. We are in the Map Room of the White House. The Map House was essentially an early version of the Situation Room during World War II. It was where Franklin Delano Roosevelt came to ponder next moves in the war. I will ask ENTITY if he will need to seriously think about a war with Iran if this deal falls through.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnnsgps", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN's GPS", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnns-gps", "publication_date": "09-08-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2521, "text": "Back now with ENTITY on Iran, ISIS, the Taliban, and what happens if the nuclear deal falls through. Right now, Iran is probably one of the strongest fighting forces against ISIS. In Afghanistan, it has historically been opposed to the Taliban, just as the United States has. Do you think that this - these overlapping interests might allow for a more productive and constructive relation between the United States and Iran? I think it is conceivable but the premise of this deal is not that Iran warms toward the United States or that we are engaging in any kind of strategic reassessment of the relationship. Within the four corners of the agreement, we deal with the nuclear problem. I think we are doing that better than any other alternative. Is there the possibility that having begun conversations around this narrow issue that you start getting some broader discussions about Syria, for example, and the ability of all the parties involved to try to arrive at a political transition that keeps the country intact and does not further fuel the growth of ISIL and other terrorist organizations - I think that is possible. Well, I... you know, what I have been encouraged by is that the Russians are now more interested in discussions around what a political transition - or at least framework for talks - would look like inside of Syria. And presumably, Iran is seeing some of the same trends that are not good for them. And I do think that it is even conceivable that Saudi Arabia and Iran, at some point, would begin to recognize that their enemy is chaos as much as anything else. And what ISIL represents and what the collapse of Syria or Yemen or others represent is far more dangerous than whatever rivalries that may exist between those two nation states. If this deal falls through somehow and what you predict does happen - Iran does go back to trying to produce centrifuges on an industrial scale; it perhaps restarts some of the weaponization programs - are you worried that you would confront, within your remaining term, the strong possibility that you might have to use nuclear - that you might have to use military force to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon? I have a general policy on big issues like this not to anticipate failure. And I am not going to anticipate failure now because I think we have the better argument. And I just go back again and again, Fareed, to those who are opposed to the deal cannot just say we want a better deal.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariacnnsgps", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN's GPS", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-cnns-gps", "publication_date": "09-08-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2522, "text": "The Challenge of Cooperation in the Americas . In your second term, you have focused on policies to try to reduce the inequity and the gap between rich and poor people. What kind of concrete commitments are you expecting from the Summit and how US can help the region to fight inequity As ENTITY, I have pledged to our brothers and sisters in Latin America that the United States will work with the countries and people of the region as equal partners, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. That is because I believe the opportunities and challenges we face as a hemisphere can only be solved by all of us working together, in a spirit of shared responsibility-and that includes addressing the injustice of economic inequality. I think this summit can build on the incredible progress the region has made in recent decades. Economic growth, trade and a shared commitment to expanding opportunity has lifted countless millions of people from poverty. Since 2002 the middle class has nearly doubled, and countries like Brazil and Mexico have middle class majorities for the first time in history. That said, alongside the region's new wealth, about a third of people across the region still endure grinding poverty, and it is still too hard for them to access the education, health care and basic service their families need. This is not just a drag on economic growth, it is a moral challenge to us all. I believe that the most effective way to close this gap is to unleash broad-based economic growth that creates new opportunities and to expand access to the tools people need to lift themselves out of poverty-including education, skills and job training. That is why we have boosted the trade and investment that creates jobs. Across the region, we are expanding access to electricity and connecting families and communities to the global economy. Our Small Business Network of the Americas is helping grow 250,000 small businesses throughout the region, and our WEAmericas initiative is helping to empower women entrepreneurs. And through our 100,000 Strong in the Americas Initiative and other educational exchange programs, we are connecting our students, young people, and entrepreneurs with each other and with the skills and networks they need to collaborate and succeed in the 21st century. My trip this week will build on this work. In Jamaica, I will be announcing a new initiative to empower young entrepreneurs and civil society leaders across the Americas, and I will be working with Caribbean leaders to promote cleaner and more sustainable energy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithefenewswire", "title": "Interview with EFE Newswire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-efe-newswire", "publication_date": "09-04-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2523, "text": "The Summit of the Americas in Panama is an opportunity to keep improving the competitiveness of the region, which is why the United States will be encouraging all the countries in the Americas to ratify the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement. I also look forward to meeting again with leaders from across Central America as part of our continuing effort to partner with their countries to strengthen governance and improve economic and security conditions so more people in these countries have the opportunity to live in safety and prosperity. At the same time, every government has a responsibility to do its part by ensuring the good governance and transparency that attracts trade, investment and the economic partnerships that lead to greater prosperity for all, as well as promoting the social inclusion that gives people of all backgrounds the opportunity to succeed. Cuba will be making its first-ever appearance at the Summit, which will bring all the countries of the region together for the first time. Are you ready, along with the Cuban, to announce in this Summit the reopening of the embassies in Washington and Havana? Do you think that the Cuban regime is doing enough to improve the situation of human rights in the country and make progress in that field? The historic policy changes that I announced in December represented a break with an approach that for more than 50 years had failed to promote improved political or economic conditions for the Cuban people. As part of that announcement, both the Cuban and U.S. governments committed to negotiate the re-establishment of diplomatic relations, broken since 1961, and the United States intends to carry through with this commitment. Secretary of State Kerry and his team have already engaged in our highest-level and most intense set of bilateral discussions with Cuba in decades. Our diplomats are making significant progress and I am confident that we will be able to move forward with the re-opening of embassies. That said, re-opening embassies is only one part of the broader process of normalizing relations between our two countries. In the meantime, our governments have already begun talks on issues such as civil aviation, human rights, and telecommunications and other issues affecting the citizens of both our countries. I strongly believe that this engagement will be good for the United States and Cuba; improve the lives of the Cuban people; and promote more effective cooperation across the hemisphere. Our new approach toward Cuba will also facilitate increased engagement with the Cuban people, including an increased flow of resources and information to the Cuban people-and it is already showing results.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithefenewswire", "title": "Interview with EFE Newswire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-efe-newswire", "publication_date": "09-04-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2524, "text": "We are seeing increased contacts between the people of Cuba and the United States, and the enthusiasm of the Cuba people for these changes proves that we are on the right path. As I said in December, we will continue to have significant differences with the Cuban government, including on issues related to human rights. The United States will always support universal values such as freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. During the Summit of the Americas, I will be meeting with civil society leaders from across the region, including Cuba, as I regularly do in different countries around the world, because we believe that civil society has a critical role to play in supporting progress in all of our societies. The request of 1 billion dollars to help Central America countries to improve their security in order to contain illegal immigration to US still need the approval by Congress. Besides, your executive orders on immigration are stuck in courts. So, what are you going to do to try to move forward in both issues? The $1 billion that I have requested for our strategy in Central America is not simply for security alone or focused exclusively on the spike in migration that we saw. Rather, it is part of our comprehensive approach to partner with Central American countries as they address the underlying factors that have led many in the past to take the dangerous journey north, including violence and poverty. It builds my Administration's ongoing efforts to promote security and prosperity in the region, including successful, community-level violence prevention programs. Throughout my trip this week, I will continue to make the case for our $1 billion request to Congress, which aims to help Central America's leaders make the difficult reforms and investments required to address the region's interlocking security, governance and economic challenges. The people of the region are seeking the same things as people everywhere-institutions that are democratic, effective, accountable and transparent, communities that are safe for their families, and economies that are integrated so the region can compete in the global economy. The United States is determined to be their partner in building that future. At the same time, I remain deeply committed to fixing our broken immigration system. The executive actions that I announced last year are designed to fix some of our current problems, and while some of these actions are temporarily on hold by our courts, I am confident that the law is on our side and that we will ultimately prevail.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithefenewswire", "title": "Interview with EFE Newswire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-efe-newswire", "publication_date": "09-04-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2525, "text": "Still, the actions I took are not a substitute for the comprehensive, bipartisan reform that we need to improve our broader immigration system, where millions of people continue to live in the shadows. And so I remain committed to working with Congress to pass comprehensive immigration reform. ENTITY, there is a global perception about US losing influence and presence in the Americas. Regional organizations like Unasur or Celac are seen more effective and powerful than OAS and, for example, Brazil has joined the China-led bank known as AIIB. Do you think US is still the main and most important ally for the region? Yes, because the relationship between the United States and the Americas is like no other in the world. We are inextricably linked by ties of family, commerce, culture, shared values and our aspirations for the future. We are bound by tens of millions of Hispanic Americans, the fastest-growing group in America that will only become more influential in the decades ahead. And since I took office, we have deepened our partnerships with Latin America, including economic ties-boosting U.S. exports to the region by nearly 70 percent. In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that our relationship with the Americas is the best it is been in many decades. The new chapter of engagement that we have begun with Cuba has been welcomed across the region and is an historic opportunity to also advance regional cooperation and progress. The United States is leading the international effort to support Caribbean nations as they secure their energy future. We are the partner of choice for the countries of the Northern Triangle as they tackle the region's security and developmental challenges. We are working in partnership with Canada, Chile, Mexico, and Peru to conclude a 21st century trade agreement in the Trans-Pacific Partnership. When it comes to standing up for the security, prosperity and human rights of the people of the Americas, no one does as much, in more places, as the United States. While it is true that the region has changed dramatically over the last two decades, it has done so in a way that largely aligns with our values and advances our national interests. We can take pride in the fact that the inter-American community today is a region free of inter-state conflicts and broadly dedicated to democratic principles, social progress, and sustainable growth. We very much want countries in the Americas reaching out and cementing commercial relationships with Europe, Africa, India, and Asia-it can mean more prosperity and opportunity for us all.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithefenewswire", "title": "Interview with EFE Newswire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-efe-newswire", "publication_date": "09-04-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2526, "text": "We welcome the contributions of any country and regional organization that is actively working toward our shared objective of achieving a hemisphere that is democratic, more prosperous and secure from Canada to Chile. As the countries of the Americas expand their international relationships and take on a more active global role - a role that largely advances our shared values and interests - it is natural that other international actors and new sub-regional organizations will play a greater role in the region. If those countries and organizations work to uphold regional security, prosperity and human rights, then it is a good thing. In March, you issued an executive order to impose sanctions to Venezuela and declaring Venezuela a national security threat . That executive order has been rejected by some countries in the region. Why do you think this order was the right choice to confront the situation in Venezuela? Are you open to have a direct dialogue with Venezuelan? I want to be clear-our deep and abiding interest is in a Venezuela that is prosperous, stable, democratic, and secure. The United States is Venezuela's largest trading partner, with over $40 billion in bilateral trade a year. We have deep and long-standing connections between families and our citizens. I am a firm believer in diplomatic engagement, and the United States remains open to direct dialogue with the Venezuelan government to discuss any matter of mutual concern. Venezuela is confronting enormous challenges right now. For many months Venezuela's neighbors sought to promote an internal dialogue and a political solution to the divisions tearing at Venezuelan society, hoping to prevent the situation in Venezuela from negatively impacting others in the region. We have consistently supported that kind of dialogue, and we continue to see it as the best way for Venezuela to move forward. This does not mean that we, or any other member of the inter-American community, should remain silent about our concerns regarding the situation in Venezuela. We do not believe that Venezuela poses a threat to the United States, nor does the United States threaten the Venezuelan government. But we do remain very troubled by the Venezuelan government's efforts to escalate intimidation of its political opponents, including the arrest and prosecution of elected officials on political charges, and the continued erosion of human rights, as we would be troubled by such developments in any other country in the world. That is why the sanctions that we imposed were focused on discouraging human rights violations and corruption. These sanctions are focused specifically on individuals responsible for the persecution of political opponents, curtailment of press freedoms, use of violence and arbitrary arrest and detention.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithefenewswire", "title": "Interview with EFE Newswire", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-efe-newswire", "publication_date": "09-04-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2529, "text": "I am going to put out a perception I have always had of you, and if I am wrong you can riff off it. You being born in Hawaii, and the ancestry that you have had, and beyond that you having a cosmopolitan experience very early on living elsewhere-this is a blunt way to say it, but it occurs to me you had an opportunity to just check out. I never perceived myself as having much choice about being black, and I have always wondered why you have made the choice. And I do not know if you perceived it as a choice-maybe you felt the same way, like you did not have one. You could have been one of these rootless cosmopolitans working on some other issues. I wonder how you came to think of yourself as black and why. Well, part of my understanding of race is that it is more of a social construct than a biological reality. And in that sense, if you are perceived as African American, then you are African American. Now, you can-that can mean a whole lot of things. And one of the things I cured myself of fairly early on, and I think the African American community has moved away from, is this notion that there is one way to be black. And so you are right that I could have been an African American who worked for an international organization and was not engaged in the day-to-day struggles, politically or culturally, that the African American community faces. There are a lot of African Americans who may make those decisions, and they are still African American, but they are just living their lives in a different way. I think for me, first and foremost, I always felt as if being black was cool. Part of it is, I think, that my mother thought black folks were cool, and if your mother loves you and is praising you-and says you look good, are smart-as you are, then you do not kind of think in terms of How can I avoid this? You feel pretty good about it. By the time I was cognizant of race, American culture had gone through enough changes that as a child, I was not just receiving constant negative messages about being black.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2530, "text": "It is true that I did not have the role models that Malia and Sasha have, but I could look at a Dr. J, or a Marvin Gaye, or a Thurgood Marshall and feel as if the embrace of African American culture was not going to hold me back but rather propel me forward, that it was exciting to be part of a group that had struggles but also had a huge potential. I think it was not until I was in high school that I started seeing complications around it, and I started to think about it explicitly. I wrote about this in my first book, but even when I started perceiving discrimination, or racism, or just the disadvantages of being a minority, that felt more like a challenge than something to fear. I think probably the final element of this is, when I moved to the mainland, that was the first time where I confronted what at that time, and to some degree to this day, was the segregation of communities. And I did have to make, I think, a conscious choice to root myself physically and professionally in the African American community. I never wanted to be somebody who looked like I was avoiding who I saw in the mirror. And disconnected from race, and more connected to the nature of me growing up, I did not like the idea of being rootless. You did not like the idea of being rootless. Michelle and I always joke-but it is not really a joke, I think it is an insight-that, in some ways, we saw in each other elements that we had not had growing up. In Michelle I saw roots. I saw a nuclear family, neighborhood, community, continuity. In me she saw adventure, cosmopolitanism. And so the fact that I had not grown up with a stable family, that I had not grown up with a father in the house or a community of which I was a part on a continuing basis-I had great friends, I had loving family members, but I did not have a place-that, I think, warned me off of the kind of life you described of just floating around and enjoying life but never being fully invested in it. You can imagine me as an Irishman deciding to want to live in a neighborhood with some Irish folks and embracing that side of myself. As somebody who began to travel relatively later, I had this moment when I was at this town in Switzerland and had to switch trains to get to a larger town.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2531, "text": "And I had started my life and thought in that moment I could get on a train and go anywhere. Nobody would know me. In some ways I saw that in my mother, as somebody who had lived an expatriate life. She loved Indonesia-really found meaningful work there, made great friends-but at the end of the day did not have a place that was solidly hers. And I think there were elements of that I saw as a kid as being lonely or a loss. You know, certainly not the majority of the African American community, but certainly a privileged few of us are now raising children who are growing up-I am thinking of my own son-with all these different experiences- Is that need for home still there? Is that still important in the same way? It is interesting watching Malia and Sasha, who have obviously lived in as strange and unreal an environment as any kids do. They feel very strongly about their African American roots. And that, I think, is a great gift to bequeath them, where they know they have got a home, they know they have got a base, they know who they are. But they do not think that in any way constrains them. And certainly they are not burdened by the sorts of doubts that previous generations-and even our generation-might have felt in what it means to be black. It is interesting, when we went to visit the museum, Smithsonian , just watching them soak it in. And they are well-informed young people, so they knew most of the history, and I forget which one of them just said, I cannot wait to bring my friends here. And I think she was not just referring to African American friends but her white friends. She said, Because face it, our stuff's cool. We have got Michael Jordan, Beyonc?, Dr. King. What you got? So there is a confidence that they project, which does not mean they are not mindful that there're still struggles. You hear them talking about what black women have to go through with hair and they will go on a long rant-just the inconvenience and expense that they still feel is forced upon them, not just by the white community but the black community. They will still notice a certain obliviousness of even their best friends on certain issues. But they do not feel trapped by that. They do not feel as if that is determinative of their possibilities.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2532, "text": "And I think they would say that the upsides really outweigh the downsides. They like the community. Do you recall the first time you were aware of folks saying, ENTITY, you are not really black ? When I look back-and I kept journals during this time, I was really in my own head-but from the age of, say, 18 to 25, when I first moved from Hawaii and I am living in L.A. and New York and ultimately Chicago, what strikes me is less the lack of acceptance and more just my own self-consciousness. That one of the wonderful things, I believe, about the African American community is the degree to which we embrace whoever it is that we are with. The friends I made in my first year in college who were African American, there was never that You are not black enough. You are from Hawaii. There were times where you'd feel it in terms of friendships and groups, right? Because you went to Howard, you are in an all-black environment, that does not come up. You have got your white friends, or you have got black friends, and they do not necessarily hang together in the same ways. So you are kind of doing shuttle diplomacy sometimes. Which is why I think some of my closest friends during those early years in college were Pakistani, or French, or people who themselves did not neatly fit in categories. But by the time I get to Chicago-and I am still a young man at that point, I am 25 years old-and I am in the middle of the South Side of Chicago, there was a degree of familiarity, and love, and comfort that I guess in retrospect you might be puzzled by it. Now, there were times as an organizer, and certainly when I ran for office, where that stuff got brought in tactically or strategically by folks who I was dealing with. So you got some pastor, some alderman, who did not like what we were trying to do, who says, You know what? That guy, he is got Jewish backing, or He is working with this Catholic church, or He is from Hawaii. He is got that Harvard degree, and he is from Hyde Park. But I always experienced those as just tactics being deployed by somebody who was pushing back on something I was trying to do. Did it bother you on any level? Again, it did not . Because of the experiences I had had in the neighborhoods, and communities, and with regular folks.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2533, "text": "They are not sort of measuring on a day-to-day basis, Okay, is what you are doing a white thing, or is it a black thing? Folks were not doing stuff like that. And in fact, among working-class black folks, you doing things that were not typical oftentimes was a source of pride. So I remember my first job out of college was working for this business magazine-subscription magazine-and I was the only African American there who was not a delivery man or some tech-support guy. Most of the African Americans in the office were secretaries and, you know, they were proud that I was walking in there and working. So I think that gave me a base and a sense of confidence. So if somebody was playing a game later on, I know that Well, they are not speaking for, quote-unquote, 'the authentic black experiences,' because I live with folks who are at least as authentic as you . Sometimes it is like these rappers who grew up in the suburbs and suddenly they are all- It is like, Come on, man, I know you. I talked to quite a few people who knew you after that Bobby Rush race, and there were people who-Valerie told me this-did not want you to run for the Senate. How personally-maybe you were not , I do not know, maybe this does not get to you-were you personally injured after that? I was upset about losing as bad as I did in that congressional race, and there is no doubt it shook my confidence. But it was not because of race. I remember campaigning in the congressional race, and it was a shoestring operation. I'd go meet people and I'd knock on doors and stuff, and some of the grandmothers who were the folks I'd been organizing and working with doing community stuff, they were not parroting back some notion of You are too Harvard, or You are too Hyde Park, or what have you. They'd say, You are a wonderful young man, you are going to do great things. So I did not feel the loss as a rejection by black people. I felt the loss as politics anywhere is tough. Politics in Chicago is especially tough. And being able to break through in the African American community is difficult because of the enormous loyalty that people feel towards anybody who has been around a while. Look at Marion Barry in D.C.-or you can come up with all kinds of stories.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2534, "text": "And so I think that the loss made me question my career choice not because of racial issues, but rather because it made me question whether, in fact, there was a path for me to be able to break through and have a platform to get the kind of things done that I wanted to get done. Or was I destined to just slog away in the state legislature until I am 55, and then some congressional race comes up, and now I am a backbencher in Congress-and is that how I wanted to spend the next 20 years? So those were the kinds of questions that I was asking myself. I am an African American and my grandfather was this and my mother was this, and you'd be very clear about it. Is that a story you always told yourself?   By the time I was running for office, I think, I was sort of formed. That stretch that I described-maybe you want to stretch it out from the age of 18 to 27, when I go to law school-I was wrestling with myself and trying to game this out, and to figure this out, and it was not a smooth passage. When I look back at journal entries, when I read biographies of me that talk about that stretch, I am full of confusion and turmoil and doubts. The degree to which my organizing work in Chicago, I think, solved a puzzle for me, I cannot overstate. I did not set the world on fire when I was doing that work. We had some small victories, and a whole lot of failures. The people I worked with and the communities I was serving gave so much more to me than I think I gave to them. It is hard to think how I could repay them. I still think about them in the Oval Office. It was a great gift they gave me, understanding who I was, or at least who I aspired to be. So that by the time I am off to law school, I am pretty formed at that point. What was it that it gave you? What is the relationship between that and sorting out who you were? For me, and this may be different for other people, part of becoming an adult is linking your personal ambitions and striving to something bigger. And when I started doing that work, my story merges with a larger story. That happens naturally for a John Lewis. That happens more naturally for you. It was less obvious to me.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2535, "text": "Kenya and Hawaii and Kansas, and white and black and Asian-how does that fit? And through action, through work, I suddenly see myself as part of the bigger process for, yes, delivering justice for the , and specifically the South Side community, and low-income people-justice on behalf of the African American community. But also thereby promoting my ideas of justice and equality and empathy that my mother taught me were universal. So I am in a position to understand those essential parts of me not as separate and apart from any particular community but connected to every community. And I can fit the African American struggle for freedom and justice in the context of the universal aspiration for freedom and justice. Which is why I have always said, and I continue to believe that, the struggle for racial equality in America has been the essential catalyst for America's growth and development. As painful as it is, as ugly as that history has often been, as hard as it is been on black folks themselves, it is the driver of the expanded moral commitment. And because of it, we better understand other struggles. It helps stretch our moral imaginations to embrace the Latino farmworker, or the LGBT kid who is feeling ostracized, or the woman who is hitting the glass ceiling. So the work helped me form an integrated vision of the world and my place in it in a way that would not have happened if I had been a professor reading about it or writing about it, but they would just be intellectual exercises. Did your mother ever get to see you working in Chicago? She never went along with me. She was doing her own thing. When we visited it was typically in Hawaii. That stretch of time when I was organizing was a particularly busy time for her. So she always expressed pride about the work, and interestingly, it was not all that different from some of the work she was doing. She was out in poor villages trying to help people leverage microloans into a better life. Probably the moment where things most intersected in a way that she sees it is at our wedding, which is why I end the book at the wedding. Because I have got some South Side folks there, I have got my boys from Hawaii there, I have got Pakistani friends there, I have got my Kenyan family there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2536, "text": "And to see my mom talking to my mother-in-law, or my Kenyan sister; to have some folks from Altgeld come up to my mother and say, You should be so proud of your son ; to see my grandmother, a little old Kansas white lady, interacting with some of Michelle's older relatives, little old black ladies, and they basically had the same tastes and attitudes-it was, I think, a moment where, in a very personal way, everything I talked about was made manifest. We still have the old video from our wedding, and when I watch it, it reminds me of how lucky I have been. How difficult was it, thinking about that, when you had to sever your relationship with Reverend Wright during the campaign? strong, somebody who embraced learning, somebody who was socially conscious and taught black folks to respect themselves and the culture. And he was a friend, somebody who I was very fond of. In a way that is true, I think, for all subcultures that are not part of the majority culture. There are things that are said in the barber shop, the beauty salon, or folks are just talking stuff, and there is a certain tolerance for exaggerations, for saying things for effect, for smack talking, that are complicated. They are not always meant literally as much as they are expressing emotions or making a point. As I said in my speech in Philadelphia, the blind spots that he possessed are the blind spots that that generation of African American men at some moments all have possessed, it would be impossible not to possess. He grew up-he was 15 years older than me-if you are coming of age in the late '40s, early '50s, early '60s, or the '70s in Philadelphia, or Alabama, or Oakland, or Baltimore, it would be superhuman not to have some vestiges of anger, not to have internalized some conspiracy theorizing, to not have blind spots. I may have said this to you in the interview that we had, but I was rewatching Spike Lee's Malcolm X. Did I say that to you? It just happened to be on a few weeks ago, and I was watching it. As crazy as Elijah Muhammad's philosophies were, if you went through what Malcolm Little goes through- It all makes sense. There is a plausibility to those theories as a way of you just explaining what is happening to you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2537, "text": "And so Reverend Wright is part of that transition from a black community, in which its men and its women are trapped in a vicious social construction, to an environment that you and I grew up in, in which suddenly there is openings and spaces are cleared, in part because of the work that they did, in part because of the struggles, and fights, and the sharp edges, and the elbows, and mistakes-but ultimately victories and triumphs-of our parents and our grandparents. To expect the broader American society to absorb that in the course of a political campaign was not possible. I did my best in my speech in Philadelphia. But recall that I am not severing the relationship until the Press Club interview in which Reverend Wright, I think feeling hurt, feeling misunderstood, showing his age, doubled down in ways that actually I had not seen out of him in church or in my previous interactions. From the outside, it looked like you did not want to sever the relationship. My hope was, after the Philadelphia speech, which was not clear to me was going to work and involved some risk, my hope was that that would contextualize what had happened. And look, the fact was that some of the quotes that he had that I had not heard-frankly, I was not in church every Sunday-were things I would have to reject, they were just wrong. The same way that, even after his trip to Mecca, Malcolm would still be saying some stuff that I said, Well, that is just not right. So that saddened me. And anybody who has sat in Trinity, as I wrote about-his father is the amazing pastor who actually gave me the idea for the Joshua speech that I made the first time I went to Selma-anybody who has gone to Trinity and sat there would say it is a magnificent community that Reverend Wright built, and it is doing a lot of good. It can never capture all the complexity and contradictions in life. So you end up having to try to be true in a way that can be consumed for a mass audience, but you are always missing some elements of it. You are always leaving some things out. And that is part of the reason why race is such a difficult thing to deal with in politics, because the evolution of racial identity, racial relationships, institutional racism, is never similar. But anything you say on the topic of race, there is a counterargument, there is an exception, there is a nuance.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2538, "text": "And that is part of the reason why, I think, it creates frustration. It is also why situations that look ambiguous can lead to people dividing into camps very quickly. We think of the two episodes of me running for ENTITY, or being ENTITY, that on their face, should not have been as charged as they were. The first is when I say at the end of a long day, towards the end of a long campaign, that part of the reason that you had a lot of working-class whites supporting a Republican agenda that on its face does not seem to be serving their interest is because they have given up hope that the system is going to look out for them. So their attitude is that, If you are not going to help me get a job, if you are not going do anything concrete for me, then at least I am going to cling onto my religion and my Second Amendment rights . And I said that not from an unsympathetic perspective. that these communities feel ignored, and so it is much easier for them to think in terms of those constants in their identity. But just by saying, They cling to their guns and Bibles made it, as David Axelrod said right after I said it, anthropological, made it sound patronizing, and to this day is the primary proof point that is used to argue that I am not sympathetic towards those communities, that I am sort of this elitist, coastal liberal, and in part responsible for the backlash to my presidency. And if I had been a white person saying the exact same thing, it would not have played the same way. If I had said it the way I meant it or felt it, it would have been absorbed differently. But because there was a racial component to it, immediately it becomes a permanent talking point. And then you have got Skip Gates being arrested, which, to me, I was saying something pretty obvious. They ended up handcuffing this middle-aged, elderly man on his own porch. No matter how much he cursed you out, you overreacted, and it probably would not have happened had there not been some assumptions about who he was based on his race. Again, immediately folks ignored the discussion.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtanehisicoates1", "title": "Interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-ta-nehisi-coates-1", "publication_date": "28-10-2016", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2552, "text": "When we talked when you were campaigning for the presidency, I asked you which Administration's foreign policy you admired. And you said that you looked at George H.W. Bush's diplomacy, and I took that to mean the pragmatism, the sense of limits, good diplomacy, as you looked upon it favorably. It is true that I have been complimentary of George H.W. Bush's foreign policy, and I continue to believe that he managed a very difficult period very effectively. Now that I have been in office for three years, I think that I am always cautious about comparing what we have done to what others have done, just because each period is unique. Each set of challenges is unique. But what I can say is that I made a commitment to change the trajectory of American foreign policy in a way that would end the war in Iraq, refocus on defeating our primary enemy, al-Qaeda, strengthen our alliances and our leadership in multilateral fora and restore American leadership in the world. And I think we have accomplished those principal goals. We still have a lot of work to do, but if you look at the pivot from where we were in 2008 to where we are today, the Iraq war is over, we refocused attention on al-Qaeda, and they are badly wounded. They are not eliminated, but the defeat not just of bin Laden, but most of the top leadership, the tightening noose around their safe havens, the incapacity for them to finance themselves, they are much less capable than they were back in 2008. Our alliances with NATO, Japan, South Korea, our close military cooperation with countries like Israel have never been stronger. Our participation in multilateral organizations has been extremely effective. In the United Nations, not only do we have a voice, but we have been able to shape an agenda. And in the fastest-growing regions of the world in emerging markets in the Asia Pacific region, just to take one prominent example, countries are once again looking to the United States for leadership. That is not the exact same moment as existed post-World War II. It is an American leadership that recognizes the rise of countries like China and India and Brazil. It is a U.S. leadership that recognizes our limits in terms of resources, capacity. And yet what I think we have been able to establish is a clear belief among other nations that the United States continues to be the one indispensable nation in tackling major international problems.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2553, "text": "And I think that there is a strong belief that we continue to be a superpower, unique perhaps in the annals of history, that is not only self-interested but is also thinking about how to create a set of international rules and norms that everyone can follow and that everyone can benefit from. So you combine all those changes, the United States is in a much stronger position now to assert leadership over the next century than it was only three years ago. We still have huge challenges ahead. And one thing I have learned over the last three years is that as much as you'd like to guide events, stuff happens and you have to respond. And those responses, no matter how effective your diplomacy or your foreign policy, are sometimes going to produce less-than-optimal results. I particularly like the third one. What do you say? I think Mr. Romney and the rest of the Republican field are going to be playing to their base until the primary season is over. Once it is, we will have a serious debate about foreign policy. I will feel very confident about being able to put my record before the American people and saying that America is safer, stronger and better positioned to win the future than it was when I came into office. And there are going to be some issues where people may have some legitimate differences, and there are going to be some serious debates, just because they are hard issues. But overall, I think it is going to be pretty hard to argue that we have not executed a strategy over the last three years that has put America in a stronger position than it was when I came into office. Romney says if you are re-elected, Iran will get a nuclear weapon, and if he is elected, it will not . If you are re-elected, Iran will not get a nuclear weapon? I have made myself clear since I began running for the presidency that we will take every step available to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. What I have also said is that our efforts are going to be Excuse me. When I came into office, what we had was a situation in which the world was divided, Iran was unified, it was on the move in the region. And because of effective diplomacy, unprecedented pressure with respect to sanctions, our ability to get countries like Russia and China - that had previously balked at any serious pressure on Iran - to work with us, Iran now faces a unified world community, Iran is isolated, its standing in the region is diminished. It is feeling enormous economic pressure.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2554, "text": "And we are in a position where, even as we apply that pressure, we are also saying to them, There is an avenue to resolve this, which is a diplomatic path where they forego nuclear weapons, abide by international rules and can have peaceful nuclear power as other countries do, subject to the restrictions of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. But the way, the Iranians might see it as that they have made proposals - the Brazilian-Turkish proposal - and that they never go anywhere. They are not the basis of negotiations. Yes, I think if you take a look at the track record, the Iranians have simply not engaged in serious negotiations on these issues. We actually put forward a very serious proposal that would have allowed them to display good faith. They need medical isotopes; there was a way to take out some of their low-enriched uranium so that they could not - so that there was clarity that they were not stockpiling that to try to upgrade to weapons-grade uranium. In exchange, the international community would provide the medical isotopes that they needed for their research facility. And they delayed and they delayed, and they hemmed and they hawed, and then when finally the Brazilian-Indian proposal was put forward, it was at a point where they were now declaring that they were about to move forward on 20% enriched uranium, which would defeat the whole purpose of showing good faith that they were not stockpiling uranium that could be transformed into weapons-grade. So, not to get too bogged down in the details, the point is that the Iranians have a very clear path where they say, We are not going to produce weapons, we will not stockpile material that can be used for weapons. The international community then says, We will work with you to develop your peaceful nuclear energy capacity, subject to the kinds of inspections that other countries have agreed to in the past. What makes it difficult is Iran's insistence that it is not subject to the same rules that everybody else is subject to. Suppose that with all this pressure you have been able to put on Iran, and the economic pressure, suppose the consequence is that the price of oil keeps rising, but Iran does not make any significant concession. It is fair to say that this is not an easy problem, and anybody who claims otherwise does not know what they are talking about.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2555, "text": "Obviously, Iran sits in a volatile region during a volatile period of time, and their own internal conflicts makes it that much more difficult, I think, for them to make big strategic decisions. Having said that, our goal consistently has been to combine pressure with an opportunity for them to make good decisions and to mobilize the international community to maximize that pressure. Can we guarantee that Iran takes the smarter path? Which is why I have repeatedly said we do not take any options off the table in preventing them from getting a nuclear weapon. But what I can confidently say, based on discussions that I have had across this government and with governments around the world, is that of all the various difficult options available to us, we have taken the one that is most likely to accomplish our goal and one that is most consistent with America's security interest. When you look at Afghanistan over the past three years - the policies you have adopted - would it be fair to say that the counterterrorism part of the policy, the killing bad guys, has been a lot more successful than the counterinsurgency, the stabilizing of vast aspects of the country, and that going forward, you should really focus in on that first set of policies? Well, what is fair to say is that the counterterrorism strategy as applied to al-Qaeda has been extremely successful. The job is not finished, but there is no doubt that we have severely degraded al-Qaeda's capacity. When it comes to stabilizing Afghanistan, that was always going to be a more difficult and messy task, because it is not just military - it is economic, it is political, it is dealing with the capacity of an Afghan government that does not have a history of projecting itself into all parts of the country, tribal and ethnic conflicts that date back centuries. Now, we have made significant progress in places like Helmand province and in the southern portions of the country. And because of the cohesion and effectiveness of coalition forces, there are big chunks of Afghanistan where the Taliban do not rule, there is increasingly effective local governance, the Afghan security forces are beginning to take the lead. But what is absolutely true is that there are portions of the country where that is not the case, where local governance is weak, where local populations still have deep mistrust of the central government.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2556, "text": "And part of our challenge over the next two years as we transition to Afghan forces is to continue to work with the Afghan government so that it recognizes its responsibilities not only to provide security for those local populations but also to give them some credible sense that the local government - or the national government is looking out for them, and that they are going to be able to make a living and they are not going to be shaken down by corrupt police officials and that they can get products to market. I never believed that America could essentially deliver peace and prosperity to all of Afghanistan in a three-, four-, five-year time frame. And I think anybody who believed that did not know the history and the challenges facing Afghanistan. I mean, this is the third poorest country in the world, with one of the lowest literacy rates and no significant history of a strong civil service or an economy that was deeply integrated with the world economy. It is going to take decades for Afghanistan to fully achieve its potential. What we can do, and what we are doing, is providing the Afghan government the time and space it needs to become more effective, to serve its people better, to provide better security, to avoid a repetition of all-out civil war that we saw back in the '90s. And what we have also been able to do, I think, is to maintain a international coalition to invest in Afghanistan long beyond the point when it was politically popular to do so. But ultimately, the Afghans are going to have to take on these responsibilities and these challenges, and there will be, no doubt, bumps in the road along the way. From the perspective of our security interests, I think we can accomplish our goal, which is to make sure that Afghanistan is not a safe haven from which to launch attacks against the United States or its allies. But the international community - not just us; the Russians and the Chinese and the Indians and the Pakistanis and the Iranians and others - I think all have an interest in making sure that Afghanistan is not engulfed in constant strife, and I think that is an achievable goal. As the Chinese watched your most recent diplomacy in Asia, is it fair for them to have looked at the flurry of diplomatic activity - political, military, economic - and concluded, as many Chinese scholars have, that the United States is building a containment policy against China? No, that would not be accurate, and I have specifically rejected that formulation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2557, "text": "I think what would be fair to conclude is that, as I said we would do, the United States has pivoted to focus on the fastest-growing region of the world, where we have an enormous stake in peace, security, the free flow of commerce and, frankly, an area of the world that we had neglected over the last decade because of our intense focus on Iraq, Afghanistan and the Middle East. So if you look at what we have done, we have strengthened our alliances with Japan and South Korea - I think they are in as good of shape as they have ever been. We have involved ourselves in the regional architecture of - including organizations like ASEAN and APEC. We have sent a clear signal that we are a Pacific power and we will continue to be a Pacific power, but we have done this all in the context of a belief that a peacefully rising China is good for everybody. One of the things we have accomplished over the last three years is to establish a strong dialogue and working relationship with China across a whole range of issues. And where we have serious differences, we have been able to express those differences without it spiraling into a bad place. I think the Chinese government respects us, respects what we are trying to do, recognizes that we are going to be players in the Asia Pacific region for the long term, but I think also recognize that we have in no way inhibited them from continuing their extraordinary growth. The only thing we have insisted on, as a principle in that region is, everybody's got to play by the same set of rules, everybody's got to abide by a set of international norms. And that is not unique to China. That is true for all of us. Well, I think that when we have had some friction in the relationship, it is because China, I think, still sees itself as a developing or even poor country that should be able to pursue mercantilist policies that are for their benefit and where the rules applying to them should not be the same rules that apply to the United States or Europe or other major powers. And what we have tried to say to them very clearly is, Look, you guys have grown up. You are already the most populous country on earth, depending on how you measure it, the largest or next-largest economy in the world and will soon be the largest economy, almost inevitably. You are rapidly consuming more resources than anybody else.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2558, "text": "And in that context, whether it is maritime issues or trade issues, you cannot do whatever you think is best for you. You have got to play by the same rules as everybody else. I think that message is one that resonates with other Asia Pacific countries, all of whom want a good relationship with China, all of whom are desperately seeking access to China's markets and have forged enormous commercial ties, but who also recognize that unless there are some international norms there, they are going to get pushed around and taken advantage of. You think it is inevitable that China will be the largest economy in the world? It is now the second largest, even on PPP. Well, they are - assuming that they maintain stability and current growth patterns, then, yes, it is inevitable. Even if they slow down somewhat, they are so large that they'd probably end up being, just in terms of the overall size of the economy, the largest. But it is doubtful that any time in the near future they achieve the kind of per capita income that the United States or some of the other highly developed countries have achieved. They have just got a lot of people, and they are moving hundreds of millions of people out of poverty at the same time. You have developed a reputation for managing your foreign policy team very effectively, without dissention. So how come you can manage this fairly complex process so well, and relations with Congress are not so good? Well, in foreign policy, the traditional saying is, Partisan differences end at the water's edge, that there is a history of bipartisanship in foreign policy. But I do think there is still a tradition among those who work in foreign policy, whether it is our diplomatic corps or our military or intelligence services, that says our focus is on the mission, our focus is on advancing American interests, and we are going to make decisions based on facts and analysis and a clear-eyed view of the world, as opposed to based on ideology or what is politically expedient. And so when I am working with my foreign policy team, there is just not a lot of extraneous noise. There is not a lot of posturing and positioning and How is this going to play on cable news? and Can we score some points here?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2559, "text": "That whole political circus that has come to dominate so much of Washington applies less to the foreign policy arena, which is why I could forge such an effective working relationship and friendship with Bob Gates, who comes out of that tradition, even though I am sure he would've considered himself a pretty conservative, hawkish Republican. At least that was where he was coming out of. I never asked him what his current party affiliation was, because it did not matter. I just knew he was going to give me good advice. But have you been able to forge similar relationships with foreign leaders? Because one of the criticisms people make about your style of diplomacy is that it is very cool, it is aloof, that you do not pal around with these guys. I was not in other Administrations, so I did not see the interactions between U.S. Presidents and various world leaders. But the friendships and the bonds of trust that I have been able to forge with a whole range of leaders is precisely, or is a big part of, what has allowed us to execute effective diplomacy. I think that if you ask them, Angela Merkel or Prime Minister Singh or President Lee or Prime Minister Erdogan or David Cameron would say, We have a lot of trust and confidence in the ENTITY. We believe what he says. We believe that he will follow through on his commitments. We think he is paying attention to our concerns and our interests. And that is part of the reason we have been able to forge these close working relationships and gotten a whole bunch of stuff done. You just cannot do it with John Boehner. You know, the truth is, actually, when it comes to Congress, the issue is not personal relationships. My suspicion is that this whole critique has to do with the fact that I do not go to a lot of Washington parties. And as a consequence, the Washington press corps maybe just does not feel like I am in the mix enough with them, and they figure, well, if I am not spending time with them, I must be cold and aloof. The fact is, I have got a 13-year-old and 10-year-old daughter, and so, no, Michelle and I do not do the social scene, because as busy as we are, we have a limited amount of time, and we want to be good parents at a time that is vitally important for our kids.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2560, "text": "In terms of Congress, the reason we are not getting enough done right now is you have got a Congress that is deeply ideological and sees a political advantage in not getting stuff done. We had a great time playing golf together. The problem was that no matter how much golf we played or no matter how much we yukked it up, he had trouble getting his caucus to go along with doing the responsible thing on a whole bunch of issues over the past year. You talked a lot about how foreign policy ultimately has to derive from American strength, and so when I talk to businessmen, a lot of them are dismayed that you have not signaled to the world and to markets that the U.S. will get its fiscal house in order by embracing your deficit commission, the Simpson-Bowles. And that walking away from that,which is a phrase I have heard a lot, has been a very bad signal to the world. Why will not you embrace Simpson-Bowles? I have got to say, most of the people who say that, if you asked them what is in Simpson-Bowles, they could not tell you. So first of all, I did embrace Simpson-Bowles. I am the one who created the commission. If I had not pushed it, it would not have happened, because congressional sponsors, including a whole bunch of Republicans, walked away from it. The basic premise of Simpson-Bowles was, we have to take a balanced approach in which we have spending cuts and we have revenues, increased revenues, in order to close our deficits and deal with our debt. And although I did not agree with every particular that was proposed in Simpson-Bowles - which, by the way, if you asked most of the folks who were on Simpson-Bowles, did they agree with every provision in there?, they'd say no as well. What I did do is to take that framework and present a balanced plan of entitlement changes, discretionary cuts, defense cuts, health care cuts as well as revenues and said, We are ready to make a deal. And I presented that three times to Congress. So the core of Simpson-Bowles, the idea of a balanced deficit-reduction plan, I have consistently argued for, presented to the American people, presented to Congress. They did not have some special sauce or formula that avoided us making these tough choices. They are the same choices that I have said I am prepared to make.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2561, "text": "And the only reason it has not happened is the Republicans were unwilling to do anything on revenue. The revenues that we were seeking were far less than what was in Simpson-Bowles. We have done more discretionary cuts than was called for in Simpson-Bowles. The whole half of Simpson-Bowles that was hard ideologically for the Republicans to embrace they have said they are not going to do any of them. So this notion that the reason that it has not happened is we did not embrace Simpson-Bowles is just nonsense. which is what Simpson-Bowles - - which is what Simpson-Bowles called for, they would gag. There is not one of those business leaders who would accept a bet. They'd say, Well, we embrace Simpson-Bowles except for that part that would cause us to pay a lot more. And in terms of the defense cuts that were called for in Simpson-Bowles, they were far deeper than even what would have been required if the sequester goes through, and so would have not been a responsible pathway for us to reduce our deficit spending. Now, that is not the fault of Simpson-Bowles. What they were trying to do was provide us a basic framework, and we took that framework, and we have pushed it forward. There is no equivalence between Democratic and Republican positions when it comes to deficit reduction. We have shown ourselves to be serious. We have made a trillion dollars worth of cuts already. We have got another $1.5 trillion worth of cuts on the chopping blocks. But what we have also said is, in order for us to seriously reduce the deficit, there is got to be increased revenue. And if we can get any Republicans to show any serious commitment - not vague commitments, not We will get revenues because of tax reform somewhere in the future, but we do not know exactly what that looks like and we cannot identify a single tax that we would allow to go up - but if we can get any of them who are still in office, as opposed to retired, to commit to that, we will be able to reduce our deficit. Now, to your larger point, you are absolutely right. Our whole foreign policy has to be anchored in economic strength here at home.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2562, "text": "And if we are not strong, stable, growing, making stuff, training our workforce so that it is the most skilled in the world, maintaining our lead in innovation, in basic research, in basic science, in the quality of our universities, in the transparency of our financial sector, if we do not maintain the upward mobility and equality of opportunity that underwrites our political stability and makes us a beacon for the world, then our foreign policy leadership will diminish as well. Can we do that in a world with so much competition from so many countries? One of the things you do hear people say is, You know, we have all this regulation. You are trying to make America more competitive, but you have got Dodd-Frank, you have got health care. And in that context, are we going to be able to be competitive, to attract investment, to create jobs? Look, first of all, with respect to regulation, this whole notion that somehow there is been this huge tidal wave of regulation is not true, and we can provide you the facts. Our regulations have a lower cost than the comparable regulations under the Bush Administration; they have far higher benefits. We have engaged in a unprecedented regulatory look-back, where we are weeding out and clearing up a whole bunch of regulations that were outdated and outmoded, and we are saving businesses billions of dollars and tons of paperwork and man-hours that they are required to fill out a bunch of forms that are not needed. I just had a conference last week where we had a group of manufacturing companies - some service companies as well - that are engaging in insourcing. They are bringing work back to the United States and plants back to the United States, because as the wages in China and other countries begin to increase, and U.S. worker productivity has gone way up, the cost differential for labor has significantly closed. And what these companies say is, as long as the United States is still investing in the best infrastructure in the world, the best education system in the world, is training enough skilled workers and engineers and is creating a stable platform for businesses to succeed and providing us with certainty, there is no reason why America cannot be the most competitive advanced economy in the world. But that requires us to continue to up our game and do things better and do things smart. We have started that process over the last three years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithfareedzakariatimemagazine", "title": "Interview with Fareed Zakaria of Time Magazine", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-fareed-zakaria-time-magazine", "publication_date": "19-01-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2565, "text": "I have no announcements to make, gentlemen, except that I want to clear up just one thing, and that is in regard to the procedure of the Ways and Means Committee. The Ways and Means Committee have been proceeding exactly as I have requested them to proceed. I asked them, in the first place, to consider social security ahead of taxes, and that is the reason they are doing it. ENTITY, Governor Dever was in here a couple of weeks ago and indicated that you favored a special inquiry by the Ways and Means Committee in the domestic watch situation. The matter was placed before me by the Waltham Watch Company and two or three other American watch companies. I made no comment on the situation, except to take the papers which they gave me and told them I would look into it. ENTITY, there is a report that the administration is going to propose home relief funds in the social security program. What kind of funds, sir, did he ask? I do not know what that means, but go ahead and explain it to him, Tony.1 Story out of New York, that is the reason. ENTITY, your military aide, Gen. Harry Vaughan, has been the recipient of a considerable amount of criticism in connection with the decoration offered to him by the Government of Argentina.2 He has been singled out for criticism, although a medal that medal and other medals under similar circumstances have been offered to other officials and other officers. Have you any comment on why he should be criticized? No reason in the world why he should be criticized. Stanley Woodward informed me the other day just accidentally happened to inform me that he has more than a hundred two or three over there in his drawer that have been presented to nearly every every general and admiral that we have got here in Washington, and more than twenty of these this same medal that General Vaughan received, in that drawer, and various other generals and admirals in the service of the United States Government. It was handled strictly according to law. And the only reason for the squawk is because General Vaughan happens to be my military aide. They are gunning for you over his shoulder? You mean, ENTITY, these generals do not pick up these decorations after they receive them? It is the specific the law is specific on it, that those decorations are to be not to be received individually until they receive permission from Congress to get them. That is the in the criminal code in the United States Code, not the criminal code United States Code.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference631", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-631", "publication_date": "17-02-1949", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2566, "text": "During wartime it was allowed by the Congress by specific law that the military services could receive and civilians, too could receive decorations from our Allies or associated powers in the World War. That period expired on the 30th day of last June, and the civil code went into effect at that time. I wonder if you will give us some of your ideas about it? My ideas were very clearly and specifically expressed by the Secretary of State yesterday after an interview with me.3 Resolution 239 was passed by the Senate and unanimously passed by the House. And I announced clearly in my message on the in the inaugural message, and in various messages on it previous to that, our stand in connection with the Atlantic Pact. ENTITY, what you said in your message still stands? What is your reaction, ENTITY, to the story that Secretary Royall asked to have troops withdrawn from Japan If I remember correctly, Secretary Royall categorically denied the statement. ENTITY, in his letter of February 14 to Secretary Krug, Mr. Pace said the Central Arizona project does not meet with your program. The Central Arizona project is under consideration by the Congress, and it has not been considered as whether it is a part of the program or not. The water situation in Arizona and in California is in a serious situation. I myself have been making some personal investigations on the situation, with the idea to try to find more water for both of those States. ENTITY, a subsequent letter to-Mr. Pace sent to Senator O'Mahoney has been interpreted by Arizona as a reversal of your position. If you will question Senator Hayden and the Senators from California, you will find that there is no confusion, and never has been. ENTITY, have you received a new report from your Economic Advisers? I receive a regular monthly report. Can you give us your estimate on what the business outlook is today? There is considerable apprehension, you know, about falling prices and unemployment. I think it is the leveling off that everybody has been wishing for. And I hope that is the case, and that we do not have another spiral in prices. ENTITY, do you think-are you in favor of modifying consumer credit controls, under Regulation W?4  I am not considering it at the present time. ENTITY, have you reached a decision on whether Dr. Bruce is going back to Argentina? I will tell you all about it later, after an interview with him.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference631", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-631", "publication_date": "17-02-1949", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2567, "text": "The McGraw-Hill Publishing Company sent out a lot of releases and stuff today, and one of them indicated that Ralph Bunche would be the next American Ambassador to Russia. Is that news to you? Yes, that is news to me. That is news to me. ENTITY, while we are talking about Russia, have you made a decision yet about Bedell Smith? That decision will have to be made by General Smith himself. He is under treatment now, on account of his health, and I have not had a conference with him lately. That is up to General Smith. He is still at Walter Reed? ENTITY, would you care to say anything further on the subject of taxes? There is some speculation that since you have put social security ahead of taxes, taxes will have to be abandoned. It is a matter of procedure-does not make any difference. ENTITY, would you care to comment on why you asked them to follow that procedure, of social security first? Because they are not we were not ready on the tax proposition as yet. ENTITY, are you would you be considering a compromise on taxes below $4 billion? I made my statement to the Congress in my message. Have you any ideas on the secrecy of those trials? I do not know anything about it, Pete5 The Constitution should follow the flag wherever it goes, and trials should be conducted as we usually conduct them in this country. That is my theory, and I am trying to enforce it. I do not know anything about this one to which you refer. ENTITY, in the Senate today, Mr. Langer said that you have dropped all pretense of continuing bipartisan foreign policy. ENTITY, would you care to comment on the Loyalty Board's clearance of William Remington? I think the Loyalty Board undoubtedly heard all the evidence and made the proper decision. That is what I set them up for. Will you clear up the Constitution following the flag? Those spies were tried in this city, those Germans that landed on Long Island, under the greatest of secrecy. That was during wartime. That was during wartime. ENTITY, I have been asked to ask you if you are opposed to building this Glacier View Dam in the Glacier National Park, which has caused a controversy between the Park Service and the ENTITY Engineers? I cannot remember enough about the case, Tony.7 That is the first I had heard of that controversy. Is that on the-that Hungry Horse Dam? First I heard about it was 10 minutes ago.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference631", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-631", "publication_date": "17-02-1949", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2568, "text": "Then I happen to know a little bit more about it than you do, Tony. ENTITY, getting back to that other thing on the Constitution, is there not a comparable situation in Europe, where you have an occupied area where you have saboteurs landing in Long Island in wartime? It is comparable to that, but I am very anxious that American citizens I do not want to treat I am very anxious that American citizens I am speaking strictly of Americans under no matter where they are, you ought to have the same privilege that you have at home, if you work for the Government. I do not care where you are, in the occupied areas, or the trial of these foreigners, it is comparable to that. ENTITY, on the other hand, do not you think American justice should be full and open? Well, that is a matter for argument, I think, if it comes to spies in enemy countries. ENTITY, what do you think of this controversy between certain reporters working in Japan and Secretary Royall, as to what he said, that we might have to pull out of Japan in case of war with Russia? I would talk to the Secretary for ENTITY. I could not understand what you said? I have no comment to make on that. The policy on Japan is set and fixed, and it has not changed. Philadelphia is having a transit strike that has everything tied up. Is there any law or provision under which you can intervene? I beg your pardon? They are in the course of preparation, and as soon as possible we will have them ready. Will it follow the plan of last May 24, in which you submitted a message to Congress outlining That is right I believe I referred specifically to it in the message in the Message on the State of the Union, I think. ENTITY, Senator Taft has said that the anti-inflation bill that went up the other day proposes a controlled economy. I was wondering if you have anything to say on that? I have no argument with Senator Taft. My views on the subject have been expressed in message after message to Congress. If the Senators want to have an argument about it, that is their privilege.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconference631", "title": "The President's News Conference", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-631", "publication_date": "17-02-1949", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Harry S. Truman"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2571, "text": "And it is my great honor to welcome to the White House the 2019 NCAA Women's Basketball National Champions, the Baylor Lady Bears. And I watched that last game, and that was a tough, rough game with Notre Dame. To ENTITY, I want to just congratulate you and the entire team. And you know, interestingly, I got a little bit of a rsum about you, Coach. Should I-can I read a couple of lines from this? Do you mind if I do that? No matter what ENTITY has attempted in basketball, whether it be the court or along the sidelines, has found tremendous success. In 18 seasons as the head coach, she has attained a 576 career victories and ranks number two among the winningest Division I head coaches in the winning percentage of .853. And she does not like number three, but she is going to catch it. She is number three alltime, by percentage, between two mentors, second ranked, Leon Barmore -that is at .869. So you are pretty close to Pat Summitt. If you have a couple of more seasons, good, you can maybe even take that percentage. And you started off, and you inherited a team that was 7 and 20 and was going nowhere. And look what you have right there. Here we are in the Oval Office, right? I just read that through. I heard great things, and I read it, and I felt we should let people know, because that is an incredible-7 and 20 to the national championship. Would you like to work at the White House, by any chance? We will take you. We need that. We met him. So, again, to your team, you deserved it. I also want to recognize Baylor President, Linda Livingstone. I am very proud of this team. We need to remember that. These are friends of mine. Congressman Bill Flores. Do you go to a lot of the games? He is been with me for a long time-Louie, right? We fight that fight. You'd better believe it. And a friend of ours also-a great attorney and a great talent-is Attorney General Ken Paxton. How you doing with all those cases? We do not let him lose any cases. The championship game will go down as one of the greatest in the history of women's college basketball. You would say that, I think, Coach, right?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthencaawomensbasketballchampionbayloruniversityladybearsand", "title": "Remarks Honoring the NCAA Women's Basketball Champion Baylor University Lady Bears and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-ncaa-womens-basketball-champion-baylor-university-lady-bears-and", "publication_date": "29-04-2019", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2572, "text": "You dominated for most of the game and led Notre Dame by 12 points going into the final minutes of the third quarter. You'd better turn on this game. Then, one of your true star players-a great player-team captain Lauren Cox suffered a painful MCL sprain and had to be taken off the court in a wheelchair. After seeing such a vital member of the team go down, Notre Dame surged in the final quarter, tying the game with 16 seconds left. And you had an angry coach. As the clock ticked toward zero, Chloe Jackson hung back at half court, drove toward the key, and made a game-winning layup with less than 4 seconds remaining It was a play for the ages. And I have heard that from a lot of people. Then, the game almost went into overtime when Notre Dame was given two free throws with 1.9 seconds left on the board. Well, they do not have that. So tell me, how many of the-one was made? She missed the first one. She missed the first one. And I am sure you were very-you felt badly about her missing the first one. So she-she went one for two, and that was that, huh? But in the end, you won the game 82 to 81. And it was a thrilling victory that people will be talking about for many, many years to come. God is good. He has blessed these kids. That victory was the culmination of an incredible year. The Lady Bears had a stunning 37-and-1 season. What happened after Christmas? Stanford has a very good team as well. You beat your chief rivals, the Texas Longhorns, not once, but twice. And you scored nearly 1,000 more points than any of your opponents and blocked more than three times as many shots. You have left an enduring mark on college basketball history. And you will all be incredibly proud of what you have achieved in many years to come. You are going to be looking back, and you are going to be thinking about that incredible season, and you are going to be thinking about being in this incredible office, right? I have had the biggest people in the world come into this office, and they stop, and they look. Can you believe it? I have seen them, where they cry. I sort of say-you know what I say?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsremarkshonoringthencaawomensbasketballchampionbayloruniversityladybearsand", "title": "Remarks Honoring the NCAA Women's Basketball Champion Baylor University Lady Bears and an Exchange With Reporters", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-honoring-the-ncaa-womens-basketball-champion-baylor-university-lady-bears-and", "publication_date": "29-04-2019", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Donald J. Trump"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2579, "text": "With the Coca-Cola 600 coming up this weekend, how confident are you that the four days of racing in the Charlotte Motor Speedway can be done safely? Did North Carolina health officials learn anything or see any concerns when they attended the health screen process at Darlington? Our health officials have worked closely with NASCAR and the Charlotte Motor Speedway to ensure a safe Coca-Cola 600 this weekend. I know a lot of people are looking forward to this live sporting event on TV. We are glad that since NASCAR, North Carolina is the home of NASCAR, that we are going to be having this event here. NASCAR was very thoughtful in their plan for protecting employees and drivers and pit crews and people working on the cars from ENTITY. They submitted a plan to our Department of Health and Human Services. Also, local health officials work with them. Our local health officials gave them feedback on the plan. I think that they are ready to put on a very safe race. Obviously no spectators will be there, and that is because we know that gatherings together, when people gather together, that the risk of infection is so much higher. This is why we continue to have in our executive order the mass gathering ban. I do not know about the situation regarding Darlington. Do you know anything about it, ENTITY? About any feedback we got? From everything I have heard, things went fine there, but we will get any reports back to see if any changes are going to be made at the Coca Cola 600 from things learned at Darlington, but I do not have the answer to that right now. My question for you is about youth sports. The only part of the executive order that explicitly mentioned sports dealt with, we presume, NASCAR, because it mentioned for broadcast on television. We have been getting a lot of questions from little league administrators and other youth sports coordinators, swim team, travel, basketball, you name it. Is that in your opinion right now, a Phase Two thing, or is that a Phase Three thing or is it somewhere in between? Sports are so important to the formation of character, for fitness. I love sports. I grew up participating on sport teams all the way through high school, and I know how important they can be for the education of children. Start out knowing that this is something that we want to have happen as much as we can as we approach the school year. At the same time, we have to understand the presence of ENTITY. I do not think that we have all of the answers to those questions yet.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnorthcarolinagovroycooperpressconferencetranscriptmay22", "title": "North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper Press Conference Transcript May 22", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/north-carolina-gov-roy-cooper-press-conference-transcript-may-22", "publication_date": "22-05-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Roy Cooper"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2580, "text": "I know that our staff is working closely with the North Carolina High School Athletic, and I think I will let ENTITY come up and make a few comments about that and what she has been doing on that front. As far as high school and other youth sports, we will be putting out guidance today on that. The reason you did not see it in the executive orders is there are no requirement, but we do have public health recommendations for folks, particularly that run the leagues and the facilities that host these sporting events. Our recommendations generally fall in one big bucket here is around contact sports. We know that contact sports like basketball or football, where you are in each other's personal spaces and you are breathing out respiratory droplets on other, we know that that is a higher way of spreading the virus as opposed to non-contact sports like tennis or baseball or individual sports like swimming or golf. Those non-contact sports, we said that that is fine to proceed from a recommendation perspective, but then we do have some guidance on how to do each of those activities safely. We are not recommending contact sports go forward, but for non-contact sports to go forward, but with a set of guidelines. Again, all of these are recommendations and we have worked, as ENTITY mentioned, with athletic associations across North Carolina. We hope to have that guidance posted today for folks to take more of a look at. This is ENTITY from Channel Nine. My question for you is, are you personally comfortable with eating inside of a restaurant this weekend? I have been the executive residence and I have been here at the emergency operation center. Yes, I would feel comfortable going to a restaurant, not saying that I am necessarily going, because I hope I can spend some time with my family this weekend. We are continuing to work on issues here and we will be working through the weekend. I would certainly want that restaurant to be following all of the personal safety rules and doing everything they can to prevent the transfer of ENTITY. We hope that that people will feel safe enough to go to our restaurants throughout the state. We hope that all of the restaurants continue to obey the rules. I think they will find that that is good business for them to do that. Wanted to ask you please, what conversations are you having with large entertainment or convention venues? Should they expect to be closed for months to come? And ENTITY, ..., is the state tracking the number of positives that are from asymptomatic versus symptomatic people?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnorthcarolinagovroycooperpressconferencetranscriptmay22", "title": "North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper Press Conference Transcript May 22", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/north-carolina-gov-roy-cooper-press-conference-transcript-may-22", "publication_date": "22-05-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Roy Cooper"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2581, "text": "And I will let ENTITY address both of those, but our office is having conversations with these large event venues who obviously want to begin the process of having people back in them. These are the kinds of places that are much higher risk for ENTITY and transferring it from one person to another. So, obviously right now where we are in phase two of the executive order, we would not have any of these large gatherings, but we are certainly planning ahead for the potential of them being open at some capacity and are trying to figure out exactly what that would look like safety. And I will let ENTITY answer both of those questions if she would. So, let me do that symptomatic and asymptomatic. We do not track that for all of our cases, but what I would draw your attention to on our website and on our dashboard, we post surveillance data and I would direct you to that surveillance data, which does show some information that we are starting to collect about symptomatic and asymptomatic spread. As we have been talking about related to ENTITY, is that we are seeing a fair amount of spread of this virus by folks who do not have any symptoms, who are asymptomatic. That is one of the primary reasons why the three W's is so important. So, we are not tracking that for all of our cases. When we get information back from the lab, it is very minimal data. There are certain places where our public health team does more in depth study, particularly the surveillance work and prevalence studies. Those are the things where we are going to be able to get more symptom-based information and link it with some of this data. So, I direct you to our surveillance data to start. And I will just echo what the ENTITY mentioned about large venues. We know mass gatherings are places when folks, particularly when they are indoors, close together for longer periods of time and sitting, those are the places where they are higher risk. We actually know that North Carolina's first cases here in the state were seeded from a mass gathering up in new England. So, we know that those kinds of events have huge implications, not just for here in North Carolina, but can cross state. We definitely want to take precautions as we go here, and I think that we are trying to step through that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnorthcarolinagovroycooperpressconferencetranscriptmay22", "title": "North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper Press Conference Transcript May 22", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/north-carolina-gov-roy-cooper-press-conference-transcript-may-22", "publication_date": "22-05-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Roy Cooper"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2582, "text": "We want to look at our numbers and understand how are we doing with the easing of restrictions that we are putting in place that only just start this evening. Let us look at our numbers and we will see as we go here. But again, mass gatherings is one of the hardest because it does bring so many people together and has such a high risk of spreading the virus to so many people at the same time. What is the responsibility of restaurants, businesses, churches, anything not open from the public to report to the public and state about new cases or outbreaks tied to their establishments? I will let you handle that, ENTITY. There are certain industries that are regulated in terms of required to report to us. As was mentioned, the restaurant industry is highly regulated and we continue to do inspections, but in terms of reporting outbreaks, that would be two or more cases or reporting clusters, that would be five or more cases. Restaurants are not one of the industries that are required to report back to us. Now, we often do want those restaurants to get in touch with our public health departments if there is an issue, because we want to work in close collaboration with them to make sure that they are doing all of the right things to prevent further spread of the infection. But there are just a few industries that are required by law to report to us. Those are settings like nursing homes and again, that is why you see those reported on our website. I wanted to ask you about lawsuits. First, there was the suit on behalf of churches and then one that was going to be filed on behalf of salon owners. Now, our state representative for Beaufort County is organizing a suit that, if successful, would allow all businesses to reopen in phase two. What is your reaction to these legal challenges and they are affecting how your team's making policy? It would be irresponsible to remove restrictions all at once. Clearly, that is a situation that could result in a massive spike in ENTITY. And our entire effort here has been to slow the spread and to keep our hospital system and medical providers from being overwhelmed, and we have been successful with that. We are beginning to turn the dimmer light up to move into phase We moved into phase one first. Now, we are moving into phase two and we are slowly easing restrictions here while remembering that the vast majority of businesses in North Carolina can be open.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnorthcarolinagovroycooperpressconferencetranscriptmay22", "title": "North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper Press Conference Transcript May 22", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/north-carolina-gov-roy-cooper-press-conference-transcript-may-22", "publication_date": "22-05-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Roy Cooper"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2583, "text": "Some of them are not because of the consequences of this pandemic, whether it be supply chain, whether it be employees that have to stay home. There are businesses that are not operating at full capacity for a lot of reasons. We did have the one lawsuit regarding houses of worship, where we have made accommodations for that in this order. And we believe that this is a smart way to move forward, to protect the health of North Carolinians while also trying to boost our economy. And that goes hand in hand, and we have got to make sure that people have confidence to be able to go out into the economy. And we are doing that and giving them that confidence by talking about things like Count On Me today, but also using the data to make decisions about when it is safe to do more easing of the restrictions. And when people know that that is what we are using to make decisions, not emotions, not politics, but science and data, people will have more confidence and not only will people be healthier but our economy will improve faster. This is ENTITY from WRAL. Today, Senator Berger sent DPS a letter demanding answers to questions and documents that reporters have been asking for for weeks. Do you intend to ensure DPS will provide those answers and documents, both to Senator Berger and the media? Well, first we want to make sure that all our employees at prisons and inmates are safe and we want to make sure that we abide with all of the public records laws. I have not seen this letter you are talking about, but I do have ENTITY here, our director of prisons, who can provide a response. This morning, I did receive a communication from Senator Berger's office and we will be sending a response back very timely. We look forward to the opportunity to answer all of the senator's questions. And quite frankly, we look forward to the opportunity to set the record straight. We look forward to the opportunity to set the record straight. Thanks ENTITY, can you provide more clarity on how craft breweries in the state are classified under the Phase 2 guidelines? The NC Craft Brewers Guild and others have said they do not believe brewery ... or brew pubs meet the order's definition of a bar, but there seems to be a lot of confusion around this as far as reopening, Our legal team and our departments will be issuing guidance on that this afternoon, regarding what establishments fall under what category, there will be a legal distinction there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnorthcarolinagovroycooperpressconferencetranscriptmay22", "title": "North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper Press Conference Transcript May 22", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/north-carolina-gov-roy-cooper-press-conference-transcript-may-22", "publication_date": "22-05-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Roy Cooper"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2584, "text": "It is important to know that we have worked very closely with the Restaurant Association, making sure that we put in place protections with this count on, on ... program that is going on right now. And we feel really good about where we are with our restaurants, but that clarification will be coming this afternoon. This is ENTITY from the Asheville Citizen-Times Newspaper. Since about April 10th, I have been reaching out consistently to Department of Employment Services, or security rather, asking them for this one metric, number of individual applications they either accept or reject every day. Through several exchanges of emails they have promised to give me these numbers, and then either those have never materialized, or they have cited vague concerns with timing that it was not right time to answer this. has tried to help me get those numbers, and we have not been successful so far. Is there a reason that you know that would not provide those numbers to the public? It is an important metric to show how quickly they will be able to dig themselves out of the backlog and one that they should have readily assessable if they are monitoring their progress. Thanks for that question, and I am not familiar with that number that you are talking about. They do post numbers of claims that were rejected and claims that have been paid. And right now about 585,000 people are receiving benefits of almost $2.4 billion. But this division knows, and I know that there are thousands of people who have yet to be paid. And every single family that has applied for unemployment benefits deserves a fair adjudication, and deserves to get paid if they qualify. I know that additional federal money has been activated today, so there will be more opportunities for people to provide unemployment insurance. But I will take those concerns that you have today and make sure that our communications people get up with you to provide that information to you, if that is something that can be provided under the Public Records Law, and it is supposed to be given out. But thank you for that question, and we will try to get that information to you. Thank you for taking my question, this is Derek with Fox 46. We have heard from gyms who have said that they have spent literally thousands of dollars to be ready on everything from air purifiers, hand sanitizers, body wipes, different protocols.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsnorthcarolinagovroycooperpressconferencetranscriptmay22", "title": "North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper Press Conference Transcript May 22", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/north-carolina-gov-roy-cooper-press-conference-transcript-may-22", "publication_date": "22-05-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Roy Cooper"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2594, "text": "Well, I guess you know everybody's anxious to talk about the economy. And I might preface this, Mr. President, saying some of the questions I am asking reflect some feedback that we get from our audience. Unemployment about 6.8 percent and not really changing very much; 25,000 manufacturing lost in the last year alone; people out of work who have never been out of work before and not the chronically unemployed. And I am getting a sense of maybe frustration, maybe even anger on the part of these people. And I wonder, what can you tell them? What can you tell them about the future? I can tell them we have been through a tough time. We have been through a recession. And I say through because technically I do not believe this country is in a recession. In this area, we have had some economic dislocations because of our success, the success in beating down a military threat that still exists, incidentally, but has enabled us to make some substantial cutbacks on defense. And so, what we have got to do is to incent this economy in the ways I have been proposing to the Congress for 2 years. And I am talking about capital gains, R&D, IRA's, enterprise zones; a transportation bill would kick the economy right now. So, we have got some answers. I have got a big problem with the Congress. And apparently the people blame the Congress. I will take my share of the blame. But we are going through a transitional period here, and we have got to help these people.  who says you have no sense of leadership. You are frozen by insensitivity to what people are thinking. I am disinclined to respond to those kinds of personal attacks. I do not agree with that, and the American people, fortunately, do not agree with that. I think the American people see Congress as a major stumbling block, and he happens to be the leader of the House over there. And if they would go forward and do some of the things I have asked, I think we'd be far further along in the economy. But today, for example, we get a breakthrough on unemployment compensation, helping people whose benefits ran out. But we did it by beating back a lot of bad ideas that would bust the budget agreement and tax all the people that are working, the 94 percent of the people that are working. And I do not want to do that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardfordksdktvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Richard Ford of KSDK - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-ford-ksdk-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2595, "text": "And I have a big difference with the liberal ideology of the leadership in the Congress. Some cynics might say that you agreed to that unemployment benefit extension because the polls show you losing in popularity or losing in this rate of approval. Some cynics might say that, but they do not know the facts. The facts are, if the Democrats had done what they are willing to do now, we could have had a bill 2 months ago and should have. But they asked me to bust the budget agreement and further tax the 94 percent of the people that are working. And by standing up and saying, No, we are not going to do it that way. We are going to beat back the liberal idea that you can just keep on spending forever, that got us partially in the mix we are in now. And so, I had to stand up against it. But now, apparently, we have got a deal. But I do not think somebody will charge that because they can see the evidence of the legislation. You are familiar with this Times-Mirror poll that was taken that showed this drop in popularity. There was another statistic in that poll that is disturbing to some, that 39 percent of those polled are afraid that some member of their family is going to lose their job. And is not it very difficult for people to spend money to stimulate the economy when they live with this fear What do we do about that? What we do about it is passing the incentive programs that I have got up before the Congress. It is long overdue that they go out in my opinion. And then I will make some proposals at the State of the Union message and take my case directly to the American people. And I think they will support me. But even if they are not, I am going to have a program that I will say look the American people in the eye and say, Look, they have tried it their way. I have had to block some of the lousy ideas that the Democratic leadership has come up with. Now, you back me, and let us try to get it done. Interest rates are down, and today yet there is another very important credit card company came down on their rates. At some point when those rates are, people see the rates are where they are, I believe you are going to see confidence start back in housing or in consumer buying. And that is what the economy needs. But people do not have jobs, sir. They do not have any income. They cannot spend any money.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardfordksdktvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Richard Ford of KSDK - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-ford-ksdk-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2596, "text": "They cannot borrow any money. There is 94 percent of the people that can stimulate the economy and help create jobs, however. Two Governors were in town here yesterday, both Republicans, Ashcroft and Edgar from Illinois. And they say we need a new bridge across the river, a very expensive bridge that has to be built. The rest of the infrastructure here could be helped. I was just wondering if you would approve or consider some sort of WPA kind of thing. If you will, that would stimulate the economy and also rebuild the infrastructure. Before we need a whole new WPA program, what we need is you are right, we need to do something about the infrastructure. And they ought to pass our transportation bill. You remember last March when I challenged the Congress to pass it in 100 days? Cannot you at least pass something that will help the infrastructure, help the highway system in 100 days? We might still get it before the end of this session. But that is the kind of thing we ought to do rather than go out and try to think of some big new way to spend money. We have got a good transportation bill that would do exactly what you are talking about. Now, whether it takes care of that bridge or not, I do not know. Not far from here, we have a McDonnell-Douglas plant, where you have already alluded there is a lot of unemployment because of defense cutbacks. Will you support the sale of F - 15's to Saudi Arabia that would keep employment there at a good level through the next several years? We have no requests, and I will consider all these requests when they come to me. We have no requests yet. There is an economist and this will be my last chat here who says that it is not high taxes and it is not high interest rates that are the problem, it is low wages, that people are not making enough money in this country because all of our manufacturing jobs have gone someplace else. Do you think there is any truth in that? No, I do not think there is any truth in that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrichardfordksdktvstlouismissouri", "title": "Interview With Richard Ford of KSDK - TV in St. Louis, Missouri", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-richard-ford-ksdk-tv-st-louis-missouri", "publication_date": "13-11-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2597, "text": "ENTITY we are here with our eyes open, wide open, we understand that ENTITY use the media to build consensus and shape public opinion, why are you turning to KVIA and El Paso? Well, El Paso has a huge stack in the debate around trade. You know you have got 14 billion dollars worth of computer and IT services and products. It is a major hub of the El Paso economy, partly because of an outstanding University there. Texas and the United States benefit from exports. About a third of our economic growth during this recovery have been export driven. Folks are already selling stuff here, we want to make sure that there is a level playing field for US businesses and US workers. And we know that workers who are employed by exporting companies typically make about 18% more in wages than folks who are just focusing on the domestic market. So this gives me the authority to create higher standards in countries that are a part of the Asia Pacific Rim, that includes by the way Mexico. And a lot of people have concerns about NAFTA, well what this does is it actually raises standards and obligates Mexico in a way that it has not before to raise labor standards and working conditions for folks on the other side of the border that creates more of a level playing field for folks-folks here in the United States. I saw that beautiful brochure, and you have campaigns, even mentioned El Paso, but what do you tell El Pasoens who have a direct effect of NAFTA since 1994? What do you tell them to reassure them that this is a good thing for not only the border land but for Texas? Well I think it is important to recognize that there were real problems with some past trade agreements because they did not have strong enforceable labor and environmental provisions. Globalization and technology has sometimes made it harder for workers to have leverage in terms of getting raises and incomes. But the truth is that if a company is looking for low wage labor, they have already left, they are not here anymore. And if it has not been because they have moved overseas, its because technology replaced those jobs. The key now for us is to make sure that the jobs we are creating, the place were we have the advantage, in high skill, high value jobs, that we are able to compete on a world stage and we are able to sell our products made in America anywhere in the world. And that is what this trade authorization does.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithestelacasasabc7kvia", "title": "Interview with Estela Casas of ABC-7 KVIA", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-estela-casas-abc-7-kvia", "publication_date": "03-06-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2598, "text": "So it has a lot of safe guards that were not there before, but more importantly we cannot just shut ourselves off. If you are not happy with the fact that it is real easy to sell Japanese cars here,but a lot hard to sell them-to sell US cars over in Japan, then I do not know why you'd just settle for the status quo, let us get a better deal. And that is what we are trying to do. Through fast track, I think there is been a lot of concern. What we are voting on now is the authority, that every ENTITY previous to me has had, to negotiate. Now, lets say we get an agreement with all these specific countries that we are negotiating with, then for 60 days before I even sign the agreement, we will have to post every term of the agreement on a website. Everybody will be able to see it. Then I sign it. So they have already had 60 days to review it, and then there will be an entire debate afterwords before Congress has to vote on it. So by the time we are actually completed and members of Congress are taking a final vote on any particular agreement, probably four, five, six months of review will have been taken place. All we are taking about right now is the authority for me to negotiate these agreements. Well it is hard to negotiated, if you think about it, you are negotiating with ten other countries. If I do not have the authority to be able to just present an agreement that has been negotiated before congress, if it is subject to all kinds of amendments and each member of congress says Well I want a little more of this or I want a little more of that, you can imagine that you'd never actually get it done. So at some point you have got to be able to say Alright here is what we have been able to negotiate, you get an up or down vote, if you do not like it, if you think its the wrong deal for the american worker, you can still vote against it. But I am confident that it will be a good deal, because the truth is is that a third of our economic growth since the recovery has been driven by exports. The future for us is in this part of the world where, you know you have got the biggest population, a fast growing market, they are becoming wealthier, they are buying more stuff, they are eating better food, and they are a right market for us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithestelacasasabc7kvia", "title": "Interview with Estela Casas of ABC-7 KVIA", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-estela-casas-abc-7-kvia", "publication_date": "03-06-2015", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2599, "text": "ENTITY, you came to town, like Jimmy Carter, as an outsider, but the results have been vastly different. How do you explain your mastery of the legislative branch? Well, I do not know whether I'd have the nerve to use that word mastery as you did. But I had 8 years experience as Governor of California in which for about 7 of those 8 years both houses of the legislature were of the opposing party, and we managed to get a great many reforms in the welfare reforms that were so tremendously successful, things of that kind. But I came here with the same idea, that we are coequal branches of the government. They have got their problems, and it is a ease of common sense and consultation. And I have had 11 formal meetings with the leadership of the House and the Senate here. I have gone to the Hill 9 times myself, and I understand that for 18 months that is kind of a record. Senator Baker, the Republican leader, said that you have an instinctive feel for how the legislative branch works, and others who've come down to the White House say that you have also capitalized on your charm and your personality and your persistence. And I am wondering, did acting give you the training and the skills to sell your program to Congress? Well, I suppose we are all the sum total of everything that is happened to us and all the experiences we have had in our lives. So, whether that contributed something or not, I do not know. I must say this about getting along with the Legislature. I am deeply indebted to Senator Howard Baker and to Representative Bob Michel, the Minority Leader in the House, for the great cooperation and the help that I have had from them, the masterful job they have done in those two positions that they hold as leader of the Senate and Minority Leader of the House. Also, when I say consultation, I find that the job of keeping track of what is up there, of not pulling surprises, of letting them know we have a group in the administration here that is appointed expressly for the purpose of legislative strategy, to keep track of our own proposals and I try to remember that the ENTITY proposes and the Congress disposes to keep track of these things. If there is something that we feel we'd have trouble with and, perhaps, have to find ourselves in a veto position, we see that they are aware of that and what it is that puts us in that position in advance, and then keep in constant touch.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukewetatvthepresidentsrelationswithcongress", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke of WETA-TV on the President's Relations With Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-weta-tv-the-presidents-relations-with-congress", "publication_date": "16-07-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2600, "text": "And it does not hurt, every once in a while in keeping in touch, to say some thank you's. Well, you go beyond that, though, ENTITY, because, when you talk to people on the Hill, there is a common refrain that comes through. They all say, we go down to the White House, and Ronald Reagan is a terribly charming man. Is there a politics of affability which has served you well? Well, I do not know whether it is a skill or not, but I like people. And I certainly do not meet them with a chip on my shoulder. I think of it as the ENTITY is the only one in town who is elected to represent all the people. Their problems are that, as Senators, they are elected, yes, to represent the people of this country, but, also, to have in mind the particular interests of their State and the problems of their State. A Representative, again, represents all the people, but also has specific things that he is responsible for with regard to his congressional district. So, I know that. And I know that they, too, have problems. And sometimes it is going to weigh on them that something that they might be able to feel might have some benefit nationwide, but would be at a cost to their district or their State, that they cannot support, and so you try to reconcile all of those viewpoints. And that is difficult, because we know that there is a great deal of hypocrisy which goes on at all times. I mean, we know that Members will get up on the floor, and they will do a great deal of grandstanding, and they will talk about cutting Federal spending. And then they will be running down to the White House or running to some of the agencies, demanding that no cuts be made in my tobacco subsidies or my sugar subsidies, or the dam project that you want for back home, additionally. How do you deal with all that? Well, again, as I say, it is one in which you I can understand their responsibilities for those particular areas or projects of their district or State. And then I have to weigh that against the advantage or disadvantage for the whole country. And if it is one in which they must lose, that the national benefit outweighs the local benefit, then it is just a case of presenting that to them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukewetatvthepresidentsrelationswithcongress", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke of WETA-TV on the President's Relations With Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-weta-tv-the-presidents-relations-with-congress", "publication_date": "16-07-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2601, "text": "So you see it, though, primarily as a matter of give and take on both sides, your side as well as their side. ENTITY, I think one of the things which surprised us a great deal in Washington was that you turned out to be a far better politician than a lot of us thought you would be. And people will tell me that you have a gritty, competitive side to your personality. Do you enjoy the attack and counterattack that characterizes so much of the warfare between Capitol Hill and the White House? Well, I have not thought of it as warfare. But in the last analysis, you have to come down on the side of what you feel inside is right, and then you do your utmost to convince someone who is in an adversary position at the time why you feel you are right and why you feel you must take the position that you do and have what you have asked for. But that is the motivating force as you see it. When you get into battles with Congress, obviously there is a matter of timing when do you call Senator X who is been wavering; when do you make the practical compromise; how do you decide that? How involved do you yourself get in the legislative strategy of the White House? Well, I must be honest and confess that it would be impossible with all that is on my plate to know the timing of things of that kind. And so, there I depend on, again, this group in the White House to tell me, because in other words, is something coming up in committee; is it coming to the floor; is this the time now; and that it is the best time to make the call before something comes to a vote. So, I depend on them for that. But do you feel that the experience you have gained as Governor of California, in dealing with the California Legislature, has enabled you to have this sense of timing, to know when to move, when to maneuver? Well, I think from experience, yes, you have some of that. You could do it too soon and memories are short-and it is worn off by the time the vote comes. But you also have to be constantly vigilant, always protecting your flanks, do not you? It is not totally, 100-percent favorable from the Hill standpoint,", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukewetatvthepresidentsrelationswithcongress", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke of WETA-TV on the President's Relations With Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-weta-tv-the-presidents-relations-with-congress", "publication_date": "16-07-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2602, "text": "While everybody does talk about your affability and the fact that they come down they love to come down to see you, and they love the stories which you spin-you also get another side from some Members who say that you are not always strong on substance, that sometimes you are out of touch, and that sometimes you have too simplistic a view of things. How do you see yourself? Well, I know there are criticisms of that kind. I think now and then to use an anecdote saves a lot of words sometimes to be able to tell something that illustrates what it is we are trying to do. If you have some example, for example, of bureaucratic dillydallying or repetitive things that are not needed and you can tell that example, it saves several paragraphs of just trying to reason with someone in explaining what it is that you are trying to correct. And I find, though, it is not only that you come down at the moment of consultation-for example, something to do with foreign policy right now and the act that requires consultation with the Congress with regard to well, my announcement recently of saying that in principle, if it was essential to bring peace to the Middle East and to Lebanon, the use of American troops in a multinational force. But the other day, I did not wait they had not been invited, so there is nothing to go to the Congress about but since the word was out and was in the press and had been leaked that this had happened, I had a very fine meeting with the leadership of the Congress on this in explaining exactly where we were and so forth, in advance, a totally informal meeting that would precede, if the need arises, when I must go to them formally. And I understand that some of them from both parties went out and said it was one of the best meetings of that kind they'd ever had. But would you concede, ENTITY, by nature that you are the kind of political leader who sees the broad, general picture and is not that interested in the specifics or the detail of a lot of legislative matters? No, I think I brought that from the experience in California, that I know the importance of the detail. My job, of course, is to sell if there is a dispute there is to sell the overall goal that we are trying to achieve. And so I center on that. In talking with many Republicans at the Capitol in recent days, I find a common thread running through what they say.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukewetatvthepresidentsrelationswithcongress", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke of WETA-TV on the President's Relations With Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-weta-tv-the-presidents-relations-with-congress", "publication_date": "16-07-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2603, "text": "Most of them say we do not have that much quarrel with the ENTITY himself, but they do say that your agents and the administration's representatives on the Hill frequently are too arrogant, that they do not return phone calls, that they do not pay attention to the advice given from Capitol Hill, that they are insensitive to the political needs of Members of Congress. Are you aware of that? I think anyone can find some incident or some oversight or something and complain about it. But I have to again say that I became accustomed in the 8 years in California, and already here, that there is a tendency to invent a palace guard and pretend that the ENTITY is being protected from the palace guard, and therefore is not aware of these things. I know that in the hectic pace that now and then something can slip by. I have not heard anyone if there is anyone on our side that is being arrogant, I certainly want to know about it. But I do not know of anyone that is, and I have not had that complaint come to me. Now, I get the summary of all of the mail also, and it is a considerable reading problem, the congressional mail. And I see all those letters that are written and some with an individual or particular problem or some with a group of Representatives or Senators that is all put on my desk. So, you do not feel that the ship may be run a little too loosely, that perhaps you have delegated too much authority? And some of the Republicans at the Hill say there is a problem in that they will negotiate deals with the Democrats, and then White House officials and others will come along and undermine those deals. And this makes it much more difficult, that it affects their credibility at the Capitol. That, I think, is a part of the whole process that goes on. Let us take the economic program a year ago in the combination of the tax program and the budget reductions. We did not get all we wanted, and we had to in addition to not getting everything we asked for, we also had to take some things that we had not asked for. Now, that is a case of in the give and take in the legislature, of what they can get. Well, then, still I am a party to that also, and I have to speak up, or my representatives, if there is a price that we feel is too high. I cannot accept something that is totally contrary to the principle that we are trying to obtain in that program.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukewetatvthepresidentsrelationswithcongress", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke of WETA-TV on the President's Relations With Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-weta-tv-the-presidents-relations-with-congress", "publication_date": "16-07-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2604, "text": "And the same was true of this most recent budget bill. That was not the bill that I would have submitted and there were seven versions on the floor at one time, most of which were unacceptable, because they would not do the job, and they would not come close to the goal we are trying to achieve. But they did evolve one that I could call back and say, yes, this one I support. Now, I am sure that someone, say, on our side who has negotiated something and been willing to give to get something in there, can be a little irked if I do not agree that he was paying the right price. ENTITY, you have started to veto some of these bills now. Can we expect a lot more vetos in coming weeks and months? I said that. They have passed a resolution, a budget resolution. I realize that that must be followed by appropriation bills. If they ignore the ceilings that have been put in the budget resolution, which they can do, send an appropriation that would, if passed, have the budget go way beyond the bounds that were set, then I have to veto it. We are also into an election campaign, and it may be a tough year for the Republicans. Some of the polls indicate that. If the Democrats, for example, pick up 10, 20, or 30 seats in the House of Representatives, what happens to your conservative majority? How will that affect your program? Well in the House, you say? Well, if they only pick up 10, then we have won a great victory, because if you look back in history, the first off-year election the party that is out of power in the White House normally picks up about 40 seats. And so you start from behind with this bielection that is coming up. And I am just I'd like to pick up some more. I'd like to have more Representatives in there than we have. But I understand I would be bucking tradition and history. So, when you use that figure 10, that would be only about a fourth as many as traditionally you are supposed to lose. Tip O'Neill you and Tip O'Neill have mixed it up a bit. He says he likes the Irish side of you, that he wishes you were a little more Irish and a little less Republican. I will tell you, Tip and I, we get along fine.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithpauldukewetatvthepresidentsrelationswithcongress", "title": "Interview With Paul Duke of WETA-TV on the President's Relations With Congress", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-paul-duke-weta-tv-the-presidents-relations-with-congress", "publication_date": "16-07-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2605, "text": "ENTITY, Colonel warned that as a consequence of American hostility towards Libya, his country could come even closer to the Soviet Union than it already is and that he may transform it into another Cuba. First of all, do you think he could achieve this goal? Secondly, would you prepare to tolerate it, and would this develop into something to be stopped? Well, I do not think there is any question but that the relationship between the Soviet Union and 's Libya has been very close. Soviet arms and weapons have been coming in there and stockpiled in there for a number of years. We are well aware of all of that. So, I do not see that there could be very much more than is already going on, and I do not think that the fear of something else or the concern about that should in any way make us unwilling to isolate Libya, as long as insists on backing terrorism the way he is. We cannot allow that to go unanswered in the world. I would not hazard a guess on that. It does not seem to me that it is in exactly the same kind of satellite position that Cuba is in. ENTITY, the Italian Government has decided to stop sales of arms to Libya and will not allow Italian workers to replace American workers. But it is also said that further sanctions should be decided jointly by Europe and not independently by-. Are you satisfied with this measure? Do you feel that Europeans would be able to do something together? I appreciate very much the fact that Prime Minister has made that statement about not replacing Americans; other states are following suit and saying the same thing But with regard to it being a joint decision, yes, we would be very much supportive of that. Those who have made statements that sanctions do not appear to work-well, one of the reasons is because for an individual nation to put forth such sanctions, when their trade or the things that they are trading is available from any number of other suppliers, indicates that maybe sanctions have not worked because we have not jointly gone together. And we'd be most pleased if we could sit down with the European community and together say to , We are going to isolate you in this way unless you will change your ways and give up this backing and promoting of terrorism. But do you feel that the measures that the Italian Government took are enough, or did you expect more?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalistslibya", "title": "Interview With European Journalists on Libya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-libya", "publication_date": "10-01-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2606, "text": "Well, except that his suggesting that on sanctions that there should be a joint discussion of whether this should take place-but, yes, I appreciate very much, as I say, what he has said so far. ENTITY, you said in your news conference that you had irrefutable evidence about 's involvement in the Vienna and Rome attacks. Now Mr. Andreotti said that he would want to see more proof. Next week you are sending Mr. Whitehead to Europe. Will he disclose to the European governments some of the evidence that you have? Yes, as a matter of fact, the State Department has released quite a document now. Perhaps some of you have seen it; I know it is available to everyone. Now, that document is based on unclassified information. To go further with classified information would run the risk of revealing some of our sources and so forth-the type of thing you do not want to do. But I am sure that Mr. Whitehead will be discussing with them this and whatever else can be released at that level to them about the information that we have. And there is not any question-a matter of fact, the unclassified document that you have makes it pretty evident that he is widely connected. We know for a fact that he is met a few times in just recent months with Nidal. Are you disappointed by the Europeans' attitude so far, and what kind of minimum cooperation do you expect from them? I recognize the problems they have in many of them with trade on a far larger scale than we have, but I have to say that I think there is a moral issue involved here with regard to a sovereign state that is so obviously resorting to terrorism literally against the world. And I am hopeful that, as they continue to consider this and learn more facts-and that is why Mr. Whitehead's mission-that we may find that we can come together on isolating this outlaw among the world's nations. ENTITY, could I ask what your reaction would be to the suggestion by Senator Howard Metzenbaum that perhaps the time had come to consider assassination. No, I was quite surprised at that. You do not join them at their level; terrorism in response to terrorism is not the answer. This is what I am hoping that our friends and allies will consider.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalistslibya", "title": "Interview With European Journalists on Libya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-libya", "publication_date": "10-01-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2607, "text": "Can we place trade, everyday relationships, ahead in value of the immorality that is inherent in people who will come in, as they did, into an airport and just simply shoot human beings that were there-men, women, children-with no regard to what participation those people have in anything that is going on? So, you may have anticipated that reaction and also the reaction of the Arab States. In that case, why did you feel that you needed to go on with sanctions? Well, for one thing, we were a little defenseless with regard to taking actions in response to this terrorism while so many of our citizens were there and potential hostages. So, we felt that we should untie our hands with regard to whatever action might be necessary in the future. And, as I say, I am hopeful that our allies might see that sanctions can be successful if enough of us do it. Sir, could I ask if the Europeans still show reluctance after Mr. Whitehead's visit and after your evidence that you have shown them and they take a position that you feel is not fully supportive, are you afraid that this might develop into a kind of split with the European allies such as developed over the Soviet gas pipeline? I think our relationship is too strong for this. It certainly would not make us turn on them, and I am quite sure that they desire to keep the relationship the way it is. I do not believe that there has ever been a time when the outright friendship between governments, or allies, has been as strong as it is now. ENTITY, the Austrian Government has, as recently as yesterday, made a point again that she has no information of Libyan involvement in the airport attacks. Since Austria, as a matter of principle, does not impose sanctions on any country except if it is in accordance with United Nations Security Council resolution, what would you expect the Austrian Government to do? Well, they have taken some positions, as you say, on a matter of principle, not just aimed at this particular incident. On the other hand, perhaps if we make available to them the information that does indicate the guilt of Libya, they might reconsider and realize that this was an assault, literally an act of war, against Austria. You have not yet made available all the information, I understand from your answer now, ENTITY.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalistslibya", "title": "Interview With European Journalists on Libya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-libya", "publication_date": "10-01-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2608, "text": "Well, as I say, Mr. Whitehead is going; and to some of our immediate allies, such as in the economic group, I have asked our people to send on my behalf, personally, to the heads of state this document that I was describing a little while ago. ENTITY, has threatened to hit American bases in Europe and the people around them. And Italy is particularly exposed in this case. Do you take the threat seriously? Have you done anything about it? Oh, I think we have to take the threat seriously. As I said in the press conference the other day, through our intelligence and our cooperation with other countries in their intelligence gathering, we have been able to abort 126 terrorist missions in the last year alone. So, yes, we take those threats seriously. But do you know anything about this particular threat? A matter of fact, he has not weighed his words carefully at all with regard to his feelings about us. Sir, in Geneva you spoke with Mr. about terrorism after the Soviet Union, itself, and its diplomats became a victim of terrorism in Lebanon. Did you feel after the summit that there was a certain common understanding between the superpowers concerning terrorism? And what do you make out of the recent Soviet reactions as, for example, today Foreign Minister Shevardnadze, who said that the American actions threaten Libyan sovereignty? Well, I have recognized that there are certain elements of propaganda that go on in this relationship. But at the same time, in my talks with Mr. , he expressed his repugnance, the feeling that he had of repugnance for terrorist acts. ENTITY, do not you think that the sanctions will have an impact, whether they are positive or negative, on the peace process now going on? I do not think that there would be a setback with regard to that peace formula. We are having some problems with it, with moving forward on the peace process. I have to tip my hat to King Hussein, who has been most courageous in trying to carry this forward. And I believe that we have established some basis of trust with many of the Arab States, and I do not think that that will be actually affected by this. But the reaction of the Arab States were not exactly positive at this time. Well, I think there was maybe some feeling that publicly they had to stand together in the world today as it is. But I have not seen any real evidence of a falling away of relationships with us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalistslibya", "title": "Interview With European Journalists on Libya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-libya", "publication_date": "10-01-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2609, "text": "ENTITY, may I just ask you one more Austria-related question. What is your evaluation of the fact that Austria-which has very close connections with the Arab countries, which has tried to at least have some moderating effect on Yasser Arafat, has welcomed in Vienna a couple of years ago-that Austria was chosen by the terrorists as one of their sites for their attacks? What does this prove, or does it prove anything? The only thing I know is that I have had a report that Austria is holding in jail at least three members of the Abu Nidal group. And this, in itself, could be a reason for them taking an action in an effort to blackmail Austria into releasing its members. Sir, said at his press conference yesterday that you had concentrated on the activities of Palestinian terrorism-I think he used that word-and ignored the root causes for it. What would your reaction be to that? Well, again, Mr. 's speaking quite loosely and without any regard to the truth and the facts. We have said from the very beginning in the peace process that the problem of the Palestinian refugees had to be a part of the peace process and there had to be a resolution of that problem, and we still feel that way. ENTITY, economic sanctions against Libya would evidently hurt the German economy. The sanctions you have ordered do not necessarily hurt the American economy. If Chancellor , for example, would sit here with us, how would you try to explain to him that it might be worthwhile in the long term to pay a price? Well, as I say, I understood the problems of some of our allies and friends. Their trade is on a greater basis than ours. And a matter of fact, we are probably the lowest on the ladder of trade with Libya, and this due in part to the fact that we already had partial sanctions that were put in effect a few years ago. So, I am aware of that, and I know that problem. Is it a permanent trade that they can go on then-and we have seen the newsreels on television-the armed guards, the military forces, policemen carrying submachine guns and so forth at the airports and the various public buildings of countries such as West Germany and the others, the United Kingdom, all these other allies-can they see this as a fair trade? That in return for maintaining economic relations, that their countries must continue in this armed state with this sense of insecurity? What is going to happen to international travel?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalistslibya", "title": "Interview With European Journalists on Libya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-libya", "publication_date": "10-01-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2610, "text": "I have had any number of people that, just coming in casual contact with, have gone out of their way to tell me that they'd canceled any plans for travel, whether it is business or pleasure. Now, is this a fair exchange for retaining the trade? And remember, I do not think you should think of the sanctions as something that is forever. You think of it as something that says straighten up and fly right to Mr. , and then things will change. ENTITY, you said before that having taken the Americans away, you feel more secure about acting towards Libya. Are you assuming that your next step should be the use of force? No, as a matter of fact, you have me here; I cannot discuss things of that kind. I think Mr. would be pleased to hear my answer, but, no, I cannot answer that. I just say that I think that we should be ready for any contingency. So, when would you be satisfied that had ended his links with terrorism to the point where you could form a new, useful relationship and remove the sanctions? Oh, I think it would have to be more than words; I think by deeds alone. For example, in reading this material there, you will find he does engage in training and in financing-through accounts in many of the banks, including banks in Europe as well as the United States-terrorist movements. He would have to reveal by action that he has severed those connections and is no longer backing these terrorist groups. So, you would have to be satisfied there was no financial link, no training camps left in Libya- ENTITY, did you not have about I year ago, when you were in Los Angeles for the Olympic games, an approach by the Italian Foreign Minister about starting discussion with ? Did you not have any attempt either from Middle Eastern diplomats or European diplomats so that you can open a dialog? I am trying to recall, but I do know that there have been proposals of that kind. And before anything could be done, why, he would do something else that made it rather impossible. Do you think the Austrian Government could be helpful in trying to exert any moderating influence on? But as I say, I would think that if basically the Western World said, The line is drawn; we are no longer going to tolerate this activity So, again, you do not expect any problems with the allies in the next few weeks regarding the mission and so on?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitheuropeanjournalistslibya", "title": "Interview With European Journalists on Libya", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-european-journalists-libya", "publication_date": "10-01-1986", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2611, "text": "ENTITY, a lot of the local government officials who have been listening to you talk about your dream of returning responsibilities and resources are saying that they have received the responsibilities, and now they are wondering when the next shoe is going to fall. Will your 1983 budget have a definite source of revenue for the local government? Well, we have been meeting with them, and they have been here in meetings with our people at OMB and with Don Regan of Treasury about these. I know that there has to be some pain for them also. But during these 10 months, I have met with over 1,200 State and local officials, going from Governors on down through counties and mayors and so forth, legislators, on all of these. And we have a commission, as you know, appointed to see how we can turn back tax sources to the local government. This is what it comes down to. We wanted and asked the Congress for far more block grants than we got, a block grant where they can set the priorities within that and the method of using it. I'd learned as Governor that the categorical grants where the government ties the red strings to it and tape to it and says this is exactly the way you have to spend it and so forth results in a large administrative overhead cost. And we did not get all that we wanted. We did get a certain number of categoricals into block grants, but there still remains too many categoricals. And, then maybe this is more than you bargained for in this answer, but let me get it all in my dream is that the block grants are only a means to an end. And the end is that the government, which has preempted over the years so much of the tax revenue potential in this country, that we could turn back not only the responsibility to governments of tasks that I think they can perform better than the Federal Government can perform, but turn back tax sources so that the tax source itself goes to them. And they, therefore, then have the responsibility for collecting the money which they are going to spend for this by way of the tax. And this is not original with me. This was first suggested when the first proposal for Federal aid to education was made.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2612, "text": "Norris Cotton, then Senator from New Hampshire, looking at the amount of money that was suggested and the Federal Government was protesting that it meant no interference; just wanted to help by giving money and he said, Well, if that is really true, he said, why do not we turn the tobacco tax over to the States and the only restriction is that it be used for education? And you know how they defeated him? They said, Well, it would not be right to educate our children with a sin tax. So the Federal Government got its foot in the door and went on from there. Realistically, is it possible that there will be room in the fiscal 1983 budget for some turn back of a tax source to the States and local governments? We have a task force, as I say, working on that under Ed Gray, that is to work and see how this could be done, what the mechanics of it would entail, and whether we could do this at the same time we give the responsibility that goes with it. But it just seems to me that there is an awful lot of money lost, simply in the process of bringing it to Washington and then sending it back out there minus a carrying charge that comes off the top here in Washington. It would make a lot more sense if it was there in the first place. ENTITY, the Governors have suggested a sorting-out process of what the Federal Government should have and what the States and locals should have. One of the things they suggested is, as you know, that the Federal Government pick up most of the welfare costs and that they would then pick up more schooling costs and more transportation costs. Would you go along with that? And if not, what sort of sorting out would you like to see? What functions do you think the Federal Government should have on the domestic side, and what would you pass on to them? Well, we have, again, a Presidential commission that is made up of representatives of State and local government, only their own people on this, to sort this out. But I would think that we might start with the tenth article of the Bill of Rights, the 10th amendment, which says that the Federal Government those powers which are granted to the Federal Government are in the Constitution, and all others shall remain with the States or with the people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2613, "text": "I think that over the years, probably coming out of the Great Depression and the traumatic experience of that, the Federal Government has gradually involved itself in areas that were never before thought of as the Federal Government's province. I am not sure that I agree with some of the suggestions they have made because let us take one, such as welfare, for example. The problems of a welfare client in New York City are far different than those from out in some small town in the rural areas in the Middle West, or something in more rural States. I believe that there is much more chance of waste and of fraud in trying to run it from the national level than there is in running it at the local level. Now, when we reformed welfare in California-and it was the most successful reform that is ever been attempted while I was Governor there we found that our biggest difficulty was getting waivers from the Federal Government in order to do some of the things that we felt had to be done. And when we finished, we not only over a 3-year period had saved the taxpayers of California $2 billion, we were able to give the welfare recipients the first cost-of-living increase they'd had since 1958 and average increase of 43 percent in their grants. And it was simply just the application of common sense and the fact that these are your neighbors there that you are trying to help, and you are better able to know what to do for them than Washington is 3,000 miles away. ENTITY, in your dream of the future of American federalism, what domestic functions do you believe should be Federal, as opposed to State and local responsibilities? Well, the first one, of course, is national security. That is the prime responsibility of the National Government. You would have me doing the sorting out that we have got a commission trying to do. But I would think that first of all, education-we built the greatest school system the world has ever seen and built it at the local level and the local school district level. And then the Federal Government got into the school business only by having preempted so much of the tax resources, and those tax resources that grew with the economy faster than something like the property tax, which is the principal basis for educational funding. Then they got into it through that money thing, having preempted the money, created the problem, and then they said, Well, now we want to help you.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2614, "text": "But in return for the help, they wanted to also regulate, and have interfered to a large extent. Welfare welfare is presently administered at the local level. It is, in most States, done at the county level. They have a county welfare department, but they do it under regulations imposed from Washington. And I can tell you, those regulations would line the walls of this room, and they are constantly changing. They have got employees at the county level that do nothing but try to keep up and inform the workers of what the new regulations are. Incidentally, we have already been pretty successful here with something of that kind. The regulations that govern HHS grants out there used to fill 318 pages of the Federal Register; they now only fill 6. Do you continue to oppose such things as increasing the gasoline tax and perhaps then giving the States a part of that increase? Again, you are getting to the area that we have not thought of nothing should be ruled out until you see if it'll work. I have spoken of such things as, What if the Federal income tax had a provision that x percent of that tax would not even come to Washington, would be retained in the States where it is collected for the States to use as they see fit? Excise taxes of the kind you have mentioned might be a way, as the example I gave of Norris Cotton when he suggested one. I think it would depend a lot on what is the revenue that is going to be gained, compared to the responsibility that you want it to cover. Or is it going to be a static kind of tax that might meet the situation now, but will not meet it down the road a ways? So, as of now, you would not rule out possibly increasing the Federal gas tax and giving some of that increase to the States? Oh, I will not rule anything out. Right now there is a sizable Federal gas tax, and most States like our own has a gas tax also. The Federal gas tax came into being for the Federal interstate highway system and I am wondering if that is ever going to be completed and it was supposed to be a temporary thing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2615, "text": "ENTITY, towards the sorting out, there seems to be a new mood of great impatience among the Governors, combined with this year's budget situation, the growth of the entitlements, the defense budget, the tax cut, which the Governors perceive as being negative to the interest of the State and local government, which took a large portion of the cuts in the first round and then will be hit again by the 12 percent that you proposed in September. And as a matter of fact, they are so angry, the Western Governors' meeting in Scottsdale 12 days ago passed a resolution saying they would flatly oppose further cuts in the domestic discretionary budget proposed by your administration unless negotiation begins for a significant sorting out of functions between the Federal Government and the States. Could you give us your reaction to their position? I think most of those Western Governors are Democrats now- it might have had something to do with it. No, we recognize that we have to straighten out this financial situation on the Federal level. They will benefit, also, to a great extent by the fact that inflation will come down. Now that is got to be reflected somewhat in their costs. And as I say, we did not get all that we wanted with regard to the switch to block grants, and I am still going to continue striving for that because, again, the savings to them we can reduce the amount of money in a block grant to less than a categorical grant because of the savings in administrative overhead. Along the same line of sorting out, would you like to see a continuing role or a continuing relationship between the cities and counties and the Federal Government? You know, if we remember back some years toni think it was around 1914 or something, that was recognized in the fact that Senators were not popularly elected. They were chosen by State legislatures to represent the State. The House of Representatives represented the people. And then they made the change in the Constitution and changed it to make them all popularly elected. That was why in the whole bill of impeachment, the Senate had been picked to be the trial court and the judge, because they would not be bound by political considerations. And I hope that not just on these things of budget and so forth, that bring in the people that we have met with the 1,200 or so that we would have ongoing meetings. And I should, while I am here, have a department for that purpose.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2616, "text": "Do you think it is at all the responsibility of the National Government to redistribute resources between the States that are relatively well off and the States that are not? No, I think that is up to the States. My first reaction to that is that this is one of the the built-in guarantee of freedom is our federalism that makes us so unique, and that is the right of the citizen to vote with his feet. They will either use their power at the polls to redress that, or they will go someplace else. And we have seen industries driven out of some States by adverse tax policies and so forth. But ENTITY, on that very point, Senator Durenberger has made quite an issue in the last few months that some States are energy rich and some energy poor; that there is a transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars within this decade going from the energy poor to the energy rich States. So he asks whether it is in any way fair to expect the States and localities that suffer from a declining economy to provide the same level of public services, including new services devolved from the Federal Government, as to expect from those States that are flush with energy generated revenues. Well now, if you take it that way, just in energy, then could not you make the same argument with regard to the great agricultural States that provide the food for the people of this country? California, for example I hope it still prevails in spite of the fruit fly but California, over the years, puts about 40 percent of all the fruits and nuts and vegetables that are on the tables of America, puts them on those tables. I just think the marketplace regulates that. How do you feel about States putting fairly steep taxes on the resources that they extract from the ground whether it is food or minerals or oil and ship to other States and thereby in effect pass on that additional tax burden to the consumers in those other States. Well, you are speaking of severance taxes that come on. Well again, does not that balance out with everything else? I once asked an automobile manufacturer several years ago that what if they put out a price tag that incorporated all the taxes that were paid in the manufacture of an automobile, and put the price tag out there like the gasoline pump does x amount for tax, price of the automobile here and I said, Have you ever figured out what would it look like? And he said, Yes, we could tell you what it would look like.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2617, "text": "And he told me then of some model of car that they had that was about $3,800. And he said it would be $800 for the automobile and $3,000 tax. By the time you go to the market and buy an egg, there is 100 taxes in that egg; none of them put there by the chicken. In the Senate hearings that were held on the 5th of November, Governors Snelling and Busbee and Matheson made a point that the State budgets were in a condition of disarray and chaos because of the deep and the continuing Federal budget cuts. They pointed again to the inflation driven entitlements, defense spending, the extent of the tax cut, feeling that more should be seen in that area in terms of the next economies. And Governor Snelling, for the Governors, proposed a 2-year moratorium on further cuts and discretionary grants to the States and localities so they would have a chance to catch their breath, institute some rational budgeting and planning, perhaps start some discussions with you about more block grants and a sorting out of responsibilities. Could you give your reaction to the proposal of the moratorium for 2 years? I think it would be great if we could afford it. And I know that part of their problem which you did not mention there it was not just the change, it is the fact that the States all have varying budget or fiscal years and in many States were caught with their budget already determined. And then we, by doing something at the Federal level, changed their or ordered their estimates of revenues and so forth. And I just think our emergency is so great, I do not know how we could hold back and wait for all of this. What we have tried to do and now with these meetings, and with Rich 1 in continued contact with them, is try to not throw any surprises at them, but to keep them informed so that, for example, in planning the next budget, they will know what we are considering and they can make allowance that in case we get what we ask for, why, they will know what it is going to be like. ENTITY, the idea that Americans can, as you say, vote with their feet, if necessary, we have heard this from some of your other spokesmen in the government. If someone, say, in New York City were caught I am talking about in a pocket of poverty. I mean, what can you say to them? They have no money to move, really.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2618, "text": "I mean, in the best of all possible worlds, perhaps they could move. What do you say to them? How do they get out of this? Well, I never said that anyone tells them to move out. No, I know that. I think that as the people we have been and still are a very migrant people. I think Americans move more than anyone else. And in many instances, it is the job holder; something happens and he starts exploring for work some place else and maybe goes and then sends for the family. But whatever means they have to use they do it. I cannot see any way that the Federal Government could set up a program for moving people, because then you get into the element of would there be something compulsory about it, would the government decide that somebody had to move. And many people during the campaign I talked to people out in Ohio and Michigan there, and the great unemployment in the automobile industry, and you talk to someone who'd say, I am third generation in my family living here. So he is going to sweat it out until jobs open up and he can get a job there.  ENTITY, I know that there are not many final decisions on the budget, but I assume that you are probably far enough into that process that you have some general idea where you stand. Is it going to be possible, for example, to hold general revenue sharing at its present level? Is it going to be possible to hold the new block grants at their present funding level, or are all of those programs at this point still subject to further reductions in fiscal 1983? The suggested 12-percent cut we did not see how and I think all of us recognize that this was going to be a blow to many communities, particularly the local level, not the State level, and again I'd seen it in our own State work. But we felt we had to go across the board, and we were asking other equally important programs to take that cut. You could not cut that. But it extended to every place, including the White House, and so we felt that we had to do it. Now realistically, the question is are you doing to get 12 percent and I doubt it-from the Congress?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2619, "text": "But again, as I say, we had to hope that if we get control of this economy at this end, that this might be a temporary setback to some communities a painful one, but the off-setting thing of reducing inflation and interest rates and, hopefully, having a surge in the economy would also begin to offset that. I think one of their concerns when they came here I have just met with a large group of both city and county and State officials, Governors, on this. And a lot of them, it was a fear they'd been led to believe that maybe we were phasing it out entirely. And I could assure them that there was no such thing in our minds, that the only way it would ever be phased out is if we had an alternate source, a tax that we were going to give to them for their own use. ENTITY, could the economic recession delay your plans for implementing some of the. I am not sure that it could, because I believe that in the federalism thing that we are approaching or approving, I believe that there is, in the long run, the reduction of government cost, as I say, the administrative overhead that is involved in the Federal Government doing so many of these things. This little case you know an example of what we are trying to cure is this one that, God bless him, Dick Schweiker grabbed a hold of after I made it public the other day of the little girl out in Iowa, and how quickly we made this change. To think that our government and I was wrong; I had old-fashioned figures when I said $6,000. It was costing between $10,000 and $12,000 a month for Medicaid, and even the doctors said she should be home, that she'd be better off at home, and it would only cost $1,000 a month at home. But that was more than her family could afford, so they could not take her home because they could not take over the cost. But here was the government shelling out $10,000 or $12,000 every month, when a silly regulation stood in the way of them getting it for $1,000 a month. Dick found a way to ignore that, make an exception to that regulation, but you wonder how many more eases are out there in the country like that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2620, "text": "If the people in that community had been in charge of that program, you know darn well they would not have stood still for a moment for that cost differential. The opinion of the Governors and the local officials seems to be that deregulation is not going to get them where they need to be quickly enough to run their own operations properly. In the same Senate hearings I was referring to on November 5th, Governor Busbee, for example, expressed such distress about the current national and State and local fiscal dilemma and the lack of legitimate Federal reform, as the Governors see it, that he said it is time that we had a domestic economic summit involving the ENTITY, the bipartisan leadership of the Congress, and our, that is the Governor's leadership, so that we might gain general agreement on ultimate prime responsibilities for government programs, the budget targets we should all plan for, and the time frame in which we are going to reach these goals. It seems to be the Governors would like a much larger role not to be informed, but to be in at an early point of taking part in the decisions. Listen, I will buy that, because those Governors, and led by Busbee, were the greatest help in the world in our getting the economic package that was passed. But where we all were helpless was, we could not convince the majority leadership in the House, particularly, to give up Federal strings on so many particularly the block grants. So here was Busbee and the Governors who had helped us get this, and they were helping because they want the block grants. They know how it would benefit them. And we just had to stand here, and we were helpless to get them. Washington does not give up authority very easily. All I could say to them is, Look, I am going to continue to fight for them and please help. In a thing of this' kind, maybe they could, because there is a feeling among a great many people in the Congress well, let us say less a feeling than a lack of understanding-of the State problem. In fact, some of the Governors told me that at the Inaugural, when I made a statement to this effect, and they were the Governors were seated right behind many of the House of Representatives-they said that many of them, when I made that statement about the States' powers and so forth, turned around to them and mouthed, Over our dead bodies.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfederalism", "title": "Interview With Reporters on Federalism", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-federalism", "publication_date": "19-11-1981", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2626, "text": "And with that, I will be glad to go to your questions. Does the President know about, and approve of, this probe that is being announced by the House and Senate of the leak of the story about the CIA secret prisons -- I just saw the announcement on that. That was a decision made by the Speaker and the Majority Leader. I want to know what the President thinks about it. Well, we just found out about it not long ago. Well, I think that you have heard him express his views. The leaking of classified information is a serious matter and ought to be taken seriously. But this is a congressional prerogative, and it was a decision that was made by those leaders, and that is the way I would describe it. I just wondered whether the White House basically endorses this under the circumstances. It was their decision, ENTITY, is the way I would describe it. You might want to ask them questions about their decisions. Can you describe in some fashion what the presentation is that White House staffers are hearing for an hour, and what you are trying to accomplish? First let me step back and just talk about these so everybody in the room is familiar with what we are doing. The President takes the issue of the handling of classified information very seriously. And about a week ago, or just over a week ago, at Camp David, he visited with his Chief of Staff, Andy Card, and his Counsel, Harriet Miers, about some steps that we should take here at the White House. And the President directed that action be taken to provide refresher briefings for all White House staff -- that includes staff within the White House, as well as staff within the Executive Office of the President; that would include agencies that operate within the White House, such as the Office of Management and Budget and the Counsel on Environmental Quality and a number of others. The White House staff knows very well what is expected of them. They are expected to focus on the people's business and they are expected to adhere to the highest ethical standards. The President has made that clear for quite some time. And he directed Andy Card and Harriet Miers to do these refresher briefings for all White House staff. And they focus on general ethics rules, including rules governing the handling of classified information.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2627, "text": "So this week there will be eight hour-long sessions that will be conducted for all White House staff that has security clearances of any level, whether that -- well, all staff that has any sort of security clearance. And so there will be -- in these briefings, which started this morning, they are organized in an alphabetical way -- there will be a general overview of ethics issues, such as the standards of ethical conduct that are expected. There will be a discussion about classified information and the proper handling of classified national security information, how that material is classified, by whom, for how long, who has access to it, how the material is declassified, the badges that people wear to show their security clearances and so forth. The briefings discuss the security precautions that are in place for handling classified information such as the use of safes, or the use of specific locations to view classified information like the Situation Room here at the White House. It will talk about the proper disposal of classified information. It will talk about the handling of classified information when you are transporting that classified information. And the briefings will include the rules and laws relating to classified information and what is expected of people. So that is kind of a general overview of these briefings. Is there underlying concern that the highest ethical standards have not been observed by everyone? Well, this was -- the President made this decision in light of recent circumstances, that we should take this action. And that is why he directed the Counsel's Office to proceed with these refresher briefings. Every White House staffer has to go through ethics briefings when they come on to the staff. You also have to go through detailed briefings when you are provided security clearances -- before you are provided those security clearances you go through very detailed briefings. And next week there will be briefings conducted for remaining employees that do not have security clearances. So we thought that -- the President thought that this was an appropriate time to move ahead with these refresher briefings, and that is why he directed this course of action be taken. They are held over in the New Executive Office Building, or the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. Is this all we should expect from the President, the ethics refresher courses, the extent of his reaction to the indictment? Well, as you are aware, if you are asking a question about an ongoing investigation, we are not going to have further say at this point while it continues.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2628, "text": "That is what the President directed us to do and that is what we are doing. I asked you a different question. Is this the full extent of what the President deems necessary, in light of circumstances? The President is always free to take the action that he feels is appropriate. Does the President think that Karl Rove lived up to the highest ethical standards -- Again, that is a question relating to an ongoing investigation. The President was asked about it last week; he reiterated what we have previously said. This is a serious matter, it continues, and what we are going to do is continue to cooperate with that investigation. And that is why I made the point, too, that all of us here at the White House understand what the expectations are. We understand that we are expected to adhere to the highest standards. We understand that we are expected to focus on the work of the American people, and that is what we do. Do you think that while Karl Rove is under investigation that he should retain his security clearance? I am just not going to talk about an ongoing investigation. You are asking that question in the light of an ongoing investigation; it is something that continues at this point. It just -- it strikes me as odd that, given the fact that Karl Rove has not been charged with any crime, he is merely under investigation, so far as we know, that the President's language about him and his confidence in him has been so distant, that he simply refuses to comment on his standing within the White House because of a pending matter. No, I do not agree with that. I mean, Karl Rove is continuing to perform his duties as Deputy Chief of Staff and Senior Advisor. We appreciate all that he is doing. So the President stands by Rove a hundred percent? Well, I have made it clear to you that everybody who works here at the White House has the confidence of the President. Does he stand by Karl Rove a hundred percent? the investigation relating to him is something that is ongoing, and the President has addressed that. forward-leaning as that, to say the President stands behind Karl Rove a hundred percent? I'd like you to clear up, once and for all, the ambiguity about torture. Can we get a straight answer? The President says we do not do torture, but Cheney -- Yes, but Cheney has gone to the Senate and asked for an exemption on -- Are you claiming he is asked for an exemption on torture?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2629, "text": "He did not ask for that? Are you denying everything that came from the Hill, in terms of torture? No, you are mischaracterizing things. And I am not going to get into discussions we have -- Can you give me a straight answer for once? Let me give it to you, just like the President has. He does not condone torture and he would never -- I am asking about exemptions. And he would never authorize the use of torture. We have an obligation to do all that we can to protect the American people. It is an answer -- because the American people want to know that we are doing all within our power to prevent terrorist attacks from happening. There are people in this world who want to spread a hateful ideology that is based on killing innocent men, women and children. We saw what they can do on September 11th -- and we are going to -- -- answer that one question. I am asking, is the administration asking for an exemption? I am answering your question. No, you do not want the American people to hear what the facts are, ENTITY, and I am going to tell them the facts. I am asking you, yes or no, did we ask for an exemption? You have had your opportunity to ask the question. Now I am going to respond to it. If you could answer in a straight way. And I am going to answer it, just like the President -- I just did, and the President has answered it numerous times. Our most important responsibility is to protect the American people. We are engaged in a global war against Islamic radicals who are intent on spreading a hateful ideology, and intent on killing innocent men, women and children. Did we ask for an exemption? We are going to do what is necessary to protect the American people. We are also going to do so in a way that adheres to our laws and to our values. The President directed everybody within this government that we do not engage in torture. Are you denying we asked for an exemption? ENTITY, we will continue to work with the Congress on the issue that you brought up. The way you characterize it, that we are asking for exemption from torture, is just flat-out false, because there are laws that are on the books that prohibit the use of torture. And we adhere to those laws. We did ask for an exemption; is that right? I just answered your question. The President answered it last week.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2630, "text": "What are we asking for? Would you characterize what we are asking for? We are asking to do what is necessary to protect the American people in a way that is consistent with our laws and our treaty obligations. Why does the CIA need an exemption from the military? David, let us talk about people that you are talking about who have been brought to justice and captured. You are talking about people like Khalid Shaykh Muhammad; people like Abu Zubaydah. I am asking you -- No, this is facts about what you are talking about. Why does the CIA need an exemption from rules that would govern the conduct of our military in interrogation practices? There are already laws and rules that are on the books, and we follow those laws and rules. What we need to make sure is that we are able to carry out the war on terrorism as effectively as possible, not only -- What does that mean -- What I am telling you right now -- not only to protect Americans from an attack, but to prevent an attack from happening in the first place And, you bet, when we capture terrorist leaders, we are going to seek to find out information that will protect -- that prevent attacks from happening in the first place. But we have an obligation to do so. Our military knows this; all people within the United States government know this. We have an obligation to do so in a way that is consistent with our laws and values. Now, the people that you are bringing up -- you are talking about in the context, and I think it is important for the American people to know, are people like Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, Abu Zubaydah, Ramzi Binalshibh -- these are -- these are dangerous killers. Did you ask for an exemption on torture? That is what I told you at the beginning. You want to reserve the ability to use tougher tactics with those individuals who you mentioned. Well, obviously, you have a different view from the American people. I think the American people understand the importance of doing everything within our power and within our laws to protect the American people. What is it that you want the -- what is it that you want the CIA to be able to do that the U.S. Armed Forces are not allowed to do? I am not going to get into talking about national security matters, ENTITY. I do not do that, because this involves -- This would be the exemption, in other words.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2631, "text": "This involves information that relates to doing all we can to protect the American people. And if you have a different view -- obviously, some of you on this room -- in this room have a different view, some of you on the front row have a different view. We simply are asking a question. What is the Vice President -- what is the Vice President asking for? It is spelled out in our statement of administration policy in terms of what our views are. no, it is not -- In terms of our members -- like I said, there are already laws on the books that we have to adhere to and abide by, and we do. And we believe that those laws and those obligations address these issues. So then why is the Vice President continuing to lobby on this issue? If you are very happy with the laws on the books, what needs change? Again, you asked me -- you want to ask questions of the Vice President's office, feel free to do that. We have made our position very clear, and it is spelled out on our website for everybody to see. We do not need a website, we need you from the podium. And what I just told you is what our view is. But ENTITY, do you see the contradiction -- Will the President pledge not to pardon Lewis Libby? I am not going to discuss an ongoing legal proceeding, and I am not going to -- No, I am not going to speculate about any matters relating to it. I was asked this question last week, and that is -- I am just not going to speculate about things at this point. So if he is interested in seeing the legal process continue, that means he will not pardon him, is that correct? That would interrupt the legal proceeding. that is going on relating to that individual. And we are not going to comment on it while it is continuing. And I am not going to -- certainly not going to speculate about it, as well. Should we take that to mean it remains a possibility? It should mean exactly what I said. ENTITY, before my question, I would like to thank the President and Mr. Andy Card for -- at the White House -- --. My question is that we do not know when the immigration law pending in the Congress will be through, but at this time, trafficking problem is a big one, especially the -- That is a high priority for this President to stop the trafficking in persons.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2632, "text": "especially from South Asia, and now India Globe is working a story on a woman from Bangladesh. They bring them here, and then they will not give them a green card and citizenship and work. And then they exploit them and rape them and use them. And then these women have nowhere to go, and they seek help from -- what they should do because there is no one to help them out. And then Immigration have them deported -- they said you have no legal citizen here. What the President is going to do -- Well, the President has made preventing the trafficking in persons a high priority, particularly trafficking that is involving sex crimes. That is something that he has talked about at the United Nations. It is an issue -- the trafficking in persons is an issue that he talked about just the other day when we were in Brazil, and the President was participating in a roundtable with some young professionals. And one of those persons was someone who worked for an organization that was committed to doing what they can to stop the trafficking in persons. It is not only the sex trafficking, it is also the trafficking in persons that are seeking to come to our country illegally, simply to provide a better way of life for their families back home, their children, because they know that they might be able to provide a better opportunity for their families back home by coming here to the United States. And you have these coyotes, as the President has talked about, who illegally smuggle people into this country. That is something that we are focused on when it comes to enforcing our borders. That is why one of the President's top priorities on his agenda is taking steps to strengthen our border enforcement and to move forward on comprehensive immigration reform, because people have lost their lives needlessly and we have got to do more to enforce our borders, as well as to move forward on other initiatives to improve our immigration system. We need a more practical and realistic immigration system to address these problems. At that meeting at Camp David, the President, Harriet Miers and Andrew Card talked about steps that would be taken -- does that mean there is going to be something in addition to the ethics -- No, he was -- thank you for the opportunity to talk further about that. What the President directed them to do at Camp David was to move forward on the action that is taking place this week and next week, as well.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2633, "text": "If you are asking me to limit the President's ability to make decisions that he deems are appropriate, I am not going to do that. But this is the action that directed to be taken last week at Camp David. ENTITY, is anyone in the White House exempt from participating in these and -- It is mandatory for all White House staff. That is who it is for. All White House staff is required to participate in these sessions. ENTITY, if that is a refresher course, the initial time that they took this class, was there any kind of statement that people had to sign saying they understood what they had been trained or taught -- Well, when you go through the clearance process to receive classified clearances, or security clearances, you have to sign information and you go through detailed briefings. And is there a portion in this training that says there are consequences if you do not follow the rules, if you do not follow these procedures -- As I indicated at the beginning, everybody at the White House understands what is expected of them. And they acknowledge that in a statement? No, I am not going to get into talking about everything that has to be signed when you go through a classified briefing on security clearances. But you do have to sign forms when you attend those briefings. Saying that you understand the rules and the regulations, and that type of thing, and the training -- that you have taken this training and you understand the consequences? Well, this is relating to classified security clearances, and that is all I will say on it, and it is what I just said. First of all, on the Australian arrests, has the U.S. coordinated with them, and is this as a result of Australia's cooperation with the United States? That is something that you ought to direct to Australian authorities. They have talked about it and you can check with our law enforcement authorities to see if there is any additional information. I will be glad to check on that, as well. Are you pleased with Australia's actions? Do you have any comment? Well, they are a good partner in the global war on terrorism, and they have been pursuing individuals who seek to do harm to their citizens. And they have announced some of the steps that they have taken and some of the results of those steps. I do not have any additional information on it at this point, other than what they have said publicly, Connie.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2634, "text": "On the French riots, do you have any message for the French, and for Europe, in general, in light of these riots? And should Americans be encouraged to go to France and other countries which might -- Well, Americans should always look to the guidance put out by our State Department in terms of travel, wherever they are traveling. It provides information regarding any security precautions or warnings that they should heed. And beyond that, you ought to talk to France about the steps they are taking to address that. ENTITY, the President was asked about an apology to the Wilson family, and he did not answer it. And if -- I am wondering if that non-answer goes to the fact that an apology would be under review right now from the administration. It goes to the fact that there is an ongoing investigation and legal proceeding, and we are not going to have any further discussion of it while it is ongoing. So are you saying an apology would compromise the investigation? I do not know how I could make it more clear, in terms of our response to questions relating to an ongoing investigation. You said that Chief of Staff and the White House Counsel were involved in planning the ethics classes. Karl is a pretty hands-on guy; how involved was he in the planning -- The Counsel's Office is the one that is responsible for conducting these ethics briefings. Richard Painter is our ethics counsel, and he is the one that conducts these briefings. So he was not involved at all in setting it up, as Andy Card was? No, this was the President talking with Andy Card and Harriet Miers at Camp David, not this last weekend, but the weekend before. So then you talk about having them in light of circumstances, is that a tacit acknowledgment that classified information has, in fact, been leaked? It was the way I described it. You said that we can direct questions to the Vice President's Office and, presumably, the Vice President is operating with the full knowledge of the President, in terms of lobbying to get an exemption for the CIA. What ENTITY was asking earlier was the exemption for torture, and that is just a flat-out false characterization. the question was -- -- the President has already made it clear that we do not torture and we do not tolerate torture.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2635, "text": "In fact, if you look at -- let us go back and just step back from this and let us look at some of what has happened that has put a stain on the image of the United States abroad. And that was what happened at Abu Ghraib. Well, what our military has done is acted to hold people accountable for their conduct, and to take steps to prevent something like that from happening again. They went through some 12 major investigations or reviews and looked at these issues. And now they have been implementing steps to prevent something like that from ever happening again. Now, I welcome an opportunity to talk about this -- uninterrupted, I might add -- to talk about the importance of what we are working to do in the global war on terrorism. And the American people I think ought to hear what we are working to do, because the President takes very seriously his responsibility to do all that he can to protect them. Hang on, I am coming to your question. We saw what happened on September 11th, when some 3,000 innocent men, women and children were killed in New York, in Washington and in the fields of Pennsylvania. The President made a decision on that day that we were going to go on the offensive, that we were going to use all available tools to bring to justice those who seek to do us harm before they could carry out their attacks. And he also made a commitment to work to change the status quo in the Middle East by spreading freedom. For too long we thought we had stability and peace in the Middle East, and we got neither. It became a breeding ground for terrorism. And that is why it is so important what we are working to achieve in the broader Middle East. That is why it is so important that we succeed in Iraq, because Iraq will be an example to the rest of the Middle East, just like Afghanistan is, in terms of that. And in terms of what Congress is considering -- or, at least the Senate, in terms of this amendment -- the President answered this question just the other day. He talked about how we would continue to work with members of Congress to address this issue. What is the White House -- -- there are already laws on the books, but not only laws, they are also values that we very much adhere to. But we have an obligation to the American people -- How do values blend with what you said earlier, which is what is necessary ?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2636, "text": "If what is necessary needs to be done, does that -- does what is necessary necessarily fit in with our values? What is necessary within our laws and within our values. So that means not torture -- You bet, the President is going to act to do what he can to prevent an attack from happening on the American people. That is what the American people expect. But we are going to do so consistent with our laws and values, and we have made that repeatedly clear. So what is the Vice President lobbying for? And is he doing it on behalf of the White House, or is he operating independently? Again, I just said we are going to continue to work with Congress. Why do not you answer the one question on exemption? Does the Vice President's Office have -- I mean, you blanket -- covered the White House. The Vice President's Office is under the Office of the White House. I am not going to get into all the discussions we have with members of Congress. If they want to add additional information, you are welcome to contact their office, as well. You are at that podium. We need to hear from you. are the Press Secretary for all -- There is a statement of administration policy that has been put out. And -- but let us talk about what this issue is relating to. This issue is relating to the protection of the American people and making sure that the President of the United States has the tools he needs to be able to prevent attacks from happening, and to be able to stop those terrorists who still seek to do us harm from carrying out their attacks in the first place. the Vice President wants torture? What is the Vice President doing? I just told you. I am not going to let you -- you are mischaracterizing what this is about. It is clearly in the statement of administration policy. April, look, you can keep showboating for the cameras, but we have made clear what our views are. Thank you -- I showboat well, thank you -- Let us be honest about it. I want an honest answer from you. And you got it in the statement of administration policy. You got it in the statement of administration policy. There are already laws on the books that cover these issues. I will be glad to provide it to you. And I just told you what it is. I just told you what it is.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2637, "text": "ENTITY, the Department of Defense is revising -- ENTITY, the Department of Defense is revising its policy guidelines for the treatment of detainees for the war on terror -- Vice President Cheney's office, his senior staff, had advised the uniform military lawyers working on this document that the White House is opposed to including any reference to Geneva Convention terms for humane treatment of detainees. Vice President Cheney's spokeswoman told us last week that that -- that the Vice President is pursuing the President's policy in holding that -- I do not think -- who told you the first part of this? Let us talk about where that came from, first of all. Well, the -- what are you talking about? The Vice President's office I do not think told you that first part of that, and you made it sound like the first part of that was from the Vice President's office. I do not think they told you that. Well, you are declaring that as fact. published reports in The New York Times and The Washington Post -- we are reporting, as well. So the question is, what is the President's view with respect to this Department of Defense policy guideline on the treatment of -- We have great confidence in Secretary Rumsfeld and the Department of Defense to move forward on steps to prevent something like what happened at Abu Ghraib from happening again. And that is what this comes out of, because, as I pointed out earlier, the Department of Defense undertook some 12 major investigations and reviews -- and/or reviews. They also pursued a number of cases against individuals who were responsible for these abuses, and they pursued people and held them to account. That is what the United States does. And that is the way we show the world what we are all about. We are about values and laws, and about adhering to those values and laws. And that is what we will continue to do. So they have taken steps, and are continuing to take steps, to put in place some policy directives that will build upon what they already had in place. Is the President opposed to any reference to Geneva Convention or adherence to the Geneva Convention, directly, in this Department of Defense policy guideline? Well, in terms of the guidelines, those are guidelines that the Department of Defense will issue. And so I'd encourage you to talk further with them about that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2638, "text": "Anytime there is something like this, there is an interagency process that goes on, and a number of people are involved in providing input into that process. That is part of the interagency process; that is a healthy part of being able to come to these decisions. And so that is what you are talking about. The President has no view? We support the action that the Department of Defense has taken, and have great confidence in the steps that they are taking to address these matters. In terms of views that we express, we do that through the interagency process. Reuters, AP, and The Los Angeles Times all reported yesterday that the IRS has threatened to revoke the tax-exempt status of All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, California, because its retired rector, George Regas, implied to parishioners before the 2004 election that Jesus would not have voted for George W. Bush. Is it possible that the President supports any such attempt to muzzle the pulpit? I do not think the President gets involved in decisions that are made by churches. Since President Bush supports the creation of a separate Palestinian state to halt Muslim violence in Israel, will he now back the creation of an autonomous Paris-stinian state to quell violence in France? The President has made very clear what his view is when it comes to the Middle East peace process. And he was the first President to articulate a policy of two states living side-by-side in peace and security. We are making great progress there. In terms of what is going on in France, you need to talk to the French government on how they are working to address those matters. That is a matter -- internal matter to France. Senator Grassley has come up with the idea that even though the administration is opposed to windfall profit tax, that major oil corporations voluntarily hand over 10 percent of their vast oil profits to help pay for -- to help direct this money toward low-income housing, or home fuel heating expenses. there are some congressional leaders who have talked about the importance of investing in our energy infrastructure. That is a goal that the President shares. We all have a responsibility to do our part. That means the federal government, it means businesses, and it means consumers. We need to do more to invest in our energy infrastructure and address the root causes of high energy prices. Now, energy prices have come down some in recent weeks, but there is action that we need to continue to take.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2639, "text": "That is why we acted with Congress to pass a comprehensive national energy strategy. That is why we are working with Congress to look at ways we might be able to expand refining capacity. And the private sector has a role to play in all this, too. And all of us need to do our part. Would that include the private sector having some responsibility in helping to alleviate the cost of home heating? What you are talking about -- in terms of the goal that members of Congress are talking about, which is that we need to do more to invest in our energy infrastructure, that is a goal we share. And we are going to continue to work with them, and we are going to continue to urge all people, in the private sector and in government, to do their part to help address this issue. And Secretary Bodman spoke some about this last week. With respect to the ethics classes that are being conducted, do they address the grounds for dismissal? And the reason I ask that is because, as you know, the President changed the ground rules on the grounds of dismissal by saying initially that those involved will be dismissed, and then later saying, only those that are convicted will be dismissed. Does that mean that -- Everybody at the White House serves at the pleasure of the President. And I have made that very clear to you. So I would not agree with your characterization. Do you ever say to yourself, I have had enough of this, Austin is really nice this time of year? I am glad to help the President implement his optimistic agenda for the American people. And I enjoy working with the people in this room most of the time. How about today? Sure, I enjoy it because -- an important topic was raised at the beginning of this briefing, and I am glad to talk about it. And I understand that. They are just trying to do their job. But there are important -- there are important points that need to be made to the American people. There is a reminder that we will continue to make to the American people. We remain a country that is engaged in a global war on terrorism. And it is important that we do everything within our power to go after those who seek to do us harm and to prevent attacks from happening in the first place. And this President will do that. But he will do so in a way that is consistent with our laws and our values.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2640, "text": "But when we are talking about this issue, let us have an open discussion about it, and let us talk about the type of people that we are talking about who have been brought to justice, people like Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, people like Binalshibh. These are people that were operational planners involved in carrying out attacks that led to the death of some 3,000 Americans. And the President is determined to prevent something like that from ever happening again. And he is going to do his part to make sure he fulfills the obligation he has to the American people, which is to do everything he can to protect them. So I welcome the discussion. ENTITY, who would be the highest ranking staffer whose attendance is required at these briefings? Yes. He is an assistant to the President. He participated in the meeting this morning, absolutely. In fact, I think a number of assistants to the President participated in the first meeting, even though it was for A through B. And I think C through D was later, and E and F later, and then more over the next couple of days. So they cut one? But all the assistants to the President were ones -- Would you make Richard Painter available to us? Would you make Richard Painter available to us? Well, he is conducting these briefings for staff. This is relating to classified information, so you can understand the nature of the briefings, and I do not think you have security clearance. But he could tell us what the guidelines are for what people are -- He is not talking about classified information in the briefing. Well, we will be glad to provide you public information that is on general information guidelines. But information related to classified security briefings, some of that information, by nature, is involved just for people with security clearances. And I am not aware that you have one at this point. He is not talking about classified information in the briefing. He is talking about the guidelines. He is talking about guidelines. No, it involves talking about classified matters -- You may have noticed that The Washington Post, The Financial Times have had reports about a human rights lawyer in Beijing whose office was forced to close down because he wrote an open letter to the Chinese leader asking them to stop the persecution of Falun Gong spiritual movement in China. Since President Bush is going to Asia next week, do you think this is some issue he will address? Well, the President had some interviews earlier today.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2641, "text": "I would encourage you to look at those interviews because one of the topics he talked about was human rights. That is something we talk about publicly and privately as a high priority for this President. We have always made the promotion of human rights and human dignity at the top -- always put it at the top of our agenda. And that is what we will continue to do. And, yes, the President will continue to talk openly and candidly with leaders he meets with, including when he goes to China, about the importance of freedom of religion for instance. Tomorrow the President and Mrs. Bush look forward to welcoming His Holiness the Dalai Lama to the White House. He is met with him on a number of occasions before, and they will talk about issues relating to Tibet. And you bet when the President goes to Asia next week, he will continue to talk about the importance of promoting human rights and human dignity for all. We have an obligation -- all of us in the world have an obligation to speak out about human rights. And where those human rights are being undermined, we have a right to speak out about them in places that the -- in countries that the President has talked about before. One question he got earlier today was relating to North Korea and the treatment of people in North Korea. And he talked about that at length. There are negotiations underway today to further liberalize the Open Skies agreement between Canada and the United States, essentially the fifth freedom which would allow, in this case, Canadian airlines to compete for the lucrative domestic international market. Considering the state of the American airlines, five now seeking bankruptcy protection, does the President believe that this is the right time to open up this market to -- That is something we continue to discuss with Canada. I do not have the latest update on any of those discussions. We have been in South America for the last few days focused on some other matters. But I am sure that if you direct those questions to the appropriate agency, they can provide you an update, in terms of that. But in general terms, considering the state of the American airline industry right now, does the President believe that it is a good time to start changing -- Well, the American airline industry is going through a transition. They have been going through that transition for some time because of the changing economy that we live in, and the changing nature of their business.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentspressbriefingscottmcclellan63", "title": "George W. Bush Press Briefing by Scott McClellan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/press-briefing-scott-mcclellan-63", "publication_date": "08-11-2005", "crawling_date": "06-07-2023", "politician": ["Scott McClellan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2642, "text": "It is ENTITY with ENTITY. I have been dancing a little bit, ad-libbing for an hour and a half, but I know you are a busy man. I owe you one. You know what I could use, a hug right now is what I could use. If I could give you one of those, I'd do that, too. I asked the callers to give me some suggestions for you. And do I have to call you ENTITY? In all respect, it is a very personable show. Can I call you something that-- Call me whatever you want. No, you tell me what to call you. I want it to be comfortable here, because, ENTITY, that puts me at a disadvantage, asking you sports questions. You do not have to call me anything. Could I call you ENTITY? You can call me whatever you want. It is fine with me. What are you doing with all those jerseys that you get when teams come to the White House? Believe it or not, I save them all because I am such a big sports fan. And when I get out of here, I am going to put them all together and decide whether to either display them or take turns wearing them. But I actually save them all. Have you put one on in the White House and maybe, you know, tossed a football or played basketball in them? Yes, I played-I shot a few baskets with a Kentucky jersey they gave me the other day, not very long ago. Now, what is the one event you would want to go to that you have not been to, sporting-wise? That I have never been to? I'd like to go to a Super Bowl, and I'd like to go to a college championship, now that the new football system is in. You have not been to the Super Bowl? I have watched a lot of them, but I have never been to one. You can come with ESPN this year; it is in Atlanta. You know, I have seen some great events. I went to the NCAA championship game in Arkansas, one in '94, and that is the only time I have ever been to that. And then I went to-I saw the women's World Cup finals this year when we beat China with the overtime, with the kickoff at the end, which was stunning. It was one of the most exciting athletic events I have ever seen in my life.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanpatrickespnradio", "title": "Interview With Dan Patrick of ESPN Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-patrick-espn-radio", "publication_date": "04-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2643, "text": "Set the scene in the White House when you are watching SportsCenter. When I am watching it? Well, I watch it all the time, you know. I am either in the kitchen, where Hillary and I and Chelsea, when she is home, we have our meals in a very informal atmosphere in the kitchen when there is no one else there, or I am upstairs in what is called the Solarium; it is up on the third floor, and it is a big kind of sunny room. And I watch TV there at night, especially when my brotherin-law or someone else is staying with us. Normally, I am watching SportsCenter either around dinnertime when I come in or late at night when I come in from an event and I am sitting, visiting with other people. Have I said anything stupid on SportsCenter that maybe you wanted to criticize or critique me? Feel free; you can take a shot at me. I think as long as I am in office, I should be criticized but not return the favor. Everybody in America gets to criticize ENTITY. That is part of the privilege of being a citizen. The President of the United States, joining us on the ENTITY Show here on ESPN Radio. You are a part of this new markets incentives. I know you are in New Jersey. The Nets are donating to the city of Newark, which I think is great. Do you see teams that do not give back to the community enough? The taxpayers build these stadiums, and maybe they do not get something in return for promoting and supporting their teams. Well, let me put it in more positive terms with regard to the Nets. I think that taxpayers finance these things because they enjoy having professional teams in their communities, because they believe it brings their communities some prestige, and because they think it generates a lot of other economic activity. But I think that the opportunity for a professional sports team to give something back to the community on a scale far greater than anything that is happened so far is embodied by what the Nets are doing. I mean, this is a stunning thing that Lew Katz and Ray Chambers are doing with the Nets. And now, you know, they are partners with the Yankees, and so they have got a smaller percentage of the overall joint operations are going into community operations not only in Newark, New Jersey, but also in the Bronx, where the Yankees are.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanpatrickespnradio", "title": "Interview With Dan Patrick of ESPN Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-patrick-espn-radio", "publication_date": "04-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2644, "text": "Here are these two guys that have made a lot of money, and they are going to dedicate almost 40 percent of the profits of this sports franchise to redeveloping the economy and developing the lives of the children of Newark. We finance these stadiums. Should taxpayers finance the stadiums if we do not have any say on when those teams can leave? The practical answer to that is that stadiums cannot be financed unless the political leaders support it. And so the political leaders should decide on the front end, I guess, what they expect out of the teams in return for financing the stadium. You know, it was interesting when Bob Lanier was mayor of Houston-one of the most popular mayors Houston ever had and a very able man- he let the football team go to Tennessee because he did not want to finance a new stadium. So it is not like-nobody makes these communities do these things. They make their decisions. And I think if they think there ought to be some conditions or some requirements, that ought to be discussed with the owners in advance. We are going to have Casey Martin on in a little bit. But you being the avid golfer that you are, do you think that having a golf cart is that much of an advantage in-I mean, the outcry over Casey Martin using a golf cart, did it surprise you? And where do you stand on that issue? I am for him. I am solidly behind him. The only way it would be an advantage to him, in my view, is if he really did not have the debilitating condition in his legs that he has. So I think that to me, this is like the golf version of the Americans with Disabilities Act, you know, where we try to make the workplace accessible with people with disabilities who are otherwise just as good at work as all the rest of us. Well, Casey is just as good at golf and better than most of the rest of us, and he is got this condition, which will probably shorten his career, anyway. And so I think that the proper course is to say, Look, we cannot let everybody start running around the golf course. We do not want to change the nature of the game, but this man has a unique disability which prohibits his walking around but does not prevent him from being a terrific golfer, and for however many years he can be competitive, we think we ought to give him a chance.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanpatrickespnradio", "title": "Interview With Dan Patrick of ESPN Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-patrick-espn-radio", "publication_date": "04-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2645, "text": "I agree with you, and I just thought that it was interesting, the outcry from everybody. What they are worried about, I think, is all the people who have to be the keepers of the tradition of any game or any club or anything else, they are always afraid that when they change any rules, it is a slippery slope, and pretty soon the whole character of a contest will be altered in ways that are not good. But I just do not think that that objection holds water here. I do not know Casey Martin. I have had some limited contact with him, but he seems like a terrific young man. He could have folded his tent in the face of his physical disability. He could have sat around feeling sorry for himself. And instead, he shows up every day, and he is obviously got a lot of courage. And I think that we ought to support that. I think that is in the finest tradition of the sport. So to me, it is not a difficult question. But I sympathize with the people who have the responsibility of preserving the traditions and the heritage of the game. I sympathize with them, but I just think all this resistance has been wrong. Can I ask you one final question, aside from the question I just asked you? Who is the number one athlete of all time, in your mind? The Sports Century countdown of the top 50 athletes-who would you vote for number one? Now, I know you released kind of a top 10; maybe it was a top 5. But if you were going to single out one athlete, who would it be? I believe the athlete in the 20th century that made the most important contribution was Jesse Owens, because he won the multiple Olympic gold medals in the face of Nazi Germany and against Hitler's racial theories. So I think he was both a great athlete who had to show an extraordinary amount of personal courage, and he did something that was of profound significance at the time. I think the most talented-physically talented athlete that I ever saw play, I think it would be a toss-up for me between Michael Jordan and Willie Mays. Once you get up to that stratosphere, then if you pick out somebody and-I always thought Jackie Robinson, to me, signified greatness as an athlete and what he overcame.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdanpatrickespnradio", "title": "Interview With Dan Patrick of ESPN Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-dan-patrick-espn-radio", "publication_date": "04-11-1999", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2654, "text": "So there is no secret that you were a jet pilot, so how would you describe, in a couple of sentences, where is Latvia on your radar? Latvia is a country that has made a big difference in important alliances to the United States, like NATO. I remember when the moment came when the countries-the new countries admitted to NATO came into the room that I was sitting in, and I turned to the person I was sitting next to and said, It is going to be so important for NATO to have these fresh-these new countries, because they bring a fresh outlook to freedom. These are people that have recently lived under, in this case, communism and realized what it means to be free, and it is going to be very important. And so Latvia is very high on my radar screen. Well, first of all, she is a straightforward person. I like straightforward people. You know, sometimes in politics you get people who say one thing and do not mean it. When she tells me something, she means it. She is very engaging and-very intelligent woman, and I admire her courage. And so I am fond of her. You are good friends with President Putin of Russia. Do you think you could encourage him to admit historical justice and admit the fact that Baltic States were occupied in 1940? Well, yes, I have talked to him about this issue when I was in Slovakia. I said, Do you understand, friend, that you have got problems in the Baltics? You have got problems with Latvia because people do not like-the remembrances of the time of communism are unpleasant remembrances, and you need to work with these young democracies. I explained to him that it is best that there be democracies on his border, free countries, because free countries do not attack people; free countries listen to the hopes and aspirations of people. I do not know if I have made any progress with him or not, but I have made my position clear. I understand there is a lot of people in the Baltics who are-you know, do not view the celebration in Russia as a day of liberation. Frankly, it is the beginning of a difficult period, and I can understand why some leaders of countries are not going and some others are. That is a decision each leader must make, and I respect the decision of each leader. But I am going to continue to speak very forcefully on freedom and liberty, and the Baltics are a great example of free countries.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatviantelevision", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Latvian Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latvian-television", "publication_date": "04-05-2005", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2655, "text": "But you are pretty certain that Russia is at least on the right path of development, and it does not pose any threat to its smaller neighbors? And one of the reasons a relationship with the United States and Latvia is important is, is that we will stand with Latvia if a larger country tries to intimidate the people. That is the great thing about Latvia joining NATO, is that the security is now guaranteed by not only the United States but all members of NATO. Listen, the President and I speak about relations between Russia and Latvia quite frequently. And my job at times is to send a message that says, Look, treat your neighbors with respect. Free nations, democracies on your border are good for you, whether that be, by the way, in the Baltics or in Ukraine. I have sent that same message-or Georgia. In other words, countries that are free countries are countries that will be good neighbors. What can we do about Belarus, because a couple of hundred miles from where you are going to be visiting there sits the last dictator of Europe. What can we do about it? The last dictator of Europe is right, and we will continue to pressure Belarus and call upon the world, the rest of the world, the free world-not the whole world but the free world-to work to give the people of Belarus a chance to live in a free society. When I was in Slovakia I met with people of the freedom movement. I know when Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State, was in your part of the world, she met with leaders of the freedom movement too. President Putin must understand that a free Belarus is in his country's interest. The sentiment of anti-Americanism, as I am sure you know, is quite widespread in Europe and in my country as well. Do you think there is any degree of your own fault in the fact that this sentiment is on the rise or-- I made some hard decisions. You know, going into Iraq was a hard decision. I can understand people not liking that. But I would hope people in Europe would understand that freedom is not owned only by Europeans, that people around the world deserve to be free. And as we act in our self-interest to fight terrorists, as we work to make sure terrorists cannot get weapons of mass destruction to cause great harm, that we will also work to free people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlatviantelevision", "title": "George W. Bush Interview With Latvian Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-latvian-television", "publication_date": "04-05-2005", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2681, "text": "ENTITY, your meeting with Mr. Gorbachev is only 3 weeks away now; everyone regards it as crucial. What do you hope, personally, to get out of the summit with Mr. Gorbachev? Well, I think that the most that we could get out is if we could eliminate some of the paranoia, if we could reduce the hostility, the suspicion that keeps our two countries particularly but basically, should we say, the Warsaw bloc and the West at odds with each other. And while I know everyone is looking toward and emphasizing a reduction in arms this is vital and important, but I see reduction in arms as a result, not a cause. If we can reduce those suspicions between our two countries, the reduction of arms will easily follow because we will reduce the feeling that we need them. Shultz is off to Moscow on Saturday to do the groundwork for this summit fully aware, as he himself admits, that there are major differences between the United States and Russia. Apart from the paranoia which you talked about, what are those differences as you see them? Here are two systems so diametrically opposed that-I am no linguist, but I have been told that in the Russian language there is not even a word for freedom. And two nations everyone's referring to as the superpowers obviously are competitive and our philosophies and our ideas on the world and that probably cannot be corrected, but we can have a peaceful competition. We have to live in the world together. There is no sense in believing that we must go on with the threat of a nuclear war hanging over the world because of our disagreements. We do not like their system; they do not like ours, but we are not out to change theirs. I do feel sometimes they are out to change ours but if we could get along. They have a system of totalitarian government and rule of their people; we have one in which we believe the people rule the government. And there is not any reason why we cannot coexist in the world. Where there are legitimate areas of competition, compete; but do it in a manner that recognizes that neither one of us should be a threat to the other. When Mr. Shultz talks to Mr. Gorbachev and Mr. Shevardnadze, what will be the topics of discussion? Will it be trying to find some groundwork, for example, on arms control and reduction?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2682, "text": "No, I would think that probably the main point in their meeting ahead of the major meeting is to establish an agenda. In other words, Secretary Shultz would tell them the things that we feel are important to be discussed. Minister Shevardnadze will probably have a list of things that are on their agenda, so that we can plan and neither one of us be caught by surprise at the summit with having a subject come up that had not even been considered. So, I think that this is probably the main, useful purpose that will be served by their getting together. Is there any chance at all that the discussions Mr. Shultz has in Moscow might enable you to produce an initiative before you go to Geneva? Right now we are in the position of studying what we call a counterproposal. In Geneva, where our arms control delegations are meeting and have been meeting for a long time, we have had a proposal for a reduction of nuclear weapons. Now, for the first time, the Soviet Union has made a counterproposal. We have put that in the hands of our people in Geneva now for them to look at; we ourselves are studying it. There are some elements in there that are well, we have called them seeds to nurture, things that we look at and say, Yes, these could very easily be acceptable. At the same time, in their proposal there are some things that we believe are so disadvantageous to us that they should be negotiated and some changes made. And with all of this going on, I am not in a position to say now at what point will we make our reply to their counteroffer and state where we are or where we differ and so forth, and then, that should be the area in which negotiations would take place. Now, whether that does not happen prior to the summit meeting or whether our team in Geneva tables it before they adjourn for their recess that is coming up, that I cannot answer; that still remains to be seen. But I must tell you, ENTITY, that Mrs. Thatcher has already told the leader of the opposition and she said this today in the House of Commons-that you were going to come up with an initiative before Geneva. Well, I am personally hopeful of that, also. So, she is right that that is what we are striving to do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2683, "text": "Now, can we look at some of the things which obviously are going to affect Geneva, but particularly I'd like to talk to you about the Strategic Defense Initiative and how important that is going to be. Can anything be achieved in Geneva without some understanding from both sides in this area? Probably not, but I think there can be an understanding when they hear what we have in mind. I believe that this is something that is probably one of the most momentous things in a century. We have a team that, within the terms of the ABM treaty, is researching to see if there is a defensive weapon, the possibility of a defensive weapon that could intercept missiles before they reach their target, instead of having a deterrent to war, as we have now, which is both sides with massive weapons of destruction nuclear missiles and the only thing deterring war is the threat we represent to each other of killing millions and millions of citizens on both sides. Now, if we can come up with a defensive weapon, then, we reach and we know that we have it, that it is there, that it is practical, that it will work then, my idea is that we go to the world, we go to our allies, we go to the Soviet Union, and we say, Look, we are not going to just start deploying this at the same time we maintain a nuclear arsenal. We think this weapon, this defensive weapon we would like to make available, and let us have the world have this for their own protection so that we can all eliminate our nuclear arsenals. And the only reason, then, for having the defensive weapon would be, because since everyone in the world knows how to make one, a nuclear weapon we would all be protected in case some madman, some day down along the line, secretly sets out to produce some with the idea of blackmailing the world, and the world would not be blackmailed because we would all be sitting here with that defense. I have likened it to what happened in 1925, after World War I all the nations got together and outlawed poison gas, but everybody kept their gas masks. So, we would have a world with some nuclear gas masks, and we could sleep at night without thinking that someone could bring this great menace of the nuclear threat against us. When you say, ENTITY, you'd go to the world once you had proved satisfactory to yourself that here was a weapon which would actually work. If you go to the world, would you include Russia in that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2684, "text": "I think that what could be safer than today everything is offensive weapons. It is the only weapon I know of that is ever been developed in history that has not brought about a defense against it. But what would be safer than if the two great superpowers, the two that have the great arsenals both of us sat there with defensive weapons that ensured our safety against the nuclear weapons and both of us eliminated our nuclear missiles. But the Russians, presumably, would have to make their own SDI. You would not offer it to them, would you, off the shelf? And I think this is something to be discussed at the summit as to what kind of an agreement we could make in the event. I would like to say to the Soviet Union, we know you have been researching for this same thing longer than we have. We wish you well. There could not be anything better than if both of us came up with it. But if only one of us does, then, why do not we, instead of using it as an offensive means of having a first strike against anyone else in the world, why do not we use it to ensure that there will not be any nuclear strikes? Are you saying then, ENTITY, that the United States, if it were well down the road towards a proper SDI program, would be prepared to share its technology with Soviet Russia, provided, of course, there were arms reductions and so on on both sides? In other words, we would switch to defense instead of offense. That, of course, is quite a long way away this idealistic world of yours, if I may say so. We have had some good breakthroughs in our research so far. And is the research going so well as to suggest to you that a defensive weapon of this kind is really practical now? As a matter of fact, very leading scientists who are involved in this have said that, that they can foresee us achieving this weapon. Oh, I think we are talking a matter of years. Let us say, though, this is not going to come about, as you say, for a matter of years. And Mr. Gorbachev, as we all know, is very worried about SDI. Would you be prepared to negotiate on SDI at Geneva? Well, negotiate in the sense of coming to an agreement, which we are bound by in the future for whenever that weapon happens bound to this matter of worldwide sharing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2685, "text": "Gorbachev, I think, accepts the idea that you could do nothing about research because it is not really verifiable; testing, on the other hand, worries him. Now, does testing, in your view, come within the ARM treaty? I think that we are well within it and within a strict adherence to the treaty, although you could have a more liberal interpretation of the treaty that I believe is justified. But rather than have any debate or argument about that, we are staying within the strict limits of the treaty. Do you think the SDI is likely to be a stumbling block at Geneva, bearing in mind what Mr. Gorbachev thinks about it, these reservations? I think it should be one of the most helpful things in erasing some of that paranoia I mentioned or that hostility or suspicions between us. You have a horror of nuclear weapons and that is why you say that SDI is a good thing. If we had SDI worldwide, would there still be nuclear weapons available? I would not see any need for them at all. I would not know why a nation would strap itself to invest in them. But, as I say, there is always the possibility of a madman coming along, and, as I say, you cannot eliminate the knowledge about building those weapons who might seize upon them. We have had an experience in our lifetime of a madman in the world who caused great tragedy worldwide. ENTITY, can we turn now to some of the things you said in your U.N. speech? One of the central themes you brought up there concerned those areas of regional conflict, such as Afghanistan, in which the Soviets have a hand. Are you going to bring these up with Mr. Gorbachev? Well, I would think that this is very much a part of trying to rid the world of the suspicions. They claim that they fear that we of the Western World threaten them, that somehow we are lying here in wait for a day when we can eliminate their method of government and so forth. If you look back to the end of World War II, our country, for example, absolutely undamaged we had not had our industries destroyed through bombings and so forth-and we were the only nation with the bomb, the nuclear weapon. We could have dictated to the world; we did not . And today those erstwhile enemies are our staunchest allies in the NATO alliance.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2686, "text": "They, on the other hand, have created-well, they have gone through the biggest military buildup in the history of man, and it is basically offensive. Now, we, therefore, claim we have got some right to believe that we are threatened; not the other way around. Now, to eliminate that suspicion or that fear, if they really want to live in a peaceful world and be friends and associate with the rest of the world, then, we need more than words. And the deeds could be the stopping of their attempt to either themselves or through proxies and through subversion to force their system on other countries throughout the world.  Do you think you were being a bit optimistic in your U.N. speech? You proposed the idea that these areas of regional conflict should be discussed. But, of course, you took them much further than that. What you actually said they should be discussed up to the point when they are just eliminated. Now, do you think you are being optimistic when you recognize the fact that the fellow sitting opposite you is Mr. Gorbachev, and he is tied up in these things. But on the other hand, he has some practical problems in his own country, some problems of how long can they sustain an economy that provides for their people under the terrific cost of building up and pursuing this expansionist policy and this great military buildup. And if we can show him that he can resolve those economic problems with no danger to themselves, convince him that we represent no threat, then I could see us as I have said before, we do not like each other's systems, maybe we do not like each other; but we are the only two nations that can probably cause a world war. We are also the only two nations that can prevent one. Will you want to talk to him about human rights? You have probably heard that Mrs. Yelena Bonner has just been granted a visa to come to the West so she can get medical treatment, but she will have to go back to Russia, of course. Do you see that as a propaganda move by the Russians? Or is it a step along the road? I would like to feel it is a step along the road, and there needs to be more. I do not think, however, that the human rights thing should be a kind of a public discussion and accusing fingers being pointed at each other and their claim that this is an internal matter with them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2687, "text": "But I think it should be explained that some of these violations well, first of all is the violation of the Helsinki pact. This was one of the main reasons why we are signatories to that pact is this agreement about not separating families and so forth, allowing people freedom to choose. What they have to understand is that in some of the major areas where we could seek agreement, we have a better chance in our type of society of getting the approval that we need from our Congress, from our people of some of these agreements if these issues, these human rights problems are not standing in the way. And maybe I can point that out. ENTITY, there have been fears expressed in Europe that arms control will be pushed right down the agenda at Geneva in favor of issues like regional conflict and human rights, which we have been discussing. Can you give an assurance that that is not the case? But, as I have said, that follows another thing. The effort is to arrive at an understanding about our ability to live in the world together and at peace and the other that can follow. Nations are not suspicious of each other because of their arms. There is a feeling, ENTITY, that Mr. Gorbachev has seized the initiative in Europe. European leaders have undoubtedly been impressed by his performance. Thatcher, as you know, said that he is someone she can do business with. What do you think about it? Well, I do not know him as yet, but he seems to have shown more of an interest in the people, the man in the street, than other Soviet leaders have. He has expressed great concern about the economic problems and the improvements that he feels that should be made there. And he is younger and more energetic than some of the more recent leaders have been. And I am optimistic by nature, but I have to be optimistic that he is looking at the entire picture. On the other hand, I do not think we should believe that he is not dedicated to the principles of their system, to communism and so forth. Do you think he is , in terms of youth, energy, if you like, intelligence, and obviously a powerful grasp of public relations do you think he is a pretty formidable Russian leader to deal with compared with his predecessors? On the public relations thing, he did far better with some of our own press than he did with the French press on his recent visit when he was there. I cannot judge him on that. Sometimes public relations are made by those reporting, not by those doing.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2688, "text": "Can I take one or two other areas with you, ENTITY? We know how you handled the Achille Lauro affair, but does that carry the risk of alienating friendly governments? Well, I know, and yet we felt that we had no choice in the matter if we were going to prevent those terrorists from suddenly, as so many in past have, disappearing into the rabbit warrens that abound the Middle East, Lebanon and so forth; and therefore they would escape being brought to justice. They had murdered a man, a helpless individual. We felt we had to do it. But I am pleased to say, now, that I think the flurry is over and that both Egypt and Italy want to continue the warm relationship that we have had. ENTITY, would you do it again, even if it meant, say, violating international law? Well, it actually did not violate international law. But terrorism is always with us. And I think that you'd have to judge each case on its own as to the need to bring terrorists to justice; the need to convince them that terrorism is not going to be successful, it is not going to make governments, like your own or our own, change their policies out of fear of terrorism. If that ever happens, then, the world has gone back to anarchy. So, you would have to judge that against how much you would be violating international law to achieve your goal. But if it was necessary, I take it you would. And you would pursue terrorism as hard as you can, as often as you can? It is been very frustrating for a number of the things that have happened, and I have been taken to task by members of the press that I talked, but I did not take action. The terrorist blows himself up with all the innocent people that he also kills at the same time. So, there is no way you are going to punish him. You now seek to find well, who does he belong to? What group brought this about? But also, even if you do get some intelligence that indicates it is a certain group, they are in some foreign city and you say, Well, how do we punish them without blowing up a neighborhood and killing as many innocent people as they did? And this has been our problem up until this last time when we had a very clear-cut case. ENTITY, this may be a difficult question for you to answer, but what would you most like to be remembered for by history?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2689, "text": "The United States economy I remember attending my first economic summit in Ottawa, Canada and that was just in the spring of the year, my first year here and I remember our friends and allies, the heads of state of the other summit nations there, beseeching me to stop exporting our inflation and our recession to their countries in this world of international trade and all that we were exporting bad economic situations to the rest of the world. The Soviet Union again, as I say, through surrogates or on their own-there was Afghanistan, there was Ethiopia, South Yemen, Angola, Nicaragua, and they had forced governments of their choosing into all of those countries. We have the greatest recovery, economic recovery that we have ever had in our history. It is not we who are exporting inflation anymore. Inflation is down from those double-digit figures well, for the last 5 months it is only been 2 1/2 percent, and none of our trading partners can match that . We have created almost 9 million new jobs over these 5 years with our economic recovery. And in the world abroad, the Soviet Union has not stepped in or created a government of its kind in any new country in these 5 years. It is not moved under one additional inch of territory, and I just like to feel that maybe some of the things we did here the American people, their spirit was down, they had heard talks, prior to our arrival, that maybe we should give up our high expectations, that never again could we look toward the future as we had in the past, lower our expectations, and so forth. Today we have a volunteer military, we exceed our enlistment quota every year. We have the highest level of education in the military, in this volunteer military, that we have ever had in our history, even in wartime drafts. The American people have rallied, and with a spirit of voluntarism, voluntarily stepping into problems that once they just let go by and thought somebody in the Government would take care of them. And as I say, the economy last year some 600,000 new businesses were incorporated in our country. I would like to be remembered not for doing all those things I did not do them; the American people did them. All I did was help get government out of their way and restore our belief in the power of the people and that government must be limit ed in its powers and limited in its actions. And that part I helped in I'd like to be remembered for that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbrianwidlakethebritishbroadcastingcorporation", "title": "Interview With Brian Widlake of the British Broadcasting Corporation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-brian-widlake-the-british-broadcasting-corporation", "publication_date": "29-10-1985", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2690, "text": "ENTITY, I'd like to start by asking you, you frequently have referred to the tremendous impact that Franklin D. Roosevelt had in reshaping the country, and in your first year, you have made a tremendous impact in starting to reshape the country. And I wondered how you judge your impact in the first year and also what sort of legacy you hope to leave. Well, I believe that we have started government on a different course, different than anything we have done in the last half century since Roosevelt began with the New Deal. And that is the recognition that there must be a limit to government size and power and that there has been a distortion of the relationship between the various echelons of government Federal, State, and local. And I think that we have the most to do with yet, because the higher levels of government are reluctant to give up authority once they have it. History shows that no government has ever voluntarily reduced itself in size. So, in effect, you know, we are part of government. We are trying to bring about that change. Now, this does not mean that we do not recognize government's basic responsibilities, the things it is required to do. And with all of the criticism of national defense, one of the top priorities that is listed constitutionally for the Federal Government is the defense of the Nation, the national security. That prime function has been one that has been sadly neglected in recent years. But I think the very fact that we were successful in getting the biggest single package of budget reductions ever adopted, the single biggest package of tax reductions and ongoing that have ever been adopted, has set us on a course of trying to bring back the idea heralded by all our Founding Fathers, and reiterated so often by leaders in government. It is that government must stay within its means. And we have not achieved that yet. But by cutting the rate of growth in government more than in half or about in half, we are trying to bring those two lines closer together the line of the normal increase in revenues that comes from the tax structure, and the growth of the country and the economy and the normal increase in government spending, which would reflect the growth in the country. Today, you have to add to that inflation has been responsible, because government's expenses go up, too, with inflation, just as the individual's do. Now, I know I am getting very lengthy with this answer, but let me just add one thing. And you were a Democrat once.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2691, "text": "The ENTITY, Yes had adopted deliberately a policy of planned inflation. And they heralded it as the New Economics, that was their term. And they said that a little inflation was necessary to create prosperity. And they claimed that it could be controlled, that you could have a small percentage that we could easily absorb, and growth would take care of it and people's earnings would stay ahead of it. And I used to proclaim in my mashed potato appearances that it was like radioactivity, that it was cumulative. And you could not continue it without it one day getting out of control. And one day, it got out of control. So, could you just sum up very quickly, though, what do you hope your legacy will be as ENTITY? I hope my legacy will mean that we restore the balance between the levels of government, meaning that we restore to local and State government functions that are properly theirs and belong there, and restore to them the tax sources necessary to support them, which have been also usurped by the Federal Government; that we set a policy that I would hope could be legally imposed, barring an emergency such as war, that the Federal Government, like the various States, must live within its means. And a policy, before I leave, that we could begin, no matter how small, paying installments on the national debt as a signal to those who will follow, that the national debt is not something that we will either default on, as all other governments in the past have done when it got unmanageable and too big that we'd not default on and that it will not hang over, forever, succeeding generations. Let me just interject there before I ask a question. Would you favor a constitutional convention to propose a balanced budget? Well, constitutional conventions are kind of prescribed as a last resort, because then once it is open, they could take up any number of things. I have always thought that the regular procedure that is prescribed first, of a constitutional amendment Would you like to see Congress pass a constitutional amendment? There must also then be some limitation on the percentage of the people's earnings or the gross national product that the government can take in taxes, because you can always balance your budget just by taking more money away from people. So, that would not help any. I remember once that Milton Friedman said that the problem is the cost of government, not just necessarily the deficit.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2692, "text": "And he said he would prefer this was a time when the budgets were approaching $400 billion and so forth he said he would prefer an unbalanced budget of $200 billion to a balanced budget of $400 billion, because 400 would be taking more money from the people than it should. I was going to ask you a question about the balanced budget. We took a poll, and it showed that three times as many people would rather have a balanced budget as increase defense spending or even income tax cuts. And you seem to be moving in a direction where your top priorities are a defense buildup and also tax cuts, and the balanced budget is not quite so high anymore on your priority list. Well, George and without appearing to be personally critical or anything of your profession is not this perhaps a reflection of what is constantly thrown at the public, publicly, that and all of us are responsible. We all talk about the evils of deficit spending, and just as I have finished talking here we want to get back to where we stay within our means. But I also promised all during the campaign and I do not know who took that poll, who they talked to but I remember if you remember, I used to do Q and A an awful lot, and I remember when repeatedly the question would be asked, if the choice came down to restoring our military security or balancing the budget, which side would I come down on? And I said I would come down on the side of restoring our defenses, our national security. And inevitably, I never in fact, I never gave that answer to an audience that I did not get enthusiastic applause. So you feel you have a mandate to do that. But what I do think lately is when you start talking about all the cuts and everything, and then usually the military budget is treated as a swollen thing and out of proportion and so forth actually, it is not . We are spending a smaller percentage of the gross national product on national defense than we used to do years ago in what were considered normal times. But we are playing catch up. We are restoring something that was allowed to diminish and deteriorate. I think that the people hear that, and the people have heard so much about that their troubles are due to the deficit in part they are. It is harder to explain that reducing the tax rates can result in even the government getting more money, that the tax cuts are not just simply to relieve an individual of tax burden.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2693, "text": "They are to restore a balance in government and private spending that will increase productivity, broaden the base of the economy, help provide the jobs for those people that are unemployed. And when that all happens, as it did in the Kennedy years, the government itself ended up getting more money. We should talk tax rate reductions. And it is a difficult thing to explain to people, that those reductions in rates for each individual are intended to result in more people paying taxes and better earnings so that government will get a normal percentage increase, even though the individual is better off. Do you see any circumstances where you might want to delay or cancel these tax rate cuts of last summer in order to balance the budget? As a matter of fact, I will tell you, I firmly believe and I have the support of a number of economists on this that had we not been forced to compromise, had we been able to make these tax cuts first of all, we asked for 30 percent, not 25, over the 3 years. We had to take that cut to get it. The second thing was we had asked for it to be retroactive to last January 1st so that the people would have been having a tax cut immediately retroactively, in fact. And we then first had to compromise down to July last July lst and finally it ended up October 1st, the beginning of the fiscal year. So, in effect, the actual tax cut for 1981 is only about 1 1/4 percent. Well, that is not exactly a stimulant to the economy that we had in mind. Now, these people, these other economists and, as I say, I myself believe that had we not had to compromise, very possibly we would not have had this recession. So, rather than push it back or postpone no, the thing that I would yield to if it could practically be done would be to move it forward. But politically it might be impossible, because if we once open that subject, that we know is what will happen. Let me jump in here with another impact type question. When you ran against Carter and during the debate, you asked people to judge his impact on their lives, and you asked them to ask themselves whether they were any better off now than when he first became elected. Do you think it is now fair to ask people whether they are better off than when you became elected? Yes, but I was asking at the end of 4 years. Now they are comparing me to 1 year ago and with a recession.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2694, "text": "I think by actual figures I could prove that they are better off. First of all, the interest rates are over five points lower than they were when I took office. The inflation rate is down to single digit, when it was almost 14 when I took office. Their rate of taxation is now lower than it was when I took office. So, I would suggest that if the people actually looked at the figures but I think in a recession it is easy to find people out there who say, No, I am not, and particularly if you ask around Washington, because we have drastically reduced the size of government. There are fewer government employees and one of them, if he has not found another job would say. ENTITY, in your first year you had extraordinary success in cutting the rate of growth in Federal spending. Would you favor, to hold down the deficits, beginning to cut into those entitlement programs, social security and such, or perhaps go to the excise taxes on gasoline and cigarettes? Well, social security, of course, is now in the hands of a commission and that was something else, again, that I'd always spoke of during the campaign, and then thought maybe we were going to be able to get something done without going that route. But we are going back to it. So, I except that and take the others. And it is not a case as when you say cut down, immediately the impression is given to anyone who is dependent on government that they are now going to have less than they had before. I think that there are great improvements that can be made with regard to eligibility and ensuring that those who are getting entitlements are truly in need of them and justified in getting them. There are corrections that can be made, such as our own Inspector General's finding out in the last 6 months that 8,500 and this is not the final check, this was just on a first check, partial check that 8,500 social security recipients have been receiving checks for an average of 7 years, that they have been dead that long. ENTITY, one of the measures that you supported last year in budget cutting was the elimination of 13 extra weeks of jobless compensation. With the unemployment rate now at 8.9 percent and some predictions it'll go higher do you see any chance that you might support a move to restore that extra 13 weeks? Well, this is one that I just do not think I could give you an answer on this, because we have not discussed that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2695, "text": "That is, there is been no discussion of this, and I have not seen the facts or figures on that. Also, on the unemployment picture you were asked, I think, at the press conference about what did you plan to do about the 17 percent rate among blacks, and you pointed to the local newspaper and said you'd made it a point to count the number of pages in the want ads, 24 pages. And then you said that you needed to get more qualified people to apply for those jobs, and you would do what you could to see that there were more qualified people. Do you have a specific program in mind? Well, we have been working with this national task force that we have on voluntarism, and they have been discussing some plans that employ a combination of government and private for this. Now, there are a number of programs that are going forward. For example, in five States, started by the governments which ought to restore some people's faith that our turning back of things to the State governments is not in these five States they have started programs, not statewide, but in several important, key cities as an experiment and a very successful one so far in which the private sector is involved in taking the least likely to succeed seniors in high school into job training programs. They do not go for the best they do not , those they figure but they found some actual statistics of the percentage of high school students that were you could really conceive that they were going to have trouble when they got out and they probably were not going to go on to any additional education in college or anything. And 60 percent of them wind up within 2 years on welfare. So, they started this experiment, and it has been, I think it is something like up in the 90 percent of salvage of these students who were judged by their associates and their teachers and so forth to be the least likely to make it. But you do not have a specific government program in mind at the time to do anything? Well, only to the extent of as I say, right now the government is working with the private sector on some programs of this type. And it is a little premature for me now to say what they are doing or how they are succeeding. You are going to comment on this in your State of the Union? Will this be in your State of the Union?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2696, "text": "On another matter, in bringing Bill Clark here as your assistant for national security you brought a longtime associate and close friend who, other White House officials say, will have enormous influence beyond this area of national security, both because of this rapport with you and because he knows so many other people in the administration. Can you comment on that? And do you see the so called troika that people say runs the White House will now be transformed into a quartet? And I think that you will find that the job that Bill Clark has, that is a round the clock job, and he is working very well in that position. Now, we had always planned well, not always, but I mean recently planned having started on one system before there was ever any thought of a change of personnel, we were looking toward a more direct access on the foreign policy matter. We found that what we had, the system we were working with was more cumbersome than it had to be. So, that change is already taking place. But he obviously discusses matters other than national security with you, does not he?  With the state of the world today, I could tell you honestly, every conversation he and I have had has been on national security. Speaking of the state of the world, some people in the Pentagon are worried that after a year or two, because of the realities and pragmatism of economics and politics, that your commitment to a defense buildup may slack off and that you will not be able to carry through with the big defense spending that you are now planning to. How committed are you to carrying forth with a No, I am committed to The ENTITY I do not think that the people I think they sense it; they did all during the campaign that we are not where we should be with regard to our ability and security, and we are not. That window of vulnerability term that we used, that exists. But I am optimistic that there can come a day when we can slack off, if we are successful, in what I believe goes along with this. And that is true, legitimate, verifiable arms reductions of our adversaries, such as the Soviet Union. Now, up till now, my criticism of the negotiations that have been held, such as the SALT talks, my criticism was that on one side of the table sat the Soviet Union in the midst of an enormous the greatest that man has ever seen in the buildup of their military.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2697, "text": "And they were seeing us across the table in these recent years, unilaterally disarming, which meant that all we could do to them was ask them, Why do not you do it, too? They did not have to give up anything. And we were already giving it up voluntarily. Now, as we go forward with our program, the Soviet Union realizes they are no longer going to have that free ride. And I believe since they have strained their economy to the limit, they are not really able to adequately provide their people with consumer goods and food, because everything is devoted to the military buildup. So, strained to the limit as they are and suddenly faced with the prospect of maybe trying to have to match the great industrial capacity of the United States now turning to a military buildup, that we can get legitimate reductions in arms. Do you think that is likely in the next 3 or 4 years, in your term? Well, I think it is going to take a while to build up, but we have started in Geneva with the intermediate range missile program. Now, if we had not gone forward with a program of promising missiles and cruise missiles to our NATO allies to match the SS 20's and 4's and 5's that the Soviet has based, targeted on Europe, they could wipe Europe out. But now, faced with our buildup in which we will put a deterrent force in Europe aimed at their cities, they are willing to sit down in Geneva and have a meeting with us on this. Where would we be in those kind of talks if we were sitting there with no plan of a deterrent force at all and simply asking them to give up their SS 20's? What you are saying is you are going full speed ahead on the arms buildup, at least until we get a verifiable arms control pact. Yes, until things can develop that we can in other words, I am very willing to talk arms reduction. legitimate arms reduction. But let me tell you what out of the SALT talks, to illustrate what I was talking about. I have been given figures that if the SALT II treaty had been ratified, it would have permitted the Soviet Union to add to its arsenal nuclear explosive power equal to what we dropped on Hiroshima every 11 minutes for the life of the SALT II treaty. Now, how do you call that strategic arms limitation?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2698, "text": "On a corollary issue, do you see any circumstances where you might approve of a peacetime draft, reassess your opposition that could please the allies? My change of mind on the registration was only because I had accepted, as most people did, even when the head of the Selective Service himself testified in 1980 that that rather costly operation would only shorten mobilization time by a few days. However, I have now since and greater study has been made and the information has been brought to me that, no, we can shorten mobilization by as much as 45 days. I will continue the registration. The peacetime draft we have now seen an upgrading in the type of personnel enlisting, an increase in the numbers, an increase in the numbers who have reenlisted. There is an entirely different spirit in the armed services, and I believe that the voluntary military, which has been traditional in our country, other than in wartime, will work. If there were anything at all you said, could anything make it peacetime I would have to hark back to the days preceding World War II, and there for the first time we instituted a peacetime draft. But the rest of the world was at war; the whole world was going up in flames. And so, hypothetically you'd have to say there could be a situation where you thought the risk was so imminent that you might do this. But I do not see that risk as imminent now, and I am philosophically opposed and practically opposed to the peacetime draft. But are you concerned though that there is sort of a growing movement in the United States of people who do not seem to take seriously the warning that you have given about the Soviet buildup and who do not think that we should be preparing for the possibility of a nuclear war? And what can you do to convince the American people that you are right about that? We tried one thing. We put out that booklet, that pamphlet Well, yes, and a great many of those skeptics are people that I think could be described as figures do not lie, but liars figure. I think the skeptics are wrong, and I think they are doing a disservice to the country and to the people of this country, because our situation is dangerous. Is it more dangerous now, do you think, than in recent years? I mean, in the past year or so has the world situation changed so much that it is more dangerous?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2699, "text": "Well, our own deterioration had continued right on down to when we took office and then started to reverse it. We have now put into operation the first realistic buildup of forces and strategic forces in over 20 years. May I ask you a question on another subject? David Stockman, your budget director, is a very important figure in your economic program in the first year. Of course, he offered his resignation after the article in the Atlantic Monthly criticizing your program came out. A lot of Republicans not just Democrats but Republicans have said he is lost his credibility on Capitol Hill. In view of that, do you expect him to continue as budget director throughout your term?  But he still lost credibility though? Recently, in the last efforts up on the Hill there on the thing of getting the continuation that we wanted for covering these months and so forth, he was the man with the figures and the man that certainly our side was relying on. And I had any number of them come down and say that they would have been lost without him. Is he going to resume dealing with Democrats, because he has not been doing that since the article came out, according to Congressman Jim Jones, the chairman of the House Budget Committee. Well, maybe he was speaking from a partisan standard. I would not have seen where there was much of a need lately. He will be involved now as we go forward with the as we present the 1983 budget. Do not you think that the Democrats are waiting in ambush for him when he comes on Capitol Hill next time, with the information from the Atlantic Monthly article? I think that they are laying and waiting ambush for me. Stockman said that it is not uncommon for him, when he is preparing our budget, not to be talking to Democrats. I have got to ask you an environment question. When you became Governor of California, people were very concerned about your environmental positions. So, the first thing you did was appoint as your resources secretary, Livermore, who had great environmental credentials from the Sierra Club ENTITY, and he gave you environmental credentials. You did just the opposite here, it seems in many people's view. You appointed a guy Interior Secretary who is perceived to be the extremist on the developmental side. And I am wondering, do you have second thoughts about maybe the way the environmental issues were handled? And, George, let me remind you of something. But a lot of people do not fancy Watt as that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2700, "text": "I know, except that I can remember when a man from the Federal Environmental Protection Agency came to Sacramento to make a speech toward the end of my terms there and said that California was ahead of the National Government in what it had done. That is why I am wondering whether you might have second thoughts about what you have done here. No, let me point something out. It was considered to be autonomous, and no one could control it. And if you remember, there were always battles going on in the State because if they decided this is where the highway's going to go, they did not care whether it went through a grove of redwoods. Do you remember Pat Brown once saying, when it was going to go through a grove of redwoods, Well, we will plant some more ? And the people were very well, one of the first things I did when I got in was make a change in the highway commission and dictated that if a slight curve was necessary to preserve an historical monument or something unique, like a grove of trees or a beauty spot or something, they'd make the slight curve. And the result was that California won in 9 out of 13 national awards for highway building that preserved the environment and historical artifacts and so forth. How about all that offshore drilling that your administration has to do now? We were the ones who stopped the offshore drilling until we were satisfied after the oil spill and the oil spill was Federal, not State. And, George, the head of the oil company told me afterward, he was not he had risen to his point from the commercial end of it, not from the engineering end and he said what he had learned in that whole thing was that had they been drilling outside the limit, under the State regulations instead of the Federal, there'd never have been a blowout. No, because and I wonder why everyone I saw again, that was was it 60 Minutes or someone did the thing on Watt and the million petitions that the Sierra Club got, asking for his resignation. Why has not anyone mentioned that in response to that, a petition of over 7 million signatures was brought in wanting him retained? I think that what happened, and what happened in our own State was and I was seeing it happen that the environmental movement there .had not been such a thing before our administration. It started during my terms as Governor. I do not say I started it it started. But it got out of control. And we had environmental extremism that was going beyond all bounds of reason.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2701, "text": "And I felt that way then, and I feel that way now. And I think that Jim Watt he is not going to destroy the environment, but he is going to restore some common sense. ENTITY, Larry's waving us out of here, so may I ask you one very quick question and make it a couple of parts? One, did the assassination attempt in any way sort of change your outlook on the Presidency and what you, you know, on how you are proceeding in your job, how you look toward the future? And most of your aides say you really enjoy the job here. Do you really enjoy the job and do you miss the California weather very much? Oh, well, I think anyone from California is kind of perpetually homesick. I am, and particularly because California means to me that ranch, which I love very much, and that kind of life and all. But, yes, I enjoy it. I have talked for so many years without ever thinking that I would ever do anything except when I say talk, make speeches; you know, I have always described it that in Hollywood, if you did not sing or dance, you ended up as an afterdinner speaker about the things that I felt should be corrected. And it was the same thing I discovered as Governor, that the satisfaction in being able instead of just talking to cope with them and try to get things changed yes, I like very much. So, we can expect you to be running for reelection in 1984? Well, I have always said the people tell you that, whether you So the people tell you you should run? Will you talk about how the assassination attempt really changed any way you look at life or the way you approached your job or the way you feel about things? Well, I think you are more aware, and I am also very aware that the Lord certainly was watching out for me on that day. Yeah, does it give you some sense of redoubling your efforts to do what you are trying to do as ENTITY, or is that As I say, I think that He has the first claim on my time from now on. You were going to ask a question, I thought. I was just going to follow up and ask one there. I also was really wondering if we have got half a second to ask you about you were talking about the danger that the country is in and the threat of nuclear war. What is your personal view of the intentions of the Soviet Union?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2702, "text": "Do you think, as some people do, that they are primarily a sort of a defensive, fearful country, looking in Afghanistan and Poland for buffers, or do you think they still have an appetite for other people's territory? Well, I think there is a combination of both. At least they talk a great deal about their fear that the world is going to close in on them, but the other, you cannot deny that the Marxian theory and Lenin's theory and every Soviet leader since has at some time or other publicly reaffirmed his dedication to this and that is that Marxism, the theory, can only succeed when the entire world has become Communist. So is it a little naive, perhaps, to think that if we just reassure them, placate them, that they will moderate their They have got to, and maybe the failures of their own system, which make them dependent on the rest of us for help as they are maybe this will help them see the fallacy of this. But this is why I mean it is a combination not only of fear; it is not just defense. They believe that that religion of theirs, which is Marxist Leninism, requires them to support world revolution and bring about the oneworld Communist state. And they have never denied that. And we have to, you feel, have to contain that, have to stop that, not just in places like Poland but in Africa Yes, because I they have proven that their system is not of increased freedom. It is one of dictation. Can anyone say that the Tsar any more repressive on the Soviet people than this regime is? Did the aristocracy in the old days, did they have any different elevation of luxury over the peasantry than the hierarchy has over the average Soviet citizen, the so called masses, today? Beach homes on the Black Sea, private jets, helicopters, country homes outside, special stores where only they can purchase the certain special kind of goods they have created an aristocracy. What is ever happened to that equality of man that they teach? Incidentally, since it is almost time that you will be hearing it anyway why did not you, in your interview, ask about yesterday's press conference and the fuss about the number of unemployed in '80 and '81? Well, we will ask about it. In fact and the others were right. But the others compare the number of unemployed in December 1980 and December 1981. But the figures that are normally taken are the average for the year.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithreportersfromthelosangelestimes", "title": "Ronald Reagan Interview With Reporters From the Los Angeles Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-reporters-from-the-los-angeles-times", "publication_date": "20-01-1982", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2703, "text": "First of all, let us talk about why you came, and that is Medicare. And you know I mean, this is something that is been important to you for a long time getting Medicare, part of the prescription drug program included in Medicare. Talk about why that is so important to have that. Well, Medicare is a program that is 35 years old, and it is been a godsend for 35 years for a lot of our seniors. But when it was established, most of medicine was about doctors and hospitals and very little about prescription drugs. Now, the average 65-year-old has a life expectancy of 82 or 83 years, the highest in the world for seniors. And more and more, people need these drugs to stay alive and also to stay healthy. Over and above that, America has about 5 million people on disability who are eligible for Medicare, and they need the medicine even more. So what we have been saying is, Look, we have got this surplus. We have the money. We should add a voluntary prescription drug benefit to Medicare, because we have, all over America, seniors who are choosing every week between food and medicine because they cannot pay their medical bills and because there is no other viable way to give them the medicine they need. So I proposed this program, and I told the American people how we can add a prescription drug benefit to Medicare, still have a family tax cut, still invest in education, and keep paying us out of debt. I think that it is so critical to provide for the elderly and disabled in America. Do you think it will happen before you leave office? I think the problem is the Republicans in the Congress believe that the program might be too expensive, although it is not nearly as expensive as their combined tax cuts, and they want they also want a private insurance plan. But the bill they passed is just like one that got passed in Nevada, and not a single insurance company would offer the drug coverage because they knew they could not offer it at an affordable price. Now, what is really going on here is that the pharmaceutical companies that make the drugs, they have reservations about it because they are afraid that if you put 39 million seniors, including 2.7 million seniors in Florida and 5 million disabled people, if you look at all of them and a significant percentage of them get in one program, that the people buying drugs for that one program will have too much marketing power, and they will get the drugs for too cheap.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkellyringwtvttelevisiontampa", "title": "Interview With Kelly Ring of WTVT Television in Tampa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kelly-ring-wtvt-television-tampa", "publication_date": "31-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2704, "text": "Because what happens is, our pharmaceutical companies charge Americans more for drugs to cover all the research costs in America. Then they can sell them much, much cheaper in Canada or Mexico. You have seen all these press stories about people going there. Now, I just think that is not a very good reason to deprive senior citizens of medicine, and I do not think it is a partisan issue outside Washington. I think out here in Tampa or in Arkansas or New York or California, nobody asks you what party you are in when you go to the drugstore to buy medicine. In Washington, it is become part of an issue because the drug companies are against providing prescription drug coverage for Medicare. Let us talk about the importance of Florida for this Presidential election. We have a Republican Governor popular. His brother is running, but tell me what the Democrats are going to do to win Florida. For one thing, I think we have worked very hard here for 8 years. We brought the Southern Command to Miami. We brought the Summit of the Americas to Florida. We worked on the plan to save the Florida Everglades. We have worked on trade policy. Our trade policy has helped a lot of Florida economic sectors. I was just here with Congressman Davis meeting with people from the Tampa area who would benefit greatly from the opening of trade to China. So I think we have got a strong record to run on. If you look at Tampa when I became ENTITY, unemployment here was 7.1 percent. So, first we are going to run on our record. It is been good for America and good for Florida, and Al Gore will continue that economic policy, and I think that is important. Then, the second thing I think is just what we have to do is get out the differences on the issues. For example, Senator Graham has a bill of his own to provide prescription drugs for seniors that is a little different from ours but essentially in the same ballpark. And I know how much credibility he has with the Florida voters. So we can talk about Medicare, and we can talk about education, and we can talk about paying the debt off. I think when you see the Vice President and his running mate and Bill Nelson and all of these other Democrats out there just having a conversation with the people, we do not have to have a mean election this year. This year the economy is in great shape. The country is doing well, and we ought to have an old-fashioned citizenship lesson in this election.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkellyringwtvttelevisiontampa", "title": "Interview With Kelly Ring of WTVT Television in Tampa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kelly-ring-wtvt-television-tampa", "publication_date": "31-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2705, "text": "And it is like you said in the speech a little while ago, you are talking about the differences. Well, I think it is because they know that there is a tendency in the country to give the other crowd a chance after they have been out a while, and they know that Governor Bush is an immensely charming, attractive man, and Mr. Cheney, Congressman Cheney, is a very nice man and has had Washington experience. So what they want to do is to seem safe and reliable and compassionate and inclusive. So they are not going to be up there saying, Vote for us. Our favorite Supreme Court judges are Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia, and we are going to repeal Roe v. Wade, but that is what is going to happen. But they are not going to say that. They are not going to be up there saying, Vote for us. We want to weaken air pollution laws on the chemical industry, or, Vote for us. We want to make sure that we do not have a Medicare prescription drug program that works, or, Vote for us. We are going to give all your money away in tax cuts, and we will have higher interest rates and a deficit. But what I think is important is, they should be able to defend their policies, but what they want to do is to obscure the differences. I see this as I travel from State to State now. They accuse the Democrats of running negative campaigns if they have advertisements pointing out how the Republicans voted. It is like they are almost saying, We have a right to obscure our record from the people if you want. What I think the voters need is clarity of difference. Let them state the differences honestly, but do not pretend the differences do not exist, because an election is a choice, and choices have consequences. And the American people should know the choice, know the consequences, and then make up their mind. And what we should do is to say, Hey, this country is in great shape now, and we have a unique moment in history to make the most of our prosperity. So we will bring our ideas; they will bring theirs. Let us clarify the differences. Let us do not say bad things about our opponents. Let us assume everybody is patriotic, loves their family, loves their country, is honest, and would do what they have said they would do. But let us do not pretend that they did not say they would do some of the things they said they would do.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkellyringwtvttelevisiontampa", "title": "Interview With Kelly Ring of WTVT Television in Tampa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kelly-ring-wtvt-television-tampa", "publication_date": "31-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2706, "text": "Let us just clarify the differences, and let the people make their mind up. That is my whole theory of the election. Now that you are in the last few months of your Presidency, your wife is just beginning her own political career. I am very proud of her. I know you are so proud of her. But on the other side, politics is mean- spirited. How do you feel about that? It hurts me. I get more nervous about her than I ever did about me, and everybody that always hated me all those years and were so mean to me, they have all transferred all their anger to her now. It is almost as if they have got one last chance to beat me. And then there are some people who voted for me that think they are mad at her because she is running in New York, and we just bought a home there. All I can say to them is, it was not her idea. The New York Democratic House delegation came to her and asked her to run. And before she said she would do it, she said, I am going to go up there and look around, talk to people, and see if I could serve. She spent almost a year doing that, and then finally she decided that she would like to serve if they wanted her to. So I think if we can get this election again in a position where they just look at who is got the greatest strength, who is got the ability to do more, and which candidate do they agree, I think she will do fine. I am really proud of her, though. As you said, it makes you very nervous thinking about what she is getting into. I guess when you are in a campaign, you do not have time to think about it. But I spend a lot more time worrying about her than I ever did worrying about myself when I was out there running. I feel like I just wake up every day wishing I could do something else to help. What are you going to do when you leave office? Everybody's talked about all kinds of things, and I know you probably have not decided yet. Well, I am going to build a library and a public policy center at home in Arkansas. I know I am going to do that. And I will be there a couple of days a week. And then I will probably be with Hillary a couple of days a week in New York.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkellyringwtvttelevisiontampa", "title": "Interview With Kelly Ring of WTVT Television in Tampa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kelly-ring-wtvt-television-tampa", "publication_date": "31-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2707, "text": "And then, of course, she will have to work in Washington if this election goes well, and I believe it will. So I will just decide what to do. There are a lot of things that I have in mind to do, but I do not think I really should make final decisions until after I leave here. What I want to do is to spend every last waking moment I can doing as much as I can for the people of America. When I lay the job down, then I would like to rest a bit and have a clear head and decide what to do. I will try to find something to do to be useful for the rest of my life. I think I will be able to find something to do. You are so young, so you have got so many opportunities. You have got to be so proud of your daughter, Chelsea. I mean, we reported last week she is made a decision to take a break and spend time with you that is wonderful and to help her mom campaign. When your children grow up I can say, now that I have this experience you are always mildly surprised when they still want to spend time with you and completely relieved and happy. So you know, she is lived 40 percent of her life in the White House. She is 20, and she was just, when we came here in '92, she was still 12 years old. She was actually I mean, in '93 she was still 12 years old. She had her 13th birthday in the White House, in February. She wanted to help her mother some; she wanted to be with me when I would otherwise be alone; and like, she went up to Camp David with me and stayed the whole 15 days and kept everybody in a good humor. She flew to Okinawa with me, and she did a great job. And I think the third thing she wants is just to be in a place that has been her home for nearly half her life, every night she can be. Because she knows when she leaves, it is for good, you know, and she will never be back, I mean, as a resident. So I think it is a very smart decision for her, and I am thrilled. I mean, everybody's fallen in love with her. I think she is an unusual young woman, and we are very proud of her and very grateful. You know, tomorrow she and her mother are going to Long Island together. They will have a big time.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkellyringwtvttelevisiontampa", "title": "Interview With Kelly Ring of WTVT Television in Tampa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kelly-ring-wtvt-television-tampa", "publication_date": "31-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2708, "text": "One more can I ask about Mid East peace, because I know how important that is? You spent 3 tough weeks. Do you ever foresee a time when there is going to be peace in the region, and is Jerusalem the sticking point there? The answer to both questions is basically yes. I think yes, I think there will be peace in the region; yes, Jerusalem is the most difficult issue. They did not agree on everything else, but they are close enough that I think that we can still get an agreement. Just a few hours ago, before we sat down for this interview, the Barak government, Prime Minister Barak's government in Israel was confirmed in a no confidence vote; that is, they did not vote him out of office. So I think now, we just have to see if we can get some movement from the Palestinians, as well, and see if we can put this thing together again. If they want it, they can get it, because they are close enough now. They can get it. And I saw something after we had been there 2 weeks sort of the body language that the Israelis and the Palestinians, the way they relate to each other. They know each other. They call each other by their first names. They know they are neighbors, whether they like it or not. And they know their children are going to have to be partners and hopefully friends; and I think they will find a way. I do believe that. I think it is just a question of making sure that we keep pushing them. When you deal with issues this difficult and this painful, it is like going to the dentist without having your gums deadened. You are not going to do it unless somebody herds you on, and you do it. But the calendar is working against them a little bit, because they have pledged to finish by the 13th of September. And that puts all kind of pressure, especially on the Palestinians. They have got to do everything they can to get as much as they can done over the next 6 weeks. They have got to make the decisions and live with them, but we will do everything we can to help. Will you try to bring them back to Camp David? It is too premature to make a decision. What I will try to do is do whatever I can to get the peace process up and going and to bring it to a speedy conclusion.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithkellyringwtvttelevisiontampa", "title": "Interview With Kelly Ring of WTVT Television in Tampa", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-kelly-ring-wtvt-television-tampa", "publication_date": "31-07-2000", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2717, "text": "ENTITY, it is nice to see you. I have had the pleasure, as you know, to sit down with you one-on-one a few times in the past, and so I know that asking you to make a prediction is like wasting my time. So I am not going to ask you to predict anything about tomorrow's elections, but let me ask you, on a scale of 1 to 10, if I can, 10 being confident, 1 being apprehensive, how do you feel about tomorrow on this election eve? And I will tell you why. If you look at it, first of all, in the House of Representatives, there are probably 36 elections that could go either way. And in my opinion, it will depend overwhelmingly on the turnout. Then there are in the Senate seven, perhaps eight, elections that could go either way, depending on the turnout. It is clear to me that our message has resonated with the American people, though we have been at an enormous, enormous financial disadvantage, the largest in my lifetime. The Republican committees-the Senate committee, the House committee, and the national committee raised over $100 million more than their Democratic counterparts in these last 2 years. I feel good about it, but it depends upon who votes. You mentioned just a moment ago that this may be the election where the imbalance has been greatest with regard to fundraising in your lifetime, Republican and Democrat, that you have been involved in. Speaking of your lifetime, let me ask you whether or not it would be fair for me or anyone else to suggest that this election is not just important to the country, it is not just important to African-Americans, but it is, in fact, quite important to ENTITY. Would I be wrong in my assessment that this may be the most important election day of your entire political career? No, I do not agree with that. No, no, it is not the most important election in my career. But it is very important to me because it will determine how much I can do for the American people in the next 2 years. We did very well here in this budget this year. We got a downpayment on our 100,000 teachers; we got programs for hundreds of thousands of kids after school; we fended off a Republican attempt to raid the surplus before we fixed Social Security.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2718, "text": "And there is so much we still have to do that if we got a few more Democrats here, we could pass this Patients' Bill of Rights; we could have modernized schools and 100,000 more teachers; we could raise the minimum wage; we could secure Social Security; we could reform Medicare in the right way; we could do something for child care; we could do more for the areas of our country which still have not felt the economic recovery. And so the last 2 years of my Presidency, I think, would be far more focused on progress, as opposed to this Washington partisan politics. So I would like it very much. It is terribly important to me. But the most important elections were the election and reelection in '92 and '96. Let me follow up on that, and again I ask this respectfully, and I will move on. The reason I asked that question in the first place is because you and I both know what you personally have at stake, what personally is riding on this election tomorrow. And you mentioned that the two most important elections were the one when you were elected in '92 and, of course, reelected in '96. And I would expect you to say that. But the reason why I asked whether or not you felt there was more riding on tomorrow is precisely because this election, depending on the outcome, could be the beginning of the undoing, the unraveling of what those two elections were all about. And I hope that the American people will turn out, and I hope that the electorate tomorrow will reflect what we know the electorate as a whole feels. The American people as a whole want us to put this partisanship behind us, want us to get back to their business. They think altogether too much time is spent in Washington on the considerations of the politics of Washington and altogether too little time spent on the real problems and the real opportunities of people out there in the country. So I agree with that, and I think that they can do a lot tomorrow to reduce partisanship and to increase progress if they all show up. It is really a function of whether the people who show up tomorrow are fairly reflective of what all the research and all our instincts, mine and everybody else's, tell us where the American people as a whole are.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2719, "text": "We will move on and ask a couple of questions that I admit at the outset I am somewhat apprehensive in asking, but I ask them because they are things that you have spoken about in the past, and I want to give you a chance to expound and extrapolate, if you will. You have talked in the past a great deal about atonement, leading up to this election day tomorrow. one, atoning as ENTITY, and secondly, atoning as a husband and a father. With regard as atoning as ENTITY, you promised to work harder to be a better ENTITY. the budget deal with Congress; the historic peace agreement between Israel and Palestine; I note last Friday the G- 7 nations agreed on your proposal to put money into markets that are jittery at the moment. You are on a roll, domestically and internationally, with regard to that atonement issue and your being ENTITY. What you have not talked about much lately- and I want to give you a chance to respond if you so choose-is how the atonement process is coming along with regard to your being a husband and a father. I have not talked about it deliberately, because I think that it ought to be a private matter between me and my family. All I can tell you is I am working at it very hard, and I think it is terribly important. It is more important than anything else in the world to me- more important than anything else in the world. But I think the less I say about it, the better. I think one of the things that I hope will come out of the reassessment of this whole business is a conviction again, which I believe the American people already have, that even people in public life deserve some measure of private space within which to have their family lives and to deal with their-both the joys and the trials of their personal lives. So I do not think I should say more about it except that I am working at it. I respect that. As you know, there was not a single reference-not a single reference-to Whitewater, as your White House staff and the entire Clinton administration reminds us every day-not a single reference to Whitewater in the Starr report. On the eve of this election day, though, it occurs to me that you still, though, have not been, despite that reality, you still have not been officially exonerated with regard to the Whitewater matter.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2720, "text": "I am wondering whether or not that frustrates you in any way, whether you are bothered by the fact that there was not anything in the report but you still have not been officially exonerated. Well, I think the American people should draw some comfort from the fact that after 4 years and $40 million, reviewing all my checks, contributions, and the pressure- the extraordinary pressure a lot of people were put under to say things damaging, that nothing has come out. That is because neither my wife or I did anything wrong. And eventually that will become clear to the American people. I hope it will become clear sooner rather than later, but I know that. I knew that in the beginning. I knew it from the start. And so I am at peace about that, and I will just have to let what others do be a matter for them to decide. A vast rightwing conspiracy - I am sure you have heard those words somewhere before- a vast rightwing conspiracy, of course, uttered by your wife on the Today show a few months ago. Number one, as I just suggested, the Starr report has come out with embarrassing, lurid, salacious details, and no mention of Whitewater; we have since had a straight party-line partisan vote in the House to move forward with this impeachment inquiry; thirdly, the Washington Post tells us last week that the Speaker of the House, Mr. Gingrich himself, was behind these personal attack ads against you. I am wondering, in light of that, and a number of other things I am sure you could list, but those are three things that come to my mind-I am wondering whether now we can reassess the First Lady's comments and ask whether or not Hillary Rodham Clinton was right when she suggested that there is, in fact, a vast rightwing conspiracy. Well, I think the facts speak for themselves, and as more facts come out, they will speak for themselves. The only thing I would say is there is a sort of a permanent political class in Washington that tends to thrive on such matters because they are not affected by what I came here to do. In other words, most of these people, it does not matter to them whether there is a Patients' Bill of Rights or not, to make sure doctors, instead of accountants, make health care decisions. It certainly does not matter to them whether there is a minimum wage increase.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2721, "text": "It does not matter to them whether we have 100,000 more teachers and modernized schools. It does not matter to them whether we save Social Security for the 21st century. So there is a group in America where the acquisition of political power is more important than the purpose for which it is used. To me, I never came here to be part of that permanent political class. I did not come-I am not a Washington person, in that sense. My whole goal was to use these precious years the American people have given me to deal with the challenges facing our country. I have done my best to do it, to move our country forward and to bring our country together. And I have to say, I think I have not really succeeded in reconciling the political parties in Washington. But to me, that is what is going on here. This is a question of whether you have got politics or people as your top goal. That phrase, a vast rightwing conspiracy, would seem to suggest on some level that there is a visceral hatred, if you will, of Bill and Hillary Clinton in this city by some folk. You buy that? Let me ask you, first of all, if you buy that, ENTITY. And number two, if you buy that, let me just ask you in a very point-blank and direct way-and I am not so sure I have ever heard you asked this question before, so maybe I am a revolutionary here, I do not know, maybe I am not-why do they hate you so much? Again, I think that people whose whole life is whether or not they are in or out of power, rather than what they do with power when they get it, do not like it when they are out. And a lot of these people really never thought there would be another Democratic in our lifetimes. And all the things they said about Democrats-that we could not run the economy, that we could not balance the budget, that we could not deal responsibly with welfare, that we could not be tough and smart on crime, that we could not be strong on foreign policy- all those things that they told the American people about Democrats generally over decades turned out not to be true. And we now have 6 years of evidence that it is not true. So there are some, again, whose life is solely-they evaluate themselves solely on whether they are in or out, who are very angry about that. And I am sorry for them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2722, "text": "I am not even angry at them anymore. I am just sorry, because I believe that there are people in the Republican Party who are good people, who have honest differences of opinion with me, that I can work with, and we could have these debates and work through to have a good, positive result. I think-but the ones that are consumed with personal animosity toward me or toward Hillary, I think, are just angry because they thought they and their crowd would always be able to drive up to the West Wing to work every day. To me, I just never thought of it that way. To me, every hour I serve here is an honor and a gift. But I never thought of myself as someone whose whole life was evaluated based on whether you were in or out. I think it is what you do when you are in that counts. Speaking of what you do while you are in that counts, there are a significant number of African-Americans who feel that part of the reason why this hatred exists, part of the reason why this animosity exists, part of the reason why this friction exists between you and them is because you have been not just friendly to black folk and people of color-a lot of folk are friendly to black folk, and they speak and pat you on the back and stop by your fundraiser and your dinner-it is not just that you are friendly to black folk, it is that you appear downright comfortable with black folk and other people of color, and women, for that matter. I am wondering whether or not, with regard to the issues, you think that the reason why this hatred exists is because you have been so comfortable, so open, so accepting of diversity. Toni Morrison, as I am sure you know, recently in the New Yorker magazine wrote that you are the first-ENTITY is the first black ENTITY. There are lot of black folk who feel that way about you. I love that. might that be part of the reason why people do not like you, because you are just so friendly and so open to this concept of diversity? I honestly do not know the answer to that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2723, "text": "I can tell you that I have watched over time, since I was a little boy, and we had all the racial troubles in the South when I was a kid- from that day to the present moment, where I am trying to stop a disaster in Kosovo from occurring, and then we have dealt with Northern Ireland and the Middle East and tribal warfare in Africa and all these things-there are many different kinds of people in the world, but there are certainly two different kinds. There are those which draw their strength and identity from what they are not and who they are not , and they feel more secure when they know they are in a more dominant position over others. And then there are people who believe that they are more secure and stronger when they are unified with others, when they are connecting with people, when they are reaching across the lines that divide, and they do not feel threatened by the success of people who are totally different from them. And I was raised by my mother and by my grandparents to be in that latter group. And I do not claim any credit for it. And this racial issue, to me, it goes way back before I was ever in politics. It is been a passion of a lifetime. I think my life is more interesting, more fun, more fulfilled because I have been able to reach out and have friends of different races and different backgrounds. And I just thank God that I was put in a position of political influence for a period of time where I could help more people to come into that mainstream of American life. I think this country is better off, and I think people individually are better off when they are connecting with people who are different from them. To me, that is one of the things that makes life interesting. So it may be that that is a source of anger and animosity toward me. But if it is, I have gotten a lot more from this than I have paid for it. I cannot imagine any more important job for ENTITY right now than trying to unify this country across racial lines. And while you have enjoyed a great deal of support-overwhelming, in fact-in the African-American community, there are some black folk who think that you have not been liberal enough. You are not the most liberal ENTITY, let us face it, that we have ever had.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2724, "text": "There are some folk who think that the black community still is taken for granted by the Democratic Party; that we are blindly loyal to the Democratic Party; that the Democratic Party wants black votes, but they do not put the resources they ought to put to secure those black votes, and then the weekend before election day everybody comes running to the black community begging for support. What do you say to folk who think-black folk, particularly-who think that they are being taken advantage of, being taken for granted by the Democratic Party, and that too many of us, quite frankly, are blindly loyal, as black folk, to the Democratic Party? I would say a couple of things. First of all, I do not think the evidence supports that in my case. I mean, in these 6 years, whether you measure it by Cabinet members, by 54 Federal judges, by any other standard, I have tried to make black Americans an integral part of our national life and my administration. Secondly, if you look at the record here- there are those who say I am not liberal enough. Let us talk about that in two different ways. This economic policy I have pursued and the special efforts that we have made through empowerment zones and community development banks and other initiatives-housing initiatives in the inner city-has given us the highest homeownership in history, the highest African-American small-business ownership in history, the lowest African-American poverty ever recorded, more access to college than ever before. So I think that if you just look at that, I think the evidence is clear. Now, there are those who say that I was wrong to sign the welfare bill that I signed. But I vetoed the welfare bills that would have taken food and medical guarantees away from poor children and families. The bill I signed simply says that every State has to make an effort to get able-bodied people in the workplace, and if able-bodied people can go into the workplace, they should not be able to draw public assistance after a certain period of time. I think I was right about that. The crime bill I signed puts 100,000 more police on the street, but it also gives young people programs and ways to stay off the street. Now-so I believe that. Then there are some African-Americans who say that I am not conservative enough because they favor-and they say they favor the Republicans on business grounds. It would be hard to argue that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2725, "text": "We have done more to promote economic activity in the inner city and for African-Americans than anybody ever has. So I actually would like it, believe it or not, someday if we could restore some balance in the party's appeal to the races. But as long as the Republicans follow the policies they are following, and if Democrats will follow the policies I have followed, I think that African-Americans are simply making the right decision based on what is right for their families and children. I think most white Americans ought to be voting for us. The truth is, I think you could make a compelling case that a lot of the non-African-Americans who vote for the Republicans are doing the irrational thing. They are voting against their selfinterest and what is best for our country and what is good and strong for our country. If you listen to what I say-the speech I gave in that Baltimore church yesterday, I could have made that speech in a white church. I could have made that speech to a white civic club. I believe that what I am trying to do is to unify America, not divide it. I know that you are tight on time, and I appreciate your sitting down with me, and I am getting some time cues here, so if I can squeeze out a couple of quick questions. Far be it for me to rush ENTITY off. I'd talk to you for another hour and a half. Let me squeeze out a couple more if I can. When we last sat down-speaking of black folk-when we last sat down one-on-one, just a few months ago, you granted me an exclusive interview in Capetown, South Africa, as you recall. I thank you again for that. One of the questions I was pressing you on that particular day, as you were about to make a trip to Goree Island-I pressed you that day on whether or not when you got to Goree Island you were going to offer an apology for slavery. You made some rather provocative statements, but you did not quite, in the minds of many, offer that apology for slavery. Your race commission, subsequently, has punted, if I could use that phrase, the question of the slavery apology. I am wondering whether or not, since no one seems to want to apologize for slavery, whether or not in your mind that means that this country, America, is unapologetic about slavery.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2726, "text": "First of all, I think Dr. John Hope Franklin, who is the Chairman of my race commission, has enormous credibility with all African-Americans. And I think what he decided was that he did not want-that, in effect, the country had been apologizing for it for over 100 years in the sense that it was abolished after the Civil War by, first, the Emancipation Proclamation of President Lincoln, and then by the passage of the constitutional amendment, the 13th amendment, and then that we had been on this long struggle, that it was self-evident that what we had done was wrong, and that we had been struggling to overcome it, and that all of us-at least virtually all thinking Americans and feeling Americans-were deeply sorry for what had happened and that we were still struggling to overcome it. But I think that Dr. Franklin and the race commission concluded that it might be a diversion from our present task, which is to look at the problems we have today and to figure out how to overcome them, and to recognize, too, that the race issue in America is today and going forward even more complicated because it is not just about black and white Americans; it is about Hispanic-Americans; it is about Asian-Americans; it is about people from South Asia, people from the Middle East. I gave a speech Saturday-a little talk-on my school modernization initiative over in Virginia at an elementary school, where there were children in just this elementary school from 23 different countries. And they said they were very sorry that they could not have simultaneous translation of my remarks in Spanish and Arabic. So what I think the race commission wanted to do was to say, Hey, the overwhelming majority of white Americans regret the whole episode of slavery, have been trying in various ways with fits and starts to overcome it for 100 years, have to continue to try to overcome it, but we should focus now on where we are and where we are going. I asked you earlier how important you thought this election day was for you. I have tried in the few moments that I have had to ask you how important you think it is for black America, specifically. Let me close by asking you how important you think this election is for the entire country tomorrow. And I think it is really a question of what the country wants us to do here. Do they want more of the last 8 months of partisanship, or would they like more progress?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithtavissmileyblackentertainmenttelevision", "title": "Interview With Tavis Smiley of Black Entertainment Television", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-tavis-smiley-black-entertainment-television", "publication_date": "02-11-1998", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2727, "text": "And now, Democratic presidential candidate ENTITY is here with me in Milwaukee. I appreciate your being with me. You just heard Hillary Clinton say your campaigns are talking to each other about another debate. You have asked for one. Of course, as you are aware, earlier today, a Clinton campaign spokesman said your requests for debates are a quote/unquote, publicity stunt. Do you think she is serious about debating you? So I would hope that we would have a good debate. My understanding is she would like to do it in Brooklyn. I was born in Brooklyn. Let us do it! The other big news, of course, you heard at the top of the program, you saw the video today from a Trump rally. But of course, Donald Trump's campaign manager charged with simple battery for an altercation with a reporter recently. Moments ago, he just defended that campaign manager. He said, I know it would be easy for to discard people. I do not discard people. Should Trump fire Corey Lewandowski? Well, let us see what happens in the legal process. He is been charged, and we do not find people guilty until you go through a process. But my campaign manager does not assault female journalists, let me just say that. You know, John Kasich came out and said he would if this had happened to him. He would go ahead and fire his campaign manager. Well, let me just say this. Let me just say this. What has concerned me very much about Donald Trump is the edginess of calls to violence around his campaigns. But he was prepared - or at least indicated that he was prepared -- to pay the legal fees for somebody who quite openly sucker-punched somebody - right, knocked them down. And when you say you are going to pay the legal fees for someone who commits a gross act of violence, what you are really telling your supporters is that violence is okay. But ENTITY, to me, all of that stuff is interesting political stuff. But what we are trying to focus on in this campaign are the issues that impact the American people. One of the key issues that we are dealing with is a rigged economy in which millions of people today are working longer hours for lower wages. Tens of thousands of jobs have been lost because companies shut down here, moved to Mexico, moved to China. We need a trade policy that works for workers, not just the CEOs of large corporations. Now, you are obviously making this case here in Wisconsin.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitherinburnettcnn", "title": "Bernie Sanders Interview with Erin Burnett of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-erin-burnett-cnn", "publication_date": "29-03-2016", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2728, "text": "You have the landslide wins on Saturday, right, in three crucial states. Now you are here in Wisconsin. Absolutely. 96 if you count the ones up for grabs. Are you going to win Wisconsin? I am never into speculation. I will tell you that the night of the election, all right? I will tell you exactly what the results are. But it is silly to be talking about it. We have a lot of volunteers here in the state. We are going to be knocking on doors, we are going to be making phone calls. And our message about the need to create an economy that works for all people is in fact resonating here in Wisconsin. So, one of the arguments you are making on that front, right, is free college. You see, every time I am on a show, somebody says free college. It is free tuition at public colleges and universities. OK, so on that front, though -- because it is important how you word it, your plan -- we have a federalist system. You would be chipping in money to the states, and they would then have the decision to make. Hillary Clinton says that is just not going to happen in a state like Wisconsin. Let me just play what she said, basically about you this afternoon. I mean, Scott Walker turned down half a billion dollars in Obamacare. OK, let me just say the danger - let me just say this. Number one, in the year 2016, we have got to recognize that a college degree is pretty much the equivalent of what a high school degree was 50 years ago. We need to have the best educated work force in the world. Young people should not be denied the opportunity because they do not have the money. Or they should not have to leave school $50,000, $100,000 in debt. Now, what Secretary Clinton said is that Scott Walker may not go along with that. Well, you know what happens to the state of Wisconsin if he does not? California will, Vermont will, states all over this country will, and young, bright people will be leaving Wisconsin. And I think the people of Wisconsin will tell Scott Walker, you know what? This will be a disaster for the future of our state. It is paid for, ENTITY, by a tax on Wall Street's speculation. When Wall Street's illegal behavior destroyed our economy, middle class bailed them out. It is now time for them to help the middle class.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitherinburnettcnn", "title": "Bernie Sanders Interview with Erin Burnett of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-erin-burnett-cnn", "publication_date": "29-03-2016", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2729, "text": "During the midst of the financial crisis when people said, let Bank of America go under. You are not just talking about tens of thousands of people that would have worked for that bank, but also the millions of Americans that have -- own shares of that bank and their 401, their IRA. millions of Americans own stocks now. Middle class Americans who could end up paying for them. No, no, the vast majority of that speculation tax will be paid by upper-income people. And that is the way we have designed it. But at the end of the day, look, this campaign is not your typical campaign. Now, you tell me, if Germany can provide in fact free college education, Scandinavia can do it, other countries around the world can do it, why cannot we do it? Why cannot we have the best educated work force in the world, which we are going to need if our economy is to survive? And let me also add this. I know you do not talk about it too much in the media, but that is the fact. We are talking about trillions of dollars. So yes, I am running for president, and am telling the top one-tenth of one percent they are going to have to pay more in taxes. And just a question, let me take a step back about the whole idea. You say you want the best educated work force. When you look at the top-ranked countries, you are looking at places like Canada, like South Korea, like Japan. All of them require people to pay in most instances about what people pay here for public education. People are going to be paying for Harvard and Yale and all kinds of private schools. The way I see it, ENTITY, is that right now, and for the last hundred years, we have had public education which says that no matter what your income is, right? You are rich or poor, you can go from the first grade to the 12th grade for free. We take it for granted. All I am saying is that in the year 2016, with a radically changing economy, where young people need more education, let us extend that concept beyond the 12th grade through public colleges and universities. ENTITY Sanders is staying with me. We are going to have much more in our exclusive conversation in just a moment in the wake of the terror attacks in Brussels. We are going to talk about that and the fight against ISIS. And we are also going to be counting down, of course, to the town hall for the GOP.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitherinburnettcnn", "title": "Bernie Sanders Interview with Erin Burnett of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-erin-burnett-cnn", "publication_date": "29-03-2016", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2730, "text": "We are live tonight in Milwaukee, Wisconsin where in less than an hour, the three remaining Republican presidential candidates will be going before voters at our town hall across town here and make their case. And of course, right now, I am talking exclusively to ENTITY, who is also come campaigning here in this must-win state up against Hillary Clinton. ENTITY, let us continue our conversation. The open primary here in Wisconsin is important. They can vote for whomever they would like, Democrats, Republicans. We have seen this across the country, people choosing between you and and Donald Trump. Some union workers, we understand here, are deeply considering whether they should vote for you or Donald Trump. What do you say to people who are making that choice? Well, I think we will get the vast majority of the union workers. Trump will get some, but I think we will get a lot more. I think what is going on, ENTITY, is there is a lot of anger in this country. For your average guy, he is asking why he has to work longer hours for lower wages. Why he is really worried or she is worried, mother really about the future of their children. And yet, almost all income and wealth is going to the top 1 percent. What Trump is doing is taking that anger and saying, it is the fault of the Mexicans or it is the fault of the Muslims. We have got to scapegoat people. Well, beating up on Mexicans who make eight bucks an hour is not going to deal with the real issues facing -- Are you, though, blaming rich people for it? We are blaming a economic system right now where factually almost all the income and wealth is going to the top 1 percent. Where you have billionaires and large corporations that are not paying their fair share of taxes; there are some major corporations make billions a year in taxes, stash their money in the Cayman Islands, do not pay a nickel in taxes. And what I want to do is take that money, do away with that loophole, invest it in rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure. We can create 13 million jobs over a five-year period with a trillion-dollar investment. It is not a question of blaming, it is a question of understanding the reality. People on the top are doing phenomenally well; everybody else is doing worse. We have got to change that. Susan Sarandon is a supporter of yours, as you know.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitherinburnettcnn", "title": "Bernie Sanders Interview with Erin Burnett of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-erin-burnett-cnn", "publication_date": "29-03-2016", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2731, "text": "The actress, she said, Some people feel Donald Trump will bring the revolution immediately if he gets in. Is Donald Trump more likely to bring about a revolution in this country -- and you have been having revolutionary talk. I know not of the violent sort, but in terms of making changes in this country. Is he more likely to accomplish that -- Well, I am not sure -- I heard that. I did not really see here Susan's context -- Susan's comment within a broader context. I think Trump will be a disaster for this country. I think the idea of insulting women and veterans and African-Americans and Mexicans and Muslims is precisely what this country does not need and does not want. Look, in every poll that I have seen, including a CNN poll, we were 20 points ahead of Trump. I do not believe Trump is going to become president of the United States. You do win in those head-to-heads, of course, in the polling. We spoke to some female Donald Trump supporters yesterday in Arizona. It was a fascinating conversation about why they do believe in Donald Trump, why they support him. Here is what one of them had to say. Well, it is not only -- no, I do not understand his appeal to women. I do not think he is particularly popular with women in general. You cannot go around insulting women everyday and expect to gain support. But I understand where that woman is coming from. Look, people are sick and tired of establishment politicians. Politicians say one thing, they do another thing. You know, the Congress has a favorability rating of 15 percent or something. And Trump is, of course, very blunt and straightforward. But you have got to look at what he is saying. Does that woman really believe the billionaire class should receive hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks over a 10-year period? I doubt it. Does she not think that we should raise the minimum wage? Does she really think we should insult Muslims all over the world? I do not think she does think that. So, I think the appeal of Trump is his bluntness, is his straightforwardness. And by the way, this guy is a good entertainer. He has done a very good job manipulating the media. He is a professional at that. And he has been successful doing it. So, let me talk about Muslims and the issues that he has brought up on that. I was in Brussels last week.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitherinburnettcnn", "title": "Bernie Sanders Interview with Erin Burnett of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-erin-burnett-cnn", "publication_date": "29-03-2016", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2732, "text": "I spoke to a young man, and it was 10 to 15 people who have gone to Syria to fight with ISIS. I spoke to the brother of the Paris attacker - of one of the Paris attackers a few months ago in Brussels. He told me he knows many young men who are in Syria training to fight with ISIS. And yet, you can still, without a visa, get on a plane in Brussels and fly to the United States. How do you prevent these young men who say their ultimate goal is to attack the United States from coming here without racially profiling, as Donald Trump suggested? You do everything that you can. And that means you have information, and we have -- that is what intelligence services are all over the world. And you share that information. And if people are going to Syria, if they are going to training camps, they are not going to come -- or if they come back into Brussels or they come into the United States, they are going to be arrested in five minutes. We have zero tolerance for people who are going to hurt Americans or people anyplace else in the world. When people -- I know people in Brussels who said my son - one of - the bomber here, they said, my son is in Syria. So if they do not know the names who is there, they do not know who is coming back. No one is saying -- first of all, let us look at the broader issue. They have lost about 40 percent of the territory they controlled. And I believe that if we are smart, if we do a good job in training the Iraqi army, and the Muslim nations, they can be destroyed in a year or two. And second of all, we have got to do everything that with can. No one has any magical solutions. But we do have to improve our intelligence capabilities. We do have to make sure that federal, state and local law enforcement is much better coordinated in preventing these types of attacks. Before we go, federal officials, as you know, this week say they have unlocked the iPhone of one of the shooters in San Bernardino. Now, they had been suing Apple to force Apple to do just that. They figured out how to do it themselves. I know you have said you are fearful of Big Brother in America. Is it a good thing the FBI broke into it? Look, I think that clearly, we need to get all of the information that we can to stop terrorism.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwitherinburnettcnn", "title": "Bernie Sanders Interview with Erin Burnett of CNN", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-erin-burnett-cnn", "publication_date": "29-03-2016", "crawling_date": "30-06-2023", "politician": ["Bernie Sanders"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2733, "text": "We have enjoyed having you. You have been very helpful to us. ENTITY, can you tell us anything about this visit? At the Crown Prince's suggestion, we divided up into groups this morning for a very deep discussion of some of the major issues that bind us together. The Crown Prince and I were alone, and then Secretary Vance had a chance to meet with Prince Saud, who is a foreign minister. And I think that was a much more productive arrangement than we have had in the past. But we discussed a wide range of issues, including future oil pricing prospects and the interrelationships between the OPEC nations and the countries in Africa. We discussed the Horn of Africa and how to keep the Red Sea region peaceful. We discussed the hopes or possibilities for a Middle Eastern peace settlement this year. We had a long discussion about our own involvement in this process. I think that we understand each other very well. And so far as I know, between ourselves and Saudi Arabia there are no disturbing differences at all. So, I think that I have benefited greatly from those meetings. The Crown Prince will now meet with the Senate Committees on Energy and Foreign Relations and also with the House Committees. What did you agree on on oil prices? What did he say about the oil prices? I would have to let him make comments on that. Just pleasure at the progress that has been made there within the last 12 months. Was there ever any mention of the threatened embargo which we heard about last weekend? What did he ask you to say to Israel? Just to continue a search for peace and keep the process alive to make sure that no one closes the door for a settlement that would provide a just and lasting peace. He also expressed his strong hope that Israel would be reassured about the inclinations of his country towards the protection of their security. These were the comments that he made concerning about his view Do you feel he expects you to pressure Israel in any way? I think it is obvious that we have some influence in Israel and also the Arab countries. But we also, obviously, have no control over Do you think that Begin would close the door? I think he shares my views that it is too early to comment on the future policies of the new government. No one knows the composition of it yet. In your public statements so far you have not mentioned the 1977 Geneva conference possibilities or a Palestinian homeland. He mentioned it yesterday at the hand-out. It was placed right in your hand.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsvisitcrownprincefahdsaudiarabiaremarksreportersthecrownprincesdeparture", "title": "Visit of Crown Prince Fahd of Saudi Arabia Remarks to Reporters on the Crown Prince's Departure", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/visit-crown-prince-fahd-saudi-arabia-remarks-reporters-the-crown-princes-departure", "publication_date": "25-05-1977", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Jimmy Carter"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2734, "text": "Before I do anything else I have to acknowledge we have some amazing women warriors - our we have got a whole crew of veterans I had nothing to do with this the USO wanted to bring them here. And I just wanted everybody to give them a big round of applause, too. I do want to ask you this, though, before we I am putting together a scrapbook of the whole 2012 campaign, and I do not I have these great pictures from the two debates. But I do not know which debate they are from. So if you could I have two pictures. I do not know if you can get that. And I am wondering, could you tell me which were the I do not I do not know if I have the dates right. Did you feel did you here is what happens to me sometimes. Sometimes I will go onstage and I will have, let us say, an open-faced turkey sandwich and a shot of NyQuil. Did you sense were you taken aback by the reaction to it? Look, you know, I think, obviously, I had an off night. They did not change after the first debate, and they did not change in the second debate and that is that the stakes in this election are really big. You know, Governor Romney makes a good presentation, but the fundamentals of what he is calling for are the same policies that got us into this mess that we have been fighting against for the last four years, trying to dig our way out of an economy that was good for a few folks at the top, but was not working for ordinary Americans. And after 31 months of consecutive job growth, we have seen 5.2 million jobs created, manufacturing is starting to come back, the auto industry recovering, housing starting to rise again. I want to make sure that we are not going back to those policies. And I want to make sure that, over the next four years, we are building on the progress that we have already made to create jobs right here in America for folks and to make sure that middle-class families have some security. Would you say do you feel like you have a stronger, affirmative case for a second ENTITY presidency, or a stronger negative case for a Mitt Romney presidency? What isin your mind, what is the stronger case to be made? Or do you prefer a ? But what is because I am curious, what do you think?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonstewartcomedycentralsthedailyshow0", "title": "Interview with Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's The Daily Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-stewart-comedy-centrals-the-daily-show-0", "publication_date": "18-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2735, "text": "Do you feel like you do you feel you have made the strong enough, affirmative case, or a stronger negative case? I think I have got a strong case on both ends. Look, four years ago, I said I'd end the war in Iraq; we did. Said I'd pass health care reforms, make sure people do not go bankrupt when they get sick; we have. Said that we would refocus our attention on al-Qaida; we have. Made sure that made sure that we saved an auto industry that was on the brink of collapse; we have done that. So we have got a very strong story to tell, whether it is on social issues, like do not ask, do not tell, or economic issues that matter for middle-class families. I do think that part of the ENTITY's job is not only moving forward on things that will work, but also preventing things that will not work. So I think you want a ENTITY in the Oval Office who is going to say, no, we are not going to amend our Constitution for the first time to restrict rights for gay and lesbian couples. We are not going to we are not going to we are not going to pass a budget where all the work that we have done to make college more affordable for young people gets wiped aside so that suddenly lenders and banks are getting extra tens of billions of dollars. We are not going to rollback health care so that millions of people are thrown off the rolls. We are not going to turn Medicare into a voucher system. So but but when you think about it, it is it is two sides of the same coin. The question is, what kind of vision do you have for this country? We need to make sure that we are developing oil and gas, but we are also developing solar and wind. So we are leapfrogging current technology to make sure that the technology 20 or 30 years from now is developed here in the United States. That is what creates jobs. And I the most important thing is, when you think about the economy, I am absolutely convinced, when you look at the historical record, that when middle-class families do well, when there are ladders of opportunity for poorer families to get into the middle class And when a few folks are doing very well at the top and everybody else is getting squeezed, the economy grows slower. And that is the central issue in this election, that we have got to make sure we address.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonstewartcomedycentralsthedailyshow0", "title": "Interview with Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's The Daily Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-stewart-comedy-centrals-the-daily-show-0", "publication_date": "18-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2736, "text": "If you had to say, Governor Romney, there is one place where you feel like, man, that is an area I wish I had done I had a stronger record on that he hits, is it unemployment? Is it the case you know, he talked in the debate, you know, the administration had said, we are going to have this thing down to 5.4 percent, it is still at 7.8 percent, that is a difference of 9 million people. Is there something in what he says? We had the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. We could be growing even faster than we have if Governor Romney's allies in Congress would move on some of the things that we have recommended. I will give you an example. On housing, right now we could make sure that families whose homes are underwater, where they owe more than their mortgage or more than their house is worth, if they refinance, typically they get 3,000 bucks in their pockets a year. That is $3,000 they are spending  or $3,000 that they are putting back into equity in their home. Governor Romney opposes it. But do not you have a HAMP program? Do not you have was not $50 billion set aside for HAMP, and only 5 1/2 billion of it has been used? Actually what is happened is we have got 5 million homes that have already we have seen foreclosures prevented. We have a settlement with the banks that provides another $25 billion to help the housing market. But the central question is, there are a whole bunch of things that we can do right now that will make the recovery even stronger, put more folks back to work. When you look at what we did with the auto industry, that is not the only industry where manufacturing can take root back here in the United States again. Now, we have got a whole bunch of cities where you have got workers who are, you know, trained in machinery and advanced manufacturing, but and companies are starting to look at maybe we in-source instead of outsource. But we are going to have to change the tax code to make sure that companies have a strong incentive to do that. Or if you win again, do you get to, at some point, say and I am just going to throw a phrase out there abracadabra? But so if their is what created the drag on the economy, and that is not going to be ameliorated, what will be the difference?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonstewartcomedycentralsthedailyshow0", "title": "Interview with Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's The Daily Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-stewart-comedy-centrals-the-daily-show-0", "publication_date": "18-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2737, "text": "Well, number number one, I want to make sure that we get as many Democrats re-elected as possible and maybe we can take some seats back. Number two number two, when you look at some of the things that we need to do, let us say, in the first year, 2013, having a plan to bring down our deficit that is balanced, that will be settled one way or another next year. The question is going to be, do we do it in a balanced, responsible way, or are we not asking millionaires and billionaires to pay a dime of extra taxes to preserve investments in education? This is the first I am hearing of this. What is that about millionaires? What are you doing to us? No, I am going to throw a commercial in. You and I are going to have a conversation and then we will come back. We are going to have to go to commercial. We are here with ENTITY. How many times a week does Biden show up in a wet bathing suit to a meeting? I had to put out a presidential directive on that. We had to stop that. You have got to put towels down. I do not doubt that in any way, shape or form. Before when you ran, you had certain things that you thought, I wonder if four years as ENTITY has in any way changed that. OK, first one is, we do not have to trade our values and ideals for our security. I still want to close Guantanamo. We have not been able to get that . You know, one of the things that we have got to do is put a legal architecture in place, and we need congressional help to do that to make sure that not only am I reined in, but any ENTITY's reined in in terms of some of the decisions that we are making. I mean, there are times where there are bad folks somewhere on the other side of the world and you have got to make a call, and it is not optimal. But when you look at our track record, what we have been able to do is to say we ended the war in Iraq, we are winding down the war in Afghanistan, we have gone after al-Qaida and its leadership. It is true that al-Qaida is still active, at least sort of remnants of it are staging in other parts of North Africa and the Middle East. And sometimes you have got to make some tough calls.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonstewartcomedycentralsthedailyshow0", "title": "Interview with Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's The Daily Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-stewart-comedy-centrals-the-daily-show-0", "publication_date": "18-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2738, "text": "But you can do so in a way that is consistent with international law and with American law. Within that, as it ratchets down, I think people have been surprised to see the strength of the Bush-era warrantless wiretapping laws and those types of things not also be lessened.  Well, you know, the truth is actually we have modified them and built a legal structure and safeguards in place that were not there before on a whole range of issues. They are not the kinds of things that you are going to you Let me put it this way. I saw you flash that Shades of Grey thing, so I know what you have been reading. I appreciate that. No, I understand that. I respect the position. The second thing and this one I thought and in the debate, it was obviously a big moment. Governor Romney said, you never called what happened in Benghazi a terrorist attack, you said, check the transcripts. Candy Crowley said, he did call it that, but also said to the larger point there was confusion within the administration over what happened. What was it that caused that confusion? Well, we were not confused about the fact that four Americans had been killed. I was not confused about the fact that we needed to ramp up diplomatic security around the world right after it happened. I was not confused about the fact that we had to investigate exactly what happened so it gets fixed. And I was not confused about the fact that we are going to hunt down whoever did it So as I said during the debate, nobody's more interested in figuring this out than I am. When a tragic event like this happens on the other side of the world immediately, a whole bunch of intelligence starts coming in, people try to piece together exactly what happened. And what I have always tried to do is to make sure that we just get all the facts, figure out what went wrong and make sure it does not happen again. And we are still in that process now. But everything that every piece of information that we get, as we got it, we laid it out for the American people. And then we know how we make sure we prevent it in the future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonstewartcomedycentralsthedailyshow0", "title": "Interview with Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's The Daily Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-stewart-comedy-centrals-the-daily-show-0", "publication_date": "18-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2739, "text": "The difficulty, the perceptions seem to be that state was on a different page than you, or that you had Susan Rice five days afterwards saying on shows, well, this video and could have been a part of that and then other people were coming out ENTITY, you know, the truth is is that information comes in, folks put it out. Throughout the process, people say it is still incomplete. What I was always clear about was we are going to do an investigation and figure out exactly what happened. Is part of the investigation helping the communication between these divisions of not just what happened in Benghazi, but what happened within? I would say even you would admit, it was not the optimal response, at least to the American people, as far as us all being on the same page. Well, here is what I will say. And we are going to fix it. And what happens during the course of a presidency is that, you know, the government is a big operation. At any given time, something screws up, and you make sure that you find out what is broken and you fix it. And you know, whatever else, you know, I have done throughout the course of my presidency, the one thing that I have been absolutely clear about is America's security comes first and the American people need to know exactly how I make decisions when it comes to war, peace, national security and protecting Americans. And they will continue to get that over the next four years of my presidency. We have been speaking now for, I think, a good 12 to 14 minutes. And I am curious, how many emails during that time do you think your campaign has sent me? But here is what I will say to everybody who is watching. The stakes on this could not be bigger. War, peace, Supreme Court, women's right to choose, you know, whether we are creating jobs in this country or whether they are getting shipped overseas, whether our kids are getting the best education they can, all that stuff is at stake. And I hope you vote for me!", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjonstewartcomedycentralsthedailyshow0", "title": "Interview with Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's The Daily Show", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jon-stewart-comedy-centrals-the-daily-show-0", "publication_date": "18-10-2012", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2740, "text": "The Orioles lead the Kansas City Royals 3-2. It is opening day, and ENTITY was here today to throw out the first ball, and he will be joining us momentarily, as soon as we get him miked up.  We finally have some balance up here. Can we get a ENTITY chair in here? It was not fast, but I had a good time. This is a good time of the year for you. I know you are a big college basketball fan, having gone to Arkansas. Unfortunately, the Razorbacks were eliminated, did not make it to the finals. But I am very proud of them. They started 4 freshmen and made it to the Sweet 16, so I think they did well. Everybody who watched the games must have felt it was a great tournament. I know you love being here on opening day. It is great to see this new Baltimore team. You know, they have got a chance to go all the way. And yet, if my count's right, all their RBI's go to Mr. Ripken today. Yes, he got 30 percent of what he had in all spring training. And of course, they all want to get to the White House, because I know you had the Atlanta Braves there in early March. I know you get out to a game or two during the season. Do you watch at the White House when you are home? I watch the games when they are on, especially at night. When I come home late at night and I am kind of keyed up and I do not want to go to sleep, I often watch the games that are on. Johnny Damon makes the catch on the warning track. Johnny Damon taking an extra base hit away from Chris Hoiles. So you were saying you watch our games late at night. I guess in essence what you are saying is that we put you to sleep. This is the youngster that last year, at Double A, got about 188 at bats, but the reason Bob Boone left him in center field, even though they have a very good center fielder in Tom Goodwin, is because of his ability to make plays like that. Did you play baseball yourself in high school? My school did not have a team, but we had church league and Boys Club. We had all those. I played in some of those teams when I was a kid. I loved it. I know you love to golf; did you play any other sports growing up?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmelproctorjimpalmerandmikeflanaganhometeamsportsbaltimore", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Mel Proctor, Jim Palmer, and Mike Flanagan of Home Team Sports in Baltimore", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mel-proctor-jim-palmer-and-mike-flanagan-home-team-sports-baltimore", "publication_date": "02-04-1996", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2741, "text": "Yes, but only not in school; I played church league basketball, softball, baseball, but you know, everybody that grew up where I did wound up loving sports. Now, are you allowed to have a favorite team? In the basketball years in the basketball season, excuse me, people understand it when I cheer for my home State team or for my alma mater, Georgetown. And when I was a kid, interestingly enough, in Arkansas, the St. Louis Cardinals were the closest baseball team to us; there were no Texas teams then. And so we used to listen to Cardinals baseball. That is what I studied to when I was a boy. I know you were out here last year when Cal Ripken broke Lou Gehrig's consecutive game streak. What did that mean to you? I think it meant a lot to me not only as a baseball fan but as a citizen and as ENTITY now, as someone who really wants his country to work well. The idea that a man could show that kind of discipline and devotion to his work and stay with one team for a career in a time and age when a lot of people do not last very long because they do not have the discipline to do it and just go for the big-time bucks in the short run and float around from team to team, or in the case of non-athletes from company to company, I think it really sort of was reassuring, not only to me but to the American people, to see that kind of record set and to see that kind of discipline and loyalty. I liked it a lot. Are you aware that Ken Griffey, Jr., is a Presidential candidate and has promised, if elected, to let people not pay taxes for 2 months? Yes, I am worried about that. I am worried about him. I figure that-at the very least he is going to take more votes away from me than Senator Dole. I am really worried about it. I think-you know, I have always been a big fan of his. I feel sort of stabbed by it. It is breaking my heart. You would not consider that, would you? What I want to know is how he is going to pay the bills. I will consider it. I want to hear the rest of the deal. How is he going to not pay the bills? Base hit for Jeffrey Hammonds, who is two for two a double his first time up and now a single.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmelproctorjimpalmerandmikeflanaganhometeamsportsbaltimore", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Mel Proctor, Jim Palmer, and Mike Flanagan of Home Team Sports in Baltimore", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mel-proctor-jim-palmer-and-mike-flanagan-home-team-sports-baltimore", "publication_date": "02-04-1996", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2742, "text": "Hammonds is back healthy and swinging the bat well. Getting back to Cal Ripken and all of the pressure that he must have been under last year during that streak and you can certainly identify with pressure in your office what do you see about the way he handled the pressure? I think he did what I try to do; he did not vary his routine. He just focused on the day that was before him. And I think that he must have had the record in mind, but it did not paralyze his play. Even the night he was here, the night he broke the record, he hit a home run on a 0-3 pitch. So he still had enough presence of mind not to even just take the walk, you know? He was alive to every moment, and I think that is what you have to do. When you are under a lot of pressure, you have to just take a deep breath and do what you know to do. Pitch is low to Brady Anderson, who has struck out and grounded out.  I think you have got to give a lot of credit to conditioning, too. And the way he keeps himself in shape in the off-season and during the season must have an incredible amount to do with the fact that he was able to play relatively injury-free all these years. And that requires a lot of discipline. And you know, a lot of discipline Mike and I played for the Orioles for a number of years, and a lot of people wonder what it is like to play in the big league. Oh, yes, I enjoy it very much. I am honored every day when I go to work. There are some parts of it that are a little rougher than I thought it would be, but I have no complaints. I signed on for the whole show, and I am just honored to have a chance to do it, to make a difference, to stand up for what I believe in, and to serve. It is an incredible opportunity, and if I had it to do over again, I'd do it in a heartbeat. Even Cal gets one off in the spring.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmelproctorjimpalmerandmikeflanaganhometeamsportsbaltimore", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Mel Proctor, Jim Palmer, and Mike Flanagan of Home Team Sports in Baltimore", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mel-proctor-jim-palmer-and-mike-flanagan-home-team-sports-baltimore", "publication_date": "02-04-1996", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2743, "text": "You know, the only frustrating thing is when you come up against a problem that you know cries out for some sort of resolution, and you are not sure you have the power to do anything about it; or when you get a problem where it seems 50-50 on both sides, you just have to kind of feel your way through to the answer, but you are not neither you nor anyone else can be sure about whether it will come out all right. Those things are frustrating, but in terms of the pressure and the tension of the job, I do not mind that at all. I like it. It is part of the challenge. Jeffrey Hammonds is at first with two outs. Come on, Brady, you need a hit. There goes Hammonds, throw to second by MacFarlane. He bounces it. He made it. But it gets him anyway. Well, maybe we can get the umpire to change his mind. I went to see the umpires before the game. Did they have their glasses on? Yeah, they got him. They got him. We will be back, ENTITY, in a moment. Take a commercial break; we will be right back. We are visiting with ENTITY of the United States, ENTITY, who is enjoying opening day here at the ball park. One nice thing is, look how hard the wind is blowing, and you see the flags up there, and yet it is kind of calm in here, so it does not seem to be distracting the game. Joe Vidiella will lead off the fifth inning for the Royals, with the Orioles ahead 3 to 2. Vidiella was called out on strikes his first time up. We were talking about your job and the enjoyment you derive from it, but what is the biggest challenge you have faced so far since you have been in office? The initial challenge was to try to get the economy turned around and get the deficit down, get the interest rates down, get the jobs coming back into the economy. Now the big frustration is how to make how to get that economic benefit of we have over 8 million new jobs in the economy. Unemployment is low, lower than the last 25-year average. But there is still a lot of people that feel uncertain, because things are changing so fast.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmelproctorjimpalmerandmikeflanaganhometeamsportsbaltimore", "title": "William J. Clinton Interview With Mel Proctor, Jim Palmer, and Mike Flanagan of Home Team Sports in Baltimore", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-mel-proctor-jim-palmer-and-mike-flanagan-home-team-sports-baltimore", "publication_date": "02-04-1996", "crawling_date": "09-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2744, "text": "Because there is of course a question on everybody's mind, I am sure you know what it is. Have you selected your vice president and who is she? Well, since this is embargoed to Thursday, I am not going to tell you. There has been some criticism within your party that the process has been messy. How many women are on the shortlist exactly? Well, first of all, if they think it is been drawn out, they have not watched any other vice presidential picks in history. This is in fact ahead of time, as a matter of fact. Notice most vice presidential nominees are not announced until a day, two or three before the convention. I have gone through it. Every one of the women we have interviewed is qualified. I have narrowed it down, and I will be ready to make that ann- ENTITY, you have been through this experience before, the vetting process, the speculation, but someone on your own VP selection committee, former Senator Chris Dodd, reportedly has been critic critical of some in contention like Senator Kamala Harris for not being more conciliatory since she went toe to toe with you during the debates. Well, he did not say that to the press. He was talking to somebody offline and it was repeated. Now I do not hold grudges. I have made it really clear that I do not hold grudges. It is as simple as that, and she is very much contention. Now on day one of your presidency, if we listen to the scientists and the doctors, as you say you will do, you are likely to begin your presidency in the middle of this ongoing pandemic. How likely is a rollback on day one of the re-openings of businesses that we have seen nationwide? That is a good question, but an unfair question, because I have no idea what this president's going to leave me with. If he acts responsibly, which he has not done thus far, if he acts responsibly I may be in a position where we do not have to roll back. But if he continues to walk away, wave the white flag and just say open and then listen to some quacks telling him that what we should be doing and you can mass cause ENTITY, the whole thing is he is got to be more responsible.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2745, "text": "It depends on what I inherit to determine what I will be able to do and say and should be saying on the day I sworn in, if that in fact happens. Based on what you see now, would you roll back the re-openings? I am not going to speculate on that, because I do not know what it is going to be. Based on what you see now? Oh, I am sorry, if I were president today, I would roll back the re-openings in a number of places because, look, it is clear mask and social distancing make a gigantic difference in terms of the spread of this disease. We should have circumstances where, in fact, we act responsibly, including in places of work where people are, where they are able to go in and continue to work in terms of social distancing testing and alike. He is done none of that. None of that is part of what he is suggesting. I have laid out in detail what I would do and all the way back in January, when this first came out. Then I did again in March, talked about how I would invoke the Defense Act to require significant stockpiling of PPE. I would also have made sure that we would not have fired the overseers of the folks who determined the allocation of the money that the Congress has allocated so that the inspector generals know where the money's going. I have laid out in detail what I thought he should be doing with regard to the OSHA and the standards that are required for businesses to open. I have laid it all out, and he is followed none of it. How often are you being briefed on the pandemic and who is in charge of keeping you up to date on what is going on? I just went through an 87 page memo with my team, including Vivek Murthy, who you know, and other docs, former heads of the CDC that are part of an entire team that I have, that we put together and go through it at least four times a week. I spent an hour-and-a-half today on the telephone. I mean, excuse me, on what we are doing right now, on camera. Based on what you have heard, a lot of people are concerned about schools, do you think children should be in schools in person while we are waiting on a vaccine to be developed? The question is, will the president do the work he needs to make them safe?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2746, "text": "I have laid out a roadmap to reopen schools safely and effectively. Studies show that we need $34 billion to make school safe nationwide. For schools that cannot reopen safely, help them improve the virtual learning. President Trump should stop tweeting and start doing his work. What is key to people feeling safe to go back to work and school is a vaccine. A recent CBS News, UGOV poll found that some 70% of Americans would either wait to get a vaccine and see what happens to other people or not get one at all. That is a huge segment of the population. How then would you secure that every American gets a vaccine as soon as possible considering that distrust? Make it totally open for review by every medical facility in the country, making clear that in fact it is safe, instead of what Trump is talking about. He is talking about all these different vaccines. Much earlier I laid out what would we constitute a business being able to reopen. When I talked about it, I said we should have a circumstance where they were able to meet all the criteria that are recommended by the CDC and others and be able to put on a sticker on their window saying, like a good housekeeping seal, You can come in here because we test, we distance, we do all alike. The fact is that the way he talks about the vaccine is not particularly rational. He is talking it being ready. He is going to talk about moving it quicker than the scientists think it should be moved. Let the medical community writ large speak to it so that there is transparency. Look, I think people are going to, as the poll show and we talked about it today with the two docs and my staff, that in fact people do not believe that he is telling the truth. Therefore, they are not at all certain they are going to take the vaccine. One more thing, if and when the vaccine comes, and it is not likely to go through all the tests that needs and the trials that are needed to be done, and the question is, is he going to seek emergency move? I proposed a $25 billion plan for the distribution to guarantee that every single American has access to the vaccine because what is going to happen, you know as well as I do, if the vaccine came out tomorrow, how in the heck would we get it to people? How would everybody in America have access to it? It is a gigantic, gigantic problem to distribute, even if we have it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2747, "text": "Not when we get it. ENTITY, I'd like to ask you about healthcare because obviously this pandemic has exposed many weaknesses in healthcare. In your platform, you'd extend medical benefits to DACA recipients. But what about the workers who have no protection, specifically farm workers now deemed essential to make Americans sure that they have food on their table? Should undocumented immigrants also be able to get subsidized healthcare? If they are working in the United States of America and they are paying taxes, they should have access to healthcare. They should have access to what everybody else has access to. You say on every undocumented worker. Every person in the country, whether they are undocumented or documented, should have access to a vaccine if and when it occurs, should have access to testing and treatment and hospitalization, if it relates to the virus. It is in the interest of everyone that everyone be taken care of, and everyone should be able to be eligible for that. Just to clarify, you are saying that if you are undocumented, you would be able to get a vaccine for free, subsidized? I'd also like to ask you this, this pandemic has exposed, as I have mentioned, so many weaknesses in the healthcare system. The most vulnerable, often black and brown communities, have been handling much of the financial burden. Before the pandemic, you were against comprehensive single-payer system. Now, if Medicare-For-All came across your desk, as the pandemic has hit so hard, would you veto it? It is not going to come across my desk. But, look, the pandemic has not only torn through our nation, devastating families and wrecking economies, it is exacerbated some of the worst inequities. I am going to fight for health equities, but the quickest way to get that is for black and Latino Americans to have access to the Obamacare with a public option. But has not this pandemic and the tsunami of layoffs shown the limits of private health care that is tied to employment? No, it has not , in my view There is countries that have, in fact, single-payer systems that had not helped them very much either. The question is, what do we do about corralling the pandemic and treating those who are affected by it?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2748, "text": "Everyone who is affected by the pandemic has access to free care for anything having to do with that pandemic. Now, some of your most ambitious legislative goals, ENTITY, are likely to face fierce Republican resistance. In fact, President Obama during his eulogy for civil rights icon John Lewis said the way to fully restore the Voting Rights Act is to abolish the Senate filibuster. We are going to be able to do that anyway. I do not think we have to, we are going to be able to do that anyway. Look where we are going to elect at least five to six democratic senators. That still will not get you enough of a super majority- I am pretty good at this. I have done that pretty well my whole career in the United States Senate. The deal is that with President Trump gone and the fear of retribution and his, how can I say it? His ego of following and ruining any Republican who disagrees with him, that is gone. Number two, you are going to see a lot of Republicans, at least a half a dozen of them, beginning to vote their conscience because they no longer have the fear of Trump being there. And thirdly, when we gain control of the United States Senate, which I believe we will on the House, you are going to find people willing to take a vote that was controversial before, because this time it will pass. There is no sense in making the reason why The way human nature works and you all work the same way, if you are going to have to go against the grain of the folks you hang out with in order to vote for something that is not going to pass anyway, you are not going to take the shot. But if you are hanging out with a group of people as against the grain, but you know it is going to pass with your vote, then that is a very different thing. I just do not believe that you are going to have this kind of resistance before, that we had before. And by the way, everybody said, we did not get anything done. After President was elected, after Trump was elected, before he was sworn in, I put together a coalition to Democrats and Republicans to provide for over $9 billion to NIH and almost $2 billion for cancer research. We only had something like a hundred votes for it in the house and we only had something like 36 in the Senate. It passed in January. It passed in late December, before he was sworn in.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2749, "text": "Everybody's telling me we cannot get things done. Just to be clear, you do not agree with president Obama that getting rid of the filibuster is necessary. He described it as a relic of Jim Crow. What I said was that if in fact they are as obstreperous as is expected, we'd have to get rid of the filibuster, but the filibuster has also saved a lot of bad things from happening too. I thought I am on record as saying that if the Republicans, if there is no way to move, other than getting rid of the filibuster, that is what we will do. I will jump in ENTITY and ask, as we are talking about elections, the pandemic, as you know, is keeping a lot of people at home and there is a lot of interest in voting by mail, but there has been a lot of comments from President Trump and other Republicans casting doubt on the security of the election system. What should states be doing now to ensure voter confidence in the election? What many of them are doing, voter suppression is what he is trying to make a big deal out of it. There is nothing we are more focused on because frankly, this is the thing that keeps me up most nights, making sure everyone who wants to vote gets to vote, making sure that everyone's vote is counted. And we are going to undertake a historic effort in terms of resources, commitment, to beat back every voter suppression effort and to make sure that the voters know that every legal option available. Our campaign has a strong, effective voter protection and anti voter suppression program. Voter protection campaigns we are putting together for November, meet the unique requirements and challenges that we are facing from this president. No campaign has ever built anything to the scale that we have built to make sure we can get out the vote. We have a major, major dedicated operation in states to address the head on voter suppression and any form of that is going to take and steps we can take to go to court as well. Did you ever think you'd live in a country where you had a President of the United States saying, Let us postpone an election. People see through this. You have five mail in state voting places, two of them overwhelming Republicans. Republicans support mail in voting. We saw with ENTITY has done to elections during the primaries. And we know there are voter suppression problems that have nothing to do with ENTITY.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2750, "text": "We are going to be prepared to make sure people have an opportunity to be protected when they show up in person to vote and we are going to have to work with election officials in key cities and battleground states to increase the number of early voting locations and in one recent case, almost double the number of people showed up to vote. In States where the law permits, we are going to be providing voters, absentee ballot request forms, pre paid postage, and the like. We are trying to raise money to be able to do that. The House when they passed the Cares Act, they provided $400 million for a voter to help states improve their voting systems. What is the president doing? He is talking about defunding the post office for God's sake. What more do you need? I am sitting in El Paso, Texas, and it is been one year since a gunman walked into a Walmart and killed 23 people. He told police, he came to kill Mexicans. This is the largest attack on Latinos in modern history. You have accused President Trump of bearing responsibility for the rise in hate crimes. How do you convince white supremacists that minority groups are vital to restore in the soul of America? I do not convince white supremacists. They have to be put in jail when they do things that are inappropriate. White supremacists are not going to be convinced, but the vast, vast, vast majority of people are not white supremacists. I have been involved in civil rights my whole life and one of the things I thought was that I thought we could really defeat hate. I thought there is a way to defeat it. And when I got out of law school, I came back, my city was in flames. My city was the only city, Wilmington, Delaware, occupied by the National Guard for 10 months since the Civil War, it just had not happened since then. What happened was, I came back, had a good job, decided to leave it, become a public defender. And I used to interview my clients down by the railroad station and here I was 40 years ago later to the month, standing under that same railroad station, waiting for a black man to come and pick me up to take me to Washington DC, be sworn in as President and Vice President of United States. So I called my three children up. My son was the Attorney General of the state of Delaware.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2751, "text": "My other son was the head of the world food program USA. And my daughter's a social worker dealing with criminal justice. And so I said, Do not tell me things cannot change, look. I looked over the East side and I said, That was all barren and burned to the ground. And so I thought you could defeat hate. The reason I am running is because of Donald Trump's, what he said when those folks came out of the fields in Charlottesville. And when a president breaths oxygen under the rocks, he pulls them out. He legitimizes them. They make up a significant minority of the American public, but left unattended, they grow, they grow and they cause great damage. And that is why we have to make sure we do a whole range of things. There is a lot of things we are going to do because look, for the first time, you have over 70% of the American people concluding that black lives matter. You have almost as many whites marching with blacks to say, Let us end this systemic racism in America. They are ready because they know we can make significant progress and they know the reason why they have been saved from ENTITY is because of the Latino and black communities have been doing all the hard work. You got thousands of DACA students out there doing the mainline work and making sure that people are safe. You have all kinds of folks, the woman making sure she is stacking the grocery shelf to make sure we have food to eat. The farm worker, you talked about ma'am, but was making sure we have the food to get in the table. They have figured it out. And we have a confluence of three things that have happened, that are going to give us an enormous opportunity to change the dynamic in America. We can now move in a direction. That is why I put this Build Back Better plan together, focusing the last, the last piece on racial equity. We can do this. ENTITY, I want to follow up on your point to Alfredo's question that white supremacists cannot be convinced. You just said there that the extreme right wing folks in the country left unattended, will grow. Should not there be some sentiment to reach out to people who hold racist views to convince them otherwise? That is different than the white Look, you are talking about white supremacists.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2752, "text": "I thought you were talking about the people like the kid who showed up in El Paso and gunned down all those innocent people. That is what we are talking about. The Klu Klux Klan and the like, the white supremacists, those who belong to those groups, they are a minority. I am reaching out to everyone else. I have done it my whole career. My state is the eighth largest black population in the United States of America as a percent of population. That is what I have been working with my whole career. And you can deal with those who, in fact, are prejudice. A lot of prejudice out there, but not everyone's a white supremacist, like the kid who went in and gunned down those folks in El Paso. Now, you have apologized for your role in the 1994 Crime Bill that created the Three Strikes Law, expanded the list of crimes punishable by death. What will you do now to make up for what you have described as the pain brought by that bill, that many people still feel today? Well, let us get something straight. The bill at the time it was passed, was overwhelmingly passed with every major black mayor in America. The black caucus supported it and violent crime against African Americans, fell by 57%. It had things in it that I did not like at all, like three strikes and you are out, which I argued against. It also had some very good things in it; assault weapons ban, drug courts, it made sure that we were in a position where we were going to focus on dealing with rehabilitation. One third of it went to prevention, one third to rehabilitation, all of those things they in fact made sense. On balanced the whole bill, there were only three provisions that were really bad. And two, the idea that carjacking was a mandatory minimum penalty, if you were convicted of it and three, money for state prisons, all three of which I opposed. But on balance, it was a much, much, much better bill. And so now we face a different problem. We have too many people in prison. That is why President Obama and I reduced the federal population by 38,000. Of all the people in prison today, 93% are behind a bar in a state prison, a county jail and or a city jail. As we passed the Fair Sentencing Act, to reduce sentences related to crack cocaine.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2753, "text": "I am running on a plan to reform the criminal justice system so we can fix it. No one should go to jail for a drug offense, for example, which I have argued for a long time. They should go to mandatory treatment. We automatically wipe out anyone's record for using marijuana. Once people get out of the system, all their rights should be restored, including the Pell Grants and voting rights and access to housing. We also have to expand the power of the justice department to adjust systemic misconduct by police departments and prosecutors and establish an independent taskforce on prosecutorial discretion. That is what I have been pushing. The city of Asheville, North Carolina recently approved what they call reparations to their African American community in the form of home ownership, affordable housing and access to capital for businesses. My question for you is, do you think the American government owes black people reparations and what form, if so, should it take? I think the studies suggested by my friend, Cory Booker, should be followed through and seen. In the meantime, we cannot wait. Meantime, we cannot wait. If you take a look at my Bill Back Better plan, which you probably have not had a chance to read, it does all the things that Asheville just did. It provides for a down payment, first time down payment of $15,000 for black Americans and Hispanic Americans seeking housing and invest significantly more money in public housing, we used to call it public housing, subsidized rental. Nobody should be paying more than 30% of their income for rent. It fundamentally alters access to capital across the board for small businesses. We have already 400,000 black, small business gone out of business. They should be at the front of the line. I propose that we take the program Barack and I put together that said that there is 1,000,000,005 that brought $3 billion off the sidelines for entrepreneurs, black entrepreneurs and has chased that to- If I may, you rolled out a plan this week for Latinos. My first question is what took you so long to come up with a plan for the largest minority group in the country? And this plan talks a lot about the urgent actions. What is at the top of that list. Well, first of all, everything in that plan, I have already said over the last year and a half, we just packaged it together. Number one, the most urgent thing is to fix the", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2754, "text": "First of all, every executive order this president has issued relating to the border and relating to dealing with the Hispanic community is going to be pulled back. We are not going to be fooling with that here. First thing I am going to do and I have already written, sent to the United States Congress a path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented folks. And you are going to be put on a path to citizenship. We are going to invest in economic mobility, invest in wealth inside Latino communities especially Latino businesses, and ensuring Latinos have access to credit and capital by providing Latino businesses access to participate in federal contracts and critical assistance programs, ensuring economic relief reaches Latino businesses. That is what my whole plan about manufacturing the United States and dealing with all the public money being spent under the control of the president. That is one that will in fact be available, those contracts and that chain, that supply chain for manufacturing is owned by many small business people, Latinos, as well as African Americans and other minorities. We are going to expand that. I am going to finish this answer. And the last piece is we are going to tackle the inequities in education. That is why I am tripling the money for title one schools, providing university and pre-kindergarten all across the board. We are going to expand STEM curricula. We are going to deal with underserved schools, and we are going to make sure that anyone who comes from a family making less than $125,000 has free access to four years of public education college. I have a few questions that I'd just like to get through because they are incredibly important to the Latino community. First of all, you are extending TPS, temporary protected status, to Venezuelans. Cubans though, are now being deported in unprecedented numbers. Would you stop those deportations? What I said, I am going to look at every single country in the world that in fact is being and this guy's sending them back. The reason why I came up with Venezuela is he not even allowing it to exist in the first place. And so the TPS program is something I will move on the first day I am in office to make sure that we extend it to people. I think that we should be extending it. Anybody can prove that they are in jeopardy to go back to their country and the reason they came in the first place. They should be able to stay in the United States of America until the circumstance changes in our country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2755, "text": "And that is why, by the way, I put that program together to provide Oh, go ahead. Are you going to reengage with Cuba though? I mean, I am specifically wondering about the Florida communities that are incredibly interested in the Cuba issue and see status given to Venezuelans while Cubans are being deported. So will you engage with Cuba? And by the way, what you all know, but most people do not know, unlike the African American community with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community, with incredibly different attitudes about different things. You go to Florida, you find a very different attitude about immigration in certain places than you do when you are in Arizona. So president Obama was known as the deporter in chief from moving more than 3 million people during the Biden Obama administration. Trump campaigned to build that wall. Trump campaigned on build that wall. Are you willing to tear that wall down? Number two, what I am going to focus on and the fact is that somebody in this group written a lot about the border. I am going to make sure that we have border protection, but it is going to be based on making sure that we use high-tech capacity to deal with it and at the ports of entry. We are not going to confiscate the land. ENTITY, under the Trump administration, asylum has virtually ended. Your new plan calls for reversing President Trump's harsh plan, but will not that restart a brand new border crisis? I mean, what would you do with all those people in camps now waiting in Mexico? It will if we do not do it well, we do not reach out to the charitable communities that will come in and help, and in addition to us spending millions of dollars providing for access, access for judges, access for asylum folks to be on the border to move quickly . I have withdrawn the order. You are going to have a crisis on the other side of the border as well. And we should not be putting these people when they come across the border in jail. We should be doing monitoring. Number one, but we have to make sure that we build up the infrastructure to be able to accommodate Trump's cruel, inhumane border policies, ripping children from their mother's arms and Trump's migrant protection protocols, remain in Mexico program.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2756, "text": "I mean, all of this is going to take time, not a long time, but you have to be prepared so we do not create another crisis as you pointed out. What are you trying the Department of Homeland Security? I will have someone heading that department that listens to what we say. And by the way, ICE is going to go back to school. The idea that ICE is sitting outside of a mass on Sunday to arrest a parent coming out as undocumented, the idea that they are going to schools, the idea they are going to doctor's appointments is wrong. This is about families. And you have so many young children, so many young children under enormous pressure and psychological pressure, wondering whether or not they are going to come home there is going to be no one there. We need to do so much more. From my perspective, it is all about families. We have to push humanitarian resources to make sure that we have public private partnerships to support people living in these conditions. We have got to surge resources for the asylum protectors. It is going to cost a lot of money and I have been calling for it for a year and a half. Are those asylum seekers that are on the other side of the border now in camps going to be allowed to come and do their claims inside the United States, something that has not been reported to them? Otherwise, if I just say, Tomorrow, everybody comes across the border. You have had to seek asylum in a third country. ENTITY, your opponent in this election, President Trump, has made your mental state a campaign topic. And when asked in June, if you'd been tested full cognitive decline, you have responded that you are constantly tested in effect because you are in situations like this on the campaign trail. But please clarify specifically, have you taken a cognitive test? No, I have not taken a test. Why the hell would I take a test? That is like saying, Before you got in this program, if you take a test where you are taking cocaine or not. What do you think? What do you say to President Trump who brags about his test and makes you a message say an issue for voters? Well, if he cannot figure out the difference between an elephant and a lion, I do not know what the hell he is talking about. Did you watch that?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2757, "text": "I know you are trying to goad me, but I mean, I am so forward-looking to have an opportunity to sit with the President or stand with the President in debates. And by the way, as I joke with him I should not say it. I am going to say something I probably should not say. Anyway, I am very willing to let the American public judge my physical as well as my mental fitness and to make a judgment about who I am and what state of affairs I have, what kind of physical shape I am in, what kind of mental shape I am in. Someone who is on your VP shortlist, Senator Kamala Harris, told NPR last year that the Justice Department would have no choice, but to prosecute Trump after his presidency. Should you win, would you follow through on the many investigations? Could you envision him, a former president, being prosecuted if the evidence shows wrongdoing? I will not interfere with the Justice Department's judgment of whether or not they think they should pursue the prosecution of anyone that they think has violated the law- I think it is a very, very unusual thing and probably not very How can I say it? Good for democracy to be talking about prosecuting former presidents. What is the bar to you to have to- I do not know what some of these cases going on in the New York courts are. I do not know the detail of those cases. And so if there is a case underway that in fact has to be pursued and I believe it should be pursued and the attorney general thinks it is, that is a very different thing. But in terms of saying, I think the President violated the law. I think the President did this, therefore go and prosecute him. I will not do that. I do not think anyone's above the law. And I love the way you are trying to get me into this thing about lock them up. I mean, the Southern District of New York just said that their extensive and protracted criminal conduct at the Trump organization that they are looking into. I said, those things that are underway, if they prove to be a criminal offense, then in fact that would be up to the attorney general to decide whether he or she want to proceed with it. I am not going to make that individual judgment. ENTITY, I want to go back to voting rights. some States that are engaging in voter suppression.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2758, "text": "And my question is if you were to become President, is there anything you have considered taking executive action in order to shore up voting systems or protect voting rights for American public without waiting for congressional approval or a bill to pass? Well, the answer is I'd do what Barack and I did in our administration, the Attorney General would go after, there are somewhere about 84, 85 attempts that have been made and I think it is 31 States, do not hold me to the exact number, to suppress voting, to make it harder to vote. And I would take those systems, and those I'd challenge in court, those attempts, those new attempts at Jim Crow. I would do that. I would have the Attorney General go out and make sure that we have, and the first thing I am going to do in terms of the Justice Department, I was the guy who got the Voting Rights Act extended for 25 years. And along came the Shelby case and Shelby County in Alabama and the court came along and said, There is no longer a requirement that you have get pre-clearance because of the conduct in the past. So any change you wish to make an electoral process, you have to check through the courts. They said that is old, but they cannot do that. There is no constitutional prohibition to change the provision in the law, I think it is section four, I am not positive, to change that provision to say they require pre-clearance under certain conditions, that requires a vote in the United States Congress that is now called, that is now the Lewis amendment to the Voting Rights Act. And that is what I pushed very hard and I have been pushing it for a long time. We just want to get in just one question in the international sphere, President Trump is not the first President to say China is ripping off the United States. President Obama made similar complaints. Some have said Trump's stance is a good one to counter China's influence. Would you keep the tariffs? Manufacturing has gone on recession. Agriculture lost billions of dollars that taxpayers had to pay. We are going after China in the wrong way. China is stealing intellectual property. China's conditioning being able to do business in China based on whether or not you have 51% Chinese ownership. I spent a fair amount of time when I was Vice President with President Xi, because the President wanted me to get to know him.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2759, "text": "He is no Democrat with a small D at all, but here is the deal, he made it real clear, he- So he scrapped those tariffs, what do you want in return? Or you are just going to scrap them without any concessions? The question is what is the appropriate behavior that they have to engage in international trade with us and they have to play by the international rules. And what we have done is we have disarmed ourselves. We make up 25% of the world's economy, but we poked our finger in the eye of all of our allies out there. The way China will respond is when we gather the rest of the world that in fact invasion and open trade and making sure that we are in a position that we deal with WHO the right way, in fact, that is when things began to change. For example, when I was last there, he said to me, Xi, that they set up an error identification zone that they had an international airspace that said that you had to check with China before you could fly through it. I said, We are not going to pay attention. He said, What do you want me to do? I said, You should, but we are not going to pay attention. So we flew B-1 bomber through it. We have got to make it clear, the international rules of the road in terms of airspace, sea space, and the way in which you deal with the trade and equity that have to be imposed. And what we did in our administration, when they started dumping steel, we responded. They just overproduced and they just started dumping steel through the state owned entities. They also did the same thing with tires. And so you respond under the rules, the international rules of trade and hold them to it. That is what you do. And just as we run out of time here, Mr. Vice-President, how would you confront China on the alleged human rights abuses, not just toward Hong Kong, but toward Uyghur Muslims, as well, beyond these newly announced Senate sanctions? You may recall, I was the first one to say, we should act and go to the United Nations with the Uyghurs. I believe the first one, period. We should be in the United Nations condemning China's action.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2760, "text": "And look what happened when he did not respond to what was going on in Hong Kong, it emboldened China does just to go ahead and break what had been an agreement they had made about the quasi independence of Hong Kong. And so now we are taking action relative to Hong Kong, but look, folks, you have to speak up. He has no conception of human rights. The way he is embraced dictators and thugs around the world. The way he is failed to take on Putin in terms of what is going on in Afghanistan, what is going on in Ukraine, what is going on in Eastern Europe. Look, this is a man who is embraced all the wrong people, all the wrong people. And he treats NATO like it is a protection racket. So I just think that this is we get to say, China, these are the international rules of the road. You play by them, or we are not playing. Now what we most have to do, excuse me. What is most is we have invest in our own people. We used to invest nationally about two to 3% of our GDP in technology as a government. It is now down to 0.3, if I am not mistaken, could be 0.4%. What are we doing? What in God's name are we doing? They are going to own the 5G market, they are making sure they are focusing extensively on IT. And we are doing what? What are we doing? Trump continues to focus on all those industries that are obsolete in America. We should be investing in made in America and make sure that our workers can out compete anybody in the world, anybody in the world, but what are we doing? We are not focused on it. Sir you had a question. I know we have to go and I have another event, but fire away. I wanted to thank you for your time, ENTITY. And wondering if you have any closing remarks for the membership of NABJ, NAFJ, people who are watching this interview right now? Well, first of all, I just want to thank especially want to thank President Tucker and Hugo, as he referred to the President for the leadership and inviting me to join you today. Look, I want to thank you for all the work you do by strengthening diversity in our press, strengthening quality and capacity of the press and is broadening our perspective and deepening our connection with each other. We need that more now than ever.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2761, "text": "We need people who know about it, especially at a time when black and Latino reporters have been targeted by this President for asking questions, honest questions, and condemn for standing strong and for doing their job. Look, America's facing a confluence of crisis and immeasurable pain, but we are also facing an incredible opportunity. It is an opportunity to right a wrong that has festered since our founding fathers. The fact is black and Latino Americans have never been fully included in our democracy or our economy. It seeps into everything. I have said it already, in the course of this pandemic, black and Latinos Americans have been three times as likely to get infected and twice as likely to die. Black and Latino Americans are disproportionately out of work, facing evictions, losing hope. The communities are the first ones to get hit and the last ones to get any relief. We need overwhelming response to right that wrong. I am proud of the sweeping plan I put together to build back better, including everyone in the deal. It is long past time we deal with systemic racism in America and deliver black and Latino Americans their full share of the American dream. Every one of us has a role to play in that work. So I want to thank you for shining a light on all of this and the work you do, and the stories you communicate because you have great credibility in the people you communicate to, it matters a great deal. And folks, I know you may not agree, but I honest to God think we have been delivered to one of those inflection points in American history that has not occurred since the '30s, where the public has had the blinders taken off and they have looked around and said, Oh my God, I did not realize it. I am convinced, and I am also emboldened by the younger generation, the generation Z to the young millennials. They are the best educated, the least prejudiced, the most open generation in American history. I will just say one last thing. When you have roughly 24 out of every 100 students in kindergarten through high school that speaks Spanish, how in God's name does it make any sense for any other American to say there is nothing we should do more than make sure they are fully integrated, educated, and grow? It is the future of the country. And the idea we walk away makes no sense.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "revcomblogtranscriptsjoebideninterviewtranscriptaugust6talksmentalfitnesshealthcare", "title": "Joe Biden Interview Transcript August 6: Compares Black and Latino Diversity & Faces Criticism", "source": "https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-interview-transcript-august-6-talks-mental-fitness-healthcare", "publication_date": "06-08-2020", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Joe Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2762, "text": "Well, you are in a good mood right now, but on the trail you seemed a little... there is a little edge. There is a little tone of frustration and one of your friends told me that you are deeply frustrated and worried about the economy. You know, you swim in this economic data. How concerned are you and how worried should people be that we might be that we might be heading into a double dip? Even if we do not go into a double dip, what I feel is what the American people feel, which is that we have now gone through not only two-and-a-half, three years of post recession blues where housing crashed. People have lost the value of their homes, they have lost their jobs, all the struggles and strains that people are going through every day, but even before the crisis the hit, for a decade, people have seen their wages flat line, their incomes flat line. So, yes, there is an enormous sense on my part that not only do we have to solve the immediate problems that the economy faces, but we have got to get this economy on a stronger foundation. If you hear a sense of urgency in my voice, it is because these problems are solvable, but you do not get a sense that we are moving in Washington with a sense of urgency that is required. I am not worried in the sense that I do not think we can solve these problems. The jobs plan that I put forward, we know that it will grow the economy by as much as 2 percent. We know that it could add as many as 1.9 million jobs. We can put teachers back in the classroom. We can put construction workers back on the job rebuilding our roads, bridges and schools. I am not worried about the long term prospects of this economy because we still have the best universities in the world, the best workers in the world. We have got the best entrepreneurs and the best market system in the world, but I am concerned that right now, things in Washington are broken. It seems as if too many folks are willing to put politics ahead of what is required and making the tough choices whether that is reducing deficit, whether it is putting people back to work, whether it is making investments that are necessary for us to become competitive, you do not get a sense of people all pulling together in the same direction. And that is what is going to be required to some very significant challenges.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketapperabcnewsnightline", "title": "Interview With Jake Tapper on ABC News Nightline", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-abc-news-nightline", "publication_date": "18-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2763, "text": "You have gotten a lot passed though, much of your agenda has been passed the stimulus, health care, Wall Street reform so we are sitting in a state right now where a majority of the voters disapprove of your handling of the economy and we are going to Virginia later, where a majority of the voters do not thing you deserve to be re-elected. We are sitting in a school, what grade would you give yourself? Well, you know I am not going to give myself a grade. Other than incomplete because the work that we started is not yet done, but the fact is that the American people are rightly frustrated over what they see as a system in which responsibility is not always rewarded, where people who have done the right thing all their lives still seem to be struggling, that sense that the American dream is slipping away. I think that is something that helped get me elected but it has not been entirely solved yet, and in some ways it is gotten tougher for folks because of the financial crisis. And I think most people understand that we did not get into this problem overnight and we are not going to solve it overnight, but I think that after two-and-a-half, three years of elevated unemployment, home values declining substantially, people feeling as if everything they have worked for is still leaving them vulnerable and not having the security they have counted on, it is not surprising that people are feeling frustrated and as ENTITY of the United States, even though they do not think I caused the problem, they are still going to feel a justifiable impatience in terms of why are not we able to get this in a better place. What I say to the American people is that we are moving in the right direction, it is going to take time to heal all the problems that exist out there, the health care bill that we passed is absolutely the right thing to do but it is going to take awhile before it is even fully implemented, much less taken full effect, and you start seeing health care inflation stabilize. When it comes to education we are doing great reforms at the elementary and secondary levels but it could take 10 years before we start seeing the full effects of education reform taking place. That is why the jobs bill is so important because even as we are doing these structural reforms that put us in a stronger position in the long terms, we still have to help people now and the most important thing we can do right now is to make sure we are putting people back to work.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketapperabcnewsnightline", "title": "Interview With Jake Tapper on ABC News Nightline", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-abc-news-nightline", "publication_date": "18-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2764, "text": "Some of the frustration that has come out in this 'Occupy Wall Street' protest, you have expressed sympathy with their position, with their feeling of powerlessness. First of all, how do you, as ENTITY of the United States, channel an energy and anger that is aimed at you in some ways, aimed at Washington? And the other question I have is it seems as though sometimes your pitch, or the White House pitch, is you are almost a victim in this. You are not responsible when you have gotten so much past. I just wonder if you think that is effective to say, it is those mean Republicans who are blocking me, when you have really gotten a lot done? Well what we have gotten done I am enormously proud of and it is making a difference, and in some cases we have had a chance to actually work with the Republicans. When they show themselves willing to actually engage to try and get stuff done, then we can do a lot of good for the country. We just signed a series of trade agreements that potentially can create tens of thousands of jobs throughout this country so that we are starting to sell cars in South Korea and not just buy cars from South Korea. We just passed a bill to reform our patent system so our entrepreneurs are able to make sure that they are rewarded for the great ideas that they have and get them to market quicker. So wherever we can find areas of common cause, I am ready and willing to work with them right away. But I do not say that we are victimized, I say that we got too little of the kind of let us work together attitude in Washington that we need, and that has been true since I came into office. And that is just a fact, that the truth of the matter is that on a series of very important measures that could make a big difference, the most prominent being right now is putting people back to work, rebuilding our infrastructure, getting teachers back in the classroom, we have not seen that attitude of cooperation that is necessary. The fact of the matter is, in the absence of some Republican support, they are able to block proposals even if they have gotten the support of the majority of American people. Sixty-three percent of the American people support the elements of my jobs plan, they support the idea that we should have the best infrastructure in the world. They support the idea that we should not be firing teachers at time when we know education is the most important thing we can do to make sure our kids can compete in this economy.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketapperabcnewsnightline", "title": "Interview With Jake Tapper on ABC News Nightline", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-abc-news-nightline", "publication_date": "18-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2765, "text": "And yet, even though we have gotten a majority of senators in the Senate willing to move forward on this, because of the filibuster, because of the rules that are set up in the Senate, those things are blocked. And most prominently on the debt ceiling debacle that we just went through, everybody knows that we are going to have to get our deficit under control, but we have to do it in a way that allows us still to invest. What I have said is I am willing to go beyond the one trillion dollars in cuts that we have already made, we can cut programs that do not make sense, curb government spending but in order to close the deficit, people like myself should also pay a little more in taxes. People who are making a million dollars or more can afford to do a little bit more, and that ideological stubbornness that is unwilling to compromise and create a balanced approach to deficit reduction is another example of why people are so frustrated. You asked earlier about Occupy Wall Street and what I have said is that I understand the frustrations that are being expressed in those protests. In some ways, they are not that different from some of the protests that we saw coming from the Tea Party, both on the left and the right. I think people feel separated from their government, that the institutions are not looking out for them and that the most important thing we can do right now is those of us in leadership, letting people know that we understand their struggles, we are on their side and that we want to set up a system in which hard work, responsibility, doing what you are supposed to do, is rewarded, and that people who are irresponsible, who are reckless, who do not feel a sense of obligation to their communities and to their companies and to their workers, that those folks are not rewarded. You know, I think that we are at a critical moment in this country where if we can regain some of the values that help build this country, that people I think long for, where they feel that everybody gets a fair shake but we are also asking a fair share from everybody, but if we can go back to that, then I think a lot of that anger and frustration dissipates. It is just over two months until the Republican Iowa caucus. I do not know if you are watching the debates, but I am sure you are reading about them in the paper. Herman Cain has his 9-9-9 plan.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketapperabcnewsnightline", "title": "Interview With Jake Tapper on ABC News Nightline", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-abc-news-nightline", "publication_date": "18-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2766, "text": "What are you hearing from the Republicans when it comes to the economy? What do you think of their proposals? I have got to say, what I have not heard is anything new, across the board, whether it is coming from Congress or from the Republican candidates so far. Well, essentially what it says is that we are going to make sure that the wealthiest among us pay less and we replace any revenues with a sales tax that would be a huge burden on middle class families and working families. I remember a candidate who ran against me, Alan Keyes who was running against me in the Senate, had a similar kind of proposal. Those ideas have been have been floating around for a long time. The overall thrust seems to be if we roll back regulations, and we lower taxes on those who are doing best, oftentimes by imposing more taxes on middle class and working class families, that somehow the economy is going to get better. One of the things I am most surprised about is hearing both from Republican members of Congress and Republican candidates, the notion that we should return to the rules that existed on Wall Street before the financial crisis. They want to roll back all the Wall Street reforms we put into place as if they have got amnesia about how we got into this problem in the first place. We have set up, for example, under Wall Street reform a consumer advocate, a consumer protection board that, whose sole job is to make sure people are not being taken advantage of when it comes to their credit cards or their mortgages, making sure that in their financial dealings they are being treated fairly and transparently. And right now, the Republicans have said they are not even going to confirm a consumer advocate, a consumer watchdog that we have nominated, Rich Cordray. You are going to talk a lot more about this in the coming days? Absolutely, because I think whether you are a Republican or a Democrat, if you are an ordinary guy out there who seen what is happened on Wall Street, whose seen what is happened in the financial system, one thing you at least expect is that we are going to curb some of the reckless behavior that damaged the entire economy so profoundly. And the notion that the Senate Republicans put forward what they call a jobs plan was one of their central tenants was we are going to roll back Wall Street reform and go back to the same rules that got us in this in the first place. I do not think that is going to find a lot of sympathy from the American people.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketapperabcnewsnightline", "title": "Interview With Jake Tapper on ABC News Nightline", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-abc-news-nightline", "publication_date": "18-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2767, "text": "Your senior political advisor David Axelrod has spent a lot of time in the last month talking about Mitt Romney. I genuinely am not spending a lot of time worrying about who their candidate is going to be. I am not asking if you are worried about it. I am asking if you are thinking about it. I guess what I am saying is I saw in my own presidential race, and I have seen enough presidential races that people are surprised that it does not make sense for me to prognosticate on what I think is going to happen on their side. They are going to go through a process. We have already seen people who get enormous attention suddenly go by the wayside. They will go through the process and sometime next year they will have a nominee. What I am certain of, though, is that there is going to be a very clear contrast between whoever they nominate and their vision of where we should take the country and where I believe we should take the country. I think that on a whole host of issues, whether it is Wall Street reform, whether it is that we are investing in education or rebuilding our infrastructure, whether it is how we approach reducing our deficit. Are we going to do it in a balanced way or are we going to do it on the backs of our seniors or the middle class or the poor? On a whole range of these issues, there is going to be a clear choice for the American people to make. I guarantee it is going to be a close election because the economy is not where it wants to be and even though I believe all the choices we have made have been the right ones, we are still going through difficult circumstances. That means people who may be sympathetic to my point of view still kind of feel like, yeah, but it still has not gotten done yet. This is going to be a close election and a very important one for the American people. The thing I hope the most is that everyone is going to be paying close attention to the debate that takes place because it could determine not just what happens over the next four years, but what'll happen over the next 20 or 30 years. 47 percent of the country voted against you with everything going your way, pretty much. It is not difficult to think that there are four million Americans who thought well, I gave him a shot. Let us give this other guy another chance.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketapperabcnewsnightline", "title": "Interview With Jake Tapper on ABC News Nightline", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-abc-news-nightline", "publication_date": "18-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2768, "text": "I think someone asked me a while back if they thought I was the underdog and I said I was in 2008 and I think will be in 2012. You know, presidential elections in America are always tough because this is a country that is diverse. We have a lot of folks who feel very strongly on one side of the ledger or the other, but the thing I am spending most of my time thinking about right now is how can I put people to work right now and how can I improve the economy right now and stabilize it. The election is 13 months away and as I have been saying in some of my remarks as I travel around the country, there are a lot of folks living paycheck to paycheck, living day to day. They cannot afford just 13 months of politics. What they need is action. So, if we can put of these construction workers back to work rebuilding our roads and bridges and schools, if we can get teachers back in the classroom, we can provide some tax breaks to small businesses who are hiring veterans or long-term unemployed. I have no idea what that does for the politics of the presidential election, I do know that there will be an awful lot of people out here doing better and are in a stronger position to dig themselves out of this very difficult economic circumstance we have been in. Aside from some of the more wild charges out there, this is a big scandal. The Justice Department, the ATF was moving guns and some of them were tied to crime scenes. what was your response when you first heard about it? Well I heard about it from the news reports. This is not something we were aware of in the White House and the Attorney General it turns out was not aware of either. Obviously Eric Holder has launched a full investigation of this, it is not acceptable for us to allow guns to go into Mexico. Our whole goal has been to interdict aggressively in the flow of weapons and cash flowing south into Mexico because the Mexican president, President Calderon, has done a heroic job of trying to take on these transnational drug cartels. So this investigation will be complete, people who have screwed up will be held accountable but our overarching goal consistently has been to say we have got a responsibility not only to stop drugs from flowing north, we have also got a responsibility to make sure we are not helping to either arm or finance these drug cartels in Mexico.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjaketapperabcnewsnightline", "title": "Interview With Jake Tapper on ABC News Nightline", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jake-tapper-abc-news-nightline", "publication_date": "18-10-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2769, "text": "I have got to tell you something, sir. I have been waiting a long time on getting you on this program. I even went down for the big old ENTITY watch when you were over on the Vineyard this summer, and I am sorry I missed you. So let us talk about a couple of things. First of all, you need to know that all the kids over at Framingham High are looking forward to your coming down with Senator Kennedy. And let us talk about this education bill. Even Jack Anderson is calling you the education ENTITY. Well, we have worked very hard on education, and Senator Kennedy has had a lot to do with it. A lot of our education initiatives have not attracted a great deal of public notice, maybe because we have been successful in getting bipartisan support for them, for most of them, all but the college loan program. The program to provide middle class college loans at lower interest rates had no Republican support because we took on some organized interest groups. And it is a real tribute to Ted Kennedy because he got the expansion of Head Start in, he got the national service program in. And this education act we are signing in Boston tomorrow, or in Framingham, has an incredible amount of good things in it. It is a dramatic reform in terms of putting more responsibility back on local school districts, giving them freedom from Federal rules and regulations but giving them very high standards to shoot for. It is a really it is a very modern, exciting, and I think, effective piece of education legislation. I am proud to be signing it. Well, you know, ENTITY, Senator Kennedy is not only delighted to have you here signing that particular bill, but as you know, this is the toughest race the Senator has ever faced in 32 years. And for many of us in Massachusetts, we are surprised to know that nationally he is one of several seats that we are looking at that could be in very serious jeopardy. Your coming out here to help him will be bringing a message to Massachusetts voters that says what? How important is Senator Kennedy and his reelection to the completion of your agenda as you go back to Washington? He is terribly important to doing it. And he is important for some reasons that people, I think, may not be aware of in Massachusetts. I mean, the rap that his critics are saying is that, Well, he is been there long enough.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarjorieclapproodwrkoradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Marjorie Clapprood of WRKO Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-marjorie-clapprood-wrko-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "19-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2770, "text": "But I can tell you, I have been talking around here the last week, just asking people, and there is a general feeling here that of all the people in the Congress, Ted Kennedy is one of the four or five who are most receptive to new ideas, to trying new things, to breaking out in new directions. And if you just look at what we have done in education, we have changed the whole national approach to education. Have national standards, have the National Government helping, but give people the freedom at the grassroots level to try new things and to do things that will work. And he is also been instrumental in developing a national apprenticeship program for young people who do not go to college and, as I said, this college loan program. We have had the most impressive set of achievements in the last year and a half in education we have seen in the last 35 years, a lot of cutting-edge, new ideas, and Ted Kennedy has done it. The other thing he is very good at that I think people do not appreciate is he is the best Democratic legislator at getting Republicans to support what he is doing. He is the best at getting bipartisan support. And I think that if the people of Massachusetts know that, they would be more inclined to reelect him, because he is really a very forward-looking Member of the Congress, and we need him back. Well, one of the things that the First Lady said when she was in a couple of weeks back I was happy to be at the dinner that she hosted for the Senator she went so far as to say that Senator Kennedy's opponent, Mitt Romney, is really just another clone for Phil Gramm and another Senator no for you. Are you as worried about that? Do you want to make any predictions on all of these GOP threats that they are going to be taking over the Senate and taking over the Congress this time around? Well, I do not think they will if we can get the facts out there. I mean, we have made the Government work for ordinary Americans. We have passed things like family leave and the Brady bill and immunizations for all the kids in this country under 2, against ferocious Republican opposition. We have got more highwage jobs coming into the economy in 1994 than the previous 5 years combined. If we can get the record out, we should be winning seats, not them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarjorieclapproodwrkoradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Marjorie Clapprood of WRKO Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-marjorie-clapprood-wrko-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "19-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2771, "text": "But the problem is that they are great talkers, and they promise the Moon, and they will go like robots off of a cliff together. And that is what I am worried about. It is no offense to Mr. Romney, but they all in the last few days of the legislative session up here, we had an important piece of environmental legislation, the Superfund bill to clean up toxic waste dumps. Everybody in America was for it. We had the chemical companies, the unions, the Sierra Club; they were all for it first time they had ever agreed on anything. There was no one in America against it except over 40 Republican Senators who filibustered it to death to keep people like Ted Kennedy from coming back to Massachusetts and saying we helped to clean up toxic waste dumps. They were willing to leave the poison in the ground. They killed lobby reform and campaign finance reform. And all the lobbyists were cheering Senator Helms when he walked off the floor of the Senate and saying how great it was. Now, I do not think the American people want to turn the Congress over to them. And especially, I do not think they want to go back to trickle-down Reaganomics. That is what they have promised to do, you know. They have promised to give us the economic policies that they did in the eighties that put New England in the ditch. And I do not think that the people will support it once they know that. Well, you know, one of the things that I loved about your campaign, ENTITY, was the slogan It is the economy, stupid. And it seems as though, with all the indicators macroeconomically looking so terrific what is the deal with cynical voters? I mean, how do we get this message out? It seems to me that you cannot win for losing, even when everything looks good. And that is that we have had 20 years when most wages have been stagnant for hourly wage earners and when people have been changing jobs more frequently, so that makes them more insecure. The average 18-year-old, for example, will change jobs six, seven times in a lifetime now. So even though people may say the unemployment rate is dropping and new jobs are coming into America, into Massachusetts, there is still an unsettled feeling. A lot of people themselves have not gotten a raise. A million Americans lost their health insurance last year; that is why we have to address that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarjorieclapproodwrkoradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Marjorie Clapprood of WRKO Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-marjorie-clapprood-wrko-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "19-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2772, "text": "Then there is a political problem, which is that when Congress is in session, particularly with the bitter partisan obstruction we have seen, what tends to get covered is the fights, the bad news, the failures, the process. So a lot of people just do not know the facts about the economy. So what I am going out to do now, in the last 3 weeks, is to say, Look, we are making Government work for ordinary people. We are bringing the economy back. The world is a more peaceful, more secure place for Americans, with opportunities for prosperity. We should be very upbeat about the future, and we ought to reward the people that are building the future, not reward the people that are tearing it down. Do you have any further comments, other than those that you made on KMOX, about talk radio? Do you think that the right-wing conservative bashing of talk radio has done a disservice? It seems to me that is the national pastime of a lot of my colleagues on the air; that is just the get good ratings if you kick Bill around. Me. Oh, I like you. But generally, I like radio because it is an immediate, it is almost an intimate thing. And people feel that they have a chance to have their say. But a lot of these folks who are on the far right, they never have anybody on that disagrees with them, they never have an honest discussion, and they are not as careful as they ought to be with their facts. I think it is good to have your critics on there and to have honest debates. We should not all agree on everything, and no one in America, including the ENTITY, is right about everything. But what I think the American people ought to insist on from talk radio is a conversation, not a screaming match, and strict adherence to the facts. That is the only thing that bothers me. I think generally this talk radio phenomenon can be a great instrument in promoting democracy. People feel so isolated from Washington, so isolated from the bureaucracies. A lot of folks even feel isolated from their State capital. So if talk radio makes people feel like they have got a voice, they can be heard, then that is good. And I have got this big problem my mother always said to me, a position that is not articulated ceases to exist. I agree with that. I wanted to ask you a little bit about international affairs, if we can.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarjorieclapproodwrkoradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Marjorie Clapprood of WRKO Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-marjorie-clapprood-wrko-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "19-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2773, "text": "Coming on the heels now of what looks like a fairly peaceful transition and return of Jean-Bertrand Aristide to power in Haiti, you have got an awful lot on your international plate, with the Middle East, with what is happening in Kuwait, and I understand you are on your way next week to the signing of the peace accord between Israel and Jordan. Do you feel as though you have turned a major corner in your administration in terms of not only the maturity of the ENTITY administration but in public perception finally cutting you a break and saying, You know what, he is doing all right ? I think, first of all, a lot of these problems are very difficult, and they do not yield overnight. And a lot of them are things we have been working on here for 2 years. But I am very proud of what our people, particularly our young men and women in uniform, have done in Haiti and in the Persian Gulf. I am proud of the role the United States is playing toward peace in the Middle East and in Northern Ireland. And I am very proud of the work that Ambassador Gallucci did in hammering out this agreement with the North Koreans, which will enable us to avoid a confrontation with them, and enable them to move toward a more normal relationship with South Korea and with the rest of the world, and take a major nuclear threat away. But I am feeling good about it. getting our relationship straight with the Russians and reducing the nuclear threat in that part of the world, and toward getting an international economic order set up. We worked on NAFTA, the Asian Pacific countries, the GATT world trade agreement. And then this year, we had some good success, as you have pointed out, in Haiti and the Middle East and elsewhere. And I am very excited, as I know a lot of people in Massachusetts are, about the moves toward peace in Northern Ireland. And we are working hard on that as well. You do not even have time to go bowling anymore. I miss bowling. By the way, I know I heard on your birthday one of your wishes was to break 80. Did you ever do that?  I am playing pretty well, for me. And if I lowered my handicap when I was ENTITY, the American people would never believe that I am working as hard as I am. So I probably should not want to break 80. It makes you very charming and endearing, because the rest of us can all relate to that. Let me ask you just a couple wacky questions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarjorieclapproodwrkoradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Marjorie Clapprood of WRKO Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-marjorie-clapprood-wrko-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "19-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2774, "text": "The thing that I remember most about you from the first time that I heard about the Governor from Arkansas that wanted to be ENTITY was a picture I saw of you with then-ENTITY John Fitzgerald Kennedy, a personal hero of mine but also someone here from Massachusetts. And I grew up in his hometown of Brookline. And I saw that picture recently on sort of a retrospective of your tenure over this last year and half as ENTITY. And I wondered, from that idealistic young man that you were, to now sitting in the Oval Office and dealing with questions like sending the 82d Airborne down to Haiti while Sam Nunn and Jimmy Carter and Colin Powell sat there, making decisions on war and peace, is it everything that you thought it was going to be? I mean, if anything, I am more hopeful, more optimistic about the future of this country than I was before I got here. You never want to say, Quit your bitching. Well, I do want to say that some. I mean, sometimes I think that Americans in this time are a little too prone to see the glass as half empty instead of half full. Our optimism, our unfailing faith in our ability to make the future better has been one of the great secrets to our successes over the last 200 years. And so I do feel that. I regret that at this moment in our history there is a lot of accumulated cynicism and frustration and that it is, in some ways, more difficult for the ENTITY to communicate directly to the American people than it has been in the past, because of all the indirect filters between me and the American people. The Presidency is more isolated than I wish it were, partly because of the security concerns that exist in this day and age. But having said all that, it is a joy and an honor to go to work here every day. And I feel good about the fact that the economy is coming back. I feel good about the fact that we are facing up to problems that have been ignored for years and years here. I feel good about the fact that we are able to do things like this family leave law and to give tax breaks to working families with children to keep them out of poverty, because I do not think anybody that works full-time with a kid in the house should be there. These are things I take pride in, not for me but for our country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithmarjorieclapproodwrkoradiobostonmassachusetts", "title": "Interview With Marjorie Clapprood of WRKO Radio, Boston, Massachusetts", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-marjorie-clapprood-wrko-radio-boston-massachusetts", "publication_date": "19-10-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2775, "text": "You have acknowledged that as ENTITY you have got to take the heat for this economy, and people are blaming you for not doing something about it. Besides speeding up the spending of $1.9 billion in Federal money for programs, what specifically are you going to suggest can be done for the economy, that the ENTITY can do without concurrence by the Congress? Well, $9.7 billion is the figure and I think that will help certainly in some areas. I will be signing a transportation bill tomorrow that is going to free up a bunch of money for construction projects. And then we may have one or two other things that are of significant size before the State of the Union. But a lot of what can be done in Washington relies on congressional action. And so, what I am going to be doing is taking a package -- some new elements, some sound old elements that we have not gotten Congress to pass, and say to the American people, Look, I need your help now. I want to lay aside partisan politics and pass this job-creating package to help the economy . We hear about all those old elements all the time; they do not seem to be working. What are some of the new elements you are going to propose? I would not tell you about that because we are still formulating the package. But stay tuned for the State of the Union and, as I say, possibly before then. But they should not say old elements that have not worked. They should say old elements that have not been enacted. these things are good ideas that we simply have not gotten Congress to enact yet. We have got to help the economy and help the people that are hurting. I talked to four Chicagoans who wanted to pose questions to you, and I am going to tell you about them and tell you their questions. One is a man from the Chicago suburbs. A veteran of Desert Storm, served in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, laid off when he got back from the Persian Gulf. And he says, It was almost better when I was in the Persian Gulf. At least I knew where the next check was coming from. My wife and son would receive some money every month. I wonder what the next year's going to hold for me. ENTITY, is it going to be better for me? And I can say that because I really believe that we will come out of this sluggish economy, some places clearly are in real decline.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlindayuwlstvchicagoillinois", "title": "Interview With Linda Yu of WLS - TV in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-linda-yu-wls-tv-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "17-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2776, "text": "And so, to him I'd say, One, we are grateful for the service. Two, the country has not forgotten that service because of the urgency of the economy here. And three, yes, I think times will be better, and I can guarantee you they will be better if I am effective in getting through the Congress the proposals that I will pose to them at the State of the Union. We have had some. We have not been able to get them through the Congress. Three straight years I have proposed growth packages. I have got to get the Congress to see that we must help these people you are talking about. Another woman from Chicago who gave up a career for her children. She is a volunteer in the Chicago public schools for the last 10 years. She says, ENTITY, I am one of your Points of Light. I am wondering, though, how can we improve math and science in our schools when we do not even have the money in Chicago to buy toilet paper and soap for schools, for our children. Why do you feel money for our children is less important than bailing out the savings and loan industry? I do not think money for the children is less important. Federal spending for education is up. But I would remind her, tactfully because she does sound like she is an unselfish person who is out there trying to help as a volunteer and that is an enormous part of the success in education, I would remind her that the Federal Government spends 6 to 7 percent of the total money on education. Educational spending in the last 10 years is up from, oh, by a couple of hundred billion dollars from $115 billion, or something like this, to well over up around $300 billion. So, it is not always a function of money. Our America 2000 education program offers the best hope from the Federal level. It is not going to replace the State level or the level she is talking about, or what the communities can do for the toilet paper or for the classrooms, but it offers the best hope from the Federal level of getting our kids better educated. I am excited about it. I believe America 2000 can really fulfill the Federal Government's responsibility. We also have a woman, a mother, who raises her children in the housing projects of Chicago. One's been accused of gang murder. And she says, ENTITY, my family's really no different from your family.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlindayuwlstvchicagoillinois", "title": "Interview With Linda Yu of WLS - TV in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-linda-yu-wls-tv-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "17-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2777, "text": "I have the same struggles trying to raise my children that you faced raising yours, but my community is very unsafe. I go outside there are drug dealers on every corner. I look around, the drug dealers have a lot of resources, but I do not have any. What are you going to do about it? What I think she ought to do is support our anticrime legislation that is hung up in Congress. It is awful hard to ask a person who is struggling at that level. But if more Americans will get in and say we want a tough crime bill, one that supports the police officers more and tougher on the criminals, I believe that would help her. In addition, we have got a National Drug Strategy that is doing better in terms of the interdiction of narcotics. But I really believe the short-term answer is more support for the law enforcement officials. the local police there in Chicago, they do a first-class job, and they need more support through Federal law, and I think sometimes through State and local law enforcement. You were here in Chicago last week, and everybody wants to know when you went to Billy Goat's, did you really like the cheezboygers, cheezboygers ? And I got a bum rap. Somebody said I asked for french fries; I did not . That was the guy that owns the place sitting next to me saying, chips only, before I even got my mouth open. But, boy, I loved it. I had two cheezboygers. And the people, the people were nice that I sat with. And, you know, let me tell you something, ENTITY, when you do something like that, everybody says show business. A couple of those guys were sheet metal workers that had just gotten to work. One was an unemployed writer, a woman who told me of what it felt like to not have a job. Another had a job at a company called Hill and Knolton. Another was a guy struggling but doing, I think, reasonably well in the computer business. So, I talked to them. And although they had those mics, that you people love, looking over my shoulder, at least I learned something. And I could tell them, hey, we care and we want to help. And I think they know it. I think they know that is what I feel in my heart.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlindayuwlstvchicagoillinois", "title": "Interview With Linda Yu of WLS - TV in Chicago, Illinois", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-linda-yu-wls-tv-chicago-illinois", "publication_date": "17-12-1991", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2790, "text": "You ran for ENTITY promising to end the war in Iraq. And at the time, you said Iraq was sovereign, stable and self-reliant. And now you are redeploying troops, some troops, to Iraq. Are you worried about your legacy in some ways, that there might be an establishment of a terrorist safe haven in the middle of the Middle East? Well, first of all, I think we did exactly what we should have done, which is to turn over to Iraq a country that had the capacity, the ability to govern itself if all the parties involved Shia, Sunni and Kurd were prepared to make compromises with each other. And I think the American people understood that whatever the debate about originally going in, our troops made enormous sacrifices to give the Iraqi people that chance. Unfortunately, that trust between those parties has never fully cohered. And now we are seeing some of the consequences of that. it has been disavowed by al-Qaida as being too violent. How urgent of a threat to the American people is ISIS? I think it is fair to say that their extreme ideology poses a medium- and long-term threat. Right now the problem with ISIS is the fact that they are destabilizing a country that could spill over into some of our, you know, allies, like Jordan, and that they are engaged in wars in Syria where, in that vacuum that is been created, they could amass more arms, more resources. Would that vacuum exist had we backed the moderate rebel forces in Syria? I think this notion that somehow there was this ready-made moderate Syrian force that was able to defeat Assad is simply not true. The notion that they were in a position suddenly to overturn, you know, not only Assad, but also ruthless, highly trained jihadists if we just sent a few arms, is a fantasy. This is the first ever White House summit on working families. I know you said in your State of the Union, when women succeed, America succeeds. What is the single most important thing you think you can do to help working women? Well, the question is not just what I can do, but I think what we as a society need to do. And this is an issue that is near and dear to my heart. I was raised by a single mom. Probably the most important financial bedrock of our family was my grandmother. And both of them were strong, hard-working women, but they experienced the glass ceiling.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnorahodonnellcbsthismorning", "title": "Interview with Norah O'Donnell of CBS This Morning", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-norah-odonnell-cbs-this-morning", "publication_date": "23-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2791, "text": "They dealt with child-care crises. I am now married to a pretty strong woman in Michelle Obama. And before we got to this place, she was dealing sometimes with me campaigning or being away and her having to deal with two small children while also working. And now I have got two daughters. So I want to make sure that they are able to balance family life and the workplace much better than or at least their choices will be better than some of the choices that existed before. So the idea of this working summit is to really lift up conversations that every family all across America has every day. The workplace will be more productive and people will do better if, in fact, they have got a little more flexibility than they currently have. I mean, you look at, even as your you know, your oldest daughter does an internship do you look and say, wow, much has not changed, and this is kind of a problem, and I do not want my daughter to have to go through this? It is important for us not to deny the progress that is been made. You know, women occupy positions of authority and are able to take advantage of career opportunities that, a generation ago, might have been blocked. What is also true is that, you know, all too often childrearing burdens fall on them. They have got to juggle more stuff. What is also true is that, across the board in the aggregate, women are making 77 cents for every dollar that a man's making. Discrimination's still taking place. And so part of what we want to do is to lift up the possibilities of changes in federal policy. But we do not want to restrict it to just federal laws. We also want to show that companies on their own initiative will discover that it is good business sense for them to take advantage of or to offer workers more flexibility on the job. Why is it, then I mean, the majority of the American people back paid family leave that you cannot get it through Congress? Well, you know, we are we are unique among developed countries in not offering it. We have got, unfortunately, a faction of one party that says no to everything.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithnorahodonnellcbsthismorning", "title": "Interview with Norah O'Donnell of CBS This Morning", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-norah-odonnell-cbs-this-morning", "publication_date": "23-06-2014", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2793, "text": "ENTITY left for this Asia trip with a slew of unfinished business in his in box, most notably that decision on a new Afghanistan strategy. Well, a week later, it does not appear ENTITY is any closer to making any sort of announcement. I will announce my decision over the next several weeks. I am confident that, at the end of this process, I am going to be able to present to the American people, in very clear terms, what exactly is at stake, what we intend to do, how we are going to succeed, how much it is going to cost, how long it is going to take. And I think that is what is owed the American people, because, frankly, over the last several years, that is not what they have gotten. Reducing the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan any time soon. Part of, I think, the task here is making sure that Afghanistan is sufficiently stable so that we can make that handoff. So my goal is exactly what you described -- creating a situation in which our footprint is smaller and Afghan security forces can do the job of keeping their country together. They need help from us. And that is exactly what our strategy is going to be designed to do. This decision, will it be the decision that ultimately ends the war? This decision will put us on a path towards ending the war. Can you understand why it is offensive to some for this terrorist to get all the legal privileges of an American citizen? I do not think it will be offensive at all when he is convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him. Pressed on whether he was prejudging a verdict, the former constitutional-law professor expressed confidence in the government's case. What I said was that people will not be offended if that is the outcome. I am not prejudging it. I am not going to be in that courtroom. That is the job of the prosecutors, the judge and the jury. What I am absolutely clear about is that I have complete confidence in the American people and in our legal traditions and the prosecutors, tough prosecutors from New York, who specialize in terrorism. Asked about the growing list of missed White House deadlines, including health care and shutting down the Guantanamo prison, the said he was not concerned. Guantanamo, we had a specific deadline that was missed. The rest of these deadlines that you are asserting oftentimes are deadlines imposed by the media, not imposed by us.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithchucktoddnbcstoday0", "title": "Interview with Chuck Todd on NBC's Today", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-chuck-todd-nbcs-today-0", "publication_date": "18-11-2009", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2800, "text": "We will , of course, be including your phone calls. The phones will flash on the screen. It was a little tougher to change things than I thought it would be. There was in this city a culture that I knew existed that tended to sometimes major in the minor and minor in the major, as you know. But I still found that if we stayed after it we could make change. It was not tough to adjust to the job. I like the job. And I was very concerned about how it would affect my family. Hillary and I wanted to-we had a good life before, a good family life, good work life. And we were very concerned about Chelsea, who loved her school, her activities, her friends at home. But I am proud of the transition she is made. And over the holidays when we were sort of reminiscing, we were most proud, I think, that our daughter had adjusted to her new school, made worlds of good friends, and has her ballet and other things. Yes. She was real important to me. I loved her a lot. And the night she died she called me. We had a wonderful talk. And then I went home, and we put the funeral together. And then I went to Europe, and I came back, took a physical, and then went to California. So you have had no time to grieve. You remember when she called on your show? You were in Ocala. We were in Ocala, Florida, and you set me up. My mother called me from Vegas. Last trip she took, you know, which is what she should have done. I saw some people who were with her the night before she died. That had to be the worst; what was the best day of this year? And then we will discuss a whole bunch of things and take calls. Well, I think my best personal day was Christmas because we had our families here. It is always very important to me. Hillary loves it. Chelsea loves it. And we had Mother here and her husband, Dick, and my brother and Hillary's family. Probably the passage of the economic plan, because it made possible all the other things, the victory of NAFTA, the GATT agreement, the passage of family leave, national service, all the other things. If the economic plan had not happened, we could not have turned the economy around, and we could not have had all those other successes in Congress.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2801, "text": "Let us run down some things real current. You are just back from L.A. Are they going to have tents outside for those people? They are working on that. They are also working on whether we can get some more trailers in and other things. What was that like to go there? I mean, we were there for it-- But I must tell you, standing on those pieces of broken interstate highway and to realize that happened in a matter of seconds, that massive- tons and tons of concrete moved, and then, of course, seeing all the homes ruined and businesses cracked open, it was an amazing thing. Well, I think the first and most important role is to assure that the federal emergency management program is working, that we are getting the emergency help to people they need, the food, the shelter, and the money in some cases, people have lost everything; secondly, that we put in motion the rebuilding process to get housing to people and to deal with the longer term needs; and thirdly, that in the case of Los Angeles, that we start rebuilding those highways as quickly as possible. So we have got to do this in a way that does not upset the economy. There are some, as you know, among us in America who will say, Well, it is their problem. They chose to live in that area. Well, because California paid for Des Moines when we had that awful flood. Americans are normally at their best in times of grave natural disaster. And I must say, after all the people in California have been through- they had the riots, and then they had the fires, and they have had all the losses of jobs because of the defense cutbacks and the national recession-to have this put on them. And yet I met so many brave people. I met a women who said, You know, I lost my house, but I'd like to say I hope nobody will take advantage of the Federal Government. Do not apply for aid you do not deserve. Do not ask for something you do not need. Somebody else may need this later in the year. That is the kind of spirit you get. And I would hope that the people of America would want to help those folks who through no fault of their own were really dislocated.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2802, "text": "I also would tell you when there is a severe economic disruption, whether it was the Middle West because of the horrible floods in the Mississippi River Valley and the adjoining rivers or now southern California in the case of this earthquake, it hurts the whole rest of the American economy. So we have got to be family in emergencies. And I think that is what America wants to do. What do you make of the Bobby Inman story? You may know as much about that as anybody. All I can tell you is that I accept his statement. He made a decision. I do not think we should lose sight of the fact that he was a four-star admiral. He gave 30 years of service to his country. He was confirmed by the United States Senate four times. You think maybe he really did not want the job? Because? it is just too brutal, what you are put through. That is what he said. Are there days you think that? You like it too much? I like it. But the only thing I have ever cared about on that is my family. You know, when Hillary or Chelsea get hurt or when my mother was hurt by something that was said or done, that really bothered me, especially for Hillary and Chelsea. They really did not sign on for all that. But for me, I figure, if you look around the Western world and you look at the recent history of the United States, if you sign on for a political career in the latter half of the 20th century, you just have to expect a level of that that did not exist before. And so I always say, if you want to get into this business, you need to know who are, what you believe in, and where you stand with what you believe because you cannot let yourself be defined by what happens outside. The reports today are that it was offered to Sam Nunn and he declined. Well, I cannot discuss that, otherwise I would have to deal with all the other personalities I have considered, and so I do not want to discuss personalities. Would you say he would be on the list? I will say this-that he would be a great Secretary of Defense, but he is got an awfully influential position now. I am going to proceed in a deliberate but fairly quick way to name a Secretary of Defense, and then I will talk about the process. Why in this year did we have so many appointment problems? First of all, I think most of it was because the rules changed on the household help issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2803, "text": "And all of a sudden it was a big issue, and the press was pillorying people that had the problem. if you have had this problem but you pay your taxes and then now you will not be-so that was the first big problem. The second thing was that people's writings became an issue for jobs other than the Supreme Court. That is, Judge Bork's writings were an issue but that is because the Supreme Court got to read, interpret the Constitution, and it was a lifetime job. The Senators and others decided this year that they'd make that an issue for everybody for confirmation, which I think is a questionable standard, but it did. You are talking about Lani Guinier and-- And one or two others that became an issue even though we got a couple through. I talked to several Republicans and Democrats who have no particular axe to grind now who think maybe it is time to have a bipartisan look at this whole appointments process. You have two and three levels of investigation. In that area, are we going to get a Deputy Attorney General for Civil Rights? Well, I certainly expect one soon. The civil rights bar basically was heavily involved in the nomination of the last candidate who withdrew. And the Attorney General is working hard on it. And basically I have given her my proxy on the thing, Just work with them. Work with people who are committed to having a strong civil rights enforcement. Interestingly enough, last year just when the Attorney General herself was in office and we did not have a full-time director of the division, civil rights enforcement was way up at record levels in many areas. So we have got a good record, but I think it is important to have somebody in there who is good. So you are giving Janet Reno a proxy meeting-if she comes to you tomorrow and says it is Joe Jones -- This is the person I'd like to nominate, unless there is some reason that I should not , something I know that she does not know, then I will be strongly inclined to go with her judgment. Of course, in your popularity ratings, which, congratulations, keep going up- went up today-you scored the highest in the area of race relations. Does that surprise you? I think the American people know how much I care about it. It is been a part of me ever since I was a little child. It was a big part of my work as Governor.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2804, "text": "And I think the American people know that I am committed to both equality and excellence, that I want people without regard to their race to have a shot at the brass ring in America. And I think also the American people know that we cannot solve the other problems, the crime, the violence, the family breakdown, all these other things, unless we reach across the racial divides. We just cannot do it. We are not going to make it if we do not . About Ms. Reno-we keep reading-she goes up and down, and again these are pundits who say this. I told her when she was hot as a firecracker, you know, with the public and with the press when she got here, and I was joking with her once, I said, You know, Janet, you go up and you go down in this business, and if you stay out there long enough, you will take a few licks. And she is taken a few licks, but she has an enormous feel for simple justice, which is what I think people want in the Attorney General. She is got a steel backbone, and she understands what really works. She, like all the rest of us-none of us are perfect; we all make mistakes. But boy, she goes to work every day and really tries to do what is right for ordinary Americans. If it is up to me, she is. I think she is done a fine job. Rumors are part of this scheme. I think he is done a good job. And I think if you look at this last trip we took to Europe, and you look at the work that he has done, along with others in the national security and foreign policy team, the United States was very well received in Europe on this trip. They know that we are trying to unify Europe for the first time in history. Never in the whole history of Europe has it not been divided. The divisions of Europe caused these two awful World Wars in this century, caused the cold war. We have got a chance to unite it. We may not make it, but we have got a chance to unite it. And he has worked hard on that, that is right. And I think he is really done a good job with the Middle East peace. He is managed this process. He is been to the Middle East a lot. And he is got good strong support at the State Department. So I think he is done a good job.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2805, "text": "What do you make of Mr. Yeltsin's grip there-strong? On a scale of 10, where would you rate it? I think he is got a strong grip because he is got a 4-year term and a constitution which gives him more power, for example, than I have here, just pure legal power. I think that in the last election, a lot of people who are not friendly to some of his policies did very well, partly because the reformers did not campaign as one group and did not do a very good job in the mass media and all that sort of stuff, partly because the average Russian's having a tough time now. One of the things that I did when I was in Russia, and you know, through that town meeting-kind of like we do-and let people ask me questions, and I tried to establish some link between them and these processes of reform that are sweeping the world. Because times are tough for them now. And I think anytime times are tough-and keep in mind, they have just been a democracy a little while. We have been at this 200 years. And we kind of feel haywire from time to time, and we have been working at it for two centuries. And so they elected some pretty extremist people and some people that are calling them to a past that is romanticized. And I think he is going to have a challenging time. He believes in democracy. He is on the right side of history. Some more talks and questions from me, and then he will take your calls. We are back to this talk with the ENTITY on this one-year anniversary. That is because we are in a winter-terrible situation here in-you cannot -you have a lot of power, but you cannot do anything about ice storms. You cannot do anything about zero degrees. We have not been asked to do as much as we were for the earthquake or the flood for that matter. More people have died in the Northeast-- It is a 100-year cold in a lot of these places. We have, first of all, tried to cut down on the Federal Government's power usage. We shut it down yesterday, shut it down today, and we are going to open late tomorrow and try to keep our power usage down so that we can give the power to people in their homes.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2806, "text": "Secondly, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Cisneros anticipating this, gave out all of our homeless money early, so that all the State and local governments all around here have got as much money as we can possibly give them to take care of homelessness and to try-- Yes, just try-on the event that it happened, we just wanted to get everybody off the streets as much as we can. And we are going to be looking for whatever else we can do now. Nature humbles all of us. I was looking at that interstate cracked open and those houses ruined in Los Angeles yesterday, and I just remind you that we are not in full control-- A ENTITY brings hope to that, does not he? Yesterday I could see-thousands of people came out to see me yesterday, to see the ENTITY, not Bill Clinton, And I could see their energy, their hope. One is to rally them by doing my job, and the other is doing my job. James Lee Witt, who runs the emergency management of this country is doing a wonderful job, and we work at that hard. And we owe that to those people. More things current, Special Counsel Robert Fiske appointed today by Janet Reno, was that solely her appointment? I did not know anything about it. Do you know Mr. Fiske? Whatever they want to do, we will be glad to do it. He says he is going to probably take testimony from you and Hillary. Whatever he wants to do. The main thing I want to do is just have that turned over to him so we can go back to work. I just want to do my job. I do not want to be distracted by this anymore. I did not do anything wrong. Everybody who is talked about it has suggested, as a matter of fact, to the contrary, that I did not . But still, let them look into it. I just want to go back to work. Well, let us wait until it is all over, and then maybe I will have something to say then. The main thing is, it is important that I not be distracted from the job of being ENTITY. That is what I owe the American people. I have got to get up every day, no matter what else is going on, and try to give everything I have to moving this country forward to changing this country for the better. And this will take the onus, if you will, off of that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2807, "text": "People will know it is being handled in that way, and then I can just go back to work, which is what I want to happen. In all candidness, a Special Counsel should have been appointed sooner, do you think? I mean, it would have certainly taken the story down. I was concerned in the beginning about agreeing to it when- for the first time ever, no one ever-people were saying, We know you did not do anything wrong, so appoint a Special Counsel. It was not , There is this evidence of wrongdoing. Were you involved in it? But it was a much bigger story here and then eventually around the country, I think, than I had anticipated. So the important thing for me, again, was for people to feel comfortable about the way it is handled so I can go back to work. And I think now people will feel comfortable about the way it is handled, and I can go to work. The one thing most people are asking is-they will learn more about this, because it is involved, obviously-is why you took a loss and did not take a deduction since everybody who has a loss takes a deduction. Well, that will come out in the-I think we took some interest deductions along, which were part of our losses, but at the end I did basically what we thought was the bend-over-backwards right thing to do and what was appropriate at the time. That'll all come out, and then if there are questions about it, when the report's made to the American people, I can answer questions about it then. The night of the NAFTA debate and the passage of NAFTA, were you at all surprised at how well Al Gore did?  people were predicting that Perot would beat him-- I thought he would be great here if he had a fair chance and an honest debate. You know, he is like all the rest of us, sometimes we pick up images that are on occasion right but not fully accurate. And this image of him as sort of wooden and stiff, anybody who really knows him will tell you he is very funny, he has a terrific sense of humor, he is got an incredibly flexible mind. And the reason I like this debate format that you provided is that no one could shout anyone else down. Everybody got to answer questions. I knew he knew a lot about it; I knew he believed very deeply in the position that we had taken.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2808, "text": "It was not just something he was saying- Well, I am the Vice ENTITY, and Bill Clinton is for NAFTA, and I have got to be -he believed it deep down in his bones. So I liked it. To do that was his idea, and he asked you to okay--   He said, What do you think about it? And so we were sort of like salesmen in our own house. Well, no, some of them did, not all of them but some of them. But we were beginning to make progress, you know; we were beginning to pick up votes already. But we were doing it by basically saying to Members of Congress, You know this is right, and you know it is in the national interest, and you ought to do it even if it is unpopular in the short run. We felt, he and I both did, that this debate here, this discussion on your program, would be the only chance we'd ever have to kind of break through to ordinary Americans who watch you and listen to you and just want to know. And that is really what-that is what you did. You gave us a chance to talk to everyday Americans. And he was really-and I was so proud of him. Do you think we might see someday a ENTITY debate? Certainly if I run for reelection I will expect-- No, I do not mean that. I mean major issues coming up for a vote-health care-- you and Senator Dole, or someone, someone of the leadership, where a ENTITY would sit down and say, Let us discuss it with the opposition. I do not think that is ever happened in this country. It might not-I would not be afraid of doing it. I would not want to commit in advance just because I would want to make sure it was the right thing to do at the time. But you know, I run a remarkably open Presidency. I ran for this job because I wanted to get the economy going, I wanted to get the country back together again, and I wanted people to believe that their Government belonged to them again and that we could be more open and accessible to them. And I have tried to do that. The day after I was inaugurated, we opened the White House to just folks to come in. And tonight in another way we are opening the White House again. And we are going to do that right away. Live.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2809, "text": "By the way, the ENTITY was fully prepared to go 90 minutes tonight, but he is very tired. As you might imagine, this has been a back-breaking schedule with the death of his mother, the funeral, overseas, back home, full physical, and we mean full physical, right?-you had what they call top-to-toe-and then out to L.A. So we understand fully, and we will get to as many calls as we can. Yes, ENTITY, what do you say to those who say that you and your administration have not done a good job about Somalia? And given the fact that the Somalis do not trust the UNISOM, Somalia is bound to go back to where it was before the U.S. intervention. Well, I think we have done a good job in Somalia. We have saved a lot of lives there. But when we went there, it was primarily for a humanitarian purpose, to try to save the lives. I was told when I became ENTITY that we might be able to withdraw the American troops as early as one month, 2 months into my term. We have now been a full year, and as you know, we have got a few more months to go before we withdraw our troops. But the thing that caused the starvation in Somalia in the beginning was that a lot of people identified with their clans more than the country as a whole, and they were fighting each other. What we have done is to set in motion a process in which the clans can agree to a peaceable way of governing the country among themselves. And if they do not do that, we'd have to stay forever. And we cannot do that. So in the end, the people of Somalia are going to have to take responsibility for themselves and their future. And in the meanwhile, we will keep working to try to keep as many of them alive as we can. How would you like to lower the country's trade deficit and balance the payments by giving all Americans and all businesses tax deductions for buying American products, by definition 90 percent made in America with 90 percent parts made in America and 90 percent profits going to American companies? It would certainly, I think, violate some of our international trade agreements, and it might cause others to retaliate against us. I would like to lower our trade deficit, at least that which is structural and permanent. Our biggest problems are with Japan and now with China. Yes, we are working on both of them.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2810, "text": "I understand what he is saying, and we do have certain buy America preferences in our law, but we have to be very careful how far we go without violating the treaties and agreements we made with other countries who take our products freely. By the way, something just hit me, and it occurred in the last year. Do we know a lot more than we did before? I do not think we know any more than we did in the beginning because I just really do not believe there is any more to know. You know, he left a note; he was profoundly depressed. You did not know it? And I talked to him-- No, I think 2 nights before, and told him to come see me. Or maybe it was the night before, and I told him to come see me on Wednesday, which was the day after he shot himself. It broke my heart. We'd been friends for more than 40 years. We lived next to each other when we were little bitty kids. And I miss him. This Special Counsel says he is going to look into that, too. Well, I think because he had some files that were relevant to-I think he has to look into what was there, and he will just- whatever he wants to do, you know, let him do that. I live in Detroit where we have had 629 murders in our State, and I would like to know, what can you do or help us about this issue? And I would just like to congratulate you. You have been a ENTITY that has said what you are going to do, and you have done it. And regardless of what the media bashing, I thank you for all that you have done. First of all, let me say that you call from Detroit, which has had a lot of murders. And the Children's Defense Fund said today that a child is killed with a gun every other hour in this country now. But this lady could have called from many other cities in the country and small towns, too. Let me tell you what I think we can do together. First of all, we have got to strengthen our law enforcement forces. You have got a great new mayor in Detroit in Dennis Archer. He is a longtime friend of mine. I read his inaugural address the other day. It was a brilliant way of getting Detroit together and getting started.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2811, "text": "But we have to put more police officers on the street, well-trained and working with people in the communities, walking the blocks, working with the kids, preventing crime as well as catching criminals. Our crime bill will put 100,000 more police officers on the street. It is the first priority for Congress when they come back. Secondly, we passed the Brady bill, but we need to do more on guns. Specifically, we need to limit these automatic, semiautomatic assault weapons that have no purpose other than to kill. And I hope we can reach an accord with the sportsmen and quit arguing about things that are false issues and get an agreement on what the problem is and how to attack it. And fourthly, you have got to give these kids something to say yes to. That is, we have got to go into these really distressed areas and rebuild the bonds of family, community, and work. We cannot have it all on the punishment. These children have to have something to say yes to. If you look at a lot of these high crime areas where the gangs and the drugs and the guns are, they fill the vacuum when family collapses, when work collapses. Most of us organize our lives around work, family, community. And a lot of these young people that are in real trouble today and really vulnerable are living in places where there is not enough community, enough family, or enough work. So I think we have to do both things. And then next year or this year now, I am going to ask the Congress to work with me and then work with the mayors, the Governors, and others to really get serious about this. We have got to do something about it, and we have got a program that will make a difference. In your Geneva meeting with ENTITY Asad of Syria, did you ask him for a withdrawal of the Syrian forces from Lebanon, or a least at time schedule, or Lebanon's going to be the price for peace with Israel? Lebanon was not the price for peace. He agreed that as part of a comprehensive peace agreement, we should implement the Taif accord which, as you know, calls for an independent Lebanon, free of all foreign forces.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2812, "text": "And ENTITY Asad clearly said that if he could be satisfied from his point of view in having a comprehensive peace agreement with Israel, Israel would also have to have an agreement with Lebanon, an agreement with Jordan, and obviously the agreement with the PLO, and that Lebanon in the end would be left a free and independent state, independent of all foreign forces. We talked about that quite explicitly, and he was quite clear in saying that he would support that. Was it tough to sit with Asad, who has been on a list of-as a terror leader for years? I mean, I know Presidents have to do things-was that hard? And I think the most important thing for me was to make it clear that I-my overriding agenda was to do whatever I could to make an honorable, decent, lasting peace in the Middle East. Yes, I think he really wants to make peace. I think there are a lot of reasons why it is in the interests of the Syrian people and in his own interest to do it, and I think he does. I also made it clear that we still had real differences between us in our bilateral relations, and one of them was what we feel about terrorism. And we talked about it for an hour. And he gave his side, and I gave mine. But the American people are entitled to know that. We talked about it for an hour-- We did not skirt it. He did in a way, and he defined it in a different way, and he made some arguments about what Syria has done and not done. But the point is, we got it out on the table. He said what he thought; I said what I thought. And maybe most important, we agreed that our Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, and their Foreign Minister, Mr. Shara, would meet and really try to get beyond the charges to very specific things, that we would come forward with specific instances of things that we believe have been done that are a violation of international law that cannot be tolerated, and we would try to work through them. So I think that it was an honorable meeting from my point of view and from the point of view of the United States because of that. A lot of companies are hiring people on a part-time or temporary basis because they do not want to give them benefits. Under your health care plan, how will people who work part-time or freelance have their benefits paid for? Let me answer the question and make a general point.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2813, "text": "First of all, under our health care plan, part-time workers will be covered partly by their employers if they work more than 10 hours a week. They will pay a portion of their premiums. And then the rest of the premium will be paid for out of a Government fund set up for that purpose. But part-time workers will be covered, and their employers will have to pay something for their coverage, too. Also, if we can do something to slow the dramatic increase in the cost of health care and to make sure all workers are covered, that, I think, will help to stabilize this trend, and more and more employers will be willing to hire new workers on a full-time basis. And let me say, we are beginning to see that now. Since I became ENTITY and we got serious about bringing the deficit down, bringing interest rates down, getting investment up, and employment started coming again, as confidence gets back into this economy, then employers will be able to hire more full-time workers. Then this year, what I have to be able to do is to show the business community that this health care plan of ours is going to stabilize health care costs while providing health care for all Americans through a guaranteed private insurance system, not a Government system but a private system. But we have to ask the employers to pay something for their part-time workers, too. He said he'd be with us every 6 months-holding right to it-he was with us July 20th, this is January 20th. We are back with the ENTITY. ENTITY, in regards to sympathy for your mother, I had the opportunity to see your mother catch a fish when she was over here, and she is quite a fisherwoman. I am sorry to hear about that. She loved that tournament. In regards to Korea, what is the possibility of the Koreans getting a nuclear weapon and maybe possibly striking Hawaii first since that is part of the United States now? Yes, what is the current status of North Korea? Well, first let me say, thank you to the gentleman from Hawaii for the condolences for my mother, and mine to the mother of the Governor of Hawaii who passed away today. The Korean-let me just tell you, if you follow the press you know that the intelligence reports are divided on the question of how far the North Koreans have gone in developing a nuclear weapon. Even if they develop one, then there is the question of their delivery capacity, which is in doubt.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2814, "text": "I would not say Hawaii is in serious danger right now. What I would say is that we need to keep working very hard and to be very firm about not wanting Korea to join the family of nuclear states. You know, I have been out here working to reduce the number of countries with nuclear weapons, with Ukraine and Kazakhstan and Belarus committing to get rid of their weapons. We are now involved in intense negotiations, and the only thing I can tell you is we are working as hard as we can to be as firm as we can and then to be as also as firm as we can about the security of our people and the South Koreans in the event all does not go well. But we are working very hard, and I certainly have not given up yet on getting the North Koreans to go back into the NPT system and agreeing to let the International Atomic Energy inspectors in there to look at what they are doing. They ought to do it. Even China used to be a big ally of theirs. China now does 8 or 10 times as much trade with South Korea as with North Korea. And I think they believe that somehow this gives them some handle on national prestige. I think their best way to be esteemed in the rest of the world is to be a good citizen and give the rest of us a chance to relate to them. ENTITY, I find your political opponents' relentless efforts to undermine the credibility of your administration absolutely appalling. How much does this cost the American citizen in terms of wasted time and money? And does it affect the U.S. in the international community? Well, first I thank you for your sentiments and your support. And the most important thing of all is that the American people be able to see through it. When they see the politics of personal destruction, when they see people who obviously do not want to talk about how we are going to get this economy going or how we are going to get health care to all Americans or how we are going to deal with the other problems, crime in the streets, that they see it for what it is. I think that abroad, frankly, our administration and me, that I personally, that we are able to do what we need to do for the United States. I was very gratified at the reception that I received in Europe and in Russia and throughout our travels. It does take time and attention and distraction when you are dealing with all that stuff, but as I said to ENTITY earlier, I can deal with it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2815, "text": "The only thing that really steams me is what it does to my wife and my daughter, to my family. As a person, that bothers me. But it is not undermining our ability to go forward. Does it take time and attention, is it distracting, is it costly in that sense? It apparently is a part of the price of being in public life in the late 20th century in the United States. So we deal with it. But I just want you to know that having you call just redoubles my determination. And I thank you for that. ENTITY, I was wondering what the progress on our situation with Bosnia-Herzegovina was? And what has happened to the sense of urgency we once had with that problem? Well, the United States had a position, as you know. When I took office I offered the Europeans my position, what I thought we ought to do, how I thought we ought to do it to get a quicker peace and, if not get peace, at least to give the government of that country a chance to defend itself. I did not believe that we could unilaterally or should unilaterally send ground troops there. So let me tell you where it is now. First of all, do not forget what we have done. We have led the longest airlift in history, now longer than the Berlin airlift, to give food and medicine to the people there. Secondly, we have enforced a ferocious embargo which has cost the Serbs, in particular, dearly. It has virtually wrecked the Serbian economy. They continue to fight, but they have paid a terrible price for it economically. And thirdly, we have tried to work with our allies at NATO to say that we would use air power if Sarajevo were subject to shelling and strangulation again. And finally, we are supporting the peace process. The government had been losing on the ground. They'd been making some gains so they have not agreed to any peace-or they are going to have to give, I think, to Moslems, some access to the water in order to get a peace agreement. They are a little closer than I think it looks, but eventually they are going to have to agree to that or the fighting will go on. But the people are still killing each other because they are fighting over land. They are going to have to reach a territorial accommodation so that all three of those ethnic groups can live with a reasonable breathing room there.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithlarryking1", "title": "Interview With Larry King", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-larry-king-1", "publication_date": "20-01-1994", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Bill Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2837, "text": "ENTITY, we cannot say thank you enough for giving NPR this time, so thank you. All right, ENTITY, the reports that 300 militants were killed, an American helicopter shot down yesterday in Najaf - that is one of the deadliest battles of the war, what can you tell us? You know, ENTITY, I have not been briefed by the Pentagon yet. One of the things I have learned is not to react to first reports off the battlefield. I will tell you, though, that this fight is an indication of what is taking place, and that is the Iraqis are beginning to take the lead, whether it be this fight that you have just reported on where the Iraqis went in with American help to do in some extremists that were trying to stop the advance of their democracy, or the report that there is militant Shia had been captured or killed. In other words, one of the things that I expect to see is the Iraqis take the lead and show the American people that they are willing to the hard work necessary to secure their democracy, and our job is to help them. So my first reaction on this report from the battlefield is that the Iraqis are beginning to show me something. Well, now, one of the concerns might be that you have - the gunmen were trying to assassinate clerics and pilgrims - Shia pilgrims. So I am wondering if that is an indication of a civil war - a term that, you know, you have been reluctant to use. Well, I think it is an indication that there are murderers who will kill innocent people to stop the advance of a form of government that is the opposite of what they believe. You know, we can debate terms, but what cannot be debated is the fact that Iraq is violent, and the violence is caused by Sunni Arabs like al-Qaida, who have made it clear that they want to create chaos and drive the United States out so they can have safe haven, and then they could launch attacks against America. No question the attack on the Golden Mosque of Samarra, which is a Shia holy site, caused Shia extremists to retaliate.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2838, "text": "Now, there is some criminality going on, ENTITY, when there is no push-back in society; criminals are able to - you know, to have their way, and now the question is whether or not it is worth it in our interest - whether it is in the interests of the United States to help the Iraqi government do what is necessary to deal with these extremists. And I have obviously made the decision, I think it is. I fully understand it is going to be up to the Iraqis to solve their problems. I was hoping to be in a different position. In other words, I had hoped I'd be able to interview with you and say, well, you know, we are not needed as much anymore, but I fully recognize that unless the violence in Baghdad, the capital city of Iraq, the sectarian violence and the criminality is dealt with, then the political reconciliation necessary to unite the country is not going to happen. And so I made a tough decision, and that is to reinforce our troops there and put a new commander there in the hopes of breaking the sectarian violence - or helping the Iraqis break it. Now, you have got a vote tomorrow in the Senate to consider a resolution opposing the troop buildup. Vice President Cheney said last week that vote would validate the insurgents' strategy. My attitude is - my feeling to the Senate echoes what Joe Lieberman said the other day - Senator Joe Lieberman - and that is it is ironic that the Senate would vote 81 to nothing to send a general into Iraq who believes he needs more troops to do the job and then send a contradictory message. The legislatures will - legislators will do what they feel like they have got to do, and, you know, we want to work with them as best we can to make it clear what the stakes of failure will be, and also make it clear to them that I think they have a responsibility to make sure our troops have what they need to do the missions. Well, another question about Vice President Cheney - he said last week that - here I am quoting - we have encountered enormous successes and we continue to have enormous successes in Iraq. Two weeks ago you said, quote, there had not been enough success in Iraq.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2839, "text": "I think that the vice president is a person reflecting a half-glass-full mentality, and that is he is been able to look at - as have I, and I hope other Americans have - the fact that the tyrant was removed, 12 million people voted, there is an Iraqi constitution in place that is a model for - and unique for the Middle East. I will tell you, 2005 was a great year for freedom, and then the enemy took a good look and said, what do we need to do to stop the advance of freedom, and 2006 was a tough year. In other words, people have asked me about whether or not I approve of the situation in Iraq and my answer is no. We can do better, but it is going to require an Iraqi government that does several things. One is provide security for its people, and therefore it is in our interest to train with them, to embed with them, and to fight alongside them for a period of time until Baghdad is secure. In other words, they have got to make it clear to the 12 million people that made a conscious decision to vote and say, we want a unity government, to reach out to disparate elements. They have got to make sure that oil revenue, for example, is available to all of the people and not just a faction that may happen to be in power. They have got to make sure that those who were involved with the Saddam government in the past, so long as they were not killers or terrorists, have a chance, for example, to be reinstated as school teachers. In other words, there is a lot of things politically that can happen, ENTITY, and - you know, I made a decision that - and, listen, I listen to a lot of folks here in Washington. I listen to the military people, I listen to people who are critical of the policy, I listen to Republicans, I listen to Democrats, and I listen carefully for which strategy would yield - would most likely yield success, and the one I picked is the one I believe will. I also want your listeners to know that a lot of people here in Washington also understand that failure in Iraq would be a disaster for the Iraqi people and for the American people. But there is no distance between you and Vice President Cheney in terms of the strength of his resolve that things are going, as he put it, you know, successfully.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2840, "text": "In other words, when I made the decision to change the strategy in Iraq with a focus on Baghdad - in other words, reinforcing our troops, he fully understands that needed to happen and supported it. You know, people are praying for you; people - the American people want to be with you, ENTITY, but you just spoke about the polls and they indicate the public - and you know about what is going up on Capitol Hill with the Congress, some in the military. Even many Iraqis, according to the polls, do not like the idea of sending more troops into Iraq. So I wonder if you could give us something to go on, give us something - say, you know, this is a reason to get behind the ENTITY right now. Well, one way to - and one of the things I have found here in Washington amongst those who were skeptical about whether the Iraqis will do what it takes to secure their own freedom, is to remind them of what would happen if there is failure. If we did not work to secure Baghdad and help the Iraqis to secure Baghdad, the country could evolve into a chaotic situation, and out of that chaos would emerge an emboldened enemy. See, the difference, ENTITY, between other conflicts in the past and this one is that failure would endanger the homeland. In other words, the enemy is not going to be just contained in the Middle East if they succeed in driving us out or succeed in wrecking the Iraqi democracy. The enemy would be likely to follow us here. And that is why I tried in my State of the Union speech, why I reminded people that September the - the lessons of September the 11th need to be remembered. It is a - and look, September the 11th changed my attitude about a lot of things. And I recognize that the world we live in is one where America cannot be isolated from the ills in other parts of the world. As a matter of fact, those ills can come home to haunt us. And so, as I said in my speech, we will do everything we can to protect the American people, and continue to stay on the offense, but we have also got to defeat the ideology of hate with an ideology of liberty, because in the long run it is going to secure peace for your children and grandchildren. How long can you sustain the policy, though, with people so vehement in their doubt, the Congress voting as the Congress is voting, the polls showing what they are showing?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2841, "text": "Well, I am - you know, I am hopeful that the decision I have made is going to yield enough results so that the Iraqi government is able to take more of the responsibility. Listen, they want the responsibility. And in my judgment, and more importantly, the judgment of the military folks, they are not quite ready to go. And therefore, it is in our interest to help them with an additional 21,000 troops, particularly in Baghdad, to help bring this violence down and to deal with these radicals, whether they be Sunni radicals or Shia radicals. And, you know, I am reluctant to put timetables on the situation because there are people who listen to what I say and others in America say, and are willing to adjust their timetables to our timetable. It is a - I am optimistic, I am realistic, I understand how tough the fight is, but I also understand the stakes, and it is very important for our citizens to understand that a Middle East could evolve in which rival forms of extremists compete with each other, you know, nuclear weapons become developed, safe havens are in place, oil would be used as an economic weapon against the West. And I am confident that if this were to happen, people would look back at this year and say, what happened to those people in 2006? How come they could not see the impending threat? You know, you mentioned timetables. NPR has a reporter embedded with the Minnesota National Guard in Iraq, and one of the soldiers there asked the question - says, my name is Specialist Ryan Schmidt from Forest Lake, Minnesota, and my question for you, ENTITY, is what if your plan for a troop surge to Baghdad does not work? What do you think? Well, I would say to Ryan, I put it in place on the advice of a lot of smart people, particularly the military people who think it will work, and let us go into this aspect of the Iraqi strategy feeling it will work. But I will also assure Ryan that we are constantly adjusting to conditions on the ground. Let us talk about Iran for a second, ENTITY. And let me also say to Ryan, thanks for serving. I mean, one of the amazing things about our country is that we have people who volunteer to go. And one of the things I look for is whether or not we are able to recruit and retain, and we are.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2842, "text": "And I appreciate that soldier, and I hope this message gets to him that not only do I appreciate him, but a lot of Americans appreciate him. We will get it to him, ENTITY. Iran's ambassador to Iraq says Iran is planning to greatly expand its economic and military ties with Iran - with Iraq. You said you have proof of Iran's role in attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. I know you want to take care of this diplomatically - I have heard you say that - but if Iran escalates its military action in Iraq, how will the U.S. respond? If Iran escalates its military action in Iraq to the detriment of our troops and/or innocent Iraqi people, we will respond firmly. We - it makes common sense for the commander-in-chief to say to our troops and the Iraqi people and the Iraqi government that we will help you defend yourself from people that want to sow discord and harm. And so we will do what it takes to protect our troops. One of the things that is very important in discussing Iran is not to mix issues. Our relationship with Iran is based upon a lot of different issues. One is what is happening in Iraq. Another is their ambitions to have a nuclear weapon. And we are dealing with this issue diplomatically, and I think this can be solved diplomatically. And the message that we are working to send to the Iranian regime and the Iranian people is that you will become increasingly isolated if you continue to pursue a nuclear weapon. The message to the Iranian people is that your government is going to cause you deprivation. In other words, you have got a chance to really flourish again as a great tradition. However, if your government continues to insist upon a nuclear weapon, there will be lost opportunity for the Iranian people. They will not be able to realize their full potential. The Iranian people have got to know that this government and the United States bears no hostility to them. We are just deeply concerned about a government that is insisting upon having a nuclear weapon, and at the same time, rewriting history - the history of the past, and regards, for example, the Holocaust. It troubles a lot of people in this world, and I will continue to work with, you know, friends and allies to send a clear message.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2843, "text": "By the way, just quickly, Harry Reid, the Senate majority leader says that if you have an incursion into Iran, he expects that you would come to the Senate for approval. I have no intent upon incur-going into Iran. I mean, this is the kind of thing that happens in Washington. People ascribe, you know, motives to me beyond a simple statement - of course we will protect our troops. I do not know how anybody can then say, well, protecting the troops means that we are going to invade Iran. If that is what he is talking about, there is - I mean, we will protect our interests in Iraq. That is what the American people expect us to do. That is definitely what our troops want to do, and that is what the families of our troops want us to do. And if we find the Iranians are moving weapons that will end up harming American troops, we will deal with it. Let us talk for a second about the State of the Union speech. You did not mention Hurricane Katrina, New Orleans, or the Gulf Coast. A lot of people from Louisiana, including David Vitter, the Republican senator, say they regret that. Well, I gave a speech that I thought was necessary to give. On the other hand, I had been talking a lot about Katrina and about the fact that I worked with the Congress to get about $110 billion sent down to both Mississippi and Louisiana to help them on their reconstruction efforts. But to take the housing issue, for example, we have sent money down to the Louisiana folks, Louisiana Recovery Authority, to fund their plan. And now it is up to the folks down there to get this plan implemented so people can start rebuilding their houses. If there is bureaucratic slowdowns in Washington, we have got a man named Don Powell who is working to address them. But no, our response to the Katrina recovery has been very robust. And I appreciate the taxpayers of the United States helping the folks down there in Mississippi and Louisiana. Now, also in the State of the Union, you talked about the - quote here - the serious challenge of global climate change. Were you talking about global warming there? And one of the things that I am proud of is this administration has done a lot on advancing new technologies that will enable us to do two things - strengthen our economy, and at the same time, be better stewards of the environment.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2844, "text": "In 2002, I talked about an energy efficiency standard, which says new technologies will enable us to grow our economy, and at the same time, improve the environment, and we are meeting certain standards that I set for the country. Well, if you are really interested in global warming and climate change, then it seems like to me that we ought to promote technologies to advance the development of safe nuclear power. It is a renewable source of energy, and at the same time has no emissions to it. But also, we are advancing clean-coal technologies. The goal is to have a zero-emission coal-fired plant. And then, in the State of the Union, I talked about another aspect of economic security and environmental quality, and that is changing the habits - or changing how we power our cars. And I want more people driving automobiles with, you know, ethanol, for example, or biodiesel. And I believe the goal I set, which is a very bold goal, of reducing gasoline usage by 20 percent in 10 years is an attainable goal, but it is going to require the Congress funding the research and development initiatives that I have put in my budgets. By the way, in the speech, you spoke about the Democrats. You said, you congratulated the Democrat majority. And I notice your prepared text said Democratic majority. I surely think that you know that for the Democrats, they think when you say Democrat, it is like fingernails on the blackboard. They do not like it. Look, I went into the hall saying we can work together and I was very sincere about it. I did not even know I did it. And that I did, I did not mean to be putting fingernails on the board, I meant to be saying why do not we show the American people we can actually work together? And it is almost like, if ENTITY is for it, we are against it, and I - and if he is against it, we are for it. And the American people do not like that. And I am going to tell you some big issues we need to work on. Your grandchildren are going to grow up with a Social Security system that is broke unless we do something about it. But it requires a lot of political, you know, capital to be spent. I am surprised, frankly, at the amount of distrust that exists in this town. And I am sorry it is the case, and I will work hard to try to elevate it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2845, "text": "So the idea that somehow I was trying to needle the Democrats, it is just - gosh, it is probably Texas. But I am not that good at pronouncing words anyway, ENTITY. ENTITY, you are bringing out a new budget next week, and I presume you are going to have healthcare, health insurance plan in it. To pay for some of the plan, some people who do not pay taxes on their health insurance plan now will have to pay taxes. Is not that a tax increase for them? No, really what it is, it is a rewriting of the tax code. We have got a tax code today that says if you get your insurance from a large employer, for example, it is part of your - it is a non-taxable event. And yet if you are an individual, like ENTITY out there as an independent contractor, and you buy your own health insurance, you are at a tax disadvantage. And so I am asking the Congress to reform the tax code to treat everybody fairly. And in my judgment, such a plan will encourage and enable more individuals to be able to buy health insurance, which will help us deal with the uninsured. Will the budget be balanced through spending restraint or taxes? The budget is going to be balanced by keeping taxes low. In other words, we are not going to raise taxes. And as a result of keeping taxes low, the economy is doing just fine, and when the economy is doing well, it yields a certain level of tax revenues that we can live with. And then making sure that we constrain federal spending, and you do that by setting priorities. And our priority has got to be this global war on terror and supporting our troops, and protecting the homeland, and that is what our budget will say, and we can balance the budget within five years. And that is going to be - that is good for the country. And in so doing, we are dealing with the short-term deficits, but we have also got to deal with the long-term deficits inherent in, for example, programs like Social Security and Medicare. So, some people would say, well, if you believe in spending restraint, why have not you vetoed one bill, you know, one appropriations bill? Because the United States Congress that was controlled by Republicans exercised spending restraint. Now, I did not particularly like - the size of the pie was what I requested.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2846, "text": "It is some of the pieces of the pie that I did not particularly care for, but that is why the ENTITY needs a line-item veto, and that is why Congress has got to reform the earmark process. What the American people need to understand is that sometimes special projects get put into bills without ever having seen the light of the day. In other words, they do not get voted on; they just show up, and we need transparency in the earmark process, and expose the process to hearings and votes so that the American people will know that any project was fully heard on the floor of the House and the Senate. ENTITY, you have talked about Harry Truman and the challenges that President Truman faced during his time here. He was not popular toward the end of his presidency, but history ended up judging him very well. Well, you know, ENTITY, my hope is that we see improvement in Baghdad. My vision is dealing with the problems at hand. I have got a lot on my agenda and believe we are going to get a lot done. At home, we want the economy to remain strong, and we want our children educated. That is why I am pushing for a reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act. And abroad, I am not only working with a great team to deal with Iraq, but we are dealing with Iran, Middle Eastern peace, North Korea. I mean, there is a lot of issues we are dealing with. My own view is that history will take care of itself. History has a long reach to it. I told people that last year I read three analyses of Washington's administration, and my attitude is if they are still writing about the first ENTITY, the 43rd does not need to worry about it. And so, the other thing is, is that, I think it is very important for people - for a ENTITY to make decisions based upon principles. And I would rather, when it is all said and done, get back home and look in the mirror and say, I did not compromise the principles that are etched into my soul in order to be a popular guy. What I want to do is solve problems for the American people and yield the peace that we all want. When you look at the quality of intelligence that you are getting about the nuclear program in Iran right now, do you think it is better than the quality of intelligence you were getting about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2847, "text": "We all thought that that - that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and we all being not only the administration, but members from both political parties in the Congress. The previous administration felt that the intelligence indicated there was weapons of mass destruction. The international community - in other words, I just want you to know that there was a universal belief that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction including critics of Iraq, like the French, who voted for 1441 in the Security Council. And therefore when it turned out not to be true, there is a certain skepticism about intel. And however, the skepticism about intel, while it needs to be tempered by, you know, the - by an analysis of statements or other fragments of intelligence - what I am trying to say that I take the Iranian nuclear threat very seriously even though the intel on Iraq was not what it was thought to be, and we have to. Now - so how do you solve the problem on intel? Well, you get more human intelligence. You constantly reevaluate the system itself and make sure that these really fine souls that work for the different intelligence agencies are given the tools they need. And so - look, I am like a lot of Americans that say, well, if it was not right in Iraq, how do you know it is right in Iran? And so we are constantly evaluating, and answering this legitimate question by always working to get as good intelligence as we can. And Negroponte's departure, did it concern you - do you feel like the CIA, all of these intelligence agencies are doing a better job now? Well, I think they understand the lessons of Iraq. And you know, we put the Silverman Robb Commission together, and wanted to make - look, the ENTITY needs the best intelligence. This is a war against a group of killers that still want to come and kill us, that is going to require accurate intelligence to give us the data necessary to act to protect Americans before the attack. And therefore we are all pulling for good intelligence. And Negroponte is much needed at the State Department. He is one of these public servants who brings a lot of skills, and a lot of really - and a lot of good judgment. And I asked him to go to the State Department to help Condi, and found a very suitable replacement, a guy named Mike McConnell.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2848, "text": "And the change of personnel really is not a reflection upon whether or not the intel is getting better or worse; the change of personnel is putting our best players in the best positions as we head into the final two years of the administration. You asked the Democrats on a bipartisan basis to form an advisory council and monitor the war, work with you. What do you take from that? Well, I am going to have to keep working with them and explain that my notion is to - is to put in place a consulting-type group that will be able to talk about the war on terror in general. In other words, I do not want - I think that a lot of these folks are not happy we are in Iraq to begin with, and I understand that, and then they are - they do not believe we are going to succeed in Iraq, and I understand that too. I think what some may be afraid of is I am trying to get them into an Iraq-type situation where they are forced to say something they do not want to say. Oh, that they would be co-opted by cooperating or working with you? Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, and that may be part of the issue. My purpose really is to - listen, we want to consult in Iraq, and we will continue to do so, and we will be very much involved with members of Congress, do not get me wrong. But the greater purpose is to help this country succeed in the ideological struggle that we are going to be in today and tomorrow and the next day. This is - what I am describing to the American people is this war on terror is going to take a while, and Iraq is just a part of it. And I guess - you know, I am going to work - I think it is important for me to continue to reach out to the Democrats, and will - and Republicans, for that matter - and explain the strategies and the way forward, but also to explain to them that presidents and Congresses will be dealing with this ideological struggle for quite a while, and therefore it makes sense to work together now to help not only us succeed, but help them succeed. ENTITY, I want say thank you from National Public Radio. I appreciate it, sir.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjuanwilliamsnationalpublicradio", "title": "Interview With Juan Williams of National Public Radio", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-juan-williams-national-public-radio", "publication_date": "29-01-2007", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2849, "text": "Well, ENTITY, it is good to see you again, my friend. We have met several times over the last year. And each time, we have deepened our nations' partnership and for the benefit, I think, of both our peoples. The alliance formed in war and has flourished in peace. Seemingly every day, we have launched new areas of cooperation on cyber, strategic technologies, in space, democracy, and all the areas that matter most to our future. Because of its core, our alliance is about building a better future for all of our people. And there is no better example than our economic relationship and partnership, which has is delivering incredible benefits to both our nations. Through the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, we are advancing economic growth grounded in high standards for our workers, for the environment, and for communities throughout the region. We are standing together against economic influence being leveraged in coercive ways. And since I took office, Korean companies have invested more than $100 billion in the United States, driving innovation and spurring good new jobs for Americans and Korean workers. Our mutual defense treaty is ironclad, and that includes our commitment to extended deterrence, and that includes the nuclear threat and the nuclear deterrent. They are particularly important in the face of the D.P.R.K.'s increased threats and the blatant violation of U.S. sanctions. At the same time, we continue to seek serious and substantial diplomatic breakthroughs with the D.P.R.K. to bolster stability on the Peninsula, reduce the threat of proliferation, and address our humanitarian and human rights concerns for the people of the D.P.R.K. The Republic of Korea and the United States are working together, including through our trilateral cooperation with Japan, to ensure the future of the Indo-Pacific is free, is open, prosperous, and secure. I want to thank you again, ENTITY, for your political courage and personal commitment to diplomacy with Japan. I have worked on these issues for a long time, and I can tell you it makes an enormous difference when we all pull together. I also welcome and support your administration's new Indo-Pacific strategy. It is a strategy that affirms how aligned our two nations are and our visions of the region, and how similar they are. Today we discussed our work together on promoting peace and stability in the Taiwan Straits, ensuring freedom of navigation in the South China Sea and beyond.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2850, "text": "I also affirmed our shared commitment we, together, shared our affirmed shared commitment to stand with the people of Ukraine against Russia's brutal assault on their freedom, their territorial integrity, and democracy. And the Republic of Korea's strong support for Ukraine is important, because Russians' flagrant Russia's flagrant violation of international law matters to nations everywhere in the world, not just in Europe. When I when it comes right down to it, it is about what you believe, what you stand for, what kind of future you want for your children and grandchildren. And right now I believe the world is at an inflection point. The choices we make today, I believe, are going to determine the direction of our world and the future of our kids for decades to come. That is why this partnership is so important, ENTITY, because we share the same values, the same vision. And I greatly appreciate, ENTITY, that the Republic of Korea cochaired the second Summit on Democracies last month and that you will host the third Summit on for Democracies. We both understand that our democracies and our people are our greatest sources of strength. From tracking the climate crisis and strengthening our effort to fight it, and strengthening global health, no two countries are better suited to meet the challenges ahead than the Republic of Korea and the United States. I want to thank you again, ENTITY, for your friendship, your partnership, and all you have done to help build a future of shared strength and success. I am very pleased to be making a state visit to the United States during this meaningful year that marks the 70th anniversary of the R.O.K.-U.S. alliance. Our two countries have overcome challenges and crises during the past 70 years based on the deep roots of freedom and democracy, building a value alliance that is strong, resilient, and sustainable. We are now being threatened by an unprecedented polycrisis. The R.O.K.-U.S. alliance is jointly overcoming this crisis also coming from North Korea as a righteous alliance that contributes to world peace and prosperity. We will further expand the depth and denotation of the R.O.K.-U.S. global comprehensive strategic partnership and march forward to the future. Today ENTITY and myself engaged in constructive dialogue to discuss ways to materialize this shared vision. The outcome of our dialogue is well outlined in the joint statement adopted today. Sustainable peace on the Korean Peninsula does not happen automatically.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2851, "text": "Our two leaders have decided to significantly strengthen extended deterrence of our two countries against North Korea's nuclear and missile threats so that we can achieve peace through the superiority of overwhelming forces and not a false peace based on the good will of the other side. Such a will and commitment is captured in the Washington Declaration. has reaffirmed his ironclad commitment to extended deterrence towards the Republic of Korea. Our two countries have agreed to immediate bilateral Presidential consultations in the event of North Korea's nuclear attack and promised to respond swiftly, overwhelmingly, and decisively using the full force of the alliance, including the United States nuclear weapons. Our two countries have agreed to establish a Nuclear Consultative Group to map out a specific plan to operate the new extended deterrence system. Now our two countries will share information on nuclear and strategic weapon operations plans in response to North Korea's provocations and have regular consultations on ways to plan and execute joint operations that combine Korea's state-of-the-art conventional forces with the U.S.'s nuclear capabilities, the results of which will be reported to the leaders of our two countries on a regular basis. In addition, our two countries have agreed to further advance tabletop exercises against a potential nuclear crisis. In addition, deployment of the United States strategic assets to the Korean Peninsula will be made constantly and routinely. and I will continue to cooperate to strengthen extended deterrence between our two countries based on our historical and concrete agreement reached during our summit. Second, our two leaders have agreed to further strengthen the strategic partnership in economic security, which is directly related to the national economies of our two countries. ENTITY and I welcomed the expansion of our firms' bilateral mutual investment in advanced technology, including semiconductors, electric vehicles, and batteries. has said that no special support and considerations will be spared for Korean companies' investment and business activities in particular. We have agreed to consult and coordinate closely so that the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS and Science Act can further strengthen supply chain cooperations between the two countries in advanced technology. Furthermore, we plan on ramping up partnerships in cutting-edge technology. We have agreed to establish a dialogue for next-generation emerging and core technology between the U.S. National Security Council and the Korea Office of National Security, pertaining to chips, batteries, biotechnology, quantum science, and other cutting-edge technologies, with the aim of promoting joint R&D and experts exchange.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2852, "text": "We have also adopted a separate joint statement for strengthening cooperation in the rapidly emerging quantum science and technology domain. and I have also agreed to get the ball rolling on discussions about expanding our alliance into cyber and space by applying the mutual defense treaty in cyberspace and space as well. We have also agreed that the Strategic Cybersecurity Cooperation Framework adopted this time around will serve as the foundation on which we address cyber threats together and boost cooperation and information sharing, collection, and analysis. Space is another area that shows great promise for cooperation between our two countries. During my time here, I was able to visit the NASA Goddard Space Center. ENTITY welcomed the establishment of KASA, and we have agreed to promote cooperation between KASA and NASA. We have also agreed to accelerate discussions on reaching a reciprocal defense procurement agreement, which is equivalent to an FTA in terms of national defense. Meanwhile, ENTITY and I have agreed to promote exchange between the future generations of our two countries. To this end, we have launched the U.S.-R.O.K. special exchange initiative for youths. In celebration of the 70th anniversary of the R.O.K.-U.S. alliance this year, our two countries plan to invest a total of $60 million to support exchanges between 2,023 youths majoring in STEM, humanities, and social sciences. And this also includes the largest Fulbright program to date, which will provide scholarships for 200 students. Last but not least, ENTITY and I have agreed that South Korea and the United States, as key partners in achieving stability and building peace in the Indo-Pacific region, will put our heads together as we implement our Indo-Pacific strategies to strengthen our cooperation in addressing regional and global challenges. In particular, ENTITY expressed strong support for efforts made by the Korean Government to normalize Korea-Japan relations, and we have agreed to continue our efforts in strengthening Korea-U.S.-Japan trilateral cooperation. Furthermore, we reaffirmed that the use of force to take the lives of innocent people an example of which would be Russia's invasion of Ukraine can in no circumstances whatsoever be justified. In that sense, we agreed to continue our cooperation and efforts alongside the international community to support Ukraine. During this meeting, we also discussed plans through which our two countries can take a leadership role in addressing global challenges, such as climate change, international development, and energy and food security.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2853, "text": "I am delighted that through today's meeting, we have opened up a new chapter for the next 70 years of the R.O.K.-U.S. alliance. I hope ENTITY and I, with the support of people in our two countries, can fully deliver on the blueprint that we have mapped out today with the aim of our founded in the reaffirmation of the value of freedom and our universal values. Your top economic priority has been to build up U.S. domestic manufacturing in competition with China. But your rules against expanding chip manufacturing in China is hurting South Korean companies that rely heavily on Beijing. Are you damaging a key ally in the competition with China to help your domestic politics ahead of the election? There have been concerns since last year that North Korea will soon be conducting its seventh nuclear test amid growing domestic support in your country for your own nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, Russia has suggested it could send its latest weapons to North Korea if South Korea sends lethal aid to Ukraine. How do you seek to manage the North Korea risk amid obligations to Ukraine and NATO? Let me respond to your question first. My desire to increase U.S. manufacturing and jobs in America is not about China. I am not concerned about China. Remember, America invented the semiconductor. We invented it. We used to have 40 percent of the market. And we decided that what we are going to do over the past I do not know how many decades we decided that it was going to be cheaper to export jobs and import product. And the pandemic taught us that we used to have, as I said, 40 percent of the market just some years ago. Now it is down to 10 percent. And again, we invented the super we got so I decided to go out and see what we could do to increase our hold on the market once again. And so what I did was I went around the country. As well as in addition to passing the CHIPS and Science Act, I, in fact, visited countries around the world. And two significant South Korean companies decided they were going to invest billions of dollars in chip manufacturing in the United States. It was not designed to hurt China. It was designed to so we did not have to worry about whether or not we had access to semiconductors. For example, during the pandemic, what happened was all of a sudden everybody started to learn the phrase supply chain. A year ago, no one knew what the hell anybody was talking about when you said supply chain.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2854, "text": "And we lost access to these semiconductors of which new automobiles in the United States need 30,000 of them just to build a new automobile. And we did not have them. And what happened was, when we encouraged the investment through the CHIPS and Science Act and now we have enormous investment in the United States well over $200 billion in long-term investment in semiconductors. And we are rebuilding the economy of the United States with those semiconductors. It is not designed to hurt China. There are certain extremely sophisticated semiconductors that we have built that are useful for nuclear and/or other weapons systems. Those we are not selling. We are not exporting them to China or anyone else. And so that is the context in which this has all occurred. In the meantime, we are creating thousands of jobs and bringing back a sense of pride and dignity to so many towns in the country where, all of a sudden, over the last three decades, we found out that factory that hired had 600 people shut down. The soul of that community was lost. And so I made sure, when the semiconductors were coming back, that they were not just going to go to the coast, they'd be all over the country. And so we have a significant field of dreams in outside of in Ohio, outside of Columbus. We are in Texas. We are in Arizona. Anyway they are all over the country. So it is not viewed to hurt anyone else. We are providing access to those semiconductors. But we are not we are not going to sit back and be in a position where we do not have access to those semiconductors. We are not going to be a place where we are the end of that line. We are the beginning of it. And it is generating significant economic growth in America and not hurting anybody. And by the way, it is creating jobs in South Korea. It is creating jobs in South Korea, and not just with SK, but anyway with Samsung and other industries. With regard to your question, let me provide my answer. Korea and the U.S., based on its Washington Declaration, our two countries have agreed to strengthen extended deterrence, and the implementation level is different from the past. First of all, we have an NCG Nuclear Consultative Group that has been launched that will implement discussions and actions. And we will hold regular meetings and consultations under NCG.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2855, "text": "We will share information on mutual nuclear assets and intelligence, and we will jointly plan responses and also jointly plan exercises and drills and implementation plans. So all of these will be strengthened and specified under the Nuclear Consultative Group. We want to customize our response against North Korea's nuclear threat based on extended deterrence. And in the process of achieving this goal, any concerns that Koreans may have against North Korean nuclear weapons will be relieved, I believe. If nuclear weapons are used, our two countries will strengthen our response in a swift manner. I have two questions for you. With regard to extended deterrence, the NCG that has been formed, how will Korea function under NCG? Any kind of nuclear-equipped nuclear assets will be in function? Korea is to maintain the NPT and it is to strengthen extended deterrence, correct? So, based on your view, do you think this is enough to guard Korea against the North Korean nuclear threat? Well, let me address your question about the activities of the NCG. We are going to be sharing information, and we are going to be acting jointly. I cannot talk to the specifics right now about what type of information and what type of specific activities we will be conducting. But, however, under the nuclear umbrella, our extended deterrence was a lot lower. So, right now it is an unprecedented expansion and strengthening of the extended deterrence strategy under the Washington Declaration, which will create the NCG. The implementation and the response at this level has never thus far been this strong. So this is a new level of extended deterrence much stronger; that, I can say with confidence. The response that I would give you is that the extended deterrence means that we are having more consultation with whatever action is to be contemplated or taken. Any the R.O.K. has repeatedly formed its confirmed its commitment to the nonproliferation treaty. And the Washington Declaration is a prudent step to reinforce extended deterrence and respond to advancing D.P.R.K. nuclear threat. Look, a nuclear attack by North Korea against the United States or its allies or partisans partners is unacceptable and will result in the end of whatever regime, were it to take such an action. And it is about strengthening deterrence in response to the D.P.R.K.'s escalatory behavior and to deal in complete consultation.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2856, "text": "And you know, the idea that I have absolute authority as Commander in Chief and the sole authority to use a nuclear weapon. But, you know, what the declaration means is that we are going make every effort to consult with our allies when it is appropriate if any actions are so called for. Certainly, we have talked about this and some other things today. And we are not going to be stationing nuclear weapons on the Peninsula, but we will have visits to port visits of nuclear submarines and things like that. We are not walking away from that. You recently launched your reelection campaign. You have said questions about your age are legitimate. And your response is always, Just watch me. But the country is watching, and recent polling shows that 70 percent of Americans, including a majority of Democrats, believe you should not run again. What do you say to them? What do you say to those Americans who are watching and are not convinced? You have said you can beat Trump again. I may not be the only one, but I know him well. And I know the danger he presents to our democracy. And we have been down this road before. And with regard to age, you know, and polling data, I noticed the polling data I keep hearing about is that I am between 42 and 46 percent favorable rating, et cetera. And but everybody running for reelection in this time has been in the same position. Number two, when the same polling data asks whether they think what kind of job I have done, it gets overwhelmingly positive results, from 58 percent thinking everything from the CHIPS Act and the all the things we have done. You know, we have created like I said, we have created 12 million new jobs. We have created 800,000 manufacturing jobs. We are in a situation where the climate we have invested more money and more help in dealing with the climate crisis than any nation in the world. The other thing is that look, you know, think about what I inherited when I got elected. I inherited a nation in overwhelming debt at the time, number one in the hole for the 4 years that he was President. I inherited a nation that had a serious loss of credibility around the world as America First and You know, the first meeting I attended the G-7 I said, American is back. For how long? There was a great concern about the United States being able to lead the free world. And we are doing that again.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2857, "text": "And those same polls you look at you take a look at the polls that are saying whether I pulled together NATO and the European Union, as well as the Asian partners. And with regard to age, I cannot even say if I guess how old I am, I cannot even say the number. It does not it does not register with me. And but the only thing I can say is that one of the things that people are going to find out they are going to see a race, and they are going to judge whether or not I have it or do not have it. I respect them taking a hard look at it. I'd take a hard look at it as well. I took a hard look at it before I decided to run. I feel excited about the prospects. And I think we are on the verge of really turning the corner in a way we have not in a long time. I know you are tired of hearing me say we are at an inflection point, but we really are. What happens in the next 2, 3, 4 years is going to determine what the next three or four decades look like. And I have never been more optimistic in my life about the possibilities of the United States. To be clear, though, you just said, I know him well. Did Donald Trump's decision to run affect yours? I do know him well. You know him well, too. And the question is whether or not look, there is just there is more to finish the job. We have an opportunity to put ourselves in a position where we are economically and politically secure for a long time. Look, there we continue to have and I know you do not like me hearing me saying it. There is still a contest between autocracies and democracies, and we are the leading democracy in the world. And it is something I know a fair amount about. It is something I care about and something that I have found a willingness of an awful lot of our allies and friends to follow. So I think that, you know, we have to finish the job and nail it down. They need to repeat the question. You need the microphone. That guy on the right's stealing the microphone. Did the recent leaks revealing that the U.S. was spying on South Korea come up at all in your discussions? And did ENTITY provide you any assurances? With regard to that, we are communicating between our two countries, and we are sharing necessary information.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2858, "text": "I believe that investigation is underway in the United States, so various and complex variables are always in play. We need time to wait for the investigation results by the United States. And we plan to continue to communicate on the matter. I am from Financial News. My question goes to both of you. My first one goes to ENTITY first. During the state visit, you have said that the alliance has strengthened to cutting-edge industries, to cutting-edge science. And also investments in businesses have been some of the outcomes. However, to each individual of the public, how will this have a long-term impact? In celebration of the 70th anniversary of the R.O.K.-U.S. alliance, I know that the atmosphere is really positive. However, Korean businesses, especially because of the CHIPS Act and the IRA, are on edge. What message can you send to the Korean companies to really make sure and tell them that this is not something to worry about? The technology cooperation between the R.O.K. and the U.S., and also in partnerships in cutting-edge industries, in science and technology, was your first question. So that is about really strengthening the competitiveness of our two countries. And it will enhance the productivity and create added value high added value. These are the types of products that are going to be produced. In that process, they will reap the benefits wide and comprehensive that will stem from these industries and investments in these industries for example, from job creation, as well. And above all, the future generations will be given the determination and will to take on new challenges and embrace opportunities in our industry so that they can continue to prosper and grow and become more abundant in the future. The reassurance is that it is overwhelmingly in our interests for Korea to do well. It is very much in America's interest that Korea do well in the Pacific very well because they are one of our most valued partners. And so I think the combination of growing democracies and the democratic institutions, as well as their economies, is overwhelmingly in the benefit of the United States, whether it is in South Korea or it is in Australia, in the deep South Pacific. Plus, in addition to that, we are increasing the number of student exchanges, access to more information between our folks, educating our people, as well as we are going to be cooperating on everything from space to technology to medicine.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsthepresidentsnewsconferencewithpresidentyoonsukyeolsouthkorea", "title": "The President's News Conference With President Yoon Suk Yeol of South Korea", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/the-presidents-news-conference-with-president-yoon-suk-yeol-south-korea", "publication_date": "26-04-2023", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Joseph R. Biden"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2859, "text": "It is very good of you to call, so I will get right to it. I am in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. I am following around one of your newest-well, not your newest rivals but one of the newest candidates for President on the Republican side, Pete Wilson. So let me begin by asking you about your speech on Monday concerning the 50th anniversary of the United Nations. How do you plan to outline ways for the U.N. to reconstitute itself for the next 50 years? Well, I think we have to, first of all, recognize that-I think there are two fundamental realities we have to recognize. Number one is that the end of the cold war gives the U.N. the possibility of living up to the dreams of its founders in ways that were simply impossible when the world was divided into two large blocs. And so I think there should be a lot of hope about the U.N. The second thing I think we have to recognize is that in order for that hope to be realized, the U.N. has got to be properly run and, in particular, the peacekeeping operations have to be properly run. And the United States has spent a lot of time, because we pay a lot of the costs of the U.N., analyzing how the overall operations can be more efficient and cost-effective and inspire more confidence in the countries that are paying the bills and, in particular, looking at the peacekeeping operations and setting up systems to make sure that we use peacekeeping when it will work, that we restrain it when the situation is not right, and that the command-and-control operations are absolutely clear, that we do not have any kind of mixed signals and crossed lines that have sometimes happened in the past. And then when you look ahead into the future, I think it is clear that the new problems of the 21st century are likely to be rooted in ethnic, religious, and other internal problems within countries and across borders; dealing with or helping to avoid natural disasters that are brought on by a combination of population explosion and natural problems like the inability to produce food; and the rise of terrorism and the danger of proliferation of biological, chemical, and small-scale nuclear weapons. I think-and so I want to talk about kind of the threats to the future security of the members of the United Nations and how we have a new set of threats, an unprecedented opportunity, and we have to clean up our-operate- clean up implies- that has the wrong implication.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanyoachumthesanfranciscochroniclepinebluffarkansas", "title": "Interview With Susan Yoachum of the San Francisco Chronicle in Pine Bluff, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-yoachum-the-san-francisco-chronicle-pine-bluff-arkansas", "publication_date": "24-06-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2860, "text": "I do not want to imply that there is anything unsavory about it, but it is just that the operation, I think, really needs to be streamlined and reformed in order to inspire confidence in all the member nations. As you know, both our-the last two Congresses, one was a Democratic Congress and this Republican Congress, expressed varying levels of opposition to some of the U.N. operations. But the last Congress was far more focused on getting the U.N. to work right, not having America walk away from its responsibilities and became more isolationist. But I will also say back to my fellow Americans and to the Congress that we should continue to support the United Nations, that they do a lot of work in the world that the United States might have to do alone or might eventually be pulled into doing, because they keep problems from becoming as bad as they would otherwise be. ENTITY, given the difficulties, the highly publicized difficulties, of course, with the U.N. peacekeeping forces in Bosnia and other U.N. difficulties, does not it make it more difficult for you to try to sell this to Americans, and do not you run some political risk in trying to do so? Well, I suppose there is -in a time like this, when a lot of people are bewildered almost by all the things that are going on in the world and the apparent conflicts of all the good forces and the troubling forces rising up at once, there is some political risk in everything. I think the-I think it is important not to define the-first of all, I think it is important not to define the U.N. solely in terms of Bosnia. I mean, there was also-I'd ask the United States to remember that we went into Haiti with a multinational force that restored the Aristide government and democracy, but we were able to hand it off to a U.N. force with even more nations involved, where there were more countries paying for it. I think most Americans know that there are going to be problems all around the world that affect United States interests and that can affect United States citizens, and it is better to have a larger number of nations working on those problems and a larger number of nations paying for the solutions to those problems. Bosnia is a unique circumstance because it is in the heart of Europe, but there is a war that is been going on there for 4 years.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanyoachumthesanfranciscochroniclepinebluffarkansas", "title": "Interview With Susan Yoachum of the San Francisco Chronicle in Pine Bluff, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-yoachum-the-san-francisco-chronicle-pine-bluff-arkansas", "publication_date": "24-06-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2861, "text": "But if you look at it, the people in Northern Ireland fought for 25 years, the people in the Middle East fought for more than four decades before there was any peace progress there. And for all the frustration people in our country have with the problems in Bosnia, the casualty rates have gone way, way down since the U.N. forces went on the ground there and since the United States began to support them with massive humanitarian airlifts and with our operation to keep the war from going into the air. That is what Captain O'Grady was doing when he was shot down; he was enforcing the no-fly zone. And I think it is important never to forget that. Before the United Nations became involved and before we became as aggressive as we were in trying to provide air help, in 1992, there were about 130,000 people killed in that civil war. In 1994, the death rate was down to under-about 3,500. So I think that it is important, even in Bosnia, to keep this in perspective. The United Nations did not succeed in ending the war in Bosnia. The United Nations did not go in there to militarily defeat the Bosnian Serbs, and they are not capable of doing that, and that was never what they were established- that is not what they were sent there to do. But the war has become less violent and has been at least contained to Bosnia and has not spread beyond its borders. So with all of our frustrations, I think it is important to remember that. You will be doing a number of things in your speech on Monday, which has been, I think, widely anticipated around the world. And certainly, the patron saint of the U.N. 50 celebration, Walter Shorenstein, says that it is a real opportunity for you to give a world-class speech. Having said that, and you having said that you are going to outline your hope for the U.N. given the changing circumstances of the world, what part of your speech-what will you say in your speech to address some of the criticisms, particularly by key Republicans, of the United States' involvement in 1995 in the U.N.? Well, I will-consider the alternatives.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanyoachumthesanfranciscochroniclepinebluffarkansas", "title": "Interview With Susan Yoachum of the San Francisco Chronicle in Pine Bluff, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-yoachum-the-san-francisco-chronicle-pine-bluff-arkansas", "publication_date": "24-06-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2862, "text": "I mean, here the United States is, the world's only superpower militarily, with other countries becoming increasingly wealthy, where there are other countries willing to put their troops on the ground in their own trouble spots and not asking us to do it, like Bosnia, and willing to pay an increasingly large share of running the United Nations. And now we have people in our country and, most importantly, people in our Congress, who want to walk away from our global responsibilities and walk away from the opportunity to cooperate with people in ways that permit others to carry some share of the load. You know, sometimes I get the feeling that some of the critics of our cooperation with other countries want it both ways. They want to be able to run the world and tell everybody exactly how to behave, and then not have to cooperate with anybody when they have a slight difference of opinion from us or even if they are willing to put their troops on the ground and put their money up. That is the case in Bosnia, where the Europeans said, We will take the lead. We will put our troops on the ground. This will be paid for through the United Nations, so you will not have to pay for any more than your regular assessment. We ask you for your air power and the support of the NATO, but we are going to follow the prescribed United Nations policy. We are not going to let the U.S. dictate policy, especially when it is our troops and our lives that are at risk. And I think we cannot have it both ways. We cannot become an isolationist country, and we cannot dictate every other country's course. And it is better for us to be a leader within the framework of the United Nations, which means that from time to time we will have to cooperate with people and agree on a policy that may reflect more of a consensus than our absolute best desires. But that is what the United Nations was set up to do. The U.S. is still clearly the dominant country in the United Nations. We still are able to do the things we need to do to be-for example, to keep a firm hand with Serbia; we have been able to keep other countries from lifting the sanctions off Iraq; we have been able to get a tougher line-in many ways, we were able to have our policy in Haiti prevail.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanyoachumthesanfranciscochroniclepinebluffarkansas", "title": "Interview With Susan Yoachum of the San Francisco Chronicle in Pine Bluff, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-yoachum-the-san-francisco-chronicle-pine-bluff-arkansas", "publication_date": "24-06-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2863, "text": "But the United Nations is about working with other countries and shared sacrifice, shared contribution, shared decisionmaking, where the U.S. leads but cannot control everything. And so in your speech on Monday, despite the criticism of the U.S. involvement in the U.N., you will not be backing away from the U.N., but at the same time, you will also be offering suggestions for reforming it? But I do intend to say that this is going to be a 21st century organization, that it is more than a debating forum and-that involves a collective decision by the community of free nations to deploy people all across the world, not just in military situations, like peacekeeping, but in other ways, where it is going to have to be run very well and it is going to have to be able to inspire the confidence of taxpaying citizens not only in the United States but throughout the world. But I think-I still think the fundamental fact is that the end of the cold war permits the U.N. to live up to its full potential; that we ought to become-we ought to stay involved, we ought to pay our fair share, and we ought to be very grateful that there are other countries that are willing to spend their money and actually put their people at risk in places where either we would not do it or we do not now have to do it all, we do not have to carry the whole load; and that we ought to be willing to lead in an atmosphere in which we also have to cooperate from time to time, especially when others are making a greater sacrifice and when the problem's in their backyard. And that is- that is the sort of future we ought to want. And we also ought to be mature enough to recognize that as long as human beings are alive on the Earth, bad things will happen, problems will exist, and that there will never be a complete and easy solution to all the problems in the world. But far better this course into the future than either having the nuclear cloud hang over the world, as it did in the cold war, or having the U.S. become an isolationist power, as we did between the wars, and run the risk of other terrible things happening all around the world which would drag us back into another war in the future.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanyoachumthesanfranciscochroniclepinebluffarkansas", "title": "Interview With Susan Yoachum of the San Francisco Chronicle in Pine Bluff, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-yoachum-the-san-francisco-chronicle-pine-bluff-arkansas", "publication_date": "24-06-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2864, "text": "In other words, the course that I advocate is not problem-free because as long as there are people and as long as bad people can get political power in various places, there will always be problems in the world. But it is far better than the alternative, better than what we went through in the cold war and better than having an American isolationism. Sir, one question away from the U.N., and that is the subject of military bases. One of your political allies, Senator Boxer, has asked you to consider sparing some of the bases in California slated to be closed. At the same time, one of your political opponents, Pete Wilson, plans to attack the administration in a speech this evening in New Hampshire for what he says are artificially low target levels that OMB has given the Department of Defense, which has resulted in a need to close more military bases than necessary to meet the budget targets. I am wondering first, on the political ally side, if there is any chance that you would spare any of the bases in California, and on the political opponent side, what you would say to that criticism by Governor Wilson? Well, first of all, let us deal with the base issue. The way the base closings works is-the way the base closing process works is that the commission votes on which bases to close. Then they send it to me in a package, which they will do on July 1st. I can accept it, in which case it goes to Congress, and unless Congress rejects it, it goes into law; the second option is I can reject it out of hand, in which case there are no base closings; the third option is that I can send it back to the commission with recommended changes. And I have to tell you that with regard to California, as you know, the McClellan Air Base was not on our list. And it was not on our list, basically-it was not on the Pentagon list for two reasons, both of which I thought were good reasons. One was that California had about 20 percent of the defense investment for the country, but it sustained 40 percent of the base cuts in the first two rounds. The other is that the Pentagon thought that a better way to deal with the problem of over-capacity in what is done at McClellan and down at Kelly Air Force Base in Texas was to shave some of the capacity off all five of the sites around the country and presented a plan to do that.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanyoachumthesanfranciscochroniclepinebluffarkansas", "title": "Interview With Susan Yoachum of the San Francisco Chronicle in Pine Bluff, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-yoachum-the-san-francisco-chronicle-pine-bluff-arkansas", "publication_date": "24-06-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2865, "text": "So I am concerned specifically-I am concerned about the decision made by the Base Closing Commission there, but I have to be careful about further comment until they send them all to me. Now secondly, Governor Wilson is just wrong about what he said about defense. Basically, my defense numbers have been about the same as the Republicans of Congress have recommended and what the Pentagon has asked for. And the truth is that the ENTITY people-all the military people but particularly the ENTITY-will tell you that we have brought the force structure down, we have reduced defense in real dollar terms about 40 percent since 1987 and we have reduced the size of the military by about 40 percent, and we have reduced our base structure, oh, about less than half that, considerably less than half that. So most of the military experts will tell you that the reduction of base structure in the United States and throughout the world has lagged far behind the reduction in numbers of people in the military. And I have tried to be very sensitive since I have been in office to the economic impact of this, to trying to give these bases a chance to do alternative things like help to develop a civilian mission as well as a military mission, and a lot of that work is being done at McClellan and in some other places as well in California and throughout the country. But it is just not true to say that inadequate budgets have led to the closing of more bases than were necessary. We have, in fact, tried to keep more open than the strict, harsh numbers would dictate, given how much the size of our forces have been reduced. I am sure it is good politics for him to say that in New Hampshire or wherever else, but it is simply not true. I was just going to ask the ENTITY if Governor Wilson really is the candidate he fears most and if there is any chance that McClellan will or may not open? Well, first of all, let me just say those two questions are totally independent of one another. From the day I became ENTITY I worked hard to help California, and I think the people of California know that. We have given aid because of the earthquakes and the fires on more generous terms than had previously been the case. Thirty-three percent of our defense conversion money to develop new technologies from old defense technologies in the commercial sector have gone into California, a disproportionate amount.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithsusanyoachumthesanfranciscochroniclepinebluffarkansas", "title": "Interview With Susan Yoachum of the San Francisco Chronicle in Pine Bluff, Arkansas", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-susan-yoachum-the-san-francisco-chronicle-pine-bluff-arkansas", "publication_date": "24-06-1995", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["William J. Clinton"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2866, "text": "ENTITY, you are coming to Egypt next week, and you are meeting with ENTITY Mubarak and a number of other Arab leaders. What are you going to tell them? What role do you see the Arab countries playing in the coming stage? First, I want to thank ENTITY Mubarak for his hospitality. He has been telling me about the beauty of Sharm el-Sheikh for a long time, and now I am going to get to see it firsthand. You will love it. I am looking forward to it. The first thing I want to do is to make it very clear to the leaders in the neighborhood that I am intent upon working toward a two-state solution in the Middle East two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace. In other words, I want them to look me in the eye so they can see that I am determined to work to make this happen. I am also going to remind them the United States cannot do this alone. We obviously need Israeli support. We obviously need the new Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority's work and help. And we need countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia and Jordan and others to work together to cut off funding for terrorist groups, to prevent the killers from moving around, to help provide security, and as a Palestinian state emerges, to support Prime Minister Abbas' regime with not only advice but, when necessary, development aid so an economy can start to grow in a Palestinian state. ENTITY, let me follow up on that. You said you are determined to bring peace, you are committed, personally committed to the roadmap, and you are personally involved in the roadmap. That has sort of a different approach from the approach that the administration had adopted at the beginning, which was a hands-off approach, the peace process. Well, first of all, I think it is not a fair characterization to say we were hands-offquite the contrary. I took an assessment of what was possible and realized that it was impossible to achieve peace with Chairman Arafat. He is failed the Palestinian people in the past. My predecessor tried hard, and I watched very carefully what was tried at Camp David. Now, having said that, I also was working with the parties to try to set the conditions necessary for the emergence of a Palestinian government with whom we could work, so we would not waste time, so that actually some progress could be made. So the people have got to know when I say something, I mean it.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithniletvegypt", "title": "Interview With Nile TV of Egypt", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nile-tv-egypt", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2867, "text": "Hopefully by now people have learned that, that when George W. commits America to a project, we mean that, we do not have idle chit-chat, that we are serious about our intentions. So the Arabs, or the people in the region should not really be worrying about voices within your administration who are opposed to serious efforts by the United States Yes, they do not have to worry about that, because I am going to put the effort forward. So you do not listen to them? Well, it sounds like they do not listen to me, because when I say something, I mean it. And I think ENTITY Mubarak knows that. And I am going to refresh their memories about the kind of administration I try to run. When I say something, we actually go do it. And when I say that I am going to be involved in the peace process, I mean I am going to be involved in the peace process. And I want to work toward achieving two states, so that the Palestinian suffering and humiliation ends. And ENTITY, how do you see the future of the Egyptian-American relations, the strategical relations that binded those two countries over the past two decades? Listen, we have counted on Egypt, and Egypt counts on America. Throughout my Government, people deal with the Egyptian authorities, and I think it is in our interests, our national interest to keep a strong relationship with Egypt, and I intend to do so. We are looking forward to seeing you, ENTITY, in Sharm el-Sheikh. It is going to be an exciting trip, and I look forward to the hospitality of the Egyptian people. And I want to assure the people of Egypt that the relationship is an important relationship between Egypt and the United States. And I want to assure your listeners that when I come to the region, I come with peace in mind and the possibilities of peace between the Palestinians and the Israelis is real in my mind, and I am going to work toward that objective.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithniletvegypt", "title": "Interview With Nile TV of Egypt", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-nile-tv-egypt", "publication_date": "29-05-2003", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["George W. Bush"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2868, "text": "So we are here with you, already four years since the recession officially ended. And as your speech sort of laid out, you still have a situation where growth remains slow, income's is unequal, and a lot of American -- unemployment high -- and a lot of Americans start to worry that this is the new normal. Your intentions aside like you stated them out there in the speech, why should not we expect that you are going to leave behind an economy that is fragile, continued income inequality, and a weakened middle class? Well, obviously, what Congress does matters. As I said in the speech, the economy is far stronger now than it was four and a half years ago. Most economists believe that growth will actually pick up next quarter and the second half of the year. And the one thing that could really screw things up would be if you have a manufactured crisis and Republicans choose to play brinksmanship all over again. And I am glad to see that there are folks in the Senate who I think have already indicated that that is not good policy. We can have debates about fiscal issues without precipitating a crisis. Certainly the idea that we would not pay our bills and plunge not just the United States but potentially the world into another financial crisis makes absolutely no sense. But what I also said out there is true that if we stand pat, if we do not do anything, then growth will be slower than it should be. Wages, incomes, savings rates for middle-class families will continue to be relatively flat. And that is not a future that we should accept. So the entire intention of the speech is to make sure that we are focused on the right thing. It does not mean that I expect Republicans to agree with all my prescriptions, but it is to say that the central problem we face and the one that we faced now that the immediate crisis is over is how do we build a broad-based prosperity. And I want to make sure that all of us in Washington are investing as much time, as much energy, as much debate on how we grow the economy and grow the middle class as we have spent over the last two to three years arguing about how we reduce the deficits.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2869, "text": "But do you worry, ENTITY, that that description of that sort of standing pat, what happens if you stand pat and the sort of slower than expected -- do you worry that that could end up being your legacy simply because of the obstruction that -- and the gridlock that does not seem to end? Well, let us separate it from me for a second, because I think if I am arguing for entirely different policies and Congress ends up pursuing policies that I think do not make sense and we get a bad result, it is hard to argue that'd be my legacy. And so I will worry about my legacy later or I will let historians worry about my legacy. I do worry about what is happening to ordinary families here is Galesburg and all across the country. When we know that rebuilding our infrastructure right now would put people back to work and it is never been cheaper for us to do so, and this is all deferred maintenance that we are going to have to do at some point anyway, I worry that we are not moving faster to seize the moment. When we know that families are getting killed by college costs, for us not to take bold action -- which means that young people are graduating with massive debt, they cannot buy a home as soon as they want, they cannot start that business that they have got a great idea for -- that worries me. So as I suggested in the speech, what I want to make sure everybody in Washington is obsessed with is how are we growing the economy, how are we increasing middle-class incomes and middle-class wages, and increasing middle-class security. And if we are not talking about that, then we are talking about the wrong thing. And if our debates around the budget do not have that in mind, then we have got the wrong focus. Well, you said it yourself in the speech that Washington has taken its eye off the ball. Do you have any -- are you culpable at all in that? Do you wish you were giving a speech like this earlier and done it more often? If you look over the last six months, we right away delivered on the promise to make sure that our tax code was more reflective of our values; that middle-class families locked in relief that they needed; folks like me, at the very top, paid a little bit more. That, by the way, was a fundamental shift that was a decade in the making.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2870, "text": "Immediately after that, obviously, we had the tragedy in Newtown and the need for a response. And my wish and hope had been that that was a quicker piece of business and that we had gone ahead and moved forward on that. Immigration reform actually squarely fits into what I am discussing right now. And the Senate's done the right thing by passing a strong bipartisan bill. So what I will absolutely admit to is that I have been here - I have been in Washington long enough now to know that if once a week I am not talking about jobs, the economy, and the middle class, then all manner of distraction fills the void. Is there any part of your agenda moving forward that you think you are willing to move to the backburner so that you can spend more time on the economy? Well, immigration reform we have got to get done, and that right now is just a matter of the House Republicans recognizing that both the American people, businesses, labor, evangelicals -- there is a broad consensus to go ahead and pass that bill, and if that bill was on the floor tomorrow it would pass. Beyond that, though, we are working on a range of other issues -- from climate change to reforming government to reducing the backlog in the VA. So there is a bunch of stuff we are going to be doing. I will be spending my time over the next several weeks talking about the issues in more detail that I discussed today so that by the time Congress gets back in the fall, I want to make sure that the American people are paying attention and asking themselves, are we doing everything we can to boost middle-class incomes, ladders of opportunity, and middle-class security. And if we are doing that, then ultimately I think that we will not get everything done that I want to see done, but we will have shifted away from what I think has been a bad - a damaging framework in Washington, which is to constantly think about is there more we can do to cut the deficit without asking are we making the right cuts, the smart cuts that actually help people in their own lives and help us grow over the long term. Well, in contrast with the jobs plan that is now what you are reflecting today, it is almost two years old now, and which would measurably add to employment the studies show. Right, because of the sequester.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2871, "text": "that you and Congress agreed to -- right -- and some of the laws -- the payroll tax cut, and the increase in upper-end taxes to some extent -- but all of those things are by any economist's measure a drag on the economy. There is not a day goes by I do not get some analyst saying that -- and that the Fed is pursuing expansionary policies to offset that. How can you -- how are you going to -- what exactly can you do between now and the end of the year to overcome the Republicans' opposition and change that, to end sequester? First of all, as the economy got stronger during the course of my presidency, I had always committed to a responsible reduction in the deficit. I think that was the smart thing to do, the right thing to do, and good for our growth. And if we are growing faster, if businesses and the markets have more confidence, then ultimately that benefits middle-class families as well. So I make no apologies for putting forward budgets consistently that, as I had promised, would gradually reduce the deficit. Now, the sequester I did not want to be in place. When you say I agreed to it, what happened, as you will recall, in 2011 is, is that we had the prospect of either default or a willingness on the part of Republicans and Democrats to spend a year and a half trying to come up with a sensible way to reduce the deficit. The sequester was supposed to be something that was so damaging to the economy that both parties would want to avoid it. The fact that Republicans embraced the sequester as what they consider a win during the course of this year, despite all the damage that they said they wanted to avoid, for example, to our military, is different from me agreeing to the sequester. Point number two, every economist will tell you that if we are being smart about growth and we are thinking about jobs and we are thinking about the middle class, but we are also thinking about fiscal responsibility, then what we should be doing is making sure that the drop-off in government spending on vital things like education and infrastructure do not go down too fast, and that rather we look at what the real problem is, which is long-term health care costs. Because of the Affordable Care Act and a lot of changes that are taking place out there among providers, we are starting to see health care costs slow.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2872, "text": "If we can build on that, then we can capture the same amount of savings that we are capturing through the sequester and use those to make sure that we are not cutting vital investments that I talked about today, and we can help middle-class families. Now, I think there are probably going to be 15 different ways for you guys to ask me the same question, which is, But there is Congress. More specifically, There is the House Republicans, and what are you going to do about that? Who are still embracing sequestration and who are still willing to use the debt limit to go to the mat Well, this is what they say. On the other hand, we also have a number of very thoughtful and sensible Republicans over in the Senate who have said that we should not play brinksmanship, that we should come up with a long-term plan. I met with a couple of House Republicans over the last several weeks who would like to see that happen. They are not the loudest voices in the room at the moment. And part of what I'd like to see over the next several weeks is, if we are having a conversation that is framed as how are we growing the economy, how are we strengthening the middle class, how are we putting people back to work, how are we making college more affordable, how are we bringing manufacturing back -- the answer to those questions I think force a different result than if we are constantly asking ourselves how can we cut the deficit more, faster, sooner. Have you yielded anything from your outreach to Republicans? And do you still have hope for a 10-year deal by the end of the year? There are certainly Republicans who are deeply concerned about the effects of sequester. It is been interesting -- I have talked to a number of them who are from deeply red states, consider themselves very conservative, who say it does not make sense for us to cut discretionary spending more; it does not make sense for us to cut education further -- because they are seeing the impacts in their districts. Certainly there are a bunch of Republicans who say for us to hollow out our military as steeply, drastically as we are doing if sequester stays in place for next year makes no sense.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2873, "text": "So if the American people have confidence that there is a path that will grow the economy faster, put more people back to work, that does not involve massive new federal spending programs, but instead just make sure that we are investing in the right things, and if we are being attentive to debt and deficits over a 20, 30-year time horizon, then potentially some of those Republicans start giving voice to their concerns a little more loudly than they are doing right now. But one of the challenges, as I said in the speech, is that there is almost a kneejerk habit right now that if I am for it, then they have got to be against it. And I think there are a lot of Republicans who are frustrated by that, because they want to be for something, not just against something. But they have got to work through that pattern that is developed over the last couple of years. On the economy, the Fed is obviously an important player. You have got a big decision ahead of yourself in terms of the chairman. What are you looking for in a chairman? And there were reports yesterday that you are very close to naming Larry Summers as the new Fed chairman. I have not made a final decision. I have narrowed it down to some extraordinarily qualified candidates. And what I am looking for is somebody who understands the Fed has a dual mandate, that that is not just lip service; that it is very important to keep inflation in check, to keep our dollar sound, and to ensure stability in the markets. But the idea is not just to promote those things in the abstract. The idea is to promote those things in service of the lives of ordinary Americans getting better. And when unemployment is still too high, and long-term unemployment is still too high, and there is still weak demand in a lot of industries, I want a Fed chairman that can step back and look at that objectively and say, let us make sure that we are growing the economy, but let us also keep an eye on inflation, and if it starts heating up, if the markets start frothing up, let us make sure that we are not creating new bubbles. And do you have a timeline in mind for announcing that? I think you can anticipate that over the next several months, an announcement will be made. Ben Bernanke, by the way, has done a fine job as Fed chairman.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2874, "text": "And when you look at Ben Bernanke's testimony, not just last week but over the last couple of years, what he is consistently said is right now, our priority needs to be growing the economy faster and strengthening incomes for ordinary Americans. If we do that, our deficits come down because we are bringing in more revenue. If we do that, it becomes easier for us to handle the long-term fiscal challenges. And one of the interesting things that we do not talk about enough is the contrast between what is happened in the United States and what is happened in a lot of other developing countries, Europe in particular. It is pretty rare where we have the chance to look at two policy approaches and follow them over several years and see which one worked. And the fact is there are a lot of European countries who followed the prescription that the House Republicans are calling for right now, and not only have they lagged well below where we have gone in terms of growth, in many cases their debt and their deficits have actually gone up because their economy is still effectively in recession. And although we have not been growing as fast as we would like, we have consistently outperformed those countries that followed the recipe that the House Republicans are offering right now. Now, I am more sympathetic to those European countries because they, in some cases, did not have a choice. They do not have the dominant world currency. They do not have people who want to invest in their countries the way folks around the world still want to invest in ours. But in some ways, we have got evidence here. And if we grow our economy, and middle-class families are doing better, and housing prices are stronger, and young people are starting families of their own and they are jobs at good wages, that is the thing that will bring deficits down the fastest. Republicans especially talk about that as a big job creator. You have said that you would approve it only if you could be assured it would not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon in the atmosphere. Is there anything that Canada could do or the oil companies could do to offset that as a way of helping you to reach that decision? Well, first of all, ENTITY, Republicans have said that this would be a big jobs generator.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2875, "text": "And my hope would be that any reporter who is looking at the facts would take the time to confirm that the most realistic estimates are this might create maybe 2,000 jobs during the construction of the pipeline -- which might take a year or two -- and then after that we are talking about somewhere between 50 and 100 jobs in a economy of 150 million working people. Yet there are a number of unions who want you to approve this. Well, look, they might like to see 2,000 jobs initially. But that is a blip relative to the need. So what we also know is, is that that oil is going to be piped down to the Gulf to be sold on the world oil markets, so it does not bring down gas prices here in the United States. In fact, it might actually cause some gas prices in the Midwest to go up where currently they cannot ship some of that oil to world markets. Now, having said that, there is a potential benefit for us integrating further with a reliable ally to the north our energy supplies. But I meant what I said; I am going to evaluate this based on whether or not this is going to significantly contribute to carbon in our atmosphere. And there is no doubt that Canada at the source in those tar sands could potentially be doing more to mitigate carbon release. And if they did, could that offset the concerns about the pipeline itself? We have not seen specific ideas or plans. But all of that will go into the mix in terms of John Kerry's decision or recommendation on this issue. And then -- I will let Jackie go -- but on the employer mandate, I do not think you have been asked the question directly why you made the decision to delay it, and whether, given your criticism of President Bush over the years for potentially exceeding his executive authority, there is been a lot of folks out there on the Republican side who claim that somehow you have exceeded your authority on this. Well, this was a very practical decision that actually does not go to the heart of us implementing the Affordable Care Act. The majority of employers in this country provide health insurance to their employees. And the number of employers who are potentially subject to the employer mandate is relatively small.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2876, "text": "The way the law was originally written, it did not take into account the fact that we do not necessarily need to load up the vast majority of companies that are already doing the right thing with a bunch of additional paperwork; are there simpler ways for us to allow them to certify that they are providing health insurance? And if they do that, then the purpose, the spirit of the law is met, and we can concentrate on the few bad actors who are unwilling to provide health insurance to their employees even though they can afford it, and they are relatively large employers. And businesses came to us and said, listen, we were supportive of providing health insurance to employees, in fact, we provide health insurance to our employees; we understand you want to get at the bad actors here, but are there ways to provide us some administrative relief? And what we said was, given that that is not critical to standing up the marketplaces where people are going to actually be able to buy lower-cost, high-quality insurance and get the tax credits that make it affordable for them, we thought it made sense to give another year not only for companies to prepare, but also for us to work with Treasury and others to see if there are just ways we can make this a little bit simpler for companies who are already doing the right thing. This is the kind of routine modifications or tweaks to a large program that is starting off that in normal times in a normal political atmosphere would draw a yawn from everybody. The fact that something like this generates a frenzy on Republicans is consistent with the fact that they have voted to repeal this thing 38 times without offering a alternative that is plausible. And from what I understand, based on recent reporting, they have just given up on offering an alternative. So essentially -- their central economic plan that they are currently presenting involves making sure that 50 million Americans cannot get health insurance; that people with preexisting conditions are potentially locked out of the market; that the rebates that people have received from insurance companies are sent back; that young people who are right now on their parents' plan because they are 26 or under, that they suddenly do not have health insurance. I do not understand the argument that that somehow grows the economy or strengthens the middle class. Are there going to be some complaints from employers who are still trying to figure it out and may not know what subsidies are available to them?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2877, "text": "Are there some folks who may say, we are going to try to figure out ways not to provide health insurance to our employees? But that is a small proportion of our overall economy, and the principle that everybody should be able to get health insurance is one that the vast majority of Americans agree with. People questioned your legal and constitutional authority to do that unilaterally -- to delay the employer mandate. Did you consult with your lawyer? No, but specifically - -- but where Congress is unwilling to act, I will take whatever administrative steps that I can in order to do right by the American people. And if Congress thinks that what I have done is inappropriate or wrong in some fashion, they are free to make that case. But there is not an action that I take that you do not have some folks in Congress who say that I am usurping my authority. Some of those folks think I usurp my authority by having the gall to win the presidency. But ultimately, I am not concerned about their opinions -- very few of them, by the way, are lawyers, much less constitutional lawyers. I am concerned about the folks who I spoke to today who are working really hard, are trying to figure out how they can send their kids to college, are trying to make sure that they can save for their retirement. And if I can take steps on their behalf, then I am going to do so. And I would hope that more and more of Congress will say, you know what, since that is our primary focus, we are willing to work with you to advance those ideals. But I am not just going to sit back if the only message from some of these folks is no on everything, and sit around and twiddle my thumbs for the next 1,200 days. Polls this week have shown your health care law has lost support. What are you going to be doing to build support? We are going to implement it. Are you going to be getting out on the road? Here is what will build support, given that we have been outspent four to one from the other side with all kinds of distortions about health care. Here is what we are going to do to beat back that misinformation. On October 1st, people are going to be able to start signing up.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2878, "text": "And if right now they are buying insurance on the individual market, they are going to get on those computers or they are going to make a phone call to one of these call centers and they are going to find out that they can save 20 percent, 30 percent, or 50 percent on their premiums. And people who have not been able to get insurance before are going to be able to finally get insurance. And people who lose their jobs in the interim and find out that they have got a preexisting condition, it is hard for them to get insurance or they cannot afford COBRA, they are going to have a place to go. And over the course of six months to a year, as people sign up, and it works, and lo and behold, the people who already have health insurance are not being impacted at all other than the fact that their insurance is more secure and they are getting free preventive care, and all the nightmare scenarios and the train wrecks and the sky is falling predictions that come from the other side do not happen, then health care will become more popular. But until then, when we are getting outspent four to one and people are just uncertain about what all this means for them, we are going to continue to have some polls like that. And me just making more speeches explaining it in and of itself will not do it. The test of this is going to be is it working. March on Washington coming up soon. Are you going to do anything to mark it? Are you planning on being a part of the 50th anniversary? It is obviously a historic, seminal event in the country. It is part of my generation's formative memory and it is a good time for us to do some reflection. Obviously, after the Trayvon Martin case, a lot of people have been thinking about race, but I always remind people -- and, in fact, I have a copy of the original program in my office, framed -- that that was a march for jobs and justice; that there was a massive economic component to that. When you think about the coalition that brought about civil rights, it was not just folks who believed in racial equality; it was people who believed in working folks having a fair shot. It was Walter Reuther and the UAW coming down here because they understood that if there are some workers who are not getting a fair deal then ultimately that is going to undercut their ability to get a fair deal.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2879, "text": "And if there is one thing that I wanted to try to emphasize today in this speech, it is that America has always worked better when everybody has a chance to succeed. I had a conversation a couple of weeks back with a guy named Robert Putnam, who I have known for a long time. He was my professor actually at Harvard. I actually knew Bob when I was a state senator and he had put together this seminar to just talk about some of the themes that he had written about in Bowling Alone, the weakening of the community fabric and the impact it is having on people. And the work he is doing right now has to do with this issue of inequality. And it applies to a city like Galesburg, where 30 years ago, anybody in this town who wanted to find a job, they could go get a job. They could go get it at the Maytag plant. They could go get it with the railroad. It might be hard work, it might be tough work, but they could buy a house with it. The kids here all went to the same school -- the banker's kid and the guy working at the Maytag plant's going to the same school. They have got the same social support. College is affordable for all of them. They do not have to take out $100,000 of debt to do it. And there was a sense of not upward mobility in the abstract; it was part and parcel of who we were as Americans. And that is what is been eroding over the last 20, 30 years, well before the financial crisis. And so I had to spend the first four years in my presidency getting us back to ground level. We had to make sure that we put people back to work short term and boosted demand until the markets got going and consumers got more confident and housing started to recover. And so here we are, having dealt with this massive crisis, but those trends -- that erosion of what a Galesburg or a Clinton, Ohio, where Bob Putnam lived -- those trends have continued. And that is what people sense. I am doing okay right now, but what I have seen over the last 20 years and what I learned profoundly during this crisis is that the ground under my feet just is not as secure, and that the work I am doing may not be rewarded. And everything that I am proposing and everything I will be proposing over the next three years goes right at that issue.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithjackiecalmesandmichaeldshearthenewyorktimes", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Jackie Calmes and Michael D. Shear of the New York Times", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-jackie-calmes-and-michael-d-shear-the-new-york-times", "publication_date": "24-07-2013", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2880, "text": "We are going through a very tough time in North Carolina. Multiple death, destruction in ways we have not seen in years. The governor said this morning she is grateful for FEMA's insistence on being there quickly, but the state needs a lot of help, a lot of money. Well look, I spoke to governor Purdue yesterday. Obviously we are all heart broken by the loss of life, and I expressed to her heartfelt condolences from Michelle and myself for all the families that have been affected. Obviously, those who lost a loved one are feeling this most severely, but if you have lost a home or a business, it is pretty tough as well. What I have assured her is that we are going to do everything we can to help rebuild. FEMA's already on the ground, it is making its assessments. There is strong state/federal coordination and you know, there is a reason why we budget for these kinds of national disasters. We are going to have to help folks rebuild and it is going to take a little bit of time but the people in North Carolina are very resilient and we are confident that they are gonna make it happen. Well, as I said, you know there are certain things that we do not cut corners on and one of those is making sure that the American family comes together in the face of natural disaster like this one. Speaking of money, your fiscal policy, what your vision is now for the country, ideology and priorities seem to find their way into budgets no matter who is writing the budget. So a question becomes if you had to choose between getting through Congress the kind of changes you believe this country needs or reelection, how do you make that choice? Well I think you-you always start with good policy, and my assumption is that good politics then follows from that. So last week I laid out my vision for the future. Look, we have got a very serious debt and deficit problem, most of it was a result of the last 10 years us not paying for things that we needed to pay for. Big tax cuts, two wars, prescription drug plan none of which were paid for. And then we had the worst recession in 50 years, and I had to step up and make sure that we were helping states so they did not have to lay off teachers and police officers and firefighters and that all cost money. And we provided tax cuts to every American to help them get through the recession.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidcrabtreewral", "title": "Interview With David Crabtree of WRAL", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-crabtree-wral", "publication_date": "18-04-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2881, "text": "So you know, right now we need to make sure that we are living within our means both medium and long term. And there is a way of doing that where we cut about 2 trillion dollars worth of spending, that we raise about a trillion dollars worth of revenue, mainly from folks like myself who can afford to pay a little bit more, closing loopholes and making the tax system fair. And that saves us about a trillion dollars in interest costs. So we can save about 4 trillion dollars. Now, we are also gonna have to make sure that we continue to drive down health care costs in medicare and medicaid, and that is part of what healthcare reform was all about last year. And you know, the Republicans in the house voted last week a system that would voucherize the medicare program so that basically seniors could not count on medicare being there, they would get a certain amount of money and if insurance companies said you know what, that is not enough to buy you converge, you'd be out of luck. I think we can make changes to the healthcare system that is smarter and works better without changing medicare in a fundamental way. They are also talking about cutting things like eduction by 25% and support for energy research and medical research. All the things that are important to put people back to work, including in North Carolina. I mean, I have seen some of the work that is been done in some of the campuses in the triangle down there, and that is the future. So we have to invest in that and cut back on the things we do not need, while making the changes that we do. I have talked to several people last week, and one theme continued to come up ENTITY. People are really still struggling, to those people what word of encouragement do you have? Well, here is what I'd say. When I came into office, we were going through the worst economy that we have seen since the Great Depression. Since then, we have been able to stabilize the economy, get it growing again, and now over the last year, year and a half we have seen two million private sector jobs created. You are starting to see businesses are starting to reinvest, they are making a lot of profit. And so- and this December what we did was we passed a payroll tax cut and a business investment tax cut that is helping to spur the economy further. But we were in a deep hole, and it takes some time to dig out.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidcrabtreewral", "title": "Interview With David Crabtree of WRAL", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-crabtree-wral", "publication_date": "18-04-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2882, "text": "And so what I say to families, and I get 10 letters a day from families who are talking about struggles without a job, losing their homes, you know gas prices, I say to them, Every day I wake up understanding how many folks are struggling out there. And we are just going to keep on making steady progress until we have come all the way back. And I am not going to rest, I am not going to be satisfied until everyone who wants a job is able to find a job. But it is going to take a little time. Military presence in North Carolina is huge. You have a lot of people deployed, second, third, fourth, fifth, deployments. Foreclosure rates are up, people are really concerned in that community. I know the first lady was just in campus union just last week. To those in the military who are really struggling, maybe more than some the others, is there a light at the end of their tunnel? Well first of all, we have tried to be very protective in terms of military pay, military benefits. And as you just pointed out, the first lady is leading the charge when it comes to support for military families. And now I have every agency federal department, all of them, not just the Defense Department, not just Veterns Affairs, but every department thinking about how are we help military families on things like daycare, on spousal spinning jobs when they get stationed to a new location. So we are going to keep on working on those things -veterans benefits, things like the post 9/11 GI Bill, to make sure that people can go back to school. But there are areas where military families are still having a tough time. And you identified one of them, which is ironically, the financial system. Credit card companies, mortgage brokers, a lot of those folks have taken advantage of military families just-more than just about anyone else. This is part of what our Wall street reform was actually all about, we have put in place a consumer finance protection bureau that is specifically working with the Department of Defense and others so that military families have good information so that they do not get suckered into a bad mortgage that they cannot pay back, so that they are not ending up taking out loans that end up having huge interest rate spikes later down the road. This is part of the reason why financial reform was so important is to make sure that we are providing consumers the information they need to make good choices on their own.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithdavidcrabtreewral", "title": "Interview With David Crabtree of WRAL", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-david-crabtree-wral", "publication_date": "18-04-2011", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2892, "text": "You have made speeches, you have addressed the joint session of Congress, you have done interviews, but the polling continues to show that people are still skeptical about your health reform plans. Orrin Hatch, the Republican senator from Utah -- who is done a lot of work on health care over the years, summed it up this way, these are his words, he said, If anyone believes that Washington can do a plan that will cost close to a trillion dollars, cover all Americans, not raise taxes on anyone, not increase the deficit, not reduce benefits or choices for our families and seniors, then I have a bridge to sell you. Have you promised too much, ENTITY? No, I do not think I have promised too much at all. Look, first of all, everybody acknowledges this is a problem -- everybody -- acknowledges that the current path we are on is unsustainable, not just for the people who do not have health insurance but for those who do. We just had a study come out this week showing that premiums for families went up 130 percent over the last decade. Those costs probably went up even higher for the average employer. And that is part of the reason why you are seeing, each successive year, fewer Americans having health insurance from their employers than they previously did. Health care inflation went up 5.5 percent this past year when inflation was actually negative, because of this extraordinary recession. Now, what I have said is that we can make sure that people who do not have health insurance can buy into an insurance pool that gives them better bargaining power. For people who have health insurance, we can provide health insurance reforms that make the insurance they have more secure. And we can do that mostly by using money that every expert agrees is being wasted and is currently in the existing health care system. So, in fact, what we have got right now is about 80 percent consensus on how we would accomplish that. Now, let me be honest, with a piece of legislation this complicated, and a sector the economy that is about one-sixth of our economy, there is a reason why, for the last 40 years, people have been talking about this and it has not gotten done. It is hard ---- and there are a lot of moving parts. And so I appreciate the fact that the American people are really cautious about this, because it is important to them, and the majority of people still have health insurance.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbobschieffercbsnewsfacethenation", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Bob Schieffer on CBS News' Face the Nation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bob-schieffer-cbs-news-face-the-nation", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2893, "text": "If we do not do anything, a lot of Americans are going to be much worse off, and, over time, the federal budget just cannot sustain it. Let me just ask you, the main concern that people seem to have is that this plan is somehow going to mean a tax on middle-class Americans. Now, you promised during the campaign that that was not going to happen -- no tax increase on people who made under $250,000, no payroll tax, no capital gains, no tax of any kind on Americans. Can you still make that promise to people today? I can still keep that promise, because, as I said, about two-thirds of what we have proposed would be from money that is already in the health care system but just being spent badly. And, as I said before, this is not me making wild assertions. You know, you always hear about waste and abuse in Washington , and usually it does not mean much because nobody ever finds where that waste and abuse is. This is money that has been directly identified, that the Congressional Budget Office, that Republican and Democratic experts agree is there, that is not improving the quality of our health. So the lion's share of money to pay for this will come from money that is already in the system. Now, we are going to have to find some additional sources of revenue for the other third or so of the health care plan. And what I -- and I have provided a long list of approaches that would not have an impact on middle-class Americans. They are not going to be forced to pay for this.  subsidies from folks. I mean, that is what, you know, the Chamber of Commerce is saying. They are starting a big ad campaign right now. They say, you are going to put these taxes on the these insurance companies, on people that make things like x-rays, and lab tests, and all of that, and they are just going to turn right around and pass it right on to the consumer. They are passing on those costs to the consumers anyway. The difference is that they are making huge profits on it, Bob. I mean, let us take the Medicare HMO programs that are being run by insurance companies. It is estimated by everybody that they are overcharging by about 14 percent. This amounts to about $177 billion over 10 years, about $17 billion a year, $18 billion a year that is just going to pad their profits.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbobschieffercbsnewsfacethenation", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Bob Schieffer on CBS News' Face the Nation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bob-schieffer-cbs-news-face-the-nation", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2894, "text": "And, in fact, because those huge subsidies are going to insurance companies, Medicare recipients are not getting a good deal. Now, if we are enforcing what should be the rules around Medicare, and making sure that people are getting a bang for the buck, it is not going to be possible for insurance companies to simply pass on those costs to Medicare recipients, because ultimately it is Uncle Sam that is paying for those services anyway. When you have got special interests that are making billions of dollars, absolutely they are going to want to keep as much of the profits that they are making as possible. And, by the way, those insurance companies, even during these down years, have been making terrific profits. We do not mind them making profits, we just want them to be accountable to their customers. Let me ask you a little bit about the tenor of this debate. It seems to me that there is a sort of meanness that is settled over our political dialogue. It started this summer at these town-hall meetings. We saw this outbreak when you spoke on the -- to the joint session. Absolutely. What do you think it is all about? Well, look, what I think we have to remember is that, at various periods in American history, people get pretty rambunctious when ---- it comes to our democratic debate. And every president who is tried to bring about big changes, I think, elicits the most passionate responses. I mean, if you hear what people had to say about Abraham Lincoln, or what they had to say about FDR, or what they had to say about Ronald Reagan when he first came in and was trying to change our approach to government -- that elicited huge responses. Now, I think that what is driving passions right now is that health care has become a proxy for a broader set of issues about how much government should be involved in our economy, particularly coming off a huge economic crisis. Number one, I have no interest in increasing the size of government. I just want to make sure we have got a smart government that is regulating, for example, the financial institutions smartly, so I do not have to engage in any kind of bank bailouts -- that is point number one.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbobschieffercbsnewsfacethenation", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Bob Schieffer on CBS News' Face the Nation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bob-schieffer-cbs-news-face-the-nation", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2895, "text": "And point number two, even though we are having a passionate disagreement here, we can be civil to each other, and we can try to express ourselves, acknowledging that we are all patriots, we are all Americans, and not assume the absolute worst in people's motives. And I have to -- one last point I have got to make, Bob, and that is, I do think part of what is different today is that the 24-hour news cycle, and cable television, and blogs, and all this, they focus on the most extreme elements on both sides. They cannot get enough of conflict. It is catnip to the media right now. And so the easiest way to get 15 minutes of fame is to be rude to somebody. In that environment, I think it makes it more difficult for us to solve the problems that the American people sent us here to solve. ENTITY, seven former directors of the CIA have sent you a letter today asking you to reverse the decision of the attorney general to reopen the criminal investigation of CIA interrogations that took place after the attacks on September 11th. Would you consider that? Well, first of all, I have the utmost respect for the CIA. I have said consistently that I want to look forward, and not backward, when it comes to some of the problems that occurred under the previous administration when it came to interrogations. I do not want witch hunts taking place. I have also said, though, that the attorney general has the job to uphold the law. He is got to make a judgment, in terms of what is going -- what has occurred. My understanding is, it is not a criminal investigation at this point. They are simply investigating what took place. And I appreciate the former CIA directors wanting to look out for an institution that they helped to build. But I continue to believe that nobody's above the law, and I want to make sure that, as president of the United States , that I am not asserting, in some way, that my decisions overrule the decisions of prosecutors who are there to uphold the law. We keep hearing that General McChrystal is about to ask you for tens of thousands of new Americans troops to go to Afghanistan -- our David Martin has reported that. Are you considering something of that nature -- sending that large a force to Afghanistan ? I am not considering at that point, because I have not received the request. But I just want to remind people how we got here.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbobschieffercbsnewsfacethenation", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Bob Schieffer on CBS News' Face the Nation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bob-schieffer-cbs-news-face-the-nation", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2896, "text": "You know, when I came in Afghanistan was adrift, because we, frankly, had not focused on it. I immediately ordered a top-to-bottom review. Part of that review was, when General McChrystal got to Afghanistan , for him to do his own assessment. In the meantime, I sent 21,000 troops to make sure that we could secure the election that was going to take place in the early fall. General McChrystal has completed his assessment. Well, if he asked you -- -- to kill Americans. for that many troops, you are going to have a hard time saying no, are you not? What we doing to protect the American people and the American homeland? Afghanistan and Pakistan are critical elements in that process. But the only reason I send a -- single -- young man or woman in uniform anywhere in the world is because I think it is necessary to keep us safe. And so whatever decisions I make are going to based first on a strategy to keep us safe, then we will figure out how to resource it. We are not going to put the cart before the horse, and just think But -- -- automatically going to make Americans safe. Did not you say on March 27th that you had announced the comprehensive new strategy for Afghanistan ? I thought you already had a strategy. But what I also said was that we were going to review that every six months, because, you know, this is a very complicated terrain; we had just started getting our troops in -- in fact, the 21,000 that I already ordered in are just now getting in place. And what I did not want is a situation in which we are just continually sending more and more troops, or putting more and more resources, without having looked at how the whole thing fits together; making sure that our efforts, in terms of building Afghan capacity is in place, that our civilian and diplomatic efforts are in place. So what we are going to do is continue to reassess, review what is taking place, and make sure that our strategy and resources fit together for the aim of making sure that al Qaeda is not able to attack the United States . You announced yesterday a major change in American strategic strategy when you said that we would not go forward with the missile defense system that would be there on the border of Russia. The Russians saw that as a poke in the eye from the very beginning. But even people who agree that that missile system is out of place are asking questions.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithbobschieffercbsnewsfacethenation", "title": "Barack Obama Interview with Bob Schieffer on CBS News' Face the Nation", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-bob-schieffer-cbs-news-face-the-nation", "publication_date": "20-09-2009", "crawling_date": "29-06-2023", "politician": ["Barack Obama"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2911, "text": "On behalf of all my colleagues present here and of the truly nationwide audience, I would like to thank you, first of all, for having agreed to do this interview. I understand that you have prepared a statement for the Japanese people that perhaps you would like to make right now. And may I say how delighted Nancy and I are to be back in Japan. The last time we visited Japan was 1978 at the invitation of one of your Diet Members, Shintaro Ishihara. I was also here in 1971, when I had the pleasure of seeing Kyoto, your beautiful, ancient capital city. There is so much in Japan's history and culture that impresses us. Americans are full of admiration for the Japanese people, the warmth of your ways, your spirit of initiative and teamwork, and your strong traditions of devotion to family, education, and progress. You have brought great development and prosperity to your country. We know that the struggle for better living was often difficult in earlier days. But endurance, tenacity, and sheer hard work-qualities which I understand are beautifully portrayed in your popular TV drama, Oshin -have brought your nation great economic success. Recently I received a letter from Masayasu Okumura, principal of the Nishisawa School in Akita Prefecture, which I understand is very far from Tokyo. Okumura invited Nancy and me to visit his country school and his 27 students. Okumura, I wanted to drop in on your school and talk with your students, but our stay in Japan this week has been too short. We wish we had time to meet more people and see more of your beautiful country, including such places as Kyoto, Hokkaido, Hiroshima, Nara, and Nagasaki. As I have said to the Diet today, we may live thousands of miles apart, but we are neighbors, friends, and partners, bound by a community of interests and shared values. Japan and America, all the same heart. Our countries enjoy great prosperity. We live in free and open societies. But much of the world lives in poverty, dominated by dictators unwilling to let people live in peace and freedom. Japan and America shoulder global responsibilities, but with every responsibility comes opportunity. We can share with the world our secrets of economic growth and human progress. We can offer the sunlight of democracy to people everywhere who dream of escaping the darkness of tyranny to decide their own destinies.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesnhktelevisiontokyojapan", "title": "Interview With Representatives of NHK Television in Tokyo, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-nhk-television-tokyo-japan", "publication_date": "11-11-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2912, "text": "Japan and America are nations of the future, builders of tomorrow, and together we can build a brighter tomorrow. I know with all my heart that if we have faith to believe in each other, to trust in the talent and goodness of the hard-working people in our great cities and small towns, then, yes, we will make our partnership grow, and together there is nothing Japan and America cannot do. And now, I'd be delighted to answer some questions that you may have for me. ENTITY, listening to your statement, like many other people I find that you are indeed a great communicator. I say this not because you said very kind words about our famous city of drama, but because I think that your personal style on television is more relaxed and informal than that of many other politicians. That is why, with your approval, Mr. ENTITY, I would like to conduct this interview in a very informal way so that the Japanese people can get a clearer view of your personality. Since your arrival, Mr. ENTITY, Japanese people have been following very closely your visit. And yesterday we saw that you enjoyed a lot about our demonstration of Yabusame at Meiji Shrine. What did you think of that typical traditional Japanese sport? And if I may ask, apart from horse riding, what are your personal hobbies, Mr. ENTITY? Well, horseback riding is certainly one, and all the things that go with having a ranch. I do a lot of the work whenever I have the opportunity to get there that has to be done around a ranch. As a matter of fact, just this summer we had a number of days at the ranch, and I managed to build, with the help of two friends, build about 400 more feet of fence that we built out of telephone poles. And it can get a little back breaking, but I enjoy that. Someone once asked me when I was ever going to have the ranch finished, and I said I hope never, because I enjoy that. I enjoy athletics of other kinds. And now, thanks to the generosity of your Prime Minister since his last visit there-while I do not get to play golf very often, I will now be playing it with a brand new set of golf clubs which he presented to me. Well, you have now completed almost all the events of your very full schedule for Japan. Yesterday you gave us your official view of the visit, but I wonder if you could give us now a more personal view of this visit?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesnhktelevisiontokyojapan", "title": "Interview With Representatives of NHK Television in Tokyo, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-nhk-television-tokyo-japan", "publication_date": "11-11-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2913, "text": "Well, yes, I am very pleased with what has taken place here. First of all the warmth of the reception from all your people, and I mean not just the people of diplomacy and government that I had dealings with, but your people there on the streets and their showing of hospitality and friendship has been very heartwarming. But I have always believed that we only get in trouble when we are talking about each other instead of to each other. And since we have had an opportunity here to not only speak with your Diet but then to meet with your Prime Minister and others-and, of course, I have been greatly honored to have been received by His Imperial Majesty, your Emperor-I think that we have established a human kind of bond, not just one that is framed in diplomacy, but an understanding of each other as people. And I think that the world needs more of this. ENTITY, I would like you to know, in the first place, that many of my compatriots will be surprised and very happily so at the inclusion of Hiroshima and Nagasaki on the list of the places that you'd like to visit or you wish you could visit. And to this end, of course, you will have to be a young sagacious man so that you will be able to fulfill your and our common desire in this regard. This is too dangerous a world to just be careless with words or deeds. And if ever there was a need for the world to work toward peace and to work out of the dangerous situation that we are in, that time is now. On a more, a little more serious note, Mr. ENTITY, my question is exactly related to this point. And that is, because of the experience that we in Japan went through, we are very genuine in hoping even for a very minimum, limited progress in the arms control talks which are currently underway. And just as it took another Republican ENTITY with very conservative credentials to effect a rapprochement very successfully with China, there are Japanese who hope that, perhaps, your hard-line policy may lead to the relaxation of East-West tensions. And in light of these hopes and expectations, Mr. ENTITY, could you comment on these talks? And, also, I would appreciate it a great deal if you would give us your assessment of the current state of and, perhaps, future prospects for U.S.-Soviet relations, particularly in the arms control area.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesnhktelevisiontokyojapan", "title": "Interview With Representatives of NHK Television in Tokyo, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-nhk-television-tokyo-japan", "publication_date": "11-11-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2914, "text": "Well, now, if all of your question-you prefaced it with remarks about the People's Republic of China. Yes, we are working very hard to improve relations there and establish trust and friendship. And I think we have made great progress. I know there is a question that is raised sometimes with regard to our friends on Taiwan-the Republic of China. And I have to say, there, that I have repeatedly said to the leaders of the People's Republic of China that they must understand that we will not throw over one friend in order to make another. And I would think that that would be reassuring to them, that they, then, might not be thrown over at some time in the future. But with regard to the Soviet Union-and you mentioned my hard line. I had some experience with Communists-not of the Soviet kind, but domestic, in our own country, some years ago when I was ENTITY of a labor union there. And I feel that we have to be realistic with the Soviet Union. It is not good for us, as some in the past have, to think, well, they are just like us and surely we can appeal to, say, their kindliness or their better nature. They have some aggressive and expansionist aims in the world. And I believe that, yes, you can negotiate with them; yes, you can talk to them. But it must be on the basis of recognizing them as the way they are and then presenting the proposals in such a way that they can see that it is to their advantage to be less hostile in the world and to try and get along with the rest of the nations of the world. But it is important because of, also, your opening remarks with reference to the great nuclear forces in the world. We are going to stay at that negotiating table. We will not walk away from it. We are going to stay there trying, not as we have in the past to set some limits or ceilings on how many more missiles would be built, how much more growth they could take in those weapons, we want a reduction in the numbers. But really and practically, when we start down that road, and if we can get cooperation from them in reducing them, we should then continue down that road to their total elimination. Many years ago, after he became ENTITY, Dwight Eisenhower, as ENTITY, wrote a letter to a noted publisher in our country.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesnhktelevisiontokyojapan", "title": "Interview With Representatives of NHK Television in Tokyo, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-nhk-television-tokyo-japan", "publication_date": "11-11-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2915, "text": "And he said in that letter that we had to face the fact that weapons were being developed in which we could no longer see a war that would end in victory or defeat as we had always known it. But the weapons were such that it would end in the destruction of human kind. And, as he said, when we reach that moment, then let us have the intelligence to sit down at a table and negotiate our problems before we destroy the world. I see it also in another way that he did not mention. Once upon a time, we had rules of warfare. War is an ugly thing, but we had rules in which we made sure that soldiers fought soldiers, but they did not victimize civilians. Today we have lost something of civilization in that the very weapons we are talking about are designed to destroy civilians by the millions. And let us at least get back to where we once were-that if we talk war at all, we talk it in a way in which there could be victory or defeat and in which civilians have some measure of protection. ENTITY, you referred to the current situation as being very dangerous. And in recent months we have witnessed one act of violence after another-the assassination of Mr. Aquino in the Philippines, and the shooting down of the Korean Airlines passenger jet, the terrorist bombing in Rangoon, and again in the bombing in Lebanon, Beirut, and the regional conflicts that persist at many different parts of the world, including the Middle East and the Caribbean. I think we certainly live in a very dangerous world, and your administration has advocated very strongly for building more effective defense capabilities of the United States and of its allies. Now my question is, Mr. ENTITY, my question is that the kind of danger that the world faces today would be minimized if the United States and its partners, including Japan, become stronger militarily? Yes, and this is part of that realism that I meant. I once did a lot of negotiating across a table as a labor leader on behalf of a union, and I think I know and understand the give and take of negotiations. But for a number of years now, recently, we have sat at the table in meetings with the Soviet leaders who have engaged in the biggest military buildup in the history of mankind. And they sat on their side of the table looking at us and knowing that unilaterally we were disarming without getting anything in return. They did not have to give up anything.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesnhktelevisiontokyojapan", "title": "Interview With Representatives of NHK Television in Tokyo, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-nhk-television-tokyo-japan", "publication_date": "11-11-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2916, "text": "They saw themselves get stronger in relation to all of us as we, ourselves, made ourselves weaker. I think realistically to negotiate arms reductions they have to see that there is a choice. Either they join in those arms reductions, or they then have to face the fact that we are going to turn our industrial might to building the strength that would be needed to deter them from ever starting a war. Wars do not start because a nation is-they do not start them when they are weak; they start them when they think they are stronger than someone else. And it is very dangerous to let them see that they have a great margin of superiority over the rest of us. Now, if they know that they cannot match us-and when I say us, I mean our allies and Japan and the United States-they cannot match us if we are determined to build up our defenses. So they then face the fact that as we build them up, they might then find themselves weaker than we are. It was all summed up in a cartoon in one of our papers. This was before the death of Leonid Brezhnev. Brezhnev was portrayed talking to a Russian general, and he was saying to the general, I liked the arms race better when we were the only ones in it. Let me just follow up my question. Some of the dangers that I refer to do not take place only in the context of the confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union. I think some of the regional conflicts have indigenous roots for that. And I just wonder if we are not having the kind of crises and dangers that do not lend themselves to the military solutions, which might call for some other approach to solving these problems and thereby reducing the tension in the world as a whole. Well, if I understand your question correctly, what we are talking about is-you mentioned the Middle East. Once upon a time, nations like our own with oceans around us, we could have a defensive army on our own land, we could have coastal artillery batteries, and we knew that if a war came to us, it would come to our shores and we would defend our shores. Could the allies, Western Europe, could Japan stand by and see the Middle East come into the hands of someone who would deny the oil of the Middle East to the industrialized world? Could we see that energy supply shut off without knowing that it would bring absolute ruin to our countries?", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesnhktelevisiontokyojapan", "title": "Interview With Representatives of NHK Television in Tokyo, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-nhk-television-tokyo-japan", "publication_date": "11-11-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2917, "text": "More than half of the minerals that the United States needs for its own industries comes from spots all over the world. Well, an aggressor nation, a nation that maybe has designs on other nations, recognizes that also. We have to look and see where are those strategic spots which we cannot afford to let fall. With the problem of Cuba in the Mediterranean-in the Caribbean, we have to recognize that more than half of all of our shipping of those necessities we must have come through the Caribbean. It was not an accident that back in the First World War that the German submarine packs took up their places there. We know that the strategic waterways of the world-the Soviet Union has now built up the greatest navy in the world, and the biggest part of that navy is here in the Pacific, in the vicinity of your own country. But they know, as anyone must know in world strategy, that there are a limited number of choke points, sea passages that are essential to your livelihood and to ours. You can start with the Panama Canal and the Suez Canal, but then the Straits of Gibraltar, but then right here in the passages that lead to your own island, the Malacca and the Makassar Straits. And a nation that could dominate those narrow passages and shut them off to our shipping could secure victory without firing a shot at any of us. Let us turn to an economic issue. Could you tell us what you believe will happen to the American domestic economy in the coming year and whether the improvement of the American economy, domestic economy will help to resolve remaining trade problems between the United States and Japan? This recession that we have just been going through is the eighth that we have known in the last 40 or so years. And each time in the past our government has resorted to what I call a quick fix. It has artificially stimulated the money supply; it has stimulated government spending, increased taxes on the people which reduced their incentive to produce. And yes, there would be seeming recovery from the recession which would last about 2 or 3 years because it was artificial, and then we would be into another recession. And each time the recession was deeper and worse than the one before. Well, we embarked on an economic program that was based on reducing government spending to leave a greater share of the earnings of the people in the hands of the people. We not only reduced the spending, we reduced taxes. When we started in 1981 our recession was about-roughly 121/2 percent.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesnhktelevisiontokyojapan", "title": "Interview With Representatives of NHK Television in Tokyo, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-nhk-television-tokyo-japan", "publication_date": "11-11-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}
{"id": 2918, "text": "People were saying that it could not be eliminated in less than 10 years. Our program, once put into effect, and as the tax cuts did have the effect we hoped they would have on the ability of people to purchase but also the incentive of their being allowed to keep more of the money they earned-the inflation for the last year has been running at about 2 1/2 percent or so, down from the 12.4. We have a long way to go. But even there, last month our unemployment dropped to a rate that in our own optimistic predictions we had said would not happen until the end of 1984. And here it is in 1983, down to what we'd predicted that far ahead. We have come down from a very high unemployment rate to 8.7 percent. And I think that we are on the road to a solid recovery. I will tell you, when our political opponents were claiming that our plan would not work, they named it Reaganomics. And lately, they have not been calling it Reaganomics anymore. But what it will do for the rest of the world and our own relationship, I think that our country-I think your country, largely-certainly between the two of us, we do affect the world's economy. The world has been in recession. And I think that the United States and Japan and, certainly, with us together, we can help bring back and bring out of recession the rest of the industrial world. ENTITY, you said that-in the National Diet this morning-that you have vigorously opposed the quick fix of protectionism in America. And in regard to this, what do you think of the steps which Japan has been taking to further open up its own markets? And one of the things that we have been discussing are some of the points of difference that still remain between our two marketplaces. And I have pointed to the danger of those in our Congress who, because of the unemployment, think the answer could be protectionism. Well, I think that protectionism destroys everything we want. I believe in free trade and fair trade. And yet, the pressure on them as legislators to adopt these bills, these measures-I am opposed to them-and yet, as I say, I know they are under that pressure. And they are talking of this. There probably have been 40 bills that have been brought up and proposed, all of which would have some elements in them of protectionism.", "label": "dialogic", "metadata": {"text_id": "presidencyucsbedudocumentsinterviewwithrepresentativesnhktelevisiontokyojapan", "title": "Interview With Representatives of NHK Television in Tokyo, Japan", "source": "https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/interview-with-representatives-nhk-television-tokyo-japan", "publication_date": "11-11-1983", "crawling_date": "10-09-2023", "politician": ["Ronald Reagan"], "gender": ["M"]}}